The Google/Brookings PHEV Conference and Why Do People Want a Chevy Volt?
Yesterday and today, there was a plug-in conference in Washington D.C. co-hosted by Google.org and the Brookings Institution called Plug-In Electric Vehicles 2008: What Role for Washington? Representatives from key automakers and the U.S. government were in attendance.
Toyota’s representative, Bill Reinert sought to play down the potential benefits of plug-in vehicles. He said “when we see the (claims of) 100 mile-per-gallon stuff, not everybody’s going to get 100 miles per gallon,” indicating real-world (aggressive) driving may reduce the range PHEVs (Automotive News).
Fords Americas President Mark Fields told the conference that he felt the U.S. government should allocate funds to battery research similar to what is occurring in Japan. In fact, also at the meeting, the U.S. Department of Energy actually announced a $30 million 3 year grant to be shared among GM, Ford, and Chrysler/GE for various aspects of PHEV development.
He also noted the potential difficulty for apartment dwellers, stating “overnight charging isn’t readily available for most people who live in apartments or condos,” and mentioned worries about leaving extension cords out in the rain, and how the cost of electricity could rise in the future (Reuters).
GM was represented by Troy Clarke who is GMs North American President. When I last interviewed Mr. Clarke he made the memorable statement that he believed the Volt will be “the next 57′ Chevy.”
Clarke also supported the idea that the U.S. government should help subsidize electric vehicle development stating it, “must fund a major effort to strengthen domestic advanced battery capabilities.”
With the Volt in the lead for battery-powered cars, Clarke noted “GM believes that the long-term solution involves a march toward the electrification of the automobile, and that the debate has shifted from if this would happen to when.”
As to why we want our Volts, Mr. Clarke said, “We believe people will want a Chevrolet Volt is because it’s a car that says so much about their commitment to the environment and their love of advanced technology.”
I can’t imagine he didn’t mention energy independence, but I don’t have the whole transcript of his talk to verify that.
Source (Wall Street Journal)
Popularity: 7%
Related posts:
- Toyota Thinks People Might Not Want Plug-in Electric Vehicles Like the Chevy Volt
- New PHEV Consortium Bashes the Chevy Volt
- U.S. Government Invests 20 Million in 5 PHEV Lithium-Ion Battery Companies
- Toyota’s People Think the Volt Will Blow up in GM’s Face
- North Carolina To Build Statewide Network of PHEV Charging Pods
(9 votes, average: 5 out of 5) 
Loading ...
June 12th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
I want a Volt so I can do my part to free us from oil, both foreign & domestic.
Oh and I almost forgot, I’m the first to post on this topic too.
gm-volt.com your source for all things Volt
June 12th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
I’ll take the ‘57 Chevy. That’s sweet!
June 12th, 2008 at 9:02 pm
$30 million is a good START. I doubt that it compares favorably with the support given by the Japanesse government to its automakers.
June 12th, 2008 at 9:05 pm
$30 million is a joke compared to what the Oil industry gets.
June 12th, 2008 at 9:05 pm
C’mon lets talk about hydrogen some more people.
June 12th, 2008 at 9:10 pm
That 57 Chev design is timeless, I wonder if it could be converted to a PHEV…
June 12th, 2008 at 9:13 pm
I always wanted a `57 Chevy…how fitting it will be a 201? Volt.
I long for the end of turm-OIL, and to see renewed faith in the United States goal to become energy independent…I WILL do my part to see that this becomes a reality.
Johnnie
June 12th, 2008 at 9:15 pm
Wasn’t there mention that GM might be investing on the order of $1B to develop this technology? $30M split between three US auto makers is not much more than a sneeze.
Come On USA, do you want to support inventing ourselves out of our current oil dependency mess or not?
June 12th, 2008 at 9:17 pm
Not sure what points we will debate in this thread…or what news is contained in this article.
I’m assuming Lyle was so afraid no one would come back to the site if they actaully read that whole ‘hydrogen thread’ and decided to bump it down with this one.
Synopsis:
Bunch of talking heads got together. They probably said something bad about ‘big oil.’ Then talked about how ‘wicked awesome’ their (and only their) EV program was. Then stuck out their hands to ask for free money because some other companies got some free money.
June 12th, 2008 at 9:18 pm
It does’nt surprise me Toyota’s representative Bill Reinert is bad mouthing plug-ins, he’s the head fool of Toyota’s ‘fool’ cell program.
Did anyone from Google or the Brookings Institution ask why Chevron will not allow Nickel Metal Hydride (NiMH) batteries to be used to power BEV’s or serial plug-in hybrids?
The whole conference was all for show, full of sound and fury signifying nothing.
June 12th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
Troy Clarke is wrong. We don’t like the Volt because it’s hi-tech and green. We like the Volt because we hate foreign oil.
June 12th, 2008 at 9:25 pm
# 5 Hydrogen - get a reality check !
Do you realise how much more electricity you need to make Hydrogen ? What a STUPID PROCESS.
Give me a Plug-in like the VOLT any day !
June 12th, 2008 at 9:32 pm
Why do I want a Volt? to be independent from oil, to reduce the use of oil, and to say to OPEC ‘Fuck you”
June 12th, 2008 at 9:39 pm
#12 Ausmartin
Yes more hydrogen debate!
Hydrogen is the only answer!
All other forms of propulsion must be phased out! New science will be developed to make it practically free, it will be a limitless supply and will be readily available in all locations across North America shortly!
(Is there not a way to put text in teal to emphasis my tone?)
June 12th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
I like the Volt because it’s hi-tech and green! As a Canadian, oil independence isn’t really a concern.
June 12th, 2008 at 9:56 pm
I am in an associated field to Grants and Agreements federal awards. $30 million is not much compared to many programs out there. Oil gets $18 billioin in subsidies to develop oil resources and refineries. They do some of the former and none of the latter to my knowledge. Now, the real trophy would be far better than the grant development money - a PHEV rebate of $5,000. Times that by 100,000 volts and voila — America begins shifting away from the monopoly the oil and gas industry holds over energy delivery.
Good luck America. The lobbyists are hard at work against this.
June 12th, 2008 at 9:56 pm
$30 Million between 3 companies? What a joke. I suppose some of those guys spitting rhetoric are married to the daughters of oil company executives. There goes the anniversary present.
June 12th, 2008 at 10:05 pm
I wouldn’t worry about oil independence. Worry about getting the stuff at all!
“The most troublesome aspect of the IEA report is that OECD crude stocks fell by 8.1 million barrels in April – a time of the year when they typically increase by 30 million barrels. Preliminary numbers suggest that the drop is continuing in May and June. The world is living off its stockpiles, a situation that will not long endure.”
http://www.fcnp.com/news_stories/the_peak_oil_crisis_the_summer_ahead_20080612.html
200+ H2 comments not enough Statik?
JBFALASKA IF we all move away from oil, Can the oil coy’s keep their 18 billion? LOL.
June 12th, 2008 at 10:20 pm
Well, it seems everyone’s on board, so who’s holding the rudder?
June 12th, 2008 at 10:22 pm
Hey, how about a restored 57 Chevy that’s been converted to a plug-in with 40 miles all electric range? Any takers?
June 12th, 2008 at 10:23 pm
I had a ‘57 Chevy and I loved it. I have often wanted the auto makers to remake some of the classic cars and trucks with modern drive trains and such. Would that be great or what! I don’t think they could make them fast enough. Everyone loves classic cars and trucks.
June 12th, 2008 at 10:24 pm
Now that is one beautiful car! I’ll take a Volt that looks just like that one; the same color and a convertible!
Just think of the extra range that would be possible with the A/C turned off and driving down the highway with the top down! It reminds me of the days many years ago when I had a ‘55 Chevy Bel Air convertible. How sweet it was! The only thing sweeter would have been a ‘57 Chevy just like the one pictured above.
As to why we want our Volt, there is no single or simple answer. There are as many answers as those being asked the question. And, one person’s reasons are as valid as the next.
