Today was a huge day for humanity.

[BayView]

Marc, time to come back to the real world, mate. Musk has already built a fully electric car that outperforms high end sports cars (using an electric motor invented by a guy who died nearly 100 years ago).

Aside from that, as long as politicians are bought off by corporations, your dreams of fixing the planet are strictly a no-go zone. Taking back our planet and repairing the damage is not going to be done passively by posting on internet forums. It's only going to be accomplished through brute force and revolution.

Repairing the damage is not a matter of brute force and revolution.

We merely start with such things as how many humans habitat the planet, such things as deforesting all the forests, de-whaling the oceans in the name of "science" (good one; Japan ), fishing out the oceans, dumping rubbish in them...there are a host of simple things that can be done that are not bloody, or revolutionary (stopping reproduction might be though).

P.S. Don't you own a 4WD, if I remember correctly?

I own a V6 Toyota Kluger AWD, 2009 model, and a 4 cyl Mazda Bravo ute, 1992 model.

Let's put this into context; one of the customers in my industry who purchases items through the industry "buying group" - Capricorn - has a monthly fuel bill of....$250,000. Capricorn looove him.

That's $250,000 dollars.....per month.

His tyre bill is $25,000 per month

He is one truck company owner, in one State, in our Country.

Extrapolate that to the USA where they have 10 times our population - my guess it would be fair to estimate that the USA would have 10 times him at least, and maybe even a few dozen with twice as many trucks, etc.

Don't get me started on India and China, where 90% of the world's humans live.

I seem to remember a heated debate about the population of this Country - several forumites got stuck into me because I said close the doors, while they were advocating that we should fill the joint up with more folks.

So yeah; kill me for driving my guzzler. Incidentally; my fuel bill is about $300 per month over both cars.

 

[cimbom]

Imagine the greed involved in that idea? The mind boggles?

Right, because having children is a completely selfless choice made solely for the benefit of humanity at significant detriment to yourself

I own a V6 Toyota Kluger AWD, 2009 model, and a 4 cyl Mazda Bravo ute, 1992 model.

Let's put this into context; one of the customers in my industry who purchases items through the industry "buying group" - Capricorn - has a monthly fuel bill of....$250,000. Capricorn looove him.

So your choices are fine because others make worse ones? I'm pretty sure you'd be getting rid of them quickly if you had to pay $12,000/year to register an SUV like in some other countries. Not to mention additional road tolls, congestion taxes and fuel excise tax.

 

[BayView]

So your choices are fine because others make worse ones? I'm pretty sure you'd be getting rid of them quickly if you had to pay $12,000/year to register an SUV like in some other countries. Not to mention additional road tolls, congestion taxes and fuel excise tax.

If you're trying to make feel guilty; whale fail.

I didn't say my choice was fine or bad; I have a 4WD size car for family needs currently.

I was answering someone's question about what I drive.

If there was an extra penalty for driving this type of car (SUV); so be it and I would reassess how I got around.

What about the Humvees which get about 4 miles to the gallon?

Or even all the old shidbox Conformadores etc rattling around that are thirsty.

There are many hundreds of thousands of soccer moms all around Aus - and indeed the world - who drive SUV's, but combined I'd wager they put no dent in the total of fuel used in comparison to trucking, rail, shipping, aviation and so forth.

But, instead of getting stuck into me for driving an SUV instead of a Prius; reread the last post I made to grasp the scale of who is at fault, and maybe look at getting stuck into both the Car Manufacturers and the Gubbmint instead.

The manufacturers make the cars you despise, and the Gubbmint allows us to drive them happily. I think it has to do with the lovely taxes they derive from each vehicle; which you enjoy in your level of lifestyle in Aus.

 

[topcropper]

Right, because having children is a completely selfless choice made solely for the benefit of humanity at significant detriment to yourself
.

Not really sure what you mean there?

I was talking about if people suddenly were able to live forever as someone mentioned. The fact is that you would have to stop human reproduction or else soon the earth would be stinking cesspit. So it would be greed in that for humans to live forever, there would be no more new humans. It doesn't get much greedier than that in my opinion

As far as myself having children, I've got 3. Anyone in Australia can have 3 and not feel guilty at all as we have a lower than replacement level of childbirth.

As I said, I'm confused as to what your point was? I get it when Daz is being sarcastic. Not so sure when you do it?


See ya's.

 

[pursefattener]

You must have been listening to Peter Costello TC

 

[DavidMc]

The manufacturers make the cars you despise, and the Gubbmint allows us to drive them happily.

