Obama backed A123 battery manufacture declares bankruptcy
#21
TECH Regular
Thread Starter
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
most energy sources are going to come at the expense of something, of course. but coal is one of the dirtiest forms out there and has HUGE negative repercussions. its a matter of time until it runs out, thats a fact. you can invest into turning your country into a wasteland, or by using your means to invest in a less destructive form of energy.
thats one of romneys more forward speaking points to 'boost the economy' is deregulating coal mine rules and keystone (which by the way could only meet at MOST 5% of our national usage).
thats one of romneys more forward speaking points to 'boost the economy' is deregulating coal mine rules and keystone (which by the way could only meet at MOST 5% of our national usage).
#22
TECH Resident
iTrader: (20)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Audi is doing some interesting things with regard to fuels, not viable yet, but hopefully in the not so distant future...The Navy is working on making a JP5 jet fuel from seawater as well
http://www.autoblog.com/2012/10/08/a...arbon-neutral/
http://www.autoblog.com/2012/10/08/a...arbon-neutral/
#23
TECH Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
most energy sources are going to come at the expense of something, of course. but coal is one of the dirtiest forms out there and has HUGE negative repercussions. its a matter of time until it runs out, thats a fact. you can invest into turning your country into a wasteland, or by using your means to invest in a less destructive form of energy.
What? Are we talking about the same entity that STILL hasnt passed a budget?
#24
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Hey BBQ, sounds like you've had your head too close to the grill! Communism DOES NOT WORK! It's a failure everywhere it's been chosen as a form of gov't. Wake up, quit listening to the liberal media!
#26
On The Tree
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Okay a question for you since you must have paid attention in middle school science class. If the worlds population and energy consumption is constantly growing, and the amount of energy is fixed, how is that sustainable?
#27
TECH Regular
iTrader: (2)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
But yes, I support population controls as well. If there were only a billion humans on earth then there would be much less scarcity and thus people wouldn't be starving. Population control is perhaps the easiest way to increase everyone's quality of life. And that starts through free education and free birth control methods.
#28
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Ft. Worth-ish
Posts: 600
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Using coal is dirty, but it has cleaned up a lot over the decades. How dirty is battery production and disposal? Care to have more heavy metals in the environment? Someone else hit the nail on the head with the rare earth metals and China. Mining is mining no matter what you are getting whether it is coal or rare earth metals. Not to mention the largest user of coal are power plants. As a nation we are stressing our current amount of power plants, and those "green" batteries are going to require power to charge them that come from.... Yes! A power plant! So more coal will me be used, and more power plants will be needed whether they're gas, coal, or nuke.
I'm fine with keystone. Once its buried, you'll have little evidence that its there. The Trans Alskan pipeline has been around since the 70's, and its above ground. I guarantee the people opposed to pipelines will be among the first to start whining about higher fuel prices. Just like they're usually the ones that bitch first when taxes get raised to support their socialist programs.
And population control? Should we start calling each other "comrad" too? Care to do your part and abstain or off yourself when you get old?
I'm fine with keystone. Once its buried, you'll have little evidence that its there. The Trans Alskan pipeline has been around since the 70's, and its above ground. I guarantee the people opposed to pipelines will be among the first to start whining about higher fuel prices. Just like they're usually the ones that bitch first when taxes get raised to support their socialist programs.
And population control? Should we start calling each other "comrad" too? Care to do your part and abstain or off yourself when you get old?
#31
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (6)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Thats not including sewer lines, oil pipelines (NG is pictured above), waste water lines, or storm sewer lines. All have to be dug up just like any other pipeline, they all have to be approved by the property owner, all property owners are reimbursed for any current or future damages, and are compensated for every 16.5 feet of pipeline laid into their property. This keystone pipeline is between the contractor (trans canada) and the property owners, and doesnt impact anybody else . If the property owner doesnt want the PL for whatever reason all they have to do is refuse and the contractor will reroute to PL. Happens every single day.
