1poordog

May's Top 10 Automotive Manufacturer Websites

I believe that's the point..., this data would be a leading indicator. so if Tdot is correct, we should expect Ford to begin gaining market share. Time (and vehicle sales) will tell.


On Jun 08 09:33 AM redbaron wrote:

> Tdot, if your assumptions are true, then why isn't Ford Number 1
> in Sales?

Lithium Batteries: Nothing But Illusion

Having worked for Westinghouse Nuclear Fuels Division for nine years, manufacturing zirconium fuel tubing and hafnium control rods, I too am a proponent of more nuclear power. How do we get the Democratic Administration to get on board?


On Apr 19 12:11 PM Dave Marsh wrote:

> Wonderful article, as was John's related article on conversions.
> The "other" electric car starts to sound more reasonable in the long
> term. The "other" is the hydrogen fuel-cell powered electric car.
> Yes, I know, the production and distribution infrastructure needed
> is immense, but in the long run sounds more feasible in light of
> Mr. Lifton's arguments. My personal "grand energy plan" has always
> been and still is based on nuclear energy. Nuclear plants would be
> designed and built as three-way machines. A three-unit plant would
> have one reactor for electricity, one for reverse osmosis clean water
> production, and one for electrolytic hydrogen production. Crossover
> capability would allow all three reactors to produce power for peak
> time of day, but would divert increasing power to the hydrogen and
> water trains as night fell. At that point, the vast available clean
> baseload of two reactors produces clean water and hydrogen gas all
> night with (of course) zero CO2 production. In the battery scenario,
> as discussed in previous SA articles, the nightime charging of all
> those extra batteries would have to come from more baseload coal
> plants, which makes your battery car dirtier, despite the efficiency
> gained from the inherent electric motor high energy conversion efficiency.
> What battery EVs there are would also retain their "CO2 cleanliness"
> if the nightime charging were from new nuclear baseload units, which
> run at 100% all night anyway (no one really does nuclear "load following"
> and they aren't designed for that). Building nuclear plants that
> can cleanly fill in the nighttime demand valley with fresh water
> and hydrogen production, while at the same time giving a clean charge
> to the battery EVs, is an alternative whose time will have to come.
>
>

Stimulus Filled with Goodies for Greentech

Does anyone know if the tax credit applies to purchasing a Segway PT (two wheeled, self-balancing transporters w/ Li-ion batteries)

PSE&G Proposes $773 Million Solar Project

any word about where the supply of solar panels will come? Will the electricity just be fed back into the grid or stored at the collection site to power the street lights at night? (meaning a storage solution would also be part of the mix)

Battery Wars

I agree with Creativforce that this blog is a bit wierd. Why no mention of SAFT (Johnson Controls)? They have been making high quality Nimh for years (in France). Did they also corner the market in the unobtanium (rare earth material) ?


On Feb 09 02:27 PM creativforce wrote:

> Thank you for one of the most interesting articles I have read on
> the subject. Everyone who has followed the plight of the electric
> car since the late nineties has wondered "Who Stole the Electric
> Car?" As an investor in ENER during those heady days of the electric
> revolution with the EV1 in California, I thought I would soon be
> rich as ENER ramped up production of the NIMH battery. When Shell
> (who later sold to Chevron) initially bought into the company, I
> assumed the huge infusion of cash ENER needed would soon be on the
> way. As we know this was the beginning of the end. CA mysteriously
> repealed their zero emissions requirement, and the stock price at
> ENER went to hell for a decade. Cobasys has been a joke and their
> leaky batteries have seemed like intentional screw ups. Last year
> Mercedes had to sue them for failure to deliver and GM who built
> one of the most remarkable cars of the 20th century (EV1) can't get
> access to the batteries they helped test and develop.
>
> So now we learn that the NIMH battery revolution failed, not because
> of oil company interference, and a deep, abiding faith in the profit
> power of planned obsolescence at GM ... but because Toyota cornered
> the market on lanthanum? The story just keeps getting weirder and
> weirder.
>
> It would make more sense if oil money paid everyone involved to keep
> the technology on ice for a decade...just think of the billion$ the
> lack of an electric alternative has saved Big Oil until now!! <br/>
>
> Lockheed Martin also makes most of their money on war in the middle
> east, providing the funds to keep EESTOR locked up for another decade
> or two seems like money well spent to me.
>
> It's not that I want to believe in conspiracies, but any detective
> will tell you to follow the money. So rather than all these back
> room dealings we suspect, we now must believe that it all comes down
> to profound stupidity at GM. Well, I guess that's not too hard to
> believe either.

Bolivia's Lithium Fields: The Next Crucial Resource?

Chile also has large reserves of Li (in the form used for batteries) The publicly traded company's ticker symbol is SQM. I've read that they have plans to expand their production capacity. they have been a profitable producer of Potash for years. I believe the Li is a byproduct of their operation.

Obama Provides More Tailwinds for LED Lighting Manufacturers

Is there any movement towards LED lighting to replace the incandesant bulbs in the home?... I dislike the light intensity/color from the newer long life-neon tube bulbs on the market. And the retail homeowner would be a far larger market.