Group of billionaires forming to lobby agains electric. See link:
The Kochs Are Plotting A Multimillion-Dollar Assault On Electric Vehicles
The Kochs Are Plotting A Multimillion-Dollar Assault On Electric Vehicles
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Big Oil Fighting Tesla
- Thread starter forumman83
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Tesla Inc.
Electric700
Active Member
I think we need to continue promoting EVs, and defend them when necessary. This is one of those times, so here are some core benefits:
1. EVs use locally-produced electricity.
2. Charging costs can be zero when local solar/wind energy is used. If grid power is used, the cost is generally close to 70% less than that of gasoline.
3. EVs emit nothing, and are end-to-end zero emissions vehicles when the electricity used to charge them comes from clean energy sources such as solar, wind or hydroelectric systems.
4. EVs are virtually silent.
5. EVs are better and safer than competing alternatives such as fuel cell vehicles (FCVs) since EVs eliminate the inefficiencies of first generating the electricity required to produce hydrogen, then transporting the hydrogen, storing it, pumping hydrogen to the FCV, and finally converting the hydrogen to generate electricity to power the FCV's electric motor. Hydrogen is also colorless, odorless and has an invisible flame, so it can be extremely hazardous.
6. Since locally-sourced energy is used to charge EVs, money is not sent to extreme governments or organizations that rely on profits from fossil fuels.
7. Low maintenance costs are a strong point of EVs, since there is no complicated engine, transmission, air filters, spark plugs or injections systems to maintain.
8. EVs can be charged at home, eliminating the time and cost of trips to gas stations. There are even wireless charging options that make charging an EV effortless.
9. Some EVs such as the Tesla Model S and X have extra storage space in the front, since there is no engine.
1. EVs use locally-produced electricity.
2. Charging costs can be zero when local solar/wind energy is used. If grid power is used, the cost is generally close to 70% less than that of gasoline.
3. EVs emit nothing, and are end-to-end zero emissions vehicles when the electricity used to charge them comes from clean energy sources such as solar, wind or hydroelectric systems.
4. EVs are virtually silent.
5. EVs are better and safer than competing alternatives such as fuel cell vehicles (FCVs) since EVs eliminate the inefficiencies of first generating the electricity required to produce hydrogen, then transporting the hydrogen, storing it, pumping hydrogen to the FCV, and finally converting the hydrogen to generate electricity to power the FCV's electric motor. Hydrogen is also colorless, odorless and has an invisible flame, so it can be extremely hazardous.
6. Since locally-sourced energy is used to charge EVs, money is not sent to extreme governments or organizations that rely on profits from fossil fuels.
7. Low maintenance costs are a strong point of EVs, since there is no complicated engine, transmission, air filters, spark plugs or injections systems to maintain.
8. EVs can be charged at home, eliminating the time and cost of trips to gas stations. There are even wireless charging options that make charging an EV effortless.
9. Some EVs such as the Tesla Model S and X have extra storage space in the front, since there is no engine.
flankspeed8
Member
Is anyone surprised by this? They are protecting their interests just like every other business. I am sure cattle farmers have a beef with vegetarians too.
Lon12
Member
cpa
Active Member
No, not surprised. They conveniently omit all the government subsidies that Big Oil receives, yet take issue with the trifling amount (in comparison) of subsidies given to the BEV owners.
If these mega-wealthy individuals were true capitalists, they would take some of their drillions and invest in all alternate technologies--solar, wind, BEVs, etc. They would hedge their bets when it came to their businesses. Instead, they cling to their anachronisms.
(As a side note, were y'all aware that their daddy, Fred C. Koch, the founder of Koch Industries, was among the founders of The John Birch Society back in the early '50s?) No surprise why these geriatric Neanderthals operate the way they do.
If these mega-wealthy individuals were true capitalists, they would take some of their drillions and invest in all alternate technologies--solar, wind, BEVs, etc. They would hedge their bets when it came to their businesses. Instead, they cling to their anachronisms.
(As a side note, were y'all aware that their daddy, Fred C. Koch, the founder of Koch Industries, was among the founders of The John Birch Society back in the early '50s?) No surprise why these geriatric Neanderthals operate the way they do.