#32
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (6)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
the bankruptcy of a company who was given 125 million dollars in less than 2 years should speak volumes of how unprofitable renewables are. This is the 3rd or 4th green energy firm to belly up, its not that renewables arent feasable, its just not a profitable form of energy. Last time I checked, my car relies on oil and gasoline to move, and I'll be damed to be forced to buy a $40k dollar hybrid car (ironically still uses oil and gas to move) that doesnt even suit my needs for my daily life. Force green energy all you want, demonize profits all you want, but you need to be profitable in order to stay in business. They dropped that plant that was suppose to build batteries for the chevy volt, GM cam to the conclusion it was actually cheaper to build a battery over seas, pay to freight it over here via cargo ship, and cheaper to pay the foreign taxes/tarrifs than it is to build it here and ship it via truck.
#33
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
What I don't want is the short sighted, profit driven free market making all the decisions for me. I certainly don't advocate communism, I'm a left libertarian. I just don't think the free market is the end all solution.
Yes, sometimes it takes institutions with more foresight to plan ahead then corporations: it's called government. Public roads are a testament to that. And yes, in case you didn't pay attention during middle school science class, there are forms of sustainable renewable energy on earth. What is needed to make them accessible is investment and no businesses are willing to make investments that far ahead.
"I don't know, that sounds like communism to me" sounds like fear mongering left over from the cold war being drummed up by a certain political party to me...
Yes, sometimes it takes institutions with more foresight to plan ahead then corporations: it's called government. Public roads are a testament to that. And yes, in case you didn't pay attention during middle school science class, there are forms of sustainable renewable energy on earth. What is needed to make them accessible is investment and no businesses are willing to make investments that far ahead.
"I don't know, that sounds like communism to me" sounds like fear mongering left over from the cold war being drummed up by a certain political party to me...
#34
Launching!
iTrader: (19)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Houston, Tx
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
How was this a prospective company? You can't blame GM for A123's bankruptcy. GM was using their batteries in the Chevy Spark. The contract that A123 lost was for the Chevy Volt, and those batteries were supplied by a South Korean company, not the Chinese. They were also supposed to supply BMW with batteries as well as Fisker. It was another case of Obama throwing taxpayer money at a company simply because it's "green". This is what happens when someone with zero business experience makes decisions.
It's funny you posted a picture of a strip mine. Where do you think all those rare earth metals used to make batteries come from? Do you know who has the most rare earth metals? China.
Obama declared war on coal despite the fact that coal mining provides jobs as well as a cheap, secure energy source produced right here in the U.S.. We're going to use energy so why not use our own.
I'm happy Romney wants the keystone pipeline.
It's funny you posted a picture of a strip mine. Where do you think all those rare earth metals used to make batteries come from? Do you know who has the most rare earth metals? China.
Obama declared war on coal despite the fact that coal mining provides jobs as well as a cheap, secure energy source produced right here in the U.S.. We're going to use energy so why not use our own.
I'm happy Romney wants the keystone pipeline.
the bankruptcy of a company who was given 125 million dollars in less than 2 years should speak volumes of how unprofitable renewables are. This is the 3rd or 4th green energy firm to belly up, its not that renewables arent feasable, its just not a profitable form of energy. Last time I checked, my car relies on oil and gasoline to move, and I'll be damed to be forced to buy a $40k dollar hybrid car (ironically still uses oil and gas to move) that doesnt even suit my needs for my daily life. Force green energy all you want, demonize profits all you want, but you need to be profitable in order to stay in business. They dropped that plant that was suppose to build batteries for the chevy volt, GM cam to the conclusion it was actually cheaper to build a battery over seas, pay to freight it over here via cargo ship, and cheaper to pay the foreign taxes/tarrifs than it is to build it here and ship it via truck.