June 12th, 2008 at 10:29 pm
If Reinert is representative of the intelligence of Toyota execs, it’s
at least understandable why that company has been so braindead the past 6 months in their public statements about hybrids and plug-ins. Reinert is correct that not every Volt owner will achieve 100 MPG. The figure is closer to 350 MPG, if one is talking about commuting mileage, and the same for various other trip regimens.
It’s obvious that Reinert is practically all ignorance when it come to the Volt. His arguments are pathetically slanted as well as being mostly irrelevant. As for people in condos, my old condo is now considering providing electrical outlets for every parking space in the garage , probably in a gradual movement. The cost isn’t great. And yesterday I read a story that fulfilled my earlier predicition that outlets for plug-ins will sprout all over the place - grocery stores, shopping malls, office buildings, etc. Two small towns in California have allocated the small amount of funds needed to equip their town commercial retail center with outlets and spaces only to be used for recharging. The electricity is free and the cost to the town small, the benefits of attracting customers quite good. We don’t need to sell a plug-in to every soul in the country, so why is reinert so concerned about those relatively few apartment dwellers. We know that one single Volt is capable of avoiding more carbon emissions and gasoline than 10 Toyota Priuses.
Let that statistic be the answer to any claims that hybrids are of
greater value. They are not. Not even remotely equal to a plug-in like the Volt. And I don’t really expect electricity sticker shock from
higher future electrical rates when they are already 10 times cheaper than gasoline bills. Even in the impossible situation of doubled electrical rates, gasoline still is absurdly more expensive.
If this kind of logic prevails at Toyota, they are talking out of more than a few mouths these days. I would suggest that they all hold a conference and figure out exactly what their company stands for. Right now it stands for protection of their own inferior green technology. Toyota truly sucks. Never thought I’d say that.
June 12th, 2008 at 10:32 pm
“A role for Washington?”
Only one is possible:
*Royally*
*SCREW*
**THIS**
***UP!***
The best role for Washington is “STAY THE HECK OUT OF THE WAY!”
====
Statik, you slay me.
June 12th, 2008 at 10:34 pm
I’m with you #20 N Riley. Perhaps Lyle could conduct a survey of those who might be interested in an E-Flex ‘57 Chevy convertible and then forward the results on to GM!
By the way Lyle, thanks for the extended time for edits!
June 12th, 2008 at 10:35 pm
Yup nothing like a 57 Chevy to take our minds off the problems we face. Something like hydrogen.
Take Care
Arch
June 12th, 2008 at 10:36 pm
A ‘55 Chevy Bel Air convertible! Man, that was a very nice car. They just don’t make them like the ‘55 and ‘57 cars (Ford and Chrysler included) and trucks.
Let’s not mention hydrogen in this thread anymore. It was picked clean earlier today. Let’s not go there anymore. Everyone made their opinion known or at least had the opportunity to do so.
$30 million should be $30 billion! We need the same kind of program to advance electric vehicles and solar power at home and at work as we poured into the moon program. Let’s take the oil company’s grants along with all the stupid grants to study the hair on some monkey’s as* and apply it to the battery technology program. At the same time we should be giving tax credits to people who convert their cars and trucks to electric assist drive train technology or to some type of electric or gas/electric conversion. That would help eliminate the hundreds of millions of cars and trucks on the road today that would hang on for the next 15 years burning too much gasoline and/or diesel.
We should all be pushing our congressmen for action along these lines. There is so much wasted pork money in our national budget that funding the tax credit would be a breeze.
What do you think?
June 12th, 2008 at 10:43 pm
“If Reinert is representative of the intelligence of Toyota exec”
Reinert is talking down the Volt because Toyota does not have a good answer for it. He is in the mainstream of Toyota thinking. Even though I will purchase a Prius until the Volt comes along, I know that Toyota has to keep the PR talk against GM and the Volt. If people catch the Volt fever, they will delay purchases of Toyota vehicles and Toyota does not want that. They desperately want to surpass GM as the number one auto maker in the world. They may do it, but they know that it could be a very temporary reign.
Come on GM get the Volt program in high gear and beat the others to the punch. Get higher mileage small cars and trucks on the market that will help sales until the Volt and its spin-offs get volume production going. You’ve got the technology and if any one can sell fuel efficient vehicles, now is the time.
June 12th, 2008 at 10:43 pm
#22 kent beuchert.
I agree with all you said except for “we don’t need to sell a plug-in to every soul in the country”. Actually, I believe that once the Volt comes out and the word gets around there will be precious few that will not want a Volt-type vehicle.
June 12th, 2008 at 10:51 pm
#25 N Riley. I agree with you.
I have long been of the opinion that the top priority of our next President, whoever that might be, should be the rebuilding of the U.S. manufacturing base. And, every option to achieve that goal should be “on the table”!
Getting rid of our dependence upon foreign oil and the electrification of the automobile are good places to start, but that should only be the beginning!
June 12th, 2008 at 10:53 pm
I dont usually delve into the iea reports but if they are to be believed the OECD has a stocks totaling about 2000 million barrels.
There seems to be a net production deficit of 1 million barrels per day but surely we can go a long time before the deficit exhausts the stocks.
Im inclined to agree with OPEC, there is a lot of financial speculation going on.
June 12th, 2008 at 10:55 pm
Estero #27
I agree. Everyone will want at least one Volt type vehicle. It would be down right stupid to not want one to save fuel and money.
June 12th, 2008 at 10:57 pm
http://omrpublic.iea.org/
Most of the data is on the front page but I also generated a report of the OECD stocks of crude.
June 12th, 2008 at 11:02 pm
We have sold our manufacturing base to overseas in order to make short term profit gains. This should be a disgrace. Instead those CEOs are rewarded with large bonuses and more stock options. It is a disgrace that every American buying non-American products should be ashamed of. I know. You can’t find most products without them being made overseas, most notably from China. It makes me sad when I purchase Chinese products because I know they are not friends of America. We should not blame them for this. It is our fault. We constantly demand lower and lower prices and what are manufacturers to do but look at overseas manufacturing to reduce cost.
June 12th, 2008 at 11:07 pm
But, the American automobile manufacturers are some of the world’s leading companies. We can re-build some of our base by supporting American autos. The Volt and it’s kin will help us refresh our base and grow as the world leader once again. We still lead the world in overall technology and should continue to do so. It takes effort and hard work and a dedicated American work force and a dedicated American public. It is our national interest to do this. Let’s get it done, GM, Ford and Chrysler.
June 12th, 2008 at 11:07 pm
Go nuclear powered, battery equipped plug-in Volt!
June 12th, 2008 at 11:12 pm
Riley #32
Our standard of living demands that ordinary household staples and the like be made overseas. Many/most of those are by American companies who actually reap most of the profit. If most of what we use every day were made here in the US our spending power and standard of living would go down because they would be so much more expensive. By not making these, we-the labor force- are free to pursue entrepreneurial and other higher paying jobs. It’s inevitable.
That said, when I shop for food for my chocolate lab, I make sure to stick with domestically produced brands for obvious reasons
.
June 12th, 2008 at 11:15 pm
How about making the volt look like a smaller 57 Chevy. I’d take two.
June 12th, 2008 at 11:16 pm
#19 Dave, once the Volt becomes established as reliable, there’s no reason GM cannot bring back some of the more popular historical models with a modified Volt drive train. A 1961 Corvette or a 1957 Chevy would have never passed emissions standards, but now, they can ! There’s no end to what models they could bring back - in highly profitable limited numbers, of course.
As for apartment dwellers, I gave it some thought. Imagine where you park at your apartment. Now imagine a box on a stand nearby, for each car - with a locked door keyed to your apartment key. You unlock the box, plug your Volt into the outlet inside, close the door, and relock it. The cord would exit the box through an small opening near the bottom, sealed snugly with foam rubber so the plug could not be easily yanked out by some punk kid pulling on the cord from outside the box. It would also stop insects from entering the box.
