Electric cars for Oregon
Kari Chisholm
Last week, Governor Ted Kulongoski was in China - lobbying auto company BYD to make Oregon their first North American test site for a plug-in hybrid car.
SHENZHEN, China -- In this far corner of China's manufacturing heartland, Gov. Ted Kulongoski's dream of making Oregon home to America's green car movement is about to roll off the assembly lines.At BYD Auto Co., China's fast-growing automotive star, a plug-in electric hybrid sedan is just weeks from meeting millions of Chinese consumers. The F3DM, which runs up to 80 miles on a single charge and packs a 7-gallon tank, will probably launch in the United States by 2010.
Earlier in the week, Kulongoski was in Japan, nailing down a deal with Nissan to roll out pure-electric vehicles in Oregon:
The Japanese automaker will include Oregon among a handful of sites worldwide to pioneer zero-emission vehicles, starting in 2010 with government and commercial fleets.Details -- such as numbers of cars and their costs -- were still being negotiated even as Kulongoski drove a prototype Nissan electric vehicle in Japan this week. The program is another green feather in the governor's cap as he prepares to visit a company Friday developing electric cars in China.
"Our goal is mass-marketing vehicles across the U.S. and globally" in 2012, said Nissan's [Mark] Perry. "We all believe that we'll be mass-marketing in Oregon much faster than that."
As the O's Rick Attig blogged, electric cars could be a big boost to our economy - and help the environment, too:
The benefits to Oregon, its economy, its energy resources and its environment, could be enormous. The Northwest Power and Conservation Council recently cited research suggesting that the cost of typical commutes in the region would drop from $7 to just 80 cents. A growing fleet of electrics also would reduce demand for oil and slash emissions of carbon dioxide, which are linked to global warming. ...The power council heard a presentation from Dr. Michael Kinter-Meyer, a scientist at the Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratory in Richland, Wash. Kinter-Meyer said Battelle's research suggests that between 43 percent and 73 percent of all cars and light trucks in the nation today could be replaced by plug-in hybrid vehicles without adding new power plants or transmission lines, provided much of the recharging took place at night, during low-demand periods for electric power.
What do you think? Ready to sign up? I know I am...
 |
More Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
connect with blueoregon
Nov 24, '08
I am absolutely a fan of electric vehicles.
But as an economic development tool, shouldn't we be building them rather than buying them?
9:58 a.m.
Nov 24, '08
Yes. But large-scale conversion to electric cars is a chicken-and-egg problem -- you need the cars and you need to solve the electric challenge (overall supply and lots of distribution nodes).
The power companies won't deal with their side until someone has cars available; and the car companies won't deal with their side until the power companies do their thing.
Kulongoski has found a way out of that dilemma - he's got someone willing to sell us the cars. And just like that, PGE is in the game, willing to invest in building a power-supply distribution system.
Once Oregon is leading the way - with a market to buy electric cars, and a power grid that can handle the volume and the distribution - you can bet that old-school and startup auto manufacturers will look here to locate production and testing facilities.
(Especially since we've got a supply of freshly unemployed Freightliner workers who know something about building vehicles, cheap hydropower, and the home of Intel's chip-developing facility -- key to managing battery life.)
10:00 a.m.
Nov 24, '08
Uh, yeah, what Dave said......and did anyone catch the stats on batteries? Maybe we ought to build them here too. While it's delightful to contemplate a couple of dozen extra jobs for Oregonians working on the docks and at the rail yards, doesn't it seem like there might be a better way.......that might provide even more jobs?
Wish I'd written something to that effect in the past week or so.
Whatever the case, if we're really collectively stupid enough to let Detroit pitch another tantrum while we pour addtional billions into the bassinette, only to see 'em come out with an overpriced, underpowered, and under-range electric car, we deserve whatever the Chinese have planned for us.
Neil Young hasa been writing for a couple of years now about the '59 Lincoln Continental conversion that he's doing. With a bio-diesel over electric powertrain, he's turning in runs of 65 mpg plus.
I'm sick to death of being patted on the head and told to wait another two decades for the "technology to mature", and when our honda hybrid gives up the ghost in the next couple of years we will buy the most efficent car out there that's within range of our budget, wherever it was manufactured....
