What is Digg?Sponsored by AVG
Not All Free Anti-Virus Software Is Created Equal view!
free.avg.com - 2.4 million people a week get AVG Anti-Virus Free, for the best protection against web threats.
178 Comments
- jstohler, on 06/12/2008, -7/+64Just think: GM had the chance to be ahead of this curve by years with the EV1, but instead chose to crush them all into cubes. Typical Detroit dumbassery.
- Michiko280, on 06/12/2008, -1/+26My favorite is when they have plug in stations attached to parking meters in super eco-friendly areas like UC Davis, California!
- inactive, on 06/12/2008, -5/+21Hurray Coal!
- slabdigger, on 06/12/2008, -2/+18dugg for "dumbassery" - but GM didn't crush the cars - they SHREDDED them.
- fr3nch13, on 06/12/2008, -0/+14Power plants are Point Sources and are much easier to control. Therefore, it is easier to clean up.
Another advantage is that America is a lot less dependent on foreign coal compared to oil. - fr3nch13, on 06/12/2008, -4/+18From what I know about this car is that it would turn on the gas engine after (A) only 9 miles or (B) speeds > 40 mph. Therefore for most practical purposes this car would still be very reliant on gasoline. This is a typical parallel hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) with the ability to plug-in.
GM is creating the Volt (see http://gm-volt.com ), also slated to start production in 2010. This would be able to go 40 miles (90% of all round trips are < 40 miles), on a single charge. This includes highway speeds. The Volt is a Extended-Range Electric Vehicle (E-REV) or series hybrid. Most drivers would be able to make it to work and back without a drop of gasoline. - inactive, on 06/12/2008, -5/+17dugg for making fun of Detroit.
- huge129, on 06/12/2008, -2/+12just go and watch "Who killed the electric car?", interesting documentary
- ChromaVita, on 06/12/2008, -0/+8I don't really know what I was expecting when I clicked that link...
- yourmanstan, on 06/12/2008, -0/+7lol, still better than petrol tho
- Lososaurus, on 06/12/2008, -1/+8Or we could just go nuclear.
- JimmyIkon, on 06/12/2008, -0/+6actually, crushed to fit nicely into the shredder.
- MattB123, on 06/12/2008, -0/+6No. Those are laptop batteries.
- inactive, on 06/12/2008, -3/+9Green + Green = Innovation. The success Toyota had with the prius will make other companies want to follow the same path to make a profitable and affordable electric car. People weren't ready for a plug in electric car when Honda came out with it. Hybrids kinda give people a stepping stone to go from hybrid to full electric...
- linuxpenguin, on 06/12/2008, -0/+5Wow, that's really funny the way you talk like Jar Jar Binks and made your name JarJar.
Except not really. - inactive, on 06/12/2008, -1/+6Someone using a computer to tell us to get off the power grid is not very convincing.
- dtd00d, on 06/12/2008, -2/+7That was not the goal of the Prius design. It was supposed to be revolutionary in the respect that it handles and gets used like a normal sedan, with all of the trunk space and interior capacity of a typical car. Toyota wasn't trying to outdo a sportscar, but rather provide a practical and useful green alternative vehicle.
If you ever get to drive one you'll know what I mean. - Zoidberg, on 06/12/2008, -0/+4I did misread your comment, so I edited my post. Sorry.
- camilos007, on 06/13/2008, -0/+4Or you could just buy your electricity from Quebec, Ontario or BC where most(in some cases ALL) of their electricity comes from Renewable sources(dams).
- fooljoe, on 06/12/2008, -0/+4I'm not satisfied because I want technology that *was* discovered yesterday on the roads today. Explain to me how we "have" electric cars. We had them, and they were taken away when automakers reclaimed and shredded them, and Chevron bought the patents to their batteries and forbade their production.
I'm not satisfied because perfectly good cars capable of running without oil existed 10 years ago, but all we hear today is that we have to wait until 2010, even as the need for such cars becomes increasingly desperate. How is that technological evolution? - jstohler, on 06/12/2008, -0/+4Well pointed out, sir.
- normalize, on 06/12/2008, -1/+5It's amazing that even the president of Toyota admits to the reality of impending peak oil:
"Our view is that oil production will peak in the near future. We need to develop power train(s) for alternative energy sources."
