Converting ICE trans and engine factories to produce electric motor and batteries?

Discussion in 'General' started by 101101, Nov 16, 2018.

To remove this ad click here.

  1. 101101

    101101 Well-Known Member

    How feasible is this and how much overlap is there. This is a retooling possibly like what happened in WWII when converting from car factories to tank and plane factories.

    Crucial are the notions that fossil fuel subsidy model based on designed to fail consumption patterns has to be jettisoned as new users will be green and possibly commercial like subscriptions to UBER self driving cars or Tesla network. Maybe some of it would go the way of Lilium?

    But presumably the work force could be retained or moved to other green conversion projects even in the face of efficiencies that green competitors will employ with automation.
    Presumably the factories could be left in place even if better economy will be realized by on site batteries and roof top solar. So much of the real estate and in place machinery would still be usable along with some machinery not dedicated to power train production.
  2. To remove this ad click here.

  3. DaleL

    DaleL Active Member

    According to the Congressional budget office, in 2016, 59% of Federal energy subsidies went to renewable energy. The fossil fuels subsidy was 25% and nuclear was a tiny 1%. 15% was to increase efficiency.

    The USA road network has been largely paid for with the highway fuel tax which is now (fed + state) for gasoline, about 50 cents per gallon. Plug-in vehicles have been subsidized with the Federal $7,500 tax credit, various state subsidies, and by not paying a highway fuel tax.

    As to manufacturing, obviously every automotive manufacturer can and will modify their product line to stay competitive. The alternative is bankruptcy. At one time Daimler AG owned a nearly 10% share of Tesla. Elon Musk even said that the German automaker “saved” the startup with its investment back in 2009. Daimler sold that stock for $780 million in 2014. It was a very good return on a $50 million investment. Toyota had a similar investment in Tesla. Daimler, Toyota, and Tesla also shared research and technology.
  4. 101101

    101101 Well-Known Member

    Exactly why would fossil fuels need subsidies? Besides the 25% you quoted isn't remotely even credible its a pure lie despite the published source. But it fits with the new FUD strategy of just telling straight up lies. We saw the Haulcat comparison where a Hellcat car engine was placed in a heavier higher profile vehicle (truck) and we were supposed to believe it could beat a P100D at 0-60 and or 1/4 mile times because the Hellcat with funny car tires was supposedly traction limited. Or like Anton Wahllman saying a gasoline Toyota SUV with 39mpg has the same fuel price per mile as a Model 3 based on comparing the hyper subsidized US national gas price (its like $9 a liter in the UK and that's still got defacto subsidies built in) with the CA Tesla charger price- pure absolute BS! The empg on the Tesla is about 3x that Toyota and most people can charge at home and soon and using Tesla solar cells and power walls at home will get the average 7x advantage vs fossil fuels on all their former domestic fossil fuel costs (car charging included) and will really give a 7x cost reduction on all the fossil fuel in one's life. Its a 10x reduction in what is spent on autos when we get to AEVs on subscription or impromptu service.

    In the other thread you tried to say the credit propping up of Ford was some how justified- no its another fossil fuel subsidy- and 99% bad credit covered sounds just like these thieves former stupid cover of VAR home loans to the poor so they could blame the poor for more fossil fuel welfare austerity. The Ford GM fossil fuel subsidy isn't justified but still not sure it applies to Toyota as much but it is another defacto fossil fuel subsidy and the basis for Forbes pointing out that Ford and GM are structurally bankrupt. But that fossil fuel subsidy number from the USG you quote is beyond ridiculous. Musk and other sources say direct global state subsidies to fossil fuels is around 6 trillion a year or something like 6% of the real gross global product and this is before any externality consideration which are more than that per year. The US share of that 6 trillion is about 1/5 (scaled for share of global economy) which would be about 1.2 trillion a year or 1/3 of the federal budget.

    If you look at what happened with bs secret energy policy and the lying bs fueled Iraq wars which supposedly weren't about (oil) and supposedly weren't a function of the 911 fraud, if you look at these you see the federal budget is still ballooned way up even when these bs wars (fossil fuel bailout wars) are supposedly over. Invasion of Afghanistan supposedly wasn't about fossil fuels nor Libya. Saber rattling over Iran is supposedly not about making it look like fossil fuels are still worth taking risks over- they're not. The 75% stranded asset number is based on more than some centigrade ceiling for climate change its more plausibly super a conservative estimate of what is truly economically stranded with these petrol companies and they are worthless based on their book values because of this. There is no place on this planet where fossil fuels are economically competitive even with subsidies now- they can't function at all without massive grotesque economy cumulative hollowing out subsidies that's always been the case but green is way above needing subsidies now and way below where fossil fuels will ever be able to go. Its all stranded asset now for fossil fuels. Fossil fuels caused the last collapse with their stranded asset based derivatives (yes, trying to infinite circle jerk insure debt on junk assets will collapse already held hostage financial institutions) so you can add the TARP to the subsides and all the austerity of that fossil fuel bail out exercise. Nothing but constant collapses and now a huge part of the ballooned federal austerity budget that requires secret bs corrupt sequestration to pass budgets now because there is so much fossil fuel corruption. After the power of fiat currency the ultra low sub threshold aggregate efficiency of fossil fuels for control was next innovation.

    Note the newest bit of fossil fuel bailout corruption- fossil fuel economy can't compete against green economies so tarifs were designed to
    defend against lower cost of goods of the green economies and hit solar with a 33% increase on the cost of panels etc., but even with that its not enough to make natural gas competitive any where in the country against utility solar or battery backed solar or wind, in fact its only crime that allows that treasonous crap of more NG plants to go on. We should be tearing down even new NG plants and prosecuting for fraud anyone involved with making new ones in the US. But that is the result of financial hostage taking think of all the unnecessary constantly passed along losses from fossil fuels as another defacto subsidy jacking up prices on every financial product from mortgages (screwed up terms) to pensions to health, life and auto insurance.

    So don't talk about cheap fuel (biggest BS ever) at cost the price of gas would be closer to $9 a liter or what ever it is in Britain (or Buckminster Fullers estimate of 250K per gallon) the UK rate still doesn't have the carbon tax to hit the externality cost of the fossil fuel global enslavement tool. But here they go again going after Saint Julian Assange- this is going to mess the fools up again just like it did with the cancellation of Hillary (Bernie beat her hard core) because all the security state fools data systems are server based, they leak like sieves hacker team style.

Share This Page