The LED "Arms race".....

ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Stephenj37826 said:
Yep.....All while demanding a living wage ...... Then go buy straight from China where people earn less than $10 a day....... Sometimes I wonder if people ever sit back and think much. A service economy with a huge trade deficit will not last forever...... Just my .02 lol.
Click to expand...
Preach, brother!

This country has let the billionaires get rich(er) by subsidizing the offshoring of our manufacturing sector and then we wonder why America isn't competitive anymore. Yes, I said that right; this country has actively incentivised exporting jobs, it's been going on for decades.

We must stop letting the ultra rich run our country. They aren't job creators, they're manipulators. The television lies about this every day. CUSTOMERS are job creators, no business can survive without them.
 
Stephenj37826

Stephenj37826

Well-Known Member
tstick said:
IS there even a U.S. manufacturer that makes electronic components? Because I would support a 100% made in the U.S.A. light if that was an option.
Click to expand...
We build the boards here in the US. Our fixtures are machined out of US aluminium. They are machined here , anodized here, and assembled here in the US. Packaging is all made here as well. We do buy some things from China as we haven't found a reliable source here in the US yet. We are working on sourcing some drivers made here as well. All LEDs are made out of the country right now. Noone packages LEDs in the US and I don't look for that to change anytime soon unfortunately. If we had the capital........
 
hillbill

hillbill

Well-Known Member
Parts and components for most products built anywhere on the planet are sourced from international sources. Manufacturers make parts for each other’s products and many products marketed by competing firms as theirown are really the same apart from badging or cosmetics. Fishing reels marketed as Quantum, Browning, Bass Pro, Shakespeare or Pflueger or Lews May be nearly identical inside and most internals are interchangeable!

Fast foods are just another area where many of various famous chains have their products processed at the same plant. Some meat processing facilities have several thousand labels in stock. Canned veggies etc. are the same.

I don't think this interconnected and interdependent system is going to unwind anytime soon.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
hillbill said:
Parts and components for most products built anywhere on the planet are sourced from international sources. Manufacturers make parts for each other’s products and many products marketed by competing firms as theirown are really the same apart from badging or cosmetics. Fishing reels marketed as Quantum, Browning, Bass Pro, Shakespeare or Pflueger or Lews May be nearly identical inside and most internals are interchangeable!

Fast foods are just another area where many of various famous chains have their products processed at the same plant. Some meat processing facilities have several thousand labels in stock. Canned veggies etc. are the same.

I don't think this interconnected and interdependent system is going to unwind anytime soon.
Click to expand...
Nothing wrong with it, as long as we aren't subsidizing counterproductive behavior.
 
TEKNIK

TEKNIK

Well-Known Member
Unfortunately there are not many companies that can Package leds to a very high quality. I have been to the biggest in China and possibly the world, the Chinese government invested so much money there they made sure its nearly impossible to compete with them. It would be far too expensive to attempt to compete with China, only thing that may change that is heavy import duties from China. The world gave China too much control and too much money, now they can dictate just about everything to do with this industry and many others.
 
hillbill

hillbill

Well-Known Member
Like we subsidize corn farm corporate projects for ethanol. Or petroleum giants with tax breaks or depletion allowances or real estate so called developers can take depreciation on assets that are dramatically increasing in value. China also is bright enough to recognize the value of turning out scientists and engineers while this government currently ridicules science.

Not saying that Chinese dictatorship is anything but horrid but they are smart. Hope they don’t get pissed and sell their huge stock of US bonds.
 
CobKits

CobKits

Well-Known Member
hillbill said:
Like we subsidize corn farm corporate projects for ethanol. Or petroleum giants with tax breaks or depletion allowances or real estate so called developers can take depreciation on assets that are dramatically increasing in value. China also is bright enough to recognize the value of turning out scientists and engineers while this government currently ridicules science.
Click to expand...
you cant have it both ways.

renewable fuel subsidies are directly related to climate change science, for what its worth
 
Stephenj37826

Stephenj37826

Well-Known Member
TEKNIK said:
All the cows farting because people love thier burgers from MacDonalds is another issue that effects climate change. Stop eating cows and start eating kangaroos instead.
Click to expand...
The funny thing is we actually had more buffalo in North America pre western discovery. We didn't have climate change then. The reality is automobiles are a big source of petroleum usage of course. It would seem most productive imho to spend more on carbon reclamation until renewable energy gets going and advances. Most people don't realize that it takes 50% of the energy a solar cell is going to generate in its lifetime to actually produce it. So what we think is green is green 15 yrs from now but an actual carbon adder until that point. I'm 100% for solar but it and wind aren't the perfect gems everyone wants to make them out to be. What would really make a positive impact would be for everyone that possibly can grow thier own food locally instead of hauling it half way across the country and or world depending. Electric cars are the answer but not 100% electric. There just isn't enough lithium for every commuter to have a car with a 300+ mile range. Chevrolet had it right with the volt. A hybrid that does roughly 60-80 mile electric only. That would reduce gasoline usage tremendously. No range anxiety either. Tesla's semi would be great in a network where rail was used quite a bit more and semis did the last leg only.
 
hillbill

hillbill

Well-Known Member
Corn ethanol distillation for fuel produces more CO2 than it saves when used as fuel. The ethanol subsidies, at this point exist only for corporate profits. While we blow 40% of our corn crop on gasohol, we price Central American farmers out of the market with our subsidies to wealthy farm corporations. Socialism in America is for the wealthy only.
 
OLD MOTHER SATIVA

OLD MOTHER SATIVA

Well-Known Member
quote

"We didn't have climate change then.":

>>there has always been climate change..look at history..

every 100 or so years the weather decides to change..

and not even mentioning about ice ages..
 
BuddyColas

BuddyColas

Well-Known Member
Stephenj37826 said:
The funny thing is we actually had more buffalo in North America pre western discovery. We didn't have climate change then. The reality is automobiles are a big source of petroleum usage of course. It would seem most productive imho to spend more on carbon reclamation until renewable energy gets going and advances. Most people don't realize that it takes 50% of the energy a solar cell is going to generate in its lifetime to actually produce it. So what we think is green is green 15 yrs from now but an actual carbon adder until that point. I'm 100% for solar but it and wind aren't the perfect gems everyone wants to make them out to be. What would really make a positive impact would be for everyone that possibly can grow thier own food locally instead of hauling it half way across the country and or world depending. Electric cars are the answer but not 100% electric. There just isn't enough lithium for every commuter to have a car with a 300+ mile range. Chevrolet had it right with the volt. A hybrid that does roughly 60-80 mile electric only. That would reduce gasoline usage tremendously. No range anxiety either. Tesla's semi would be great in a network where rail was used quite a bit more and semis did the last leg only.
Click to expand...
Not to piss in your Cheerios, but there's always been climate change!
Just imagine all those dinosaurs farting! EWWWWW! :o
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Stephenj37826 said:
The funny thing is we actually had more buffalo in North America pre western discovery. We didn't have climate change then. The reality is automobiles are a big source of petroleum usage of course. It would seem most productive imho to spend more on carbon reclamation until renewable energy gets going and advances. Most people don't realize that it takes 50% of the energy a solar cell is going to generate in its lifetime to actually produce it. So what we think is green is green 15 yrs from now but an actual carbon adder until that point. I'm 100% for solar but it and wind aren't the perfect gems everyone wants to make them out to be. What would really make a positive impact would be for everyone that possibly can grow thier own food locally instead of hauling it half way across the country and or world depending. Electric cars are the answer but not 100% electric. There just isn't enough lithium for every commuter to have a car with a 300+ mile range. Chevrolet had it right with the volt. A hybrid that does roughly 60-80 mile electric only. That would reduce gasoline usage tremendously. No range anxiety either. Tesla's semi would be great in a network where rail was used quite a bit more and semis did the last leg only.
Click to expand...
I'm glad you brought up the old story of millions of buffalo. First, we're raising more cattle than there were bison. Second, plowing the plains had more of an effect on atmospheric carbon dioxide than raising cattle.

The answer to sustainable solar panels is to use sustainable energy to produce them- a challenge but certainly a solvable problem.

The question really amounts to whether we as a species like what we're doing to the planet and if not, what are we gonna do about it?
 
BuddyColas

BuddyColas

Well-Known Member
TEKNIK said:
All the cows farting because people love thier burgers from MacDonalds is another issue that effects climate change. Stop eating cows and start eating kangaroos instead.
Click to expand...
So if I was an Aussie going in the drive-thru, I'd say, "I'll take a roo-burger with cheese, a biggie fry and a Coke."
 
shimbob

shimbob

Well-Known Member
delstele said:
Cutting down the rain forest has done more damage to our climate than any Cow, Buffalo or burning fossil fuel..
Click to expand...
And a lot of that cut rainforest is due to increasing beef consumption. Its a double whammy with cows, they fart and we cut down forests for them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top