GM to halt production of the VOLT

[billvon 3,114]

(as Brenthutch and RushMC both pray for the failure of another American industry)

[brenthutch 444]

Quote

(as Brenthutch and RushMC both pray for the failure of another American industry)

That is one way of putting it. Another way might be; we have learned the lessons of history, and know a boondoggle when we see one.

[billvon 3,114]

> Another way might be; we have learned the lessons of history, and
>know a boondoggle when we see one.

If the lesson you have taken away from history is "new technology is hard so we should stick to the old ways" - you may be in for some disappointment.

I remember when people were bitching about how much "Al Gore's Internet" sucked; it would never be adopted by the general public. Too expensive! No privacy! Too slow! You need a $2000 computer just to use it! No one is going to be willing to get a master's degree in computer science just to read rec.drugs. The one public service originally available, Usenet, was likened to working "with a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea."

And I am sure there were people saying "we should learn the lessons of history, and abandon this boondoggle before we waste any more taxpayer money on it."

[brenthutch 444]

Quote

> Another way might be; we have learned the lessons of history, and
>know a boondoggle when we see one.

If the lesson you have taken away from history is "new technology is hard so we should stick to the old ways" - you may be in for some disappointment.

I remember when people were bitching about how much "Al Gore's Internet" sucked; it would never be adopted by the general public. Too expensive! No privacy! Too slow! You need a $2000 computer just to use it! No one is going to be willing to get a master's degree in computer science just to read rec.drugs. The one public service originally available, Usenet, was likened to working "with a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea."

And I am sure there were people saying "we should learn the lessons of history, and abandon this boondoggle before we waste any more taxpayer money on it."

I have been online since the late 80's and never heard any of that.
The internet has been getting better, faster, cheaper from day one. We have been playing with electric cars for over a century now. Your comparison to the internet could not be more illustrative. Thank you for making my point so eloquently.

[billvon 3,114]

>The internet has been getting better, faster, cheaper from day one.

Actually data communication for the masses goes back to ticker tapes in the 1870's. It progressed through Baudot teletypes to async lines to dedicated data lines through Arpanet and finally to the Internet that you are familiar with. But yes, it has been getting better, faster, cheaper etc despite people like you.

>We have been playing with electric cars for over a century now.

Yep. And nowadays you can walk into a dealership and buy one. I have one, and I charge it with a solar power system on my house. Couldn't have done that 100 years ago. Ain't technology great?

[brenthutch 444]

Actually it looks like you could.

"In 1897, the first commercial EV application was established as a fleet of New York City taxis built by the Electric Carriage and Wagon Company of Philadelphia."

http://inventors.about.com/od/estartinventions/a/History-Of-Electric-Vehicles.htm

1883:
Charles Fritts, an American inventor, described the first solar cells made from selenium wafers.

http://inventors.about.com/od/timelines/a/Photovoltaics.htm

[brenthutch 444]

"Actually data communication for the masses goes back to ticker tapes in the 1870's. It progressed through Baudot teletypes to async lines to dedicated data lines through Arpanet"

Thank you for the history lesson, but you said "internet" and I responded to "internet”. I will award you a black belt in obfuscation though

[billvon 3,114]

>Thank you for the history lesson, but you said "internet" and I
>responded to "internet”. I will award you a black belt in obfuscation though

You could give RushMC a run for his money on twisting out of your claims!

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

I remember when people were bitching about how much "Al Gore's Internet" sucked; it would never be adopted by the general public. Too expensive! No privacy! Too slow! You need a $2000 computer just to use it! No one is going to be willing to get a master's degree in computer science just to read rec.drugs. The one public service originally available, Usenet, was likened to working "with a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea."

And interestingly enough, it developed quite quickly on the basis of private industry. Many of those people who had ideas and formed companies failed. (See dotcom bubble). Hundreds of billions of dollars were lost in that.

Compare to “green energy.” This is an issue with technology. There is little room at this point for private interest in pure science, and this is where government is useful. Newton hadn’t profit motive in his discovery of the laws of motion. That was fundamental science. There is glory in it, but glory goes to those who do it first. The money is for those who figure out what to do with it. (Note: “glory is for the first, money is for the second” applies to just about everything. Ask Eli Whitney).