10:12 a.m.
Nov 24, '08
Yes, Governor Kulongoski, along with Mayor-elect Adams, have the right vision: electric cars to get us off foreign oil and the petro-dictators it supports and to cut greenhouse gases as we shift to renewable electricity. But, as Dave Lister suggested, we also need to think how can this shift to electric cars nationally aide our economic development here in Oregon. And it's not just in making the cars. There are all the new components, especially batteries, and the charging station infrastructure that offer new business opportunities. Just how many battery experts does Oregon have in High Ed? Where are our entrepreneurs?
I noted on my own blog here that Oregon has competition from the SF Bay Area to be the the "Electric Vehicle Capital of the US." They seem to be a bit ahead of us in thinking through how the state can assist the infrastructure build out(maybe I'm wrong and just don't know all that is going on here). Governor Kulongoski does propose a $5,000 tax credit for electric cars.
Further, note that two Asian countries have the technology we want. This is going to happen increasingly. China's economy is projected to be as larger as the US economy in 2035 and twice as large in 2050. China is making enormous investments in education. The way to leverage China's economic growth to Oregon economy development is to teach more of our students Mandarin and send them to China to study. With less than 1% of our public K-12 students studying Mandarin, Oregon is just not prepared for this future
Nov 24, '08
If not for GM's stupidity, the EV-1, or more likely an improved version would still be on the road today. In a continuing test market capacity, GM could have kept it on the road, strengthening interest and confidence on the part of consumers, politicians and energy providers, for this particular vehicle technology.
Instead, GM's inept actions result in the irony that a little trade trip Kulongoski makes to China and Japan gives the spotlight to those countries for the electric cars they're producing rather than on one of GM's own.
I haven't heard any good reason why the Chevrolet Volt, in a test market capacity, isn't on the road today with consumers behind the wheel. The word is out that Mini, makers of the Mini-Cooper, are going to do exactly that early next year. If The Big Three were on the ball with EV technology, this foreign trade effort being made by Kulongoski would be much better news.
Nov 24, '08
New technology is a greta thing, I'm gald to see some innovation. I have one HUGE concern about plug in electric cars.
Isn't most electricity produced by burning fossil fuel? If so, aren't we just pushing against a different side of the balloon here? I mean if the current all electric car just moves where the fossil fuel is burned (internal combustion engine versus huge oil, natural gas or coal turbine) what is the net effect on energy cost, availability and green house effect?
Nov 24, '08
I'm another on the "Kari and Dave P have the sequencing right, but I have one huge concern" bandwagon. Plus the ones already mentioned.
Are we going to have to pay outlandish insurance rates because one turd in 100 has to own a Hummer and he might hit us while talking on his cell? Small footprint means small footprint and talk to the SUV crowd. Most I have will admit straight up that they like an SUV because they know that you are more likely to be killed than they are.
Love to see the spirit of "great idea" plus add-ons. Good green stuff may be coming fast and furious over the next four. We'll need to be real-time smart to take advantage of it!
11:26 a.m.
Nov 24, '08
Isn't most electricity produced by burning fossil fuel? If so, aren't we just pushing against a different side of the balloon here?
Yes, partially. But there are some substantial advantages.
<h1>1. Not all electricity is coal or natural gas produced. Some, like here, comes from hydropower. Lots comes from nuclear (which has its own challenges, but atmospheric carbon isn't one of them.)</h1> <h1>2. The internal combustion engine is a terribly inefficient and dirty way to burn fossil fuels. If we simply shift all the fossil-fuel consumption from millions and millions of autos to several hundred power plants, that alone would reduce emissions - since those power plants would be much more efficient and cleaner.</h1> <h1>3. Cars can't run on wind, solar, or geothermal. Boosting demand for electric power would create additional incentives for investing in non-fossil-fuel alternatives (especially since the money you spend on gasoline today would be flowing to domestic power companies, not the oil companies and their overseas suppliers.)</h1>Nov 24, '08
I sure hope they can get these electric cars up to "rural standards". We need cars with enough power to go over our mountain passes, and enough range to not leave you dead in the middle of those same passes.
Nov 24, '08
This short pdf www.pnucc.org/documents/OregonFuelMix.pdf
shows coal + natural gas produces more than half the electricity supplied in Oregon (it's more than half for coal alone, nationally). Nuclear is a very minor player, and all others are only trivial players.
