It's electric!
Carla Axtman
Norwegian car company Think North America is scouting Portland as a potential home for it's new auto plant:
A Norwegian company considering Oregon for electric-car manufacturing may be eyeing the Portland plant that built Freightliners as a site to employ 900 workers.Think North America, whose parent company makes emission-free vehicles, confirmed today that it's considering Oregon and seven other states for a factory that would ultimately make 60,000 compact cars a year.
Think managers want to convert an existing building into a car plant and to launch an engineering center, perhaps alongside. As Oregon, Michigan, California and other states scramble to offer incentives, Think plans to decide on a location within a couple of months, investing an as-yet-undisclosed amount.
"There's a number of things that appeal to Think about Oregon," said Brendan Prebo, a Think North America spokesman, who added that state officials are pursuing both the factory project and the engineering center. "They've also shown their interest in terms of supporting electric vehicle sales."
The factory could potentially yield 900 new jobs for the region:
When it gets going in 2010, the company plant would produce about 16,000 electric cars a year. A technical center attached to the plant would employ about 70 engineers and electric drive specialists.At first, the plant would employ about 300 people. Another 600 jobs could be added as production grows. During its first year, the plant would produce about 2,500 cars for pilot and demonstration fleets.
One of the arguments I've heard against electric cars is that they won't be a game changer due to so many coal-fired electric plants. But this guy seems to offer a compelling narrative against that notion. More here, too.
It's the Electric Slide!
 |
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
Apr 6, '09
One of the arguments I've heard against electric cars is that they won't be a game changer due to so many coal-fired electric plants.
Well, I think the point is NOT that we should abandon all hope of electric cars because the electric power would be largely generated by coal plants.
Rather that we should take note that going to electric cars isn't the end of the process - but merely the beginning.
Certainly, coal plants are better than automobile exhaust pipes.
But if we're going to put a massive new load on our electrical grid, we're going to need massive new supplies of electrical power. Hopefully those new supplies won't just come from additional coal-burning, but rather some combination of wind, solar, geothermal, hydro, wave, and yes, probably nuclear. (Nuclear has many problems, but carbon emissions isn't one of them.)
Apr 6, '09
Carla Axtman:
One of the arguments I've heard against electric cars is that they won't be a game changer due to so many coal-fired electric plants.
Bob T:
Well, that's true if we keep going the way we're going. But the bigger issue is being able to travel without long interruptions. I see an eventual system of membership types of chains where one can stop to exchange a depleted battery with a freshly charged one. I'm not sure of the typical size one of these would need to be in order to supply the typical number of refills one could expect on a daily basis.
Nuclear power plants will need to be built, by the way. Not just "looked at" as a possibility.
Bob Tiernan Portland
10:58 a.m.
Apr 6, '09
Well, I think the point is NOT that we should abandon all hope of electric cars because the electric power would be largely generated by coal plants.
Rather that we should take note that going to electric cars isn't the end of the process - but merely the beginning.
I think in some cases, that is indeed the point. But I have in fact heard politicos state that electric cars aren't a place we should invest..with the specifics being coal-fired electrical plants.
I personally find this to be rhetorical hogwash for the reasons in the links provided--and the fact that we're moving toward alternative energies for the generation of electricity.
11:02 a.m.
Apr 6, '09
The Think North America plant would be great for Oregon.
But consider the competition and note the NY Times article “China Vies to Be Leader in Electric Vehicles” (here):
"Chinese leaders have adopted a plan aimed at turning the country into one of the leading producers of hybrid and all-electric vehicles within three years, and making it the world leader in electric cars and buses after that."
And further:
"China wants to raise its annual production capacity to 500,000 hybrid or all-electric cars and buses by the end of 2011, from 2,100 last year, government officials and Chinese auto executives said. By comparison, CSM Worldwide, a consulting firm that does forecasts for automakers, predicts that Japan and South Korea together will be producing 1.1 million hybrid or all-electric light vehicles by then and North America will be making 267,000."
11:43 a.m.
Apr 6, '09
I see an eventual system of membership types of chains where one can stop to exchange a depleted battery with a freshly charged one.
That's exactly what's being rolled out in Israel right now - and soon, in Hawaii.
Note that both of those places are islands, which makes 'em perfect places to test battery-swap electric cars. (OK, technically Israel isn't - but residents can't drive anywhere more than 200 miles in one direction without having to turn around, which makes it functionally an island.)
Apr 6, '09
Hard to believe, but Kari and I are in total agreement on this issue. I second what he said in his first post. See Kari, any two people can find SOME common ground.
Apr 6, '09
Bob T:
Well, that's true if we keep going the way we're going.
... going, going ...
One argument for electric vehicles that I haven't heard is that it decreases the weight of the average vehicle. Reducing that makes all alternative means more viable, and lessens the "mass angst" that so many SUV owners feel.
Next time someone wants to raise taxes, how about creating a new class of "heavy personal vehicle", between cars and trucks, exempting commerical use. If you want to make arguments for social side effects, good and bad, there's no end with that one!
2:09 p.m.
Apr 6, '09
I think if you charge the electric cars at night, when there is excess power from dams, etc. not being used at the time, then there is a bigger offset. This is a benefit to putting technology in place to charge different electric rates during peak hours than off hours.
