Bill Frezza finds California's proposed rule that would fine automakers $5,000 per vehicle if at...


Bill Frezza finds California's proposed rule that would fine automakers $5,000 per vehicle if at least 5.5% of the new cars they sell in the state aren't electric "so astonishing you have to wonder whether the destruction of an entire industry is its actual intent."

Comments (65)
  • Derek A. Barrett
    , contributor
    Comments (3554) | Send Message
     
    Japanese car makers have always led the way with adhering to new emissions standards before Detroit does, the same thing would happen here.
    20 Jun 2011, 05:55 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    lightway,

     

    And when did any automaker "Not Adhere to the Regulations?"

     

    Never happened,m so other that the typical ( Bash America) rhetoric, your comment does not offer very much.
    20 Jun 2011, 06:14 PM Reply Like
  • Derek A. Barrett
    , contributor
    Comments (3554) | Send Message
     
    I'm not bashing America, I'm bashing crappy American auto makers for making crappy products nobody wants. Japanese car makers have always been ahead of the curve with stricter emissions standards, putting out compliant models before American companies did.

     

    You ever been through a smog check?

     

    By the way, well done by the Seeking Alpha editors for the California troll-bait. Hoping to see Paul Krugman later tonight lol.
    20 Jun 2011, 07:04 PM Reply Like
  • bigazul
    , contributor
    Comments (1073) | Send Message
     
    "I'm bashing crappy American auto makers for making crappy products nobody wants." You're about 10 years too late with that.
    20 Jun 2011, 07:20 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    lightway,

     

    Yes, I have been though many smog checks.

     

    You did not anwer the question.

     

    What domestic manufacturer has not met Federal emmission standards?

     

    Go ahead, Keep making comments on subject matter for which you have demonstrated you have absolutely no knowedge about.

     

    www.detnews.com/articl.../‘Visionary’-former-GM...

     

    articles.latimes.com/1...

     

    As far as "crappy products nobody wants"

     

    Is that an orignal thought or phrase of your own?

     

    GM and ford have larger Market share than ANY of their Japanese competitors, and growing.

     

    I suggest your read the links before rebutting.

     

    BTW, Who make the Highest fuel mileage non Hybid or Diesel Car you can buy?

     

    Hint, It is NOT Japanese, It is the Chevy Cruze.
    20 Jun 2011, 07:23 PM Reply Like
  • Joe Morgan
    , contributor
    Comments (1608) | Send Message
     
    Lightway, 1980 has showed great knowledge of the Auto industry....he's the expert, and you are just spewing left rhetoric of American manufacturers being crappy....have you seen the numbers? The big three have GAINED market share......
    20 Jun 2011, 07:28 PM Reply Like
  • Derek A. Barrett
    , contributor
    Comments (3554) | Send Message
     
    Mr. 1980, your question is stupid because you're asking about something else entirely from my post. I said that Japanese auto makers have provided compliant vehicles BEFORE Detroit ever did, not that Detroit vehicles never MET the standard.

     

    A quick check and actually following reading comprehension would have seen the difference. Read this page, there are way too many bullet points to post.

     

    "1995
    World’s first gasoline Low-Emission Vehicle (LEV), the 1996 Honda Civic, is introduced in California.

     

    The 1998 Accord, the first Ultra-Low Emission Vehicle (ULEV) is introduced.

     

    Honda introduces the 2000 Accord, the first Super-Ultra Low Emission Vehicle (SULEV)."

     

    www.flowhonda.com/Hond...

     

    Wrecked
    20 Jun 2011, 07:54 PM Reply Like
  • Derek A. Barrett
    , contributor
    Comments (3554) | Send Message
     
    As for you Joe Crash, didn't you just rant below about big government intervention?

     

    Aside from Ford, you can't claim government intervention sucks and then tell me what a wild success the car makers are. I don't give a crap how awesome Slim Shady is.
    20 Jun 2011, 07:55 PM Reply Like
  • Joe Morgan
    , contributor
    Comments (1608) | Send Message
     
    Lightway, your ignorance is just astounding.....
    20 Jun 2011, 07:59 PM Reply Like
  • J 457
    , contributor
    Comments (1000) | Send Message
     
    Only $5,000 penalty. I would make it at least $10,000.
    20 Jun 2011, 08:45 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    Lightway,

     

    As expected you did not address the Link I provided as to the FACT, that GM was in fact the Pioneer of the Catalytic converter, the modern basis for all emission controls.

     

    Nor that Honda did not even start using them until 1979, while GM did so stating in Model Year 1975.

     

    You also said That Japanese Makers voluntarily accelerated low emissions vehicles, yet the story (from Your green hugging state I provided) described not only Toyota Failing to comply, but fighting such assessment tooth and nail.

     

    As far as a few 4 cylinder cars meeting certain requirements pre-2000, that is a function of Physics.

     

    Gasoline was under a Dollar a gallon in 1999, and as such 4 cylinder autos made up very little of product mix. (The cars people want, in YOUR WORDS)

     

    And can you define which particular regulated emissions qualifies one for such bragging rights?

     

    CO2 was not a regulated emission, nor is, although your state may have given such accolades for such levels.

     

    It is heathy for your Cailifornia Weed Crop though.

     

    In 1996 GM had the EV1 long before your "Beloved Honda" had anything like it.
    Essentially what they are striving for now.
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

     

    CO2 emissions, setting the "toxicity" debate aside, are a function
    of fuel burned, not technology. As such 4cyl Cars that nobody wanted, would excel in that space without any engineering prowess or technology on that front.

     

    In 2005, GM became the first automaker to build a V6 to SULEV standards, not Honda

     

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
    20 Jun 2011, 08:52 PM Reply Like
  • Derek A. Barrett
    , contributor
    Comments (3554) | Send Message
     
    Catalytic converter is great, if you are talking the 1970s, but 40 years ago GM did indeed suck alot less, and they did alot of better things...40 years ago. Though they did get really bad during the 70s. GM also pioneered absolutely genius marketing strategies decades ago, but that was another generation.

     

    Yet over the past 15 years, Detroit put focus on huge gas guzzling SUV's, sent out wave and wave of increasingly larger vehicles, and were left with their pants down when the economy crashed twice.

     

    Meanwhile, during the same time, when it wasn't "cool" to, Honda was focusing on meeting California requirements long before they were due, because they were smart and anticipated the market much better than the clowns you are defending.

     

    Your EV1 example is joke, and a great example of how GM continues to fail. The difference is people actually BUY the Honda cars, not some experimental side project that most people have never even heard of.

     

    You guys are so big on free market forces, why do you feveriously defend an industry that has needed huge bailouts and tariff protections to exist? I thought tough love was the rule of law around here?
    20 Jun 2011, 09:03 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    J457,

     

    And where would the $10,000 come from, besides the customers that would be penalized for buying what it is they wanted?
    20 Jun 2011, 09:07 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    The EV1 was ahead of it's time. So much so, that Available Battery technology could not support the long term performance that customers demanded.

     

    That was why GM leased the car rather than sold it.

     

    As far as GM needing a bailout, that was mostly due to Union Legacy costs for Healthcare and retirement benefits that Honda gets from it's own government, or does not provide for it's american workers.
    20 Jun 2011, 09:14 PM Reply Like
  • Derek A. Barrett
    , contributor
    Comments (3554) | Send Message
     
    Meh, I knew you'd fall back on the union blame, and almost wrote that in my first post. Always need a socialist boogieman to lay the blame on.

     

    GM Management was completely incompetent, sure the legacy union obligations were a big part of their demise, but you can't blame bad management on that.
    20 Jun 2011, 10:29 PM Reply Like
  • Stone Fox Capital
    , contributor
    Comments (9635) | Send Message
     
    Um, shouldn't sales be based on demand?
    20 Jun 2011, 05:55 PM Reply Like
  • Radardoc
    , contributor
    Comments (190) | Send Message
     
    Only if you believe in Capitalism and free markets. This is destruction by design.
    20 Jun 2011, 06:07 PM Reply Like
  • montanamark
    , contributor
    Comments (1455) | Send Message
     
    this is communism - just say no

     

    are the businesses private or not
    20 Jun 2011, 06:07 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    Stone Fox,

     

    I would rather put gasoline in my car vs ethanol blends.