Rain could be a problem with power cords, as well as the cord being a tripping hazard. I wonder how long it wil take before someone trips over a Volt power cord, and sues both the Volt owner and GM for multi-millions of dollars ?
If any politician suggests more taxes on gas, for any reason, suggest that the politician should set a good example, and prevent his / her own C02 from contributing to global warming. It’s simple - they need only a clear plastic bag, and three feet of twine. 1) put plastic bag over politician’s head. 2) tie bag firmly around neck with twine. 3) They should sit back, read a book, or watch TV, and let the C02 containment system do its job. After a minute or two, they will feel light-headed. This is normal. After five minutes, all C02 emmisions will stop, and the politician will no longer feel a need to raise gas prices - or feel anything at all. Such is the price of green leadership.
Just food for thought, while we wait, and wait, and wait on the Volt. The waiting is truly the hardest part. Gas just topped $4.00 in northern Maryland, where the policy is “If it exists, tax it. If it moves, regulate it. If it stops moving, study it at taxpayer expense until it moves again”.
June 12th, 2008 at 11:19 pm
I didn’t get moderated for #37 ? What is this world coming to ?
June 12th, 2008 at 11:20 pm
I owned a 1957 Sport Coupe with 4 barrel carb and dual exhaust. Best car I ever owned. But the 1978 Malibu I bought new was a lemon, and the 1991 Silverado I bought new was a lemon, so I bought an Olds in 93 and an Avalon in 2004. Inadequate head room or an inadequate trunk are deal breakers for me.
What should the government do? Fund building battery production facilities to facilitate a rapid shift away from oil.
June 12th, 2008 at 11:31 pm
Grizzly
I agree we demand lower prices, higher salaries and a higher standard of living. That does not make it right. Plus, since we have been shipping so much of our manufacturing overseas our standard of living has declined (or so I have read several times over the past several years). I know my purchasing power is less and less every year because of higher cost for just about everything. Just think what our purchasing power is going to be like over the next 5 years if crude oil continues to climb in price along with the many products derived from it or affected by higher fuel cost (which is just about everything). We are going to have to make some serious decisions about purchases in the future. The amount of money available to Americans (and others) after purchasing the “necessities of life” is going to decline sharply. The picture does not look very rosy.
June 12th, 2008 at 11:32 pm
#11, Dave G!
“Troy Clarke is wrong. We don’t like the Volt because it’s hi-tech and green. We like the Volt because we hate foreign oil.”
May the economies of Iran, Saudi Arabia, and a few others be converted back to how they were before oil, like that of Africa.
death to oil
http://www.oiljihad.org
June 12th, 2008 at 11:34 pm
In the past the American people have not shied away from challenges. I hope that is true of today’s and tomorrows generation. If we face our challenges squarely and apply our knowledge and work together we can not be held back. We will succeed, but we must start doing it.
June 12th, 2008 at 11:50 pm
H2 is just for the oil companies it keeps us coming back for more, to them. If we all go Electric then you can make your own, solar and wind are an easy do even for a do it yourselfer. The car companies keep making prototype H2 cars so as not to make big oil mad.
I would like a nuclear powered volt. No need for the ICE, once started it would run for over 20 years no charging required. No need for lights either since, it would glow on its own.
June 12th, 2008 at 11:52 pm
The real question to be asked is, will you buy a Chinese made battery if it’s XX (a significant number here) % cheaper than the American made one (everything else being equal obviously) ?
June 13th, 2008 at 12:35 am
It’s too bad that people are still pushing hydrogen. The vast, vast majority of hydrogen is made by cracking petroleum. As others have said, it takes a lot of energy to do that. Furthermore, cracking the petroleum releases significant CO2. Basically, for now, it’s an oil-based fuel. Bad idea. See, R.E. Uhrig, “Engineering Challenges of the Hydrogen Economy,” THE BENT of Tau Beta Pi, Spring, Vol. XCV, No. 2, 2004. It’s online, but I’m not sure I have a good link. Alternatively, see http://www.tbp.org/pages/publications/Bent/Features/Su07Uhrig.pdf
June 13th, 2008 at 1:10 am
In a heart beat Raphael. Cheers.
Of course I don’t live in America either, so why would I care where it’s made?
June 13th, 2008 at 1:30 am
Thanks Kyle #45, this reference will be used asap in a master’s thesis.
June 13th, 2008 at 2:21 am
N. Riley #40
You are correct about the cost of fuel, that’s a no brainer. But shipping manufacturing for staple type items like plastic items, silverware, consumer electronics, etc overseas is inevitable. Makes no sense to manufacture these types of things in the US when we can benefit from the labor cost advantage of foreign countries. After all these items are not a matter of national security. There are however many high value added goods which should and WILL continue to be produced in the USA and of course those that are in our national interest or security.
Li-ion is a great example to discuss. It’s expensive and the only way for it to be remotely affordable is to have cells for packs manufactured overseas, currently China. Many who’ve been following these forums know that I’ve got a problem with such a strategic component of EVs coming from that one source because of unpredictability and questionable motives. GM and other manufacturers could quickly find they have no supply of an RM they desperately need to fulfill demand for EVs. Some have suggested we manufacture these cells in the US. If it could be done by automation and cheaply I’d have zero problem. I’ve suggested taking advantage of inexpensive labor in our hemisphere, namely Mexico, which I’ve stated many times would be safer and more controllable than China. It is highly unlikely that for no reason the Mexican Gov’t would just shut down a plant halting production and refuse an explanation all the while there are ulterior motives at work.
I’m afraid that the same can’t be said of China. I really wonder if the fact that CPI’s cells come from S. Korea as opposed to China(A123) has anything to do with the statement Lutz made about “less risk with one company”.
June 13th, 2008 at 2:30 am
Kyle. Thanks Very interesting PDF. It would seem to be a good way of making Jet A1. EV’s are still better for vehicles. Still a good stop gap measure if started right now.
Grizzly. Both manufacturers have stated they would build plants in the US to provide the Volt batteries. As I would expect them to be highly automated, for quality control reasons, labor cost should not be a problem
EDIT: Lyle, thanks for te extra edit time, much appreciated.
June 13th, 2008 at 2:40 am
I wish you guys would take the topics more seriously. Sheesh. Obviously, we all want Volts to pick up chicks. Duh.
Which, of course, makes waiting for 2010 all that much worse.
And it’s in a package that won’t suck to drive.
You thought it was just going to be your pocketbook that will be hurting by then.
Beyond that, however, there’s so many reasons to support the Volt, it’s ridiculous.
Less oil use means less world instability, more security, less effects on global warming.
Electric drivetrains mean more powerful yet vastly more efficient cars that are far cheaper to operate and maintain.
Better and cheaper batteries mean more opportunity to manage the electrical grid and your own household supply.
This car will help advance nearly all the technologies that I want to advance (won’t help solar panel tech directly, but a car can only do so much
Plus, I’m expecting a huge quantity of cup holders over the battery hump. Maybe even a tray table there, too.
Oh, oh, and think of the stereo system you could power with a 16kWh battery pack capable of putting out over a hundred kW!
Yeah! And to everyone who says a stereo with that kind of power is plain crazy, I say, “what?!? huh WHAT??”
June 13th, 2008 at 2:41 am
NZ David
I know they’ve both stated that, won’t be the first time similar promises have been made. The reality is that it takes some time to build and scale plants, it’s not done overnight
. Regardless, they certainly won’t be built and functioning for the first few generations of Volt, and these are the vehicles that will make or break the project.
June 13th, 2008 at 2:49 am
About the only important information that you can get out of this article is that Toyota is:
1. Toyota is lagging the chevy volt in implementing this sort of technology in its cars. Toyota will not beat GM to the punch.
2. Toyota is grasping for straws when they can’t come up with one reasonable excuse to NOT move to the electrification of the Vehicle.
