Numbers Just Aren't There To Continue With Internal Combusti

[Bret Cahill]

The most efficient power plant on the planet is a natural gas fired
industrial gas turbine made by GE -- 60% efficient.

It's down hill from there as far as efficiency is concerned so a few
points increase is a farce when compared to the impending 1000+%
increase in fuel prices.

The only way to go is hybrid electric with electrification of major
highways.

Do _not_ give automakers any bailout money unless they agree to go
completely hybrid.


Bret Cahill

 

[kiloVolts]

"Bret Cahill" <BretCahill@peoplepc.com> wrote in message
news:c6f1c0cf-1286-4602-a8ad-bfc5fec2b7dc@s9g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

The most efficient power plant on the planet is a natural gas fired
industrial gas turbine made by GE -- 60% efficient.

It's down hill from there as far as efficiency is concerned so a few
points increase is a farce when compared to the impending 1000+%
increase in fuel prices.

The only way to go is hybrid electric with electrification of major
highways.

My cable internet got knocked out overnight be a sudden cold snap, so
electrification of highways will not work in a cooling world.

Do _not_ give automakers any bailout money unless they agree to go
completely hybrid.


Bret Cahill

 

[Eeyore]

Bret Cahill wrote:

The most efficient power plant on the planet is a natural gas fired
industrial gas turbine made by GE -- 60% efficient.

Garbage. MAN can do a 95% efficient co-gen one.

http://www.mandiesel.com/category_000082.html
MAN Diesel designs and builds turn-key power stations. On-shore or as
power barges, using modular designs. In this way, each power plant can
be extended step-by-step to keep pace with increasing power demand. In
combined heat and power mode (CHP) they generate both electrical power
and thermal energy and so overall energy utilisation levels as high as
95%. Our experts in application engineering and project management are
the key to achieving very short construction times: from zero to 280 MW
power output in 17 months.

Graham

 

[rc]

On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 08:03:06 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill
<BretCahill@peoplepc.com> wrote:

The most efficient power plant on the planet is a natural gas fired
industrial gas turbine made by GE -- 60% efficient.

It's down hill from there as far as efficiency is concerned so a few
points increase is a farce when compared to the impending 1000+%
increase in fuel prices.

The only way to go is hybrid electric with electrification of major
highways.

Do _not_ give automakers any bailout money unless they agree to go
completely hybrid.


Bret Cahill

So. You want to get away from the free enterprise system. Free

enterprise is when the _people_ decide what products or services are
needed, wanted, desired and ultimately produced. If the _people_ did
not what SUV's, pickups and sedans, they would not buy them and the
automakers would not build them. If the _people_ demonstrate (by
using their dollars) they want hybrids most, then the automakers would
build them.

What you are proposing is that the government decide what products the
automakers make and what products are available to the _people_. I
don't think your vision for the future is desired or wanted by any
free enterprise advocate.

 

[Sean]

"rc" <rebelcmndr@ftfreedom.org> wrote in message
news:sid4m452j1me42sts3h6kgqfmjs1k1shq1@4ax.com...

On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 08:03:06 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill
BretCahill@peoplepc.com> wrote:

The most efficient power plant on the planet is a natural gas fired
industrial gas turbine made by GE -- 60% efficient.

It's down hill from there as far as efficiency is concerned so a few
points increase is a farce when compared to the impending 1000+%
increase in fuel prices.

The only way to go is hybrid electric with electrification of major
highways.

Do _not_ give automakers any bailout money unless they agree to go
completely hybrid.


Bret Cahill

So. You want to get away from the free enterprise system. Free
enterprise is when the _people_ decide what products or services are
needed, wanted, desired and ultimately produced. If the _people_ did
not what SUV's, pickups and sedans, they would not buy them and the
automakers would not build them. If the _people_ demonstrate (by
using their dollars) they want hybrids most, then the automakers would
build them.

What you are proposing is that the government decide what products the
automakers make and what products are available to the _people_.

The govt already does this in every arena of life .. it already legislates
about how autos are built and what they contain [ ever heard of a guy called
nader? ] , and it does the same thing about every other product and service
available to man almost .... why limit auto regulation to just brakes and
seat belts , types of tyres, pollution standards, and crash protections??

