Ontario’s green dream was just a fantasy

[DearSummer]

Ontario’s green dream was just a fantasy
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/margaret-wente/ontarios-green-dream-was-just-a-fantasy/article2369422/


Premier Dalton McGuinty has heard the voters speak. In an effort to placate them, the government is going to trim its subsidies to wind and solar development and give the rural folks some say. The bad news is that these changes won’t affect the contracts already in place. Taxpayers will still be on the hook for soaring energy bills for years to come.


Mr. McGuinty insists that his green energy investments will launch a vast new industry in Ontario, whose products and expertise can then be exported to the world. But the world is losing interest. Besides, green subsidies don’t create jobs – they kill them. In Germany, where the government has invested heavily in renewables, high energy prices are forcing companies to close factories or move abroad. Germany has pumped more than €100-billion into solar subsidies, with disappointing results. Now it has announced that it will phase out support to the industry by 2017 – news that caused solar stocks to plunge around the world. Spain, which is in serious economic trouble, has also decided to stop subsidizing new alternative energy projects.


Everything Mr. McGuinty believed about alternative energy turned out to be spectacularly wrong. Today, despite billions of dollars of investment, the total percentage contributed by wind power to the global energy supply can be rounded out to zero, as wind critic Matt Ridley has pointed out. Wind power is not an efficient source of energy and never will be, because it always needs a parallel backup system for times when the wind doesn’t blow. With its hulking metal towers and tons of concrete footings, it isn’t even green.

What a disgrace. Lost jobs. Lost taxpayer money. Increased electricity prices. We all lost on this one. Just another pipe dream not grounded in reality for Ontario. :(

[Agafaba]

Ontario’s green dream was just a fantasy
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/margaret-wente/ontarios-green-dream-was-just-a-fantasy/article2369422/







What a disgrace. Lost jobs. Lost taxpayer money. Increased electricity prices. We all lost on this one. Just another pipe dream not grounded in reality for Ontario. :(

And the rest of the world it seems.

I always said wind was foolish, but solar is still improving quite a bit and seems to have a place in future power generation.

[vero95]

Ontario’s green dream was just a fantasy
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/margaret-wente/ontarios-green-dream-was-just-a-fantasy/article2369422/

What a disgrace. Lost jobs. Lost taxpayer money. Increased electricity prices. We all lost on this one. Just another pipe dream not grounded in reality for Ontario. :(

there should be an investigation how Duceppe stole the national taxpayer waste aword from Dalton
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20120307/teddies-waste-awards-cite-agriculture-canada-120307/
Dalton was a sure bet

[SoBored]

article seems like it was written/influenced by natural gas lobbyists

we should be putting money towards finding new / environmentally safe ways to get renewable energy

or we can keep using the same methods we have been for a century and wait for another country to innovate the technology and pay a huge premium for it

[nx6288]

whether it continues to work out or not, it was innovative compared to what the rest of the country is doing on all fronts.

[vero95]

whether it continues to work out or not, it was innovative compared to what the rest of the country is doing on all fronts.

we do not have money for experiments

[DearSummer]

whether it continues to work out or not, it was innovative compared to what the rest of the country is doing on all fronts.

Innovative in what way? What exactly did it accomplish?

[pshch]

article seems like it was written/influenced by natural gas lobbyists

we should be putting money towards finding new / environmentally safe ways to get renewable energy

or we can keep using the same methods we have been for a century and wait for another country to innovate the technology and pay a huge premium for it

The problem is they did not invest in "finding new / environmentally safe ways to get renewable energy". Instead they subsidized a wind energy likely somebodies pet project without doing a proper research on how viable this energy source is.

[pshch]

whether it continues to work out or not, it was innovative compared to what the rest of the country is doing on all fronts.

Alberta got an award for paying MLA's 1000$/month for seating in commission which had no meeting since 2008. Compared to this Ontario for sure was innovative. The only problem - they will likely disband this commission here and money wasting will stop and Ontario will pay for McGuinty "green dreams" for many more years to come.

