Why Pantone and / or G system is not developed?

[lio74]

Hi to all of you

the subject speaks for itself it's a big open question

I paused because many people pause me when I tell them about the system!

-> and why does it not already exist on all new tractors?
-> why don't we talk about it !? it's a great system!

I launch this post because I would like to do some measurements on the system while I am in studies ... but I run up against the Septissism of some teachers who are not too much in agreement to unlock funds ...
I need to make a mini demo engine it can help
so for the moment I'm doing some sort of bibliographic file, and part of this file deals with the politico-economic situation of the pantone in France!
it is a little easy to say: "it is the oil lobbies which block early because they have too much $$$ to lose ... (the barrel has not yet reached $ 200)" ...

That's why I turn to you, econologists online, I want to reap the max of different opinion to do good things!

by the way I will look for sites that speak from afar or near the pantone ... so if you know some of them that seem interesting!
Chris: there was a link to a forum tractors on a post .. what do you think?
de + I'm trying to swallow the pages of Quanthomme!

voalou I count on your many pertinent reflections!

@ ++

[pollux]

Hello,

I voted "marginal system never industrializable", because manufacturers have an unfortunate tendency to never want to adopt something that has not been invented at home. (I even think I saw this in one of the econology videos put on google ...). moreover, the reputation of the pantone of being a "water engine" and the fact that nobody really understands what is happening must dissuade a lot of car manufacturers ... not to mention the difficulties of industrializing a process which we do not know how to describe or model the exact operation.

I also voted that because I think it is difficult for an industrialist to use a patent that is in the public domain ... but there, I'm not sure at all, I do not know much about it in legal protections ...

I hope the future will lie my vote ...


-Pollux

[lio74]

Hello,
.........
......... not to mention the difficulties of industrializing a process that we can not describe or model the exact operation.

I also voted that because I think it is difficult for an industrialist to use a patent that is in the public domain ... but there, I'm not sure at all, I do not know much about it in legal protections ...

I hope the future will lie my vote ...


-Pollux

hi to you & thank you for your answer
I quite agree with the reasons you mention.

for the pb public patent is that it is usable by everyone and there is no right to exploit ... so no $$$ that fall alone! unless you make an improvement and patent it


otherwise it is clear that we must come to model the system before its industrialization! the question that I pause:
-> have auto manufacturers already tried and given up because it's too complicated!?!
-> Or do they have nothing to launch for the moment because the investment (in thinking heads and in €€€) seems too important to them?

I think there are some parameters that can be modeled ... after understanding the chemical reactions inside the reactor it's another scientific fight ...

@ ++

[gegyx]

I would opt, anyway for the 3, on the one hand.
Because when one is convinced of the usefulness of an approach, which is not taken into consideration by the politico-financial system, it is to our honor (of self-respecting man), to undertake it, if it is a good thing for the preservation of life in general.

I will also vote for 1, in the sense that they are marginal systems that are not industrialized.

But I am convinced that the techniques have been tested, and that they will one day appear, gently on some models, under the pressure of more restrictive standards, to improve the rejections, with low cost systems.
Maybe on a low-coast Asian car, destined for the western market.
Then these systems of depollution, associated with existing others, will arise at all manufacturers, to maintain a technological edge, on low-end vehicles.

[Christophe]

My opinion is succint but realistic enough I think:

Here is what any industrial engineer would think about this:

"It's too simple, not or with difficulty patentable and it goes against the society of overconsumption and in addition (and above all?) It comes from handymen, pecno and little idiots of engineers (that's me ) ... IMPENSABLE to prove them right ... "

That's why it's marginal whether there are results or not is not even the main question, the main question is how much it will bring us back ... In short this system is not good for a capitalist system ...

Too bad for us but also ... for "them" ... France has a chance to seize the ... others may be able to seize it in its place ...

[popaul]

Great !! I am nodding optimism ambient!

One thing is for sure, it is not with you that this system will be industrialized and therefore relapsed. If there is no industrialization, the pantone system is strictly useless and there is no point in discussing it. forum.

If I'm interested, it's not what I have the deepest hope that research will lead, and then an existing manufacturer or not will launch if it works.

Rather than this question, I will ask you, how will you persevere someone, who started from nothing and after serious research, mounted his box to install pantones in the car of everyone?

[Christine]

One thing is for sure, it is not with you that this system will be industrialized and therefore relapsed.

The tips of Mamie Christine:
It is not defeatism that makes us hold these discourses, but experience.
- Your enthusiasm is nice, but it's not a reason to take us down.
- It is not the enthusiasm that makes projects succeed, but perseverance.
- Good luck (it's sincere).

[Christophe]

- Your enthusiasm is nice, but it's not a reason to take us down.
- It is not the enthusiasm that makes projects succeed, but perseverance.

+1 + downside: he is young and it can be heard ... still too "idealistic" ...

[popaul]

I may be young, that's not why we can not be right. It is surely not to be pessimistic and negative all the time that we advance: meet business leaders and you will see!

[Woodcutter]

What is the verb "persevirer"?

I find it a pity to always read the same speech under the pen of Christophe ... (agreement over our poor pawn heads insignificant for ever more consume and patati-patata ...)