Apparently, The Obama Administration Is Writing Chevy Volt Ads Now
Written by Mockarena // January 28, 2012 // Hippies Smell // 55 Comments
Ok – that might be a bit of an exaggeration. But you’ll see what I mean if you watch this:
“This isn’t just the car we wanted to build, it’s the car America had to build.” SERIOUSLY!?!?!
The Volt has been a colossal failure. Did you know that each of these Volts has cost $250,000 in taxpayer money? A QUARTER OF A MILLION DOLLARS PER CAR, you guys. And even that wasn’t enough money to prevent a recall of 8000 of them (more than were sold last year).
FAIL.
55 Comments on "Apparently, The Obama Administration Is Writing Chevy Volt Ads Now"
Gag!
The Chevy Volt runs on coal. Liberals conveniently forget about where electricity actually comes from… And the lithium for the battery? A lot of it comes from Bolivia, Chile and Argentina. So, on the outside chance that electric cars were to catch fire (pun intended) with the general public, we’d be beholden to South America for most of our lithium. Is that energy independence?
This whole thing is just one big comedy of errors. And it would be funny if it weren’t so pathetic…
I am not sure that it can be considered a failure even though it cost a lot. For one thing, we dont know where its technology will take GM, for another, we dont know if it was an economic success or failure until the last one have been sold.
Personally i would love to have the European version of the Volt, The Opel Ampera.
Yeah I saw that, too. It’s not a commercial, it’s a political ad.
I read where Israel has taken the concept and perhaps made it a reality (you exchange the batteries when they are discharged, which are then recharged and given to someone else. They even have a station that will automatically switch out the batteries (supposedly)). However, gasoline there is something like $7.00 per gallon, and the longest drive is probably only 250 miles. It will still take some doing before electric cars can be a reality here.
What people also don’t realize is that it is more efficient to generate the power at the point of use. Gasoline, even though not hugely efficient, is more so than electricity, which normally is generated hundreds of miles away, with large loses between the generation site and where it is used. If someone has solar panels on their home charging their Volt, how many panels will it take? I don’t know, but if someone does let us know.
The Volt is so much FAIL..
1. It’s not a true “plug in” electric car. It’s a hybrid, with a gasoline engine.
2. It’s not a very efficient hybrid at that, you DO need to boost the battery from household current.
Because the brain-trust at Government Motors decided that traction-motor drive (like a locomotive) was the way to power a car…
ENER 1 the lithiom ion battery maker declared bankruptcy yesterday because there is not enough demand for those batteries for them to stay in business. $188 million in federal green stimulus money down the toilet. I am beginning to believe all this green stimulus money, and the bailout of GM is nothing more than a grand money laundering scheme by the Obama administration.
Does anyone besides me wonder why Obama is pushing electric cars, yet the EPA is on the warpath to shut down coal powered electricity generation? Think about it, increase demand for electricity, but lower the capacity to generate electricity. Solar and wind energy are not at a point where they can reliably replace our fossil fuel sources of energy. It all seems somewhat absurd to me.
Alan said, “It all seems somewhat absurd to me.”
That basically describes my opinion of the entire Obama agenda.
I have one question: If this is the car America had to build, why is it made in China? Oh, and why were 75% of the “jobs created by the GM bailout” overseas jobs and not US jobs? This thing failed on multiple levels, not just the engineering level.
I’ve written a string of blogs about subsidies, bailouts, and government intervention in business and personal life through unconstitutional executive branch regulations without legislation.
Here is the latest:
http://pg-matuszak.blogspot.com/2012/01/more-statist-theft-of-liberty.html
You can track back to my commentary on the Chevy Volt and other executive branch projects designed to control your life. The second hyperlink in this post connects to the one discussing the Volt.
Now I’m sitting back and waiting for the solar powered Ho-Hos, hydroelectric cupcakes, and wind-powered ding-dongs. Nevermind, the wind-powered Ding-Dongs are already killing Eagles in Southern California.
The Chevy Volt–the first electric car with an “internal combustion” engine!!!
Ha!
Like Simon mentioned, it’s fool-hardly to call anything a failure yet.
“This `telephone’ has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a practical form of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us.” – Western Union, 1878
It’s troubling that the government subsidizing so much instead of the market, but it’s not like the right complains when they was filling their coffers with Ag subsidies… It is also troubling that people are so close-minded and misinformed so their views are full of hate and ignorance.
Coal electric production is by far more efficient than the gas thermodynamic cycle, and current energy production isn’t necessary the future’s, with wind, solar, tidal, and hydro growing. Gasoline has a higher energy density than current batteries but they are improving every year and becoming cheaper in $/kwh terms, with less “memory” effects. A “plug-in electric car” is a series (not parallel) hybrid and the Volt was the first mass production of this kind here, but Jaguar is making one (the CX) as well as obviously the Prius plug-in. Look at the major automotive companies, which ones AREN’T investing in electrification of some sort? The future of the hybrid doesn’t even have to use batteries (flywheel accumulator like Porsche uses, or capacitors).