As far a green energy, I'm sure at some point in the future it will be profitable and compete with oil and gas. This however, is not happening anytime soon and the more the government keeps investing in failing companies, the longer it will take to reach that point.
#35
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Houston,Tx
Posts: 1,844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Anyone in here can do there part and buy wind energy to power their house, just ask your provider. O and it is going to cost you more per kilowatt BTW so hope you are ok with that.
You can buy a battery car that has a shorter life span than any other vehicle and has to be subsidized to attempt to be affordable.
You can buy solar panels for your house. Did I mention that they have to be subsidized to be affordable and generally don't pay for them selves by the end of their life span?
Why are we not building nuclear power plants?
ALL smoke and mirrors to line the pockets of their buddies.
EDIT: The comment above about the government investing spurred another thought. Why do we allow foreign companies to come here and put up wind turbines and reap the benefits of all our government subsidies which we the tax payers pay for?
When it is all said and done America is not business / manufacturing friendly any more.
You can buy a battery car that has a shorter life span than any other vehicle and has to be subsidized to attempt to be affordable.
You can buy solar panels for your house. Did I mention that they have to be subsidized to be affordable and generally don't pay for them selves by the end of their life span?
Why are we not building nuclear power plants?
ALL smoke and mirrors to line the pockets of their buddies.
EDIT: The comment above about the government investing spurred another thought. Why do we allow foreign companies to come here and put up wind turbines and reap the benefits of all our government subsidies which we the tax payers pay for?
When it is all said and done America is not business / manufacturing friendly any more.
Last edited by sleepersilverado; 10-17-2012 at 11:34 AM.
#36
TECH Regular
iTrader: (2)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Yea actually, I don't plan on having children. If anything I will adopt. It's a selfish and egotistical gesture when there are so many children who can't get food as it is to add to the problem by wantonly creating more mouths to feed, backs to clothe, and heads to shelter.
So at what point would you advocate population controls? Or maybe you think we should just let it happen via the inevitable wars that will result from an exponentially growing population outgrowing resources?
#38
TECH Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
You're an idiot if you think advocating population control makes you a communist...
Yea actually, I don't plan on having children. If anything I will adopt. It's a selfish and egotistical gesture when there are so many children who can't get food as it is to add to the problem by wantonly creating more mouths to feed, backs to clothe, and heads to shelter.
So at what point would you advocate population controls? Or maybe you think we should just let it happen via the inevitable wars that will result from an exponentially growing population outgrowing resources?
Yea actually, I don't plan on having children. If anything I will adopt. It's a selfish and egotistical gesture when there are so many children who can't get food as it is to add to the problem by wantonly creating more mouths to feed, backs to clothe, and heads to shelter.
So at what point would you advocate population controls? Or maybe you think we should just let it happen via the inevitable wars that will result from an exponentially growing population outgrowing resources?
Egotistical and selfish to want to have my own children with my wife? I counter that it is egotistical and selfish for all those out there who CHOOSE not to use birth control and just pop out kids left and right. Matter of fact, its not the ruling class thats breeding like wild rabbits......
#40
TECH Regular
iTrader: (2)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Someone needs to get their head out of Chomksy's ***.
Egotistical and selfish to want to have my own children with my wife? I counter that it is egotistical and selfish for all those out there who CHOOSE not to use birth control and just pop out kids left and right. Matter of fact, its not the ruling class thats breeding like wild rabbits......
Egotistical and selfish to want to have my own children with my wife? I counter that it is egotistical and selfish for all those out there who CHOOSE not to use birth control and just pop out kids left and right. Matter of fact, its not the ruling class thats breeding like wild rabbits......
When you have a child you are increasing the number of persons on earth and thus by extension creating more demand, driving up prices, taking away resources from people who are still alive, and driving up costs for everyone, creating more poverty and suffering.
I don't want people to stop having children, I want them to stop having so damn many. 1 Billion is probably a good sustainable number. We have to choose between a high birth rate and a high death rate.