I'd love to go buy some acid from my local free enterprise system, but the
govt has decided that such products are not available to the _people_.

Something sounds wonky in your rationales here. No one was rushing out ot
buy cars with seat belts either in the 70's.



I

don't think your vision for the future is desired or wanted by any
free enterprise advocate.

 

[krw]

In article <90363d66-7cd8-45c9-b654-f5a1946f9db8
@e22g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>, kevirwin@comcast.net says...>

On Jan 5, 11:44 am, rc <rebelcm...@ftfreedom.org> wrote:
On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 08:03:06 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill





BretCah...@peoplepc.com> wrote:
The most efficient power plant on the planet is a natural gas fired
industrial gas turbine made by GE -- 60% efficient.

It's down hill from there as far as efficiency is concerned so a few
points increase is a farce when compared to the impending 1000+%
increase in fuel prices.

The only way to go is hybrid electric with electrification of major
highways.

Do _not_ give automakers any bailout money unless they agree to go
completely hybrid.

Bret Cahill

So. You want to get away from the free enterprise system.  Free
enterprise is when the _people_ decide what products or services are
needed, wanted, desired and ultimately produced.  If the _people_ did
not what SUV's, pickups and sedans, they would not buy them and the
automakers would not build them.  If the _people_ demonstrate (by
using their dollars) they want hybrids most, then the automakers would
build them.

What you are proposing is that the government decide what products the
automakers make and what products are available to the _people_. I
don't think your vision for the future is desired or wanted by any
free enterprise advocate.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I'n not answering for Bret, just posing a question:

What part of "free enterprise" is screwing up your own business and
then asking the government to give you tax dollars and let you do it
again any way you like??

If you walk down the street handing out free money, sure I'll have
some. It's called "benefit with no down side", better known as
"cake and eat it too".

The same part of "free enterprise" that brought you Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac. It's a great job, if you can get it.

 

[rc]

On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 08:50:51 -0800 (PST), kevirwin
<kevirwin@comcast.net> wrote:

On Jan 5, 11:44 am, rc <rebelcm...@ftfreedom.org> wrote:
On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 08:03:06 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill





BretCah...@peoplepc.com> wrote:
The most efficient power plant on the planet is a natural gas fired
industrial gas turbine made by GE -- 60% efficient.

It's down hill from there as far as efficiency is concerned so a few
points increase is a farce when compared to the impending 1000+%
increase in fuel prices.

The only way to go is hybrid electric with electrification of major
highways.

Do _not_ give automakers any bailout money unless they agree to go
completely hybrid.

Bret Cahill

So. You want to get away from the free enterprise system.  Free
enterprise is when the _people_ decide what products or services are
needed, wanted, desired and ultimately produced.  If the _people_ did
not what SUV's, pickups and sedans, they would not buy them and the
automakers would not build them.  If the _people_ demonstrate (by
using their dollars) they want hybrids most, then the automakers would
build them.

What you are proposing is that the government decide what products the
automakers make and what products are available to the _people_. I
don't think your vision for the future is desired or wanted by any
free enterprise advocate.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I'n not answering for Bret, just posing a question:

What part of "free enterprise" is screwing up your own business and
then asking the government to give you tax dollars and let you do it
again any way you like??

just wonderin',
K e v

The automakers are victims of circumstances. It is not they who are
the cause of the economic meltdown. In fact, they are building the
_best_ automobiles in history. But the question becomes whether we
want the US to have a domestic automobile producing capacity in the
future or not. If the US automakers are allowed to go out of
business, then the US is left with foreign owned automakers. If the
government then tries to tell the foreign automakers what to build,
then it is possible the automakers will "close-up shop" and move
elsewhere. Then, the US is left without any "domestic" auto making
capacity. I think that it is important for the future and long term
security, that the US government helps them over this rough patch.

Now, the financial institutions that are the main cause, most
certainly will have more regulations and oversight. Hopefully, they
are not allowed to use tax dollars and then "do it again any way
(they) like".

