mauka
Nov 24, 02:26 PM
To access the Govt employee store go to apple.com, click on Stores, scroll to the bottom and look for "Visit other Apple Stores around the world", on the drop list choose "US Government". From here you have to click on the agreements that you are eligible to use that store.:D
themadrussian
Mar 17, 07:13 PM
iPhone 4's are everywhere here in CA. They used to be unique, now the only comment is... "oh you have the one with a bad antenna."
Steve's denial might work for him and his lemmings, but the general public is more aware than any Apple enthusiast would care to admit. Me? I simply reach into my other pocket and show them my new HTC Inspire, those are the popular phones where I live.
Public perception overrides how the phone actually performs every time. It's human nature.
It's a shame that the "4G" on the Inspire is slower than the 3G on the iPhone 4, especially in upload speed (since the Inspire is mysteriously crippled and lacking in HSUPA support and the iPhone 4 is not). Shrug.
And for what it's worth, my iPhone 4 consistently outperforms all of my friends' Android and Win7 phones (Droid A855, HTC Incredible, HTC HD7, HTC Evo 4G) in just about every way (battery life, reliability, network speed and connection reliability). Of course, your location can have a big impact on your experience with certain devices, and it helps that I'm in a city with outstanding AT&T service.
Steve's denial might work for him and his lemmings, but the general public is more aware than any Apple enthusiast would care to admit. Me? I simply reach into my other pocket and show them my new HTC Inspire, those are the popular phones where I live.
Public perception overrides how the phone actually performs every time. It's human nature.
It's a shame that the "4G" on the Inspire is slower than the 3G on the iPhone 4, especially in upload speed (since the Inspire is mysteriously crippled and lacking in HSUPA support and the iPhone 4 is not). Shrug.
And for what it's worth, my iPhone 4 consistently outperforms all of my friends' Android and Win7 phones (Droid A855, HTC Incredible, HTC HD7, HTC Evo 4G) in just about every way (battery life, reliability, network speed and connection reliability). Of course, your location can have a big impact on your experience with certain devices, and it helps that I'm in a city with outstanding AT&T service.
bedifferent
Apr 29, 07:06 PM
I used Photoshop.
lol :p
lol :p
Torrijos
Jul 21, 11:05 AM
The antenna issue is real. It is more pronounced on the iPhone 4 than other smartphones because it is directly exposed to touch.
That said, Apple is defending the notion that this problem does in fact affect nearly all phones to some degree. They show evidence and catalog it very clearly. What's wrong with that?
What upsets me more is the backlash from those companies denying the issue altogether - denying an issue that these videos and others clearly show. Shouldn't this denial be more worrisome?
Exactly, plus, like Anandtech showed (the only technical site that tried to gather technical information on the problem), the iPhone do suffer of a higher attenuation of signal when touched, but at the same seems to have better reception at lower signal levels this is why the amount of drop calls is less than 1% over the level of the 3GS.
So if your in an average-low signal area, and touch the "mean" spot tightly you will still be able to maintain communications, the fact that some people seem to believe that you could be in a full signal area and drop a call simply because you touched your phone is at best lack of knowledge, at worst (like in a lot if not the majority of tech websites) cash trolling (Leprechaun-ing?!).
A nice follow up from Anandtech (or any other site) would be to calculate/show real-life implications, like the distance from the antenna that the problems cost you.
That said, Apple is defending the notion that this problem does in fact affect nearly all phones to some degree. They show evidence and catalog it very clearly. What's wrong with that?
What upsets me more is the backlash from those companies denying the issue altogether - denying an issue that these videos and others clearly show. Shouldn't this denial be more worrisome?
Exactly, plus, like Anandtech showed (the only technical site that tried to gather technical information on the problem), the iPhone do suffer of a higher attenuation of signal when touched, but at the same seems to have better reception at lower signal levels this is why the amount of drop calls is less than 1% over the level of the 3GS.
So if your in an average-low signal area, and touch the "mean" spot tightly you will still be able to maintain communications, the fact that some people seem to believe that you could be in a full signal area and drop a call simply because you touched your phone is at best lack of knowledge, at worst (like in a lot if not the majority of tech websites) cash trolling (Leprechaun-ing?!).
A nice follow up from Anandtech (or any other site) would be to calculate/show real-life implications, like the distance from the antenna that the problems cost you.
flashPUNK
Apr 15, 12:28 PM
Is it just me, or is the writing on the 3rd photo a bit skewed, or rotated in an odd way?
iMeowbot
Oct 28, 05:44 PM
Isn't a healthy chunk of OS X based on FreeBSD?
Yes, big parts of it come from the BSD world.