Then there is applied science. What can we do with Newton’s laws? We can use them to travel to the moon – there’s the applied science. Again, not a lot of money in that, unless you can patent the specific processes.

But the third is technology. We’ve got the science, we have the application, but we need the technology to get there. (Note: it was based on available technology of the time, too. That’s why Lunar Orbit Rendezvous was the method finally selected over Direct Ascent or Earth Orbit Rendezvous – we could get the technology to do it that way).

Yes, interesting that I picked a government program for this to demonstrate the folly of the government “investments” in technology. It makes sense if the government is the end user. “We’re using money for us and we want results.” The US wanted the glory, not the profit. Glory was the reason.

But this isn’t about glory. And it’ll be costly.

When the government is trying to support an industry, I understand that. There’s a policy that this green energy should be made a priority. And the government will guarantee loans for these companies, but not demand a product of their own? It also results in the actual cost of the product being disguised. That creates a problem, too.

The internet thing was different. It was like GPS – a government created technology that the government allowed private people and industry to use. Private companies began creating GPS products. (I remember using Pluggers in the Army. Just a few years later there was a GPS in a car. Just amazing). It’s another place where government started it and private industry jumped in to make it cheap and available to the public. (Note: people seem to be relying on the government to start moving on a strategy to replace the aging GPS fleet. I think the GPS operators better have a role, too.)

Government and private industry can certainly work together. Private industry likely could not have created the GPS system. Private industry would not have gone to the moon. Even though I am libertarian, I DO understand the role of government in many things. It’s simply the fine line that divides where government should be and should not be in its relation with private industry.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[brenthutch 444]

That is rich coming from you.

Oh BTW this just in from Tesla:

"The company said it expects its gross profit margin in the quarter - now expected to be in the range of negative 15 percent to negative 18 percent."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/25/tesla-outlook-idUSL1E8KP23H20120925

[billvon 3,114]

>And interestingly enough, it developed quite quickly on the basis of private industry.

?? No, it didn't. It was funded by the government for over a decade, from 1962 to 1979. From then on it was primarily funded by the government. I was in college during that time and I can tell you from firsthand experience development was glacial. It wasn't until the 90's that the Net really took off.

> Many of those people who had ideas and formed companies failed. (See
>dotcom bubble)

Agreed. That happened in 2000.

>The internet thing was different. It was like GPS – a government created
>technology that the government allowed private people and industry to
>use.

Also agreed. Which makes it very similar to solar power - a technology needed by the space program to power satellites that now has a terrestrial application.

> It’s simply the fine line that divides where government should be
> and should not be in its relation with private industry.

Yes, that's a fine line that has to be heeded. Too much support and you get expensive useless products that exist solely due to subsidies (witness the 1970's solar hot water boom.) Too little support and you have technologies that fail miserably because the existing bad technology is too established. (witness alternative deicing methods.) It's a tricky thing to get right - but when done well can help bring new technologies to market that benefit everyone.

[billvon 3,114]

>Oh BTW this just in from Tesla:

More American companies having trouble. Must make you very happy. Perhaps there will be a big layoff somewhere; that would make your week!

[brenthutch 444]

While I wish no ill to befall anyone in particular, in a capitalist system there are profits AND losses. If we step in to mitigate the losses we create a moral hazard and a much worse situation. You seem to think I hate technology. Nothing could be further from the truth. I like technology that works, while it appears that you like technology that doesn’t. That is your choice, just don’t spend my tax dollars on it.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

>And interestingly enough, it developed quite quickly on the basis of private industry.

?? No, it didn't. It was funded by the government for over a decade, from 1962 to 1979. From then on it was primarily funded by the government. I was in college during that time and I can tell you from firsthand experience development was glacial. It wasn't until the 90's that the Net really took off.

Oh, I know that. It was pretty internal and "glacial" until the TCP/IP development. But I also recall it being featured in the movie War Games. it was the first time I recall seeing anything about modems, etc. What was that? Early 80's?

I trust you, though, bill. Yes - it took off in the 90's quite a bit.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

>And interestingly enough, it developed quite quickly on the basis of private industry.

?? No, it didn't. It was funded by the government for over a decade, from 1962 to 1979. From then on it was primarily funded by the government. I was in college during that time and I can tell you from firsthand experience development was glacial. It wasn't until the 90's that the Net really took off.

Oh, I know that. It was pretty internal and "glacial" until the TCP/IP development. But I also recall it being featured in the movie War Games. it was the first time I recall seeing anything about modems, etc. What was that? Early 80's?

I trust you, though, bill. Yes - it took off in the 90's quite a bit.

And where did TCP/IP come from? From the University and ARPA funding support. Why do I bring this up? Because in the 80s and 90s, aside from ARPAnet/NSFnet/Internet, consumers had AOL, Compuserve, Prodigy, the Well, and lots of other dialup model BBS products to choose from.

The fact here is, that the government supported option beat out several private industry offerings. It was better, and most importantly, it was interoperable. So if you're using the internet as an example that government support for solar or electric vehicles is bad, you have it backwards. The Feds are subsidizing next generation possibilities while lots of industry types would like to keep doing it the same way as they have for decades.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

if you're using the internet as an example

No. As stated above, there are times when the government does a good thing.

Quote

he Feds are subsidizing next generation possibilities while lots of industry types would like to keep doing it the same way as they have for decades

Yes. We saw how that worked in the 70's, when Japan was making vehicles people wanted and American firms were making the cars they wanted to make.

I look at the internet as something the government started that paid off huge. Private companies figured out how to effectively utilize it and expand the possibilities/capabilities. I compare the internet to GPS, actually. A government developed technology made commercially available.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[billvon 3,114]

> But I also recall it being featured in the movie War Games.

Really? I liked that movie but I don't recall a reference to the Internet. It was mostly point to point modem communications IIRC. But it's been a while so I could be wrong.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

> But I also recall it being featured in the movie War Games.

Really? I liked that movie but I don't recall a reference to the Internet. It was mostly point to point modem communications IIRC. But it's been a while so I could be wrong.

the WOPR computer was attached to every missile command site with the ability to handle broken lines of communication - the primary purpose around the design of Arpanet.

[brenthutch 444]

Quote

>Oh BTW this just in from Tesla:

More American companies having trouble. Must make you very happy. Perhaps there will be a big layoff somewhere; that would make your week!

OMG The gift that keeps on giving!

Consumer Reports slammed Fisker's flagship luxury plug-in, the Karma, on Tuesday, calling it "plagued with flaws."

"The Karma broke down on the Consumer Reports test track as a result of battery problems. Fisker subsequently offered replacement battery packs for all 2012 models, though Consumer Reports said its engineers had still noticed "disconcerting intermittent glitches related to the gauges, warning lights, power windows and radio""

http://money.cnn.com/2012/09/25/autos/fisker-karma-consumer-reports/index.html

[brenthutch 444]

"Chevy Volt broke monthly sales record in August as GM hails EV's momentum"

[billvon 3,114]

Some bad news for the antis . . .

==============
Chevy Volt tops most-loved car survey again

Chuck Burton / AP

General Motors' Chevrolet Volt plug-in hybrid car topped Consumer Reports' annual owner-satisfaction survey for the second straight year.

Ninety-two percent of Volt owners surveyed by the influential consumer magazine said they would definitely buy the Volt again, earning the electric car the top ranking. Last year, 93 percent of respondents said they would buy the car again.

"The Volt's two-year reign at the top of our satisfaction survey points to the continuing trend of owners' enthusiasm for cars that are fuel-efficient, especially as we see more and more hybrid and electric models hitting the market," Consumer Reports' auto editor, Rik Paul, said in a statement.

. . .

Consumer Reports said its survey received responses from owners of almost 350,000 vehicles spanning the 2010-2013 model years.
===============

And yet more bad news!

===============
Worldwide Electric Vehicle Sales to Reach 3.8 Million Annually by 2020
Tech 1/3/2013
Forbes

Since the launch of the Nissan Leaf and Chevrolet Volt, in late 2010, plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) have become more widely available. Hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs), which first appeared a decade earlier, are now selling steadily. According to a new report from Pike Research, annual worldwide sales of these vehicles, collectively referred to as electric vehicles (EVs), will reach 3.8 million by 2020.

. . .

Dave Hurst, senior research analyst with Pike Research, explains that overall sales of EVs have not lived up to automakers’ expectations nor politicians’ proclamations. But the market is expanding steadily as fuel prices remain high and consumers increasingly seek alternatives to internal combustion engines

“Indeed, sales of plug-in EVs will grow at a compound annual growth rate of nearly 40 percent over the remainder of the decade, while the overall auto market will expand by only two percent a year.” — Dave Hurst

While hybrid vehicles have been widely available for more than a dozen years, the market for plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) has grown rapidly in the last 2 years, reaching more than 120,000 unit sales worldwide in 2012. Earlier this year, Oregon and Washington states announced the West Coast Electric Highway.
=================

Sorry about the bad news on a Friday.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Some bad news for the antis . . .

==============
Chevy Volt tops most-loved car survey again

Chuck Burton / AP

General Motors' Chevrolet Volt plug-in hybrid car topped Consumer Reports' annual owner-satisfaction survey for the second straight year.

Ninety-two percent of Volt owners surveyed by the influential consumer magazine said they would definitely buy the Volt again, earning the electric car the top ranking. Last year, 93 percent of respondents said they would buy the car again.

"The Volt's two-year reign at the top of our satisfaction survey points to the continuing trend of owners' enthusiasm for cars that are fuel-efficient, especially as we see more and more hybrid and electric models hitting the market," Consumer Reports' auto editor, Rik Paul, said in a statement.

. . .

Consumer Reports said its survey received responses from owners of almost 350,000 vehicles spanning the 2010-2013 model years.
===============

And yet more bad news!

===============
Worldwide Electric Vehicle Sales to Reach 3.8 Million Annually by 2020
Tech 1/3/2013
Forbes

Since the launch of the Nissan Leaf and Chevrolet Volt, in late 2010, plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) have become more widely available. Hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs), which first appeared a decade earlier, are now selling steadily. According to a new report from Pike Research, annual worldwide sales of these vehicles, collectively referred to as electric vehicles (EVs), will reach 3.8 million by 2020.

. . .

Dave Hurst, senior research analyst with Pike Research, explains that overall sales of EVs have not lived up to automakers’ expectations nor politicians’ proclamations. But the market is expanding steadily as fuel prices remain high and consumers increasingly seek alternatives to internal combustion engines

“Indeed, sales of plug-in EVs will grow at a compound annual growth rate of nearly 40 percent over the remainder of the decade, while the overall auto market will expand by only two percent a year.” — Dave Hurst

While hybrid vehicles have been widely available for more than a dozen years, the market for plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) has grown rapidly in the last 2 years, reaching more than 120,000 unit sales worldwide in 2012. Earlier this year, Oregon and Washington states announced the West Coast Electric Highway.
=================

Sorry about the bad news on a Friday.

I dont care if companies want to build electric cars

What I dont want is governments pushing them on us and picking winners and loosers

Also
The bull shit EPA rules are about to close 12 coal plants in the eastern US

Electric prices are going to rise per Obama's wishes

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[DanG 1]

Quote

Electric prices are going to rise per Obama's wishes

Why do you think Obama wants electricity prices to rise? Please don't just say "power" or "control", as that makes no sense.

- Dan G

[Remster 30]

Quote

Electric prices are going to rise per Obama's wishes

Damm you Evil President! http://news.yahoo.com/gasoline-prices-predicted-fall-2013-193421544--finance.html

Wait what?

Remster

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Electric prices are going to rise per Obama's wishes

Why do you think Obama wants electricity prices to rise? Please don't just say "power" or "control", as that makes no sense.

You tell me

It makse no sense

But I could pull up the video where he says exactly what I posted

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln