Ford keeping V8's to 2040!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't know, but I do have a sense of how large the earth is and how large the sun is.
If you don't know then how can you say the widespread use of solar won't result in ushering in the next ice age? Because the northern hemisphere is less than 2C away from extensive continental glaciation.

Englander 420kyr CO2-T-SL rev.jpg
 
Do you always call dudes "sweetie"?



Let's put it this way: while you are draining your wallet to gas up your SUV I'm driving for free. Have been for about 3 years now.

I'd say I'm the one who's ahead.
That cost you probably $100,000 total. Many of us live in areas where there solar power is not viable alternative due to rain, snow, high winds, hail, and days upon end with complete overcast.
 
Not really. I was paid very well.

Well, I get paid well and I still got patents for my work. Since I work in industry I actually get a bonus for each patent that gets granted.

Actually it does.

That isn't how USPTO inventorship works. US Patent Law is rather unique in that it puts a central value on proper inventorship. No matter WHAT companies are working on what.

It's not a core business.

Doesn't matter. It matters to the business if they don't see any value in protecting that IP, which is not uncommon.

Correct. There are several competing vendors who developed different techniques to solve the same problem. They all developed competing expandable sand screens and multiple zone single trip systems.

So there's no real value to your version? That's sad. I bet there actually was value. But it's not uncommon for legal departments to save their filing budgets if the technology isn't of any real value to the core business or they don't feel it is sufficiently solid to make it through patent prosecution.

But this all continues to miss the point: a patent is a limited form of a "monopoly" enforced by the US government.
 
Last edited:


Many of us live in areas where there solar power is not viable alternative due to rain, snow

LOL. I live in the Pacific Northwest. Seems pretty rainy here most of the year and I STILL maintain a month-over-month 1000kWh excess.

, high winds, hail, and days upon end with complete overcast.

"complete overcast"? Tell me about it. Yet I still have only paid two electric bills in the last 5 years. It's REALLY hard to make me think I'm coming out behind in all this.
 
Yet another nimrod who does not understand the difference in tax breaks and subsidies.

You DO realize I didn't write that article, right? In fact the ONLY folks I ever hear who call subsidies "not subsidies" are the usual anonymous randos on internet discussion fora like this. Unfortunately all these economists and experts in the field keep calling them subsidies.

I guess you also don't know that you linked a G20 reference site. There are 19 other countries in the G20.

I could link to any number of sites and they'll still call 'em subsidies.

But thanks anonymous rando, I'll make sure to moderate all my views based on your "anti-expert" view.
 
Correct. All safety requirements. Totally different from the make believe problem of global warming.

Maybe you don't remember the 1980's. I do. I remember people fighting tooth and nail against mandatory seatbelt laws. I even resented it early on. Turned out to be a good thing.
 
That's silly, especially since what you envision happening won't happen. Most people today are more worried about runaway inflation and material shortages.

EV's are for the more affluent who need to assuage their perceived "white privilege" guilt by perceiving they are helping solve a problem we don't have and wouldn't solve it if we did. Or maybe you missed the part where US emissions have been decreasing for almost 2 decades while the rest of the world's is increasing at a rate of 1 billion tons per year.
EVs are moving beyond expensive toys

What is expensive is paying $4 a gallon for gas for the lifetime of a vehicle
 
Common sense.
Really? Did you just say that common sense tells you that widespread use of solar won't usher in a glacial cycle when you previously said you didn't know how much solar it would take to usher in a glacial cycle? Because common sense tells us that if we are less than 2C away from extensive northern hemisphere continental glaciation that we should be damn sure that widespread use of solar won't usher in a glacial cycle. Because a glacial cycle WOULD be catastrophic and we don't need any models to tell us that because we have the geologic record which shows what that effect would be.
 
Well, I get paid well and I still got patents for my work. Since I work in industry I actually get a bonus for each patent that gets granted.



That isn't how USPTO inventorship works. US Patent Law is rather unique in that it puts a central value on proper inventorship. No matter WHAT companies are working on what.



Doesn't matter. It matters to the business if they don't see any value in protecting that IP, which is not uncommon.



So there's no real value to your version? That's sad. I bet there actually was value. But it's not uncommon for legal departments to save their filing budgets if the technology isn't of any real value to the core business or they don't feel it is sufficiently solid to make it through patent prosecution.

But this all continues to miss the point: a patent is a limited form of a "monopoly" enforced by the US government.
My tax bill was 60 grand a year. Except for last year which was 100 grand. I did OK.

Everything else was addressed in my previous post about this. Nothing further needed on my part.
 
Maybe you don't remember the 1980's. I do. I remember people fighting tooth and nail against mandatory seatbelt laws. I even resented it early on. Turned out to be a good thing.
I do remember the 80's. I loved the seat belt laws. AGW is a farce to part fools from their money.
 
Really? Did you just say that common sense tells you that widespread use of solar won't usher in a glacial cycle when you previously said you didn't know how much solar it would take to usher in a glacial cycle?

Maybe you can summarize the science that says how many millions of square miles of solar PV systems it would take to usher the earth back into another ice age. It sounds stupid, but maybe you have something.



Because common sense tells us that if we are less than 2C away from extensive northern hemisphere continental glaciation

2degC average temperature. That's quite a bit of heat. And I'm uncertain why you think Solar PV systems are perfect absorbers of radiation and don't generate any heat themselves.

that we should be damn sure that widespread use of solar won't usher in a glacial cycle. Because a glacial cycle WOULD be catastrophic and we don't need any models to tell us that because we have the geologic record which shows what that effect would be.

LOL. Yeah. Just share the most convincing science you have that this would happen. Don't just site the article you did earlier about one solar farm. We are talking at a hemispheric or global level.

It's just not going to happen that way.
 
Who gets the royalties?

Umm, I assign my patents to my employer which is pretty standard in the US. That's the way it's been at every company I have worked at.

As such my employer gets all the direct benefits from the IP. If your company actually does get patents on anything they probably do the exact same thing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum List

Back
Top