Design Con 2015
Breaking News
Comments
Oldest First | Newest First | Threaded View
Page 1 / 3   >   >>
Carl_S
User Rank
Rookie
re: Why legislative mandates of engineering goals are a bad--and even dangerous--idea
Carl_S   7/23/2010 4:09:56 PM
NO RATINGS
A related concept is the "Pentium mentality", the notion that any technology will drop in price next year. You don't need to explain why the price will come down; it just happens. Many people use that rule to explain why electric cars and solar cells will be commonplace soon, when it is obvious that they are way too expensive to be practical.

kdboyce
User Rank
Rookie
re: Why legislative mandates of engineering goals are a bad--and even dangerous--idea
kdboyce   7/23/2010 11:27:55 PM
NO RATINGS
There is an old saying that goes - "never trust a politician any further than you can throw him". That ain't very far, and gets even shorter with a group of them (legislature, senate, what have you). Yet they continue to ask us to trust them with (fill in the blanks). To the point that legislative fiat can bring retribution for failure, I would like to somehow see said "legislators" suffer retribution way beyond just being un-elected or un-appointed. That might slow them down a bit....but I doubt it. The temptation is just too great. Our current banking system is largely fiat money that is "declared" money by the government. It is not backed by anything but promises and deceit, allowing the government can spend more then they take in through taxes. The recent bailouts of big banks and Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae show that those who engage in the money fiat structure make the rules and shove the consequences on the rest of us while they get off without real penalty.

KB3001
User Rank
CEO
re: Why legislative mandates of engineering goals are a bad--and even dangerous--idea
KB3001   7/24/2010 3:19:44 PM
NO RATINGS
I agree with you Bill. However, I would not want to diminish the importance of goals (even politically driven ones) in advancing science and engineering. What is wrong in this legislation is that it is dictating pretty much everything: the technology and the market share. This is simply unrealistic and quite frankly stupid.

Jagdish Bisawa
User Rank
Rookie
re: Why legislative mandates of engineering goals are a bad--and even dangerous--idea
Jagdish Bisawa   7/24/2010 5:23:09 PM
NO RATINGS
Setting such goals is the need of the day, with the depletion of natural resources. And who knows such "diktats" might lead to the invention of newer technologies which can help the mankind to enjoy luxury & also co-exist with nature. The engineering community should take this as a challenge & come out with tangible results in the said amount of time. A couple of decades is a fair time limit for us to "deliver"......

ylshih
User Rank
Rookie
re: Why legislative mandates of engineering goals are a bad--and even dangerous--idea
ylshih   7/24/2010 11:31:33 PM
NO RATINGS
It is reasonable for society, through it's legislators as one directive mechanism, to set major goals ("go to the moon in this decade"). However, such successes encourage the hubris of thinking that direction equals outcome. Attempting to dictate too many parameters leads to failure ("you can have it fast, cheap, or good - but not all 3 at the same time").

resistion
User Rank
CEO
re: Why legislative mandates of engineering goals are a bad--and even dangerous--idea
resistion   7/25/2010 12:29:54 PM
NO RATINGS
The committee should have done something like provide tax incentives for gas-free electric car development. What if the goals are not met? Is it the carmaker rather than consumer or taxpayer that pays?

WKetel
User Rank
Rookie
re: Why legislative mandates of engineering goals are a bad--and even dangerous--idea
WKetel   7/25/2010 9:49:03 PM
NO RATINGS
Resistion and Rich are certainly correct about providing motivations instead of mandates! The first and most obvious challenge of electric vehicles is the energy to charge them. I must come from some place. That is one unpleasant reality that is certain to cause a lot of pain. So far, I have not heard or seen any rational description of where this quantity of energy will come from. I have heard all sorts of descriptions about quite expensive energy sources, but those are proposed as alternatives to the present sources. So once again, it is time to stand up and say "You have a good idea, jnow show us a plan to implement it". The surest way to bring electric cars into very widespread use is to exempt them from many of the stupid safety mandates that burden current vehicles. Unfortunately, the same legislatures also believe that individuals should not be responsible for the results of their actions.

old account Frank Eory
User Rank
Rookie
re: Why legislative mandates of engineering goals are a bad--and even dangerous--idea
old account Frank Eory   7/26/2010 5:47:40 PM
NO RATINGS
Maybe Congress should also mandate that the electricity needed to charge all those electric cars must be generated by nuclear fusion reactors!

ANON1235460098216
User Rank
Rookie
re: Why legislative mandates of engineering goals are a bad--and even dangerous--idea
ANON1235460098216   7/27/2010 7:16:49 AM
NO RATINGS
It is true that sometimes governments do take actions that are silly and/or incorrect. However, in this particular case, Bill's article appears to be a "cheap shot," that mischaracterizes the Senate Bill in order to manufacture a "straw man" that he can then easily shoot down. Bill does this in the very first line of his article, where he says the proposed Senate bill has provisions "requiring that 50% of cars be all-electric, battery-powered in 20 years" and provides a link to a WSJ article that he claims supports his statement. In fact, I have read the WSJ article and no where does it mention any such requirement. What the article does say is the following: "The goal is to electrify half the country’s cars and trucks by 2030, which could reduce demand for oil in the U.S. by as much as one-third." A "goal" is very different from a "requirement" and Bill ought to know this. Funding one option, towards solving our energy problems in the future, in no way means that other options will not be pursued. The Senate Bill only allocates $3.9 billion, over 10 years, towards its goals. Given the very real potential that electric cars could be the transportation method of the future, this does not seem like a particularly large sum.

DrQuine
User Rank
CEO
re: Why legislative mandates of engineering goals are a bad--and even dangerous--idea
DrQuine   7/27/2010 1:58:01 PM
NO RATINGS
Perhaps the best approach is to look at the long term objective without trying to micromanage the best route to get there. When polio was a national problem, it was tempting to ramp up iron lung production - but the seemingly impossible development of a polio vaccine was a much better long term solution. We need to provide incentives to encourage deployment of the best currently available technologies. We also must ensure that visionary solutions which meet the objectives in unexpected ways are encouraged.

Page 1 / 3   >   >>


Top Comments of the Week
Flash Poll
Like Us on Facebook

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
EE Life
Frankenstein's Fix, Teardowns, Sideshows, Design Contests, Reader Content & More
<b><a href=Betajet">

The Circle – The Future's Imperfect in the Present Tense
Betajet
5 comments
The Circle, a satirical, dystopian novel published in 2013 by San Francisco-based writer Dave Eggers, is about a large, very powerful technology company that combines aspects of Google, ...

Max Maxfield

Recommended Reads From the Engineer's Bookshelf
Max Maxfield
27 comments
I'm not sure if I read more than most folks or not, but I do I know that I spend quite a lot of time reading. I hate to be idle, so I always have a book or two somewhere about my person -- ...

Martin Rowe

Make This Engineering Museum a Reality
Martin Rowe
Post a comment
Vincent Valentine is a man on a mission. He wants to make the first house to ever have a telephone into a telephone museum. Without help, it may not happen.

Rich Quinnell

Making the Grade in Industrial Design
Rich Quinnell
16 comments
As every developer knows, there are the paper specifications for a product design, and then there are the real requirements. The paper specs are dry, bland, and rigidly numeric, making ...

Special Video Section
The LT8640 is a 42V, 5A synchronous step-down regulator ...
The LTC2000 high-speed DAC has low noise and excellent ...
How do you protect the load and ensure output continues to ...
General-purpose DACs have applications in instrumentation, ...
Linear Technology demonstrates its latest measurement ...
10:29
Demos from Maxim Integrated at Electronica 2014 show ...
Bosch CEO Stefan Finkbeiner shows off latest combo and ...
STMicroelectronics demoed this simple gesture control ...
Keysight shows you what signals lurk in real-time at 510MHz ...
TE Connectivity's clear-plastic, full-size model car shows ...
Why culture makes Linear Tech a winner.
Recently formed Architects of Modern Power consortium ...
Specially modified Corvette C7 Stingray responds to ex Indy ...
Avago’s ACPL-K30T is the first solid-state driver qualified ...
NXP launches its line of multi-gate, multifunction, ...
Doug Bailey, VP of marketing at Power Integrations, gives a ...
See how to ease software bring-up with DesignWare IP ...
DesignWare IP Prototyping Kits enable fast software ...
This video explores the LT3086, a new member of our LDO+ ...
In today’s modern electronic systems, the need for power ...