There is no more unused hydro siting capacity; as the existing dams silt up or are removed to attempt to save a few salmon, our fuel mix will continue to trend towards the fossil fuel side of the mix.
So, yes, most electricity in Oregon is from burning of fossil fuels.
12:17 p.m.
Nov 24, '08
According to NRDC, a purely coal-fired electric car is more carbon-efficient than a regular car but less so than a Prius. Right now 50% of America's electricity comes from coal. In Oregon, it's about 40%, I think, and 15% natural gas. We're not adding more hydro, and given the relative cheapness of coal, until we really really ramp up wind and solar, it might not be too far off the mark to assume that as large percentage of power for those electric cars will come from coal. So electric cars are better than regular cars but are not a cure-all. They're nowhere near as good as walking, bicycling or taking light rail. (I say this as someone who drives too much.)
Nov 24, '08
Yes! There's also a small local company, led by Mark Frohnmayer (yes, that Frohnmayer), that has a prototype of a 3-wheel electric vehicle.
If we play it right, perhaps we can build a cluster around electric vehicles. That would fit with advancing a long-term state strategy around clean smart business, and a state brand as a "healthy" place to live and work.
Pretty cool.
12:42 p.m.
Nov 24, '08
I imagine that a majority of future plug-in electric vehicles will get charged in garages at night, when general demand for power is lowest but the hydro-power sources still run at the same speed as day time. Remember you can turn down a nuke or coal plant when demand is low but the river runs at 100% so to speak 24/7, with seasonal adjustments for river flow (and yes I know they can reduce the number of operating turbines in a dam.) Don't you suppose the power companies will either voluntarily or by Gummint mandate supply a higher percentage of clean hydro-power at night, if available, to support vehicle charging needs?
12:47 p.m.
Nov 24, '08
One other thing: Is there any indication Gov Kulongowski discussed with Toyota or the Chinese companies the idea of doing assy of these electric cars here in Oregon, or is just gonna be ready to drive e-vehicles coming over? Chevy has some engines where the parts are built in Asia, shipped to Canada for assembly into complete engines, and then imported to US car plants for installation into vehicles. Thanks NAFTA.
Nov 24, '08
@GlenHD28: Wouldst that it were so, but you have it exactly backwards. Coal and nukes are baseload plants; it takes a looooong time to bring them up to full output and they do not like to cycle up and down following demand. It's dams that follow demand quickly without stress. Gas turbines are fast and responsive as well.
So of the big boys, coal @ 41% wants to run fully loaded and stable; hydro is the one that can dial up and down rapidly (which is why we have turned the Columbia into a roller-coaster ride with as much as nine-foot variation in water level on any given summer day -- they build up the reservoir level at night so that when Portland turns on the a/c units in the p.m. they have something to run on.
We can't have our cake and eat it too -- you can't be building up hydro levels behind the dams AND charging all that many batteries at night. It's a fantasy to think we have the grid capacity to put the transportation fleet on it; we barely have the grid for peak summer demand now. If we lose the respite periods (i.e., don't build up the reservoirs at night) then we'll just have the brownouts sooner in the day.
The bottom line is we have to stop moving around so much, period. Hauling tons of metal around to deliver 200 pound people is not going to be able to continue much longer. Soon the predominant options will be mass transit, telecommute, or bike/hike.
Nov 24, '08
I guess the readers of this don't see what I see. There is a bunch of existing wind power over in Sherman County, and lot's more on the way. The wind blows at night too.
So, we have two carbonless sources - the hydro that is tapped out, and the wind, which could charge cars at night. Timers that cost $20 or less could guarantee charging in the wee hours, between midnight and say 5:00 AM.
We do need more capacity on the electric grid to make the wind power more usable. The other day driving to Burns, I saw what looked like around 10,000 square miles of potentially really good wind farm country .... But not a power line (or even a head of cattle) in sight.
Nov 24, '08
Good luck with that electric car idea.
It should work out about as well as the Tram turning SoWhat into the Biotech capital or the West Coast.
Would you really subject your children and friends that ride with you in this little tin buckets to a higher chance of death just to save $500/year in gas?
