News Are UAW Union Bosses Abusing Their Positions for Pay?

[Proton Soup]

I think that's a pretty cruel way of doing things. When the company I worked for laid people off, they actually talked to them privately before announcing the lay offs to the rest of the workers. They also let everyone know about three weeks before the lay offs (actually, it was supposed to be a month before, but I worked for a subcontractor and the manager quit, followed by my company being stripped from the contract completely, so there were some delays). There's always a chance a company is going to want those workers back someday, if possible, so doing things with a little dignity has some advantages.

it sounds like they are afraid of their employees. thing is, when the people who remain see this, they will just view the employer as hostile. when those people find new jobs and leave Atmel, there will be no basis for giving advance notice. you just leave, because that's the same courtesy the company gives its employees.

 

[WhoWee]

This is real innovation...

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/02/the-venture-one.php

but it has to pretend to be a motorcycle to evade safety standards (even though it's priced at $20,000)...I'd buy one for $10,000.

 

[mgb_phys]

Or VW's 2 seater 235mpg version

http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/gw/vw1litre.htm

 

[RonL]

This might be of interest to some, I had no idea so many companies had attempted electric cars and trucks, and how little power was used for most (2-6hp).

http://earlyelectric.com/carcompanies.html

Did not find the link intended, when I started the search.

 

[OmCheeto]

Somehow I doubt good o' Myles, all on his lonesome, built one that would last 10 years without battery replacement, would take 5000 charge cycles, had regenerative braking, and had 40 miles+ battery range without 1000 lbs of batteries.

It's a plug in electric hybrid, just like the Volt. He actually didn't build the vehicle. It was built by Sam McKinney in 1988. Myles only converted the means of propulsion.

He says that 4 of his 12 batteries were manufactured in 1999.
So 1/3 of his bank of batteries will have survived your 10 year replacement requirement.

I haven't asked him how many cycles his batteries have been through, nor his nominal depth of discharge, which would yield a theoretical number of cycles.

His vehicle has a pure electric range of between 16 and 100 miles, depending on load.

He uses 744 pounds of lead acid batteries.

I don't think regenerative braking would work on his boat. Although in the spring, the river current past his marina can be quite swift and I'm sure that with a bit of tinkering, we could convert his motor into a 24 hour power source. (It has a permanent magnet dc motor)

Oh and it seats 16. How many hybrid electrics can boast that number.

 

[mheslep]

It's a plug in electric hybrid, just like the Volt. He actually didn't build the vehicle. It was built by Sam McKinney in 1988. Myles only converted the means of propulsion.

He says that 4 of his 12 batteries were manufactured in 1999.
So 1/3 of his bank of batteries will have survived your 10 year replacement requirement.

I haven't asked him how many cycles his batteries have been through, nor his nominal depth of discharge, which would yield a theoretical number of cycles.

His vehicle has a pure electric range of between 16 and 100 miles, depending on load.

He uses 744 pounds of lead acid batteries.

I don't think regenerative braking would work on his boat. Although in the spring, the river current past his marina can be quite swift and I'm sure that with a bit of tinkering, we could convert his motor into a 24 hour power source. (It has a permanent magnet dc motor)

Oh and it seats 16. How many hybrid electrics can boast that number.

Its a boat? Ok, I didn't get that you were being tongue in cheek.

His vehicle has a pure electric range of between 16 and 100 miles, depending on load.

And the tide/current.

 

[BobG]

it sounds like they are afraid of their employees. thing is, when the people who remain see this, they will just view the employer as hostile. when those people find new jobs and leave Atmel, there will be no basis for giving advance notice. you just leave, because that's the same courtesy the company gives its employees.

That's common practice for any level of job at most companies. Hence career advisors recommending employees always have an updated resume, that they maintain a network of friends and former bosses that can help them find a job, and always have enough savings to get you through a few months without a job (the last helping to explain why even the threat of a bad economy becomes self-fulfilling; people stop spending and start saving when that prospect starts to look a little more realistic).

No loyalty either way. Employees that need inputs on their resumes more than they need long term company health (and managers are employees, too).

It creates embarrassing situations, too.

In my work environment, you have defense contractors with a lot of subcontractors on each project. Generally, when a company loses a contract, the people doing the actual work just move to the company that won the contract (with some cleaning out of dead wood, of course - it's hard to get rid of the employees doing just enough to not get fired, so a change in contractors can be a good thing). That constant movement of employees back and forth between companies is why my company and some others try not to create grudges. A few folks take a while to learn how things work.

A friend of mine had his company, a subcontractor, fired off a project. The supervisor for the prime contractor was surprisingly happy to be ordering the subcontractor employees to pack up their stuff and leave. Unfortunately (or fortunately) for the prime supervisor, my friend called his supervisor at his own company before leaving. When the supervisor for the prime contractor came back and asked why the subcontractor employee hadn't left yet, the guy replied, "Because I work for you now. You're my new supervisor. You still want me to take the day off?" Half the guys the supervisor was kicking out of the office had been picked up by his own company and now worked for the supervisor. Doh! Tough way to establish that supervisor/employee respect and rapport. That would have made a better cell phone commercial than that stupid girl jumping around the room for Michael Phelps!