     

    But, That's unlikely to happen.

     

    When politicians demand votes from special interests, with other people's money, Market demands mean very little.
    20 Jun 2011, 06:07 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    Let the people in those states, that voted for those politicians pay the price.

     

    Just stay the hell away from me.
    20 Jun 2011, 06:10 PM Reply Like
  • warrenrial
    , contributor
    Comments (550) | Send Message
     
    Give California back to Mexico.
    20 Jun 2011, 06:12 PM Reply Like
  • Radardoc
    , contributor
    Comments (190) | Send Message
     
    As a Cali resident, I offer the following:

     

    We already have
    21 Jun 2011, 01:19 PM Reply Like
  • Mike Maher
    , contributor
    Comments (2860) | Send Message
     
    Wouldn't automakers just not sell new cars in California? I bet car sales in Nevada, Arizona and Oregon would all jump up as the auto companies pull out of Cali.

     

    In all seriousness though, California can not afford to start making up ridiculous laws and hurting business there. The state is already on financial life support as it is.
    20 Jun 2011, 06:14 PM Reply Like
  • Windsun33
    , contributor
    Comments (4431) | Send Message
     
    In actual fact, they did that once, I believe back in the 1980's, before California gave up on it's stringent requirements and backed off then for about 5 years. There were temporary expanded carlots in the state border towns that looked like giant parking lots.

     

    It was so bad until CA woke up that dealers even in CA were selling cars for out of state delivery that could be driven back to CA as "used" cars.
    20 Jun 2011, 11:07 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (16256) | Send Message
     
    Wind:

     

    The can solve that problem "creatively" by having border-control stations, like those agricultural checkpoints on CA borders. That way, if your car isn't electric, they simply refuse you entry into the great state of California. What could be simpler than that?

     

    P.S. A few years from now, when they figure out that electric cars "destroy the planet" from all the coal, nuclear and endangered-species-kil... hydroelectric power plants, they can ban electric cars, too, and finally achieve their ultimate goal, forced ridership of bicycles (along with Mao jackets, of course).
    20 Jun 2011, 11:17 PM Reply Like
  • Radardoc
    , contributor
    Comments (190) | Send Message
     
    In reply to:
    "In all seriousness though, California can not afford to start making up ridiculous laws and hurting business there."

     

    The word "start" is misplaced. California has been on a slow self destruct program for years. I watch in horror as, year after year, the same morons are re-elected to office and the masses pass ballot measures one after the other that run the state debt higher and higer. Then in unison, they all chant "tax the rich, we want more..."

     

    Someone once said "As goes California, there goes the country."

     

    God help the Country.
    21 Jun 2011, 01:29 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    Maher,

     

    It is presently illegal to register a car less than a couple years old under a certain level of mileage, that was not made to their Specs.

     

    You did not think the politicians would make it that easy, did you?
    20 Jun 2011, 06:18 PM Reply Like
  • Mike Maher
    , contributor
    Comments (2860) | Send Message
     
    I was aware that it must meet the smog rules in California, but not of any other requirements. Either way, the new law would fine auto makers, not people purchasing the cars. Since the law is not changing any car requirements, and is aimed at invoking change by punishing automakers for not adhering to a certain product mix, I do not see why it would not be allowed for Cali residents to purchase cars in another state, so long as it meets the Smog standards.

     

    dmv.ca.gov/pubs/brochu...
    20 Jun 2011, 06:27 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    I would guess the Bureaucrats would just base their fines on new registrations for their own residents.

     

    They do need "Their" money as you should know.
    20 Jun 2011, 06:36 PM Reply Like
  • bigazul
    , contributor
    Comments (1073) | Send Message
     
    California native here, all cars made for sale in the US are built with CA emission standards, and have been for quite a number of years. It was just cheaper to built the one type. Most states also match CA standards also.

