You are currently browsing the forum as a guest which gives you limited access. To make use of all forum features such as posting to topics, reply to other postings, starting polls and using the Private Messaging System (PM) you are invited to register. Registration is free and simple. All you need is an e-mail address and a password and you are ready to go! Sign up and join the Green Car Network today!
Should you have problems with the registration process, please contact us.
DOE funding for Aptera-like vehicles?
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
Written on: 06 October 2009 [19:10]
|
|
|
ecoadmin
Administrator
Topic creator
registered since: 20.07.2007
Posts: 585
|
Hot of the press: Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) has co-sponsored legislation that would redefine what kind of vehicles would qualify for DOE funding. It seems that this updated legislation has passed through the House and is likely to be voted on in the Senate sometime next week. If passed, any vehicle that's fully enclosed, designed to carry at least two adults and averages at least 75 mpg would be eligible for funding. Aptera isn't the only company that's interested in seeing this definition changed as the law would apply to any company that meets the updated qualifications. This would be very good news for Aptera and other vehicles not classified as a 'car'. It would certainly be a step in the right direction. I don't understand why only a car with a steering wheel and 4 wheels is called a car... Airplanes also come with different configurations...3 wheels, 6 wheels, ....2 engines, 6 engines, 1 engine... Twike 890
 |
|
Written on: 06 October 2009 [20:32]
|
|
|
childress
Administrator
registered since: 14.08.2007
Posts: 140
|
ecoadmin wrote: I don't understand why only a car with a steering wheel and 4 wheels is called a car... Greed. Pure and simple. See the full story why a recumbent bicycle isn't really a bicycle at: http://www.bicycleman.com/history/history.htm# In 1934 the recumbent bicycle was banned from racing by UCI (Union Cyclist International) the governing body of bicycle racing (then, the mile per hour record, now Le Tour de France). The ban is still in effect. To give you an idea of how insane this is and to put the current rules in perspective, if bicycle racing had started prior to the invention of the safety bicycle, we'd all still be riding pennyfarthings (big 5-foot plus diameter wheel in front, little wheel in back)! Dig a little further, and you'll see that the bicycle manufacturers always had a large amount of control and influence over bicycle racing/racers. The same is true in the US of Auto racing and automanufacturers (as well as being able to lobby the legislature). We have some of the worst-written legislation when it comes to vehicles, specifically new vehicles. One such example is the legislation on what constitutes an electric bicycle (does not require a driver's license or plate). It's limited to a 750 watt motor and IF you wiegh exactly 170 pounds, you can't go over 20mph unassisted by pedaling. HOWEVER, if you DON'T weigh 170 pounds, you are unrestricted in how fast you may go (either pedaling or no). This is easily achieved by adding gearing (e.g. NuVinci) to a 750 watt motor. Better to have capped the top speed period, regardless of weight and size of motor. So it's essentially capitalist greed/defensiveness effecting legislation. That is why the US Federal tax rebate for electric vehicles applied only to those with 4-wheels or more... Commute suck? Twike it; You'll like it!
http://www.uiuc.edu/goto/twike |
|
Written on: 09 November 2009 [20:59]
|
|
|
ecoadmin
Administrator
Topic creator
registered since: 20.07.2007
Posts: 585
|
I read in in the press: "Obama signs HR. 3183..." can someone from the US tell me what this exactly means? Heard that this enables companies like Aptera to gt government funding? Thanks. Twike 890
|
|
Written on: 10 November 2009 [01:41]
|
|
|
iamian
 
registered since: 23.02.2009
Posts: 110
|
ecoadmin wrote: I read in in the press: "Obama signs HR. 3183..." can someone from the US tell me what this exactly means? Heard that this enables companies like Aptera to gt government funding? Thanks. Any time you want to know what a bill is... you can go to sites like the one I link to bellow and put in the H.R. number like the one you have above ( #3183 ) http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-3183 In this case it is a 36 page document as a pdf. among the dozens of different things this one bill does... the closest it comes to supporting Aptera like vehicles is: $43,000,000 TITLE 17 INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM. $20,000,000 in ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY VEHICLES MANUFACTURING LOAN PROGRAM. This same bill also has the following that I do not like so much: $98,400,000 for nuclear waste disposal. $578,850,000 for URANIUM ENRICHMENT DECONTAMINATION AND DECOMMISSIONING $23,627,000 for NAVAL PETROLEUM AND OIL SHALE RESERVES $672,383,000 for FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT $786,637,000 for NUCLEAR ENERGY Plus several other things... all rolled together. So vote for it you are for Nuclear power... vote against it you are against advanced vehicle technologies... and some $80,000,000 for Wind based renewable energy programs....etc... etc.. ----------- I personally really dislike the 40+ things that all get lumped together on one bill... then all 40+ things are voted on collectively yes or no. I really think it should be... only one thing on each bill ... do you vote for or against the wind power has no influence on your vote for nuclear power has no influence on your vote for advanced vehicles ... fossil fuels , etc... but I am the 1% not the 51%. RE & Efficiency enthusiast
|
|
Written on: 10 November 2009 [20:14]
|
|
|
ecoadmin
Administrator
Topic creator
registered since: 20.07.2007
Posts: 585
|
Thanks very much for the link and explanation. Wow, didn't now that a yes or no has an impact on so many issues! I agree with you that each matter should be dealt separately. The list does contain sums for some questionable investments.... Twike 890
|
|
Written on: 11 November 2009 [02:32]
|
|
|
iamian
registered since: 23.02.2009
Posts: 110
|
ecoadmin wrote: Thanks very much for the link and explanation. Wow, didn't now that a yes or no has an impact on so many issues! I agree with you that each matter should be dealt separately. The list does contain sums for some questionable investments.... I think the multi-issue on one bill thing is probably my #1 dislike for the current legislative system in the U.S. ... of course there are other areas for improvement as well... but I think that is the top of my list. I confuses issues and a politicians voting record. There is really no way to know what a person is voting for or against because each vote is for 30+ things all lumped together in one yes or no vote. I understand why they do it... They want this senator's vote so they put in x to get his vote... and they want that other senators vote so they put in y to get him... etc... etc... a bill to raise the national MPG number could also end up spending millions in one state to build highways... build a statue for some local hero... remove powers from the EPA ... change Social security ... etc... etc... The recent U.S. National Health care bill was over 2,400 pages long... I seriously doubt any of the 1,000+ people in congress actually have read the whole thing... weather they voted for it or against it... but in order to get support to pass this part they had to put in those other parts... and to get support for those other parts that had to add more parts... etc... etc... then the media just picks and chooses parts to focus on , and what not to focus on ... and 99+% of the U.S. population never bother to go and read what the bills actually read... even though it is very easy to do. oh well... I know I'm the 1% ... and it is more likely I will win the lottery even though I don't play than for the 51% to actually adopt my opinions or see things my way. RE & Efficiency enthusiast
|
Portal information:
At the moment there are 9 users online, thereof 0 registered users and 9 guests.
Today 0 registered users and 501 guests were already online.
Now online
ecocarforum.com has 738 registered user, 619 topics and 1217 answers. On the average 1.04 posts are written per day.
Today 0 registered users and 501 guests were already online.
Now online
ecocarforum.com has 738 registered user, 619 topics and 1217 answers. On the average 1.04 posts are written per day.