 

[krw]

In article <1ef4m4pfomrh1b509p6r443pg6cgfbq4a4@4ax.com>,
rebelcmndr@ftfreedom.org says...>

On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 08:50:51 -0800 (PST), kevirwin
kevirwin@comcast.net> wrote:

On Jan 5, 11:44 am, rc <rebelcm...@ftfreedom.org> wrote:
On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 08:03:06 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill





BretCah...@peoplepc.com> wrote:
The most efficient power plant on the planet is a natural gas fired
industrial gas turbine made by GE -- 60% efficient.

It's down hill from there as far as efficiency is concerned so a few
points increase is a farce when compared to the impending 1000+%
increase in fuel prices.

The only way to go is hybrid electric with electrification of major
highways.

Do _not_ give automakers any bailout money unless they agree to go
completely hybrid.

Bret Cahill

So. You want to get away from the free enterprise system.  Free
enterprise is when the _people_ decide what products or services are
needed, wanted, desired and ultimately produced.  If the _people_ did
not what SUV's, pickups and sedans, they would not buy them and the
automakers would not build them.  If the _people_ demonstrate (by
using their dollars) they want hybrids most, then the automakers would
build them.

What you are proposing is that the government decide what products the
automakers make and what products are available to the _people_. I
don't think your vision for the future is desired or wanted by any
free enterprise advocate.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I'n not answering for Bret, just posing a question:

What part of "free enterprise" is screwing up your own business and
then asking the government to give you tax dollars and let you do it
again any way you like??

just wonderin',
K e v

The automakers are victims of circumstances.

Nonsense. Their unmanageable costs are completely their fault.

It is not they who are
the cause of the economic meltdown. In fact, they are building the
_best_ automobiles in history.

At an unsupportable cost.

But the question becomes whether we
want the US to have a domestic automobile producing capacity in the
future or not.

No, that isn't what's at issue at all. The issue is whether we
want a federally subsidized UAW, or not.

If the US automakers are allowed to go out of
business, then the US is left with foreign owned automakers.

You're logic is fatally flawed. These are not the only choices.

If the
government then tries to tell the foreign automakers what to build,
then it is possible the automakers will "close-up shop" and move
elsewhere.

As they should. What makes you think the federal government has
any business telling *ANY* company what to build. You've just
demonstrated that you are a socialist, if not fascist.

Then, the US is left without any "domestic" auto making
capacity. I think that it is important for the future and long term
security, that the US government helps them over this rough patch.

Nonsense. If the car companies go bankrupt it won't change the
manufacturing base one bit, at least in the long run.

Now, the financial institutions that are the main cause, most
certainly will have more regulations and oversight. Hopefully, they
are not allowed to use tax dollars and then "do it again any way
(they) like".

Nonsense. The big three have been heading towards bankruptcy court
for years. Get it over with. Throwing money at the problem will
just prolong the pain a few months and cause much more.

 

[kevirwin]

On Jan 5, 11:44 am, rc <rebelcm...@ftfreedom.org> wrote:

On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 08:03:06 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill





BretCah...@peoplepc.com> wrote:
The most efficient power plant on the planet is a natural gas fired
industrial gas turbine made by GE -- 60% efficient.

It's down hill from there as far as efficiency is concerned so a few
points increase is a farce when compared to the impending 1000+%
increase in fuel prices.

The only way to go is hybrid electric with electrification of major
highways.

Do _not_ give automakers any bailout money unless they agree to go
completely hybrid.

Bret Cahill

So. You want to get away from the free enterprise system.  Free
enterprise is when the _people_ decide what products or services are
needed, wanted, desired and ultimately produced.  If the _people_ did
not what SUV's, pickups and sedans, they would not buy them and the
automakers would not build them.  If the _people_ demonstrate (by
using their dollars) they want hybrids most, then the automakers would
build them.

What you are proposing is that the government decide what products the
automakers make and what products are available to the _people_. I
don't think your vision for the future is desired or wanted by any
free enterprise advocate.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I'n not answering for Bret, just posing a question:

What part of "free enterprise" is screwing up your own business and
then asking the government to give you tax dollars and let you do it
again any way you like??

just wonderin',
K e v

 

[tg]

On Jan 5, 11:44 am, rc <rebelcm...@ftfreedom.org> wrote:

On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 08:03:06 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill



BretCah...@peoplepc.com> wrote:
The most efficient power plant on the planet is a natural gas fired
industrial gas turbine made by GE -- 60% efficient.

It's down hill from there as far as efficiency is concerned so a few
points increase is a farce when compared to the impending 1000+%
increase in fuel prices.

The only way to go is hybrid electric with electrification of major
highways.

Do _not_ give automakers any bailout money unless they agree to go
completely hybrid.

Bret Cahill

So. You want to get away from the free enterprise system.  Free
enterprise is when the _people_ decide what products or services are
needed, wanted, desired and ultimately produced.  If the _people_ did
not what SUV's, pickups and sedans, they would not buy them and the
automakers would not build them.  If the _people_ demonstrate (by
using their dollars) they want hybrids most, then the automakers would
build them.

Except that there was never a *choice* to buy hybrids, or fuel
efficient SUV's, or anything but what was most profitable for the car
companies. And since it was the government that restricted imports of
fuel efficient vehicles like small trucks that exist in other
countries---some made by the very same US companies, IIRC---- you can
hardly claim that the market was at work.

Perhaps you have never shopped for cars or trucks. It is very easy to
manipulate choices by varying features---if a company wants you to
*not* buy a smaller vehicle, they will simply make it with fewer
amenities and of poorer quality. Then they can claim that people are
'demanding' their high-profit SUV.

What the government can do is insist that there are standards by
weight class, so that people will indeed have choices.

-tg

What you are proposing is that the government decide what products the
automakers make and what products are available to the _people_. I
don't think your vision for the future is desired or wanted by any
free enterprise advocate.

 

[Sean]

"tg" <tgdenning@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:33f47e7f-0421-4008-afdb-01376b6240dc@j35g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 5, 11:44 am, rc <rebelcm...@ftfreedom.org> wrote:

On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 08:03:06 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill



BretCah...@peoplepc.com> wrote:
The most efficient power plant on the planet is a natural gas fired
industrial gas turbine made by GE -- 60% efficient.

It's down hill from there as far as efficiency is concerned so a few
points increase is a farce when compared to the impending 1000+%
increase in fuel prices.

The only way to go is hybrid electric with electrification of major
highways.

Do _not_ give automakers any bailout money unless they agree to go
completely hybrid.

Bret Cahill

So. You want to get away from the free enterprise system. Free
enterprise is when the _people_ decide what products or services are
needed, wanted, desired and ultimately produced. If the _people_ did
not what SUV's, pickups and sedans, they would not buy them and the
automakers would not build them. If the _people_ demonstrate (by
using their dollars) they want hybrids most, then the automakers would
build them.

Except that there was never a *choice* to buy hybrids, or fuel
efficient SUV's, or anything but what was most profitable for the car
companies. And since it was the government that restricted imports of
fuel efficient vehicles like small trucks that exist in other
countries---some made by the very same US companies, IIRC---- you can
hardly claim that the market was at work.

Perhaps you have never shopped for cars or trucks. It is very easy to
manipulate choices by varying features---if a company wants you to
*not* buy a smaller vehicle, they will simply make it with fewer
amenities and of poorer quality. Then they can claim that people are
'demanding' their high-profit SUV.

What the government can do is insist that there are standards by
weight class, so that people will indeed have choices.

-tg

----------------------------------------------------

and don't forget the HUGE Tax concessions offered by the addicted US Govt
for anyone buying a "truck" such as a Humvee even though it;s for use to
drop off the kids at school .... vs a smaller option because with the tax
break buying the Humvee works out cheaper for many.

couldn't be bothered quoting or linking to the info, but tis old news to me,

cheers

What you are proposing is that the government decide what products the
automakers make and what products are available to the _people_. I
don't think your vision for the future is desired or wanted by any
free enterprise advocate.

 

[terryS]

On Jan 5, 1:44 pm, rc <rebelcm...@ftfreedom.org> wrote:

On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 08:03:06 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill





BretCah...@peoplepc.com> wrote:
The most efficient power plant on the planet is a natural gas fired
industrial gas turbine made by GE -- 60% efficient.

It's down hill from there as far as efficiency is concerned so a few
points increase is a farce when compared to the impending 1000+%
increase in fuel prices.