[BornRuff]

Ontario’s green dream was just a fantasy
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/margaret-wente/ontarios-green-dream-was-just-a-fantasy/article2369422/







What a disgrace. Lost jobs. Lost taxpayer money. Increased electricity prices. We all lost on this one. Just another pipe dream not grounded in reality for Ontario. :(

Based on the quotes you provided, they are not looking at both sides of the story here. They only mention that subsidies have apparently forced companies to close, but they did not quantify how large this impact is. Then they mention that stopping the subsidies tanked solar stocks, which are also linked to many jobs, but they don't mention that.

Solar and wind do create many jobs, as people need to produce, build, maintain, etc etc, all of these things.

Global interest in this stuff has predictably diminished with increased focus on the economy. Before 2008, the environment was issue number one, and it will come back into the light once all the economic stuff quiets down. With other countries being forced to abandon their programs for now due to budgetary issues, Ontario has a good chance to really establish itself as the world leader, attract all the businesses that produce this stuff here. When the next wave comes, we could be sitting very pretty.

[Syne]

Mr. McGuinty insists that his green energy investments will launch a vast new industry in Ontario, whose products and expertise can then be exported to the world. But the world is losing interest. Besides, green subsidies don’t create jobs – they kill them. In Germany, where the government has invested heavily in renewables, high energy prices are forcing companies to close factories or move abroad.

It's called progress :facepalm:

Green energy does not fit into the capitalist paradigm. This much should have been obvious from the outset - but that doesn't mean that is a valid argument against it.

I like how the article paints Canada as progressive on the green energy front, when the sad fact is, even with the McGuinty initiatives, we are still lagging embarrassingly behind most other G10 countries. Now we just look like luddites.

[vero95]

It's called progress :facepalm:

Green energy does not fit into the capitalist paradigm. This much should have been obvious from the outset - but that doesn't mean that is a valid argument against it.

I like how the article paints Canada as progressive on the green energy front, when the sad fact is, even with the McGuinty initiatives, we are still lagging embarrassingly behind most other G10 countries. Now we just look like luddites.

LOL do you think those countires would invest so much in this type of energy if they had enough other resource to produce it? for example we have tons of cheap natural gas whereas Germany imports it mainly from Russia
it's not about the capitalist pardigm but about common sense :facepalm:
let other people make "progress" and experiment. why should we have an energy revolution here if we have enough resources to produce it

[vero95]

Based on the quotes you provided, they are not looking at both sides of the story here. They only mention that subsidies have apparently forced companies to close, but they did not quantify how large this impact is. Then they mention that stopping the subsidies tanked solar stocks, which are also linked to many jobs, but they don't mention that.

Solar and wind do create many jobs, as people need to produce, build, maintain, etc etc, all of these things.

Global interest in this stuff has predictably diminished with increased focus on the economy. Before 2008, the environment was issue number one, and it will come back into the light once all the economic stuff quiets down. With other countries being forced to abandon their programs for now due to budgetary issues, Ontario has a good chance to really establish itself as the world leader, attract all the businesses that produce this stuff here. When the next wave comes, we could be sitting very pretty.

that argument does not make any sense. it's like defending usless people in the public sector by saying that those jobs lower the number of welfare recipients

[BornRuff]

that argument does not make any sense. it's like defending usless people in the public sector by saying that those jobs lower the number of welfare recipients

No, it is a simple fact. There are jobs associated with these technologies. If they are going to talk about jobs apparently being lost because of it, they have to consider how many are being created as well.

[vero95]

No, it is a simple fact. There are jobs associated with these technologies. If they are going to talk about jobs apparently being lost because of it, they have to consider how many are being created as well.

maybe not simple for you but it is a simple fact for the rest of us that those technologies increase the price of energy and so cause the economy to shut down

Besides, green subsidies don’t create jobs – they kill them. In Germany, where the government has invested heavily in renewables, high energy prices are forcing companies to close factories or move abroad.

[DearSummer]

No, it is a simple fact. There are jobs associated with these technologies. If they are going to talk about jobs apparently being lost because of it, they have to consider how many are being created as well.

