Grab our RSS Feed
Bob Lutz Reponds on the Recent Crock of Global Warming Comments
February 22nd, 2008 | Posted in: General
We discussed a few days ago, along with several other major blogs, Bob Lutz’ comment about global warming, where he had called it “a crock of s–t”. Apparently the GM vice-chair was quite amazed about how that took off on the blogosphere.
He has now responded on his own blog, and makes the point that his opinions about global warming are his own personal ones, are immaterial, and have no impact on the decisions he makes for GM and the direction the company is headed.
He advises us not to form opinions about him, but rather about GM the company, and advises us it is GM’s plan to take cars out of the environmental equation. He even says that doing so is “good for the planet”.
He concludes the Volt is being built under his personal supervision and he fully believes it will revolutionize the automotive industry.
Source (Fastlane Blog)
Popularity: 4%
(4 votes, average: 3.75 out of 5) 
Loading ...
Posted by: Lyle
February 22nd, 2008 at 6:19 am
Well, thanks Lyle , the comments of Bob Lutz are those of a “true” executive of a great company.
BTW, the electrification of vehicles is progressing, see today’s information ” Now the People’s Car is turning electric!” on : http://www.batteryvehiclesociety.org.uk/wordpress/?p=365
VW is in the run.
February 22nd, 2008 at 6:41 am
As long as he keeps pushing the Volt, he can think what he likes.
February 22nd, 2008 at 7:14 am
I agree with NZDavid!
February 22nd, 2008 at 7:32 am
Actually, I admire Bob Lutz tremendously for not trying to be “politically correct” –about global warming or much of anything else! Really. It’s a breath of fresh air in the midst of the stale, stifling, smelly air presently polluting the political atmosphere of the U.S. presidential campaign! Bob’s spontaneous, unvarnished remark about a “crock of —-” (and lots of other things) makes him as credible to me as a close friend.
So when Bob Lutz says, “The Chevrolet Volt program is occurring under my personal watch, because I believe in it. I fully expect that it will revolutionize the automotive industry, and I’m committed to seeing it successfully developed and in showrooms” ….I KNOW he’s genuinely committed and that the huge change in automotive design he’s talking about isn’t a “ZEROX CHANGE”!!!
Sure glad you’re holding the reins, Bob!!!
February 22nd, 2008 at 7:39 am
Bob Lutz is the man. The only thing better than his straight talk is his real action in progressing the Chevy Volt - they go hand in hand. His strategy, plan for execution and unwavering drive will do more to eliminate the use of foreign oil than any other efforts happening today.
February 22nd, 2008 at 7:41 am
PS: I see I’ve just shown my own “political incorrectness” by mis-spelling XEROX!
February 22nd, 2008 at 8:14 am
Well, Bob is a public figure who should have known better than to step into that one.
Lyle, nice that you caused such a commotion that he had to respond. Now if only we could get GM to offer a couple versions of the Volt with longer ranges…
February 22nd, 2008 at 8:52 am
We are all entitled to our opinions (mine are mostly wrong), but when
someone as high up as Mr. Lutz is, one needs to be careful when talking to reporters while representing the company. It seems to me and if the reporters are interviewing the Vice Chairman of GM, they expect that what he says is what the company thinks. They are not expecting his personal opinion unless otherwise stated.
Either way, I agree with NZDavid #2.
February 22nd, 2008 at 9:24 am
Global Warming has become a religion that is more fundamentalist than any other out there. Disagree with the dogma and you are dragged and beaten in the streets. There are numerous climate scientists who know that man-made CO2 is not the only possible explanation for climate change. But like Bob, they are taken out to the woodshed and beaten into submission to the point where they say “why bother.” It’s a shame and a sham. Bob shouldn’t have to explain himself or apologize for calling this debate what it is…a bloody jihad against anyone who disagrees with the elitist position on CO2. The hypocrisy of the so-called scientifically enlightened liberal establishment is shameful.
February 22nd, 2008 at 9:37 am
#9 PR-Thug
The tone and content of your discourse seems to promote the type of behavior you are condemning.
February 22nd, 2008 at 9:48 am
If Global Warming is like religion, then the last thing you should do is bash it. Nobody wins. Bob Lutz learned this lesson the hard way.
February 22nd, 2008 at 9:50 am
Just a jump on the bandwagon here … Lutz is an expert on what makes a car popular. His opinions on that subject matter. His opinions on other subjects are of no more importance than any body else hanging around the bar. He’s right about that.
On the subject that matters he is doing the right thing.
Is he doing it because he wants to help reduce the magnitude of the crisis that is global climate change? Or to help make America less dependent on other counties for oil? No. He is doing it because he sees that it will make GM a ton of money over time. And that is just fine by me. Just so long as it gets done.
The best things in the world are often accomplished by people just looking out for their own selfish interests.
February 22nd, 2008 at 9:50 am
He thinks that global warming is “a crock of s–t” but he also believes that taking cars out of the environmental equation is “good for the planet”.
Am I the only one thinking that it is not good that a person who holds both such ridiculous dualistic thinking and is, quite frankly, ignorantly prejudiced is not the best person to be leading on the development of electric cars?
It also shows that he is completely out of touch with reality if he was amazed that his comments attracted criticism.
February 22nd, 2008 at 9:50 am
Well said #4 nasaman and #9 PR-Thug.
I applaud Bob Lutz for saying what he thinks even though it might not be politically correct. We need more Bob Lutz in this world!
My interests in the Volt are simple; 1) decrease our country’s use and dependence upon foreign oil, and 2) stick it to the oil thugs of this world!
If the Volt and other E-REV/Hybrid vehicles have a beneficial effect upon the environment that is great! But, I’m not convinced it will happend to a measurable degree, at least not in my lifetime!
February 22nd, 2008 at 9:57 am
#13, Barry,
I don’t see those two positions as inconsistent. Liberals have made the mistake of dropping pollution arguements for global warming arguements. Burning less petroleum will reduce pollution, which is good for the planet - no one would ever argue with that.
February 22nd, 2008 at 10:03 am
I do not understand people sometimes - Bob Lutz is credible because he is not afraid to say out loud that the Earth is flat? Maybe he should stick to cars and stay away from science. It reminds me what a lot of people said about a certain political figure: I like him because when he makes a decision, he sticks to it. Even if it happens to be a wrong decision? I am sorry, but in my book, that’s dumb. Smart people change their decisions based on new data coming in. But that’s called flip floping.
#9 - I am afraid you are not correct. Global warming is not a religion, on the contrary - it is a fact. And there are no numerous climate scientists that disagree with global warming. Scientific community is pretty uniform here, with the exception of a couple of quacks (hey, they are people who think the Earth is flat too).
Sorry for the rant. I agree with #2, although I wish Bob would not say things like these anymore. In my eyes that makes him LESS credible.
February 22nd, 2008 at 10:11 am
#10 thomdbhomb
My tone is simply factual. Bob disagrees that manmade CO2 is THE cause of climate change….he’s in the company of several thousand scientists who objectively can say “manmade CO2 is one of MANY possible causes.” My point is that to be contrary to the popular belief system, you are assasinated by the elitist believers who follow the dogma with more faithfulness than the most hardened relgious zealot. If Bob thinks it’s a “crock” he’s not arrived at that opinion by chance…trust me, he’s a really smart guy who’s very well read on this issue. His choice of words were obviously bad in this case…but the point he’s making is not. This global economy is going to take hits totaling trillions of dollars to “fix” an issue that it has no possibility of “fixing.” That sounds like a crock to me! What’s a bigger crock is that every country that signed the Koyoto Protocol not only didn’t meet the reductions specified, they all dramatically INCREASED their CO2 output. That’s because CO2 simply equates to economic expansion and opportunity. No country is going to go into poverty over policy…that also would be a crock. The global climate debate ish about far more than CO2…it’s the biggest wealth redistribution scheme ever created. When the zealots cry “there is no more debate,” or “anyone who denies GCC is diluted,” or “the science is conclusive and settled,” is simply a liar. And that too is a crock.
February 22nd, 2008 at 10:26 am
PR-Thug - Several thousand scientists? Since you called me a liar for saying there is no more debate, back it up. Where are you getting the info from and the numbers? I want to look it up. I suggest you drop the letters PR from your nickname until you can show some hard data.
February 22nd, 2008 at 10:34 am
Global warming, the point of conjecture is not the existance but the cause. Is the cause man made or cyclical ?
February 22nd, 2008 at 10:36 am
Well said PR-Thug!
February 22nd, 2008 at 10:36 am
Lucky #18
Here’s a good starting point.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming
And remember, in an open minded, scientifically enlightened society…one year here the words “there no debate” it’s usually followed by mobs and hangings. We have no more “proof” that manmade CO2 is the difinative cause of global climate change than we do of the existence of space aliens. What we have is a temperature trend and a whole bunch of hysteria. The “facts” tell us the earth has warmed and cooled MANY times in the ancient past…way before there were Hummers. Can you help me out with how that could happen without all the manmade CO2?? (I’ll save you the trip..you can’t and neither can the CO2 faithful).
And by the way, I never called you a liar or anything else…my comments were generalized, no matter how close to home they may have been
February 22nd, 2008 at 10:55 am
Global warming or not global warming, there are other reasons to see oil go away.
How about ending terrorism, war over oil, pollution in our waterways and in the air that we breathe. How about the high gas prices we are paying. Global warming or not, the Volt is a good start. The Air Car might be a better one. They will both be for sale around the same time.
http://crave.cnet.com/8301-1_105-9876428-1.html
February 22nd, 2008 at 11:04 am
Unlike MANY people today, Mr. Lutz is smart and bold enough to form his OWN opinions contrary to mass media programming and to realize that there will be a HUGE market for electric cars in the near future for MANY reasons other than whether or not Global Warming is caused by man.
His FIRST duty is to GM’s stockholders and transitioning from Oil to Renewable Electricity is simply good policy. Like a farmer, GM is sewing seeds now for a bountiful harvest in the future as petroleum becomes more rare thus in MANY ways more expensive.
There are leaders and there are followers. Mr. Lutz has the COURAGE to show GM how to once again LEAD the market and this is indeed a VERY nice change.
RESPECT!
February 22nd, 2008 at 11:13 am
PR-Thug. Thanks for the list, I looked it up. The list contains 42 names, not thousands. Here is another article on wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_controversy
Here is a part of the article:
The majority of climate scientists agree that global warming is primarily caused by human activities such as fossil fuel burning and deforestation. The conclusion that global warming is mainly caused by human activity and will continue if greenhouse gas emissions are not reduced has been endorsed by at least 30 scientific societies and academies of science, including all of the national academies of science of the major industrialized countries. The U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and the Joint Science Academies of the major industrialized and developing nations explicitly use the word “consensus” when referring to this conclusion.
Consensus. 42 names mean nothing. So I still disagree with you, although I appreciate your response with a link.
February 22nd, 2008 at 11:20 am
I think that the best response to this was posted yesterday on the “Bob Lutz: ‘The Road Ahead’” thread by john1701a, #46, 6:27 PM.
Once again, zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz, wake me when it’s over.
February 22nd, 2008 at 11:40 am
Bob Lutz should run for President!!! He would have my vote.
February 22nd, 2008 at 11:41 am
Rock on Bob.
February 22nd, 2008 at 11:41 am
PR Thug, If you knew anything about scientists and science, you would understand that an issue is rarely ever deemed settled, especially on such a new topic as climate change and its causes. Science is all about asking questions in an attempt to describe the would around us. Sometimes the questions need to be asked from different angles or points of view, and sometimes the prevailing beliefs are proven wrong. The overwhelming evidence points to some dramatic things going on in our atmosphere. Most scientists agree on the rough sketch. Questions are still being asked, and the attempt is made to answer them. If there is a scientist who disagrees with the trend it is up to him or her to pose the questions, make the observations, formulate the conclusions and present it. There is still a great deal of disagreement and vigorous debate in the scientific community, even if the debate is 100 to 1.
‘they are taken out to the woodshed and beaten into submission’?
Isn’t that a little over the top?
Regardless whether you think human caused CO2 climate change is happening (I do), there are a number of reasons why developing new technologies and producing a car like the Volt are really important. http: http://www.thecaseforpluginhybrids.com. Lets remove global warming from the discussion and lets make this happen for any one of the other reasons.
February 22nd, 2008 at 12:01 pm
It’s funny how things change in a matter of 40 years. I remember back in the 70’s we were going to have an ice age and all the leading scientists at the time said that we should release CO2 to save our self’s. The amount of CO2 release by humans is nowhere near the amount released by a single volcanic burp. The earth has heated and cooled its self many times and will continue to do so, the most likely cause of the current temperature trend is due to the sun, not my trail blazer. Besides if you look closely at the CO2 vs. temperature graphs that AL Gore showed you will see that in almost all cases that temperature goes up than the amount of CO2 increases.
The actual fact is that cars like the VOLT will be good for everyone including the earth. PR-Thug said it best, people are confusing pollution with global warming, the 2 may be related but I doubt it.
February 22nd, 2008 at 12:41 pm
PR-Thug
Fact: You talk about religion, beating, jihad, elitism, hypocrisy, “liberal establishment,” mobs, hangings, hysteria, and the faithful.
Fact: You call yourself “Thug.”
Conclusion: You sound more religious and irrational than scientific.
Recommendation (to PR-Thug): Seek troll food elsewhere.
Recommendation (to others): Keep this site respectful and rational.
February 22nd, 2008 at 12:53 pm
If you think that 1.5 degrees warming over the last century is bad, wait until you see the swing between January and July!
Seriously though, the rising global temperature is FACT, measured and recorded by impartial scientific instruments. The cause of that warming is seriously debated in many scientific and government bodies. Is the rise of upper atmosphere CO2 causing the warming, or is the warming causing CO2 in the upper atmosphere? Here’s a little tidbit that will mess with your mind: Water vapor is several orders of magnitude stronger than CO2 as a green house gas! Warmer water evaporates faster. Higher levels of water vapor in the upper atmosphere lead to more high-altitude clouds which reflect solar energy back into space thereby cooling the planet. Where’s the balance? I dunno, and I don’t care. Just build me a car that doesn’t pollute so much and let’s me get away from this expensive gasoline!
Bob has my vote all the way…
February 22nd, 2008 at 1:07 pm
Car people love cars. They love the internal combustion engine. The growl of the engine, the exhaust “note”. This colors their vision of the world. To accept that car exhaust is killing the planet would threaten their passion. That’s why Gore called his film an INCONVENIENT truth. Most people don’t want to change their lifestyles. They like things the way they are. That’s why the loudest global warming deniers are car enthusiasts. So this doesn’t surprise me at all.
While there are other reasons to make the Volt, surely, in his perfect world, Bob Lutz would probably LIKE to keep his company making fast sports cars and SUVs as long as possible. So you can’t say that his opinions don’t color GM’s long-term plans for the size and powerplants of its vehicles.
February 22nd, 2008 at 1:17 pm
Rashiid Amul @ 22,
I agree, people should focus on the ends rather than the means of getting to those those ends.
February 22nd, 2008 at 1:19 pm
thomdbhomb, #10 & #30:
Thank you.
February 22nd, 2008 at 1:50 pm
Let’s get off this Global warming debate. An electric car reduces pollution. Gets us off of a limited resource and increases efficiency. Then we can tackle the generation of electricity to more renewable resources. The whole infrastructure of internal combustion is riddled with inefficiency and pollution. I want to see the Volt succeed. The whole concept is a giant step towards a prosperous economic future. Sure there will be a shift in markets once electric transportation is the norm. Oil change and muffler shops will go the way of blacksmith shops. We’ll still need tires, car washes and mechanics. I want more insight to the design trade offs and technology advances that are used to bring the Volt to the masses.
February 22nd, 2008 at 1:53 pm
Rich Anderson #35
I TOTALLY AGREE! LET’S STOP THE GLOBAL WARMING DEBATE!!!
February 22nd, 2008 at 2:05 pm
To those who remain mad or confussed by Bob Lutz’s statement that it is his actions, and not his opinion that should be judged, I would say — get over it.
Like it or not, Bob Lutz and GM have done more for the environmental cause with the Volt than all of the environmental organizations on earth. It’s just that simple.
February 22nd, 2008 at 2:34 pm
On February 19th, the Government of British Columbia announced that in their 2008 budget that they are introducing a “Revenue-neutral Carbon Tax”, effective July 1, 2008. To my knowledge, this is the first jurisdiction in North America to introduce a “Carbon Tax”.
From: http://www.bcbudget.gov.bc.ca/2008/backgrounders/backgrounder_carbon_tax.htm
The carbon tax will be phased in to give individuals, businesses, and industry time to adapt, innovate, and reduce the impact of the tax. The carbon tax starts at a rate based on $10 per tonne of associated carbon, or carbon-equivalent, emissions and will rise by $5 a year for the next four years — reaching $30 per tonne by 2012. This works out to 2.41 cents per litre for gasoline, rising gradually to 7.24 cents a litre by 2012. For diesel and home heating oil, it works out to 2.76 cents per litre, rising to 8.27 cents over the same five-year period.
Monies collected from the Carbon Tax will be used to fund a $1 Billion fund for Climate Action …
From: http://www.bcbudget.gov.bc.ca/2008/backgrounders/backgrounder_climate_action.htm
Balanced Budget 2008 provides an additional $1 billion over four years for operating and capital expenditures and tax incentives to encourage environmentally responsible choices, implement new regulatory requirements, undertake cutting-edge research, and make needed low-carbon investments.
This includes: $33 million to provide tax relief for the purchase of conventional fuel-efficient vehicles that meet the fuel efficiency criteria set out in the federal government’s ecoAuto rebate program.
Let tax relief for the Chevy Volt begin!
February 22nd, 2008 at 2:44 pm
The one debate I’ve not seen anyone mention is while Global Warminig may not be casued by man, we (homosapians) would not have surived during every period that the earth has been through so to say that the levels of CO2 in the atmosophere have come and gone before, yes probably but that Carbon was locked up billions of years ago on a planet predominetly covered by vegatation with a toxic atmosphere. Just remember the planet we are working towards is not one that we can survive on. You don’t have to look very far (Venus) to find an unfriendly planet. So I hope all you anti global warming folks aren’t producing children because there wont be a planet left for them to live on.
February 22nd, 2008 at 2:50 pm
#39 - Tom wrote: So I hope all you anti global warming folks aren’t producing children because there won’t be a planet left for them to live on.
I’ve got two kids: 9 months old and almost 3 years old. It’s no wonder I am concerned about climate change!
February 22nd, 2008 at 2:50 pm
“Like it or not, Bob Lutz and GM have done more for the environmental cause with the Volt than all of the environmental organizations on earth. It’s just that simple.”
It’s not that simple. The Volt is still 3 years away from the showrooms. I’ll give GM props when I start seeing people driving Volts around town and not a day sooner.
Right now NEV makers like Miles, Zenn, and Zap have done more than GM, which isn’t say much.
February 22nd, 2008 at 2:51 pm
A carbon tax is bull sh#& plain and simple.
February 22nd, 2008 at 2:53 pm
Right on Bob! Global warming is not settled science and the majority of data they use to support is done in a way to distort the facts. I want clean air and cheap transportation. I grew up in the 70’s, anybody remember the coming ice age?
February 22nd, 2008 at 2:57 pm
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/dire-new-climate-warning/2008/02/20/1203467189745.html
February 22nd, 2008 at 3:16 pm
#37 Wise Golden
Well said. Simple, straightforward, and FACTUAL.
Irrefutable is always good.
God Bless,
Tagamet
February 22nd, 2008 at 3:25 pm
BlackSheep and your claim that 40 years ago “all the leading scientists at the time” thought we were in for a new ice age….
,… you really need to do your research. There was indeed a single article published in a major magazine around that time that made a case for a new ice age. However, it never went further than that because of the scientific process. Most, never mind “all”, leading scientists at the time, did NOT back it up.
Even various oil lobbies/organizations and individual oil companies which were responsible for the massive misinformation campain against the science the last couple decades have come clean and admitted their product is responsible for the huge increase in CO2 and is a large part of what is causing global warming. Why have they flip-flop’ed? It’s called “peak oil” and “record profits” means they no longer need to worry about earnings as it’s a given.
The continued use of carbon based fuels (mostly fossil based, but “renewable” ones like bio ones, don’t really help) and the resultant release of CO2 is definitely not 100% attributable to the increase of atmospheric concentration of CO2. While it may be the majority of the problem, it’s a 2-fold problem. The Earth’s natural CO2 scrubbers, ie. plant life, is also a problem, and also a man made cause. We are losing large areas of forest as 3rd world countries attempt to survive and grow. And a new wave of deforestation is occuring due to Europe’s growing demand for biodiesel.
Another thing that is often overlooked, and is going to be a problem is global diming. This has been masking global warming for decades. Global diming has/is caused by pollution, most of it from burning dirty fossil fuels. All that pollution has been blocking the sun’s warming rays (and energy) from reaching the Earth’s surface. 9/11 actually helped prove it. Scientists were able to measure the difference after all flights were grounded for days. So our successful efforts of making our energy use cleaner have actually helped reduce global diming, and hence increase global warming.
According to OPEC (http://www.opec.org/library/FAQs/PetrolIndustry/q2.htm) the total world consumption of crude oil in 2000 was 76 million barrels per day (there are 42 US gallons in a barrel). That’s carbon that was trapped for millions or billions of years! There’s definitely no dispute that man is releasing a crap load of carbon into the air every day! There’s no way natural processes can recapture that much carbon on a daily basis that originally took eons to capture!
In any case, as the cliche goes, politics make for strange bedfellows. Even those ardent conservatives who believe the Bush admin (that is filled with ex-oil men and women, even Condy Rice was from Chevron and had an oil tanker named after her at one point) has no motive to discount the science, can stand side by side with those they disagree with for a common goal. Ie. reduce our use of oil, and stop sending money to the likes of Saudi Arabia, where it flows to the likes of the 19 Saudi’s who hijacked the planes on 9/11.
I don’t think it’s any surprise that Lutz would continue the auto industries party line, as they still need to make a profit during the transition, and that in large part means attempting to keep selling the higher profit larger vehicles like trucks and SUV’s. They do have shareholders after all.
And Lyle, did this really warrent a new thread so we have to rehash all the same arguments again? I think having posted it as a reply and/or editing the other thread’s blog entry would have been sufficient, so that the discussion could have been contained.
February 22nd, 2008 at 3:30 pm
OK, I’ve got an idea. Let’s take the half a trillion dollars we are sending out of the country for oil every year (as per T. Boone Pickens) and purchase Chevy Volts with it. Even at $40k/copy that’s 12.5 million electric cars/year and 78% of them won’t use any gas or emit and CO2, There are 243 million registered passenger cars in the US so we can replace all of them in 20 years and then join OPEC because we will be an oil exporter.
That’s my post for the day… it’s Friday afternoon, I’m off, where’s the vodka?
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:20 pm
#46, Jeff M:
Thank you for being the voice of reason regarding this nonsense 70s ice age argument. I was going to post something similar and you saved me the trouble.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:28 pm
47 mmcc:
I’ll drink to that!
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Jeff M #46
I thought it was interesting and important to see how Lutz viewed the public response, so that we can analyze the impact our discussions are having.
I cant control the comments to a post, anything is possible, and that’s what is so great about it.
February 22nd, 2008 at 6:18 pm
Bob Lutz is exactly right - and I give him credit for speaking the truth even though it is not politically correct. I have great respect for leaders who will speak the truth. The punch line I have for those who think man can control the earth’s warming or cooling is “you are in for a big disappointment”.
On the other side of the coin, I am a big supporter of the Chevy Volt, because we need to eliminate our dependence on foreign sources of energy like oil and gas, and because electric vehicles powered by resources we do own (nuclear, coal, hydroelectric, wind, solar) will dramatically clean up the air we breathe in our big cities. So, whether the reason used is “global climate change”, correcting our trade balance of payments, cleaning up our air, makes no difference. We are generally all on the same road to success. What will be sad is an unnecessary crippling of our economy to chase Quixotic illusions like carbon dioxide pollution - I always love it whan the big scientist Al Gore from my home state, Tennessee, manages to pull the wool over the eyes of the sheep of our world.
February 22nd, 2008 at 7:37 pm
Is the volt done yet?
February 22nd, 2008 at 7:40 pm
Patience, Jim, Patience
February 22nd, 2008 at 7:59 pm
I’m with you Bob
February 22nd, 2008 at 8:09 pm
Lyle, I love that Quote feature. I just noticed it. When did you add it?
February 22nd, 2008 at 9:13 pm
Let’s get the Volt on the road, and anyone missing gasoline can post their “thousand tears”.
February 22nd, 2008 at 9:15 pm
HEY Grizzly, I thought Obama was the xerox stance guy….(lol)
February 22nd, 2008 at 9:16 pm
I wonder if ozone pollution will become a problem.
February 22nd, 2008 at 9:17 pm
Funny thing, I just completed my mandatory “integrity” training at GM - maybe Bob should as well.
I’d like to see the stats on the degree one believes in god in relation to the degree with which they don’t believe in global warming. There has to be a good corelation there.
This comment by Bob makes me feel why a California start up company is going to be much more sucessful in the future. Passion drives invention.
February 22nd, 2008 at 9:29 pm
tOM
Help me understand what you mean.
February 22nd, 2008 at 9:58 pm
Yup, this board is getting to be that way, that was my point….or…..errr….I think it was mine…. the POINT I mean.
February 22nd, 2008 at 10:06 pm
Ok, your point, my quote. Sounds fair.
February 23rd, 2008 at 8:08 am
I have to admit that when I read Mr. Lutz’s “crock” comment I did wince. Kind of like you do when your drunk friend just said something stupid that essentially stops the party music. I’m sure he is kicking himself for saying it but hey we all make mistakes and say things we don’t think will cause the reaction they do. Let the first person who has never had this happen to them step forward.
I’m sure he has learned his lesson not to alienate 50% of his future customer base. If I were him the first thing I would do is jump around at my good fortune and then I would basically “find God”. I don’t mean he has to proclaim that the oil tycoons are evil and run away to live in the mountains. I’m suggesting that he learn to smooth his relationship to billions of future customers. Kind of like, “Honey, I didn’t really mean it. Life must be tough when so many people hang on your every word.
February 23rd, 2008 at 11:19 am
Bob Lutz displays the kind of intransigent thinking that’s been death to the domestic automotive industry for decades. There’s more than enough scientific evidence to prove that global warming is happening, that human behavior is contributing, and that denying it doesn’t make good economic or environmental sense.
This isn’t just a case of industry vs. the tree huggers, either, as some on this blog would like to portray it. The insurance industry (second largest industry in the world, in terms of assets) is quickly becoming one of the leading protagonists in the green industry due to the fact that climate changes are presenting an ever-increasing risk to their clients, and their risk-assessment models validate this. You’re kidding yourself if you think that they’re doing this out of political correctness. They’re doing this because it’s a matter of survival in an intensely competitive industry.
Information technology companies (IBM, Sun, EMC, HP, Dell, etc.) are all seizing the opportunity to aggessively develop increasingly energy efficient products to combat the rapidly increasing power-consumption and greenhouse gas-generating effects associated with explosive datacenter growth.
The companies that don’t find a way to participate in the green economy will not survive, period.
You may be compelled to defend Mr. Lutz as a “straight talker” and pat him on the back for not bending to the compulsion to be “politically correct”, but realize that decades of this kind of backwards-looking executive leadership in the domestic auto industry is responsible for the billions upon billions of dollars in losses that continue to accrue.
February 23rd, 2008 at 11:41 am
Good for Bob Lutz. It’s nice to know that there are some practical people around who aren’t afraid to express themselves frankly. Our country is being severely damaged by those who think they are knowledgeable and concerned, yet they are uniformed and scientifically naive. If we had embarked, as a nation, on a program of nuclear power generation and electric cars back in the 1970s when our nation was first attacked by an uneconomic cartel, we would be free of OPEC now and our most brutal enemies would be impoverished. So the market doesn’t necessarily make the optimum decisions and we do need well considered, strategic national initiatives. Where are we to get that?
February 23rd, 2008 at 12:44 pm
This has nothing to do with whether Global Warming exists or not. The fact that Bob Lutz’ would say something like that as the vice-chair of a major automotive company is just plain stupidity.
Personally I agree with him. But you can’t expect people to believe that you trying to be a green company when you say things like this on the sideline. The fact is the majority of America believes in Global Warming and they are not going to feel comfortable buying cars from a car company that has people up top with this kind of attitude.
February 23rd, 2008 at 1:53 pm
Who knew so many republicans would be on an electric car website, I think Rush and Ann Coulter would call you a bunch of p$%$ies. Maybe you should be dumping some chemicals in a lake somewhere, isn’t that what you guys enjoy?
February 23rd, 2008 at 11:04 pm
Earl, Earl, Earl…. Watch out! Bigotry is something democrats are supposed to be against!
February 24th, 2008 at 11:37 am
Earl:
This, my friend is why you’re a liberal. People like you just want to sit around and whine about the problem (i.e. say republicans like to throw chemicals in ponds). Where people like me are for America and are for anyone who is trying to solve the problem at hand (i.e. GM). When you are more educated on the topic please feel free to come back and blog with us.
February 25th, 2008 at 3:27 am
“Good for Bob Lutz. It’s nice to know that there are some practical people around who aren’t afraid to express themselves frankly.”
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad isn’t afraid to speak his mind either. Should we all praise him for denying the holocaust?
February 25th, 2008 at 3:40 am
UG
If Bob Lutz was a Head of State seeking nuclear arms, it might be a fair comparison to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
(He’s not)
February 25th, 2008 at 4:05 am
I’m sorry. If someone says something stupid, it’s stupid regardless of how earnest they are about it, whether a head of state, a corporate executive, or someone around the water-cooler.
When someone says “at least they are being honest” it usually means they agree with what the guy says but since the position is unpopular they don’t want to come out and admit it themselves! So they just use that as a way to try to convince people to put down the knives and pitchforks. It’s a weak argument.
February 25th, 2008 at 8:41 am
There are two hallmarks of the liberal mindset;The presumption of intellectual and moral superiority.Both of which preclude the necessity of them entertaining any type of rational discussion - not when name calling over an internet site makes them feel manly. ‘Tis a pity their conceptions are as flawed as their presumptions.
February 25th, 2008 at 10:17 am
If people want a good summary of peak oil here you go. Sorry so depressing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2vflGvgC68&feature=related Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nqcavvB66g&feature=related Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6-6hsZXC8U Part 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23qbjLr07qo&feature=related Part 4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlW00dNW7oA Part 5
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cENh5v0sl8Y Part 6
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mWeLI8y07E Part 7
February 25th, 2008 at 10:50 am
Sadly, the media has decided to attack Mr. Lutz for speaking against their mythology. The Drudge Report brought the matter to everyone’s attention, and now even on the morning talk radio I hear that Mr. Putz does not believe in global warming. Bottom line, old guys must be careful not to express views because the lefties have taught the majority of Americans that their crock is truth. Mr. Lutz will be lucky if he is not quietly replaced within 6 months. Time will tell.
February 25th, 2008 at 12:49 pm
“preclude the necessity of them entertaining any type of rational discussion”
There is no rational discussion to be had with people who reject scientific concensus.
February 25th, 2008 at 2:24 pm
The consensus regarding a large effect upon global warming by human caused carbon dioxide emission exists only in the minds of the devious, the specious and some of those who cannot even spell it.
February 25th, 2008 at 3:21 pm
Concensus != uninamity.
Some people approach global warming the way OJ juries approached the murder case.
February 25th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
ug,
“Concensus != uninamity.
Some people approach global warming the way OJ juries approached the murder case.”
Right, the jury was unanimous and found OJ not guilty. Some would say that they were unanimously wrong.
I suspect that we both could rattle off a half dozen instances where the scientific consensus was just flat wrong. That being the case, to suggest that “There is no rational discussion to be had with people who reject scientific concensus.” sounds more like a religious leader than it does a scientist. You’re not related to Tom Cruise are you? He seems to have all THE answers too.
GOD BLESS
February 25th, 2008 at 4:37 pm
” to suggest that “There is no rational discussion to be had with people who reject scientific concensus.” sounds more like a religious leader”
Hmm. Religious leader??
From Tagamet’s previous post:
“Well said. Simple, straightforward, and FACTUAL.
Irrefutable is always good.
God Bless,
Tagamet”
We know your bias. You are an intelligent-design Jesus freak!!!
February 25th, 2008 at 5:31 pm
” to suggest that “There is no rational discussion to be had with people who reject scientific concensus.” sounds more like a religious leader”
Hmm. Religious leader??
From Tagamet’s previous post:
“Well said. Simple, straightforward, and FACTUAL.
Irrefutable is always good.
God Bless,
Tagamet”
We know your bias. You are an intelligent-design Jesus freak!!!
Ug,
lol, you sure a funny one. If you look ALL the way back through my posts, I think you’ll find that I’d even say “God Bless” to a Scientologist. I consider it a kindness, not a slur. I’m certain that I’ve never stated a stance on evolution, and I suspect that I haven’t *posted* a stance on global warming. I’m here to discuss the VOLT.
Ever heard the old saying “All things in moderation. Including moderation?” Words that you might consider….
GOD BLESS
February 25th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
PS And no mention of “instances where the scientific consensus was just flat wrong.” ??
February 25th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
Tagamet….
Based on your intelligent, level-headed comments here at gm-volt.com, I’d like to meet you at the Javits Center in NYC on 3/19 if you’re able to make it there. (I answer to “Phil” and I’m a stout 6ft with dark hair & a dark beard. You’ll find me trying to elbow my way close to anyone from GM available for questioning.) *
* I’d also like to meet anyone else here who’ll be in NYC on 3/19!
February 25th, 2008 at 6:17 pm
Nasaman,
Thanks, I’d love it! I’ll be the Jesus Freak in a long robe of sack cloth, flowing hair, and long beard…. Seriously, I’d love to meet you and any of the other zealots/lunatic fringe from the site. I’m about 5′ 10, thinning hair, WHITE beard, and excellent shape (as long as “round” is included).
Please shoot me an email at lgeguzisATSIGNcomcast.net and we can make arrangements. I was within a couple of blocks of the Javits Center yesterday, but visiting my daughter meant going another direction.
Be well, God Bless, AND see you soon!
February 25th, 2008 at 11:26 pm
I believe that global warming is a lot of hype. General Electric and others are spending more than all the oil companies combined on Lobbyists. Now this alone is fine. They have the money and the right . What is not fine however is if they cause congress to Give away subsidies. The bone headed politically correct corn ethanol subsidies are a good example. .
GM is doing great by pouring so much money into Electrifying cars
Electric motors are already far more efficient and can give better performance right now than an ICE. If Hydrogen fuel cells ever become feasible Gm will be ready with the power train VFI’s .etc.
In summary Electric cars will be the way of the future along with highly efficient clean diesels. There are many many very real reasons to begin moving in this direction. WE do not need the trumped up hype of man made Global warming.
God has been warming and cooling the earth for eons all by himself
I figure that he niether needs or wants our help with this.
February 26th, 2008 at 4:57 pm
He said global warming is a crock of s–t. He didn’t say that the effect of man-made CO2 on global climate change was debatable.
He said global warming was a crock of s–t. Even scientists skeptical of the effect of man-made CO2 don’t go that far.
And, yes, there is highly reliable evidence that man-made CO2 is affecting the global climate. What is not clear is how much effect it is having and what we can possibly do about it.
Don’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh. He has an agenda too.
February 27th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
To: Mark NoName #86
I do hope you are supportive of nuclear power, which is the safest and most reliable and most plentiful source of energy-on-demand known to man. It doesn’t emit carbon dioxide.
Maybe with new batteries, solar power will finally become economic (this was the hope when I was an undergraduate EE over 30 years ago).
We’ll still need nukes for commercial and Industrial power.
Don’t forget,that despite your disapproval, Bob Lutz may very well be correct, speaking figuratively that is.
February 27th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
Don’t worry about Bob Lutz, he’s an idiot anyway.
I don’t care whether climate change/global warming is real or not.
Like many of the other people who have posted comments on this article, my primary concern is ending/reducing this great nation’s dependence on foreign oil; plain and simple.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
88. “Like many of the other people who have posted comments on this article, my primary concern is ending/reducing this great nation’s dependence on foreign oil; plain and simple.”
Reason enough.