Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Will Green Cars Be Exciting To Drive And Enjoyable To Own?

1272830323351

Comments

  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,969
    Just don't touch any metal parts while doing this.

    image
  • steverstever YooperlandPosts: 40,436
    I think that's how Zap cars got their name.

    Moderator
    Need help navigating? stever@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,969
    Don't mention ZAAP. I lost money on that EV stock. Interesting story on another EV scam CODA. Not much longer for this world.

    “On Nov. 10, 2011, Gov. Jerry Brown came to Los Angeles to help open the new headquarters of CODA Automotive. The company was rolling out its CODA Sedan, which boasted new battery technology that would deliver unprecedented range for an all-electric car. The company claimed it would bring 650 high-tech jobs to L.A.

    “‘To the naysayers, we’re saying yes to solar, yes to CODA,’ Brown said. ‘We’re saying yes to a Los Angeles that’s on the move.’

    “But though Brown and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa did most of the talking at the day’s ceremony, it was City Council president Eric Garcetti who deserved most of the credit. Garcetti played the key role in enticing CODA to move its headquarters from Santa Monica by dangling $1 million in city redevelopment money — even as he received $8,000 in contributions from CODA executives and their spouses.

    “And yet, a little more than a year later, CODA is in trouble. The company never got close to its goal of 650 employees, topping out at about 270 before it began laying off workers in December. A showroom at the Westfield Century City mall has closed. It appears the company has sold fewer than 100 cars.


    http://www.calwatchdog.com/2013/03/01/green-jobs-lies-the-los-angeles-edition/?u- tm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=facebook
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Cora's car was competitive with the 1986 Honda Civic.

    That was a bad gamble from the start.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,969
    That was a bad gamble from the start.

    And the $100,000 Tesla family EV sedan is a good gamble?? Not anyway I can think of. Except for the con artist that sold it to the Feds.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    They expect to be profitable next quarter, so lets see.

    A loaded 3 series overlaps with the Model S in price.

    Did you see in the other thread that an Escalade can hit $87k? :surprise:
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,969
    No way to compare them. The EV is not practical for anyone but a short haul commuter, and a rich one at that. And how would you get a BMW 3 up to $100k? Even the hybrid would not be that expensive with every option.

    And how does a sedan compete with an Escalade? The Escalade I drove in 2007 was over $70k. A real apples to lemons comparison.

    When Musk makes a profit selling cars for $100k that cost $140k I will believe in his genius.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I said they overlap. You can get a 3 series with a 4 banger up to $50k. The big sedans go way higher.

    A Valet would park the Tesla out front but never the 3 series.

    We have to remember the target demographic owns 4-5 vehicles, so this would not be their trip car.

    A toy for the rich but at least they make them here and power them with domestic energy sources as well.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,969
    A toy for the rich but at least they make them here and power them with domestic energy sources as well.

    How much is made here? My guess is less than 50% of the Tesla is USA made. The GM Volt is only 45% USA made. We don't have the natural resources to build EV or Hybrids. CA has an electric shortage so I hope none sell here to suck down our energy supply.

    They are Corporate Welfare to the MAX. One of many reasons the Rich in this country keep getting richer. People that pay enough taxes to get the tax credit don't need the subsidy. Maybe a few that would buy the Leaf. The Tesla is a government payoff for favors rendered pure and simple. When out tax dollars are spent they will be gone like all the rest of the con men.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I've heard GM fans say they will eventually shift more parts production to the US.

    Not sure about the Tesla's domestic content.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,969
    At some point the technology has to be economically viable."

    That is an ABSOLUTE FALSE statement. EVs may NEVER become economically viable. Wishing they will does not make it so. That is why throwing tax dollars at them is SOOO wrong. Think about where we would be if the government decided which auto maker would survive and which would not. Oh yeah, that is what they are trying to do now. CODA did not get as much as Tesla and did not last as long.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,201
    edited March 2013
    I agree that our tax dollars should not be used to subsidize certain propulsion systems over others. I'm okay with the government subsidizing basic research, but not investments in companies. That's the function of venture capital and the market, where skin is in the game.

    I don't think anyone can predict whether EVs will ever be a better value proposition than ICs. I think it would take a major breakthrough in batteries. From what I've read that's a major challenge. So far the improvements have been incremental, and in the meantime IC systems, including transmissions and accessories, continue to become more efficient.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,969
    You are spot on top to finish.
  • steverstever YooperlandPosts: 40,436
    edited March 2013
    I don't think so. If the US hadn't bailed out GM and Chrysler, the economy would really be in a mess. The auto industry is about the only bright spot around and I don't think that would have been true without the bailouts.

    I know here in Michigan, those jobs bring in some real green.

    Plus there's a lot of infrastructure money floating around. Building a railroad spur or subsidizing the expansion of utilities is another way the government invests in companies.

    Moderator
    Need help navigating? stever@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,969
    I don't think so. If the US hadn't bailed out GM and Chrysler, the economy would really be in a mess.

    The investments are in companies that are failures. The economy is in worse shape for the middle class than it was 5 years ago. Handing out welfare and extended unemployment is purely political. The Stimulus could have been used on real projects to get our infrastructure back in shape. Less than 1% was spent on real projects that hire real people that are out of work. Buying cell phones and backing phony auto loans is just creating the next bubble. We will probably never agree until we look like Greece or Spain. It is headed our direction at the speed of light.
  • steverstever YooperlandPosts: 40,436
    Everything goes in cycles and even my little depressed area has had a little pick-up.

    Take it from me - if you tune out 99% of the incessant political squabbling of the true believers you'll enjoy a much nicer (and quieter) bike ride. Having to lean either left or right all the time isn't nearly as much fun as active leaning. :P

    Moderator
    Need help navigating? stever@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America: I70 & I75Posts: 18,157
    >I'm okay with the government subsidizing basic research, but not investments in companies. That's the function of venture capital and the market, where skin is in the game.

    But this rewards certain folk who donate to our campaigns. Need more political access? Donate.

    I've been around through the green evolution since people started building solar panels to catch the sun's heat on their roofs and use it for hot water or storing it. The things that were energy and cost efficient have caught on and have been incorporated into some houses and businesses. But the solar cells for charging your house battery to be used later in the day haven't. The windmills as a similar charge and store have not worked out. AFter 30 years, there's still a lot that doesn't work despite being touted by the greenies (and some politicians).
  • steverstever YooperlandPosts: 40,436
    edited March 2013
    True, but "local" solar adoption is still just a drop in the bucket. Must be all those campaign contributions from the oil companies holding it down. :shades:

    Moderator
    Need help navigating? stever@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America: I70 & I75Posts: 18,157
    >If the US hadn't bailed out GM and Chrysler, the economy would really be in a mess. The auto industry is about the only bright spot around and I don't think that would have been true without the bailouts.

    Glad to see you say that. Amazing how much ridicule was heaped on folks like myself in forums who said that the bailouts were critical to not having a worse collapse economically. I even suggest more bailout money would help GM further. I don't agree with how the money was spread politically, but keeping part of GM going and keeping the suppliers operating was a big help to the economy.

    I see the Volt existing as a result of the government's push. That is the future in this country for any EV rather than being electric only which limits range. What's needed is reduction in battery cost for the couple of vehicles with the IC assist to bring the car's prices down.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,969
    Pretty wild vehicle. I think you will see more of that type EV than others. They seem exempt from all the safety crappola on 4 wheeled vehicles. The 3 wheeled EV we tested was only legal on roads posted 35 MPH or less. That looks like it would go more than 25 MPH.

    PS
    I just expect governments to live within their means like I do. Neither a left or right ideology.
  • steverstever YooperlandPosts: 40,436
    We all know plenty of people who don't live within their means. Borrowing and bankruptcy goes back centuries.

    A few people with insufficient means are probably putting deposits down on Leafs and Volts and trying to buy i-Roads right this very minute. :shades:

    Moderator
    Need help navigating? stever@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,969
    Amazing how much ridicule was heaped on folks like myself in forums who said that the bailouts were critical to not having a worse collapse economically.