The only way to go is hybrid electric with electrification of major
highways.

Do _not_ give automakers any bailout money unless they agree to go
completely hybrid.

Bret Cahill

So. You want to get away from the free enterprise system.  Free
enterprise is when the _people_ decide what products or services are
needed, wanted, desired and ultimately produced.  If the _people_ did
not what SUV's, pickups and sedans, they would not buy them and the
automakers would not build them.  If the _people_ demonstrate (by
using their dollars) they want hybrids most, then the automakers would
build them.

What you are proposing is that the government decide what products the
automakers make and what products are available to the _people_. I
don't think your vision for the future is desired or wanted by any
free enterprise advocate.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

And pollution of the planet and/or profligate use of a non renewable
resource be damned.
And that's what unbridled and uncontrolled private enterprise can lead
to.
No forests (I want my furniture), no air (Because I want to drive my
Hummer anywhere I want to). No water, clean enough to drink etc. (So
people in California can fill swimming pools). No land to grow food
(So that we can have acres and acres of monster houses. all on credit
of course. With very few people in each house!).
Boy. Shakespeare was right; 'Lord what fools these mortals be!".

 

[zzbunker@netscape.net]

On Jan 5, 11:03 am, Bret Cahill <BretCah...@peoplepc.com> wrote:

The most efficient power plant on the planet is a natural gas fired
industrial gas turbine made by GE -- 60% efficient.

It's down hill from there as far as efficiency is concerned so a few
points increase is a farce when compared to the impending 1000+%
increase in fuel prices.

Well, siince the wanks still invest about zero in wind, solar,
tidal,
Pv Cells, autonomous vehicles, advanced robotics, magnetics,
materials research, modern batteries, and biodiesel, there's still
not
even that many people with post 18th Century engineering brains
who are all that concerned what the tax-a-thon cranks do with
highways either way. anymore.

The only way to go is hybrid electric with electrification of major
highways.

Do _not_ give automakers any bailout money unless they agree to go
completely hybrid.

Bret Cahill

 

[rc]

On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 09:43:58 -0800 (PST), tg <tgdenning@earthlink.net>
wrote:

On Jan 5, 11:44 am, rc <rebelcm...@ftfreedom.org> wrote:
On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 08:03:06 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill



BretCah...@peoplepc.com> wrote:
The most efficient power plant on the planet is a natural gas fired
industrial gas turbine made by GE -- 60% efficient.

It's down hill from there as far as efficiency is concerned so a few
points increase is a farce when compared to the impending 1000+%
increase in fuel prices.

The only way to go is hybrid electric with electrification of major
highways.

Do _not_ give automakers any bailout money unless they agree to go
completely hybrid.

Bret Cahill

So. You want to get away from the free enterprise system.  Free
enterprise is when the _people_ decide what products or services are
needed, wanted, desired and ultimately produced.  If the _people_ did
not what SUV's, pickups and sedans, they would not buy them and the
automakers would not build them.  If the _people_ demonstrate (by
using their dollars) they want hybrids most, then the automakers would
build them.


Except that there was never a *choice* to buy hybrids, or fuel
efficient SUV's, or anything but what was most profitable for the car
companies.

Sure there is and has been. Do you really think electric cars are a
new concept? Let's not forget that (I think) Ford, Honda, Toyota and
GM all have hybrids. Quit squawking and go buy one!

And since it was the government that restricted imports of
fuel efficient vehicles like small trucks that exist in other
countries---some made by the very same US companies, IIRC---- you can
hardly claim that the market was at work.

Although this is probably true enough, I think all governments do
practice some form of protectionism for their industries. Are you sure
all of those imports will meet all of the US governments mandated
standards?

Perhaps you have never shopped for cars or trucks. It is very easy to
manipulate choices by varying features---if a company wants you to
*not* buy a smaller vehicle, they will simply make it with fewer
amenities and of poorer quality.

Poorer quality? Really? Please provide an example.

Then they can claim that people are
'demanding' their high-profit SUV.

If you don't want an SUV then don't buy one. You have other choices.

What the government can do is insist that there are standards by
weight class, so that people will indeed have choices.

Such as?

