Ooops there goes another one....

Mr981 · 10-16-2012, 16:40

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-1...tml?cmpid=yhoo

The first question that comes to mind is what has been the failure rate of these green industry companies that received government dollars and had Obama bundlerers as shareholders vs. that of Bain's investing in companies while Romney was there.

MadMonkey · 10-16-2012, 16:49

Glad they're only getting rid of the automotive side, I know a lot of people who use A123 batteries on a daily basis. They're good stuff, but I went directly to lithium ferrite instead.

dango · 10-16-2012, 16:53

It is way simple , when you got 3 and 4 generations vested in OIL what do you expect....?

I'm about ready to puke about this ! WHY do YOU ALL think these
GREEN companies fail when there is proof IT WORKS..?

The powers that be have a GUN to the heads of people whom YOU
think have any power.....! OIL , OIL , OIL.........! I give up , think what you will..............!

fnfalman · 10-16-2012, 17:38

It may work, but it ain't cheap.

dango · 10-16-2012, 17:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by fnfalman

It may work, but it ain't cheap.

Waring for oil reserves ain't free , really costly , blood and money!

pipedreams · 10-16-2012, 17:44

When it can stand on it's own and cost effective the people will buy.

nursetim · 10-16-2012, 17:50

I'd rather see us on hydrogen, but everybody tells me it's impossible due to infrastructure. I still say the arguments don't make sense and thus are horse flop to me.

Tax breaks to stations that put x number one then x number the next and so on. It's been proven tha hydrogen is a legitimate alternative. I'm not green, I'm greedy. Hydrogen is cheap, or can be. MVA have potential to suck bad but if ruptures happen, the volatile gases float away, not pool in a low area.

Jonesee · 10-16-2012, 18:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by nursetim

I'd rather see us on hydrogen, but everybody tells me it's impossible

Absolutely not true.

Toyota already has plans to roll out fuel cell technology in 2015 for sale to the general market.

686Owner · 10-16-2012, 18:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by nursetim

I'd rather see us on hydrogen, but everybody tells me it's impossible due to infrastructure. I still say the arguments don't make sense and thus are horse flop to me.

Tax breaks to stations that put x number one then x number the next and so on. It's been proven tha hydrogen is a legitimate alternative. I'm not green, I'm greedy. Hydrogen is cheap, or can be. MVA have potential to suck bad but if ruptures happen, the volatile gases float away, not pool in a low area.

Cars running on hydrogen? Possible, but you have to produce hydrogen somehow.

***jpa*** · 10-16-2012, 18:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonesee

Absolutely not true.

Toyota already has plans to roll out fuel cell technology in 2015 for sale to the general market.

Cool, I'll be getting close to time to trade in my Camry Hybrid by then....

dango · 10-16-2012, 18:51

Again , 7 gal.oil =1 tire , all paints , all plastics , all etc. , OIL !

Peak oil production-1970ish , on the down , energy spent -vs-
energy produced , what exactly does this mean......?

Who would of thunk.....?

droidfire · 10-17-2012, 07:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by nursetim

I'd rather see us on hydrogen, but everybody tells me it's impossible due to infrastructure. I still say the arguments don't make sense and thus are horse flop to me.

Those same people would have posed that argument at the dawn of the time of the automobile. You can see how that turned out.

With a viable product the infrastructure will be created. It will create jobs, tax breaks (as you mentioned) will help, 'ground floor' investing opportunities, the whole regular business rigamarole.

The problem it will suffer that gasoline did not, is in this case there already is an existing infrastructure to compete with, whereas with gas the closest competition was a railroad...yeah...so no competition. Just build.

Now you have to build at a loss and at the expense of the already existing infrastructure trying to get you to fail.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 686Owner

Cars running on hydrogen? Possible, but you have to produce hydrogen somehow.

They already trained plants to synthesize hydrogen instead of oxygen. Old news, few years old now. (sorry no cite - but first picked up the trail on that from an article in Discover magazine - yes, a physical copy - and went out to learn what I could from there. Interesting stuff. Haven't thought about it in a while.)

...better not let any of those seeds out of the greenhouse. That's on the 'messing with our ability to survive as a species' level. Genetic manipulation - Like an atom bomb without a desk to hide under.

Edit:

Quote:

Originally Posted by dango

Again , 7 gal.oil =1 tire , all paints , all plastics , all etc. , OIL !

Peak oil production-1970ish , on the down , energy spent -vs-
energy produced , what exactly does this mean......?

Who would of thunk.....?

...that modern science and the technology resulting from it allow us to do much more with much less?

We're getting better?

nursetim · 10-17-2012, 07:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by 686Owner

Cars running on hydrogen? Possible, but you have to produce hydrogen somehow.

It takes electrical energy to produce hydrogen. Easy as all get out. Heck they were using it in WWII in blimps. Not hard at all.

Sveke · 10-17-2012, 08:04

We just need alt energy to run the non moving stuff like homes and buildings. We need to invest in it, some will fail (that's called biz), but eventually we'll get it, cheap, and can power or cars and trucks with the oil.