It's a shame that the vast majority of the U.S. government still believes that cheap oil will continue to flow out of the ground indefinitely. Sure, gasoline prices today are mostly a result of speculation, but that speculation is caused by evidence that production is beginning to slow. We might be able to weather the storm for a little while, but the reality is that we're coming to the end of the petroleum era.
I guess we should get used to seeing more cars like these. - yourmanstan, on 06/12/2008, -3/+7its like automakers always just want to gauge public opinion. GIVE US A VIABLE ELECTRIC CAR ALREADY! Who killed the electric car?
- inactive, on 06/12/2008, -0/+4Yeah, the 18 and up crowd aren't affected by the digging.
- jumanous, on 06/12/2008, -1/+5Why can't they make a diesel electric and actually make an impact on CO2 rather than this half assed petro-electric crap.
- inactive, on 06/12/2008, -2/+6Ah, some people are never satisfied. They seem to want undiscovered technology to be discovered yesterday.
Let's see, we currently have:
Hybrids: considered bad due to the fact that is still uses gas, even at a greatly reduced rate
Electric: bad because of how electricity is generated
Biofuel: bad because of the effect on the global food supply, as well as the possible effects caused by their emissions
That leaves???? Apparently technological evolution doesn't really mean much to some people. - Culyt, on 06/12/2008, -3/+7They didn't just crush (or shred) them, they sold the patents on the battery to big oil and they force car makers to only put them into hybrids if they want to use them, not full electric. I wouldn't be surprised if there are other strings attached (such as a specific amount of fuel efficiency).
Hybrids are exactly what the oil companies want, they are now making the same amount of money thanks to the price increase by selling half as much oil at a time when oil is running out. (Actually I understand hybrids only use about 30% less oil). As oil prices go up, fuel efficiency does too and big oil keep getting the same profits and controlling lots of the world.
Hybrids are a step in the right direction since they pollute less, but I'll wait until we get electric before I start to really care, and then we still need to be getting the original electricity from a clean source.
☢ - moo083, on 06/12/2008, -0/+4I wanted to point out that the article description in digg is inaccurate. It says that the next Prius comes out in 2010 but the article actually says that the next Prius will come out BY 2010 which is very different. It means it will be the 2010 model, but it will likely come out some time in 2009, NOT 2010.
- beathermit, on 06/12/2008, -0/+3I hear this ***** so much on digg so much its acronym worthy .
- nydwarf, on 06/14/2008, -0/+3We truly need to get beyond oil because as we have seen if you have a car that still needs gasoline the oil producers still have you by the balls. Even if demand goes down they can just keep on jacking up the price.
- inactive, on 06/12/2008, -0/+3I don't think you have seen the documentary?
- CharlesSaint, on 06/13/2008, -0/+3Exactly. I'm so tired of this "It will just offset the pollution to large coal power plants" argument. You can't attack a large problem like eliminating our dependence on fossil fuels, from all sides at once. A problem of that magnitude has to be solved piece by piece, gradually. It's a lot easier for industries to shift to cleaner and more efficient energy solutions than it is for the entire American fleet of automobiles to make the transition away from petroleum dependence. This is not tricky to understand...
Step 1: Transition your fleet of existing automobiles away from foreign finite resources to a resource produced locally; with an already existent national distribution infrastructure. IE: Electricity
Step 2: Transition electricity production away from finite foreign resources in favor of renewable and/or more efficient resources. IE: Nuclear, Wind, Solar, Hydroelectric
Step 3: Watch as the US "magically" quits finding reasons to intervene in the middle-east, and America finally enters a new age of transportation efficiency. - betacmag4u, on 06/13/2008, -0/+3VW Lupo 78 mpg introduced in 1998. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Lupo
- SBColt15, on 06/12/2008, -1/+42020 - 2029 is far too long to wait for a full fleet of hybrids. Every manufacturers' fleet should be all hybrid by 2012 and moving completely away from gasoline after that.
- thredden, on 06/12/2008, -0/+3geocities? wtf? i thought that died off with the .com bust...
- linuxpenguin, on 06/12/2008, -0/+3Service Unavailable. Awesome!
- sgvprelude, on 06/13/2008, -0/+3Not all the energy comes from coal folks. Let's not forget Geothermal, Solar, and wind that already powers millions of homes.
