The motorized vehicle, both electric and petroleum powered, was invented more than 100 years ago. Each version has had the same evolution period. During this 100 years of evolution, the technology related to fossil fuels has been the most cost-effective, or the internal combustion vehicle would not be the primary mode.
Battery technology as a result of the competition with fuel has lagged, according to the environmentalists because of unfair competition. Therefore subsidies are needed to be competitive.
This theory does not consider that electric vehicle technology is controlled by the requirement for a source of charging energy. This energy, (follow the wires) must come from a reliable source of energy, currently from fossil fuels. Therefore, no matter what the subsidy is for the battery-powered car, it will still require a reliable source of electricity to charge it.
The concept of charging the battery powered vehicle overnight, without fossil fuel, is difficult to imagine. The sun does not shine at night (unless the wires are long enough to reach a solar panel on the sunny side of the world). Also, wind power is usually insufficient at night.
Perhaps a subsidy for electric power plants? — Jeff Fox, Medford
Barry Martin's Oct. 17 letter, "Logging isn't the answer," provides an opportunity to bring up a subject that is typically missing in anti-logging discussions. He uses the standard rhetoric of "large tracts "¦ clearcut", "degraded forests result in silted streams," etc. But the part of his letter that caught my attention was his reference to our local economy based on "farms, dairies and vineyards."
Forest management today is guided by science, directed by professionals, working under forest practice regulations and done sustainably. Trees harvested are replaced. A renewable resource is maintained. So the question is, what happened to the ecosystems that were replaced by cows, vines and tilled fields? They were obliterated.
The Rogue Valley used to be oak/pine woodlands, grasslands and shrub fields, home to deer, cougar, bear, wildflowers and many bird species. Mr. Martin loves to hunt and fish. Not much of that in farms, vineyards and dairies. He appears to prefer conversion to agricultural use over sustainable maintenance of remaining forestland.
Environmentalists incessantly complain about trees being cut, but ignore, or fail to recognize, the continued loss of critical ecosystems through total conversion to other uses. Why is that? — Bill Jones, Eagle Point
How come when a state authorizes gay marriage they put on extra staff and open clerks' offices early (example: marriage license office opening at 12:01 a.m. on the day marriages become legal) but the same extra government attention is not shown when concealed carry laws change and new potential licensees "line up" to get a license. They instead have to wait months to exercise their Second Amendment right that government tried to take away.
Could it be that as George Orwell wrote, some animals are more equal than others? — Elaine Wheeler, Central Point