Attract new industry, not old ideas
![]() By Mark Forsythe The Kansas City Post Kansas City has long sought to become a leader in industry. In the 60's it was defense manufacturing with Bendix. In the 70's Armco Steel was the hope for many to maintain a strong base of manufacturing jobs. In the 80's, the emergence of Sprint promised to make KC the backbone of a fiber optic long distance telecom network. The 90's saw the emergence of bio-sciences led by The Stowers Institute. With each passing decade we attempt to latch on to one particular industry in the hopes that we have found the it thing. The only common denominator seems to be that we continue to fail in learning the lesson that singularity of focus in economic development leads to eventual failure. With the recent announcement that Smith Electric Vehicles is coming to the United States, and intends to build a manufacturing facility in North America, it stands to reason that EV's (Electric Vehicles) will soon grace the streets of our more progressive U.S. communities. It's no longer a question of if the United States will begin pursuing alternative fuel transportation modes, but when. I am the first to admit that the alternative fuel industry is hardly mature. The metro only has one EV dealership to date and it remains to be seen whether suburbanites will catch on to electric cars as anything more than a fad. Solar power is viable today, but only in states with significant subsidies. Our current group in Jefferson City is more enamored with ethanol than a truly clean and renewable resource like the sun. Wind and hydrogen power also show promise but are mired in technological problems that have yet to be solved. Yet even with these limitations, the promise of a new industry based around sustainable energy is too great to ignore. The Automotive X-Prize will elevate the profile of real solutions to our dependence on fossil fuels. Tesla Roadster has gone into production of their Lotus-designed electric sportscar. Phoenix Motorcar is already making fleet deliveries of their electric SUT (Sport Utility Truck) and will soon follow up with an electric SUV. Even General Motors is still sticking by their assurances that the Chevy Volt is more than just vaporware and will grace showroom floors in 2010. Back to Smith EV. Usually by the time a company issues a press release, the opportunity to make the pitch to Consider Kansas City has probably passed, but I think it is important for our economic development officials to stay on top of new opportunities involving sustainable energy. Once Smith EV arrives and begins making inroads into the US delivery truck industry, other manufacturers are sure to follow suit. These are the kinds of gambles we should be taking in the area of creating new jobs. I'm certainly not advocating pursuing green industry while forsaking all others. We should certainly continue to invite all types of industry to locate in the metro. It just makes sense to me that if everything is going to be "up to date in Kansas City" we need to be up to date on what's coming over the horizon, not fading into the past. |







Comments on "Attract new industry, not old ideas"
-
Ed said ... (1:26 PM) :
-
Morgan said ... (2:38 PM) :
-
StanWellaway said ... (7:15 AM) :
-
Anonymous said ... (8:34 AM) :
-
Mark said ... (9:01 AM) :
-
Anonymous said ... (10:34 AM) :
-
Anonymous said ... (11:50 AM) :
-
Noah said ... (2:36 PM) :
-
Phil said ... (10:14 PM) :
-
Noah said ... (6:55 PM) :
post a commentI think we'll know a lot more about how viable the trend is in the next 3-5 years. The green hype is about at it's maximum right now. Once the public hype begins to die down some, it's THEN when we'll see if these products will continue to be produced.
Despite your stance on man-made global warming, it's a good thing to be a little more mindful of protecting the environment.
People should plug in with the Volt. When gas is $5 a gallon, people will be lining up for these types of cars. Learn more about the volt at http://www.chevy-volt.net
Many vehicle makers are toying with electric vehicles. Displaying prototypes at motor shows, and talking of what might happen two years from now.
The encouraging thing about Smith is that they have EVs in production and on the road. Several hundred of their newest designs are now in service with UK supermarkets and delivery companies.
Smith EV is owned by Tanfield Group, whose shares are quoted on the London stockmarket, and who are due to publish their Annual Results in April - a week after Smith have taken part in Europe's biggest commercial vehicles show (CV 2008) at the NEC, Birmingham, UK. Presumably they will be making some significant announcements around that time - and possibly an indication of where their new US factory will be built? They have already commenced production on US soil, within a factory owned by another Tanfield subsidiary in Fresno, California.
Incidentally, Smith have been building electric vehicles since 1920, in which time they have quietly shipped about 70 thousand of them worldwide. So they are not some trendy newcomer.
Mark,
Did you know about the Bombardier deal? Ironic that the front page of the paper announces Kansas City is going after a factory to build airplanes for a dying industry. Ask Seattle or St. Louis about airplane plants.
anonymous 8:34AM,
The Bombardier thing was news to me when I opened the paper this morning. If it brings jobs, great. I agree that passenger aircraft manufacturing is not the future though.
What does the EDC have to say about Smith EV? Do they even know about them? Probably not. Too busy with tax incentives for condo developers.
Typical the EDC is using the all eggs in one basket approach. Probably throwing every resource at Bombardier and letting every other opportunity fall by the wayside.
TKC reports that Bombardier was probably never coming in the first place. And still I'm betting the EDC hasn't even made a call to Smith EV.
I don't understand how people think EVs are "Green". In Kansas City and most other places in the US, any vehicle that pulls from the power grid indirectly burns coal for fuel.
If it saves a few bucks in the face of expensive gasoline, that's one thing. Green, however? These cars won't be the answer.
An electric car with coal-made electricity is still FAR greener than a gasoline car that requires refineries and the like while the coal-fired plants are simultaneously in operation.
Also, it is much easier to control and reduce pollution at a single coal/natural gas plant (filters, carbon-catching, etc) than in thousands of cars and trucks all over.
And those coal plants can then be replaced by hydro/solar/wind/else sources - and then, that argument collapses.
What is the answer? Hybrids are just a stop-gap measure, hydrogen isn't ready yet (I should know, I worked in the domain), biofuels take good arable farmland, then what else?
Please don't fault electric cars because of old (and replaceable) coal plants.
Ah, Phil. It's also to say nothing about the process that goes into making the batteries, the toxic chemicals within those batteries, and the woes of inevitably disposing them. As a whole, EV tech still has a long way to go. If they aren't faulted for burning coal, they can be faulted half a dozen other ways.
As for me? I'm offsetting using my Ford Focus (not as "green" as some cars) by riding my bicycle as much as I can, which is to say thousands upon thousands of miles per year, with very little "riding for the sake of riding nowhere".
And I'm not even really an environmentalist. I just play one while being The Devil's Advocate against those justifying silly things with environmentalism. Ostensibly, I don't like paying for fuel and urban parking.