GM has been researching electrification for a long time and the technology was developed further with the Volt, and can be leveraged into the fleet, such as e-Assist which is a “hybrid lite” option , which improves mpg for the upcoming CAFE standard bumps (without the weight or cost increase of a traditional hybrid). It’s Americans fault car makers have to put so much energy in consuming it now, because we were spoiled by low gas prices and liked to drive big V8 SUVs and then freaked out when gas hits $4, which is still less than half the cost in much of Europe. The Opel Ampera will do well across the pond. It’s far too early to count out the Volt, like people did for street lights, radio, television, railroads, the automobile, nuclear power, human flight, space flight, personal computers… you get the idea. (ref: http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/neverwrk.htm)
Are you aware that Hamtramck is the town that the Muslims took over and now the call to prayer is broadcast over loudspeakers 5 times a day? Hamtramck is a city within the city limits of Detroit, and was primarily Polish until the Muslims moved in and took it over.
But wait…is that voice of George Clooney? yummy.
btw, look at the numbers. $3 billion for electric vehicles and batteries total…. $25 billion a year for farm subsidies… $4 billion a year for Big Oil subsidies, yet the Right attack the electric car only and defend the others. Hypocrisy? I think so. FWIW, I vote Republican yet refuse to march lock-step in the narrow-mindedness that is rampant.
We need farms. We need oil. We don’t want to import those things. We also have plenty of energy sources at our disposal which Obama refuses to use.
Volts? TOTALLY UNNECESSARY.
Slim that is Tim Allen doing the voiceover.
I am not for subsidies of any kind so quit assuming. Also subsidies, especially of the farm kind, not of the ethanol variety, are a little more complex than numba jockey will have you understand.
Crops are a commodity folks. If a farmer doesn’t make enough to cover his costs, replant, and earn some type of a living then you will starve. There has to be some predictability there to the future of farming. Yes commodities are dealt in futures. So is oil. People take far too much for granted in this country. Many never realize the downside to things or the cost.
The Volt is failure in the short term which will probably make it a failure in the long term. Few can afford it. No sales means no money for future endeavors such as taking that technology and making it a broader application of it. Unless some billionaire out there wants to take a long shot.
There is nothing green about the Volt or Hybrid cars. Quit fooling yourselves. Hell we can’t even dispose of the batteries in this country so we dump the toxic waste in other countries. Yeah that will make them love us.
Oh and BTW…electricity in California is so high that gasoline, despite it’s high cost, is still more cost efficient than electricity.
So the viability of the Volt totally depends on where you live as well.
Yes Mock, because without subsidies farms or oil would not exist or be produced here…
And Laurel, trying to say that farm subsidies primarily go to starving farmers is ridiculous.
Even one of the top conservative think tanks agrees, yet like the above hypocritical right think about their peers with selfish bias rather than on their own principles: http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2007/06/how-farm-subsidies-harm-taxpayers-consumers-and-farmers-too
“Farm subsidies are intended to alleviate farmer poverty, but the majority of subsidies go to commercial farms with average incomes of $200,000 and net worths of nearly $2 million.”
“Farm subsidies are intended to be consumer-friendly and taxpayer-friendly. Instead, they cost Americans billions each year in higher taxes and higher food costs.”
This isn’t the car we wanted build…it’s the car Obama told us to build!
numba_jockey: You have a problem with presumption and projection. I never nowhere or no how stated that farm subsidies go to starving farmers.
That is the reason subsidies came into existence but not the current reason they exist. Subsides have had a rubber band effect to put the small farmer out of business. I blame DC corruption for this.
Apparently you can’t read either since I said I wasn’t for subsidies. BTW…we do not subsidize oil companies. We give them tax breaks so they can spend a whole lot of money for oil exploration. There is a difference. Learn it and stop beating the media mantra leftist drum that you have been spoon fed willingly.
Originally food would not have existed without subsidies or price stabilization. Oil would be far more costly without the tax breaks.
To everything there is a positive and negative. Learn both.
Actually, it was the car that Bob Lutz envisioned. The same guy behind the Solstice, CTS, and Viper. And it was unveiled at the start of 2007, long before everything that followed with the company.
And if you hold reservations against batteries, that is fair. They require rare earth metals from some sketchy countries instead of oil from other sketchy countries, but if we don’t research and innovate, we won’t get anywhere with the technology. Research universities are working to bring better compounds and a sustainable future.
If you want more cars with more domestic or friendly-nation-supplied materials, capacitors are made here and also sourced from Canada, Australia, and Brazil. They are good for storage of small charges for short term rather than big charges for long term, which would be a good fit for city driving and parallel hybrid utilization. The same electrification tech that is being learned from battery-hybrids (the electric traction motors, regenerative brakes) will be utilized in capacitor hybrids, only without the cost of batteries or their weight, but benefits of better mpg.
But what is vital is people to not be so close-minded against something just because the pundits tell you to be. That is why government can’t get anything done because they argue based on bias and act like 5 year olds with their hands over their ears, shouting over any other viewpoint.
Laurel, ” If a farmer doesn’t make enough to cover his costs, replant, and earn some type of a living then you will starve.” Sure sounds like trying to imply that subsidies help farmers from starving.
You might not be for subsides but Mock is. (As long as they support the industries she supports)
Tax breaks for oil companies are different from the tax breaks given to Compact Power (as mentioned in the link of the original blog post)?
