The USA Needs a National Hybrid Retrofit Program

The real story has nothing to do with the electronics industry and everything to do with the US government making money with spectrum auctions and the National Association of Broadcasters trying to keep this spectrum from being sold out from under them. The end result of this Congressional/NAB battle is what we have now. This is very important for the rest of your discussion since the initial government motivation was to GET money from communication firms, not GIVE money to individuals.

A couple of questions:
1) What basis (Constitution, legislation, lots of excess cash?) justifies the government getting into this business?
2) Why do we have to look to the government for ALL answers to ALL problems? You would thing after 100s of years of inferior government "solutions" we would figure out that big brother is not very smart when it comes to technology selections.
3) Why can't I spend my money on the solution I want, not the inferior result that is guaranteed to come from a government "solution"?
4) What exactly will the government create that is not being done better by industry right now?
5) Who pays?

 

money is not the issue really. its feasibility. what car has extra space designed in under the hood "just in case?"

unlike older cars (i had a 65 chevelle that i could just about hide in under the front hood... a child could easily fit.

today, you lucky if you can find an area large enough to hide something the size of a six pack under the hood... where you could put another motor at??

as far as moving from analog to digital, there is a millions to do so, only legacy conversion costs (which are relatively small) to not.

power savings alone will far outweigh the costs in just a few years. plus it frees up bandwidth for more programing. allows for more wireless communication products, etc.

and sure, if the government can make a buck selling it, why not?

 

Television is a great analogy. No matter how impressive a backward compatibility upgrade could be (converter box), the shape itself will continue to mismatch movies. Widescreen was the standard long before television. It's about dang time the shortcomings of 4:3 are finally being acknowledged.
.

 

No debate that the derailing of the economy has caught many unprepared. But this larger problem would not be solved, or even slightly improved with a government technology initiative. Heck, the government has already provided $25 billion to "improve" car technology and I can bet that you and I will see NOTHING in new technology from this. The track record of the government advancing auto technology is horrible. The track record of small companies is vastly better. Hymotion is just one example, but it should be clear that the new technology is relatively expensive.



I can't directly answer your questions. Some lighthearted responses
1) What justification was there for the WPA during the Depression?
Very little, and rather ineffective from many viewpoints
2) I see the government's job to be forward looking and if not actually lead,
then to point the way. It would be a govt program based on industry's equipment. I see governments job to legislate, and properly done, could be helpful. But when it comes to government types picking technology, then history has shown dismal results
3) You could do as you wish. And I wish that same freedom on everyone else.
4) It seems to me that the condition of Detroit's Big 3 argues that they aren't
in a position to argue that they know what's best/needed. Agree, but Telsa, Hymotion, Toyota, etc. seem to do fine without government help.
5)Where's the money coming from for all the bailouts already/soon-to-be
implemented? You know the answer as well as I do.

 

addressing people who cannot change their driving habits is also another issue. mass transit will have a very hard time being accepted but must be nevertheless, but make the option attractive and people will come.

i work at a company that hires a lot of entry level workers, (we have more ex-employees than MacDonalds@!!) and most make entry level wages ($9-11 an hour) for the entire time they are there. so i talk with people daily who struggle with daycare, transportation costs, etc. although they work full time, they are one medium repair issue from being stranded with little or no options, so a new car purchase (in most cases ANY purchase at all!!) is completely out of the picture.

in an area like mine, primarily rural going all directions but towards the water, most are spread out and mass transit is a pitiful option (with recent budget cuts, its even worse) couple that with our 24/7 facility and even that is not an option for a large percentage here.

but i have lived in other areas were mass transit was brought in . i was living in Redwood City CA when BART was being expanded back in the 80's, and there was HUGE opposition to it. costs too much, no one would use it, etc...

but BART made it convenient, lots of trains, capacity, comfort, etc... and people came. and so will others if we make it a better option....and right now, we cant afford to continue to do what we have been doing.

my employer also provides things like free bus passes (works for a woefully few because of near zero service area out in the rural county area along with limited service hours but at least they provide the option) subsided van pooling (no car pooling yet, but we working on that) etc... but they are limited by what options the area provides.

van pooling does not really work because of the 24/7 nature and the over 130 different shift options, and the minimum 5 people requirement makes the logistics nearly impossible...

so a HUGE investment in the current bus system is the most likely way to go. my local transit system already invests heavily in mini bio-diesel and diesel-electric hybrid buses. sure it will be constant planning and re-evaluation to insure money is best spent especially on the rural routes where ridership is much lower. the bus system also provides free daily shuttle service in and around the capitol during lunch hours to reduce people using POV's for lunch. and until they started running buses every 10 mins, that project failed at first. its now a runaway success.

 

It also has to do with keeping pace with the rest of the world.

We are woefullly outdated in our internet/wifi infrastructure too.

I think hybrid retrofit is a waste of money. But replacing current cars with hybrids/EVs and increasing the efficiency and availability of our mass transit is where we should be going. We're about 30 years behind on that.

 

Hi All,

There has been a program that could be a model of what could be done to implement hybrids. But its not a retrofit program.

Many states and metropolitan areas have had "cash for old-car programs". These are aimed at cars with poorest emissions.

A similar thing could be done for people willing to buy a hybrid better than 40 mpg EPA combined (for example). Or for people that would switch to public transport for commuting.

Give the goverment the old, functional car, and they give you either a voucher good towards the purchase of the Hybrid, or mass transit passes.

 

actually considering the mass transit system in Europe when i was there in 1979 and how long it had been around, i say we at LEAST 30 years behind

the cash for old cars program sounds awesome

 

It certainly has crossed my mind of what could I do with the 2001 Prius for a second (electric) life. In every possible case, it ends up requiring the owner to become the entire service center AND spend a great deal of money. There are certainly many who have done electric conversions (http://metricmind.com/ac_honda/main2.htm). So far they are pioneers, not saviors.

At the end of the day, the expense just does not work out as a method to save money overall. Someday this will change, but not quite yet.

 

with falling gas prices we can all see this has been a scam

 

Unfortunately, i think such a program would probably be too expensive to run, even for the government. Think about it - the DTV switch requires you to buy a $20 converter box for each TV you own - and then only if you don't have satellite or cable. So even if everyone in the US had 2 TV's working no the airwaves, the total cost would be 300 million * 2 * 20 = $12 billion. Less than the auto companies are asking for in their bailout. When you assume that 75% of people have cable or satellite, that number drops significantly.

Now, for a hybrid conversion, we're talking what, $5,000 if you're lucky?If the government subsidized half of that for our existing cars - around 150 million, i believe - you're talking about a much bigger pot of money. 150 million * 2,500 = $375 billion. And thats probably being generous.

I, for one, don't want to see our country get another trillion dollars of debt.

But despite the money problems, i certainly would like to see or national mileage increase

 

do know what the ROI is for every mile of increase per gallon is??

look at that first, then comment on how much it would cost. considering the manufacturing woes we currently have in this country, i think a buyback of older cars with deeply subsidized loans for new hybrids would be best. base the subsidy on what is "American made" if you must. Only allow American built TCH and Priuses to qualify along with the (hopefully) myriad of TRUE hybrid cars from the Big 3(nothing in passenger under 40 MPG or SUV/truck under 30 MPG need apply!!!)

realize that a 10 mpg overall increase in fleet mileage overall would save us in YEARLY OIL EXPENSE....50 billion? 100 Billion...if talking last summer, maybe even 200 Billion... high gas prices are not over. lets do something before they come back

 

I don't know if retrofitting is feasible, but it certainly makes sense in view of the huge inventory of new vehicles which are basically dinosaurs in the current market. Some of that $25 billion would be put to good use converting that inventory to hybrids. It will keep people working and improve marketability. $4 gas has killed the ICE car market.