 

[baywax]

This might be of interest to some, I had no idea so many companies had attempted electric cars and trucks, and how little power was used for most (2-6hp).

http://earlyelectric.com/carcompanies.html

Did not find the link intended, when I started the search.

Obviously Americans have been way ahead of the curve for over 100 years.

 

[mheslep]

WOW!

Just look at all those High Speed, Long Distance machines. I can just about rest my case.

What case? Here's one, 155km/h top speed, 40 liter tank. What do you want?
http://www.tatacarsworldwide.com/products/indigo-sw.asp

 

[mheslep]

http://www.insideindianabusiness.com/newsitem.asp?ID=32966

http://www.epi.org/briefingpapers/227/bp227.pdf

I read the EPI paper. It appears to be mostly a panic piece for saving the industry, rather than a research article.

EPI does not provide any evidence that 3.3 million jobs will be in fact be lost if one or more Detroit firms files for Chap. 11., as you quoted. They arrive at the 3.3m figure merely by counting up jobs as follows:
-all direct jobs from the big 3
-all indirect jobs (suppliers) to the big 3
-all non-domestic auto makers! Yes, they're including Toyota-US, etc.
-a very large multiplier in the economy at large, that is lost jobs from reduced income by auto related people. This last multiplier is far greater than all the above auto related jobs.
They call this a 'total industry shutdown', which would cost 3.3m jobs. They even include, a stoppage of imports from other countries in that figure! [See foot note 3 where they call it a far fetched idea]. Their words:

The third scenario [the 3.3m jobs] ]assumes that the entire U.S. light vehicle assembly industry, including foreign-owned assembly operations (so-called transplants), shuts down.

It is the wildest hand waving to suggest this would actually happen. They have to show where Chapter 11 would actual force the companies to cease operations, vs go into conservator-ship. They provide no evidence of this major issue at all, but cite a New Yorker piece. BTW, http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1a2e2042-c79f-11dd-b611-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1", among others, says they will not shut down if they enter Chap. 11.

The figure they cite for a GM only shutdown is 53,200 direct jobs. This much is well sourced by the labor bureau, and is credible, IF GM shuts down. Then the list 284,000 indirect jobs for GM in immediately connected business (suppliers). Yes it is credible that this many people are involved in supplying GM; it is not credible that 100% of this figure will lose their jobs IF GM shuts down. Their 'respending' figure for GM, the ripple through the economy, is 576,700. Well perhaps, but every job lost in every industry has a ripple effect, but this does not justify the government picking winners.

The EPI assertion that the foreign-owned domestic manufacturers will also shutdown, without evidence, is ridiculous.

 

[RonL]

What case? Here's one, 155km/h top speed, 40 liter tank. What do you want?
http://www.tatacarsworldwide.com/products/indigo-sw.asp

I guess the attempt at humor did not turn out so well.
The case I have been trying to make is that a full sized Pickup or SUV offers the comfort and options most people want in their transportation, and a speed of 45mph (maybe 55) and a range of 75 miles per charge will meet the needs of nearly all drivers in any given day (intercity and urban population).

The WOW! comment at your last link, was about the picture of all the lanes of traffic stopped or just barley moving, this is how so many people spend the greater part of their commute around towns and the top speed of 45mph is what's posted on most streets other than loops and expressways.

Just a couple of my thoughts, so I'll leave it at that.

 

[drankin]

I guess the attempt at humor did not turn out so well.
The case I have been trying to make is that a full sized Pickup or SUV offers the comfort and options most people want in their transportation, and a speed of 45mph (maybe 55) and a range of 75 miles per charge will meet the needs of nearly all drivers in any given day (intercity and urban population).

The WOW! comment at your last link, was about the picture of all the lanes of traffic stopped or just barley moving, this is how so many people spend the greater part of their commute around towns and the top speed of 45mph is what's posted on most streets other than loops and expressways.

Just a couple of my thoughts, so I'll leave it at that.

What would convince most of those commuters to drive an electric car? That's the question that really matters. Just because it can be done doesn't mean people will buy into it.

 

[baywax]

What would convince most of those commuters to drive an electric car? That's the question that really matters. Just because it can be done doesn't mean people will buy into it.

$4.00 usd per litre of guzzoline?

 

[RonL]

What would convince most of those commuters to drive an electric car? That's the question that really matters. Just because it can be done doesn't mean people will buy into it.

I think the single solution needed is a recharge in less than 10 or 15 minutes.

 

[mheslep]

$4.00 usd per litre of guzzoline?

Add smog, pollution, noise. With all the hype on global warming it seems good old NOx and SOx auto pollution has almost been forgotten.

 

[turbo]

A friend of mine had his company, a subcontractor, fired off a project. The supervisor for the prime contractor was surprisingly happy to be ordering the subcontractor employees to pack up their stuff and leave. Unfortunately (or fortunately) for the prime supervisor, my friend called his supervisor at his own company before leaving. When the supervisor for the prime contractor came back and asked why the subcontractor employee hadn't left yet, the guy replied, "Because I work for you now. You're my new supervisor. You still want me to take the day off?"