I don’t watch or read any left media… but thanks for assuming that if I don’t buy into the propaganda from the right Beck, I must be watching CNN.
I wouldn’t matter if this vehicle were everything they claim it to be. It could be the safest, best mileage, smoothest riding car in the world.
But, if people DON’T WANT TO BUY IT, there’s nothing anyone can LEGALLY do to change that.
Unless you belong the the slowbama administration, of course. THEN you can get people to buy such things as unwanted insurance, automobiles, and light bulbs.
numba_jockey: And sure sounds like the tone of your posts you are all for subsidizing the Volt and not anything else? Which is it?
As I said originally you presume then project and no little of what you are talking about.
This little comment is presumptive as well…”I don’t watch or read any left media… but thanks for assuming that if I don’t buy into the propaganda from the right Beck, I must be watching CNN.”
I think Beck is a blind squirrel but you would rather assume then project.
Get back to me when you learn economics in conjunction with market forces, what determines them, what effects them, and the general mechanics there of. I am not interested in your arm chair quarter backing, assumption or projection. So far your logic dictates throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
Skiv: Precisely!
Even without subsidies I am not sure this car would ever take off in the market due to the hassle of purchasing one and all that goes with it.
Whatever the case may be it is not eco friendly and neither is the Prius and other hybrid cars that they purport themselves to be.
I don’t think the government should subsidize any industry and market should prescribe products and prices. But like you mentioned, if it weren’t for oil tax breaks, then the price would be higher. This would encourage consumers to buy more fuel efficient cars, instead of demanding further government action so they can continue their with their huge SUVs.
How do you assume I watch left media and then get upset when I assume you must watch right media?
Look at the industry as see how many makers are producing EVs or working on it: Acura, Audi (E-tron), BMW (i8), Cadillac (ELR), Chevy obviously, Chrysler, Ferrari has a hybrid, Ford has several, Honda, Hyundai BlueOn, Infiniti’s ESCC, Jaguar’s CX, Lamborghini Minotauro, Lexus obviously, Lotus Elise turned into Tesla Roadster, Mercedes, Mitsubishi MiEV, Nissan Leaf, Peugeot, Porsche has a 911 GT3 hybrid as well as the 918 RSR, Rolls-Royce EV, Toyota obviously does, Volvo C30 electric.
It’s not like the administration is making all those companies produce them…
numba_jockey: I am not sure I would call Beck right wing media. I call him out there in the stratosphere media. Like I said…blind squirrel. He finds a nut once in awhile.
Do you understand marketing trends? Do you know what the substitute term for trend is? It’s called a fad. Hybrids are a fad that is rapidly fading because the marketing used to push the product is turning out to be a gigantic lie hence the rapidly growing number of lawsuits that are being filed.
You need to be aware you can’t push people to a market that doesn’t exist. The pie in the sky fuel efficient market doesn’t exist especially when one factors in things like lifestyles. Most people know there are trade off’s that have to be made in life. I will trade off paying for and using more gas than having to make multiple trips. Remember time is a priceless asset and convenience is the next most valuable behind it. Add in comfort as a third in that equation.
And while you may think lack of oil subsidies ie tax breaks would push people to fuel efficient cars I guarantee you it won’t because no one will have a job to head to that market that doesn’t exist. Why? Because oil is more about all of the products in our lives, to the tune of about 95%, than just our cars.
You are looking at the micro without first understanding the macro and how the two work together in conjunction with one another.
The solution to all of this of course is science. Find a way to make exploration more affordable. While natural gas may a good proponent in the equation realize there is little usable by product, if any, from it so the cost of everything else that is oil related in your life will rise a great deal. I have as of yet to make a mathematical equation to that effect but I suspect the savings would be little if any.
I think methane use shows a lot of promise but gets little attention IMO.
And realize comparing oil tax breaks to farm subsidies is apples to onions. The reasons behind both vary greatly and the effects are far different.
The whole Chevy Volt debate is incediary.
Are you saying people aren’t buying smaller and more fuel efficient vehicles? That it is just a fad or media wash over our eyes? Hybridization will grow and the industry will have several levels of electrification and efficiency from battery EVs (Leaf) to series hybrid (extended range EV like Volt) to parallel hybrid (Insight) to capacitor or KERS / flywheel accumulator (Porsche and Indy car / Formula 1) to turbocharged models to convert waste energy energy into better efficiency and finally, the gas or diesel engine which will use mass reduction in the car, selective cylinder firing, and fuel and ignition optimization to improve fuel economy.
You actually don’t make any point about how there isn’t a fuel efficient market. In a given segment or even the same model, cargo space don’t really change when you go for the more efficient engine. And “lite” hybrids won’t need as many batteries as full ones, nor will capacitors take up much space at all. The technology most companies are implementing has more performance and more economy, who is holding out for a low-tech, gas guzzling car?
Your guarantee makes no sense.
Natural Gas is an abundant resource and if you wanted a fuel that was found here, CNG would be your fuel of choice. (And you can convert your car and fill it at home, and there are some refilling stations).
