Deweyp

Fuel Systems Solutions Conceptualizes a Better Energy Policy

You are right, I'm just a hard working grunt in the auto industry who heats his house with fuel oil, but I have an electric plug in my garage. I was told that charging up a Chevy Volt costs less than running my refer (about $.80 a day for 40 miles of travel) and it works on 110 VAC. Some folks in my neck of the woods have LPG for their furnace and hot water but no ready outlet to connect to their car if they had one. Having conversed with some of them I noted a concern about safety from leaks, fire and explosion from a leak. I have noted also the safety measures that the local hardware employs when filling my gas grill tank and when questioned, the guy told me that they were State mandated because of past accidents. No such problems exist with Electric as circuit breakers protect against accidents, which seldom happen. But again, without the afore mentioned technical experience I can only rely on my extensive practical experience and that of the guys in the neighborhood and at work who use Electric tools. I hear that several battery development/production centers are now up and running in the US and GM will announce one (probably in Michigan for the Volt support) that will be in operation by late 2010. What I think those of us with a practical bent are up against here is a deck stacked with commenters who have a pro nat gas agenda, and that's OK, 'cause we all get to comment on our beliefs and desires and if there is any believable logic to our comments other logical folks (as opposed to you technical types) will read and agree or disagree. I'm betting on logic and apparently so is GM and Chrysler and Ford and, oh yah, Toyota and Honda.


On Jun 12 01:39 PM ART005 wrote:

> Deweyp, I don't think you have a technical background:
> 1. Natural gas cars do exist. Fueling systems exist.
> 2. Adding regenerative braking to a natural gas car is not a technological
> hurdle.
> 3. PHEV (plug-ins) are a huge unknown based on world supply of battery
> materials, operating range, life/cost cycle, charge rate capacity,
> weather sensitivity, and all around market demand. The market/gov
> has to decide if PHEV are going to be light productive vehicles unable
> to meet current crash standards or PHEV will meet crash standards
> and give up most benefits of elec. car technology.
> 4. Almost 10 years ago practical analyst called for the bankruptcy
> of GM based on simple revenue vs. income charts. Union reps held
> their positions encouraging outlandish compensation and Execs. signed
> the contracts to keep the place going long enough for them to collect
> a few more years of million dollar salaries. The whole thing was
> a predicted scam publicized 9 years ago. Sorry you didn't get the
> memo! Details above in NakedJayBird.
> 5. GM had a 40 years head start on U.S. automarket. They blew that
> and everything else. Don't tell U.S. families paying their bills
> what social engineering now has to be done for U.S. auto industry
> to pretend they haven't destroyed themselves. U.S. auto industry
> doesn't build Nat Gas cars because they think they don't have to.
> Me thinks they doth protest too much!!
> 6. When you try to justify the value of an industry that killed itself,
> each auto worker you describe in your first post should ask themself
> would they pay themselves the rate to do the work for themself the
> rate they were being paid? The same applies to alot of U.S. workers.
>
>
> On Jun 12 01:10 PM Deweyp wrote:

Fuel Systems Solutions Conceptualizes a Better Energy Policy

Michael. I see 3 problems here. 1) The car you mentioned is a concept, not yet in production, if ever. 2) Being a foreign brand, it does not address the issue of American manufacturing jobs, American company profits or US taxes paid. 3) Although I agree that nat gas would solve many problems, there is no nation wide system set up for refueling. If we are to gain an immediate effect we must begin with what is currently available, then take the next step when feasible. If you recall, back when commodities were being driven to the moon, nat gas was well over $10. Without proper controls it will again go beyond affordability for most consumers and any positive effect will be lost. Maybe the most effective process would be to develop the plug in electrics and leave nat gas to the utility companies. The electric grid is already in place, although it needs upgrading to support an electric auto fleet.
No one I know in the auto industry wants to rip the tax payers off. The full intention was for 100% payback once GM and Chrysler is back on their feet. Hopefully Ford will not need assistance as it appears auto sales are on the mend.

Fuel Systems Solutions Conceptualizes a Better Energy Policy

My God, it is so refreshing to read your comments because I can tell they truly come from your heart. I too am tired of reading and hearing from only those who love to bash the hard working folks in our American auto industry. There was much that needed to be fixed in our union and that is being done, but few people writing these pieces and comments really understand what patriots those of us who work with our hand are. We arise before sunup 6 days a week and seldom get home before sundown. We serve in the armed forces, go to church on Sunday support our families and stand taking our hats off when we hear the National Anthem. Maybe we vote democratic but that doesn't mean we support what the media calls the liberal agenda. We love this country and have a lot of faith in it's ability to win and we get mad as hell when someone trashes it. Keep up the good work American-Born, I love it.


On Jun 11 11:41 PM american-born wrote:

> Sorry --- for writing a little long --- I have a lot more to say
> -- like too many American soldier have fought for more than seems
> to be happening in their and our Country ---- I'm gone