Apr 6, '09
@Jamais
And one would suspect that elec cars used for daily use would be charged at night.
Apr 6, '09
Kari, There are new car batteries on the way that can be charged in the same time that it takes to fill a tank with gas. The problem here would be that a home wouldn't necessarily have an electrical source that strong, but we don't have filling stations at home either. I also admit that it sounds a little scary.
Apr 6, '09
Carla: But I have in fact heard politicos state that electric cars aren't a place we should invest. B: They are correct - the government shouldn't be spending people's hard earned tax money in any scheme to force people to change their lifestyle. (The government should not force us to worship the god of the moment - be it GWB’s god, or the green Armageddon god of Al Gore.)
People will naturally choose plug in hybrids as the logical step to eclectic cars when they make economic sense. If they don’t make economic sense that means that they cost too much for what they do - like light rail.
Carla: with the specifics being coal-fired electrical plants. B: We need to shut all of these down and replace them with cheaper, cleaner nuclear.
B
4:10 p.m.
Apr 6, '09
What we really need is to make every other street (and maybe every other bridge) in Portland (and other cities) "bikes only." Then get the bikes off the "cars only" streets. That's when real non-polluting commuting will start to take off--when it's safe. Those electric cars look like a step in the right direction, but not very crash-worthy. I certainly wouldn't want to get hit by an SUV in one.
In rural areas, you aren't going to see a transition to electric cars only until those vehicles get a much longer range, not to mention more power for traveling in the mountains.
Apr 6, '09
It's depressing to see nuclear powerplants being touted again. Let's google "toxic waste." The stuff can't be stored safely on site long-term--where it is now quietly accumulating--and it's surely never going to get shipped on highways and railroads through our cities and towns to an enormous storage dump, such as a cave in Nevada. Nevada was once used for atmospheric atomic bomb testing--that too seemed like a good idea to some people.
And let's not even think about how much the suicide bombers would love to get into existing powerplant waste storage sites. There's simply no future for existing nuclear powerplants, all of which already face scheduled decommissioning. There are non-radioactive ways out of our energy dilemma, including serious conservation.
Apr 6, '09
If we take every option off the board b/c someONE doesn't like it, what have we left......NOTHING
Apr 6, '09
B: We need to shut all of these down and replace them with cheaper, cleaner nuclear.
B
OMG, does "billy" want a nuclear powered car, now?
Apr 6, '09
Posted by: mp97303 | Apr 6, 2009 5:24:42 PM
If we take every option off the board b/c someONE doesn't like it, what have we left......NOTHING
This is why attempts to stereotype you as a right winger are misguided.
A agree heartlily. With what you said. It's the "are you real" litmus test for me...can ya' stop doin' that?!?
Apr 6, '09
Stereotyping seems to be the passion of blog posters.
On right wing blogs, I am a "typical liberal socialist"
On left wing blogs, I am a "dittohead"
Hell, I must be doing something right.
Apr 6, '09
How about this!
Apr 6, '09
Here ya go
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5qpzYI-Zi8
Apr 6, '09
one more and thats it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9u-YeEee2k
Apr 6, '09
Well just one more. Ok thats it!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ikj90_Un0o
Apr 7, '09
And I thought the campaign for 2008 went on forever.
Apr 7, '09
Patrick Story:
It's depressing to see nuclear powerplants being touted again. Let's google "toxic waste." The stuff can't be stored safely on site long-term
Bob T:
All you're doing is repeating many of the fallacies associated with nuclear power. They are believed by people who either don't understand how it works or too prone to believe what is written by others who also have no idea about how it all works. Granted, there may actually be some anti-nuclear power people who do understand that it's a highly exagerrated issue but who repeat the false information for propaganda purposes.
Patrick Story:
And let's not even think about how much the suicide bombers would love to get into existing powerplant waste storage sites.
Bob T:
Oh, there ya go! Those people don't exist, except when they can be used to further your agenda, I guess. Who might those people be, by the way? Can you be a little more specific than just "suicide bombers" ? I'm really curious.
Bob Tiernan Portland
Apr 8, '09
I like this car
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKNl8iZLUec
Apr 8, '09
Kari:
Hopefully those new supplies won't just come from additional coal-burning, but rather some combination of wind, solar...
Bob T:
You need to deal with this sort of roadblock.
Bob Tiernan Portland
Apr 8, '09
Bob T, I just saw your comments. I can't give you any bombers by name any more than you can guarantee that such people "don't exist." They existed on 9/11.
I don't believe by any means that sabotage is the main threat associated with nuke power, but perhaps you have seen today's headline that our electric grid has apparently been mapped and possibly compromised by outsiders. How certain are you about the computer controls at nuclear plants? Even if no existing plant self-destructs anytime soon, can we be sure that the "suicide" bomber won't be able to do his job from elsewhere in the world, without even having to risk his own skin?
Also, I'd like to see a couple of your examples of how nuke powerplants and storage of toxic waste are now fail safe. Help me understand why you are so utopian about this topic.
Apr 9, '09
On the nuclear toxics issue, I think there's a touchstone that cuts through all the rhetoric. Have we disposed of the waste from the original Trinity experiment? No. Doesn't that say we still don't have a clue?