Remember all the rumors of The Big 3 auto maker snatching up patents for

@ParaTed2k (22940)
Sheboygan, Wisconsin
June 25, 2011 1:28am CST
high MPG engines? Well, now that the US government owns controlling interest in GM, and the UAW owns large amounts of stock in both GM and the FIAT subsidiary Chrysler, where are those patents? Why hasn't anyone in either the Obama administration or the UAW dug up those patents to start using them to make these cars with amazing fuel efficiency. Either the rumors were never true in the first place, or the left really doesn't give a crap about fuel efficiency in the first place. http://detroitnews.com/article/20110625/AUTO01/106250369/Feds-set-sights-on-56.2-mpg-by-2025
7 responses
@dark_joev (3034)
• United States
27 Jun 11
Well as most have said the Oil Industry owns a majority of them. As for it we need to get off Gas. These kind of motors that burn fossil fuel are not nearly as efficient as electric motors. Why you might asked well for one Combustion motors need to do far more energy wise than electric motors. As well electric motors can be placed in the wheels of the Vehicle and used to move it that way which would prove faster acceleration oh and breaking that can be done by running the motors in reverse which would cause the batteries to recharge. Oh and Torque is what gives the Electric car an advantage it is instant they don't have to work up the torque it has to do it over time. Electric motors don't do it they go right to the max. The issue right now is a technology one and not a concept one. The Ideas work with physics. Here are some examples of the faster Electric Cars in the world. Also some Designs that will be the future as well like it or not the future of vehicles will be a lot quitter with almost no sound what so ever. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=369h-SEBXd8 Say electric cars can't do anything
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
27 Jun 11
So, with the left whining about coal, nuclear and natural gas powered electricity plants, where are we going to come up with all the extra electricity we'd need to power all the cars? Btw, this isnt' against what you said, I actually agree with you.
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
27 Jun 11
Yeah, I have always wondered why we don't use geothermal more. Of course, that comes with it's own downside, such as how to keep the turbines cool. But, even though it has potential, the electricity needed to run electric cars would need to be produced in the near future.. which means using the technology we have now.
@dark_joev (3034)
• United States
27 Jun 11
Well what the future of our power grid is going to be is Fusion Reaction right now I believe we have one in the design phase last I heard. This would be the ability to harvest the energy of the sun by creating our own sun on earth that would last about as fast as it takes light to travel one meter which is a nanosecond of time to create several million terawatts of power or something like that. It is enough power to power the entire world. Oh and well we do have the worlds biggest Super Volcano so geothermal would be the way to go. Switzerland is starting to head this way and the downside so far would be more hot springs. But with the United States having Yellowstone we could use a lot more of that heat energy that is otherwise escaping to create electric energy for our power grid and we are talking about using the very core of the planet which will out last any of the other energy sources we have available. Then there is wave energy harvesting the energy off of the ocean. Norway has these built for parts of their coast. There are tons of possibilities that don't cause much or any harm to the environment Of course Fusion Reactors would have the same issues as Nuclear ones.
@andy77e (5156)
• United States
26 Jun 11
The left does care about 'fuel efficiency'. What the left doesn't care about is the physical laws of nature, which govern the science of energy efficiency. In short, they think they can legislate a change in physics. In order to move W amount of weight, at Z speed, over D distance... you need X amount of energy. This is unchangeable. You can not just get infinite distance, and not have a change in the amount of energy required. The equation must balance out somewhere. In the 1980s, GM had the Saturn Project (before there was the Saturn brand name), and they built a tiny 2 cylinder car that got 100 miles per gallon. With a tiny engine, and a frame almost entirely of aluminum, and a body of plastic, they could get 100 miles per gallon. They cut W (weight), and cut Z (speed), plus 100 miles distance = 1 gallon of gas. Granted you had a top speed of 60, and your car split in two if you hit a twig in the road. Building high gas mileage cars is easy. But no one wants the "0 to 60 in... at some point" or the "high safety standards when hitting bicycles" marketing hype. I can personally build you a car that can get 100 miles per gallon. Hope you like pull start vehicles. Please ignore the Lawnboy emblem, and yeah just push the slider up to the rabbit when you want to really move. The only way to get good power, high strength material, and 100 miles per gallon, is to make the entire car out of carbon fiber material... you know... like space shuttle stuff? Got a million dollars for a two seater? So yeah, it can be done, for a price point absolutely no one would afford. Sorry but physics doesn't change just because you demand more fuel economy. All that garbage about mystical engines that get some unknown amazing mileage.. just made up hysteria. I really hate it when people say things like "well we can send a space shuttle to the moon, then we ought to be able to...." Oh yeah, the space shuttle to the moon? You know the shuttle costing multiple billions of dollars every year to operate, paid for by 300 million people contributing taxes to the program? That shuttle? Well heck yeah we can build a 100 mile, or even 200 mile per gallon full size family Sedan, with A/C and Power Windows, for a few billion in tax money. Good catch there sparky... almost missed that one. Heck for a few hundred million, we'll just build you a Plutonium power car, using spent fuel rods. The fuel rods should last about 92 years if I remember right. You'll likely die before they have to be replaced. Never fuel up again! Only $800 Million, plus tax. Insurance premiums might be a bit high on the spent fuel rod coverage. But just think of all the gas money you'll be saving.... Ugh... some people...
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
26 Jun 11
"You know the shuttle costing multiple billions of dollars every year to operate..." Don't forget that about 80% of the weight of that shuttle is fuel. That crap isn't running on water, biodiesel, solar power, or whatever the green people like as a fuel these days.
@andy77e (5156)
• United States
26 Jun 11
Yeah, I read a post on here by a guy, and he seemed really honest, and asked "why do we pay for electricity when we can buy a solar panel and get it free?" The media and leftist groups have been so prolific at talking about solar crap, that people like this guy simply don't know the truth. I did some calculations. I'd need about $14,000 dollars worth in panels, I'd have to cover the entire roof, and the back deck, and cut down the trees so the sun can hit the panels. And that doesn't include a battery storage unit, so at night, or on cloudy days, no power for me. And even then, my $14,000 setup wouldn't produce enough power for A/C so, time to sweat it out in the summer. And finally, the break even point would be between 10 and 12 years, and most people don't realize panels need replaced no later than 10 years. This of course assumes that no squirrels or other rodents, or even birds, damage the panels, or that high winds, or hail never damage them. Or that it simply gets to hot, and damages them. Its amazing, the entire greeny movement, the whole thing, is fueled by ignorance. Goes all the way back to middle school teachers that said all of our air was escaping through the ozone hole. (not kidding. My science teacher in middle school told me our air was escaping into space through the ozone hole)
@xfahctor (14113)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
26 Jun 11
"(not kidding. My science teacher in middle school told me our air was escaping into space through the ozone hole)" ........wow
@bobmnu (8157)
• United States
26 Jun 11
First of all the oil companies can only get the patents if the owner is willing to sell them. I have read about the water mixed with gasoline and the problem was the rust it caused and reduced the life of the engine. Also in northern communities the water would cause freeze up in the fuel lines. For the most part such patents are just rumors.
@bobmnu (8157)
• United States
27 Jun 11
Several of those magic engine or carburetors also prove to be very expensive for a company to install. Often they are labor intensive to install or build. Very often these inventors fail to take in the cost of labor. How many of these magic things have failed or ruined the engine. Look at the expense the auto companies had when they had to remove the lead from the gasoline. What problems did they have to overcome to add Ethanol to the gasoline. The auto company has to consider all the changes they would have to make in the car to place one of these magic engine in a car. You may be able put one in your car and save money but how much of your time would be required and who is to blame if it ruins your car?
• United States
27 Jun 11
What about that guy who has the F-350 and pulled his motor out and put in a magnetic motor. I see those all over youtube that people are using on their house fans and etc that require very minimal energy. If I was more motivated I would like to try it myself but I am too lazy these days...
@xfahctor (14113)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
26 Jun 11
There are all sorts of plans available on the net to supplement your gas with hydrogen from water, I think that's what they are talking about. It doesn't work though, you get a hair more kick but that extra kick has to go to running the generator that's generating the electricity that makes the hydrogen. And yes, moisture is a problem as well. There is a reason these devices aren't sitting on a shelf at your local NAPA store.
• United States
28 Jun 11
Working through all the red tape and collaborations take time. The Obama administration did an excellent did in saving and giving a fighting chance to US firms who were on the verge of failing. The US auto makers have increased in profits and creditability greatly since Obama took office. The future looks bright. Automakers are pushing and promoting for electric cars and are gearing for the future. Obama help save an industry.
@dragon54u (31633)
• United States
25 Jun 11
India has a car that runs on compressed air and one that runs on natural gas. I read about that a year or more ago and knew such vehicles won't be coming here--in order to control people you must control their access to money and high oil prices and gasoline powered cars are just a couple of means to the end.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
25 Jun 11
There is a Honda Civic that runs on natural gas. Unfortunately it's only available in a couple of states. Also there are very few stations that have natural gas for you to fill the car's tank with.
@petersum (4522)
• United States
25 Jun 11
Most of the best patents are actually owned by the oil companies rather than car manufacturers. The company Elf is known to hold a patent for an engine that runs entirely on water! Many other water fuel patents exist in the safes of petroleum companies.
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
25 Jun 11
I guess I'll get to ask the same question if Obama is re-elected and pulls a Chavez on the Oil industry. ;~D
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
25 Jun 11
Don't you find it odd that nobody, in any other country has come up with such a thing? I would think nuclear bombs were pretty hard to invent, but we weren't the only ones to pull that off were we? With billions of people in this world there is no idea that only one person will ever come up with.
@xfahctor (14113)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
25 Jun 11
I couldn't find anything specifically related to a company by the name of Elf(other than "Elf" auto coolant), but those water powered engines are pretty much bunk. There is a reason we don't have them in cars all over the place and it isn't because someone is sitting on a patent. The idea simply doesn't stand up to the science. You can "patent" almost anything, whether it actually works or not.
@EvanHunter (4026)
• United States
27 Jun 11
I heard that most were turned around and sold to the oil industry kind of like how GM sold off its controlling interest in the batteries that could produce the kind of long range vehicle in a electric car that people want.