> Exxon was concerned that oil supply might peak in the next few decades, and was funding research on a wide variety of alternative energy technologies that might replace it.
But later in the 21st century, transnational petroleum interests simply decided to change the leadership of any government that attempted to pass radical legislation that might reduce pollution and dependence on petroleum.
You can't really blame the mega-corporations without also blaming the people that voted for a government that's promised deregulation, "drill baby drill", mass deportation, tariff wars, government dysfunction through mass layoffs, and general chaos that will only favor the rich. I have to wonder what they really thought they were voting for and if it's going to be worth the high cost.
> You can't really blame the mega-corporations without also blaming the people that voted for kakistocracy
In the context of what democracy ought to mean, you are of course correct.
In the context of who now really operates the levers using historically unprecedented stockpiles of cash, I think the notion of blaming the voter is a quaint allusion to a bygone era (of democracy).
This article leaves out a lot of history of the lithium-ion batteries -- there were tons of companies using them in the late 80s and early 90s.
I ported software for testing them under various temperatures for use in down-hole horizontal drilling equipment in the late 80s. When looking up my old company when writing this post, I ran across the following list of hundreds of companies getting permission to transport them (hazardous back then too!) in 1991 from the DOT, and a 1973 technical report from the US Army on appropriate lithium ion battery testing procedures, which seems earlier than much of the research discussed in this article:
https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/hazmat/documents/offer/SP7052.pdf/...
I would argue a dynamic tension between IPR exploiters investing and state funded public interest had helped. It depends on time, cost and difficulty, with breakthroughs in both domains.
What a nice read and I love the conclusion! So often it's really hard to know why something will make it big but with hindsight so easy to understand why it did.
At the time Ford was looking to build EVs, and all manufacturers were trying insane things leading into the 1970s, where an oil production crisis severely impacted American drivers. Chrysler made a turbine car that could run on either Jet Fuel or Soybean Oil, some of these are still driving, and are amazing in their own right.
Exxon responded to the 1970s by recognizing that data was going to be a huge part of the world going forward. I'm guessing their early experiences with what was "big data" at the time to do oil field exploration clued them into what was about to happen.
Then the 1980s happened with massive shifts in geopolitical borders and in the energy sector in particular so both companies got cold feet on these long shots that previously seemed existential to their futures. This isn't a particularly surprising story.
Readit News
But later in the 21st century, transnational petroleum interests simply decided to change the leadership of any government that attempted to pass radical legislation that might reduce pollution and dependence on petroleum.
In the context of what democracy ought to mean, you are of course correct.
In the context of who now really operates the levers using historically unprecedented stockpiles of cash, I think the notion of blaming the voter is a quaint allusion to a bygone era (of democracy).
I ported software for testing them under various temperatures for use in down-hole horizontal drilling equipment in the late 80s. When looking up my old company when writing this post, I ran across the following list of hundreds of companies getting permission to transport them (hazardous back then too!) in 1991 from the DOT, and a 1973 technical report from the US Army on appropriate lithium ion battery testing procedures, which seems earlier than much of the research discussed in this article: https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/hazmat/documents/offer/SP7052.pdf/...
Related research from 1993: https://colab.ws/articles/10.1016%2F0378-7753%2893%2980023-i
From 1984: https://colab.ws/articles/10.1149%2F1.2115957
Exxon responded to the 1970s by recognizing that data was going to be a huge part of the world going forward. I'm guessing their early experiences with what was "big data" at the time to do oil field exploration clued them into what was about to happen.
Then the 1980s happened with massive shifts in geopolitical borders and in the energy sector in particular so both companies got cold feet on these long shots that previously seemed existential to their futures. This isn't a particularly surprising story.
Schlumberger was another one, tried their luck with Fairchild.
So how much did it fall per MWh?
Deleted Comment
Deleted Comment