Right now I want all cars to be battery or ultracapacitor powered. The volt in my opinion should just be the first step. No solid evidence that GM plans to make an E-Flex Silverado. But after listening to GM’s beliefs and Toyotas beliefs (here and many times previously) it is pretty obvious that GM at least has the goals that I share and Toyota is currently lobbying against what I want.
Now GM may get beat out by toyota on E-Flex type cars in the long run due to price, quality or whatever but they are fighting it right now.
June 13th, 2008 at 2:58 am
Please understand that there is a difference between manufacturing “packs” and “cells”. The “packs are in essence the battery and the “cells” are the raw materials (RM). The problem at hand is that if the supply of RM stops, you can’t manufacture “packs” regardless of your locale or how “automated” you are. This is an important point and needs focus.
June 13th, 2008 at 4:43 am
Americans, Volt is not solution for you, i am sorry but from oil import you only go to cell import or import of materials for cell production. Did Lutz tell you this. Plus, to convert massively to PHEV you need to build how many atom reactors? How about airlines, will you have electric Boings? Ha! Toyota is much smarter then GM+Ford together, dont forget that! But in fact we should be happy about this so continue with GM promises
June 13th, 2008 at 5:21 am
Lilo (post 54):
1) Americans need to import oil EVERY time they refuel. They would only have to import their battery ONE time and then fill it with electricity from American Coal, Gas, Nuclear or ideally Renewables, so that argument is weak.
2) Your comment regarding atomic reactors shows that you have never read an article on BEV efficiency in your life.
3) This thread has nothing to do with electric aircraft but small ones already exist (and are probably spying on you as we speak).
4) You are entitled to your opinion that Toyota are smarter than GM an Ford, but in reality they all have some very intelligent people in their R&D departments, and the winners will be those who are least constrained by small-thinking so-called management. So I must respectfully disagree with you here too.
So there it is - a Brit defending the Yanks and GM where it is due (Grizzly and James - who seems to have disappeared or re-named himself - will remember that I don’t always do so). Tootle-Pip!
June 13th, 2008 at 5:28 am
lilo:
Oil runs out rather quickly, whereas a li-ion battery pak will last for years so having a foriegn supplier isn’t nearly as bad as with oil.
The electrification of the car will have very little impact on how many reactors we need as many people will be charging at night. Adoption of ev’s will take time so the increased demand will take years, giving us enough time to adjust.
You ask ‘will we have electric Boings?’ Once most of the cars are e-flex style we will have enough oil supplied domestically to support those vehicles/planes etc that still run on gas/deisel/jet fuel.
June 13th, 2008 at 6:06 am
#44 Raphael
Yes, I would pay a couple of thousand for an American made battery pack for the Volt.
Everything produced in China is pretty much crap, and does’nt last.
Example: Light bulbs
When incandesant light bulbs were made in the USA, they lasted years before they burned out.
When incandesant light bulbs were made in Mexico, they lasted about a year.
Now that incandesant light bulbs are made in China, they last about four months.
China has no quality control.
HEY!!! LET’S TALK ABOUT HYDROGEN!!!
June 13th, 2008 at 6:12 am
Some will say “it makes no sense to manufacture plastic items, silverware, consumer electronics, etc in the US when we can benefit from the labor cost advantage of foreign countries”.
Actually, I see it differently. We need to use technology to reduce labor costs so that we CAN manufacture at least some of those things.
Every time we put an American to work, he/she becomes more self sufficient and pays taxes instead of being a tax burden and dependent upon government subsidies.
I’m not saying the rebuilding of our manufacturing base will be easy. And, I’m not saying we can manufacture all things. But, we can do a whole lot better than we have these past several years of transforming our society from a manufacturing base to a service base.
June 13th, 2008 at 6:16 am
Statik, are you genetically wired to stir the pot or have you had a closed head injury (g).
I remember seeing a 57 Chevy when I was 7 and my dad pointed to it and said “That’s a classic” For a long time I was confused by people talking about the Classics when they were discussing trivial stuff like writing or painting….
Please! That Hydrogen horse is dead. It ain’t moving. Nothing of interest there, move along (g)
PS The grant’s are free money that has to be matched by the recipient, so not QUITE free. What wasn’t mentioned in the artilcle is the GOALS of releasing prototypes by 2014 and mass production by 2016! ARGH.
Be well,
Tag
June 13th, 2008 at 6:17 am
I want a VOLT for $$$ savings and enegry independence.
I would like the Volt to be priced at $35k but even at $40k I would buy one. Here’s the math:
GAS SAVINGS:
16 gal / week @ $4 / gal = $64 / week
$64 / week X 52 weeks in a year = $3328 / year savings
ADDED ELECTRICAL EXPENSE:
$100 / month X 12 months in a year = $1200 / year expense
$2128 savings a year, so in 2 1/2 years I will have recouped the extra cost of the Volt.
June 13th, 2008 at 6:22 am
Brad G, don’t worry about incandescent bulbs. The latest bill to save the planet outlaws them in favor of compact florescent bulbs - which of course, are ONLY made in China! (HeeeYouge SIGH)
June 13th, 2008 at 6:30 am
Oh, and the DOE released 130M for fuel cellls and 87M for cellulosic ethanol.
June 13th, 2008 at 6:38 am
I take a couple of days off from this site to finish up a project at work, and look what I have come back to………….
GM better release some pictures of the production Volt soon to give you people something real to talk about!!!!!
Eveyone please take a deep breath and say to yourselves, “We will see the first Volts in 29 months……….”.
June 13th, 2008 at 6:42 am
Welcome back, Jim I. It was tough while you were gone. I agree that we need another carrot to keep us on point. LET’S SEE THE PRODUCTION MODEL !
June 13th, 2008 at 6:43 am
Hi people,Newt Gingrich is involved with americansolutions.com. You can sign a petition there that will be presented to congress to motivate them to allow development of U.S. resources ( to try and negate influence of lobbyists) . Check it out and hope you consider signing - it allows us a way to have input but needs numbers, thanks.
I believe it addresses alternative energies also.
June 13th, 2008 at 6:51 am
http://www.americansolutions.com
Here is the link to American Solutions. It does not cost anything and besides producing our own enegry, think of all the jobs it will create.
Why keep sending our $$$ overseas. We could be an enegry exporter and have a trade surplus.
June 13th, 2008 at 6:58 am
#60 Tag
That hydrogen thread was just too much for me. It took me a day (and Steven Seagal) to get over it.
#36 Griz
“Our standard of living demands that ordinary household staples and the like be made overseas. Many/most of those are by American companies who actually reap most of the profit. If most of what we use every day were made here in the US our spending power and standard of living would go down because they would be so much more expensive. By not making these, we-the labor force- are free to pursue and other entrepreneurial higher paying jobs. It’s inevitable”
There is some fact in here. However the first sentence should read, “our always accelerating standard of living” I also agree with the statement, ‘if this stuff was made here our standard of living would indeed go down’.
However the conclusion that this decision to ‘off-load’ jobs overseas in fact brings more money in, and leaves us to persue other ‘high paying jobs’ is a fundamental flaw.
By off-loading our ‘base jobs,’ we actually hurt ourselves. Much like our over consumption of oil. For every dollar more we spend than we produce to the world…we actually do have to pay. There is some profit at the corporate level, true. But that is a result of the checks and balances of a individual company and does not translate to the national well being. A company could make 10 million dollars, but to get there it has to ‘redistribute’ 100 million dollars in development, production and labour to another country to get there. Our result is a net loser.
All those ‘lost dollars’ go into government and/or personal debt. We are not freeing ourselves up at all to further advance our ‘entrepreneurial’ or highpaying jobs…what we are doing is ‘buying now’ — ‘paying later’
Unfortunately the ‘paying later’ part is what is happening now. Over the past 20-30 odd years by buying oil and having our ‘widgies’ made overseas we have redistributed our wealth to all the other countries (which may not be a bad thing in the grand scheme…just for us personally). The standard of living is now contracting in the US, because the credit market for the first time in a couple decades is contracting, not letting Joe consumer borrow ‘more and more’ money or take ‘more and more’ money out of his house.
