P. O. Box 1104
Anaconda, MT 59711
ph: (406) 563-5186
alt: (406) 560-0118
fbcanaco
Mr. Lawrence D. Burns, Vice president March 06, 2006
Research & Development and Strategic Planning
GM Research & Development
30500 Mound Rd.
Warren, MI 48090
Dear Mr. Burns:
Thank you for your cordial response in reference to advanced Rankine engines for automobiles. We have been following fuel cell development for about thirty years. We have fully reviewed your web site, www.gmability.com. We have known of GM’s disappointing experiences with steam engines for about twenty-four years. We have been involved in genuine advanced Rankine research and design for about forty years while comparing it to all other recognized means of power and propulsion. Our work has been according to recognized and established design criteria and steam theory and practice. Our desire is to help realize the best option. It is not our intention to anger or offend you or GM in any way. We expect that GM will disagree with our statements, however we would prefer to be allies than adversaries. We realize that GM is presently the world’s largest automotive manufacturer and we accept the claim that GM is the leader in fuel cell development. We know that GM is proud of its R&D, and loves its fuel cell program, and is totally committed to fuel cells. We applaud the published objectives of GM in R&D.
We understand General Motors disappointments in Rankine which were due to the poor performance of poor engine and system designs. We have long been aware of the many “objections” GM has to Rankine. GM’s distorted perception of steam is based on a straw man which does not represent the true qualities of a properly designed advanced Rankine engine-system. The real thing does not resemble the straw man.
The question is: “Does the real advanced Rankine offer advantages over advanced I.C. design, hybrid design, and fuel cell?”
A properly designed advanced Rankine system can accomplish all of the published objectives of all of GM’s R&D projects. Advanced Rankine can accomplish these objectives better, cheaper, more efficiently, and more reliably because these objectives are incorporated into the very design and nature of advanced Rankine. If this were not true we would not have written to GM.
The final consideration involves the issue of a hydrogen fuel economy. GM assumes that a hydrogen economy means fuel cells. This is a fallacious assumption. While fuel cells need hydrogen, a hydrogen fuel economy does not require fuel cells. Advanced Rankine can use hydrogen fuel better than fuel cells can.
We admit, Rankine might not be able to give the world a skate board to ride around on.
Sincerely,
John A. Cozby
cc: Michael Fairo
Mr. Michael Fairo March 06, 2006
Customer Relations Specialist
DaimlerChrysler Corporation
Auburn Hills, MI 48326-2766
Dear Mr. Fairo:
Thank you for your courteous call of last Thursday, March 02, 2006, concerning advanced Rankine for automobiles. It was a pleasure talking to you.
A little trivia about us. We presently drive a Dodge Grand Caravan and a Plymouth Acclaim which have given us good service. Before that we had a Dodge Ram 350, 15 passenger van. We lean toward Chrysler and tend to have a favorable impression of the company. We would like to be able to help DaimlerChrysler help the world.
We understand that the Daimler of DaimlerChrysler refers to the German based component of the corporation. Germany was once the world leader in efficient small scale steam and Rankine technology and innovation. A couple of world wars pretty well killed further development. Had Germany continued their developments we would not be needing to write you now.
Last Friday, the day after our conversation, we received a written response from GM’s Larry Burns. I am enclosing a courtesy copy of my response to Mr. Burns for your information. The copy should be self explanatory.
We realize that DaimlerChrysler has their own fuel cell program and R&D. However, advanced Rankine technology is superior and can render fuel cell technology obsolete. It appears that GM intends to use their fuel cell development to try to corner the market for themselves and their partners. We think that there is an opportunity for DaimlerChrysler to pass GM, become the undisputed leader, and largest automotive manufacturer by developing the superior advanced Rankine technology.
We believe DaimlerChrysler has a broader vision and better insight than GM. We also expect DaimlerChrysler can succeed with advanced Rankine where GM could not. The option is yours.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
John A. Cozby
Ross Perot and GMC
Mr. Ross Perot was a very rich and influential gentleman. He once ran for President of the United States. Mr. Perot was also on the Board of General Motors Corporation. Mr. Perot was distraught with General Motors Research and Development Division. He raised an unwelcome question that went something like this: "For all of the Billions of dollars spent on research and development — WHERE IS IT?" GM did not seem to like Mr. Perot and they parted company, BUT the profound question — "WHERE IS IT?" ought to be on the minds of every board member of GMC as well as on the mind of every Congressman that has voted for Billions of taxpayer dollars for General Motors Corporation!; Billions of dollars (grants and tax breaks) for research and development and now over 50 Billion dollars in bail out funds.
What IS wrong with this picture??!!
THE DECEPTIVE, HYPOCRITICAL, AND DAMAGING PREJUDICE OF GENERAL MOTORS AGAINST STEAM ENGINES FOR AUTOMOBILES
Dec. 2008 — Jan. 2009 John A. Cozby
General Motors Corporation has been the single greatest obstacle to meaningful progress in automobile propulsion systems, thereby greatly contributing to her own sorry demise. The tragedy is that General Motors could have been the world’s leader in advanced automobile propulsion systems if she had made the right choices. It is hoped that Toyota and bankruptcy can provide a positive and corrective effect on General Motors Corporation. (Except for multi-billion dollar government bailouts to GMC and GMAC, General Motors is bankrupt, and no longer the largest automobile company.) The position General Motors has taken against Rankine development is utterly irrational and probably the worst and most damaging decision GMs’ Research & Development and Strategic Planning Division has ever made. A total reversal in General Motors’ policy is mandated for GMs’ own good. Since the bailout is taxpayer money, everyone now has a stake and interest in the matters of GM’s decisions, whether good or bad. As long as General Motor’s didactic is thought to be valid, no beneficial progress can be made. General Motors’ prejudice against Rankine cycle engines for automobiles has never been valid.
This tutorial is meant to teach how General Motors went wrong in the matter of Rankine cycle engines for automobiles and how devastating it has been for both GM and America.
Copyright 2012 COZBY ENTERPRISES, INC.. All rights reserved.
P. O. Box 1104
Anaconda, MT 59711
ph: (406) 563-5186
alt: (406) 560-0118
fbcanaco