Not me. I love me children and friends more thatn my bank accounts or politically correct carbon politics.
Nov 24, '08
I am a fan of electric vehicles. But they have less power to be a opponent for normal vehicles. In a few years we can talk about this fact.
Nov 24, '08
@SCB: Yes, there's an abundance of acreage where there are no people. Problem is, the people kinda wanna stay elsewhere.
If you look at the link posted above, you see that Oregon gets about 1% of its juice from wind; and that's mainly in winter months, when our power demand is lowest. In summer, when crunch time hits, is when wind has an annoying tendency to stall out. Moreover, capacity factor for wind is about 1/3 -- meaning that to realize 1 average Megawatt over a year, you have to build 3 MW nameplate capacity (and associated transmission).
If we do build the wind capacity (and the associated spinning reserves, and the associated transmission) then we would be far better off using for electrified mass transit and to shut down coal plants such as Boardman, not to power small cars.
Nov 24, '08
Europeans and the Japanese have been traveling in electric "vehicles" for decades. This is one reason they consume less than half the oil per capita that we do. By the way, those "vehicles" are called passenger trains.
4:13 p.m.
Nov 24, '08
Kari,
Ready to jump on the electric car bandwagon? Yes.
Ready to endorse this initiative? No.
We will never be a car assembly state unless we are willing to provide significant economic incentives to the manufacturers and hobble our unions. I don't care how many cars we buy in Oregon--no manufacturer is going to assemble them here when the costs of doing business are far lower elsewhere.
The Nissan announcement is just a public relations stunt. The announcement makes it look like they are building cars here--no, we are just one of the places they are announcing them.
There is a promise to have recharging stations every 60 miles along the highway. Am I wrong or is this a completely empty gesture? It takes hours to recharge an electric car. No one is going to drive 60 miles, pull over, and park for a day. Am I missing something here?
If we want Oregonians to drive electric vehicles, it will happen in the cities, and here's what will make it happen:
1) Tax incentives 2) Free or low cost parking + recharging stations 3) Preferential freeway access (HOV lanes)
As far as the technology, the best thing we can do is provide economic incentives for the R&D or drop some money from an increased gas tax into OSU for electric engineering professors dedicated to green energy research.
4:44 p.m.
Nov 24, '08
If every parking space in every parking garage in Portland had a 110 outlet, that would do it for the plug in electrics.
We pay by the month for three spaces for my wife's company. They could charge us XXX per month additional and would cut down on signifgicant overhead incurred by other spaces that will need to provide electricity with a coin or card swipe.
<hr/>Plug in hybrids could, under a lot of circumstances, feed back into the grid and actually reduce some of the additional demand created by plug in electrics.
<hr/>The four door honda civic that my wife drives now has power enough to haul four adults, at 10 mph over the speed limit from Sandy over Hwy 35 to Hood River. I've done it several times.
<hr/>Safety vs Hummers will only occor ifn you decide to drive a Bradley fighting vehicle. Everyone who currently drives anything smaller than a Ford Extinction is already at the same risk they would be in a more fuel efficient car.
Did I mention the 59 Lincoln hybrid Deisel conversion that gets 65 mpg?
We only wind up with tiny tinny underpowered pieces of crap from Detroit, because the do not want to sell 'em.
O-60 in under four seconds with full electric has been done years back, and dang it, put some more windings in the motor/generator to get more power and more batteries to get more range. It's already been done. The only roadblock is mental when you figure in the current cost of petroleum as including two wars with Iraq and the medical bills for respiratory illnesses, and so on...
Nov 24, '08
Electric cars will soon dominate the market all over the world. American Nanotech has had major breakthroughs in the production of solar thin film photovoltaic. With Nanosolar in Palo ALto, Ca producing thin film at .99cents per kwH at around 20% efficiency. Which is comparable to coal. There are other thin film producers that are nearing this important benchmark.
Also, there are many upstart Nanotechnology battery manufactures that are claiming some very promising capacities and very fast charge times. Namely Altair-Nano, A123 systems, EEstor. Altair-Nano has already installed a 2 megawatt power storage device on the east coast....
