Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 10-08-2016, 09:45 PM
avb3 avb3 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 7,861
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergerboy View Post
Electricity will have to really drop in price to make any of the high demand pieces of equipment cheaper to run on line power. I have been around big drilling rigs (diesel electric) that had the option to run on line power but instead chose to use the diesel engines to create electricity to run the rig as it was cheaper by a long shot.

Anybody ever notice Andy only posts stuff that will upset the AO herd?
Good grief, things change, and don't you think we should be aware of that? Why would you get upset about issues that are real?
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 10-08-2016, 10:05 PM
Newview01 Newview01 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5,326
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimPS View Post
Or educating - depending on your current state of mind.
The posts are interesting, but unfortunately are unrealistic and mostly based on the environmental fanaticism that MSM foments.

This thread is addressing a current, relevant issue, but as someone else stated, the problem is we are being forced to accept technology that is underdeveloped and inefficient. The free market should be allowed to take its course, and once electricity is as viable for transportation as internal combustion I will be a little more accepting.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 10-08-2016, 10:06 PM
avb3 avb3 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 7,861
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nick0danger View Post
what are we gonna heat home and water with?
You mean like with electricity which half the world does?
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 10-08-2016, 10:12 PM
ak-71 ak-71 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Almaty
Posts: 2,032
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by avb3 View Post
You mean like with electricity which half the world does?
Not sure that half of the world doesn't convert most efficient form of energy in this electricity (with some loss). And it's not solar, wind or bio fuel for now.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 10-08-2016, 10:40 PM
Sundancefisher's Avatar
Sundancefisher Sundancefisher is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Calgary Perchdance
Posts: 18,776
Default

Any expectation that the world will move to 100% renewable energy is lost to reality. Outside of nuclear...and secondly hydro which FN opposes also (and destroys habitat and increases CO2 release to the atmosphere)...there is NO chance any other will compete for natural gas and coal. Unless the world reverts to 1800...and people stop driving from Alberta to Florida too much energy demand is require to not just live but to save lives. Cheap power prevents death and prevents throwing money away that can be used to feed, cloth, shelter and heal the sick.

Reduce, reuse, recycle...conserve wisely is all common sense. What fanatics want is their disciples to bow and sacrifice so they can aford to preach in luxury under the guise of helping us turn from evil. The same evil they so dearly cherish.

Electric cars while fanciful does not worry. At the current growth of construction we are not worried. If all cars were electric their bill would be astronomical due to power shortages.



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File...since_2011.png
To put this into perspective there are well over 1.3 billion gasoline vehicles in the world.

About 1.5 million electric vehicles.

So while someone may wish to lead the conversation about scary change...ask if they own an electric vehicle...or are they preaching that you should buy one first?

__________________
It is not the most intellectual of the species that survives; it is not the strongest that survives; but the species that survives is the one that is able best to adapt and adjust to the changing environment in which it finds itself. Charles Darwin

Last edited by Sundancefisher; 10-08-2016 at 11:00 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 10-09-2016, 07:38 AM
nick0danger nick0danger is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,507
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by avb3 View Post
You mean like with electricity which half the world does?
as posted the electrical grid and electrical systems installed in homes and buildings in Canada wont handle the load.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 10-09-2016, 07:41 AM
58thecat's Avatar
58thecat 58thecat is online now
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: At the end of the Thirsty Beaver Trail, Pinsky lake, Alberta.
Posts: 24,504
Thumbs up

Standard issue will be bikes!
A healthier Germany!
__________________

Be careful when you follow the masses, sometimes the "M" is silent...
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 10-09-2016, 08:28 AM
avb3 avb3 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 7,861
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ak-71 View Post
Not sure that half of the world doesn't convert most efficient form of energy in this electricity (with some loss). And it's not solar, wind or bio fuel for now.
You're right, I don't know the real number, but I know it is large. Most of Germany and France for sure, a lot of the USA, and elsewhere. The point is, that one does not need O&G for heating/cooking/hot water. Let's face it, most North Americans have been cooking on electric stoves for the past 60 years. Hot water heaters are probably more prevalent in the US, where the price of electricity is much less than here.

Evacuated solar heat tubes are widely used in many parts of the world, they are cheap, and they work well for heating water and supplementary heat. Even the CMHC endorses them in Canada.

http://shop.latitude51solar.ca/Evacu...ctors-s/38.htm

https://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/inpr/...sufepr_010.cfm

They are my next reno project, and yes, I will keep the natural gas backup.

Short video of a fellow who installed a solar heat collector and how well it works in winter time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aB8disMi3A8

Last edited by avb3; 10-09-2016 at 08:35 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 10-09-2016, 09:20 AM
CBintheNorth's Avatar
CBintheNorth CBintheNorth is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Communist Capital of Alberta
Posts: 3,707
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by avb3 View Post
Those long haul trucks are already in the concept stage:

https://electrek.co/2016/05/12/nikol...truck-concept/

Hydrogen/Electric:

https://nikolamotor.com/

And the economics behind another concept:
https://www.trucks.com/2016/09/01/el...ks-profitable/
A natural gas turbine to charge a 320 kwh battery pack to turn a 2000 HP electric motor? I see...
Considering that 320kw is only about 430hp, I'd say they just created a natural gas long-haul truck that pretty much already exists. It also weighs less, has a smaller footprint, and costs half.
But hey, any opportunity to use up precious metals and man made material that's proven bad for the environment we should all jump on!
I'm all for minimizing environmental impact with proven science, but California proved in '74 that most electric vehicles weren't viable or more environmentally friendly than some fossil fuels.
And don't get me started on Hydrogen in a vehicle.
Obviously some people are still stuck on old science.
__________________
Social acceptance is NOT effective therapy.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 10-09-2016, 09:56 AM
avb3 avb3 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 7,861
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CBintheNorth View Post
A natural gas turbine to charge a 320 kwh battery pack to turn a 2000 HP electric motor? I see...
Considering that 320kw is only about 430hp, I'd say they just created a natural gas long-haul truck that pretty much already exists. It also weighs less, has a smaller footprint, and costs half.
But hey, any opportunity to use up precious metals and man made material that's proven bad for the environment we should all jump on!
I'm all for minimizing environmental impact with proven science, but California proved in '74 that most electric vehicles weren't viable or more environmentally friendly than some fossil fuels.
And don't get me started on Hydrogen in a vehicle.
Obviously some people are still stuck on old science.
Looks like German companies think that electric has a big future in the US.
""We want to invest around 6.5 billion euros between 2016 and 2018," Chief Executive Peter Terium told the paper, adding that investments will include grid networks and infrastructure but also wind farms in Germany, Poland, the Netherlands and electric car charging stations in the United States."

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/innogy...--finance.html
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 10-09-2016, 10:01 AM
Bergerboy's Avatar
Bergerboy Bergerboy is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: In your personal space.
Posts: 4,787
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CBintheNorth View Post
A natural gas turbine to charge a 320 kwh battery pack to turn a 2000 HP electric motor? I see...
Considering that 320kw is only about 430hp, I'd say they just created a natural gas long-haul truck that pretty much already exists. It also weighs less, has a smaller footprint, and costs half.
But hey, any opportunity to use up precious metals and man made material that's proven bad for the environment we should all jump on!
I'm all for minimizing environmental impact with proven science, but California proved in '74 that most electric vehicles weren't viable or more environmentally friendly than some fossil fuels.
And don't get me started on Hydrogen in a vehicle.
Obviously some people are still stuck on old science.
X2. Andys posts are always full of holes when you lift the carpet. A friend of mine has a Tesla and the 750hp doesn't come from children's giggles and dolphin shows. It comes from fossil fuels. The batteries are not grown in a garden they are complex structures that take lots of resources to make. The OP has a degree in political science and loves nothing more than to upset people. He loves to post anti fossil fuel propaganda on an outdoors site that has a large population of oil related workers, many are underemployed due to the economic conditions. The best word for his actions are Schadenfreude.
__________________
When in doubt, use full throttle. It may not improve the situation, but it will end the suspense.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 10-09-2016, 10:04 AM
hal53's Avatar
hal53 hal53 is offline
Gone Hunting
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Lougheed,Ab.
Posts: 12,736
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by avb3 View Post
Looks like German companies think that electric has a big future in the US.
""We want to invest around 6.5 billion euros between 2016 and 2018," Chief Executive Peter Terium told the paper, adding that investments will include grid networks and infrastructure but also wind farms in Germany, Poland, the Netherlands and electric car charging stations in the United States."

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/innogy...--finance.html
I don't think anyone is against looking after our environment, the part that most normal people do not like is the fact that fossil fuels are being "banned" to push an agenda, which BTW is having it's wheels falling off the alarmists mantra at an increasing rate..
__________________
The future ain't what it used to be - Yogi Berra
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 10-09-2016, 10:05 AM
Newview01 Newview01 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5,326
Default

Would I be right if said one of the major challenges of greater draw on the electricity system is the distances we are dealing with in North America as opposed Europe?

I can see that electricity will likely play a greater role in our lives in the future, but we will be paying for it with greater "transmission" fees than we already are paying. There is going to have to be a breakthrough in electricity generation, transmission, and storage, and not just in general terms but we need cost effective break throughs, in order for NA to pursue it more.

Alternative energy should not be the answer due to the environmental footprint of a solar generation or wind farm site, in proportion to the electricity they produce as opposed to a single nuclear, coal fire, or natural gas fired plant. The logic of people who supposedly care for the environment but yet want alternative energy sites dotting the landscape escapes me.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 10-09-2016, 10:08 AM
Bergerboy's Avatar
Bergerboy Bergerboy is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: In your personal space.
Posts: 4,787
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Newview01 View Post
Would I be right if said one of the major challenges of greater draw on the electricity system is the distances we are dealing with in North America as opposed Europe?

I can see that electricity will likely play a greater role in our lives in the future, but we will be paying for it with greater "transmission" fees than we already are paying. There is going to have to be a breakthrough in electricity generation, transmission, and storage, and not just in general terms but we need cost effective break throughs, in order for NA to pursue it more.

Alternative energy should not be the answer due to the environmental footprint of a solar generation or wind farm site, in proportion to the electricity they produce as opposed to a single nuclear, coal fire, or natural gas fired plant. The logic of people who supposedly care for the environment but yet want alternative energy sites dotting the landscape escapes me.
If the demand on electricity increases I cannot see it becoming cheaper as companies like profit. Dont forget that 24% of the motor fuel cost is taxes. That will get tacked onto the electricity you consume.
__________________
When in doubt, use full throttle. It may not improve the situation, but it will end the suspense.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 10-09-2016, 10:23 AM
Newview01 Newview01 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5,326
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergerboy View Post
If the demand on electricity increases I cannot see it becoming cheaper as companies like profit. Dont forget that 24% of the motor fuel cost is taxes. That will get tacked onto the electricity you consume.
Exactly.

We need a couple major new competitors if we want to see prices drop. Which means prices will not drop.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 10-09-2016, 10:36 AM
avb3 avb3 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 7,861
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Newview01 View Post
Would I be right if said one of the major challenges of greater draw on the electricity system is the distances we are dealing with in North America as opposed Europe?

I can see that electricity will likely play a greater role in our lives in the future, but we will be paying for it with greater "transmission" fees than we already are paying. There is going to have to be a breakthrough in electricity generation, transmission, and storage, and not just in general terms but we need cost effective break throughs, in order for NA to pursue it more.

Alternative energy should not be the answer due to the environmental footprint of a solar generation or wind farm site, in proportion to the electricity they produce as opposed to a single nuclear, coal fire, or natural gas fired plant. The logic of people who supposedly care for the environment but yet want alternative energy sites dotting the landscape escapes me.
You make some valid points that the existing electrical grid is not setup for a distributed network situation. That being said, there is no question that the constrain because of that is a known quantity, and will require a different mindset. Think of the way the internet is distributed as a model to emulate.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 10-09-2016, 10:37 AM
avb3 avb3 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 7,861
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Newview01 View Post
Exactly.

We need a couple major new competitors if we want to see prices drop. Which means prices will not drop.
I've many times commented how electrical is so much cheaper in the US than what we pay in Alberta, and has been the case since about the time the deregulation occurred here. The theory of competition lowering prices never happened in Alberta.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 10-09-2016, 10:43 AM
avb3 avb3 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 7,861
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergerboy View Post
X2. Andys posts are always full of holes when you lift the carpet. A friend of mine has a Tesla and the 750hp doesn't come from children's giggles and dolphin shows. It comes from fossil fuels. The batteries are not grown in a garden they are complex structures that take lots of resources to make. The OP has a degree in political science and loves nothing more than to upset people. He loves to post anti fossil fuel propaganda on an outdoors site that has a large population of oil related workers, many are underemployed due to the economic conditions. The best word for his actions are Schadenfreude.
No Schadenfreude at all. That being said, let's not bury our heads in sand that there is a sea change happening globally with regards as to how energy is produced. If we in Alberta don't adjust, we fall behind.

Good news stories like Nova's expansion into value added products is something that HAS to be our economic strategy to be encouraged if we hope that our O&G resources get full value.

http://www.reddeeradvocate.com/news/...berta-economy/

Plastic is not going away. We know that. And of course there are environmental issues, but they certainly are easier to address at one source as opposed to millions of tailpipes, right?
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 10-09-2016, 10:50 AM
Newview01 Newview01 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5,326
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by avb3 View Post
You make some valid points that the existing electrical grid is not setup for a distributed network situation. That being said, there is no question that the constrain because of that is a known quantity, and will require a different mindset. Think of the way the internet is distributed as a model to emulate.
It is a little unrealistic to compare the internet distribution to electricity distribution is it not? The difference in infrastructure required is immense.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 10-09-2016, 10:54 AM
Newview01 Newview01 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5,326
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by avb3 View Post
I've many times commented how electrical is so much cheaper in the US than what we pay in Alberta, and has been the case since about the time the deregulation occurred here. The theory of competition lowering prices never happened in Alberta.
One word for this - cronyism.

I was 7 when deregulation occurred, and I still clearly remember the kerfuffle.

Have we seen any new players in the market? There was far too much infrastructure in place to allow for a new competitor to set up shop, and from what I recall, the government pretty much handed over control to only a couple suppliers. It wasn't right from the start.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 10-09-2016, 11:09 AM
avb3 avb3 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 7,861
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Newview01 View Post
One word for this - cronyism.

I was 7 when deregulation occurred, and I still clearly remember the kerfuffle.

Have we seen any new players in the market? There was far too much infrastructure in place to allow for a new competitor to set up shop, and from what I recall, the government pretty much handed over control to only a couple suppliers. It wasn't right from the start.
It was a horrible execution of a bad idea. It didn't help that the Southern's were part of Ralph' "kitchen cabinet" along, with the Mannix's. I asked some Deputy Ministers at the time to explain the situation, and they couldn't. It was a clearly a lobbied political move, one of Ralph's worst, if not his worst, and I generally supported his actions.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 10-09-2016, 11:14 AM
Newview01 Newview01 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5,326
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by avb3 View Post
It was a horrible execution of a bad idea. It didn't help that the Southern's were part of Ralph' "kitchen cabinet" along, with the Mannix's. I asked some Deputy Ministers at the time to explain the situation, and they couldn't. It was a clearly a lobbied political move, one of Ralph's worst, if not his worst, and I generally supported his actions.
At this point I am happy it is largely out of the hands of the current gov.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 10-09-2016, 11:24 AM
ak-71 ak-71 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Almaty
Posts: 2,032
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by avb3 View Post
You're right, I don't know the real number, but I know it is large. Most of Germany and France for sure, a lot of the USA, and elsewhere. The point is, that one does not need O&G for heating/cooking/hot water. Let's face it, most North Americans have been cooking on electric stoves for the past 60 years. Hot water heaters are probably more prevalent in the US, where the price of electricity is much less than here.

Evacuated solar heat tubes are widely used in many parts of the world, they are cheap, and they work well for heating water and supplementary heat. Even the CMHC endorses them in Canada.

http://shop.latitude51solar.ca/Evacu...ctors-s/38.htm

https://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/inpr/...sufepr_010.cfm

They are my next reno project, and yes, I will keep the natural gas backup.

Short video of a fellow who installed a solar heat collector and how well it works in winter time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aB8disMi3A8
You have missed my point, or, rather, evaded the simple observation that for now you need carbon fuel to generate electricity unless you want to repeat Ontario fiasco. I think it is probably your job to deny it, but common, get real.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 10-09-2016, 11:34 AM
CBintheNorth's Avatar
CBintheNorth CBintheNorth is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Communist Capital of Alberta
Posts: 3,707
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by avb3 View Post
Looks like German companies think that electric has a big future in the US.
""We want to invest around 6.5 billion euros between 2016 and 2018," Chief Executive Peter Terium told the paper, adding that investments will include grid networks and infrastructure but also wind farms in Germany, Poland, the Netherlands and electric car charging stations in the United States."

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/innogy...--finance.html
No offense, but do you think they are thinking of investing because they want to save the planet, or because they see people that are willing to part with their money for a "noble" cause and will make a profit?
__________________
Social acceptance is NOT effective therapy.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 10-09-2016, 11:56 AM
avb3 avb3 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 7,861
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ak-71 View Post
You have missed my point, or, rather, evaded the simple observation that for now you need carbon fuel to generate electricity unless you want to repeat Ontario fiasco. I think it is probably your job to deny it, but common, get real.
Yup, I did miss your point. I agree, fossil fuels will by necessity be part of the energy mix for some time. I've seen suggestions that use will increase until about 2030, and decline to below 20% sometime around 2100.

I also think that nuclear should be more of the mix than many others do.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 10-09-2016, 01:34 PM
Arty Arty is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: one Fort or another
Posts: 768
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ak-71 View Post
[...]
To be accepted technology actually has to better, no laws, bans will change it in a long run, it's not only stupid to do so, it is actually harmful for new possible innovations we may not even think about today.
[...]
The only more technology is a political technology of how to move money around against and business or common sense.
Don't get me wrong - these traditional "new" technologies may eventually incrementally become better to replace what we have now, and the way we will know this is when all the stupid political talks, laws and money redistribution schemes will come to an end. All of the big energy companies will be rushing into a new business, there is no "oil conspiracy" these companies will go with their money anywhere if it will make them more money.
Not quite. There is a strong recent history of the profit motive causing deployment of bad technology because it's easier to make money that way. Not because it creates a better technical solution.

For example, the tcp/ip data network protocol is horribly limited and obsolete, compared to the extensively planned and prototyped ATM (asynchronous transfer mode) protocol, or other modern protocols. Unfortunately tcp/ip quickly developed because it was known early in local academic sites, was adopted early by the US military, and was released for free use by AT&T. Not because it was better.

After awhile, nobody cared anymore because underlying physical bandwidth got so cheap that gluing together a network with bandaids and baling wire got you something which sort of worked OK anyway.

A second example is the crap known as microsoft; full of bugs, bloatware, security holes, and generally bad design overall. With massive, huge marketing scams and predatory business practises they weaseled their way into one office after another and charged people fortunes for it. Then cemented their position by quashing all newcomers. Many general consumers don't even know there are better alternatives out there.

A few people made more money than God from it. The rest got screwed and got stuck with high purchase costs, bad performance, virus attacks, and expensive maintenance contracts. -So you need an oversight agent such as competent government or industry associations to plan and regulate pure profit groups, even with technology.

Unfortunately it appears that banks, global corporations, and entrenched capital now have government in their back pocket more than ever before. There's even evidence the whole mess in Syria and mass migration of dislocated mid-east populations is being promoted by globalists to make a buck from it.

That gives rise to wing-nut radicals of all kinds who try to snag anyone they can into any half-baked program, to balance out entrenched capital. It's a bad situation and it's getting worse.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 10-09-2016, 02:18 PM
ak-71 ak-71 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Almaty
Posts: 2,032
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arty View Post
Not quite. There is a strong recent history of the profit motive causing deployment of bad technology because it's easier to make money that way. Not because it creates a better technical solution.

For example, the tcp/ip data network protocol is horribly limited and obsolete, compared to the extensively planned and prototyped ATM (asynchronous transfer mode) protocol, or other modern protocols. Unfortunately tcp/ip quickly developed because it was known early in local academic sites, was adopted early by the US military, and was released for free use by AT&T. Not because it was better.

After awhile, nobody cared anymore because underlying physical bandwidth got so cheap that gluing together a network with bandaids and baling wire got you something which sort of worked OK anyway.

A second example is the crap known as microsoft; full of bugs, bloatware, security holes, and generally bad design overall. With massive, huge marketing scams and predatory business practises they weaseled their way into one office after another and charged people fortunes for it. Then cemented their position by quashing all newcomers. Many general consumers don't even know there are better alternatives out there.

A few people made more money than God from it. The rest got screwed and got stuck with high purchase costs, bad performance, virus attacks, and expensive maintenance contracts. -So you need an oversight agent such as competent government or industry associations to plan and regulate pure profit groups, even with technology.

Unfortunately it appears that banks, global corporations, and entrenched capital now have government in their back pocket more than ever before. There's even evidence the whole mess in Syria and mass migration of dislocated mid-east populations is being promoted by globalists to make a buck from it.

That gives rise to wing-nut radicals of all kinds who try to snag anyone they can into any half-baked program, to balance out entrenched capital. It's a bad situation and it's getting worse.
I think you still get my point.
You post is basically an analogy and somewhat unrelated to what I was trying to convey, but I will give an analogy too.
Linux for example was around for decades, I used Redhat for a long time at school and at work. But somehow people still tend to pay for Windows, I wonder why? Conspiracy? Or maybe it is better for an average consumer? Not technically, but just easier, more intuitive, stable enough on different machines, more applications they like, better support and such. If yes, then Windows is better, regardless of what you think about it from a technical point of view.
You could of coarse put a heavy tax on all Windows applications and give money to any competitor for free, that is essentially what happens with energy sector, but it is just a another way to fit a square peg into a round hole - not gonna work and is incredibly wasteful way of doing things.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.