Methane is what natural gas is made of… and can be generated from much of our waste, especially agricultural. There was interest in making the most of this when the prices almost had it make sense when oil peaked, and in the 1970s, but momentum has waned since oil got cheaper again. It’s sad that something that makes a lot of sense – anaerobic digesters which turn waste into energy and process it – can’t really make a dent in industry because of government subsidies helping its competition. Atlas Shrugged much?
You mentioned “Originally food would not have existed without subsidies or price stabilization.” Not sure what you are referencing, as one of the first agrarian cultures I think of is Eqypt. They gave their grain to the Pharoh (government) to store and keep in case of bad crops and hard times. This provided an insurance through taxation. This centrally planned agriculture was similar to the USSR’s where the state would take production and store it as well.
In the capitalist market, why is the government trying to centrally plan production, instead of letting it take place through the market? Why is the government providing insurance, when it could be done via private means and a more efficient market solution? Private crop insurance exists, but the government still provides theirs?
Sure, if farmers weren’t getting the subsidies, either they would make less profit or prices could go up… but there is also the benefit of competition and the market. Even if they prices go up, maybe we would eat less and be less obese and the government would have a LOT more money to help the less fortunate who might be negatively affected.
Both sides want to support their industries with tax benefits or other financial backing, but is that truly the free market?? Isn’t that crowding out other potential companies by propping up artificially those with enough lobbying money to get their votes in? If people respect the free market, they would truly “laissez faire”
Hmmmm, maybe there is a certain Darwinism in this. We all know that common sense and self preservation are being bred out of liberals. Maybe purchasing Chevy Volt’s is just speeding this process along.
Just a thought.
numba_jockey: Now you are babbling and parsing words, you are also ignoring points made because you can’t address them.
Sorry dear but those big ol’ gas guzzling vehicles are outselling and outlasting hybrids. Will that market improve? Yes, with quality improvement but there is no evidence it will replace larger market completely. Also you need to understand that geography coupled with lifestyle makes a huge difference.
And while you wax poetic about agrarian agriculture and Pharaohs you need to realize they had a lot of famine.
“In the capitalist market, why is the government trying to centrally plan production, instead of letting it take place through the market? Why is the government providing insurance, when it could be done via private means and a more efficient market solution? Private crop insurance exists, but the government still provides theirs?”
I am not sure the government is centrally planning production as much as it is insuring continuity of production. But that is a good question. Some serious lessons had to be learned from the Dust Bowl. One cannot buy at any price what doesn’t exist. If the market is flooded with food, then it gets cheaper however the farmer doesn’t make enough to plant the following year. Private crop insurance doesn’t work the way regular insurance does and you need to understand that insurance only gives enough to replant. That doesn’t help high prices of food or no food at all. One cannot eat insurance.
“Even if they prices go up, maybe we would eat less and be less obese and the government would have a LOT more money to help the less fortunate who might be negatively affected.”
Nonsense. Obesity has more to do with quality then availability as well as changing of lifestyles. We have an obesity epidemic mainly due to an abundance of technology but other factors come into play as well. Look at history. With the advent of technology waistlines have expanded and contracted accordingly. The obesity epidemic is temporary and a sign of the times. Civilization will adjust but it always happens at a slower pace. Furthermore your premise would hurt the poor even more.
“If people respect the free market, they would truly “laissez faire”
Please learn what that means before using it.
Have a nice day.
I’m not ignoring points, I cannot understand your jumble of words that you believe counts as English: “And while you may think lack of oil subsidies ie tax breaks would push people to fuel efficient cars I guarantee you it won’t because no one will have a job to head to that market that doesn’t exist.”
Really? How were Hummer sales doing in 2007, 2008? How about Minis? And you can fit a surprising amount in a Cooper too. I NEVER said that hybrids would replace the gas market, as clearly I said there would be a large range of electric to hybrid to gas options. And lifestyle and geography will play well into that, with small EVs in cities, extended range plug-in hybrids in the suburbs, and greater efficiency gas or diesels on the highway.
If the government isn’t trying to plan how much is planted, then why does it pay people to NOT plant and grow on some of their land? (CRP)
I know what that means, which is why the right who say the left is trying to ruin the free market are hypocrites when they themselves support tariffs, subsidies, tax credits, etc. You can’t pick and choose as you like! Attack battery tax breaks yet charge a tariff on ethanol to protect domestic industries that have ‘support’ in Congress is laughable, yet people are diehard supporters because pundits tell them it is the RIGHT thing to believe.
numba_jockey: Settle down there fella. We agree more than you think.
“If the government isn’t trying to plan how much is planted, then why does it pay people to NOT plant and grow on some of their land? (CRP)”
You are leaving the economics out the equation here. What happens when a forced scarcity occurs? What happens when the market is flooded with goods? Prices go up and down. Supply and Demand. Believe it or not the Dept. of Agriculture doesn’t just randomly pick crops that are to be tossed or purchased by the govt. There is a formula to it. The reason this takes place is so the market isn’t flooded with a product, let’s say oranges, then prices bottom out and the farmer cannot make enough to cover costs or replant. The subsidies are in place to provide continuity.
Now I am not saying I agree with it, but I am giving you the logic behind it. Personally I don’t agree with it. The farmer is smart enough to grow another crop IMO, or make the money in volume but that puts the small farmer into dire straits…if there are any small farmers left since subsidies killed that too. Don’t get me started on that….