I think most of the posters I have read are really underestimating the innovation that has been progressing here in the United States..
batteries that can store renewable solar produced from each households roof top are about to become common all over the world. These systems will have the added ability to charge our EVs.
Furthermore American expertise in mass producing and distributing such advanced technology. Will cause a new boom in our economy and the entire world! These solar panels and storage systems can bring power to many billions of people on this planet that haven't had any power. This in turn will create new markets for electronic devices and computers. And will also help encourage peace around the world!
Get ready for the Solar and robotic revolution that is about to explode!
Off we go to the Moon and Mars as a human race at peace with ourselves. We still have to pry the money out of the hands of the Upper management in order to allow the low class to live comfortably. Which is proving to be very difficult and painful as technology continues to eliminate jobs and new robotic technologies will continue to eliminate jobs.
Why should 10s of millions of people live in poverty while just a few extremely wealthy hold all of our money?? It is computers and new machinery and robots that have upped our productivity to amazing levels!
And our productivity is only going to increase exponentially while profits will end up in fewer and fewer hands. And more people will suffer. Unless our government taxes the job eliminating technologies and redistribute that money evenly.
The link below provides proof of the impending robotic revolution. ALthough I do not agrre with commmunism I do Love the idea of Hyper capitalism that this websit discusses.
Nov 24, '08
U.S corporations have outsourced so much of our manufacturing industry to China, so wouldn't it be nice if they returned the favor? Trouble is, companies like NIKE and Wal Mart are obvioulsy going there so that they can pay slave wages. It doesn't sound realistic that the Chinese would produce anything here, where they will actually have to follow labor laws, the environment and human rights, something that this still repressive and brutal Communist nation doesn't do.
I think it's far more realistic talking to the Japanese or Koreans about building a plant here, or God forbid, an American auto company building a popular economy car in Oregon, or anywhere. (I consider an economy car one that gets AT LEAST 30 mpg on average, NOT just freeway.)
BTW, I drive a Chevy Prizm, a twin to the Toyalta Corolla, although cheaper, which gets 32 avg. mpg and was built at the GM-Toyota plant in CA. Unfortunately, they discontinued the Prizm in '02.
Nov 24, '08
George Seldes writes, "If you look at the link posted above, you see that Oregon gets about 1% of its juice from wind; and that's mainly in winter months, when our power demand is lowest."
First, when I look at my electric bill, winter is always higher than summer. In fact, when I lived south of Portland, same was true.
Second, we are talking about powering cars, which goes on at all times of the year. Driving isn't seasonal.
Third, wind is 1% now. What I'm talking about is a future when we can have functional electric cars that meet a "rural standard" of having enough power to cross a mountain pass, and enough range to not stall out in the pass. If we were to take those places out around Burns, Fossil, John Day, Lakeview, etc., and put wind power there, and step by step go from 1% to 3% to 5% and so on - then we would increasingly have less fossil fuels, and more non-carbon fuel.
-- It doesn't happen in a day, or a year. We have to work at this.
Nov 25, '08
I will have to admit. I certainly hope that plug in vehicles become economically viable in todays market. Although not thoroughly tested, advocates like to proclaim that they are less energy intensive and thus less pollution intensive.
My qualms with the electric car are the way that the Oregon government is going to promote these vehicles. There is something wrong with publically subzidizing the purchase and the "fuel" for these vehicles at the expense of the taxpayer and ratepayer.
What is being proposed is to bribe people to buy a car with plug-in technology, subsidize the fuel at 100% and exempt the user from paying for the roads. Certainly people can be expected to jump at such an offer, but how will we ever know if this technology is economically viable if we so distort the market?
Check out what I have to say about this here:
http://www.cascadepolicy.org/2008/11/10/can-you-spare-a-charge/#more-564
Nov 25, '08
@ SCB:
Presumably you don't have an air conditioner or use it much. And it's understandable that your lighting demand goes up sharply in the winter, as does your power consumption for furnace fans. But the fact is, regardless of what you or I experience, as a state, we have lots of slack in our power system in winter. We have almost none in summer.
Which takes us to your second point:
Actually, driving is seasonal. They don't call it the summer driving season for nothing. People do drive more in summer.
Besides, even if driving didn't peak just when our power capacity was at its most stretched, putting a new constant load on an already-overstretched system is just as bad.