Years back, I was hired by an architect for a very large (for Maine) apartment complex, and I was to inspect concrete, soil placement, framing, etc. As I found problems, I reported them to the superintendent of the prime contractor, who made the subcontractors fix the problems. The owner of the project told the architect to fire me because I was slowing up progress on his project. Friday afternoon, the architect flew in and handed me my last check. I went to the prime contractor's office trailer to say goodbye to the superintendent. He said "come back Monday". I showed up Monday morning and he made me the clerk of the project, in charge of payroll, supplies, and yes, quality inspections. Over the next two years, I was promoted to Assistant Superintendent, and Project Superintendent. Let me tell you that you don't want to be Project Super when it comes time to punchlist finished buildings for final turnover.

 

[drankin]

I think the single solution needed is a recharge in less than 10 or 15 minutes.

Wouldn't matter if it's 2 minutes.

-Your electric bill goes thru the roof (can our power grids even handle this?). What do people do if there's a power outage? Ride your bicycle in the snow?
-You have to buy a new, lesser performing car when the costs are compared.
-You have to have a second car if you need to go out of your driving range. Could you imagine running out of juice on a lonely highway? You can't go get a can of electrons to get you to the next station to plug-in.
-You have significant AC and heating power requirements that are always left out of the equation.

A hybrid is about is close as we'll get to compromise. We have to burn something to get the energy to move the masses. We should focus on clean burning fuels.

 

[WhoWee]

What case? Here's one, 155km/h top speed, 40 liter tank. What do you want?
http://www.tatacarsworldwide.com/products/indigo-sw.asp

These are the guys that are acquiring Jaguar

http://www.google.com/search?q=tata...s=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

don't be TOO surprised if they take a look at Saturn on some of the other brands.

As far as I can determine, they haven't lainched in the US yet?

 

[WhoWee]

Wouldn't matter if it's 2 minutes.

-Your electric bill goes thru the roof (can our power grids even handle this?). What do people do if there's a power outage? Ride your bicycle in the snow?
-You have to buy a new, lesser performing car when the costs are compared.
-You have to have a second car if you need to go out of your driving range. Could you imagine running out of juice on a lonely highway? You can't go get a can of electrons to get you to the next station to plug-in.
-You have significant AC and heating power requirements that are always left out of the equation.

A hybrid is about is close as we'll get to compromise. We have to burn something to get the energy to move the masses. We should focus on clean burning fuels.

Here's a little something to kick around...there's been a lot of discussion lately about the deficiencies of the existing power grid.

Sometinmes the way to solve a problem is to step back and look at the entire landscape.

Some of the givens:

1.) We want to drive electric cars, or propane cars, or hydrogen cars, etc., but we need a new way of fueling any of the new cars/trucks.
2.) We have a highway system that covers nearly the entire country.
3.) Trucks and cars are currently fueled differently (gas/diesel)
4.) Truck stops are located most often near the highway system.
5.) Most (natural) gas wells are located in the country...outside of cities.
6.) Compressed natural gas is dangerous to store/hold.
7.) The highway system has a lot of unused space (in most places)
8.) Many people consider the highway system an eyesore.
9.) Many people consider windmills an eyesore

Some ideas:
Trucks first;
1.) Semi trucks running on diesel use "middle of the barrel oil" which is expensive and (not clean). Alternatively, natural gas is cleaner and very abundant...and the wells and delivery trunk lines are out in the country...where the highways and truckstops and trucks are located (when not making deliveries to cities). Trucking in general has become capital-intensive and investment in infrastructure to support a compressed natural gas delivery system is do-able. Additionally, trucks have on-board storage capacity and perform well when fueled in this manner. Someone should be able to figure out how to put all of the pieces together.

Cars are more difficult;
We live and use cars in the city and drive long distances. A car fueling system has to be easy to use, dependable, safe and economical. If all we needed to do was plug our car in at night and make a 25mph/20 mile total daily commute...we'd have reasonable options now.
http://www.gemcar.com/models/

But most of us drive farther and want the freedom to travel when/where we choose...on the highway system.

HERE'S THE POINT...we have this enormous highway system with lot's of extra space, it connects to cities, it's already considered an eyesore, it obviously is where we drive...why not place wind-driven devices (eyesores also) and solar systems (especially Nano-solar technology) all along the highway system and connect into a new power grid. The first use of the power would be electric stations along the highway system and surplus could be directed to the existing grid. As for faster charge times...someone should be able soon enough to figure out how to charge batteries at power/service stations and swap vehicle batteries...much like we change propane tanks on our grills.

(I'd also like to open a conversation in another thread regarding the logistics and problems of capture/use of static energy into a power grid)

I'm not an engineer...it just makes sense to me that if the government is going to get into the car business and tackle the power grid...the problems might be considered together.

 

[edward]

I read the EPI paper. It appears to be mostly a panic piece for saving the industry, rather than a research article.

