“In reality, there has never been a conflict between pollution standards and performance; just an unwillingness to look beyond next week’s bottom line…”
That’s literally true, but a bit simplistic. It’s taken over 30 years for the auto manufacturers to develop computer systems that monitor engine pollutants and figure out how to use the same computers to reduce pollution and provide outstanding power - better than in the late 1960s. I’m not aware of any business that plans that far in advance.
How about the computer industry…Apple has the iPad model 89 ready and waiting for the 88 to become obsolete.
I’m in the flashcard section, dagosa. Please explain.
Just a response to " don’t know of any business that plans that far in advance". Most defense contractors do usually at the direction of the department of defense…as well as NASA. Medical research and universities as well. Retirement plans and insurance companies are notable exceptions. We are already, in the computer industry preparing for " singularity", as computer development is given over to the computer with a capability that exceeds that of human intelligence within the next 30 years.
The computer as used by automakers is an adaptation and was never developed by the auto industry. Few profit making businesses ever developed or invent anything. It’s research facilities and teaching universities and government funded non profit research centers that are responsible for the vast majority long range developments.
The auto industry, you are absolutely right, would still be using drum brakes on everything and rusting exhaust systems if it wasn’t for the long range planning of someone else…profit makers can’t afford the luxury.
Few profit making businesses ever developed or invent anything.
Don’t tell that to IBM, Texas Instruments, or AT&T.
Their idea of the future is next Monday’s stock market report.
I agree 100% with that.
“Most defense contractors do usually at the direction of the department of defense…as well as NASA.”
Not that long. They may be willing to spend a 5 years or so getting the contract, and are happy to have that contract. But they don’t spend 30 years working to earn a contract. I think the same is true of pharmaceuticals. They will spend several years developing products, but they review them periodically to see if they still present a viable revenue source. But won’t spend even 20 years without revenue, let alone 30.
Give me a clue! Pollution abatement, I care! As a side note if I see a windows logo when I test drive a car I am going back in time for my next car purchase.
…mikein NH…definitely a poor choice of words on my part…develope for consumer use for sure,
…I have friends who work in industries who survive on government contracts…it is not unusual for a project to go as long as 20 to 25 years. Missile defense and pharmaceuticals are prime examples of long term planning and co sponsorship of research centers funded by both corporate and public tax dollars to these ends. Primarily, most developments are done at these research centers so we “the people” can have strategic control of these inventions.
The gps system which has been in the planning and control from it’s infancy to now by the defense department…same for the computer industry whose major inventions are overseen co funded and allowed on the market under govt. control. It’s part of our interest and national defense to operate this way. Generally speaking, corporations profit from these enterprises, not from further inventions but from marketing these developments and then only after giving over the appropriate technology to their domestic side. What the car industry uses for domestic production has little to do with new inventions and more about packaging of systems developed through research co funded by corporate and public tax dollars. Would you want it any other way ?
This is one example of what I mean. You will see it in computers to come, but it’s development though supported by te computer industry, is not done by tem directly.