I'm not surprised it's the Koch family. They are connected to the oil business (Koch Industries doesn't find or produce oil and gas, but they are in the refining and pipeline business along with a number of other oil product businesses like plastics and asphalt), but their political activities are much more conservative than most of the oil business (most of whom are pretty conservative). The term "astroturf movement" was coined to describe some of their political activities which include creating fake grass roots organizations to lobby for some cause. If they don't like something, they are very aggressive in their attacks.
CHG-ON
Still in love after all these miles
I could use the F-bomb about a thousand times when talking about the Evil Koch Twins. And many other rage infused expletives.
But I won't.
As my beloved step dad told me: "when you go to bed at night and close your eyes, it is only you. Can you live with yourself and with what you are doing?"
I live by that every day and yes I can. I wonder how they feel as they rape the earth for financial gain.
But I won't.
As my beloved step dad told me: "when you go to bed at night and close your eyes, it is only you. Can you live with yourself and with what you are doing?"
I live by that every day and yes I can. I wonder how they feel as they rape the earth for financial gain.
Not sure how many billions they will have left considering falling commodity prices... oil is below $30 a barrel now... from what it looks like, it doesn't seem that this will reverse anytime soon https://www.tipranks.com/stocks/xom
I came to this conclusion on my own about a year ago, but then found this article written a few months before that:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/15/opinion/thomas-friedman-a-pump-war.html?_r=0
I heard a radio interview a few years back with a reporter who had researched the oil prices of the 1980s and he had concluded the US and its allies had deliberately kept the price of oil low for a decade to hurt the USSR. He had interviewed the last Soviet foreign minister who told him the low price of oil was a major contributing factor to the collapse of the USSR. The reporter had concluded that the price of oil had been kept high from the late 90s up to the point of the interview (about 2010) to hurt China which is dependent on oil imports.
I noted the price of oil started crashing about the time Putin took the Crimea and the world was outraged. The low oil price is hurting Russia and Iran the worst. I expect it will remain low until one of both of those countries have changes in leadership.
The big oil companies though have big cash reserves. Some tech giants have more, but most oil companies have a lot of cash in the bank too:
http://www.ineedaloan.net/2013/07/10-companies-with-the-largest-piles-of-cash-on-hand/
Where they are spending money, it's to gobble up smaller oil companies that were caught on the wrong side of the oil crunch. It's the small companies that were hit hardest.
mknox
Well-Known Member
Sage advice. I'm going to remember that myself.
This kind of stuff doesn't really bother me, but it does puzzle me. You'd think parties that wealthy would learn the repeated lessons of history and get on with leading the future rather than go kicking and screaming. They certainly have the money to really get out in front of this.
The people running the majority of companies today are not very imaginative. They often keep doing whatever they did to make their money until it doesn't work any more. The more imaginative CEOs tend to be in the tech industry.
Paul O'Neil who was GW Bush's first Treasury Secretary wrote a book about his experience. He was one of the few very effective non-tech CEOs in the private sector. He had a very low opinion of most of the CEOs he dealt with in office and thought most of them should not have been running companies. To get to the top in most companies takes being a cut throat game player rather than competent at your job. I ran into a number of the ladder climbers when I worked in large companies in aerospace. They were universally hated by the technical staff, but often had management buffaloed.
Bill
The problem is that once the founder leaves (who is often an engineer), the bean counters always seem to take over. Bean counters typically make poor managers because all they can see is cost cutting rather than what's good for the company in the long run. Cost cutting usually means shifting jobs to low wage countries which reduces employee moral so that most of the good people leave (assuming they can, some are trapped due to age or other factors). The other bean counter strategy is to merge with other companies and then dump half the workforce. This results in high CEO wages, higher prices for consumers, less competition, and fewer consumers to purchase their products--it's a lose, lose path.
WentOffGrid
Member
Don't forget that >93% of all hydrogen produced comes from natural gas, a fossil fuel.
Using it as fuel for our cars and trucks will not be good for our planet's future!