The rest of your post shows you agree with me. Remember though that the longer hybrids are on the road, the more people will see the viability or not in them. Time will tell. However, the government should of never interfered into that market. There is a reason private investment has steered clear of it, and there is a reason the tax payers are losing their shirts over it.
You would be surprised at how much I fit into my VW Beetle as well. However, I have one child, grown, and regardless it still cant be used as a family car. I have a SUV for that. I can tell you as a Mom anyone with more than one kid is doomed on those cars. Even when my child wasn’t grown I couldn’t use that car for field trips etc. Most people cannot afford to own cars like they do shoes. Cars are multi-purpose but shoes are for certain occasions.
numba: One other thing. I don’t know too many conservatives who believe in tariffs, subsidies, etc. I have a farmer friend in Illinois who grows corn and soy. He gets ethanol subsides from the govt. He hates them but the govt. forced them upon him and has no choice.
As the tax code currently stands I do support certain breaks. What I would rather see is a no frills flat tax but I doubt that would happen since it would take a lot of power out of DC.
That’s not really how CRP works… http://cornandsoybeandigest.com/conservation/usda-looks-how-rising-commodity-prices-may-affect-crp / http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1139&context=uer . Focused on paying farmers to NOT farm corn and soy even as price (and demand) increase. If you want a good look at all this, watch King Corn – it’s fair and not lefty leaning, just a nice perspective at how increasing yields changed our food to processed things like McDonalds that are unhealthy and make us obese. Like you said, quality is important and the commodity-heavy food industry is low quality because of the subsidizing of it.
Again, innovation and higher yields and better (low or no till) practices will improve CRP’s goals, but in the meantime… is the government really effective in its economic intervention? Should it be intervening?
I agree in that we shouldn’t be funding huge corporate farms with American taxpayer’s money. But look again at who has more voice – the small farmer or the corporate one and the big Ag companies…
The government shouldn’t interfere with the market, like it did with E85. Or it does with oil. Or it does with corn and soy. But as China and India have growing demands for oil (look at Chinese growth in drivers), we will have to become much more efficient or drive a whole lot less. There will ALWAYS be people who prefer pure petrol engines and V8s, and as long as they have money and there is a free market, they will continue to buy them. (Unless, of course, the government interferes like they did with light bulbs or Cash 4 Clunkers) For the average consumer, smaller engines, more efficient engines, and more electrification will make sense. So many new technologies are being implemented across the board, like direct injection, which provides power and mpg! I personally would like a Volt because it’d reduce my costs dramatically and leave gas for my “fun” motoring activities, which I’d love a capacitor or KERS in too. The truth is, after a hybrid battery is no longer useful for automobile because the DoD will be below standard, it will still be highly useful for industrial or residential purposes. Recycled/Re-used batteries could significantly improve the demand asymmetry that power stations have to deal with (day vs. light loads).
Losing their shirts? $3 billion / 300 million = $10 per US citizen. Granted only 53% of people pay taxes, so let’s say $20 per person, and more weighted for higher earners. You can’t even buy some shirts for $50 even…
The underlying thought is understood though about ‘wasting’ government spending, but if you want to attack government handing out subsidies and money to meddle in the market, you should include all of it, not just a targeted portion that is leading to innovation and will be needed in the future, and provide new areas of industry growth. (And primarily because leftys drive Priuses, therefore all hybrids have to suck and be the spawn of hippies, yet Volts aren’t liked by them as much as they are liked for their cool technology. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/04/business/04hybrid.html)
Of course, that SHOULD HAVE been done via research universities, private capital, and entrepreneurship… but who said government was smart? Somewhere in this century people determined they cannot take care of themselves and expect the government to fix everything. So maybe the voters are dumb to think they can vote for money and jobs. (Bread and circuses indeed)
You are absolutely right that flat tax and leaving the market alone would pull power out of DC, as well as $$$$. (lobbying money) And what politician would ever want to see that? And think about what the market effects (good ones in my opinion) to remove rewards for more children than you can afford, buying a house on a mortgage, or racking up student loan debt? We subsidize things to enjoy consumption and push people to buy a house, even if it is questionable, and then surprise, surprise, we have bubbles in the housing market and also education. AND THEN, the craziness is that we expect and give power to the government to fix the problem they made, and usually create ANOTHER set of problems that we have to look forward to.
And I think your sentence I didn’t understand may have been saying that higher oil prices would reduce employment in many industries… but we did not see that happen when oil got expensive. People remained in plastics and other petro-influenced areas, although we did see innovation that produced foam for car seats, carpet, and ‘plastic’ cups out of agricultural commodities. And a good portion of the food price increases at the time were connected to the transportation costs because of oil and diesel being up… and what happened = more trucking companies invested in hoods over the cab, aerodynamic panels under the trailer, and even a tail on the truck to reduce fuel consumption. We also saw innovation in packaging and backhaul strategies, which reduced waste and made new business opportunities occur.
The market is best left alone, with high prices driving new ideas and innovation, instead of transferring taxpayer money to parties which profit most from intervention.