- mikevp, on 06/12/2008, -0/+3The StoneCutters
- inactive, on 06/12/2008, -0/+3Horses. Just move back to Horses and wagons, we can put struts on the wagons, rubber tires, a poop catch on the horse, volia...gas free, electric free transportation.
Doesn't leave much room for the import modding guys, I mean racing stripes on a horse would be so wrong, but so is a 3 foot wing on a civic. - davidrools, on 06/12/2008, -0/+3Even if they were to build several bodies around the same platform, they could reach a much wider audience. I'm sure they will in the future. Apple started out with a single iPod model, then launched the different colors and sizes all based around the same music management system. Same deal.
- themonkielives, on 06/12/2008, -0/+3Which would release less polution then the gas powered cars being replaced. The power plants are far more efficient.
- davidrools, on 06/12/2008, -0/+3I'll never look at a prius the same again.
- TheOther1, on 06/13/2008, -0/+3Dunno, but video killed the radio star.
- IllBeBack, on 06/12/2008, -0/+3My Toyota Camry Hybrid looks identical to all other Camrys and I really like it. 38mpg consistently.
- MoralThreat, on 06/12/2008, -0/+2I'm still afraid to look....
- Sawta, on 06/13/2008, -0/+2Or we (the US) could just develop a better infrastructure for public transportation. Ah well, better than nothing I guess.
- apeweek, on 06/13/2008, -0/+2GM's battery problems are largely of their own creation. The A123 batteries GM wants are licensed through Cobasys, the same oil-company controlled entity that controls and overprices NIMH batteries. Automotive Li-Ion batteries can indeed be made cheaply, even today. Here's a Chinese company doing it - you'll notice the page says "1/10 the cost of other lithiums" : http://everspring.net/product-battery.htm
Before you criticize the quality of these batteries, realize that asians invented Li-Ions, and the vast majority of Li-Ions are manufactured in China already.
Of course GM is angling for government help with their price targets. Why shouldn't they try this? But as I've already shown with the $6 billion Ford Mondeo example, initial selling prices for all new cars have little to do with the real costs of making them. Carmakers have to look ahead to capturing market share and earning future profits.
Business is far more complex than simply filling demand, as you seem to think.
Of course there are alternatives to inkjet printers - but despite all your dancing around my inkjet printer example, the fact remains that you cannot buy an injet printer that uses a big ink tank instead of a cartridge, despite consumer demand for such a thing. Here's another example: surveys repeatedly show people would like 'a la carte' cable TV pricing - buying just the channels you want, instead of a package of channels. Why won't cable providers - any of them - sell us channels this way? It's what we demand!
Carmakers have historically resisted EVs because they could threaten to displace more profitable gas-powered models. Electric motors have just one moving part, and can last decades with no service whatsoever - no filters, fluids, tuneups, oil changes, plugs, etc. And new nanotech-based batteries have long 20-year lifespans, even eliminating battery replacements.
Example: here's a nanotech alternative to A123 batteries for GM - the Altairnano battery. It's used in this vehicle: http://phoenixmotorcars.com
Instead of hiding behind your "pansy victim" slur, how about rebutting with real facts and logic? No, I can't start my own company to beat GM at the EV game. In case you haven't noticed, many others are trying this. Only a big company with deep pockets can afford to sell EVs for a reasonable price through mass production. A smaller company, like Tesla, has to get there slowly - they don't have billions to burn on building market share.
Despite your apparent assumption, I do not think GM or any other company "owes" us electric cars.
What we are owed is simply the truth. Once people truly understand they could be driving an EV for 1 cent per mile instead of the 20 cents/mile gasoline costs them - and they understand they could have a car that lasts decades with no engine maintenance - the rest will eventually take care of itself - Dracker, on 06/13/2008, -0/+2This is a step in the right direction. Cars running on the grid is better than cars running on petrol. Even if the grid is currently powered by coal, use of PHEVs will decrease foreign oil dependence. And if the grid gets cleaned up (You want that, right?) it will reduce environmental impact more than if the cars had stayed petrol-based.
We're on the same team here. - trollick, on 06/12/2008, -0/+2Oh yeah, that's Prius right there.
- inactive, on 06/13/2008, -0/+2If I can go 9 miles, I would probably never use the gasoline. But then, I live on an island.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 180 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is