I'll shoot myself before I drive a hybrid of any sort.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

certifiedfunds · 10-17-2012, 08:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by dango

It is way simple , when you got 3 and 4 generations vested in OIL what do you expect....?

I'm about ready to puke about this ! WHY do YOU ALL think these
GREEN companies fail when there is proof IT WORKS..?

The powers that be have a GUN to the heads of people whom YOU
think have any power.....! OIL , OIL , OIL.........! I give up , think what you will..............!

Because it DOESN'T work

certifiedfunds · 10-17-2012, 08:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by nursetim

I'd rather see us on hydrogen, but everybody tells me it's impossible due to infrastructure. I still say the arguments don't make sense and thus are horse flop to me.

Tax breaks to stations that put x number one then x number the next and so on. It's been proven tha hydrogen is a legitimate alternative. I'm not green, I'm greedy. Hydrogen is cheap, or can be. MVA have potential to suck bad but if ruptures happen, the volatile gases float away, not pool in a low area.

Not necessary when we have plenty of natural gas.

droidfire · 10-17-2012, 08:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sveke

I'll shoot myself before I drive a hybrid of any sort.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

...and I said i'd quit when smokes went above $2 a pack...

...and found out that it didn't bug me as much as I thought. (don't confuse that with a like for paying it.)

...and I swore i'd never own another cell phone...

...do I need to address that now with the tech landscape just over a decade later?

...and nowadays I wait and see before pre-judging something off my radar based on an emotional response in the tech sector.

I like me some gas engines - believe me - but we are being saturated with an exponentially increasing dose of new technology. It's at the point now where we have more capability then ability to use it well but in scattered patches here and there.

The different ways all the tech is interacting also creates new and unforeseen advantages/possibilities.

Idle thoughts...

Sveke · 10-17-2012, 08:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by droidfire

...and I said i'd quit when smokes went above $2 a pack...

...and found out that it didn't bug me as much as I thought. (don't confuse that with a like for paying it.)

...and I swore i'd never own another cell phone...

...do I need to address that now with the tech landscape just over a decade later?

...and nowadays I wait and see before pre-judging something off my radar based on an emotional response in the tech sector.

I like me some gas engines - believe me - but we are being saturated with an exponentially increasing dose of new technology. It's at the point now where we have more capability then ability to use it well but in scattered patches here and there.

The different ways all the tech is interacting also creates new and unforeseen advantages/possibilities.

Idle thoughts...

I should have phrased it better. If they get the performance the same I'll consider it.

But what about the phenomenal sound of a big boy V8?

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

AtlantaR6 · 10-17-2012, 08:42

Buy a Tesla and play a CD of a roaring engine. Check and Check.

Hell, the new M3 BMW pumps the soundtrack of an engine through the cabin to match the actual sound and RPM's.

SC Tiger · 10-17-2012, 08:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by 686Owner

Cars running on hydrogen? Possible, but you have to produce hydrogen somehow.

Easy to do, and Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe.

The problem is fueling infrastructure. How does the accountant that lives down the street, or the nurse next door, or the machinist across the street get it for his or her car? Will the one or two stations that open up still be open in 5 years? 10 years? How long before people believe in it enough to actually plunk down $20K or more for a vehicle that burns it?

Sveke · 10-17-2012, 08:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by AtlantaR6

Buy a Tesla and play a CD of a roaring engine. Check and Check.

Hell, the new M3 BMW pumps the soundtrack of an engine through the cabin to match the actual sound and RPM's.

Haha, I've heard it. It's not the same.

Like trying to tell a Harley guy to ride an electric scooter.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

SC Tiger · 10-17-2012, 08:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by AtlantaR6

Buy a Tesla and play a CD of a roaring engine. Check and Check.

Hell, the new M3 BMW pumps the soundtrack of an engine through the cabin to match the actual sound and RPM's.

I read about that. The first cars that did that used a tube through the firewall. Now they (BMW, VW, probably MB too) either play it through the audio system or put speakers behind the dashboard.

A lot of people are a bit POd about it. They feel like they are being lied to.

domin8ss · 10-17-2012, 08:48

A123 is just another example in the long history of why government subsidized companies don't work. There was an article I read about a year from a Harvard economics professor. He used a shipping company subsidized by the government versus a shipping company started and operated by Vanderbilt as an example. Point being, there are examples of this that are over 100 years old, yet the government still pisses away our money.

Btw, somebody in this thread says that gas cars never had to compete to create their infrastructure. Not true. Most cars were electric over 100 years ago. Gas won out because it was more reliable.

droidfire · 10-17-2012, 08:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sveke

Haha, I've heard it. It's not the same.

Like trying to tell a Harley guy to ride an electric scooter.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

...an electric scooter with a boombox.

See? Now it's better!

domin8ss · 10-17-2012, 08:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sveke

I should have phrased it better. If they get the performance the same I'll consider it.

But what about the phenomenal sound of a big boy V8?

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

Ford has been testing a supercharged V10 short bus running on hydrogen for several years in California. I think we're in good shape there with hydrogen.