Well, the car manufacturers will make whatever it is you want to buy... I'd also prefer not to live in a world where the government is required to tell us what to buy and what not to buy. Much more effectively to stick it to people on forums... My biggest problem with 4WD's is not being able to see past them in traffic, especially dangerous at intersections... off topic.

But yes, it's all small fry compared to the huge stupid decisions our governments (and their oil thirsty corporate overlords that control them) make.

Hopefully an oil poor country (Japan?) will invent something to ween us off our fossil fuel dependency. I read the other day that Germany is apparently 74% renewable now despite having much less sun that we do... good on them, all those solar panels were probably cheaper than another war.

 

[Mr. Fabulous]

We merely start with such things as how many humans habitat the planet, such things as deforesting all the forests, de-whaling the oceans in the name of "science" (good one; Japan ), fishing out the oceans, dumping rubbish in them...there are a host of simple things that can be done that are not bloody, or revolutionary (stopping reproduction might be though).

Marc, correct me if I'm wrong, but you do live in the modern world with the rest of us right? For instance, you live in a big, most likely far too big for your needs, house that is heated with natural resources, you've already confessed to owning two cars, do you eat meat? You own a tyre replacement business, yes? Just think of the environmental impact created so you can live even a *basic* lifestyle. How much of what you have now, today, are you prepared to give up? Judging by your reaction to my first post, I would guess not much at all.

It's akin to people who say 'Oh look, I use green bags when I go to the supermarket, because I care about the environment', whilst they load up their Toorak Tractors.

But hey. let's blame Japan for causing the reduction in whale numbers, all the while we're (all of us) contributing to the extinction of goodness only knows how many species. But whales are 'cute' right? It's trendy to pump your fist in the air and holler 'Save the whales!' Really salves your conscience, doesn't it. By simply proclaiming 'Save the whales' you don't actually have to do anything at all! Oh and you forgot to roll your eyes at Norway and Iceland as well, who also hunt whales.

When I said that halting the damage to the environment would be done by brute force, I meant that big business isn't going to politely say 'Oh sure, we're happy to sacrifice billions of dollars in profit so we can fix the planet, no worries guys!' Not to mention the 3 or 4 billion people who have developed a taste for the modern lifestyle. How do you plan to convince them (and yourself!)? Both North Carolina and Texan politicians have attempted to ban Tesla Motors from selling cars in their respective states. No prizes for guessing who is actually behind those moves. Let me give you a hint. Tesla Motors is the single biggest threat to the Oil Industry today.

So yeah; kill me for driving my guzzler. Incidentally; my fuel bill is about $300 per month over both cars.

The bill for recharging the Tesla Model S is about $5 worth of electricity per one tank of petrol. So I don't know how many tanks of petrol $300 gets you these days (I imagine it's maybe what, 4 or 5?). It'll be interesting to see what they achieve when they bring out a standard model. Another thing to consider is that because the car is significantly lighter than most cars (since it doesn't have an engine and various other components weighing it down) is the reduced wear and tear, re: tyres and the resultant reduction in tyre production.

 

[John_]

Electric cars are good if you plan on driving in the city to get a coffee. Try driving interstate with an electric heap of **** oh and what about the cost of an optioned tesla its almost 200k for that crap.


Environment hey... How do people think an electric car is charged? How do they get power..to charge the heap of ****.

 

[Fifth]

Both North Carolina and Texan politicians have attempted to ban Tesla Motors from selling cars in their respective states. No prizes for guessing who is actually behind those moves. Let me give you a hint. Tesla Motors is the single biggest threat to the Oil Industry today.

Though you've probably seen it, 'Who Killed the Electric Car?' is an excellent documentary (if you can look past the Hollywood celebrity love-in) and I recommend it to everyone.

People are quick to point out the flaws in electric cars, but the electric car industry has had to fight against a disgusting level of corruption and hostility that it's been a case of one step forward, one step back and has made it difficult to perfect a workable, viable alternative to petroleum-fueled cars even though the technology exists.

Governments, particularly the US government, have no real interest in protecting the environment or resource preservation.

 

[Mr. Fabulous]

Thanks Fifth. I've heard of it, but haven't seen it. Will check it out.

 

[Dazz]

alternative to petroleum-fueled cars

As soon as you mention that, you've just bought yourself a one-way ticket to the biggest fight in your life.