You could also hire people to dig holes aimlessly with taxpayer money which is "creating jobs". Even still, how many of those jobs will exist when the subsidies are removed (almonte none, see Germany). The government is the worst venture capitalist in the world and should not be involved in any way, shape, or form.

[NorthYorker]

maybe not simple for you but it is a simple fact for the rest of us that those technologies increase the price of energy and so cause the economy to shut downAs far as Germany is concerned, this:
In Germany... high energy prices are forcing companies to close factories or move abroad. Is the load of bull I would be expecting from the Sun but not from G&M. Whatever energy prices are in Germany, they are of no consequence comparing to extremely high workforce costs. Whatever companies could leave the country to strip-mine cheap labour market, did it pre-2000. Remaining industries have no choice but to pay German prices for German workforce and energy bills do not even register in comparison.

[BornRuff]

maybe not simple for you but it is a simple fact for the rest of us that those technologies increase the price of energy and so cause the economy to shut down

Germany clearly hasn't shut down and is not in the process of shutting down. They are the strongest of the Euro countries. Their early investment in solar and wind technologies did lead to many export opportunities that created jobs not just supported by government subsidies.

Looking at the world right now, if you believe that green energy will make a comeback once the economy settles down, then it could be well worth it to maintain our investments in the industry. It will attract the companies from areas that are cutting subsidies, and when people decide to start buying solar panels again, they will be buying them from us.

[CDNPatriot]

You could also hire people to dig holes aimlessly with taxpayer money which is "creating jobs". Even still, how many of those jobs will exist when the subsidies are removed (almonte none, see Germany). The government is the worst venture capitalist in the world and should not be involved in any way, shape, or form.

Digging holes and paying someone vs promoting a high technology cutting edge industry will have significantly different effects on the economy.

I'm starting to figure why certain people spend so much time posting stuff on here. In real life people avoid them like the plague with the verbal nonsense.

[DearSummer]

Digging holes and paying someone vs promoting a high technology cutting edge industry will have significantly different effects on the economy.

What effects on the economy has Dalton's "green dream" had?

[CDNPatriot]

You think government investment in Nortel paid overnight? If that was the case every country in the world would be doing it.

[toalan]

Solar and wind is a pipe dream, it is about time the government woke up a little. If you just add up the numbers, it makes no sense. Even if it was economically competitive with fossil fuels, it's next problem is inconsistent output, supposing they solve that somehow, the next hurdle is the large amount of energy required to construct solar panels and wind turbines compared to it's energy output over it's useful life, supposing they can solve that, the next hurdle is vast amounts of land required, ............. it ain't just a money thing, it is also everything else.

Green energy sounds cool and hip, that is the only thing going for it.

Specific for ontario, we do not have an energy problem, we have a capacity problem due to using Air conditioning when it is hot. The government should be targeting specifics like mandating or subsidizing high efficiency AC units and natural gas heating rather than electric heating. Take out the extreme heating and cooling loads, and we will be running on nukes for atleast 75% of our energy needs, we will not have to build another power plant for maybe 2 decades.

[BornRuff]

Solar and wind is a pipe dream, it is about time the government woke up a little. If you just add up the numbers, it makes no sense. Even if it was economically competitive with fossil fuels, it's next problem is inconsistent output, supposing they solve that somehow, the next hurdle is the large amount of energy required to construct solar panels and wind turbines compared to it's energy output over it's useful life, supposing they can solve that, the next hurdle is vast amounts of land required, ............. it ain't just a money thing, it is also everything else.

Green energy sounds cool and hip, that is the only thing going for it.

Specific for ontario, we do not have an energy problem, we have a capacity problem due to using Air conditioning when it is hot. The government should be targeting specifics like mandating or subsidizing high efficiency AC units and natural gas heating rather than electric heating. Take out the extreme heating and cooling loads, and we will be running on nukes for atleast 75% of our energy needs, we will not have to build another power plant for maybe 2 decades.

