OMG just read this > A123 Batteries

Sparky49

Joined Jul 16, 2011
833
I've always had a special place for Duracell.

My things don't feel 'right' without a couple in.

spinnaker

Joined Oct 29, 2009
7,835
What do you expect? Just another green energy pay off.

Sparky49

Joined Jul 16, 2011
833
Green energy should get more funding.

Much better than fossil fuels.

loosewire

Joined Apr 25, 2008
1,686
Trading spaces,the green energy is taking too much above ground space and

the ego systems that are being destroyed. The birds that are killed in the fan

blades. That is only the begining,that means less crops,more land used for solar

power panels. More land owners waiting to be contacted,holding back on pro-

duction. Think about the small thing like bird eggs and nest,pollination of land base

crops. Already you have "where are the bee's......Most of our food is imported,so

that you have fresh food year round. Space,watermelons are hard to find year round.

Last edited:

MrChips

Joined Oct 2, 2009
22,880
Think about it. Who killed the electric car?

Big oil has too much at stake to allow green energy to succeed.

Audioguru

Joined Dec 20, 2007
11,249
A123 batteries were expensive and were not selling as much as ordinary Li-Po batteries.
Why did the government give them money when their batteries are not wanted?

loosewire

Joined Apr 25, 2008
1,686
Our government is backing the chevy volt ,no let up as long as they give credits

of $40,000.00 per car to G.M. that the government bailed out. You can lease one for$340.00 a month,compare that with what you can afford to pay. If you are

looking at what you can afford to lease for,compared with your duty to nature.

You may select the volt ,based on your income.

Last edited:

JoeJester

Joined Apr 26, 2005
4,390
A123 batteries were expensive and were not selling as much as ordinary Li-Po batteries.
Why did the government give them money when their batteries are not wanted?
Because the U.S. Government throws money at potential solutions whether or not the solution has promise.

When your source of income is taxes you authorize, you don't care about sales or the products not meeting the customers expectations with respect to pricing.

If clean energy is to have a snowball's chance in hades, it would have to be either privately financed ... from some rich person or from the sale of stock. I'm sure the true believers are willing to put up their cash reserves on some of these ideas.

After all, we've all seen Man's Credulity when it comes to financing overunity. Didn't PT Barnum say "A sucker is born every minute"? Well, add the U.S. Government to that list.

There are plenty of successes the Government had thrown money towards, specifically the few billion spent on developing the Atomic Bomb and the space program, both come to mind quickly. There were setbacks in those programs as well.

Twenty years ago we were talking about stem cell research as the "key" to various diseases. How many cures have been developed to date? What is that return on investment? Lots of outflow. The U.S. Education system also causes alot of outflow and when someone attempts to hold the system accountable, all hell breaks loose.

At least when individuals are investing their money into a project, they will follow that project and withhold funding if they are not getting the expected return.

Who would pay for a college level class called "Statistics using Excel" and the first day of class the instructor would inform you that you won't use Excel because he didn't know how to use it? Do you think the students should drop that class and get their money back because of false advertising? How about the Government grants (PELL grants) that paid for that course?

I have no problem with people investing their hard earned money in projects they believe in. I do have a problem with the governments throwing money at projects that don't have a return on investment.