-tg




What you are proposing is that the government decide what products the
automakers make and what products are available to the _people_. I
don't think your vision for the future is desired or wanted by any
free enterprise advocate.

 

[rc]

On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 03:59:26 +1100, "Sean" <santimvahREMOVER@gmail.com>
wrote:

"rc" <rebelcmndr@ftfreedom.org> wrote in message
news:sid4m452j1me42sts3h6kgqfmjs1k1shq1@4ax.com...
On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 08:03:06 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill
BretCahill@peoplepc.com> wrote:

The most efficient power plant on the planet is a natural gas fired
industrial gas turbine made by GE -- 60% efficient.

It's down hill from there as far as efficiency is concerned so a few
points increase is a farce when compared to the impending 1000+%
increase in fuel prices.

The only way to go is hybrid electric with electrification of major
highways.

Do _not_ give automakers any bailout money unless they agree to go
completely hybrid.


Bret Cahill

So. You want to get away from the free enterprise system. Free
enterprise is when the _people_ decide what products or services are
needed, wanted, desired and ultimately produced. If the _people_ did
not what SUV's, pickups and sedans, they would not buy them and the
automakers would not build them. If the _people_ demonstrate (by
using their dollars) they want hybrids most, then the automakers would
build them.

What you are proposing is that the government decide what products the
automakers make and what products are available to the _people_.

The govt already does this in every arena of life .. it already legislates
about how autos are built and what they contain

Not so much as to how they are built but to what standards they must
meet. Most of the governments legislation is regarding safety
measures, fuel economy and so forth. Actually, it seems they are
trying to protect the consumers from schlock producers.

[ ever heard of a guy called
nader? ] ,

You mean Ralph works for the US Government?

and it does the same thing about every other product and service
available to man almost .... why limit auto regulation to just brakes and
seat belts , types of tyres, pollution standards, and crash protections??

Safety....Safety....Safety!

I'd love to go buy some acid from my local free enterprise system, but the
govt has decided that such products are not available to the _people_.

For good reason!

Something sounds wonky in your rationales here. No one was rushing out ot
buy cars with seat belts either in the 70's.

But they all had'em!

I
don't think your vision for the future is desired or wanted by any
free enterprise advocate.

 

[Sean]

"rc" <rebelcmndr@ftfreedom.org> wrote in message
news:kgp4m4d8in19nrb7r0fc135f30hnjm1s4d@4ax.com...

On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 03:59:26 +1100, "Sean" <santimvahREMOVER@gmail.com
wrote:


"rc" <rebelcmndr@ftfreedom.org> wrote in message
news:sid4m452j1me42sts3h6kgqfmjs1k1shq1@4ax.com...
On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 08:03:06 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill
BretCahill@peoplepc.com> wrote:

The most efficient power plant on the planet is a natural gas fired
industrial gas turbine made by GE -- 60% efficient.

It's down hill from there as far as efficiency is concerned so a few
points increase is a farce when compared to the impending 1000+%
increase in fuel prices.

The only way to go is hybrid electric with electrification of major
highways.

Do _not_ give automakers any bailout money unless they agree to go
completely hybrid.


Bret Cahill

So. You want to get away from the free enterprise system. Free
enterprise is when the _people_ decide what products or services are
needed, wanted, desired and ultimately produced. If the _people_ did
not what SUV's, pickups and sedans, they would not buy them and the
automakers would not build them. If the _people_ demonstrate (by
using their dollars) they want hybrids most, then the automakers would
build them.

What you are proposing is that the government decide what products the
automakers make and what products are available to the _people_.

The govt already does this in every arena of life .. it already legislates
about how autos are built and what they contain

Not so much as to how they are built but to what standards they must
meet. Most of the governments legislation is regarding safety
measures, fuel economy and so forth. Actually, it seems they are
trying to protect the consumers from schlock producers.

Mmmm ... FUEL ECONOMY !!!

What's the main benefit of Hybrids rc????

[ ever heard of a guy called
nader? ] ,

You mean Ralph works for the US Government?

NO, Ralph created a social movement that put more pressure on the Govt to do
somethingm, that the Autos had been putting on it to NOT do anything while
they raved on that no one wanted to buy safe cars, or cars that didn't fall
apart. They claimed there just wasn't a "market demand" for them.

GO FIGURE

and it does the same thing about every other product and service
available to man almost .... why limit auto regulation to just brakes and
seat belts , types of tyres, pollution standards, and crash protections??

Safety....Safety....Safety!

Yeah yeah ... and you ignore pollution standards, and you're ignoring fuel
economy standards, and you're ignoring everything else as well that is
Mandated by Govt's all over the world for decades.

Get over it ... Govt setting minimum standards has NOT killed the free
enterprise and free market system in the auto industries anywhere.

I'd love to go buy some acid from my local free enterprise system, but the
govt has decided that such products are not available to the _people_.

For good reason!

HYBRID CARS ... high MPG cars, tigher fuel economy standards, are ALL good
reasons too.

 

[krw]

In article <kgp4m4d8in19nrb7r0fc135f30hnjm1s4d@4ax.com>,
rebelcmndr@ftfreedom.org says...>

On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 03:59:26 +1100, "Sean" <santimvahREMOVER@gmail.com
wrote:


"rc" <rebelcmndr@ftfreedom.org> wrote in message
news:sid4m452j1me42sts3h6kgqfmjs1k1shq1@4ax.com...
On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 08:03:06 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill
BretCahill@peoplepc.com> wrote:

The most efficient power plant on the planet is a natural gas fired
industrial gas turbine made by GE -- 60% efficient.

It's down hill from there as far as efficiency is concerned so a few
points increase is a farce when compared to the impending 1000+%
increase in fuel prices.

The only way to go is hybrid electric with electrification of major
highways.

Do _not_ give automakers any bailout money unless they agree to go
completely hybrid.


Bret Cahill

So. You want to get away from the free enterprise system. Free
enterprise is when the _people_ decide what products or services are
needed, wanted, desired and ultimately produced. If the _people_ did
not what SUV's, pickups and sedans, they would not buy them and the
automakers would not build them. If the _people_ demonstrate (by
using their dollars) they want hybrids most, then the automakers would
build them.

What you are proposing is that the government decide what products the
automakers make and what products are available to the _people_.

The govt already does this in every arena of life .. it already legislates
about how autos are built and what they contain

Not so much as to how they are built but to what standards they must
meet. Most of the governments legislation is regarding safety
measures, fuel economy and so forth. Actually, it seems they are
trying to protect the consumers from schlock producers.

Perhaps his argument is that the government shouldn't have any
standards. Remove all EPA, OSHA, CAFE, right down to Sarbanes-
Oxley restrictions from US auto makers.

[ ever heard of a guy called
nader? ] ,

You mean Ralph works for the US Government?

Sure. He flies in the black helicopters.

and it does the same thing about every other product and service
available to man almost .... why limit auto regulation to just brakes and
seat belts , types of tyres, pollution standards, and crash protections??

It's not.

Safety....Safety....Safety!

I'd love to go buy some acid from my local free enterprise system, but the
govt has decided that such products are not available to the _people_.

You certainly can buy LSD from your local free enterprise system.
You, however, are *not* allowed to by it from your local regulated
enterprise system. Duh!

For good reason!

Something sounds wonky in your rationales here. No one was rushing out ot
buy cars with seat belts either in the 70's.

But they all had'em!

....and he's wrong. Everyone who bought a car was.

I
don't think your vision for the future is desired or wanted by any
free enterprise advocate.

Careful with the quoting, folks.

 

[tg]

On Jan 5, 2:55 pm, rc <rebelcm...@ftfreedom.org> wrote:

On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 09:43:58 -0800 (PST), tg <tgdenn...@earthlink.net
wrote:



On Jan 5, 11:44 am, rc <rebelcm...@ftfreedom.org> wrote:
On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 08:03:06 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill

BretCah...@peoplepc.com> wrote:
The most efficient power plant on the planet is a natural gas fired
industrial gas turbine made by GE -- 60% efficient.

It's down hill from there as far as efficiency is concerned so a few
points increase is a farce when compared to the impending 1000+%
increase in fuel prices.

The only way to go is hybrid electric with electrification of major
highways.

