To British Prime Minister
2025-04-04: Weekday edition,
On January 20, President Trump announced his intention to repeal the "EV man-date" in a presidential order titled "Unleashing American Energy." However, the di-rection of next-generation automobiles should be indicated.
Many Americans are against the "EV" mandate. "HVs" are popular in the United States. In China, the combined sales of BEVs and PHEVs will account for 38% of new car sales in 2023. The United States does not need to "follow China."
I have been saying that in a decarbonized society, the United States should make "hydrogen-fueled vehicles" the next-generation automobile. The Earth is a hydro-gen planet. The United States has an abundance of natural gas, which is the raw material for hydrogen.
Hydrogen in the United States is mainly produced from natural gas by steam me-thane reforming (SMR), and about 10 million tons are produced annually. Hydrogen is used for oil refining, ammonia production, power generation, storage batteries, etc. .
Hydrogen is mainly produced in the Midwest and the United States (Gulf Coast), transported by natural gas pipelines, and supplied to refineries and ammonia and methanol manufacturing plants.
It is expected to be a technology that can be used in areas where decarbonization is difficult, such as the steel and transportation industries. The United States is de-veloping technology to produce clean hydrogen with low carbon emissions.
China and other countries have no choice but to produce hydrogen through electrol-ysis or import it. China will probably generate electricity from natural energy sources such as solar power and use that electricity to run its cars. For this reason, China has promoted EVs as a policy.
"EVs have heavy batteries," so "I" have opposed the transition to "EVs" for reasons such as wearing out asphalt and "tire rubber," and polluting the air.
I think the Trump administration should produce hydrogen from natural gas in the United States and promote hydrogen-fueled vehicles that use hydrogen instead of gasoline as a national policy.
Unlike gasoline-powered vehicles, hydrogen vehicles only emit water while driving, and do not emit air pollutants such as carbon dioxide (CO2).
By making hydrogen cars, gasoline is replaced with hydrogen. GS sells hydrogen cartridges instead of gasoline. Drivers bring hydrogen cartridges to GS instead of gasoline.
There are two types of "hydrogen cars": "hydrogen engine cars" and "hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (FCVs)". Hydrogen engine cars are similar to gasoline cars. "FCVs" are similar to BEVs in that they run on a motor.
In the automotive industry, both gasoline cars and hydrogen engine cars have in-ternal combustion engines, so their manufacturing structure is the same. The price of hydrogen engine cars is almost the same as that of gasoline cars.
Tesla should switch from "EVs" to "FCVs". "FCVs" are cars that run on a motor us-ing electrical energy generated by a chemical reaction between "hydrogen" and "oxygen in the air". Good luck, Musk!
China is on the "EV" route, and America is on the "hydrogen car" route. I think "hy-drogen engine cars" with the same manufacturing cost as "gasoline cars" will sell. President Trump, let's go with "hydrogen fuel cars" in America!
Part 1 Citations and References
US Presidential Order to Abolish "EV Mandate", Experts Concerned about the Impact of Uncertainty on Society
https://www.jetro.go.jp/biznews/2025/01/935d169939b53b2b.html
I'll write again tomorrow
Part 2. "Immigration Control Act Violation Cases" "Weekday Edition".
"Everyone" in the "international community" please help!
First, please read about the "false accusation" of "aiding and abetting violation of immigration law" in 2010.
"Chapter 1". The summary of the incident is as follows.
In the fall of 2008, my company (I am the president) promised to hire "Chinese people studying abroad on student visas". I "issued" them "employment contracts" stating that "LEFCO" would "employ" them when they graduated from university the following spring.
However, after that, the "Lehman Shock" occurred in 2008.
As a result, orders for "system development" from the following year onwards were "cancelled".
As a result, "LEFCO" "cancelled" the "employment" of "those who were scheduled to join the company" in 2009.
Therefore, "they" continued to work at the restaurants where they had worked part-time as students even after graduating in 2009.
In May 2010, the Chinese were arrested for "violating Article 70 of the Immigration Control Act" by "activities outside of the status of residence".
In June 2010, after their arrest, I and the Chinese person in charge of recruitment (KingGungaku) were also arrested.
The reason was "crime of aiding and abetting" the Chinese for "violating Article 70 of the Immigration Control Act (activities outside the status of residence)".
<Reason for arrest> The prosecution said that I and KingGungaku giving the Chinese a "false employment contract" constituted "crime of aiding and abetting" under the Criminal Code.
"Chapter 2". Crimes in the judgment: (arbitrary and ridiculous)
The charges in the indictment are "the very provisions" of "Article 22-4-4 of the Immigration Control Act".
If a "status of residence" is obtained by submitting false documents, the Minister of Justice can revoke the "status of residence" at his "discretion". (And the person will be deported).
Therefore, even if a Chinese person submits "false documents," it is not a crime. It is not a crime to "aid" an innocent act.
The "reason for punishment" in the judgment:
1. The Chinese person obtained "resident status" by submitting a "false employment contract."
2. And they violated the Immigration Control Act (activities outside of their status of residence).
3. The Chinese person obtained "resident status" because "we" provided the Chinese person with a "false employment contract."
4. The Chinese person was able to "reside" in Japan because he obtained "resident status."
5. Because of that, the Chinese person was able to "work illegally."
6. Therefore, "we" who "provided" the Chinese person with a "false employment contract" were punished for "aiding" the Chinese person's "activities outside of their status of residence."
This is an "error" in the arbitrary "logic of law."
This reasoning is the "argument" that "when the wind blows, the barrel maker (profits)." This goes against "legal logic" even internationally.
The "criminal reason" in the indictment cannot be a crime because the provisions of the "Immigration Control Act," which is a "special law," take precedence over the "Criminal Code," which is a "general law."
My argument:
"1": The Immigration Control Act stipulates that the Minister of Justice will revoke the act of a foreigner who has obtained a residence status by submitting false documents (Immigration Control Act: Article 22-4-4, cancellation of residence status) through "administrative disposition." That's all.
"2": The Chinese who engaged in "unqualified work activities" are not guilty. The reason is that their "employers" have not been punished for the "crime of aiding and abetting illegal employment" under Article 73-2 of the Immigration Control Act.
Therefore, under the principle of "equality under the law," the Chinese are not guilty.
The Japanese government has punished "diplomats and Philippine embassy staff" for the exact same "criminal reason."
However, like the Chinese government, the Philippine government is also silent.
The rest will be published in the Saturday edition.
Part 3. Special Zone Construction. A new business model.
Special Zones accept refugees and immigrants as temporary immigrant workers and limit their residence to the special zone.
Developed countries use them as low-wage workers and achieve high economic growth again.
Refugees and immigrants can get jobs and live a hopeful, humane life.
Temporary immigrants are low-wage, but "food, clothing, shelter, medical expenses, and education are free."
NO2: https://world-special-zone.seesaa.net/
NO1: https://naganoopinion.blog.jp/
For NO4: to NO10:, please see the Sunday edition.
Thank you.
Yasuhiro Nagano
No comments:
Post a Comment