A free, open source Unix distro? In a sense, if they use FreeBSD and do not contribute back to the very open source community they're borrowing from, doesn't that make Apple a thief?
The BSD terms specifically allow derivatives to keep their sources closed, as long as credit is given.
Yes, big parts of it come from the BSD world.
A free, open source Unix distro? In a sense, if they use FreeBSD and do not contribute back to the very open source community they're borrowing from, doesn't that make Apple a thief?
The BSD terms specifically allow derivatives to keep their sources closed, as long as credit is given.
Lesser Evets
Apr 25, 12:29 PM
The grain texture on the screen compared to the hand is a sign of photoshop.
However, despite the probable fake picture, it could be a possible product since rumors of it were going around for a year or such. The bigger screen would make sense: borders are wasted space.
I am curious when they will begin to limit the borders on iMacs. That chin has gone on too long.
However, despite the probable fake picture, it could be a possible product since rumors of it were going around for a year or such. The bigger screen would make sense: borders are wasted space.
I am curious when they will begin to limit the borders on iMacs. That chin has gone on too long.
err404
May 2, 10:06 AM
I hope performance in gps accuracy isn t affected by it...
Accuracy, no. Time to lock, maybe slightly when traveling (more so in areas with spotty data coverage).
Accuracy, no. Time to lock, maybe slightly when traveling (more so in areas with spotty data coverage).
Hephaestus
Mar 18, 04:23 AM
Thanks for the responses guys, pretty much reinforces what I originally thought. Somebody actually owned themself yesterday, he kept going on about how Android phones get apps for free. " I got angry birds for free but you paid for it", when I asked him to show me Angry Birds running on his HTC it was running at around 2FPS, the lag made my eyes bleed. Lol It all turned very silent after that.
Ugg
Apr 17, 12:08 PM
More to the point, where do you draw the line? Should every school curiculum include the struggles of Jews, Blacks, Native Americans, Chinese, Muslims, Hispanics, Christians, Women, etc... gonna be kinda tough to fit all that in. Or does your plan draw the line somewhere? I mean are gay people more important than Native Americans? In terms of history, whom do you believe got screwed over more and whose struggles should be taught in school?
If you were to walk onto the street and ask 100 people which group of people were persecuted the most out of blacks, Native Americans, Jews, women or gays, I'm pretty sure the majority of people would place gays last, out of those groups. Now a liberal state like New York, Hawaii or California may add gay history to their school programs, but don't expect to see it in the majority of the US States. It's simply not important to single out a persons sexuality to highlight their importance in history. Was Oppenheimer's religion put before his contributions to the bomb? I mean is there a little star next to his name with an annotation listing his religion?
Maybe its just me. But I simply don't care if someone was black, blue, brown, Jewish, the Egyptian god Ra, whatever... its the persons contributions, not their ethnicity, sexual pref or religious affiliation that define(d) them. Treat people equally, not with preference.
I don't think you understand the thrust of this law. It's not about creating a separate class on gay rights, it's about incorporating gay people into existing history lessons. You mention Oppenheimer. Unless, I'm mistaken, the fact that he was a jew is mentioned in most history books. The same with Einstein. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 was a pretty big deal, as were the US internment camps for Japanese-Americans during WWII. The Act and the camps are pretty self-explanatory. They were directed at a specific ethnic group of people. Gay accomplishments and persecution has mostly been swept under the rug.
Harvey Milk wasn't shot because he was gay, he was shot because he defeated a very disturbed man in an election. But, the fact that he was gay is pretty important.
The story of America is a story of minorities.
Awesome, to make enough time for this lets just forget everything after the Great Depression because it's not like that junk matters as much as gays being persecuted. Seriously, the Holocaust and the Rape of Nanjing are totally trivial events compared to the Stonewall riots. We should totally drop coverage of the bombing of Pearl Harbor to make room for a lecture on how NAMBLA doesn't represent gays. To top it off we should ditch the civil rights movement in favor of the White Night riots!
:rolleyes: there is no time available to teach this, if we teach this something else gets whacked. As is we get to the 1930s by the tests which go to the 1980s...
So the Pink Triangles of the Holocaust are irrelevant?
His life and what he did was not irrelevant. I'm sure a movie or book could be done on his life's story. Teaching kids to look more at a person because of their sexual orientation, rather than their contributions, is irrelevant.
Wow, I don't know what to say. People of distinction aren't simply born that way, one's upbringing and the time in which they came of age play an enormous role. Any number of American industrialists were driven by adverse events during their formative years. Those events are almost always touched on. Being gay for most of human history has been pretty difficult. To not touch on that is really stupid and shows a bias that when it comes to history, should not be shown.