     

    What is illegal is register a car outside of the state after an out of state purchase...which has always been a problem in CA because the registration fees are so bad.

     

    So, yes, this would once again be another stupid law that would send revenue out of the state. The proposal will never get to the Governor's desk anyway. Bills like this are proposed every couple of weeks in CA...that's why no real work gets done by the CA legislature.
    20 Jun 2011, 06:38 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    Bigazul,

     

    Only very recently did most automakers build one version acceptable for all 50 states.

     

    Some had been in the issue of production simplicity.

     

    Those that are, or were not, cannot be registered in California as new cars, to California residents.
    20 Jun 2011, 06:46 PM Reply Like
  • Windsun33
    , contributor
    Comments (4431) | Send Message
     
    This time around, unlike the 80's, it is not the emission standards that are the issue though. It is the actual type of vehicle.

     

    When I was working in Blythe a few years ago, 95% of the RV's and probably half the cars there had AZ plates on them.
    20 Jun 2011, 11:13 PM Reply Like
  • Duude
    , contributor
    Comments (3413) | Send Message
     
    Liberals have made proposals before which they later reverse when reality doesn't catch up to their idea of utopia. I believe their thinking is that more pressure will bring a greater likelihood of it becoming reality. But they know they can and will likely reverse this policy later, if passed now. Imagine what Californians would do if they had to pay a $5000 premium on new automobiles or buy it out of state. Imagine how many more dirty used vehicles would be sold instead. If they passed this law now and kept it in place in the year 2017, a new voter initiative would appear on the ballot that would institute a 100% tax on lawmakers in the state.
    20 Jun 2011, 06:34 PM Reply Like
  • SA Editor Rocco Pendola
    , contributor
    Comments (6177) | Send Message
     
    The writer of this article shows (A) an obvious political bias and (B) a general lack of understanding of the role EVs will play.

     

    He plays loose with the facts, re: supply and demand of the Leafs. He never mentions what the Volt really is. And, like many outsiders, he has a wholly incomplete and inaccurate view of California.
    20 Jun 2011, 06:40 PM Reply Like
  • bigazul
    , contributor
    Comments (1073) | Send Message
     
    Just remember, CA. is more than LA and SF... a point missed by many "insiders" in CA.
    20 Jun 2011, 06:48 PM Reply Like
  • tigersam
    , contributor
    Comments (1707) | Send Message
     
    It is about time CA. Lets do it!
    20 Jun 2011, 06:43 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    Tigerscam

     

    And just where is this "Majic, Emissions Free Electicity" going to come from?

     

    I guess they can tax too!

     

    As Usual, you will not offer technical solutions, only political rhetoric.

     

    Because technically, you are not capable of offering viable alternatives or solutions.
    20 Jun 2011, 06:56 PM Reply Like
  • Windsun33
    , contributor
    Comments (4431) | Send Message
     
    They can buy it from the nuke or coal plants in Arizona.
    20 Jun 2011, 11:16 PM Reply Like
  • CharlieM
    , contributor
    Comments (149) | Send Message
     
    Windsun,
    That's mature and responsible isn't it? Just let AZ or anyone else carry the burdens. BRILLIANT and spoken like a real Green Weirdo!
    20 Jun 2011, 11:28 PM Reply Like
  • tigersam
    , contributor
    Comments (1707) | Send Message
     
    XLS:

     

    Looks like you know lot about cars. But CA is always ahead in technology related legislation and I am very sure legislators thought about all possibilities.
    21 Jun 2011, 09:35 AM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    Tigerscam,

     

    The only thing legislators have thought about is buying special interest votes.

     

    An agreement was ALREADY made with the feds accepting the stricter Ca standards nationwide.

     

    www.chicagotribune.com...

     

    So much for agreements when politicians are involved
    21 Jun 2011, 09:52 AM Reply Like
  • Windsun33
    , contributor
    Comments (4431) | Send Message
     
    Uhm... yeah, OK.

     

    Look at the financial mess that California is in, and then tell me again "I am very sure legislators thought about all possibilities..."
    21 Jun 2011, 10:57 AM Reply Like
  • Good Captain
    , contributor
    Comments (463) | Send Message
     
    Call me foolish but I tend to attribute this to blissful ignorance. Unfortunately, I have a front row seat (living near Sacramento) and I believe most of the proponents have very little concept of the negative impact of their handiwork on jobs, etc.
    20 Jun 2011, 06:49 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (16256) | Send Message
     
    It's more like the destruction of California, not the auto industry. Like with other insanity the wild-eyed libs propose and often pass, the residents --especially those with money, increasingly are voting with their feet, moving elsewhere.

     

    A recent survey assessing which counties had the most high-wealth emigration out found Santa Clara County (Silicon Valley) as the #1 loser in the nation. Other top losers were all in high-tax states, like MA, NJ, NY, and MD. All the top winners were in Florida and Texas, two states with no state income taxes.

     

    Think there's a message there? Think there's the slightest chance that CA's socialists will get it?
    20 Jun 2011, 06:52 PM Reply Like
  • CharlieM
    , contributor
    Comments (149) | Send Message
     
    Tack,
    I doubt it. I expect to see the Fed step in and punish businesses that exit CA for places like Texas.

     

    I've been considering some of the thread's responses. I suppose the libs are happy with Nuclear Power Generation as opposed to other means. I find it pitiful that those "Green" windmills are killing more endangered species of birds than any power plant ever has or will.

     

    Like Greece, keep an eye on California for the lessons of what NOT to do for the rest of America.
    20 Jun 2011, 07:15 PM Reply Like
  • Joe Morgan
    , contributor
    Comments (1608) | Send Message
     
    That's why this country is going to the crappers.......

     

    What's with all this meddling into the private sector? Why Government can choose the winners and pick the losers? What's next... a tax on how much oxygen we breath?

     

    Let's the free markets decide.....or this is going to end badly....

     

    We are already witnessing the damage of too much government intervention....the housing bubble was instigated and pushed by politicians who mandated subprime lending....if we continue messing with the private sector, micromanaging things from an Oval office, we are for serious pain ahead....
    20 Jun 2011, 07:09 PM Reply Like
  • neutrinoman
    , contributor
    Comments (700) | Send Message
     
    California is apparently finished as a state. Let's hope the crazies can't impose what destroyed CA on the rest of us.
    20 Jun 2011, 07:29 PM Reply Like
  • HiSpeed
    , contributor
    Comments (1300) | Send Message
     
    The ultra-lefties who run are running the Peoples Socialist Republic of California into the ground know nothing about running a business.

     

    This comes as no surprise since Socialists only know how to create more burdensome regulations, as opposed to producing something productive and useful.
    20 Jun 2011, 07:40 PM Reply Like
  • Ted Bear
    , contributor
    Comments (700) | Send Message
     
    The auto companies have had how many years to build an electric, or otherwise fuel efficient, vehicle? Instead, they have farted around and played games with what constitutes a 'car' (versus a truck or an SUV) so that the crap they build car 'average' into the ridiculously low fuel mileage hurdles.
    They refused to do it on their own, so Kalifornia is doing it for them (not that the State can't use the money as well).
    If you think the American car companies are knocking the cover off of the ball, go take a look at the performance of the stock prices. Nothing has changed at GM, and they are rapidly headed toward Bankruptcy II. Don't be surprised when one day soon you read a headline that they are once again on life support, and that their days are numbered.
    Perhaps it is because they can't seem to build a car which is fuel efficient, stylish, reliable at a price point which reflects reality.
    20 Jun 2011, 10:31 PM Reply Like
  • Mike Maher
    , contributor
    Comments (2860) | Send Message
     
    How are 5 consecutive quarters of profitability and $21 billion of cash and cash equivalents "rapidly heading toward Bankruptcy II"??

     

    investor.gm.com/earnin.../
    20 Jun 2011, 10:48 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    TedBear,
    You, another one commenting on a subject for which you obviously know nothing.