So yes, Laurel, we agree more than we disagree. My trouble with modern politics is focusing on one subsidy because it is associated with the other party’s interests while generally defending its own interests (and lobbying support). That party support is then continued by the followers, even if against the basic principles that was used to attack the other side. Government shouldn’t be a contest of who can influence legislation the most, and most conservatives, especially those who likes Atlas Shrugged should concur – particularly when we want to support “free market” and capitalism.
One of the biggest aspects of narrow-mindedness is about renewable energy and how it is thrown into the hippie tree-hugger camp to be villianized by the right. That makes the right seem like old foggies who are more concerned with protecting interests in oil than keeping a market. Like pandering to voters about cheap oil and jobs. BUT! There are people who want solar power for example, and there is money to be made: http://www.fastcoexist.com/1679215/4-market-niches-in-the-solar-boom
Although, the narrow-view as “People here want more space in a small car” or X renewable power will never be competitive, it overlooks all the potential market in the developing world. Unlike in the US – were the vast majority of people have direct access to natural gas, electric, clean water, and sewage – people in Africa, India, and China do not have readily available access to these things. Solar panel companies are making good models for people in India who don’t have power, methane anaerobic digesters are doing well in Africa where kerosone creates health hazards, and way too many people don’t have access to proper toilets nor clean water.
Instead of focusing on how to create demand in the US, or to get consumers to buy more crap we don’t need, or like ANOTHER facebook or similar, we should be encouraging entrepreneurs to look to the place where consumption is driving up our energy prices as a place to deliver renewable energy products. That demand exists and a broad opportunity because of the sheer numbers. And it’s basic needs being met, not just stuff they want, so they will absolutely be buying this as more and more, especially in China and India, enter the middle class.
That technology won’t have to be subsidized by our government and will improve through time and competition, and the end result will be much more innovative and competitive for US customers.
numba_jockey: You are wandering off the cliff there fella. The problem of where I disagree with you is what you classify as a subsidy and a tax credit. They are not one and the same. Learn the difference. If you don’t like either subsidies or tax credits then push for monumental tax reform.
You are correct about the different parties in their support, but you are incorrect as to the history of subsidies and why. If you are going to make a knowledgeable decision on something you need the full history.
The problem with green energy is it isn’t green. Perhaps if the greenies haven’t been committing terrorist acts, blackmail, and then selling a product that is hypocritical to the masses then ‘green energy’ would be a little more embraced. Another problem with it is it isn’t cost effective by any measure and can at best fulfill only 7% of our energy needs. Greenies have also violated the fundamental rights of the citizens of this nation and totally undermined property rights which foundational to this Republic via our founding documents. They use a lot of fraud to do it as well.
It is too late for the green movement. Just because they are blind squirrel finding a nut once and awhile makes no difference. People are going deaf from it.
I also admit I skimmed over your last two posts because they are getting increasingly intense. I get that you feel strongly about this. I get that you feel you are the only one right. I get that you feel the need to carve out an individual stance. I get that you feel.
I don’t feel. I save my feelings for my husband and family, and friends. I think.
“Although, the narrow-view as “People here want more space in a small car” or X renewable power will never be competitive, it overlooks all the potential market in the developing world. Unlike in the US – were the vast majority of people have direct access to natural gas, electric, clean water, and sewage – people in Africa, India, and China do not have readily available access to these things. Solar panel companies are making good models for people in India who don’t have power, methane anaerobic digesters are doing well in Africa where kerosone creates health hazards, and way too many people don’t have access to proper toilets nor clean water.
Instead of focusing on how to create demand in the US, or to get consumers to buy more crap we don’t need, or like ANOTHER facebook or similar, we should be encouraging entrepreneurs to look to the place where consumption is driving up our energy prices as a place to deliver renewable energy products. That demand exists and a broad opportunity because of the sheer numbers. And it’s basic needs being met, not just stuff they want, so they will absolutely be buying this as more and more, especially in China and India, enter the middle class.”
You don’t report the environmental impact of all that green energy being utilized by India and China. Yes there is one. It is also what makes it so expensive. You leave out the economics. why is it more viable there than here? There is a reason for that.
If you encouragement to entrepreneurs then be careful who you elect. the single biggest obstacle to entrepreneurs is big government. And let me tell you green energy is not going to produce innovation at the level of the space program. Green energy is quite a bit older than the space program and hasn’t produced 1/10th of the innovation. I get that you are jazzed about it. good! Maybe you could be on the forefront of it. You are correct that electric might be marketable in foreign countries but when were we ever talking about that? And while it may seem narrow to you, marketing is rarely defined in narrow terms. That is known as niche marketing. Most people want to sell on a broad basis. Niche marketing also tends to have a high dollar amount attached to it. They are marketing electric cars in foreign countries currently using your tax dollars with those trade agreements you disliked in a previous post. But I wonder if you see the fallacy in your own post? Read it again. Your logic has a hole in it.
I think this conversation has reached it’s zenith.
numba: “Focused on paying farmers to NOT farm corn and soy even as price (and demand) increase. If you want a good look at all this, watch King Corn – it’s fair and not lefty leaning, just a nice perspective at how increasing yields changed our food to processed things like McDonalds that are unhealthy and make us obese. Like you said, quality is important and the commodity-heavy food industry is low quality because of the subsidizing of it.”
That is but one slice of subsidies and one type. Do you know the others?
Clearly you’re biased against renewable energy or any idea about being sustainable like a lot of the right, because of their hatred for hippies. It’s unfortunate to be full of such prejudice and shows poorly when attempting to converse as a collective society.
Rappers drive Escalades, among other people, but they are most visible and stereotypical. Escalades are luxury SUVs. Therefore, people who drive luxury SUVs are rappers? (The same logic is used for all hybrids because of environmentalists who are obsessed with Priuses, although they don’t even think the Toyota Camry Hybrid “is strong enough of a statement”) The Volt ought to be judged on its own merits, not on pure ignorant hatred.
So all green industry people are fraud and try to steal your rights? Terrorists?
The point I was trying to make is you only think about YOUR lifestyle and situation, or those under similar constraints or access to the same things. The world is future of demand, not just within our borders. And while using your tax dollars to market to other country’s customers isn’t fair… it should not require subsidizing! But our politicians are focused on personally impacting industries and think the only way to do anything is waiving money. It’s there, and an opportunity to develop the technologies through organic means, and we ought not have to fund it to make it happen.
“You leave out the economics. why is it more viable there than here? There is a reason for that.”
I mentioned it – that there is no centralized power, gas, or sewage access for a lot of users. Hence, there is no easy or cheap competition. Where you compare solar panels to the electric company’s cost, they don’t have that hook up.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2011-07-02-india-rural-solar-power_n.htm
“With 40 percent of India’s rural households lacking electricity and nearly a third of its 30 million agricultural water pumps running on subsidized diesel, “there is a huge market and a lot of potential,”
Despite decades of robust economic growth, there are still at least 300 million Indians — a quarter of the 1.2 billion population — who have no access to electricity at home. Some use cow dung for fuel, but they more commonly rely on kerosene, which commands premium black-market prices when government supplies run out.”
Solar panels are worse than kersone lamps for the environment?
CRP: You said the government wasn’t trying to control or limit production, and I pointed out how they were in the farm bill.
Fortunately, not ALL Republicans are full of disdain for renewable energy or the industry. Look at the governor selected to respond to the president’s state of the union address, and one of Mock’s favorite politicians.
http://www.issues2000.org/Governor/Mitch_Daniels_Energy_+_Oil.htm
“The upside for America, in new energy industry jobs, is too large for us to continue a suicidal national policy. That includes renewable sources. I join with those who look forward to the rapid growth of wind and solar power, and unlike many of my free market allies, I believe in some degree of subsidy and research to jump-start their arrival as meaningful energy contributors. In the last few years, Indiana has led America in the growth of wind power, with our administration’s active encouragement.”
“In 2009, several young companies who may lead the electric vehicle industry chose Indiana for their plants. Many of their suppliers are following them. Our goal is to be the capital of this potentially massive industry of tomorrow.
Over the last two years, Indiana has been the fastest growing state in wind power, and now businesses seeking to build the equipment for this new industry are coming. Within weeks, you’ll see us explode onto the solar power landscape.” – 2010 State of the State
Daniels endorsed setting goal of 25% renewable energy by 2025
http://www.25×25.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=181&Itemid=209
Endorsements
Governor: Mitch Daniels
Congress: Sen. Lugar
Rep. Pence
Much be a misguided hippie… or maybe not everyone is as painfully close-minded.
numba: You are off the rails again. I never said I was against renewable energy. What I am implying is that it isn’t the panacea people purport it to be. Previous tactics used in the name of green energy has hurt the cause of green energy…there simply is no denying that. You want to know what green energy I am for? NUCLEAR! LOTS OF IT!
I also am against the land grab the government is doing to create all of this ‘renewable’ energy as well. Land grabs and set asides tend to drive up the cost of land for people like you and me, or our children who would like to own a home one day.
Throwing up Republicans that support it has zero effect on me. I’m not some blind sheeple. I think the Republicans are as big a charlatans at times as the Democrats, Independents, Libertarians.
“Solar panels are worse than kersone lamps for the environment?”
Do you have any idea how a solar panel is made or with what it is made?
Yeah I didn’t think so.
Now tell me how India is going to charge those cars when they don’t have electricity….
Numba,
As you said repeatedly there is so much government money in this crap. Government money is code for “Money we forcibly take from your paychecks and then may or may not give back to you by June the next year, while we will pay you NO interest”. 3 alternative energy companies that have been heavily financed by the Obama administration have gone belly up this week alone. By the way, the billions that each company “borrowed” from me? We will NEVER SEE A DIME!
How many more need to go bankrupt for you to see that this whole thing is bull?
The Volt catches on FIRE if you drive it more than 40 miles. The TESLA car is just a theory, All of them will need power generated from COAL to survive. Solar power is ineffective in any area that does not have desert like condition of at least 300 sunny days a year. Wind Turbine power requires lubricants that are more corrosive and have a higher environmental impact than burning gasoline for the same period of effect. Hydro electric depends on the earth being static, and having a steady river to wheel, and it’s not possible outside of the theory room. There are next to no areas for Geothermal collection that are stable enough for the facilities to collect it even once it becomes reality and not Science Fiction. Nuclear is to dangerous according to the critics.
Private industry has more of an ability to discover what is worth pursuing than Government EVER WILL. The Beer Industry paid for the invention of refrigeration, which lead to air conditioning, they also are responsible for pasteurization, germ theory, and modern medicine. By the way, they also paid to research the mass production of glass bottles which lead to the end of Child Labor in America. I’d say that’s even bigger than the Internet and the 300,000 lb bunker buster bomb, and that’s only one industry.
But corporations are bad and government is the answer for all.
“I never said I was against renewable energy.”
Your repeated attacks against it would have me fooled… and it makes it seem like you are even against private ventures into it.
Again you make blanket statements against renewable energy as it is going to rob your grand childs of a home. http://www.indianabusinessnews.com/main.asp?SectionID=31&SubSectionID=232&ArticleID=55548
“I don’t know anybody who leases their land for turbines that doesn’t like them,” Blaney said. “Wind is not going to solve all the energy problems in North America, but it helps alleviate them, and it certainly helps the agricultural community. In Texas it saved some ranches when some people got behind in their payments.
“In the long-run maybe it can help preserve the family farm.”
People choose to lease their land and only marginally decrease usage crop land – portions that were likely to be CRP’ed anyway.
Dan Delong signed up.
“The footprints are really small. It’s not like they’re going to make a big huge disruption in our farming ground,”
Of course it’s not a panacea, who said it was? Now you’re just building a straw man to argue against. The idea is to reduce the headwinds of growing global demand with efficiency and renewables. If we simply remain stagnant, prices will continue to drive higher. We have made progress but people being sticks in the mud doesn’t help.
Solar panels are made of silicon, and it is “an abundant non-metallic chemical element which makes up almost 30% of the earth’s crust and is the 7th most common element in the Universe.”
There’s a vast difference in needs of developing countries, based on demographics and geography (like you mentioned about the US). Clearly the people who are rural and off the grid have poor access to electricity, but those in cities have much better. Chinese companies and those selling to Chinese are designing electric cars for them, for city commuting. Trying to compare rural developing to their cities like you did is like comparing Montana with New York… Rural makes more sense to focus on methane/CNG cars, if you know… they could afford them. With better agricultural practices, and after sanitation, maybe. Methane could be produced on-site via waste (as previously mentioned)
Ali, I feel you are strongly biased and shooting from opinion solely and slight misinformation… but at least you watched How Beer Saved the World. That’s the one useful part of your comment, besides coal/nuclear/wind/hydro/geothermal are all bad, so what’s your answer?
Private is the right way to go, once again you are playing against a straw man with “corporations are bad”, it is clear government rarely has intelligent or feasible/effective answers but it is also clear that your narrow-mindedness only allows you to equate disagreeing with your viewpoints as leftist/hippie. That perverts your worldview as RIGHT or wrong, where people can be fiscally conservative or Republican but believe in private investment in sustainable development.
And a link I included above mentioned, Solyndra did fail because of a bad solar panel market – it lost because of a good one with cheaper panels made than it could manage. It focused on an unproven technology to avoid a pricey aspect of conventional panels, which ended up dropping dramatically in price.
“Solyndra and Evergreen in particular suffered because they pursued unusual technologies whose competitiveness depended on their using less polysilicon, the main material for solar panels. That has become less important because polysilicon prices have tumbled more than 80 percent in the last three years as output has caught up with demand.”
Basically, the government didn’t need to be involved and try to artificially drive the market, they bet on an unique strategy and the market ended up proving it to be a poor one. Economics naturally would have brought down solar panel prices and advance them.
*sorry: It did NOT fail because of a bad solar market.
And if I want to personally buy one and use it, how does it negatively affect anyone else? (as long as company funded by private capital, not the government). If anything, it benefits others by ever so slightly reducing demand. Same with the programmable thermostats which don’t waste energy keeping an empty house warm. Or composting and reducing the need to buy it from Lowes while decreasing trash amount. How are my sustainable choices harmful?
You’re all such a sad little bunch of misinformed sheep. None of you geniuses believe in global warming or the need for any kind of alternative fuel, so you make fun of everything that’s good and green. What a bunch of idiots. Too bad you’re not the ones who have to inherit this polluted crap pile of a planet that you’re leaving for everyone else. Rot.
Liz – thanks for proving everything I thought to be true about the blind koolaid drinkers who fall for this crap. You only hear what you want to hear.
Don’t you have a tree to hug somewhere?
Hey Chicks: I see MOTUS linked to you today…
http://www.michellesmirror.com/2012/02/visas-volts-and-cheeky-ads.html#comments
That’s kind of a big deal because her blog just made one of the top 150 coservative sites according to Alexa. Not quite an “Instalanche”, but better than a poke in the eye.
http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2012/01/top-150-conservative-websites-1q12.html
Go Patriots!
We are big fans of MOTUS!
The reasons why smart people do not buy Electric or Hybrid cars are: Batteries are expensive, short lived, efficiency isn’t 100 % and the electricity is not free. Going electric you won’t decrease Air Pollution because 50 % of the electricity is produced by burning COAL. By the way a Jetta Diesel, TDI for $23000 makes 40MPG. With a full tank of Chevy Volt, driving non-stop, you make 37MPG, plus the price of electricity you charged the hefty 750-pound battery pack.