I only know a couple of you personally but here is the litmus test. How much money do you owe right now? (mortgage, car loans/lease, credit, etc.) How much did you owe 10 years ago? For probably 95% of you, the answer is alot more today. Second question, how much credit to you have left compared to how much you owe?
A good example is housing. Just today foreclosures up 48%
http://www.newsvine.com/_news/2008/06/13/1569251-us-foreclosure-filings-surge-48-percent-in-may
1 in 483 household went into foreclosure just THIS month. Some states alot higher. 1 in 118 houses in Nevada in ONE month. Overall 1.23 percent of all houses are in forclosure (1 in 81). 1 in 4 sales in the US are ‘distressed sales’ Over the past 2 years, over 4 million forclosure filings have been issued…thats a foreclosure note of 1 house in 20.
June 13th, 2008 at 7:08 am
Yes…I do get paid by the word.
June 13th, 2008 at 7:10 am
Statik noted “Then stuck out their hands to ask for free money ….”
Yes, getting government money was the purpose of the conference. We are into heavy politics here, methinks.
But going into this a little more, who was invited to the conference? Was it private (I assume) or public? And, who organized it? And, what was its intended outcome?
June 13th, 2008 at 7:12 am
Why do I want a Chevy Volt? The main reason is quite obvious. The other reason is, to have GM show the world that the USA is still a technological leader in the auto industry. It seems no matter what Detroit comes out with, the media will not give it full credit and maybe, just maybe, the Volt will. Take for example, many people don’t even know GM has a full hybrid. The two mode hybrid transmission has leap frog the Prius’s technology and/or anything out there today. I know Detroit deserves some of the bad media for sleeping all those years, but it looks like there is no end in sight. Another example, GM has been catching heck with the Hummer’s gas mileage. Did you know that Toyota builds a Hummer like vehicle with worse gas mileage? It’s call the Toyota Land Cruiser. Why has no one pick on Toyota?
http://www.internetautoguide.com/new-cars/03-int/toyota/land-cruiser/index.html
I know a lot of rice burner owners will come slamming at me with half truths for what I’m saying, but it’ll only prove what I’m saying. I say, just look at the record of the new GM and you will see cars and trucks that are world class.
June 13th, 2008 at 7:12 am
#68 OMG!!!! I agree with Statik.
Forgive Lilo. Russia is enjoying a bit of a resurgence thanks to oil. See last month’s National Geographic. The idea of the USA and others moving off oil is probably pretty sacry. Don’t worry Lilo, oil still has tons of uses (plastics, etc.).
I couldn’t confirm or deny a claim above that all CFLs are made in China. However, I recall that I posted here months ago that an incadescent light bulb factory in SW Wis was taken off line, and that a new CFL plant had been build in Mexico a few years ago. Of course where CFLs ARE made, where they CAN be made and where they SHOULD be made are three separate questions.
On the last point, CFLs contain mercury, which is both highly toxic and highly durable. So, on a side note, recycle your CFLs don’t throw them in the trash. But given China’s envrionmental track record the mass production of anything involving quantities of mercury is a cause for concern. So we loop back to one of the topics that I bring up too often for many, which is that trade agreements should have at least minimal environmental standards.
June 13th, 2008 at 7:14 am
You’ve got your glass turned upside down again (can’t even GET it half full). The vast, vast, vast majority of mortgages are fine. People are paying them and on time. BUT the Govt has to step in and “save” people who should have READ the darn papers, while the person who save for a good downpayment and pays on time, lives right next door working his butt off. “Overall 1.23 percent of all houses are in forclosure” says it all.
Once we get “off oil” I think the dollar will make a comeback, but until then it’s going to be tough sailing, especially if the “wealth distributors” get in office.
JMO
Tag
June 13th, 2008 at 7:19 am
MarkinWi,
I **watched** a senator speaking in congress and he made a big deal that every CFL is indeed made in China. He also joked that if he were to DROP that CFL they’d have to evacuate congress.
June 13th, 2008 at 7:19 am
The same issue of the WSJ has an article about Toyota in which Watanabe talks about accelerated battery development and Toyota making over one million hybrid vehicles a year, sometime after 2010. This stuff is turning into a really big wave.
June 13th, 2008 at 7:19 am
Side note to Lyle: I run/host/mod a site myself, which is peanuts in terms of number of eyeballs you get here.
I note that the content of your thread quotes from the source. However the link leads to a teaser for a subscribtion based service. I assume you do have a subscription to the WSJ (or possibly just use a 3rd party cache system to read it (which is wrong people, lol)).
You should be careful when quoting content from a subscription based link, especially as the owner of the site. I’ve ran into this issue (mass dissemination of premium content) on more than one occasion. Maybe you have the ok, or have been running other sites for years and you know the drill…I just wanted to give you the heads up.
June 13th, 2008 at 7:20 am
This article is from about year ago may be of interest:
http://www.evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=1245
June 13th, 2008 at 7:28 am
I’m glad they’re not blind to the fact of people living in apartments and Condos would have problems charging. Bravo for people actually thinking about this ahead of time (might not have a solution, but are at least acknowledging it).
June 13th, 2008 at 7:31 am
#73 Tag
Good morning by the way…nice to see you in the office early, hehe.
“The vast, vast, vast majority of mortgages are fine. People are paying them and on time. BUT the Govt has to step in and “save” people who should have READ the darn papers, while the person who save for a good downpayment and pays on time, lives right next door working his butt off. “Overall 1.23 percent of all houses are in forclosure” says it all.
Foreclosure is the absolute end of the line, the banks don’t want to foreclose on these people, that is total failure…they stop getting their interest checks…and they know when they take them back they are going to sit on the market for 6 months and they end up losing at least 25% of the original mortgage principal.
There is a massive pile of houses that should ‘technically’ be foreclosed. Banks do not want to put them on their books, and it would cause national panic and the credit market would completely seize.
The current numbers aren’t out (it goes quarterly), but for Q1 6.35% of all homes were at least a month behind their payments. That is not the vast majority. 1 in 15 are on the edge of the knife and growing.
Imagine the carnage on the market and the American people if 1 in 15 where tossed from their homes. Scary part is, it isn’t getting better…it’s getting worse. It makes it easy to see why the fed is throwing hundred of billions of dollars at banks to keep liquidity in the system.
June 13th, 2008 at 7:47 am
#72 MarkinWI
CFLs! Wow, that is a issue isn’t it. I find it ironic that we tout CFLs as environmental and green, when they have flippin’ Mercury in them!
Of course there is a note on the package to not thrown them out, but to take them to a ’special’ recycling station (for most people…take them to HD to recycle, probably your easiest location).
But c’mon, really? Are people really reading that little label on the back of the box…then storing that ‘nugget’ of information into their heads for the 10 years (?), then actaully making that trip?
I doubt it…to the landfill with you! How about in other countries, like the third world? Do they have the recycling infrastructure for these bulbs?
If our focus was on renewable energy…and we had a solar/wind/water based infrastructure CFLs would be outlawed, or at least would have big warning stickers on them like cigarettes.
This is way off topic, but it is still important. I imagine alot of people, even on this board, where unaware of the hazards of CFLs.
CFLs are 100% about energy conservation, 0% about environmentalism.
June 13th, 2008 at 7:47 am
statik,
NO, the government should not step in. Home prices skyrocketed due to the government’s push to increase homeownership among those who couldn’t afford homes. This imbalance created the bubble, which hurts qualified homeowners, as well as unqualified.
Currently, this shakeout is causing home prices to drop to more affordable levels, and when people start buying homes again (which is already happening in areas where prices dropped to meet demand), then builders can go back to work.
June 13th, 2008 at 7:48 am
The banks were bundling debt and trading it like a commodity, There SHOULD be a consequence for poor decisions, whether it’s a bank or a homeowner in way over his head. As anal as you are about debt, I’m surprised at your bail-out support. Will we be paying off credit card debt next? And I do mean WE, because it’s our tax dollars.
Maybe I should come to the office later in the day. I sure sound cranky.
June 13th, 2008 at 7:49 am
#59 Estero - Brilliant post as I’ve been trying to tell people that for years
# 61 Brad - The figures that you’ve posted are very relevant, something every future Volt owner should consider
# 71 Joe - Because somehow, everyone has concluded that Toyota is perfect. Just look at the 2009 Tundra. Somehow, Toyota has convinced themselves that they have “re-invented the truck”. Funny they should say that. GM catches flak for continuing to build trucks despite fuel prices, yet out of nowhere Toyota decides to build one from the ground-up in the middle of high fuel prices. If they were so smart, they would’ve seen that coming and not wasted development dollars on a product with a 3 year shelf life. Maybe if they spent that money on hybridizing their fleet they wouldn’t have that issue. I guess it takes a lot of time out of your busy day to beat up on GM instead of worrying about your own house.
June 13th, 2008 at 8:00 am
#80 Jason Hendler - the govt did push, but does that mean the consumer has to make a bad decision? Or that a bank should forego common sense? Everyone says that there is a certain amount that they won’t pay for gas, so using common logic, if you know that you can’t afford a $375,000 home should you buy it? Should a bank be allowed to ram it down your throat? It is the consumer that signs the mortgage agreement. We should exercise more restraint with our finances. Here in Alabama the problem has been that they’ve been building these McMansions and making everyone believe that they MUSTget these new homes whether they can afford it or not. The way companies keep sending jobs overseas so that they can increase profits gives the american consumer NO GUARANTEE about tomorrow. It is up to the consumer to be wise about their finances. The companies aren’t going to help you and neither is the govt, as more and more of your dollars leave the US (the reason its value has fallen). Everyone shoulders a portion of the blame for foreclosures.
June 13th, 2008 at 8:12 am
The Volt marks a departure point for GM. They realize that the petroleum problem has the US consumer worried to death and in that atmosphere profit is possible. Also they know that other car companies smell blood in the water too. If the Volt looks as good as the concept and performs as well as advertised then we the consumer will have a real step forward modern vehicle. The flip side of this doesn’t need to be discussed; we all have been there.
My choice would be small turbo diesels burning clean bio-fuels. They have the torque needed to move heavy loads, like SUVs, pickups, and trucks; also they will burn most any combustible fuels. The Southern Moon Shiners could be a good source of fuel as well as refreshments. The US has more distilleries then refiners, I think? What a concept, do I drink it or drive it? Of course the ATF would want to get in the middle of this action and federal taxes would drive the price out of sight, however maybe we could get a permit to brew of own? Home cooking would take on a whole new meaning!
June 13th, 2008 at 8:14 am
#81 Jason
#82 Tag
“NO, the government should not step in”
“As anal as you are about debt, I’m surprised at your bail-out support”
Hehe, easy fellas. We are on the same side here. I can see how you got the opinion I was pro-bailout though after rereading my post.
Here is what I said, “It makes it easy to see why the fed is throwing hundred of billions of dollars at banks to keep liquidity in the system”
I understand why they are doing it, I don’t agree with it. The gov’t fears the collapse of the system…but that might be what we need.
I believe in free market activity. A level playing field. If that means the US goes into a recession, even a depression as a consequence of it’s action, then so be it.
I think often people associate phrases like ‘free market’ and ‘democracy’ with ‘the good life.’ The two have nothing to do with each other. Money just naturally gravitates to the vehicle that gives it the most freedom/liquidity. The more restrictions and interventions (apart from the basic human rights of the day) that is put on the system by government, regardless of the intent, will ultimately lead to a net negative.
June 13th, 2008 at 8:26 am
Statik,
I ag, COUGH. I agre, CHOKE. You’re ri, GAG.
Hmmm….
I don’t believe in bail-outs either.
Whew, that was tough.
Tag
June 13th, 2008 at 8:32 am
Sure, free markets should be absolutely unregulated, and that’s just somehow, magically, will guarantee “the good life”.
Apparently, it seems everyone here either failed or never took Economics 101.
Have you even heard of market failures?
On the side note, those cheering for “the free market” (it only exists in textbooks, there is no free market in the reality), you must be very happy with recent run up in crude oil and gasoline, as a very large portion of it is due to index funds throwing in ridiculous amounts, and bypassing speculation limits on positions, because they are done through swap agreements with banks. Free markets are great, right? Enjoy the results at the gas pump.
June 13th, 2008 at 8:37 am
#81 Jason M. Hendler
“Currently, this shakeout is causing home prices to drop to more affordable levels, and when people start buying homes again (which is already happening in areas where prices dropped to meet demand), then builders can go back to work.”
I think there is local pockets where specific market factors are insulating home prices. But I don’t think nationally we are even close to having equillibrium on ‘affordable’ and ‘house prices’
We have a unbelievable amount of homes on the market, and for very long periods of time. I think what we are seeing is more and more people trying to get out of their houses and they are finding the price they thought their house was worth…it is not. Eventually they reduce and sell, bringing the whole market down a peg with the ‘new low,’ which the next seller has to deal with…and the next person repeats the process.
Gradually, the median home selling price is dropping.
April 2007- $219,900
April 2008-$202,300
http://www.realtor.org/research/research/ehsdata
Housing prices go down gradually as a rule, (even though this year’s 8 percent drop is unprecidented…ever) and as a trend, meaning things in motion tend to stay that way. I’d say we have several more years of pain to go…just my opinion though.
June 13th, 2008 at 8:40 am
Raphael,
There’s always room for civil discussion. BTW, I aced Econ 101, 201, and 301.
Your complaint is the heavily regulated stock market.
When I say free market, I meant that if I work harder and smarter than the next guy, I’ll likely be better off than he is. To me govt intervention in my effort to make a living for my family, is undesirable. If your preference is to redistribute the wealth, to the people who are unWILLING (not unable, they need help), then I guess we’ll agree to disagree.
Be well,
Tag
PS I should mention that when I took econ, money hadn’t been invented yet…
June 13th, 2008 at 8:43 am
Statik, you are right on. This bailout thing is garbage. No one helps me pay my mortgage. But now I have to help some irresponsible person pay theirs.
While I don’t support the government spending any money bailing out people and banks, I do support a “Manhattan Project” for alternative fuels (mostly solar because we are not going to run out of that).
I loved your comment #5. You are too funny.
June 13th, 2008 at 8:44 am
What does the stock market have anything to do with what I said?
June 13th, 2008 at 8:50 am
This is the gm-volt.com site, right?????
For a minute there, I thought I was misdirected to the lending tree bad loans and bailouts blogs…
But I guess it is time to chime in on this.
(rant on)
IMHO, the whole mortgage mess was fueled by greed, plain and simple. Greed on the part of the realtors, who told people making minimum wage and nothing saved for a down payment, that they could buy a home, just so they could get their 7%. Greed on the part of the mortgage companies and banks for setting up these crazy loans with the low up front rates and payments, to make their loan departments look good to the stockholders. And mostly greed on the part of the home buyers, who thought that owning a home was a right, and who now think they deserve to get special treatment for their stupidity. And I have even less compassion for the ‘home flippers’ that thought they could buy a home, slap a coat of paint on it, and re-sell it for a 50% profit before they even had to make the first payment…………..
I just really get tired of the “It’s not my fault” defense. Buck it up, take responsibility for your actions, and deal with the consequences. But stop asking me to have to pay for your mistakes!
First there was the .com bubble burst, then the stock market bubble burst, and now the housing market bubble burst. I hope that we are about out of bursting bubbles!!
Edit: I guess I forgot about the oil futures bubble. I wonder how long that one will go on???
(rant off)
Sorry - I guess I am a bit cranky today as well. It has been a long week at work!
June 13th, 2008 at 8:51 am
Raphael,
You talked of index funds. What do you think they index?
What does your reply address in my last post?
Tag
June 13th, 2008 at 8:53 am
A little bit on the potential load EV’s pose for the USA’s electrical generation providers. As a rough order of magnitude estimate, lets say there are 250 million vehicles in the USA, and lets say the average daily electrical use would be 10 KWHs. That would increase the existing load in the USA by about 10%.
But this added load from EV’s would not hit all at once, but grow over a 12 year or so period, as the car fleet turns over, shifting from foreign oil burners to domestic energy users.
How many nukes would be required to supply this demand? About 100 of the typical 1000 Megawatt units, or double what we now have running.
June 13th, 2008 at 8:54 am
I’m not ignoring anyone. I just have to leave so I can recover from agreeing with Statik (g)
Bye,
Tag
June 13th, 2008 at 8:55 am
#90 Raphael
Sure, free markets should be absolutely unregulated, and that’s just somehow, magically, will guarantee “the good life”. Apparently, it seems everyone here either failed or never took Economics 101.
Did you read my first sentence?
Here is what I said, “I think often people associate phrases like ‘free market’ and ‘democracy’ with ‘the good life.’ The two have nothing to do with each other”
Obviously everyone understands there is no actual totally ‘free market’ or will there ever be, that is also way I added the caveat for ‘the basic human rights of the day’, which could be interpreted as ‘level playing field’ and open access.
“you must be very happy with recent run up in crude oil and gasoline…Free markets are great, right? Enjoy the results at the gas pump”
Nice thing about free market, I can invest where I choose. Right now, mostly cash/bonds/derivatives, etc (net about 6 percent return), but around a tenth of my portfolio in dividend paying equities…like big oil, so I’m ok with the price. Side note: 85 percent of the portfolio in non US paper.
It is that same ‘free economy’ that skyrocketed oil that is leading this charge now to electric cars and solar power…not any government incentive or program.
/now this could turn into a debate
June 13th, 2008 at 8:56 am
Grizzly #49
We are in agreement about one source, especially China. That country should be our last source for any manufacturing shipped overseas. We have too many other dependable “partners” in the world to rely on China.
June 13th, 2008 at 8:59 am
Van,
Maybe we should get the FIRST Volt’s wheels on the road, and then worry about 250 million over a 12 to 15 year period. Thechnology will be marching on over that period.
June 13th, 2008 at 9:05 am
30 Million, split between the big 3 is 10 million each, that’s the same as the grant the Saudis gave to the researcher that came up with the carbon nano tube anode for Li batteries. Alternatively it is about 1 hour in Iraq.
Nice to know where Uncle Sam’s priorities are!
June 13th, 2008 at 9:20 am
Statik #95
Right this starts a debate :
You wrote :
“Sure, free markets should be absolutely unregulated, and that’s just somehow, magically, will guarantee “the good life”. Apparently, it seems everyone here either failed or never took Economics 101.”
Well
I teach Economics, the first thing I (with may other colleagues across the world) say to my students is that Free markets does not mean “laissez faire - laissez passer” like in the middle of the 19th century, otherwise you give Marx his main argument for the destruction of free markets : monopolies take power and it is the end of free market because of their market power, until they destroy themselves trough harsh competition.
Free markets are regulated markets ensuring that each player in the marked is not exploited by others.
Like Durkeim wrote more than a century ago :
« I am only free if nobody cannot use his physical, economic or whatever superiority to constraint my own freedom, the social rule only may stop those power abuses.
We now know how complex the rules must be to ensure the citizens the independence without which their freedom would have been only a nominal one. »
From : Emile Durkheim, De la division du travail social, Paris, 1893
Preface to the second edition
Or more concisely in French: “La liberté opprime, la loi libère”, roughly translated as ” Freedom oppresses , the law frees”.
Even Paul Krugman, Paul Samuelson, Milton Friedman, etc., etc. agree with those statements.
Hope that helps.
JC
June 13th, 2008 at 9:28 am
Jean-Charles #97:
I have no problem with rules to level the playing field.
I do have a problem when someone else thinks that they deserve to take my money to pay for their greed and mistakes, when things do not work out the way they wanted them to……
June 13th, 2008 at 9:35 am
Jean-Charles Jacquemin
Not to nitpick, but that was Raphael’s quote from a post or two above mine, I was actually quoting him. I just don’t want people to think I’m that insane, so I’m posting on your post, lol.
I/we actually sort of come to the same conclusion of free market after this quote.
I added the ‘free market’ had to have, “the basic human rights of the day’, which could be interpreted as ‘level playing field’ and open access” in today’s society.
I think we are echoing the same sentiment, just yours were more eloquent and with a very well thought out quote by Durkeim on abuses.
I like you, your my cup of tea.
(=
June 13th, 2008 at 9:39 am
Welcome back Jim, did you miss me?
As for Volt news, you have missed, well…nothing. No news.
Alot of exciting debate on hydrogen though, I strongly suggest you read the last thread about it…exciting stuff.
June 13th, 2008 at 9:45 am
Thanks Statik #102
Tonight (I’m in Belgium) I’ll cheer my late glass of good belgian beer to you and our common sentiment.
June 13th, 2008 at 9:53 am
Mmm, fancy Belgian beer and discussion on economics
Your definitely moving up my list of favoUrite (note Canadian ‘u’) posters.
/remeber when this site was something about some car? What was it’s name again?
June 13th, 2008 at 9:53 am
Since my #23 comment last night, I realize that there is a role for government, one which keeps them out of the energy production or automobile businesses, while helping both mightily in this transition.
Yes, dear freinds, this seems like a good place (Mortgage issues excepted), to once again preach on the virtues of a superconducting electricity line between the coasts.
(audience groans)
No, really.
It’s sunny in the Western deserts, and Windy in Texas; but we need energy on the Eastern Seaboard and the Pacific Coast. There’s a government role (with precedent) for enabling alternative energy by providing access (think Interstate Highways and their effects on goods deliveries, which helped busnesses and industries having nothing directly to do with goods delivery or highways).
The Volt is only part of the equation; somewhere, there has to be a generator turning. Our off-peak capacity is fine for a few years, but won’t continue to be. It will take years to get new Nukes on line. Alternate energy has a chance, but a major problem is getting energy from where it’s collected to where it’s needed.
The government funds research into superconductivity today, but by commissioning an actual project, there will be an opportunity for new businesses to be founded on the technology which will have far reaching consequences beyond the project itself.
How much more electricity will we need for a nationwide EV fleet? How much electricity is lost to transmission on conventional power lines? Hmmm.
Oh, and where are we going to build 100 nukes; when the NIMBYs come out in force? With superconducting technology, the plants can be located in remote locations.
June 13th, 2008 at 9:57 am
Statik #103: I tried to read the H2 thread, but I fell asleep by post #80 something…………..
Jean-Charles #104: I guess that InBev Beer from Belgium might start to taste like Budweiser?!?!?!?!
I figured we might as well move this thread onto something more tasty!!
June 13th, 2008 at 9:59 am
Tag #74
When you watched that senator in congress talking about CFLs being only made in China, did you accept the fact that every time a congressman or senator speaks he is telling the truth. If you did, that was a real big mistake. I don’t know if any of them know how to speak straight.
June 13th, 2008 at 10:00 am
#27 - N Riley
“Even though I will purchase a Prius until the Volt comes along, I know that Toyota has to keep the PR talk against GM and the Volt. ”
I don’t agree with the thought process here. I would think one would want to support the company that is developing the Volt. Yes, the Prius gets the best mileage right now (although far less that the EPA originally credited it with), but there are fuel efficient, quality models from GM to purchase in the interim. If we want the Volt, it seems to me we’ll do our part to help it become a reality.
June 13th, 2008 at 10:02 am
Jim I #101
You wrote :
“I do have a problem when someone else thinks that they deserve to take my money to pay for their greed and mistakes, when things do not work out the way they wanted them to…”
Me too.
Statik #105
GM should show us something new otherwise we shall finish to discuss Toyota vs GM like they do with Boeing vs Airbus in the textbooks : game theory, duopoly, reaction curves and other niceties for intellectuals.
JC
June 13th, 2008 at 10:12 am
Jim I #104,
“Jean-Charles #104: I guess that InBev Beer from Belgium might start to taste like Budweiser?!?!?!?!
I figured we might as well move this thread onto something more tasty!!
:)”
OK I think and hope that it is the reverse : ” Budweiser might start to taste like ‘InBev Beer from Belgium called “Jupiler” or “Stella”".
If you ever come to Belgium you will observe there is a more than one beer different from each other for every day of the year, and every letter of the alphabet and for every …
And I’ll make you taste “Optimo Bruno” from Grimbergen, that’s a true belgian beer the one I’ll use to cheer Statik.
But back to the main subject of the blog :”Never drink two Belgian beers before driving a Volt.”
June 13th, 2008 at 10:15 am
Your killing me Jean-Charles!
I would love to get into Boeing vs Airbus.
I’m sure everyone would be delighted if we got into the ‘nitty gritty’ of the latest confrontation dejour between the two with the 787 Dreamliner and the Airbus 380…or about the irony of China and Russia being the biggest opposers and/or threat to their duopoly.
/hydrogen debate v2.0
June 13th, 2008 at 10:21 am
Well Statik #111,
Just this simple question to stay on subject.
In Western Europe, for more than 30 years we have observed a Bertrand price competition between the VW Passat wagon and the Peugeot 4XX wagon both with diesel engines.
Do you think we ought to observe the same type of Bertrand competition between the Prius and the Volt ?
June 13th, 2008 at 10:23 am
#108 Joy
You might be correct. I will consider some of GM’s fuel efficient cars as a possible alternative to buying the Prius. But, no promises except that I will, God willing, purchase at least one Volt when it is available to me. I have been a GM purchaser most of my life. I don’t like to think about buying a Toyota. But, it will be a money decision. Which car will save me more money until the Volt can be purchased. Right now the Prius seems to fit that description. But, I will take a new look at the Malibu and other Chevy cars.
June 13th, 2008 at 10:35 am
All these debates are fine, but what I am interested in is seeing what the Volt will finally look like. Especially inside. The outside is going to really cool, I am sure. The inside of the car is what is interesting to me at this juncture. That is where I will be spend most of my viewing time of the Volt. From the perspective of the driver.
I am curious how GM will manage the vehicle to human interface for communicating to and from the Volt. As a software designer and programmer, I have my opinions. I just wonder what GM will do because there is going to be A LOT of information about the car’s vital statistics to be communicated to the driver.
We will probably not find out to much about this interface until close to release of the Volt.
June 13th, 2008 at 10:38 am
#9 Statik:
Roger that on the ‘hydrogen thread’. Burned me out.
June 13th, 2008 at 10:47 am
Where’d Raphael go? (g). I suspect that the CuisineArt combo of Statik and Jean-Charles was in play.
I think the car was called a Bolt, or something. It had SOMETHING to do with lightning or electricity or some such stuff… but it might have been hydrogen…..
June 13th, 2008 at 10:57 am
Tag #116
Yes right the lightning Bolt, the one on the Opel Flextreme, and all the Opels throughout the world.
JC
June 13th, 2008 at 11:00 am
Fords Americas President Mark Fields noted “the potential difficulty for apartment dwellers, stating “overnight charging isn’t readily available for most people who live in apartments or condos,” and mentioned worries about leaving extension cords out in the rain”.
________________________________________________________________________
With all the hubbub about hydrogen, China and mortgage foreclosures…
Is this a good time to bring up the “plug free” Volt again ?
So say ye ?
June 13th, 2008 at 11:01 am
I want the Volt so our own oil drilling can be used to keep Jet Fuel cheap so I can fly cheaper than I can right now. Also, our own oil development will keep plastic prices low, home heating prices low in the NE, and all those other oil driven products low in price.
Drill Here, Drill now. Get Hydrogen working.
June 13th, 2008 at 11:16 am
I want the Volt to restore GM to the position of leadership in automotive excellence and style represented by the 57 Chevy.
Tick tock, tick tock, tick tock.
June 13th, 2008 at 11:20 am
N Riley #113
If its a pure financial decision I would find it hard to believe the Prius makes a better financial case when compared to a cobalt or focus.
I bought my Cobalt for about 14,500 with power and an auto trans. I also average ~29mpg in mixed driving.
There are also many used options that might even be better. Please don’t run to the Prius when there are better domestic alternatives.
June 13th, 2008 at 11:21 am
Brad G #61
Nice math based on today’s GAS prices. Wait until you adjust for 2010/11 GAS prices. You’ll pay off the extra cost of the VOLT waaaaaaaay faster!
Jim I #64
I couldn’t agree with you more! I just checked back to the site and I heard a rumor that Steven Seagal is driving a Hydrogen powered fuel cell car with mercury filled CFL bulbs that he’s filling up @ LAX. He got the fool cell car from a 10 million dollar grant from the US govt pertaining to mortgages kickbacks. How come he gets one of those?
I’d rather have a GM VOLT electrically powered with the ability to use GAS as a backup just in case, with cool LED lighting, that I recharge off my solar grid at night for free, THX GM!
BTW, how do I get paid for each word that I type.
Oh ya, now I remember the question…
People want a VOLT because they’re tired of paying for the privilege (HIGH GAS PRICES) to drive their vehicle!
June 13th, 2008 at 11:29 am
Sorry, I thought this was the Volt forum. I’ll be back after you all straighten out your home loans with the bank.
Meanwhile, I agree with Joe #71 - GM is getting better (Chevy Malibu), and leading the way with the Volt. This leaves everyone else with their “mild hybrids”, certainly a left-handed complement. Even the Prius is pretty mild vs the Volt.
See, I can agree with Joe, as long as the subject isn’t a certain flamable gas which shall remain unnamed here (let’s not start THAT again).
June 13th, 2008 at 11:31 am
Here is a link to the event at the Brookings Institute. They state that transcripts and videos will be available soon. Interesting stuff…
http://www.brookings.edu/events/2008/0611_plugin_vehicle.aspx
June 13th, 2008 at 11:43 am
JC,
“In Western Europe, for more than 30 years we have observed a Bertrand price competition between the VW Passat wagon and the Peugeot 4XX wagon both with diesel engines. Do you think we ought to observe the same type of Bertrand competition between the Prius and the Volt ?”
Hrm, I understand how the definition may apply to the VW and the Peugeot. However, I think you need a inherently similar composition between the Prius and the Volt to have it apply in this case.
I believe the central theme in Bertrand’s model is marginal costing (it’s been awhile), would not factor into this scenerio.
Much like Boeing and Airbus, a duopoly may indeed exist in ‘the sector’ between GM and Toyota, but because it is a product of market timing, not more traditional monopolistic (duopolistic?) forces, I think the limited timeframe of the duopoly’s existence would interfer with any development of this model. (In fact, it is more likely that it disqualifies the duopoly even existed in the first place).
June 13th, 2008 at 11:47 am
A 1957 Chevrolet Bel Air Convertible had an original base MSRP of $2,611, which is in today’s dollars about $19,670. There’s no sign that a top trim Volt will cost less than $20,000. So, while the idea is nice thought, the analogy doesn’t hold up in practice.
June 13th, 2008 at 11:51 am
The apartments & condos problem will solve itself. As PHEVs gain in popularity, demand will quickly grow for apartments/condos that allow PHEVs to be recharged in the parking lot. Some kind of flat monthly rate or usage-