OT: Why General Motors is doomed

[Dhakala]

I... don't... f'ing... believe it! But it's true!

[Leon]

Sales manager, as the Parts director, and eventually as the GM of an AC/Delco distributor it is not a even close to a surprise that GM would end up where it is today. Arrogance will get you every time.

Unfortunately these "Environmentally Friendly" new cars are worse for the environment than the exhaust of a gasoline engine. The batteries that do not last for ever are a hazard to deal with as well.

[Teamcasa]

battery technology, electric cars are only a sick dream. As a Saturn Dealer, we were dealing with EV1's and they were a pain. It was a very happy day when that program ended. (Anybody want an EV1 charging station?)

The current crop of hybrid cars - (another cruel joke played on the unsuspecting public) are really only out there to appease the "green" people. They too will go the way of the EV1 and dodo bird.

If people were serious about fuel emissions from cars, they would require any car/truck made before 1995 to be scrapped. They would also change the license fees to be 0 on a new car/truck and increase year by year. Finally, require all gasoline vehicles to use 30% ethanol and all diesel's to use 30% biodiesel by 2010.

Dave

[Bruce T]

So, if electric cars are the salvation, where's the electricity coming from? California had "rolling blackouts" last year, so I guess that if we double (or triple) the demand for electricity, the government will figure out how to "FIX" the problem? Oh wait, I forgot, it's probably a conspiracy......

Maybe if people just tried to think things through before they start whinning....but no, that'll NEVER happen....

[George Max]

I love the environmental groups that don't talk to each other. Some groups hate power plants and fight tooth and nail against them. Other groups hate the internal combustion engine and do everything they can to switch everyone to electric cars.

I guess those people think electricity just pours out of those two (or

3) holes in the wall.

[gfretwell]

I am really surprised that the tax and spend folks are not charging an excise tax on electric cars. That power you are using is not assessing a "road tax" like petroleum fuels. From a tax standpoint it is like burning home heating oil in your diesel car.

It is making me look at an electric tho. I don't drive very far from home so I don't need a lot of range.

[Michael Daly]

Old lead acid batteries - yes. New battery technologies - no.

Mike

[Michael Daly]

I don't know a single person with a Prius who isn't happy with it. Maybe you're referring to the American excuses for hybrid technology.

Hybrid technology isn't likely to go away any time soon. Even if fuel cells come on line (hopefully DAFC and not hydrogen BS) it is easier and cheaper to create a fuel cell hybrid than a vehicle fully powered by a fuel cell.

Mike

[Edwin Pawlowski]

I saw an ad for a new extension cord for charging your electric car. It increases the distance traveled by 20% and charges in half the time, Yes, the Supercharger Cord is the future. The electric companies have know about this miracle cord for years, but, of course, they are interested in making money so they've been keeping it off the market.

Send $199.95 for your new Supercharger Cord and Supercharge your batteries,

But wait . . . . .there's more. If you order today, well give you an no extra charge the Supercharger for cordless power tools. just pay shipping and handling, of $29.

[Leon]

No, new technology batteries also.

[J. Clarke]

Nahh, don't buy that piece of junk, by the Monster Cable SuperDuperCharger with oxygen-free copper and fine stranding for more surface effect for only

1999.50.

[J. Clarke]

Huh? How do you figure? The point of a hybrid is that the engine charges the battery when there is excess capacity available. You can't charge a fuel cell.

[Teamcasa]

Deliberately ignoring your other post about batteries, I said "hybrid cars" NOT hybrid technology. (Locomotives and ships use hybrid technologies.) As for the Prius, and the other crop of hybrid cars, the people who drive them like them - for now. Wait until they need major service or when they try to re-sell them in the future (3-6 years).

We sell the Honda Hybrid and the main reason they buy them is, "so I can drive in the carpool lane by myself". Not one the main three hybrids, VW, Prius or the Civic have the horsepower of the standard engine counterpart and the mileage difference will pay for the cost difference in a few years of ownership.

Currently the newest - latest and greatest DAFC is only about 45% efficient and a long way from use in our cars. The best, most efficient method is moving to blended fuels, (Ethanol/gasoline) like Brazil has done and converting to biodiesel for trucks. The big hurdle for ethanol fuels is distribution and water separation systems that make it still to costly to implement nationally. Maybe when oil crosses the $100 a barrel it will make sense.

Dave (Hoping for room-temperature superconductivity and a method to render radio-active waste inert!)

[Michael Daly]

No, but you can still charge a battery. You want a 200 hp fuel cell? That's going to be a big fuel cell. How often do you use 200hp? Rarely (probably never, but most drivers think and buy with their penis). Instead, install a fuel cell for the power you need on a regular basis and store extra energy in a battery for acceleration - just like a Prius with an Atkinson cycle engine - turns an engine that is something like 80hp into a power plant that accelerates like it was 40% more powerful.

Reducing the size of the real power supply (engine, fuel cell) reduces weight and cost. In the case of an internal combustion engine, you get a real increase in efficiency too. Adding the battery is a small price compared to the alternative.

Mike

[Michael Daly]

The only locomotive I've heard of is a shunt engine for rail yards. There's no real advantage for long distance rail travel.

And people drive SUV's because they are big, not because they are needed. There are a lot of Priuses in my town and they aren't being purchased for carpool lanes - there are too few for that to be a justification. Every person I know buys one because they want a more fuel efficient vehicle.

That's more efficient than current H2 technology and way more efficient than an internal combustion engine. Since the focus of fuel cell technology is H2 (i.e. the US Congress' stupid alternative energy bill recently passed) , they may never succeed at producing auto-ready DAFC on an even playing field.

If they use (heavily subsidized and energy intensive) corn and sugar based ethanol, no. If they go with cellulose ethanol from low-grade crops, yes. Hybrid will make this even better. I can't think of a single reason why hybrid is not a good idea; it's simple technology with a big benefit.

It's nice to dream.

Mike

[Michael Daly]

Why? Is lithium the new heavy metal? NiMH are not anywhere near as bad as NiCd.

Replacing a reusable battery once every few years is peanuts compared to the environmental cost of finding, transporting, refining and burning gas or diesel.

Mike

[J. Clarke]

You still have to find, transport, refine, and burn oil in one form or another. Where do you think the electricity comes from?

[J. Clarke]

So now you're going to have a gasoline engine, a battery, _and_ a fuel cell? What is the fuel cell supposed to do?

It is? Why?

This kind of remark is one of the reasons that environmentalists get branded as whackos. Leave personalities out of it. If you have a statistic to present present it without commenting on the character of others.

So you're saying to use a hybrid with a battery and a fuel cell but no conventional engine?

Do you have numbers to present to support this view or are you just in love with your own notion?

[J. Clarke]

You just blew your credibility.

[CW]

You might as well shut up and go away. You lost all credibility with that statement.