4 ms·

> the infrastructure for which is now solidly entrenched This is one of the reasons you have for making choices and having mandated standards for interoperabil

by olefoo 16y ago

> the infrastructure for which is now solidly entrenched This is one of the reasons you have for making choices and having mandated standards for interoperability. Building infrastructure is expensive and if you do it right it lasts for a long time. From an infrastructure standpoint electric cars have some serious advantages over hydrogen, since we already have extensive experience building electrical infrastructure. And it should be possible to improve batteries without replacing entire vehicles. And electric vehicles create an opening for small entreprneurial companies to try out new devices in ways that hydrogen with it's high barriers to entry and need for a massive infrastructure upgrade do not.

stretchwithme 16y ago
when you do it wrong it lasts for a long time too. especially when government builds in things that hide the true costs. electric and hydrogen are only 2 options. We should wait for one that can actually beat the gasoline engine. all we need do is make sure that the total costs of using gasoline are paid by those choosing to use it. That means taxing emissions too. if another technology can beat gasoline when all costs of both are considered, it should replace gasoline. And if nothing succeeds at doing that, then no big change makes ense
- moxiemk1 16y ago
  >> We should wait for one that can actually beat the gasoline engine. I'd say that motors that are far more mechanically efficient than gas engines, a fuel distribution infrastructure that's already in place (electricity mains) and in-car storage of fuel that has made enormous leaps in the past few years and shows no signs of slowing down pretty much qualifies as beating the gasoline engine. With scale, costs will be lower; there are fewer moving parts, all elements of power distribution and use can be independently upgraded to improve the efficiency and impact of the car. Gasoline cars cannot do this. Gasoline looks quite beat to me.
  - stretchwithme 16y ago
    then let it beat it. If its so much beater, it should be able to do without any special help. we didn't have Steve Jobs going to DC to explain how his product is better than other phones and therefore needs a subsidy. new products should prove themselves as they always have. it should not be whichever product that has presented for it the most widely believed theory that wins if its so great, it should be able to garner investment dollars all on its own.
    - moxiemk1 16y ago
      The gasonine subsidy is a non-level playing field. Dcespite that, the cars being produced by Tesla are price competitive, and are on track to do just that, despite the subsidies.

by olefoo 16y ago

stretchwithme 16y ago

when you do it wrong it lasts for a long time too. especially when government builds in things that hide the true costs. electric and hydrogen are only 2 options. We should wait for one that can actually beat the gasoline engine. all we need do is make sure that the total costs of using gasoline are paid by those choosing to use it. That means taxing emissions too. if another technology can beat gasoline when all costs of both are considered, it should replace gasoline. And if nothing succeeds at doing that, then no big change makes ense

moxiemk1 16y ago
>> We should wait for one that can actually beat the gasoline engine. I'd say that motors that are far more mechanically efficient than gas engines, a fuel distribution infrastructure that's already in place (electricity mains) and in-car storage of fuel that has made enormous leaps in the past few years and shows no signs of slowing down pretty much qualifies as beating the gasoline engine. With scale, costs will be lower; there are fewer moving parts, all elements of power distribution and use can be independently upgraded to improve the efficiency and impact of the car. Gasoline cars cannot do this. Gasoline looks quite beat to me.
- stretchwithme 16y ago
  then let it beat it. If its so much beater, it should be able to do without any special help. we didn't have Steve Jobs going to DC to explain how his product is better than other phones and therefore needs a subsidy. new products should prove themselves as they always have. it should not be whichever product that has presented for it the most widely believed theory that wins if its so great, it should be able to garner investment dollars all on its own.
  - moxiemk1 16y ago
    The gasonine subsidy is a non-level playing field. Dcespite that, the cars being produced by Tesla are price competitive, and are on track to do just that, despite the subsidies.