Wind is 1% now and we will be lucky to see it out of single digits by 2030. I'm a big wind booster, but I don't underestimate the challenges. The bottom line is that wind is diffuse, fickle, and there are already a host of NIMBY problems now. Just imagine how bad it's going to get if we make a serious commitment to wind. Moreover, when you build wind, you have to build some kind of spinning reserve to stabilize against the wind's inconstant output. So a massive program to build wind means a massive build out of natural gas turbines (probably), geothermal (ideally, perhaps) or concentrated solar (best of all, but even less proven at scale).
We may well never have that "rural standard" car at a price rural people could afford. You just compounded the problem of the electric vehicle greatly. The electric vehicle is best suited to the short, relatively low speed trip; it's the ideal commuter vehicle in a suburb or urban setting.
The question for Oregon is this: given our multiplicity of crises, where should we put our scarce public dollars to get the best results for all Oregon?
I suggest that electric is the right idea, but definitely not electric cars -- or, if you prefer, electric cars, but not with rubber wheels. The single best thing we can do for our various needs (reduce greenhouse emissions, speed farm and freight traffic to markets, reduce our trade deficits, limit sprawl, provide people with mobility at the lowest possible cost) is to rebuild and expand the electric rail system and to electrify heavy rail.
America is heading towards having an economy of a third-world country, or maybe a second-world one if we're lucky. If we persist in thinking that we're rich because we have a lot of dollars floating around, we're going to be hurting for a long time. We need to provide now, while we still have some wealth, for the coming crunch, when autos will become the rich man's plaything again. We can do it the easy way or the hard way, but it's going to happen.
The easy way is by providing ourselves with a world-class rail network that lets everyday folk in denser places move around without need for an auto while conserving the gas and the gas vehicles for for practical use in the rural spaces.
The hard way is by squandering our limited capital on an attempt to replace the gas powered auto with electric autos but otherwise maintain the world's most expensive, wasteful, polluting, and deadly transport system intact.
The easy way is the road to a state that has a future. The hard way means following in Michigan's footsteps.
12:47 p.m.
Nov 25, '08
"George Seldes" (a stolen pseudonym) has now officially jumped the shark.
George doesn't like fossil fuels, biodiesel, hydropower, nuclear, and now wind.
He reminds me a lot of a guy who once told Markos Moulitsas (while I was standing next to him) that he shouldn't have had children, because America is about to be plunged into a post-oil famine that will have us all using horses for transportation or somesuch silliness.
Hey "George" - do something productive: turn your post-apocalyptic dystopian fantasies into a screenplay and make us another sequel to Mad Max.
But until then, stop bothering those of us who are trying to actually figure out achievable short-term solutions.
Dec 5, '08
Whatever happened to the plan to retool Freightliner to build hybrids?
Dec 16, '08
i HAVE BEEN DRIVING AN ELECRIC CAR FOR 5 years in Denmark! It´s quite normal here!
Dec 16, '08
Posted by: Detektei | Dec 16, 2008 2:17:15 AM
i HAVE BEEN DRIVING AN ELECRIC CAR FOR 5 years in Denmark! It´s quite normal here!
How refreshing! It's not everyday that a Danish Private Dick weighs in with an opinion at BO!
Posted by: Fireslayer | Dec 5, 2008 12:08:35 PM
Whatever happened to the plan to retool Freightliner to build hybrids?
My experience is that they got the bankruptcy protection and then continued on as usual. It is surreal, and I hope this isn't what's going to happen in Detroit. I was there about three years back to look at some Java code they had. I looked at the architecture, how they were trying to deploy it, and said that it simply wouldn't work that way because of something MS had done to torpedo the functionality. They said that they knew that. In fact, they were suing MS over the issue! Now, back to the code, how much to continue development? No realization showing in their faces that they could change courses.
More interesting, it was the day after a major ruling, accepting their reorg plan. They tried to hire me at that point and I balked. They pointed out that previously, they had been limited to one year contracts at a certain rate. Now, with the settlement, they could fill that position indefinitely, at the same rate!
So, simple answer, I'm sure it was all about getting the settlement they wanted, then back to business as usual. Meanwhile our new VP thinks it's most important to see that consumers don't get to try that kind of thing!