    If the GM bailout wasn't so blatantly a pay back to the UAW, I might agree. And the biggest share of the loss will be filling the Pension plan for just the UAW. The non represented folks got screwed in the bailout.

    As for the Volt, I don't see how a vehicle that is less than 50% USA made is a plus for the economy? There is no doubt EVs and Hybrids are a bigger environmental problem than a plain vanilla ICE vehicle. So where is the Green in them, except a few people reaping all the benefits of the Green Agenda.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,969
    We all know plenty of people who don't live within their means. Borrowing and bankruptcy goes back centuries.

    A few people with insufficient means are probably putting deposits down on Leafs and Volts and trying to buy i-Roads right this very minute.


    I agree, but when they drag all of US down with them I have a problem with it. The current Sub-prime loans from GM is a good example. The idiocy of spending your way out of debt goes back to the Roman empire. I see US heading that direction faster than a High Speed Bullet Train.

    General Motors has flooded financial markets with auto-backed securities in an effort to offload its risky subprime loans onto banks, a strategy industry insiders say could produce a bubble.

    High production costs and falling profit-per-car have led auto manufacturers to turn to financing to earn higher profits. Automakers have capitalized on lending by not only loaning money to customers but also packaging and selling those loans to investors in a manner similar to the sale of mortgage-backed securities that created the housing bubble.


    http://freebeacon.com/fannie-motors/

    http://www.gmfinancial.com/dealers/product-offerings/subprime-auto-loans.aspx
  • steverstever YooperlandPosts: 40,436
    And people can dig up a bunch of links where some person or company got a SBA loan or some grant money or other kind of government help, and made a go of it and wound up repaying the money ten-fold just in taxes.

    Rome fell apart but lots of those public works roads they built are still there. :shades:

    Moderator
    Need help navigating? stever@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I agree that our tax dollars should not be used to subsidize certain propulsion systems over others

    Yeah, but doesn't big oil received huge subsidies?

    The global fossil fuel subsidies were $523 billion and renewable energy subsidies $88 billion in 2011.[1] According to Fatih Birol, Chief Economist at the International Energy Agency

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_subsidies#cite_note-1

    Why are we complaining about the $88 billion and given the half trillion a pass?
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,969
    Rome fell apart but lots of those public works roads they built are still there.

    Don't expect any roads we build to last 2000 years. 50 years and they are falling apart.

    SBA loans are limited to $6 million. And friends that I know that tried to get them were not able to. You better have a good plan that is near fool proof. I don't know what to tell you if you cannot see all the loan guarantees we have put out over the last 20 years are political pay backs. The rich are getting the money and NOT creating jobs as promised.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,969
    Why are we complaining about the $88 billion and given the half trillion a pass?

    Don't forget the writer is part of the Green Agenda. Probably makes a small fortune spinning the truth. Every time I research these so called fossil fuel subsidies they turn out to be legitimate tax deductions. There is a HUGE difference. Giving a half a billion to a campaign contributor and then watch the company file for BK to avoid paying US back, should be prosecuted. We are now reaping the losses from the last Green Agenda under Carter. There are thousands of wind generators no longer usable. Many NEVER produced any energy. Only provided cash for those involved. Same with defunct Solar farms. Not to mention chumps like myself that bought into the Solar Panel scams of the 1980s. I don't trust any program with a 20 year payoff as the Solar Panel industry is now pushing. The panels go bad, the company is out of business and you still owe the bank that holds a 2nd against your home. The whole Green Agenda stinks in my nostrils. I also have some worthless stock to prove I was not always this way.
  • steverstever YooperlandPosts: 40,436
    they turn out to be legitimate tax deductions

    Right, just like those "legitimate" second home tax deductions. Depends on whose ax is getting gored.

    Here's another fun one:

    The fastest Ferrari road car ever comes with just one name (Yahoo)

    It's a gas/electric hybrid. :)

    Moderator
    Need help navigating? stever@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

Sign In or Register to comment.