by The Practician » Sat 27 Aug 2011, 16:01:29
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Outcast_Searcher', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('The Practician', '
')Did you hear that guys? Toyota has an
ENERGY ROAD MAP! We're saved! 100 bucks says they had the Underpants Gnomes from south park draw it up for them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBiSI6OdqvAHydrogen is viable as an energy storage medium for rich peoples toys, but it is not going to be powering any sort mass motoring society any time soon without a significant amount of spare electrical capacity. This may be possible on a certain scale, but its going to mean motoring will be a whole lot less democratic and societys lower classes will not have as much access to energy.
Yeah, I like South Park too. It makes fun of virtually every aspect of our troubled society, which is great, IMO.
Unlike you, at least South Park's creators AND Toyota have REAL entities that are actually trying to do something about society's ills.
Complaining about the terminogy to describe Toyota's future energy plan for their cars (you like that better?), doesn't change it. Complaining about the fact that there is an income disparity doesn't change THAT either.
(BTW, I am NOT a Toyota shill.
I am a Toyota customer who is enthusiastic about their progress on car technology, recent product offerings like the 2012 Camry Hybrid, and likely future offerings like the 2013 (for the general U.S.) Prius. And, despite your whining that all the problems aren't solved yet, the coming POTENTIAL revolution in practical fuel cell cars. (IMO, if someone does it, Toyota has a good shot. If it doesn't work -- SO WHAT? It's not like they hurt YOUR narrow minded fanny by trying). They spent THEIR money trying to make a profit AND make the world a better place).
One would think the leftists would LIKE such efforts.
Toyota is both bringing cleaner and more efficient cars utilizing several different technologies into the world AND making them cheaper. This reminds me of a company that did a LOT to make a product better and cheaper, but the left hated them because they dared to be profitable. Let me think -- I worked for them for 27 years, I am sure I can recall it...
Oh yes. It was IBM, which did more to democratize computers than any of its peers in the 60's and 70's (and became huge and very profitble in the process), so Uncle Sam sued them and helped screw up the company for DECADES. Kind of like they did for MSFT more recently.
Of course, folks like you and Uncle Sam are good for:
a). Complaining about people who produce things.
b). Trying to take their money and give it to those who don't or won't (because, of course, life is UNFAIR).
c). Screwing such people over if taking their money doesn't do enough damage to suit you.
d). Bailing out FAILING entities (generally unionized)

like GM and Chrysler.
Well, thank you SO much. If you can't do something productive or suggest something constructive, please get the he** out of the way. (And have a nice day).
Look, you're right: Toyota has the right to manufacture whatever kind of vehicles they want, and consumers have the right to buy them, but that doesn't make them viable as mass transportation in the absence of infrastructure to support them. (the proverbial "?" in the underpants gnomes 3 step plan). I have reviewed the case for and against hydrogen and other alternative "fuels" and their potential to supplant gasoline and diesel in a post cheap oil world, and in my opinion the evidence weighs heavily against them. All the shrill screaming to the contrary is not going to change that opinion.
As for you extrapolating my entire value system from a very few sentences where all I said was that a low EREOI transport system, based on large privately owned vehicles is going to be inherrently undemocratic, I would appreciate it if you wouldn't do that. I dohope beating the S#it out of all those straw men was good for your self esteem though.