[Oeva-list] Think EV's in the news.

[garry painter]

On Aug 20, 2012, at 8:07 AM, CraigSchaefer wrote:

> Put me down under 'Totally Stupid'.   I don't even know what this  
> means--
>
> "Given partisan politics, the DOE doesn't often have an opportunity  
> to provide those companies with enough slack to keep going during  
> an inevitable period of growing pains," he said.
>
> Are we saying the DOE killed the battery makers causing them to be  
> sold off to other countries?

No, the DOE did not kill these battery makers.

>   How?

I believe the above statement, which you do not understand, implies  
that politicians are blocking the DOE from allowing further funding.

>    What about companies that succeed in spite of our government?

Do you mean like Lockheed Martin?
Revenue because of the US government: $39,980,000,000
non-US government revenue:             $6,320,000,000
Revenue provided to A123 by the govt:    $129,000,000

IMHO, our financial priorities are not where they should be.

People whining about the relatively trivial revenue lost by these  
failing battery companies is like whining about someone cutting a  
tree down while standing in the middle of a 10,000 acre wildfire.

$39.98 billion / $129 million = 310

So we spend $310 every year on Lockheed Martin for every dollar we  
invested in A123.
How come I don't hear people whining about that?
I guess I won't, because Eisenhower is dead.


ps. I forgot to list
  [ ] beyond
in my choose your level of stupid

>
>
> From: "garry painter" <garry at europa.com>
> To: "OEVA" <oeva-list at oeva.org>
> Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2012 11:37:26 PM
> Subject: Re: [Oeva-list] Think EV's in the news.
>
>         $118,500,000          Ener1
> $200,000,000,000          US annual trade deficit due to imported  
> petroleum products.
>
> 1 time loss to every American because of Ener1?    25 cents.
> Continuous annual bleed to every American due to dragging our  
> heels? $670
>
>
>  U.S.-backed battery-makers fall to foreign competitors
>
> Analysts wonder whether A123, Ener1 grew too fast for  
> infrastructure that did not exist
>
> August 19, 2012
> .....Andrew Kaplan, energy partner for Brown Rudnick in Boston,  
> said a country like China would not have allowed investments in  
> companies like A123 or Ener1 to founder.
> "Given partisan politics, the DOE doesn't often have an opportunity  
> to provide those companies with enough slack to keep going during  
> an inevitable period of growing pains," he said.
>
> hmmm.... A $10 investment by every American in A123 would give them  
> a market cap of $3 billion. But no, we'll just let a Chinese car  
> parts manufacturer buy it, so we can buy Chinese batteries when we  
> get around to all driving electric.
>
> Choose your level of stupid:
> [ ] Totally
> [ ] Somewhat
> [ ] Not at all
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Oeva-list mailing list
> Oeva-list at oeva.org
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/oeva-list

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20120821/aabc03dd/attachment.html