EPI does not provide any evidence that 3.3 million jobs will be in fact be lost if one or more Detroit firms files for Chap. 11., as you quoted. They arrive at the 3.3m figure merely by counting up jobs as follows:
-all direct jobs from the big 3
-all indirect jobs (suppliers) to the big 3
-all non-domestic auto makers! Yes, they're including Toyota-US, etc.
-a very large multiplier in the economy at large, that is lost jobs from reduced income by auto related people. This last multiplier is far greater than all the above auto related jobs.
They call this a 'total industry shutdown', which would cost 3.3m jobs. They even include, a stoppage of imports from other countries in that figure! [See foot note 3 where they call it a far fetched idea]. Their words:


It is the wildest hand waving to suggest this would actually happen. They have to show where Chapter 11 would actual force the companies to cease operations, vs go into conservator-ship. They provide no evidence of this major issue at all, but cite a New Yorker piece. BTW, http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1a2e2042-c79f-11dd-b611-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1", among others, says they will not shut down if they enter Chap. 11.

The figure they cite for a GM only shutdown is 53,200 direct jobs. This much is well sourced by the labor bureau, and is credible, IF GM shuts down. Then the list 284,000 indirect jobs for GM in immediately connected business (suppliers). Yes it is credible that this many people are involved in supplying GM; it is not credible that 100% of this figure will lose their jobs IF GM shuts down. Their 'respending' figure for GM, the ripple through the economy, is 576,700. Well perhaps, but every job lost in every industry has a ripple effect, but this does not justify the government picking winners.

The EPI assertion that the foreign-owned domestic manufacturers will also shutdown, without evidence, is ridiculous.

My reply was in response to your statement:

Originally Posted by mheslep

Who says they are going 'down', vs into Chapter 11? And even if the GM and Chrysler closed shop, where do you get you the 'millions' figure (as in more than 2 million)?

If GM and Chrysler close shop it will probably be more than 2 million. You have to account for the fact that auto and auto industry support workers will not be spending money. There will be a snowball effect that people don't want to look at.

A significant concern is the snowball effect that a Detroit Three Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing would have on their highly interdependent supply base. Loss of outstanding receivables for some suppliers will mean their own filings, or even liquidation, which will impact every other car maker, including Toyota and Honda; 65 per cent of suppliers to the Detroit Three also supply the "Japan Three."

http://news.guelphmercury.com/article/413852

 

[mheslep]

-Your electric bill goes thru the roof (can our power grids even handle this?).

Still much cheaper than gasoline. ~4x less dollars (at $2/gal) to travel the same distance, and the margin between electric and imported oil (gasoline) cost is only going to increase.

 

[mheslep]

My reply was in response to your statement:

Originally Posted by mheslep


If GM and Chrysler close shop it will probably be more than 2 million. You have to account for the fact that auto and auto industry support workers will not be spending money. There will be a snowball effect that people don't want to look at.

Ok, thanks for the response, but don't you find the EPI numbers excessive, even silly as a prediction? Yes there are support people, there always are, and yes there will be additional snowball effects. Here's what EPI lists for the case of just the Detroit 3 firms failing, closing their factories and laying off EVERYBODY.
"Direct jobs 122,800"
Then for suppliers they have:
"Indirect jobs 655,000"
Now who really expects 100% of those machine shops to just close their doors? Yes some would, and many will just turn to other work, like continuing to make parts for cars still on the road. I've was in some high end Silicon Valley PCB shops during the dot com collapse; they got absolutely hammered, orders went to zero, but they scrambled to find business outside of telecom and hung on.
"Respending jobs 1,329,900" First, all the suppliers are not to going fail, so this respending figure is way high regardless of what multiplier they used, and they cite their own people for the basis of the multiplier. Handwaving.
"Total employment impact 2,107,700"

A significant concern is the snowball effect that a Detroit Three Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing would have on their highly interdependent supply base. Loss of outstanding receivables for some suppliers will mean their own filings, or even liquidation, which will impact every other car maker, including Toyota and Honda; 65 per cent of suppliers to the Detroit Three also supply the "Japan Three."

Now that sounds credible. Some suppliers will file Chapter 11, and that means they can keep operating, and yes some will just fail. And some percentage of those supply the foreign-owned domestic mfns. By definition, the foreign-owned have access to other foreign suppliers for their models, perhaps at increased overhead. They are not going to simply stop production and lay everyone off.

For comparison, recall that Citigroup announced layoffs of 53,000 people last month. Where are the claims of 1 million dependents being laid off in the financial sector?

Again I suggest the EPI piece is only so much handwaving, which I can do as well as they and I suggest, if they're not bailed out, the big 3 a) will either merge or file chapter 11, b) that some suppliers will also file Chap 11 or fail, c) that the foreign-owned US manufacturers will not miss a single day of production because of parts shortages or US health care costs, and d) as a result of a&b maybe 50k to 200k people will face more than temporary unemployment (ie not just switch jobs). That is in total, including snowball effects. This is still tragic, but not calamitous.

 

[russ_watters]

Wouldn't matter if it's 2 minutes.

-Your electric bill goes thru the roof (can our power grids even handle this?). What do people do if there's a power outage? Ride your bicycle in the snow?
-You have to buy a new, lesser performing car when the costs are compared.
-You have to have a second car if you need to go out of your driving range. Could you imagine running out of juice on a lonely highway? You can't go get a can of electrons to get you to the next station to plug-in.
-You have significant AC and heating power requirements that are always left out of the equation.

One thing people always leave off that list is the price of electricity. In the US, it is kept artificially low by price caps that are set to expire in 2011. That $4 gas won't look as bad when the price of electricity doubles.

 

[mheslep]

One thing people always leave off that list is the price of electricity. In the US, it is kept artificially low by price caps that are set to expire in 2011. That $4 gas won't look as bad when the price of electricity doubles.

Speak for yourself Pensylvannian. That 2011 change is only for the http://www.philly.com/dailynews/local/20080910_Electric_costs_apt_to_soar_in_2011.html" for as far as you can see.

Edit: EIA US average forecast 2009
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/steo/pub/gifs/Fig21.gif

 

[mgb_phys]

-Your electric bill goes thru the roof (can our power grids even handle this?).

It helps the power grid, you use cheap off peak electricity. It balances the load so instead of having 4x the demand during the day - the generator can run the same baseline load.

What do people do if there's a power outage? Ride your bicycle in the snow?

Same thing they do when the gas station runs out because of pipeline failure, strike, refinery fire, war in the ME etc. It's generally pretty quick to reconnect a power grid.
If there is a power cut you know have a battery backup in the garage to run your lights, TV, cable modem etc - so no need to miss out on Pop Idol!
In fact this distributed failure resistant nationwide network of UPS should be compulsory.

You have to buy a new, lesser performing car when the costs are compared.

Depends what you mean by performance. It won't go twice the speed limit and you will have problems on all the trips to soccer practice when you need to tow an 8000lb load.
But it terms of energy required to transport you to the office with less noise and polution the 'performance' is rather better.

-You have to have a second car if you need to go out of your driving range.

You could also use the train or plane. I need a second vehicle to get off the island because my stupid gas powered car can't go on water.

Could you imagine running out of juice on a lonely highway? You can't go get a can of electrons to get you to the next station to plug-in.

I can't imagine why they allow complex unreliable internal combustion engines with numerous failure modes to go out on lonley highways. Ever heard of tow trucks?

-You have significant AC and heating power requirements that are always left out of the equation.

A single bar electric heater is 1Kw, slightly more than 1HP. So diverting 1HP from the electric motors would be enough to roast everyone in the car.
It is a problem with internal combustion engines though. My little 1.2L diesel was so efficent that by the time I had got to my office 5miles away the engine hadn't got hot enough to provide any warm air. I knew I should have got a 5.6L V8 - that would also have solved the problem of me forgetting where the gas filler was.

 

[baywax]

Add smog, pollution, noise. With all the hype on global warming it seems good old NOx and SOx auto pollution has almost been forgotten.

For sure. It would be nice to get around without lowering everyone's quality of life. Its a double edged sword. Not having to walk home with the groceries balanced on your head is a raise in standard of living. Lead or NOx and SOx poisoning is a drop in quality of life. The condition would level out in severity with a move toward electric. That's not to say electric mobility doesn't come with a large carbon foot print with the manufacturing and disposal of batteries and components.

Is it true that a hybrid creates a larger carbon footprint than a small combustion type vehicle and that a cow represents a larger foot print than a hybrid?

Speaking of which... where is global warming now? Its freezing out.

 

[russ_watters]

Speak for yourself Pensylvannian. That 2011 change is only for the http://www.philly.com/dailynews/local/20080910_Electric_costs_apt_to_soar_in_2011.html" .

Heh - I didn't realize that. I probably should have known about it. Sorry.

 

[russ_watters]

Same thing they do when the gas station runs out because of pipeline failure, strike, refinery fire, war in the ME etc. It's generally pretty quick to reconnect a power grid.

How often does that happen? I'd bet it's nowhere near as much as power failures. I've never seen a gas shortage in my life, but I've seen many power outages.

You could also use the train or plane. I need a second vehicle to get off the island because my stupid gas powered car can't go on water.

You're right! I need to start a car rental company! One way or another, those cars still need to exist and the point remains: you can't eliminate long-range and high power cars.

I can't imagine why they allow complex unreliable internal combustion engines with numerous failure modes to go out on lonley highways. Ever heard of tow trucks?

I think you missed the point: the short range and difficulty in getting a short range fuel-up to get you to the nearest gas station means a huge increase in stranded motorists. Hey - I should start a tow truck company too!

A single bar electric heater is 1Kw, slightly more than 1HP. So diverting 1HP from the electric motors would be enough to roast everyone in the car.

I highly doubt you can heat a full sized passenger car with 1 kW. I suspect you are a good order of magnitude low.

Give me a few minutes and I'll go measure it...

 

[russ_watters]

Ok, I drive a Mazda 6i, 2.0L. It has five 2.25" vents up front. When I set the selector to blow at the face (it almost, but doesn't quite elminate airflow to other vents), the velocity is about 1300 FPM and the free area of the vents about 90%. That's an airflow of 160 CFM. I didn't measure temperatures, but let's estimate conservatively low: with the outside air damper closed, and the car only being on for a few minutes (and therefore not warmed up much inside), it can produce air perhaps 110 F from return air of perhaps 30 F. That's 4.1 kW - not an order of magnitude, but like I said, a pretty conservative estimate. Perhaps over the weekend I'll measure the actual delta-T (not going to start the car and let it warm up right now).

 

[Astronuc]

Bush considering "orderly" auto bankruptcy
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/081218/meltdown_autos.html

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Bush administration is looking at "orderly" bankruptcy as a possible way to deal with the desperately ailing U.S. auto industry, the White House said Thursday as carmakers readied more plant closings and a half million new jobless claims underscored the deteriorating national economy.

With General Motors, Chrysler and the rest of Detroit anxiously awaiting a White House decision on billions of dollars in emergency federal loans, press secretary Dana Perino said it wasn't simply a choice between government rescue and the disastrous collapse of a major industry.

"There's an orderly way to do bankruptcies that provides for more of a soft landing," she said. "I think that's what we would be talking about."

President George W. Bush, asked about an auto bailout, said he hadn't decided what he would do but didn't want to leave a mess for Barack Obama who takes office a month from Saturday. A White House decision on helping the troubled automakers could come as early as Friday.

It will be interesting to see how the markets respond. The plant closings alone are painful enough, especially just before Christmas.

 

[Astronuc]

Paulson: 'Orderly' bankruptcy might be best option for dealing with ailing automakers
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/081219/meltdown_autos.html

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Bush administration is convinced the ailing economy could not withstand the demise of Detroit's Big Three and is looking at "orderly" bankruptcy to keep the automakers from collapsing.

A White House decision on helping the industry could come as early as Friday -- none too soon for carmakers suffering from their slowest sales in 26 years and dwindling operating cash.

Bush administration officials were reviewing several approaches to assisting the automakers, including short-term loans from the Treasury Department's $700 billion Wall Street rescue program. But Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson told a business forum in New York on Thursday night that while bankruptcy for the automakers should be averted if possible, an "orderly" reorganization might be the best solution.

"If the right outcome is reorganization or bankruptcy, then isn't it better to get there through an orderly process?" Paulson asked.

Paulson said President George W. Bush wants to avoid bankruptcy -- "if it can be avoided." But Paulson said the No. 1 priority was getting U.S. automakers back on a viable path. Part of that effort, he said, would require all sides making sacrifices to boost competitiveness with foreign carmakers.

"It's difficult to do such things outside of reorganization," he said. "But sometimes that can be successfully done."

"When you look at the size of this industry and look at all those that it touches in terms of suppliers and dealers ... it would seem to be an imprudent risk to take," he said.

The Big Three automakers said anew on Thursday that bankruptcy wasn't the answer, as did an official of the United Auto Workers who called the idea unworkable and even dangerous. The car companies argue that no one would buy a vehicle from a bankrupt company for fear that the company might not be around to honor warranties or maintain a supply of spare parts.

The National Automobile Dealers Association also spoke out against bankruptcy "in any way shape or form, orderly or disorderly, prepackaged or unpackaged, managed or unmanaged," said spokesman Bailey Wood.

. . . .

Ostensibly, bankruptcy would save Uncle Sam from putting a lot of Treasury funds in the automobile dealers. Then the question seems to be - who assumes the losses? Investors? Creditors? Labor?

Bankruptcy or not - reorganization is inevitable.

 

[russ_watters]

Bankruptcy or not - reorganization is inevitable.

Not really, no. That's kind of the whole point that people opposed to the bailout have: a bailout could just hand them a big bag of money and allow them to continue on as before. People are talking about a "strings attached" bailout, which could require some reorganization, but it would almost certainly allow them to do less than a bankrupcy would require. That's why bankrupcy is the best option. It takes the power out of their hands and forces them to do the maximum.

 

[Astronuc]

Not really, no. That's kind of the whole point that people opposed to the bailout have: a bailout could just hand them a big bag of money and allow them to continue on as before. People are talking about a "strings attached" bailout, which could require some reorganization, but it would almost certainly allow them to do less than a bankrupcy would require. That's why bankrupcy is the best option. It takes the power out of their hands and forces them to do the maximum.

OK - I was thinking that the government would impose some reorganization, which some in government want to do while others don't. I expect the Bush administration doesn't want to impose on corporate management.

Isn't the government (Congress) supposed to regulate commerce, or at least interstate commerce. On the other hand, I suspect that the US Code does not permit Congress or the Administration to delegate to corporations. So how did FDR do it?

Makes me wonder (I'm diverging off-topic) - "if people think the government doesn't work, why would they expect a bankruptcy court to work". After all, they are comprised of people. Ultimately people make a system/institution work or not.

 

[Mentz114]

GM and Chrysler got some help as loan guarantees. But they have to 'be financially viable' by March 30th or give it back. NYT article 5 minutes ago.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

GM and Chrysler got some help as loan guarantees. But they have to 'be financially viable' by March 30th or give it back. NYT article 5 minutes ago.

Would they have anything to give back?

 

[DrClapeyron]

Home prices are plumetting from their decade high after nearly tripling within less than a decade. The $7 trillion 'bail out' is not over. As people have been suspecting on this board, the 'bail out' will come at the expense of a 'lost' decade like the 1990's were for Japan.

 

[Topher925]

Would they have anything to give back?

What? They don't have to give anything back by March 30th, they just have to show that have a restructuring plan to become financially sound by then.If anyone cares, I went to Chryslers HQ yesterday for a tour of the engine testing and development facilities. It didn't even seem like there was a crisis. There were still tons of people walking around and getting stuff done, kinda like a bee hive. If you have never been to Chrysler's HQ then you should go. Its an absolutely amazing structure, the most impressive I have ever seen. It makes Ford's and GM's look like crap.

 

[mheslep]

How often does that happen? I'd bet it's nowhere near as much as power failures. I've never seen a gas shortage in my life, but I've seen many power outages.

Yes but the pumps at the gas stations go out with the power failures. The odd grocery store will have a backup generator, but I've never seen a gas station with one. Of course people don't mind so much because one can usually limp out of the failure area.

If PHEVs gather any speed at all Id expect something like a service station to add small metered electric service for this kind of thing - anything to get people to stop in long enough to buy something else.

 

[mheslep]

Ok, I drive a Mazda 6i, 2.0L. It has five 2.25" vents up front. When I set the selector to blow at the face (it almost, but doesn't quite elminate airflow to other vents), the velocity is about 1300 FPM and the free area of the vents about 90%. That's an airflow of 160 CFM. I didn't measure temperatures, but let's estimate conservatively low: with the outside air damper closed, and the car only being on for a few minutes (and therefore not warmed up much inside), it can produce air perhaps 110 F from return air of perhaps 30 F. That's 4.1 kW - not an order of magnitude, but like I said, a pretty conservative estimate. Perhaps over the weekend I'll measure the actual delta-T (not going to start the car and let it warm up right now).

Sounds good, but that is the warm-up heating power needed, right? So 4kw for maybe 15 mins to reach steady state temp (1 kWh), then hopefully 0.75kw to maintain, unless one likes driving down the road in the Winter w/ the window down and heat on full. 750W would be no problem for EV batteries, especially if a heat pump is used to maintain the SS. And there is also the 10% heat loss from the E motor and batteries to tap.

 

[mheslep]

OK - I was thinking that the government would impose some reorganization, which some in government want to do while others don't. I expect the Bush administration doesn't want to impose on corporate management.

Isn't the government (Congress) supposed to regulate commerce, or at least interstate commerce. On the other hand, I suspect that the US Code does not permit Congress or the Administration to delegate to corporations. So how did FDR do it?

The Supreme court told him at first he could not do it. Then FDR threatened to pack the court with additional judges until he got the ruling he wanted, and the court backed down. Not his finest hour.

 

[Astronuc]

Bailout approved: Automakers to get $17.4B
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/meltdown_autos

WASHINGTON – Citing danger to the national economy, the Bush administration approved an emergency bailout of the U.S. auto industry Friday, offering $17.4 billion in rescue loans in exchange for deep concessions from the desperately troubled carmakers and their workers.

The government will have the option of becoming a stockholder in the companies, much as it has with major banks, in effect partially nationalizing the industry.

At the same time, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said Congress should release the second $350 billion from the financial rescue fund that it approved in October to bail out huge financial institutions. Tapping the fund for the auto industry basically exhausts the first half of the $700 billion total, he said.

President Bush said, "Allowing the auto companies to collapse is not a responsible course of action." Bankruptcy, he said, would deal "an unacceptably painful blow to hardworking Americans" across the economy.

Some $13.4 billion of the money will be available this month and next, $9.4 billion for General Motors Corp. and $4 billion for Chrysler LLC. Both companies have said they soon might be unable to pay their bills without federal help. Ford Motor Co. has said it does not need immediate help.

. . . .

The devil is in the details, wherever that is. Probably should be posted on the WhiteHouse.gov, Dept. of Commerce and/or Treasury websites.

 

[mheslep]

...

Makes me wonder (I'm diverging off-topic) - "if people think the government doesn't work, why would they expect a bankruptcy court to work". After all, they are comprised of people. Ultimately people make a system/institution work or not.

Rep Barney Frank made that very comment on the House floor in response to members attacking the car czar and auto bailout bill. Here's my response: because the judge is immune to special interest lobbying. A car czar will never cut the UAW benefits/salaries, if that's what is required, it would be politically impossible, especially for the UAW beholden Obama admin. The main problem with government: it is vulnerable to special interest pleading that results in "concentrated benefits and dispersed costs."

 

[baywax]

I didn't think orderlies made enough to go bankrupt.

 

[Astronuc]

Here's my response: because the judge is immune to special interest lobbying.

That would be my expectation with respect to the judge.

Regarding courts and the process:

The first company I worked for got pulled into an Interpleader in Federal Court. The judge had to disposition the funds in our ESOP (~$400K) + insurance (~$350K) against $800 K in liabilities minus lawyers fees (and there were some expensive lawyers involved, and it was not clear how they all got involved). Some evidence never got the judge, and in the end, two managers who had been involved in under the table deals that basically precipitated the demise of the company and 401K got benefits, and the rest of us got much less. I received $18 K of $60+ K that I had invested in the ESOP.

We had been told that the cash (deferred compensation) in the ESOP was guaranteed, and that stock was at risk. What happened however, was that the stock of the ousted managers was valued at full value before the collapse, which was charge against the 'our' supposedly safe cash. The rest of us, who remained after the collapse, got less cash and our stock revalued at a post crash value ($15 down from $50-55). Apparently the stock appraiser was unaware of the companies perilous situation and gave what amounted to a falsely (not his fault) value to the stock before the crash.

BTW the court was in Colorado and I was located on the E. Coast. I was welcome to go to court - at my expense. I couldn't afford to participate.

In the end as part of the settlement, I (and others) was required to surrender all rights to future litigation and basically let malefactors off. I personally feel they should have been prosecuted for what amounted to RICO violations.

 

[russ_watters]

Sounds good, but that is the warm-up heating power needed, right? So 4kw for maybe 15 mins to reach steady state temp (1 kWh), then hopefully 0.75kw to maintain, unless one likes driving down the road in the Winter w/ the window down and heat on full. 750W would be no problem for EV batteries, especially if a heat pump is used to maintain the SS. And there is also the 10% heat loss from the E motor and batteries to tap.

The difficulty for the steady state comes from bringing in fresh air, which is necessary in the winter to eliminate window fogging. If my car's fresh air fraction is 50% and the steady state airflow is 50% of maximum, that's 40 cfm and 760 w to get 30 F air up to 90 F. That's still conservatively low.

And that isn't the only thing on a car that uses a significant amount of electricity. Lights (night only, yes) are another couple of hundred watts, the stereo is another 50 at a bare minimum, rear window fogger probably another 100, power steering, power brakes. This all adds up to a very significant additional electrical drain.

 

[baywax]

The difficulty for the steady state comes from bringing in fresh air, which is necessary in the winter to eliminate window fogging. If my car's fresh air fraction is 50% and the steady state airflow is 50% of maximum, that's 40 cfm and 760 w to get 30 F air up to 90 F. That's still conservatively low.

And that isn't the only thing on a car that uses a significant amount of electricity. Lights (night only, yes) are another couple of hundred watts, the stereo is another 50 at a bare minimum, rear window fogger probably another 100, power steering, power brakes. This all adds up to a very significant additional electrical drain.

I used to scrape the ice off of the inside of my 63 Ford Falcons. The station wagon was murder.

 

[edward]

Paulson: 'Orderly' bankruptcy might be best option for dealing with ailing automakers
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/081219/meltdown_autos.html
Ostensibly, bankruptcy would save Uncle Sam from putting a lot of Treasury funds in the automobile dealers. Then the question seems to be - who assumes the losses? Investors? Creditors? Labor?

Bankruptcy or not - reorganization is inevitable.

Again, the main problem I have with the bankruptcy is that a lot of people are going to get hit financially. And I am not necessarily talking about the big three.

There are numerous vendors who manufacture and supply parts for the big three. Will bankruptcy mean the smaller companies will be left out in the cold??

I have seen that happen before when a builder filed for bankruptcy during the Savings sand Loan debacle. A friend of mine who owned a small A/C company lost over $300,000.

 

[mheslep]

The difficulty for the steady state comes from bringing in fresh air, which is necessary in the winter to eliminate window fogging. If my car's fresh air fraction is 50% and the steady state airflow is 50% of maximum, that's 40 cfm and 760 w to get 30 F air up to 90 F. That's still conservatively low.

Hmmm. Could a lower power method of reducing the humidity be used?

And that isn't the only thing on a car that uses a significant amount of electricity. Lights (night only, yes) are another couple of hundred watts, the stereo is another 50 at a bare minimum, rear window fogger probably another 100, power steering, power brakes. This all adds up to a very significant additional electrical drain.

Nah, heating OR cooling is going to dwarf all of that energy wise. There may be some short term power spikes from this or that device, but battery power is not an issue in a vehicle that must provide ~200kW peak for motive load. Energy density is the problem, but I don't see auxiliaries taking more than 10% of a 16kWh charge in an hour of driving (40mi).

 

[BobG]

The difficulty for the steady state comes from bringing in fresh air, which is necessary in the winter to eliminate window fogging. If my car's fresh air fraction is 50% and the steady state airflow is 50% of maximum, that's 40 cfm and 760 w to get 30 F air up to 90 F. That's still conservatively low.

And that isn't the only thing on a car that uses a significant amount of electricity. Lights (night only, yes) are another couple of hundred watts, the stereo is another 50 at a bare minimum, rear window fogger probably another 100, power steering, power brakes. This all adds up to a very significant additional electrical drain.

How are you heating the incoming air? How efficient is your heater?

In fact, how efficient is the motor driving the car and how are you getting rid of excess heat? I really don't know how efficient the electric motors used on vehicles are, but, generally, finding a way to dispel excess heat is a bigger problem than generating it. I think air conditioning is going to be a bigger electrical load than heating.

 

[russ_watters]

Hmmm. Could a lower power method of reducing the humidity be used?

No. The other way to reduce the humidity is by running the air conditioner.

Energy density is the problem, but I don't see auxiliaries taking more than 10% of a 16kWh charge in an hour of driving (40mi).

I can see 10% being a reasonable estimate, but that makes your 40 miles 36. It is also presents a problem when there's heavy traffic: If you go 40 miles in an hour and use 1.6kWh for accessories, you'll use 3.2 kWh if it takes 2 hours.