If you were to walk onto the street and ask 100 people which group of people were persecuted the most out of blacks, Native Americans, Jews, women or gays, I'm pretty sure the majority of people would place gays last, out of those groups. Now a liberal state like New York, Hawaii or California may add gay history to their school programs, but don't expect to see it in the majority of the US States. It's simply not important to single out a persons sexuality to highlight their importance in history. Was Oppenheimer's religion put before his contributions to the bomb? I mean is there a little star next to his name with an annotation listing his religion?
Maybe its just me. But I simply don't care if someone was black, blue, brown, Jewish, the Egyptian god Ra, whatever... its the persons contributions, not their ethnicity, sexual pref or religious affiliation that define(d) them. Treat people equally, not with preference.
I don't think you understand the thrust of this law. It's not about creating a separate class on gay rights, it's about incorporating gay people into existing history lessons. You mention Oppenheimer. Unless, I'm mistaken, the fact that he was a jew is mentioned in most history books. The same with Einstein. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 was a pretty big deal, as were the US internment camps for Japanese-Americans during WWII. The Act and the camps are pretty self-explanatory. They were directed at a specific ethnic group of people. Gay accomplishments and persecution has mostly been swept under the rug.
Harvey Milk wasn't shot because he was gay, he was shot because he defeated a very disturbed man in an election. But, the fact that he was gay is pretty important.
The story of America is a story of minorities.
Awesome, to make enough time for this lets just forget everything after the Great Depression because it's not like that junk matters as much as gays being persecuted. Seriously, the Holocaust and the Rape of Nanjing are totally trivial events compared to the Stonewall riots. We should totally drop coverage of the bombing of Pearl Harbor to make room for a lecture on how NAMBLA doesn't represent gays. To top it off we should ditch the civil rights movement in favor of the White Night riots!
:rolleyes: there is no time available to teach this, if we teach this something else gets whacked. As is we get to the 1930s by the tests which go to the 1980s...
So the Pink Triangles of the Holocaust are irrelevant?
His life and what he did was not irrelevant. I'm sure a movie or book could be done on his life's story. Teaching kids to look more at a person because of their sexual orientation, rather than their contributions, is irrelevant.
Wow, I don't know what to say. People of distinction aren't simply born that way, one's upbringing and the time in which they came of age play an enormous role. Any number of American industrialists were driven by adverse events during their formative years. Those events are almost always touched on. Being gay for most of human history has been pretty difficult. To not touch on that is really stupid and shows a bias that when it comes to history, should not be shown.
Suture
Mar 23, 08:12 AM
rtdgoldfish -- that's awesome. I hope you catch the thief. Keep us updated.
Avatar74
Jan 16, 10:31 AM
Well, then try to run Aperture on your PB. Good luck.
No money from me until MBP is state of the art. I'm not going to pay nearly $ 3.000 in January 2008 for a notebook without SSE4 and Blue-Ray.
I just sold my shares.
John:
My point was to ask the guy what exactly he does that demands that kind of firepower. Computers these days are overpowered for what 90% of the population does. However, Aperture is a perfect example of an application that needs more firepower... Thanks for pointing that out. It is a professional application that is useful, almost necessary, to professional photographers but a complete luxury for anyone else.
If you can justify the purchase of Aperture to manage images from your $10,000 mega-res SLR, then you can probably afford a desktop workstation to handle it... and write it off as a business expense.
But otherwise, I'm asking why does the poster in particular to whom I responded need more than that in a MacBook Air? Not because I want him to buy one. Clearly he could buy a MacBook or a MacBook Pro that better suits him. But you have to understand I see way too many people complaining every year that Apple hasn't produced the gadget to snatch up the money burning a hole in their pockets since... oh, a year ago when they bought that year's latest and greatest.
People say "I'm ready for a new computer" six months to a year after they just bought one... and I find that patently absurd when 90% of the time, the person speaking uses said computer for: internet, email, word processing, music and consumer photo/video.
No money from me until MBP is state of the art. I'm not going to pay nearly $ 3.000 in January 2008 for a notebook without SSE4 and Blue-Ray.
I just sold my shares.
John:
My point was to ask the guy what exactly he does that demands that kind of firepower. Computers these days are overpowered for what 90% of the population does. However, Aperture is a perfect example of an application that needs more firepower... Thanks for pointing that out. It is a professional application that is useful, almost necessary, to professional photographers but a complete luxury for anyone else.
If you can justify the purchase of Aperture to manage images from your $10,000 mega-res SLR, then you can probably afford a desktop workstation to handle it... and write it off as a business expense.
But otherwise, I'm asking why does the poster in particular to whom I responded need more than that in a MacBook Air? Not because I want him to buy one. Clearly he could buy a MacBook or a MacBook Pro that better suits him. But you have to understand I see way too many people complaining every year that Apple hasn't produced the gadget to snatch up the money burning a hole in their pockets since... oh, a year ago when they bought that year's latest and greatest.
People say "I'm ready for a new computer" six months to a year after they just bought one... and I find that patently absurd when 90% of the time, the person speaking uses said computer for: internet, email, word processing, music and consumer photo/video.
bming1
Jan 13, 09:36 AM
I can name one big thing - visual voicemail. I think this is an amazing feature. Instead of waiting for the voicemail system to respond to your button inputs to skip messages so you can finally get to the one you want, you just touch the screen once. Please show me another cell phone that can do this.
As someone else has already pointed out, there are over 200 patents in the phone. While I'm certain that many are related to human factors elements and software, it's likely that there are some hardware patents involved. Only an Apple hardware engineer who was intimately involved in the design of the iPhone would be able to help you out here.
who are you kidding? what part of iphone is not previously existed in technology? yay it has a nice UI, like all other apple products, but the hardware?
remind me, again, what's revolutionary about iPhone?
As someone else has already pointed out, there are over 200 patents in the phone. While I'm certain that many are related to human factors elements and software, it's likely that there are some hardware patents involved. Only an Apple hardware engineer who was intimately involved in the design of the iPhone would be able to help you out here.
who are you kidding? what part of iphone is not previously existed in technology? yay it has a nice UI, like all other apple products, but the hardware?
remind me, again, what's revolutionary about iPhone?
andiwm2003
Apr 25, 09:50 PM
if it looks like this, has 16GB, A5, 512MB Ram, a good 5MP camera, the same facetime camera as before I'll upgrade from my 3GS. This is likely to happen anyway. When will it be out? Any guesses in the absence of data?
idunn
Mar 25, 03:06 PM
'Consequently, Apple has chosen to position the next step in the evolution of Mac OS X as "Back to the Mac", an effort to bring some of the most popular features of iOS to the Mac platform for the first time while retaining the familiarity, flexibility, and horsepower of Mac OS X.'
- per 'Macrumors'
;) A lot of fantastic change in but 10 years. In looking back, I'm somewhat amazed at the evolution of Apple. Happy Birthday.
If still basically loyal to Apple, I would note, in hopefully helping the brand, certain lapses such as apparently quality control in some aspects of the new iPad2. Other areas as well. Just something to be mindful of, and with luck smoothed out soon.
As for OS X, I've wondered of late if the natural progression would not be a merging of iOS and OS X into one. Although it certainly should not be a merger in one direction only. Some of the discussions on the iPad forum concern those frustrated with the limitations of iOS for real work, such as lack of a real file system. Some have postulated, and surely rightly so, that the iPad is still a device best used in conjunction with something running OS X. The same would hold true for users of the iPhone, as likely very few who consider it their only computer. So, ideally, I could see the best traits of either OS merged into one better, and that expanded in capability.
In any event, if imperfect, Apple still the best, and much to love.
- per 'Macrumors'
;) A lot of fantastic change in but 10 years. In looking back, I'm somewhat amazed at the evolution of Apple. Happy Birthday.
If still basically loyal to Apple, I would note, in hopefully helping the brand, certain lapses such as apparently quality control in some aspects of the new iPad2. Other areas as well. Just something to be mindful of, and with luck smoothed out soon.
As for OS X, I've wondered of late if the natural progression would not be a merging of iOS and OS X into one. Although it certainly should not be a merger in one direction only. Some of the discussions on the iPad forum concern those frustrated with the limitations of iOS for real work, such as lack of a real file system. Some have postulated, and surely rightly so, that the iPad is still a device best used in conjunction with something running OS X. The same would hold true for users of the iPhone, as likely very few who consider it their only computer. So, ideally, I could see the best traits of either OS merged into one better, and that expanded in capability.
In any event, if imperfect, Apple still the best, and much to love.
twoodcc
Apr 11, 03:23 PM
Mate if you think thats bad, I'n holding out for a Mac mini and there has been no rumors for it! Would love to see a intel i5 :D
yeah i hear ya. an i5 mac mini would be very nice. but again, i doubt it will happen this year, if ever
yeah i hear ya. an i5 mac mini would be very nice. but again, i doubt it will happen this year, if ever
geoffism
Dec 13, 03:26 PM
We've all be wrong before.
its interesting that Fortune picked up the story as well. The internet is the new home of the written truth.
It would be cool if it happens, but I'm not holding my breath.
its interesting that Fortune picked up the story as well. The internet is the new home of the written truth.
It would be cool if it happens, but I'm not holding my breath.
mduser63
Sep 12, 07:20 AM
Note that it doesn't say "The iTunes Music Store is being updated." That's a pretty clear sign to me that not only are they going to add movies, it's also now just going to be the iTunes Store.
vizkiz
Apr 15, 04:05 PM
This would be popular with suicides (cut throat sharp edges) and PC users (device has numerous huge holes which may or not have a function).
Which holes are those? All the holes in those pictures correspond correctly to the holes on my 3G.
Bottom: Speaker, screw, dock, screw, microphone
Side: Volume rocker, vibrate switch
Back: Camera
I would assume the big gap on the side is supposed to be an SD slot.
Volume rocker...
Which holes are those? All the holes in those pictures correspond correctly to the holes on my 3G.
Bottom: Speaker, screw, dock, screw, microphone
Side: Volume rocker, vibrate switch
Back: Camera
I would assume the big gap on the side is supposed to be an SD slot.
Volume rocker...
rcread
Aug 1, 10:13 AM
This is just one more reason why socialism doesn't work. It takes away the incentive of a company to put a product in the country, and the consumers ultimately suffer.
iJohnHenry
Apr 16, 05:17 PM
Make more sense. This sentence of yours makes none.
Even a Merriam-Webster is of no value to me, if we don't agree on which word we should use to encapsulate you.
I might have better luck with the Urban Dictionary (www.urbandictionary.com).
Even a Merriam-Webster is of no value to me, if we don't agree on which word we should use to encapsulate you.
I might have better luck with the Urban Dictionary (www.urbandictionary.com).
Reissman
Jan 8, 10:59 PM
Do you think they will have a price reduction of anything with the introduction of new products?
lostngone
Oct 29, 04:17 AM
The Free Software movement has nothing to do with "free-as-in-free-beer" software. Freeware is not Free Software. Free Software can cost ten thousand dollars. It's Free as in freedom.
Thats wrong, its not free as is freedom. If that was the case I should be able to do as I please with the code and that is not the case. If I use the free(GPL) software as a baseline for a project I then have to turn around and release all the changes I made for free as well. This may be hundreds of hours of work and I don't know anyone that works for free.
Thats wrong, its not free as is freedom. If that was the case I should be able to do as I please with the code and that is not the case. If I use the free(GPL) software as a baseline for a project I then have to turn around and release all the changes I made for free as well. This may be hundreds of hours of work and I don't know anyone that works for free.
oldMac
Aug 10, 08:35 AM
And that's what's so sinister about the electrics. Because it is hard to track just how efficient (or inefficient) the electricity from the grid is... people tend to ignore that whole side of the equation. But it is just as important.
There's nothing really sinister about it. It's just harder to measure and to this point, there's been no point in trying to measure it in comparison to cars.
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
so the efficiency of the power coming off the grid becomes the primary concern. And figuring that out is much harder than looking at mpg numbers.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
How many pounds of coal/gallons of oil are burned at the power plant to get your Volt a mile down the road (I assume it works out to be fairly efficent, but I don't know any numbers)?
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
More importantly, would a proliferation in plug-ins result in regular rolling blackouts because power plants can't keep up with rising demand?
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
The biggest thing Americans have trouble with is adjusting to smaller cars. The cars we drive are, on average, unneccesarily big - and anyone who says otherwise is thought to be a Communist.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Lifestyle changes (buying a smaller car, driving less) are the only way to really reduce fuel consumption on a national or global scale in the near to medium future. We can't wait for technology alone to pick up the slack.
And if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
There's nothing really sinister about it. It's just harder to measure and to this point, there's been no point in trying to measure it in comparison to cars.
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
so the efficiency of the power coming off the grid becomes the primary concern. And figuring that out is much harder than looking at mpg numbers.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
How many pounds of coal/gallons of oil are burned at the power plant to get your Volt a mile down the road (I assume it works out to be fairly efficent, but I don't know any numbers)?
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
More importantly, would a proliferation in plug-ins result in regular rolling blackouts because power plants can't keep up with rising demand?
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
The biggest thing Americans have trouble with is adjusting to smaller cars. The cars we drive are, on average, unneccesarily big - and anyone who says otherwise is thought to be a Communist.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Lifestyle changes (buying a smaller car, driving less) are the only way to really reduce fuel consumption on a national or global scale in the near to medium future. We can't wait for technology alone to pick up the slack.
And if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
No comments:
Post a Comment