Comments on: GM’s E-Flex Plans for Europe

By: 57silver

57silver — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 22:49:15 +0000

Jackson @ #90,
“what if you offered a discount on that first 20 gallons? That would help families’ bottom lines while discouraging ‘guzzling’ (either vehicles, or drivers)”
———————————————————-
Yes, that could work also. The US Federal Government adds an $.18 per gallon tax on gasoline presently. The Europeans add several dollars per gallon to support their health care system, mass transit systems, etc. The US could increase the tax to a couple of dollars per gallon and use the collections to finance rebates on BEVs, E-REVs, hybrids and also to build recharging stations, alternative energy development, etc. The cards could be set up to eliminate all tax on the first 20 gallons, then the taxes would kick in after the discount is used up. Like some cell phone plans that ‘carry over’ unused minutes, the cards could carry over unused gas allotments for vacations, etc. A husband and wife would both get allotment cards, so there could be some savings of the 40 gallons per month they have access to at a tax-free discount. Of course, I am only using the “twenty gallons” as an arbitrary number. The main purpose of the gas card would be to promote the energy efficient lifestyles and vehicles while penalizing gas guzzling lifestyles and vehicles.

By: Uwe

Uwe — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 18:14:27 +0000

Its amazing how GM continuously fails to meet costumers expectations. Instead of delivering this real hot chevy volt instantly to key markets like Germany we again have to live with weired or boring Opel-models. We want the Volt here too.

Regards

By: DaveP

DaveP — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 17:16:06 +0000

#90 Jackson:
Well, you may be right. It’s a bigger engineering challenge electrifying a big truck than a small car but for a bigger financial reward, too. They’ve chosen to be somewhat conservative with their “moon shot” so we’ll see how that works out.

Frankly, I’d personally rather have the \Volt than a truck. And as I said in #4, what I REALLY want is a AWD \Volt with about 320 hp, which would easily be accomplished by simply putting another electric motor on the rear wheels plus the electronics to drive it. And I’d like a roof rack for my snowboard. And put it in a wagon shape. For THAT car, I’d trade in my WRX. And while I’m dreaming, I’d also like a helocopter…

By: Jackson

Jackson — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 14:20:49 +0000

57silver:

…what if you offered a discount on that first 20 gallons? That would help families’ bottom lines while discouraging ‘guzzling’ (either vehicles, or drivers).

DaveP:

Okay, okay, you can have your electric truck .

I was just saying that it shouldn’t be the first (probably not the next) thing they should do. It will be cheaper for GM (and the consumer) to wait awhile for engineering and economics to ramp up. Think of larger EREVs as a reward for successful electrification.

By: 57silver

57silver — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 08:20:19 +0000

nasaman @ #87;
“You’re right …..many, many people own trucks & SUVs that don’t need them. But many if not most of them are essentially ADDICTED to those gas guzzlers”
——————————————————————–
Yes, I imagine that there are many people that bought SUVs and trucks that don’t need such vehicles. There are also many people that bought such vehicles because they are essential to their needs. I’ve owned many different types of vehicles over the years and have never been ‘addicted’ to any of them. Different types serve different purposes. You can’t pull a boat or carry your wife, three kids, and a mother-in-law with a four passenger compact. You do realize the most popular type of SUV is one with third row seating, don’t you?
——————————————————————
nasaman,
“My point is that, like Andy Grove might argue, there needs to be a transitional (or “withdrawal”) period for guzzler owners”
——————————————————————-
I recognize the fact that Andy Grove is an intelligent man, but there is something that is overlooked by him and most, if not all, the posters on this fan site. You assume the “guzzler owners” are the ones burning most of the nation’s oil. I can make the argument that it is the “guzzling drivers” that burn most of the fuel. “Guzzling drivers” are the suburbanites that bought homes located 50+ miles from their place of employment. Did they think gasoline would always be cheap? Did they not realize high mileage would greatly decrease the resale value and reduce the lifetimes of their vehicles? I haven’t known too many long distance commuters, but the ones I have known bought inexpensive econoboxes for commuting and larger, roomier cars or trucks for their family vehicles that are used infrequently. I live in a small city though, do the ‘big city suburbanites’ really buy Suburbans to commute long distances? That doesn’t seem very wise.

I am retired now and drive very few miles per month, but I haven’t lived over three miles from my workplace in the last 35 years. I filled up with gas on July 13th, the first time I had bought gas since June 3rd. I used slightly over 16 gallons of gas in those forty days. My ‘fuel efficient’ vehicle? A Ford Supercrew XLT 4×4. The moral of the story? Before dissing the owners of ‘gas guzzlers’, find out how many gallons of gas they burn per month. How about a type of gas rationing to reduce our national consumption? No one consumer is ‘entitled’ to more gas than any other. Twenty gallons per month per licensed driver could be a start. Issue an electronic card to each license holder to count their gas purchases, then charge a $2 per gallon premium over the standard price on all purchases over twenty gallons. It could work with electronic gas pumps, such as those used at Krogers etc.that lower the purchase price when their store card is swiped. Just make the rationing card mandatory before gas can be purchased, then raise the price after the monthly allotment is reached. That would get the ‘gas guzzling consumers’ to evaluate the type of vehicle they purchase. Volts, hybrids, and BEVs would be supported by the market. Bet this wouldn’t be popular though, would it? (G)