blzrul Posted June 3, 2008 Author Share Posted June 3, 2008 Except that person didn't make a ridiculous statement, you did. He correctly pointed out the issue of trying to find alternatives to oil, which are all still super expensive, and that the best alternatives are ways to extract the oil from other sources. So, while you spout your daily ignorance, he made a valid point, the dependence on oil will stop when a reasonably priced alternative is found and distributed and he probably trusts the private sector better in finding it than the government. And if YOU bothered to read either article you'd see that the private sector is very close to a solution but lacks the ability to scale it up to the mass market. So here you have people who've invested the time and $$ to find a solution but lack the desire or wherewithal to bring it to market. They're willing to let someone else do it. And theire relative altruism is totally wasted because without assurances of huge obscene profits apparently the big corporations don't want to take what could be a gift and productize it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 Are you going to collect your SS? Also name a "small" car manufacturer. I'm not saying buy a car from a small company. Don't B word about corp America ripping people off and then feeding the flames. And of course I'm collecting my SS, I look at as a return on an investment. A very shiitty return on my investment but a return of it none the less Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 Bought 'em used from private parties. Sorry to rain on your parade. The big corporations got their money from someone else, not me. When your Mercedes needs a part where's it coming from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 And if YOU bothered to read either article you'd see that the private sector is very close to a solution but lacks the ability to scale it up to the mass market. Bull. There are a ton of venture capitalists out there looking for places to invest their money, especially in this economy and companies like GE who're looking for new avenues to replace lines that are closing. If I had a nickle for everytime someone said they needed "just a little backing" to solve this problem, I'd make Bill Gates look like an Ethiopian refugee. So here you have people who've invested the time and $$ to find a solution but lack the desire or wherewithal to bring it to market. They're willing to let someone else do it. And theire relative altruism is totally wasted because without assurances of huge obscene profits apparently the big corporations don't want to take what could be a gift and productize it. The reality is these people are talking a much bigger game than they're likely able to support in hopes that they'll get enough backing from the populous to get some of that "free" taxpayer money. You know, the kind everyone calls "pork" unless it's a project they think is cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 Bull. There are a ton of venture capitalists out there looking for places to invest their money, especially in this economy and companies like GE who're looking for new avenues to replace lines that are closing. If I had a nickle for everytime someone said they needed "just a little backing" to solve this problem, I'd make Bill Gates look like an Ethiopian refugee. The reality is these people are talking a much bigger game than they're likely able to support in hopes that they'll get enough backing from the populous to get some of that "free" taxpayer money. You know, the kind everyone calls "pork" unless it's a project they think is cool. Thanks for saving me the typing time. No one is close to a realistic solution, but they are very close to Congressional mandates to have their "pet" technology get the official blessing. Let's repeat the ethanol experiment again why don't we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 When your Mercedes needs a part where's it coming from? She probably buys jobber parts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 She probably buys jobber parts. Jobber parts? Are those parts you get for free from your knees? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 Jobber parts? Are those parts you get for free from your knees? Nono Jobber parts are parts that body shops buy that are replicas since the originals cost like 5 times more... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 Nono Jobber parts are parts that body shops buy that are replicas since the originals cost like 5 times more... Well if she does here hypocrite meter rating went from a 9.9 to a 9.7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 That's for the research and trials. As if corporate America isn't going to come up with it and make it affordable to "the little people". You of all people should know better. If someone truly figured out how to run a car on tap water the govt would figure out a way to either regulate or tax it. You're an idiot. You think the oil companies got to where they are now by pricing their product out of the reach of the general public? You think energy is some sort of boutique industry that appeals only to the obscenely wealthy, like luxury yachts or private jets? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 Bull. There are a ton of venture capitalists out there looking for places to invest their money, especially in this economy and companies like GE who're looking for new avenues to replace lines that are closing. If I had a nickle for everytime someone said they needed "just a little backing" to solve this problem, I'd make Bill Gates look like an Ethiopian refugee. Exactly. One problem is that 90% of those people 'who need a little backing' don't have a fuggin' clue how to run a business, regardless of how good their idea may be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted June 4, 2008 Author Share Posted June 4, 2008 You're an idiot. You think the oil companies got to where they are now by pricing their product out of the reach of the general public? You think energy is some sort of boutique industry that appeals only to the obscenely wealthy, like luxury yachts or private jets? And you're a jerk. Anyone knows that new technology is often too pricey for the masses. Did everyone own a car in the early 20th century? No. Did everyone own a VCR in the 1970's? Not likely. Cable? Satellite? Course not. It was expensive. $1500 for a VCR as I recall. Now, $70. DUH. The oil companies have been in business for DECADES. And, I'm not talking about the ENERGY. I'm talking about the fact that if there is truly a viable vehicle that can be charged via a standard home electrical outlet, and if it can be manufacturered at a reasonable price, eventually the corner Shell station, and it's products, are GONE. Or at least substantially changed, because in 10-20 years people won't need gas. So Big Oil will have to cast about in other countries / markets to make their OBSCENE profits. Or, figure out a way to get in on the increased dependence on electricity. Last night's news showed this vehicle and interviewed the CEO. This thing came from a bunch of nerds: Honeywell. Boeing. Raytheon. etc. The car is a converted SUV (you'd recognize it). The CEO says that he's been talking to the car makers but it's like turning the Queen Mary to get them to make a decision. He isn't gonna make them, he doesn't WANT to make them, he is going to make the technology available, for a license fee of course. He's four years ahead of Detroit in his R&D. It would seem like they would, at a time when they're having a little trouble unloading the gas guzzlers, consider exploring this particularly since it could possibly mean minimal BOM modification and retooling as opposed to a complete shift from a design and manufacturing perspective. Don't call names - I realize the stick up your butt probably hurts like hell but that's no reason to take it out on other people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 And you're a jerk. Anyone knows that new technology is often too pricey for the masses. Did everyone own a car in the early 20th century? No. Did everyone own a VCR in the 1970's? Not likely. Cable? Satellite? Course not. It was expensive. $1500 for a VCR as I recall. Now, $70. DUH. The oil companies have been in business for DECADES. ufacturing perspective. Don't call names - I realize the stick up your butt probably hurts like hell but that's no reason to take it out on other people. And then what happened after that? Oh, later on, investors got together and made the product affordable. Yet the reason why the average joe can put himself in massive debt to buy himself an escalade, an LCD TV with HD. All this stuff a long time ago was out of reach, but eventually when one dude figured out how to make it cheap, well everyone had access to it. Eventually the same sh-- will happen with alternative fuel sources, and if it doesn't then we as a society have failed to advance ourselves and are doomed to extinction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 And, I'm not talking about the ENERGY. I'm talking about the fact that if there is truly a viable vehicle that can be charged via a standard home electrical outlet, and if it can be manufacturered at a reasonable price, eventually the corner Shell station, and it's products, are GONE. Or at least substantially changed, because in 10-20 years people won't need gas. So Big Oil will have to cast about in other countries / markets to make their OBSCENE profits. Or, figure out a way to get in on the increased dependence on electricity. I think that Tom was spot on with his assessment. This is about energy. It's not about one Caddy in California, and it's not about the available technology of charging up a car in your garage. It's about scaling this technology to displace the friggin gasoline powered automobile and the entire infrastructure that's been built up for over a century. If you think it's as simple as running an extension cord to the garage that prevents the golly-gee technology from the masses, then you are a fool. It's shifting the generation of power from the highly polluting car to the highly polluting electrical plant, then you're talking about a total overhaul of the electrical grid, because people's electrical needs will be much greater than they are now. So, unless you are also willing to support the building of 200 new nuclear reactors in the next decade, and opening up the lands for new electric transmission towers and lines, keep yer trap shut about these wonderful new technologies that are being held back by the man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 I think that Tom was spot on with his assessment. This is about energy. It's not about one Caddy in California, and it's not about the available technology of charging up a car in your garage. It's about scaling this technology to displace the friggin gasoline powered automobile and the entire infrastructure that's been built up for over a century. If you think it's as simple as running an extension cord to the garage that prevents the golly-gee technology from the masses, then you are a fool. It's shifting the generation of power from the highly polluting car to the highly polluting electrical plant, then you're talking about a total overhaul of the electrical grid, because people's electrical needs will be much greater than they are now. So, unless you are also willing to support the building of 200 new nuclear reactors in the next decade, and opening up the lands for new electric transmission towers and lines, keep yer trap shut about these wonderful new technologies that are being held back by the man. Wait, there's a butterfly effect at play? Who knew? (rhetorical - obviously not Debbie). And I can guarantee that even if they approved nuclear power plants that it'll be 25 years before the first one is able to produce a single watt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 Wait, there's a butterfly effect at play? Who knew? (rhetorical - obviously not Debbie). And I can guarantee that even if they approved nuclear power plants that it'll be 25 years before the first one is able to produce a single watt. Time? We don't have time! We need to force a radical change now. Subsidize! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 And I can guarantee that even if they approved nuclear power plants that it'll be 25 years before the first one is able to produce a single watt. How about 8 years. Oh yeah. I'm getting pre-billed for it too. http://www.sptimes.com/2008/03/11/Business...s_for_Pro.shtml http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.p...toryId=89169837 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 And then what happened after that? Oh, later on, investors got together and made the product affordable. Yet the reason why the average joe can put himself in massive debt to buy himself an escalade, an LCD TV with HD. All this stuff a long time ago was out of reach, but eventually when one dude figured out how to make it cheap, well everyone had access to it. Eventually the same sh-- will happen with alternative fuel sources, and if it doesn't then we as a society have failed to advance ourselves and are doomed to extinction. Not even that dynamic so much as economies of scale. When Sony made 40k plasma TVs a year, the prices was about $60k per (we have one of the originals in the lobby of the building I'm in right now). Now, with millions of them hitting the market, I can get that same level of features and reliability for about a grand, and MUCH better for two. Ditto just about everything you care to think of (my first MP3 player held one CD and cost me $300. I can get one that will hold about 40 CDs for $20 now). Last I checked, those evil profit-making electronics manufacturers weren't subsidized by the government to drive prices down; market forces did it, as the mass market demanded affordable items that fostered both competition AND economies of scale (it's much more cost-effective to amortize a production line across a million units than ten thousand). But I'm sure the market dynamics of energy generation - a commodity EVERYONE uses - would be completely different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 How about 8 years. Oh yeah. I'm getting pre-billed for it too. http://www.sptimes.com/2008/03/11/Business...s_for_Pro.shtml http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.p...toryId=89169837 They say 8 now, just like they said $6 billion a year ago and now it's $17B. The last one completed took 23. I'd bet the over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts