|
Neil. I sent you a PM (unanswered) about conversing with Brad Jaeger of Edison. I had received an email from him earlier this year about my design. He told me to contact him after the X prize competition was over.
I was hoping to meet with them and discuss a cooperative arrangement that would consider my technology.
You see, the next step is to have a reputable organization give my patent a small amount of time and consideration. It's an ongoing pursuit. I have spent hundreds of hours in this pursuit, and the responders particularly Va Tech saw the promise in the design.
I have other potential pathways to a cooperative arrangement but nothing I would consider firm. In many cases, including Edison, no response seems to be the typical reaction.
If it was a rejection with some evidence of the determination involved in rejection then I could understand, but no response smacks of rejection without consideration.
If the US does not consider every path to technology that could make a difference in our energy utilization and application, than we condemn ourselves to be followers instead of the technology leaders we were in the 20th century.
I appreciate your concern about the environment, and although I may not share your beliefs exactly the same way you do, I appreciate your concern for the future.
My business required me to solve problems every day. If I did not solve problems, the bills didn't get paid.
My design is principally based around the EPA documents that stated that an 80% improvement in mileage can be achieved by power train developments. Not engine, aero, or fuel consuming principle power production in vehicles, but just power train.
That does not exclude developments in aero, batteries, or other areas of development.
In fact it is all inclusive, with individual improvements compounded by other individual improvements.
The other day I missed a show at the Hampton Coliseum where Edison was showing their x prize winning vehicle. It seems to be the story of my life in this pursuit. The opportunity to talk with those who have the power to move this design forward choose (for reasons I can not fathom) to ignore what may be a key component, while we bleed 300 billion in national worth, which if not bled could mean 3 trillion in new money in the US economy every year, and the death of the monopoly called OPEC.
Not a future dream which requires some significant technological achievement at some time in the future, but a design that could be incorporated into every vehicle on the planet in a very short period of time. A design that would allow the vehicle itself to accomplish high efficiency transportation automatically.
I was raised to believe that people are not the problem. The system is the problem. I look at cars today and see archaic transportation technology that still uses systems developed 50 years ago. Recently we see some real improvement but the pace of real improvement is pitiful.
Sorry for the rambling. It is truly sad to watch us bleed our children's financial security while we all seem to be content with arguing ad nauseum.
regards
Mech
|