     

    "crap they build car 'average' into the ridiculously low fuel mileage hurdles.
    They refused to do it on their own, so Kalifornia is doing it for them (not that the State can't use the money as well)."

     

    Is that right?

     

    FACT:
    Automakers, California, and the Federal Government all agreed to uniform federal standards for emissions and MPG in May 2009.

     

    wheels.blogs.nytimes.c.../

     

    www.huffingtonpost.com...

     

    These standards were embraced by all involved, and do not involve
    "Low Hurdles" I can assure you.

     

    Obviously with this story they ( California) are trying to backpedal, and will lose by Federal override if necessary.
    21 Jun 2011, 07:39 AM Reply Like
  • Windsun33
    , contributor
    Comments (4431) | Send Message
     
    Some people don't let the truth get in the way of their statements.

     

    I guess GM is going broke by making money.
    21 Jun 2011, 08:14 AM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    TedBear,

     

    Another link for you and lightway.

     

    "Most overpriced cars of 2011"

     

    Toyota and Honda Win Again!

     

    www.thestreet.com/stor...

     

    And GM and the domestics,

     

    www.thestreet.com/stor...

     

    www.thestreet.com/stor...
    21 Jun 2011, 09:06 AM Reply Like
  • Derek A. Barrett
    , contributor
    Comments (3554) | Send Message
     
    "Two of the automakers most affected by the disaster,"

     

    Wow, pretty low Mister 1970.
    21 Jun 2011, 11:44 AM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    I was referrring mostly to overpricing, not temporary production cuts due to the quake.

     

    What does them overpricing their product have to do with the Quake?

     

    In case you did not know Toyota has been having "Issues" for well over a year now, nothing to do with the Quake.
    21 Jun 2011, 11:57 AM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10786) | Send Message
     
    I love their crazy idea of putting a negative incentive in place - ha, ha. It would cost 10x as much as providing a positive incentive. Why doesn't the state just provide a tax credit to those who buy an electric car of sufficient magnitude to get to the 5.5% mix of vehicles they want. I'm sure CA can find the money in their budget to provide for such a tax credit. Right? Maybe it's the legalized marijuana working on their brains.... Kinda like why the public worker PENSIONS for San Franciscians are more than the average ACTUAL WAGES of non-public employees.
    21 Jun 2011, 08:34 AM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (16256) | Send Message
     
    WM:

     

    Here are how the synapses are connected in their brains:

     

    All private companies = evil = punish

     

    All public entities (including employees) = good = reward
    21 Jun 2011, 08:41 AM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10786) | Send Message
     
    Tack....why is it you have such a simple way of making everything so understandable.

     

    I am looking forward to the day when there is one gigantic intellect sitting behind the curtain running all the computers that run all the factories run by robots that make all the stuff and deliver all the stuff so all the rest of us can sit on our butts or go play golf. We can all then be employed by the Fed, State or Local governments just making sure our neighbors are not wattering on an "odd" day.
    21 Jun 2011, 08:59 AM Reply Like
  • SA Editor Rocco Pendola
    , contributor
    Comments (6177) | Send Message
     
    Don't let the facts get in the way of a "good" story...

     

    www.autoweek.com/artic...

     

    "Electricity costs 11 cents per kilowatt-hour at my house, where Southern California Edison supplies the juice. So a full charge from empty to 24 kilowatt-hours costs $2.64. That will take you as far as 90 miles. If gasoline is $4 a gallon and your car gets 20 mpg, it'll cost you $18 to go 90 miles. So an EV costs 1/7th as much as a gasoline car to keep fueled. Your numbers will vary.

     

    Southern California Edison says it doesn't get any of its electricity from coal-burning powerplants, either. So in Southern California, EVs make even more sense.

     

    During those three months the car didn't have any mechanical problems, either, not that you'd expect to have any in only 1,673 miles. But we should at least note that the quality was pretty good during our short tenure with the Leaf.

     

    People can and should debate the viability of electric cars, but now that we have had two of them for three months each and come away happy, that should say something."