Do _not_ give automakers any bailout money unless they agree to go
completely hybrid.

Bret Cahill

So. You want to get away from the free enterprise system.  Free
enterprise is when the _people_ decide what products or services are
needed, wanted, desired and ultimately produced.  If the _people_ did
not what SUV's, pickups and sedans, they would not buy them and the
automakers would not build them.  If the _people_ demonstrate (by
using their dollars) they want hybrids most, then the automakers would
build them.

Except that there was never a *choice* to buy hybrids, or fuel
efficient SUV's, or anything but what was most profitable for the car
companies.  

Sure there is and has been.  Do you really think electric cars are a
new concept?

No, I think that GM had one that people wanted to buy but they
scrapped the project and the cars as well. This is clearly a case of
market distortion by monopoly.

Let's not forget that (I think) Ford, Honda, Toyota and
GM all have hybrids.

Not until the last couple of years is this true. When SUV's were
popular, there was no alternative offered.

Quit squawking and go buy one!

And since it was the government that restricted imports of
fuel efficient vehicles like small trucks that exist in other
countries---some made by the very same US companies, IIRC---- you can
hardly claim that the market was at work.

Although this is probably true enough, I think all governments do
practice some form of protectionism for their industries. Are you sure
all of those imports will meet all of the US governments mandated
standards?

Of course not---as you say, the standards are there for protectionism,
which means *people did not have the choice of buying more efficient
vehicles* all these years that SUV's were popular.

Perhaps you have never shopped for cars or trucks. It is very easy to
manipulate choices by varying features---if a company wants you to
*not* buy a smaller vehicle, they will simply make it with fewer
amenities and of poorer quality.

Poorer quality? Really?  Please provide an example.

Then they can  claim that people are
'demanding' their high-profit SUV.

If you don't want an SUV then don't buy one.  You have other choices.



What the government can do is insist that there are standards by
weight class, so that people will indeed have choices.

Such as?

If an SUV and a sedan weigh the same, they should be required to have
the same gas mileage. Also, more things should be standard across
weight classes---I should not be forced to buy a bigger car than I
need in order to get safety features like airbags and ABS.

This kind of regulation does not distort the market, since it applies
to all vehicles---people can choose a sedan that gets 25MPG or an SUV
that gets 25MPG---where's the problem? If they want a bigger vehicle,
then they will go up in weight class, if they care more about mileage
they can get a smaller one with good safety features.

-tg

-tg

What you are proposing is that the government decide what products the
automakers make and what products are available to the _people_. I
don't think your vision for the future is desired or wanted by any
free enterprise advocate.

 

On Jan 5, 8:43 am, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

Bret Cahill wrote:
The most efficient power plant on the planet is a natural gas fired
industrial gas turbine made by GE -- 60% efficient.

That's a co-gen one too. Not very portable either, kinda big too.

Garbage. MAN can do a 95% efficient co-gen one.

http://www.mandiesel.com/category_000082.html
MAN Diesel designs and builds turn-key power stations. On-shore or as
power barges, using modular designs. In this way, each power plant can
be extended step-by-step to keep pace with increasing power demand. In
combined heat and power mode (CHP) they generate both electrical power
and thermal energy and so overall energy utilisation levels as high as
95%. Our experts in application engineering and project management are
the key to achieving very short construction times: from zero to 280 MW
power output in 17 months.

Graham

"In combined heat and power mode (CHP) they generate both electrical
power and thermal energy and so overall energy utilisation levels as
[sic] high as 95%."

If thermal energy is enough to make you happy, you can take a kerosene
lantern and it will give you 100% thermal energy too... sheeeesh...
the tough part is converting the thermal energy to electric or
mechanical energy...

Michael

 

On Jan 5, 1:40 pm, mrdarr...@gmail.com wrote:

On Jan 5, 8:43 am, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com
wrote:

Bret Cahill wrote:
The most efficient power plant on the planet is a natural gas fired
industrial gas turbine made by GE -- 60% efficient.

That's a co-gen one too. Not very portable either, kinda big too.

Whoops I meant to say Combined Cycle, not cogen
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_cycle

basically it's a steam engine downstream of the gas turbine

sure, if you want heat, collect all you want from the tailpipe

Michael