CookinFlat6 wrote:Lets try not to sidetrack into what makes an investment and if a failed investment, renders all investment irrelevant.
thanks
Does a successful investment render any investment relevant?
CookinFlat6 wrote:Lets try not to sidetrack into what makes an investment and if a failed investment, renders all investment irrelevant.
thanks
spankyham wrote:CookinFlat6 wrote:... Honda with the largest R&D budget, producing electric instead of algae powered leaf cars
Honda UK currently advertise on their web site 8 diesel models and 3 hybrids.
spankyham wrote:CookinFlat6 wrote:... could you please direct me in the direction of, or provide some proof about zero impact on food supply from bio fuels
The amount of land needed to replace all the diesel fuel used in the US today with an algae derivative would be half of one percent of the current farm land used according to Douglas Henston Solix CEO. Algae can grow on marginal/dessert type lands with saline groundwater.
Energy source[edit]
Main articles: Algae fuel, Biological hydrogen production, Biohydrogen, Biodiesel, Ethanol fuel, Butanol fuel and Vegetable fats and oils
To be competitive and independent from fluctuating support from (local) policy on the long run, biofuels should equal or beat the cost level of fossil fuels. Here, algae based fuels hold great promise,[58][59] directly related to the potential to produce more biomass per unit area in a year than any other form of biomass. The break-even point for algae-based biofuels is estimated to occur by 2025.[60]
spankyham wrote:I don't think these comments add anything to your posts "comicbook projections" or "Spanky may be having problems replying to the post above".
spankyham wrote:CookinFlat6 wrote:Lets try not to sidetrack into what makes an investment and if a failed investment, renders all investment irrelevant.
thanks
Does a successful investment render any investment relevant?
spankyham wrote:CookinFlat6 wrote:Lets try not to sidetrack into what makes an investment and if a failed investment, renders all investment irrelevant.
thanks
Does a successful investment render any investment relevant?
What's Burning? wrote:Opinions and facts are mutually exclusive until you demanded as much credibility for your opinion as is given to a fact. Why is this simple concept so difficult to accept by the opinionated? And please don't reply with lots of "wordy words".
sagi58 wrote:What's Burning? wrote:Opinions and facts are mutually exclusive until you demanded as much credibility for your opinion as is given to a fact. Why is this simple concept so difficult to accept by the opinionated? And please don't reply with lots of "wordy words".
You have a narrow definition of opinion.
If you were to accept that they can be based on emotions/thoughts,
you would understand and possibly respect the right to have one.
sagi58 wrote:What's Burning? wrote:Opinions and facts are mutually exclusive until you demanded as much credibility for your opinion as is given to a fact. Why is this simple concept so difficult to accept by the opinionated? And please don't reply with lots of "wordy words".
You have a narrow definition of opinion.
If you were to accept that they can be based on emotions/thoughts,
you would understand and possibly respect the right to have one.
darwin dali wrote:What's Burning? wrote:What's Burning? wrote:Some people are afraid of change, any change. Electricity is the one source of power that can be gathered in perpetuity for free once the initial investment has been made.
Anyway, with all these Tesla posts it would seem to me that our forum queen would quickly drop her knickers for Alon Musk.
Elon is schmexy
CookinFlat6 wrote:I shared an opinion sagi, no need to argue, no need to mention bias/unbiased - whatever you mean by that - I know yu dont mean it but that could be miscontsrued as you saying 'your opinion is wrong' just because i said so..
sagi58 wrote:CookinFlat6 wrote:I shared an opinion sagi, no need to argue, no need to mention bias/unbiased - whatever you mean by that - I know yu dont mean it but that could be miscontsrued as you saying 'your opinion is wrong' just because i said so..
Your lack of reading comprehension has reared its head, once again.
I did not argue. Nor do I have the need to argue.
Your opinion is "biased" in that you have chosen to agree with this
technology and will accept only opinions from those who also agree.
My intention was not to say "because I said so"; but, you may have
misconstrued that, since that's how you yourself operate.
sagi58 wrote:It's not about change.
It's about the fact that the initial investment necessary for us to be an electrically-powered
world is not a financial possibility, for most countries, at the moment.
Yes, wind turbines have been proven to work in many communities, around the world. And,
yes, in Ontario with all the hydroelectric generating plants, it would probably be easier to
convert; but, that doesn't mean it would be financially feasible to do that in our life time.
And, yes, of course, we need to start "some time"! Just not sure that beleaguered taxpayers
are ready for it, at the moment.
sagi58 wrote:... For how long will Tesla supply free Superchargers to consumers, when this
vehicle makes it to the market? Does Tesla plan on supplying them free "forever"? If not, how much
is a Supercharger going to cost? What sort of maintenance / repairs can one anticipate? How much
do they cost? Who is authorized to perform the service? What sort of warranty is available? Does it
become void, if anyone other than authorized service centers perform maintenance on the vehicle?
sagi58 wrote:Do tell, how is asking for clarification a complaint?
Those questions need to be answered before anyone
can stand on a soap box and rebuke anyone who is
not on board with this sort of innovation!
sagi58 wrote:You're reading between the lines to find a shovel.
Generally, world investors have money to work with.
I do not. Nothing sinister, nothing implied.
sagi58 wrote:I did NOT claim investors have money to throw again, rather that they can afford to make investments that I can't.
And, for the record, IF we're going to hear about how stupid people are that don't buy into this NOW, what is the
problem with providing a plausible reason as to why people can't?? Unless, of course, only those agreeing with it
are allowed to voice their opinions?
sagi58 wrote:They aren't alone: 8 Really Bad Investments That Lost a Bundle
sagi58 wrote:What's Burning? wrote:Opinions and facts are mutually exclusive until you demanded as much credibility for your opinion as is given to a fact. Why is this simple concept so difficult to accept by the opinionated? And please don't reply with lots of "wordy words".
You have a narrow definition of opinion.
If you were to accept that they can be based on emotions/thoughts,
you would understand and possibly respect the right to have one.