Up to now, the Greenies haven't been good enough to even step into the ring, let alone seriously challenge the reigning champion.

It's a unique industry, so special in fact, that you are forced to drop the economics and delve straight into heavy duty world politics, where many powerful countries rely totally and utterly on the champion prevailing.

 

[BayView]

The bill for recharging the Tesla Model S is about $5 worth of electricity per one tank of petrol. So I don't know how many tanks of petrol $300 gets you these days (I imagine it's maybe what, 4 or 5?). It'll be interesting to see what they achieve when they bring out a standard model. Another thing to consider is that because the car is significantly lighter than most cars (since it doesn't have an engine and various other components weighing it down) is the reduced wear and tear, re: tyres and the resultant reduction in tyre production.

This would be a good choice for me; the work ute (a little Mazda Bravo clunker) drives from my house to work - about 1 km, so the electric battery would easily make it there and back.

But, that's if I use it at all (I often ride to and from work on the pushie) and so it sits on the side of the road with an ad sign on it most of the week.

The fuel bill for this car is about $20 per month - if that.

Problem is, the Tesla would be an expensive swap over simply for a sign to sit on next to the curb.

 

[spanna]

Electric cars are good if you plan on driving in the city to get a coffee. Try driving interstate with an electric heap of **** oh and what about the cost of an optioned tesla its almost 200k for that crap.


Environment hey... How do people think an electric car is charged? How do they get power..to charge the heap of ****.

Yes its true electricity is made using fossil fuels... however we will always need to produce electricity! And cars I.C engines are so inefficient! (due to weight restrictions) like 70% of the energy is lost as heat! In a power plant where weight or size is no real issue the heat can be captured to drive steam turbines and create more electricity... I think the most efficient plants are around 78% atm Not to mention the renewable electricity sources.

The tesla can drive for 2-3 hours on one charge. A battery swamping station network (where you don't even need to get out the car, it just drops the old battery out the bottom and slots a new one it! takes 2 mins)

Electric cars are definitely the was of the future! Musk is a pioneer... in less than 10 years time you will have a distillate petrol and electric option just about every car you can buy!!! People just have a hard time accepting change!

 

[Richard Feynman]

Oh hi everyone.

Elon Musk just announced that Tesla Motors have released all, yes, ALL of the company patents:

http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/all-our-patent-are-belong-you

Yesterday, there was a wall of Tesla patents in the lobby of our Palo Alto headquarters. That is no longer the case. They have been removed, in the spirit of the open source movement, for the advancement of electric vehicle technology.

Tesla Motors was created to accelerate the advent of sustainable transport. If we clear a path to the creation of compelling electric vehicles, but then lay intellectual property landmines behind us to inhibit others, we are acting in a manner contrary to that goal. Tesla will not initiate patent lawsuits against anyone who, in good faith, wants to use our technology.

When I started out with my first company, Zip2, I thought patents were a good thing and worked hard to obtain them. And maybe they were good long ago, but too often these days they serve merely to stifle progress, entrench the positions of giant corporations and enrich those in the legal profession, rather than the actual inventors. After Zip2, when I realized that receiving a patent really just meant that you bought a lottery ticket to a lawsuit, I avoided them whenever possible.

At Tesla, however, we felt compelled to create patents out of concern that the big car companies would copy our technology and then use their massive manufacturing, sales and marketing power to overwhelm Tesla. We couldn?t have been more wrong. The unfortunate reality is the opposite: electric car programs (or programs for any vehicle that doesn?t burn hydrocarbons) at the major manufacturers are small to non-existent, constituting an average of far less than 1% of their total vehicle sales.

At best, the large automakers are producing electric cars with limited range in limited volume. Some produce no zero emission cars at all.

Given that annual new vehicle production is approaching 100 million per year and the global fleet is approximately 2 billion cars, it is impossible for Tesla to build electric cars fast enough to address the carbon crisis. By the same token, it means the market is enormous. Our true competition is not the small trickle of non-Tesla electric cars being produced, but rather the enormous flood of gasoline cars pouring out of the world?s factories every day.

We believe that Tesla, other companies making electric cars, and the world would all benefit from a common, rapidly-evolving technology platform.

Technology leadership is not defined by patents, which history has repeatedly shown to be small protection indeed against a determined competitor, but rather by the ability of a company to attract and motivate the world?s most talented engineers. We believe that applying the open source philosophy to our patents will strengthen rather than diminish Tesla?s position in this regard.

 

[Mr. Fabulous]

What a bloody legend.