Fossil fuels and nuclear are clearly going to be doing the heavy lifting for the foreseeable future. They have huge costs above what we see on our power bill though.

[IceBlueShoes]

maybe not simple for you but it is a simple fact for the rest of us that those technologies increase the price of energy and so cause the economy to shut down

And what happens when we run out of gas? It's not a renewable resource.
This is exactly the problem. Too many people can only think 1 quarter at a time.

[Mark77]

You think government investment in Nortel paid overnight? If that was the case every country in the world would be doing it.

Aside from paying to train a sh*t-load of engineers (including myself) to work for them, what exactly did the government do in terms of giving money to Bell/Nortel?

[Syne]

And what happens when we run out of gas? It's not a renewable resource.
This is exactly the problem. Too many people can only think 1 quarter at a time.

I like this expression.

[MrKap]

Looking forward to the next oil spill. We need more jobs!



article seems like it was written/influenced by natural gas lobbyists


It's the Globe and Mail.

[DearSummer]

You think government investment in Nortel paid overnight? If that was the case every country in the world would be doing it.

What investment? And it's absolutely hilarious that you would use Nortel as an example of a successful company. :facepalm:

[vero95]

And what happens when we run out of gas? It's not a renewable resource.
This is exactly the problem. Too many people can only think 1 quarter at a time.

that's not a problem. we have enough for hundreds of years
why would you waste money on such scale if you do not need it. you could build a transit system instead for example but this government has never been in touch with reality
money is being wasted left and right while urgent projects such us transit are not funded enough

[vero95]

Germany clearly hasn't shut down and is not in the process of shutting down. They are the strongest of the Euro countries. Their early investment in solar and wind technologies did lead to many export opportunities that created jobs not just supported by government subsidies.

Looking at the world right now, if you believe that green energy will make a comeback once the economy settles down, then it could be well worth it to maintain our investments in the industry. It will attract the companies from areas that are cutting subsidies, and when people decide to start buying solar panels again, they will be buying them from us.


Digging holes and paying someone vs promoting a high technology cutting edge industry will have significantly different effects on the economy.

I'm starting to figure why certain people spend so much time posting stuff on here. In real life people avoid them like the plague with the verbal nonsense.

I think you read another article. probably some lefties propaganda distributed in your office
there is nothing wrong with continuing to explore the cutting edge technology but until it's not economically sound it's plain idiotic to expand it to a large scale. it's like promoting electric cars in the 50s when the costs did not justify them

[DearSummer]

The definition of waste and pissing taxpayer dollars down the drain...


Wind’s cost to ratepayers is $135-million per Twh, or about $526-million for the 3.9 Twh wind delivered to Ontario in 2011. According to OPG’s annual statement, it sells nuclear power into the market at $55-million per Twh and unregulated hydro power from places like Niagara Falls for $32-million per Twh. The math is simple: Had OPG used its hydro facilities to deliver the same amount of power supplied by wind, the cost savings to Ontario’s ratepayers would have been the difference between the $32-million per TWh hydro price and the $135-million paid for wind. The 3.9 Twh of wind power that cost Ontario ratepayers $526-million last year could have been bought from OPG for $125-million — a potential saving of $400-million and delivered $125 million in additional revenue for OPG.
http://opinion.financialpost.com/2012/03/15/ontarios-power-trip-wind-wastes-water-and-your-dollars/

[vero95]

The definition of waste and pissing taxpayer dollars down the train...


http://opinion.financialpost.com/2012/03/15/ontarios-power-trip-wind-wastes-water-and-your-dollars/

but ruffy will say that those hydro power plants do not create as many jobs as wind turbines or solar panels. he will not find a source to back it up though :facepalm:

[IceBlueShoes]

that's not a problem. we have enough for hundreds of years
why would you waste money on such scale if you do not need it. you could build a transit system instead for example but this government has never been in touch with reality
money is being wasted left and right while urgent projects such us transit are not funded enough

Hundreds? Hardly. Demand is increasing, not decreasing. We've already hit peak oil.

As for natural gas, it's "cleaner" but not perfect. If so, why aren't more cars/trucks using it?

Also I'm not against gas. I'm not the type of person that thinks we should shut off the taps completely, but rather should take money collected from a gas tax and use it to develop new energy strategies.

[vero95]

Hundreds? Hardly. Demand is increasing, not decreasing. We've already hit peak oil.

As for natural gas, it's "cleaner" but not perfect. If so, why aren't more cars/trucks using it?

Also I'm not against gas. I'm not the type of person that thinks we should shut off the taps completely, but rather should take money collected from a gas tax and use it to develop new energy strategies.

it's about the scale, IceBlueShoes. you do not waste tons of money on economically not sound technology. I am sure we'll come up with something in the future but do you think it's time for that now?

Canada is a leading producer with more than 100 years of available resources
http://www.newswire.ca/en/story/770601/natural-resources-canada-sponsored-roadmap-report-points-way-to-lower-emission-trucking-in-canada

[Agafaba]

Solar and wind is a pipe dream, it is about time the government woke up a little. If you just add up the numbers, it makes no sense. Even if it was economically competitive with fossil fuels, it's next problem is inconsistent output, supposing they solve that somehow, the next hurdle is the large amount of energy required to construct solar panels and wind turbines compared to it's energy output over it's useful life, supposing they can solve that, the next hurdle is vast amounts of land required, ............. it ain't just a money thing, it is also everything else.

Green energy sounds cool and hip, that is the only thing going for it.

Specific for ontario, we do not have an energy problem, we have a capacity problem due to using Air conditioning when it is hot. The government should be targeting specifics like mandating or subsidizing high efficiency AC units and natural gas heating rather than electric heating. Take out the extreme heating and cooling loads, and we will be running on nukes for atleast 75% of our energy needs, we will not have to build another power plant for maybe 2 decades.

Wind yes, Solar no. Solar power is great because it doesnt require any new land to be a substantial benefit. Every building has lots of great space for solar on its roof, giving a local source of electricity during the daytime when the strain is the heaviest on the power grid. I dont think Solar will ever be a full replacement, we will always need several different sources, but I do think it will become a common addition to our infrastructure.

Solar is always getting cheaper, I am always seeing new improvements online. Actually just read about another cost saving idea with solar just a few days ago.
Link to article (http://www.digitaltrends.com/green-technology/new-super-cheap-ultra-thin-solar-cells-threaten-fossil-fuel-dominance/)

[DearSummer]

Wind yes, Solar no. Solar power is great because it doesnt require any new land to be a substantial benefit. Every building has lots of great space for solar on its roof, giving a local source of electricity during the daytime when the strain is the heaviest on the power grid. I dont think Solar will ever be a full replacement, we will always need several different sources, but I do think it will become a common addition to our infrastructure.

Solar is always getting cheaper, I am always seeing new improvements online. Actually just read about another cost saving idea with solar just a few days ago.
Link to article (http://www.digitaltrends.com/green-technology/new-super-cheap-ultra-thin-solar-cells-threaten-fossil-fuel-dominance/)

I'm all for any power source that makes sense from an economic standpoint. However, the government picking winners and losers through subsidies is pointless and a huge waste of taxpayers' money. The right solutions will be determined by the market, not by Dalton McGuinty thinking solar, wind, or whatever else is the right solution.

[Syne]

You can tell who is the right-leaning parties on this topic because they refuse to talk about each alternative energy source on its own merits, and instead prefer to lump them all together. That's because they know nothing about the science of alternative energy. Everything they know is from conservative blogs and television.

[DearSummer]

You can tell who is the right-leaning parties on this topic because they refuse to talk about each alternative energy source on its own merits, and instead prefer to lump them all together. That's because they know nothing about the science of alternative energy. Everything they know is from conservative blogs and television.

We don't need to talk about merits of each source individually. The market will decide what sources are economically-feasible and which aren't. Nobody on this forum or in government has the knowledge to determine what energy source(s) are right for Ontario. To allow the government to choose which energy sources it supports and which it doesn't through subsidies is insane and an extremely short-sighted strategy.

[pshch]

Hundreds? Hardly. Demand is increasing, not decreasing. We've already hit peak oil.

As for natural gas, it's "cleaner" but not perfect. If so, why aren't more cars/trucks using it?


Because it's still cheaper to run cars using oil. At some point it will change.

[pshch]

You can tell who is the right-leaning parties on this topic because they refuse to talk about each alternative energy source on its own merits, and instead prefer to lump them all together. That's because they know nothing about the science of alternative energy. Everything they know is from conservative blogs and television.

Usually when people start to put labels on they opponents it means they have no more arguments. The reality is alternative energy in large scale applications is not economically sustainable without government subsidies. What government should subsidize is a research but never a commercial use.

[hugh_da_man]

Because it's still cheaper to run cars using oil. At some point it will change.

Cheaper but not if you consider it's environmental impact. Put consumption taxes on all the sources of energy based on their environmental impact and oil and coal will be the most expensive. Coal is the worst thing ever though, if you ditch the idea of wind and solar for nat gas then it's no big deal really but coal is so bad and we should do everything we can to avoid coal plants.

Wind and solar are both good. The coal lobby has done a good job of criticizing the renewable industries as not being "green" but when you consider the environmental impact of a field of turbines vs. a coal plant the criticism for renewables isn't justified.

[Syne]

Cheaper but not if you consider it's environmental impact.

Nah, global warming is a myth.

Now excuse me while I head out and do some gardening in shorts & a t-shirt in the middle of March.

[MrKap]

Yeah, I have to agree that global warming is not an accurate way of explaining it. It's more like climate change.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_ice_cap



Data from the National Snow and Ice Data Center shows that the sea ice coverage of Antarctica has a slightly positive trend over the last three decades (1979–2009).[4]

The Ice Caps only appear to be melting in one hemisphere.


According to the National Snow and Ice Data Center, "since 1979, winter Arctic ice extent has decreased about 4.2 percent per decade." Both 2008 and 2009 had a minimum Arctic sea ice extent somewhat above that of 2007. At other times of the year the ice extent is still sometimes near the 1979-2000 average, as in April 2010, by the data from the National Snow and Ice Data Center. [3]


With that in mind, people do attribute the death of thousands of people around the world to air pollution. You know how they give warnings to people not to go outside when the air is bad.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/story/2008/06/06/smog-deaths.html


The OMA's Illness Costs of Air Pollution model finds that of the 9,500 premature deaths from air pollution, 1,000 occurred immediately after times of intense pollution. The model uses air pollution levels, rates of illness and demographic data to project air-related premature deaths for 2008.


In any event, let's hope it has more to do with man made pollution than it does with solar variation. If it is all just because of solar variation then there would be no stopping it, right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_variation


Sami Solanki, the director of the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Katlenburg-Lindau, Germany said:

The sun has been at its strongest over the past 60 years and may now be affecting global temperatures... the brighter sun and higher levels of so-called "greenhouse gases" both contributed to the change in the Earth's temperature, but it was impossible to say which had the greater impact.[71]

[hugh_da_man]

Global warming or not pollution is a bad thing. Even if you don't believe in global warming or climate change you gotta want clean air and water. Wind, solar, hydro, tidal, nuclear, natural gas, and oil should all be a part of our energy usage but we should slant it towards the things that pollute the least and use the heavy polluters as backup where we can't use the 'cleaner' alternatives. Right now it just seems like coal is the easiest so let's ignore the consequences and stick our heads in the sand. And just wait, they'll start carbon capture at coal plants and we'll have another potential environmental disaster waiting to happen.

[MrKap]

Yeah, like the gulf of mexico. What makes people think that could never happen in Canada at the Hudson Bay or in the St Lawrence Straight?

You know there has got to be oil there, right?

[toalan]

Wind yes, Solar no. Solar power is great because it doesnt require any new land to be a substantial benefit. Every building has lots of great space for solar on its roof, giving a local source of electricity during the daytime when the strain is the heaviest on the power grid. I dont think Solar will ever be a full replacement, we will always need several different sources, but I do think it will become a common addition to our infrastructure.

Solar is always getting cheaper, I am always seeing new improvements online. Actually just read about another cost saving idea with solar just a few days ago.
Link to article (http://www.digitaltrends.com/green-technology/new-super-cheap-ultra-thin-solar-cells-threaten-fossil-fuel-dominance/)

Unfortunately when it comes to energy, there are always new promises, few ever have an impact on the market if it actually makes it to market at all. The government today is paying out huge money on a technology that is not economical, in exchange for the promise that one day it will be economical.

Certainly there is merit in the government fostering an industry that has the potential to have a huge positive impact on the world, however my firm belief is that instead of spending billions subsiding green energy based on technology that does not currently make sense, that money should directly be put into research grants to develop the technology that does make sense.

It is the same screw up with the chevy volt, the US government spent a few billion subsidizing the price of the volt, i guess the government was hoping that through the volt new technology would surface and somehow change the world. There is no secret in how to build a good electric car, it is all in the batteries, if the batteries are good and cheap, you would need the riot out in full force at every electric car dealership to stop people from storming the place, throwing money on the floor, and driving away with a new electric car. Back when Tesla invented the AC motor, it was probably already 90% efficient, now you can get AC motors approaching 100% efficiency. As long as the car is not butt ugly, once you have the batteries solved, it will sell itself without any subsidies.

The US government would have been much better off putting their billions directly into battery research grants.

"Green" is a machine gun approach, massacre the area with money and hopefully the target it is killed.

[MrKap]

Bailouts and electric cars are kind of separate things.

I haven't researched these guys enough yet, but my guess is they are what apple computers was back in 1990.

http://www.teslamotors.com/


Different cultures believe different things, and as far as California is concerned. They are both rich and rather righteous in their environmental views. jmo...

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/driveon/post/2012/01/environmentalists-laud-californias-electric-car-mandate-/1


Environmentalists are thrilled about California's adoption of the toughest, new clean-air regulations in the country that will mandate that one out of seven cars sold in 2025 are plug-ins or full electrics.

In particular, they say that the mandate will help lower prices of electric cars because it will force more of them to be manufactured. Makers will finally achieve economies of scale.

"California made history today," said David Friedman of the Union of Concerned Scientists. "It cemented their legacy as a world leader in protecting public health and getting clean cars on the road." He said that by the time "my son gets his driver's license" -- 2025 -- California will be putting a million super-clean, fuel-efficient cars on the road.

[Agafaba]

Unfortunately when it comes to energy, there are always new promises, few ever have an impact on the market if it actually makes it to market at all. The government today is paying out huge money on a technology that is not economical, in exchange for the promise that one day it will be economical.

Certainly there is merit in the government fostering an industry that has the potential to have a huge positive impact on the world, however my firm belief is that instead of spending billions subsiding green energy based on technology that does not currently make sense, that money should directly be put into research grants to develop the technology that does make sense.

It is the same screw up with the chevy volt, the US government spent a few billion subsidizing the price of the volt, i guess the government was hoping that through the volt new technology would surface and somehow change the world. There is no secret in how to build a good electric car, it is all in the batteries, if the batteries are good and cheap, you would need the riot out in full force at every electric car dealership to stop people from storming the place, throwing money on the floor, and driving away with a new electric car. Back when Tesla invented the AC motor, it was probably already 90% efficient, now you can get AC motors approaching 100% efficiency. As long as the car is not butt ugly, once you have the batteries solved, it will sell itself without any subsidies.

The US government would have been much better off putting their billions directly into battery research grants.

"Green" is a machine gun approach, massacre the area with money and hopefully the target it is killed.

Actually I agree with this completely, I think they should have left wind alone and funded solar research. I think the government forced green more for the public image than anything else. Canada gets hounded all the time for being "too dirty" even with this green push.

[Syne]

+1 toalan. Good post.

I'm reminded of Henry Fonda's character in 12 Angry Men.