     

    Read more: www.autoweek.com/artic...
    21 Jun 2011, 01:18 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    Rocco,

     

    Where then, does the electricity come from, Magic?

     

    Electric Cars given the current battery technology, are only viable for a small segment of the market given their limitations.

     

    The Mandate (allegedly) is to help the environment, not save you money.

     

    That said, they are fairly economical on a cost per mile basis.

     

    One must take into the cost of batteries however. Both on the original purchase as well as duty cycle replacement.

     

    Back to the electricity. The only source cleaner than a conventional gasoline auto itself would be Solar, As modern gasoline autos emit virtually no pollutants other than CO2 given current standards and technology.

     

    Problem,

     

    Your car needs to charge at home while you are sleeping at night.
    For obvious reasons as well as Off-Peak demand issues related to grid capacity.

     

    Solar has this big problem however.

     

    It's called NIGHTIME!

     

    Point is, politicians have not thought that out.

     

    I doubt they care either.

     

    21 Jun 2011, 01:41 PM Reply Like
  • SA Editor Rocco Pendola
    , contributor
    Comments (6177) | Send Message
     
    Wow. No offense, but you really do not know what you are talking about.

     

    And even if you did, you are stuck on one issue. Did you ever think people will choose an EV because its cheaper for them? Without even considering the environment?
    21 Jun 2011, 02:19 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    Rocco,

     

    Sure,

     

    For the few that can live with their Limitations, they can save alot of money.

     

    Especially given an article in my state only yesterday, how some charging stations are available to use for FREE!

     

    Yes for free. That, however brings a greater political discussion.

     

    Matter of fact, I guy I know was the first in my home state to own a Chevy Volt. He loves it and has only used 3 gallons of gas for the 8K miles he has used the car.

     

    The Volt however is a bit more practical than Cars like the Leaf, albeit at a price.

     

    $41K is a lot of money for a Car of that Caliber.

     

    Less the $7500 Federal Tax Credit. Naturally. In my state one does not pay sales tax either for such a car.

     

    Without subsidies the economic Viability gets a bit more cloudy.
    21 Jun 2011, 02:33 PM Reply Like
  • CharlieM
    , contributor
    Comments (149) | Send Message
     
    Here's a little suggestion for all to consider as well. Being an engineer I am SERIOUSLY considering setting up a compressor at my house to use the natural gas, that comes to the house from our local utility, so that I can fill a tank on my truck. The cost of this clean fuel is almost NOTHING and is a LOT cheaper than either of these options. Here's a little breakdown on the costs:

     

    Truck Conversion: $2,500
    Pump and radiant cooler: $3,000

     

    Emissions: near nothing
    Cost to power the pump: Same as the natural gas as it will be powered from the same gas stream being compressed.
    Range of my truck on a full tank: 1200miles
    Current cost to fill that tank: $40

     

    I will grant you that gasoline is currently declining in cost but, the return on investment for me will be around 6 months and I will also gain on oil changes and engine life since the combustion produces MUCH less carbon and will allow me to extend the life of my vehicle by nearly another 30, 000 miles.

     

    WHY isn't America considering this option? We now have a HUGE surplus of natural gas and take a look at the current rates it trades at!!!!
    21 Jun 2011, 07:45 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    CharlieM,

     

    That would be the "Picken's Plan" in a nutshell.

     

    WPRT, CLNE CMI

     

    www.pickensplan.com/
    21 Jun 2011, 07:48 PM Reply Like
  • CharlieM
    , contributor
    Comments (149) | Send Message
     
    1980,
    I have not had time to seek out T Boon's plans lately. I know he has been developing a HUGE wind farm in the panhandle of Texas lately. I will look for them. If you have any links for them I would really appreciate you posting them.

     

    I know that this is one resource/fuel we do not currently export in massive quantities. It quite possibly could get us away from foreign imports and in my way of reasoning would be a HUGE help to our struggling economy.

     

    Would you agree?
    21 Jun 2011, 08:00 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Hub
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs