Electric cars

Comrade Jim, I think he's been pretty frank about his real goal, which is redistribution of wealth.

The theory is that those without means have been cheated, and those with means got it unfairly.

As for freedom, taxes are necessary, but must be applied wisely, for there is no more certain abridgment of freedom than a government which requires its citizens to spend half their lives in its service.

Cheers, James Arthur ~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Democracy is two foxes and a chicken voting on what's for dinner." -various

More per kWhr might be less $$ overall. But the price is whatever it is, and that's what it should be.

I was looking at some schedules from California--the rates are like progressive taxation, ranging from zip if you're poor, to $0.14/kWhr for a basic quota, to $0.33/kWhr for business. I think. It was damn hard to decode. Thanks to bureaucrats.

As usual, part of the problem is energy costs are so hidden and distorted by subsidy, that it's hard to tell the real market price.

James Arthur

Lovins touts exactly the opposite--the technology is xxxx-fiber thermoplastic composite.

I'm not in a position to judge whether it's true.

Cheers, James Arthur

Several reasons:

1. Massive investment in capital equipment, tooling, supply facilities, worker training. All things that were available for consumer production after the war, with huge productivity benefits.

1. The development of a "work hard" culture, which persists in the USA to this day.

2. Bringing more women into the work force. No economy is going to prosper whan half of the available talent is shut out of important jobs.

1. Huge advances in technology, a lot of which was just happening anyhow.

2. Cars.

The New Deal sort of spending didn't really help much, because it was aimed at symptoms. The war sort of spending did, because it worked on fundamentals.

If Obamanomics does the New Deal thing, it will just burn money and make things worse. People need good jobs, and business creates jobs, so skew the "stimulus" to encouraging businesses to design and make stuff in the USA. Enduring infrastructure ain't bad either.

John

Well we were speaking of acceleration, which is what engines are currently sized for.

Cruising takes way less power, if you have regenerative braking then you've already got a better drivetrain with a smaller, more optimal ICE, and most cars carry but one passenger most of the time.

So, unless you weigh 2,200 lbs, none of your conditions normally apply.

Cheers, James Arthur

Composites are actually quite easy to repair - drop by a boatyard sometime. The same bondo that will fill a dent on your car and them make it rust out from behind will fill a hole on your composite panel and not make it rust out - or you could actually use the better stuff and the fix will be as strong as the original panel. In either case, the structure that the repair is fixed to won't defeat the repair by rusting away from under it.

As might not occur to the sunny southwestern portion of the group, old cars wouldn't need to be recycled nearly so much if they were not rusted out - you could just keep driving them, as it might make sense to do the sort of repairs that don't make sense when the repair will last longer than the "designed to rust away" car. Saturn provides a fine example of getting this exactly wrong - plastic fenders that don't rust away, brake lines that did, repeatedly, (indeed entire brake calipers and rotors that did, repeatedly) and several other corrosion traps - but it had fine looking fenders when it was hauled away...

Be sure it's hardwired to make some noise at all times the "ignition" is on. Don't tell the rednecks, but you're also fixing the main pedestrian complaint of electrics cars, that they make no noise and are thus dangrous to pedestrians, especially the blind, who don't and can't hear an oncoming vehicle.

Obama will see to that ;-)

...Jim Thompson

James Arthur wrote in news:dg%fl.2630$ snipped-for-privacy@nwrddc02.gnilink.net:

I agree with that. IMO,It should be the operators choice to not wear seatbelts or MC helmet,BUT,auto/MC insurers should not have to pay medical claims for those not wearing their seatbelts or helmet.

that is why the "rollcage" construction of the passenger compartment.

except that in practice,it's not economically feasible. Else the manufacturers WOULD be using it. The advantages being too great to ignore....allegedly.

passenger autos already have gone a long ways towards "streamlining"; HOWEVER,there's a point at where the interior space becomes impractical for more than 2 people,or for elderly,etc....

James Arthur wrote in news:3q%fl.2636$ snipped-for-privacy@nwrddc02.gnilink.net:

Yeah,and the Narod has pretty much denied or not heard any of it.

AGREED!

Jim Thompson wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

Just clip a playing card to the spokes of one of the wheels. like we used to do on our bicycles. 8-)

You're showing your age ;-)

...Jim Thompson

Does anybody remember when we had "checks and balances"?

Thanks, Rich

So, we should all drive Indy cars with lawnmower engines? ;-P

Cheers! Rich

You've answered your own question. it's _because_ it's that good, and simple, and so unacceptable to the bureaucrats and the people who want to be "safe" without bothering to learn to drive.

Cheers! Rich

Not to mention orders of magnitude cheaper. ;-)

Cheers! Rich

Didn't Corvettes used to be made of fiberglass? (or maybe they still are?)

Thanks, Rich

If it's such energetic stuff (which is their excuse for the NIMBY syndrome), then put one of those slugs at the bottom of my swimming pool and I'll use it to heat my house.

Maybe we should start a "YIMBY" movement. ;-)

Cheers! Rich

Just give him liposuction, and the fat would produce enough biodeisel to provide all of the US's energy needs for a year.

(don't forget to liposuck the fat head as well.) ;-)

Thanks, Rich