What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
207 Comments
- ScienceDoc, on 02/04/2009, -7/+100Don't forget the douche bag at the California Air Resources Board, Alan Lloyd, that helped kill it because he just took a position as the head of the fuel cell consortium. Alan Lloyd should go to jail. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_killed_the_electr ...
- Ghoztt, on 02/05/2009, -4/+69After I saw "Who Killed The Electric Car" I was telling some of my friends how the car company refused to let people buy the car - and ended up repossessing every single one and SHREDDING them to tiny little pieces.
They called me a 'Conspiracy Theorist'...
:\ - yocouchdigga, on 02/05/2009, -7/+56see: Who Killed The Electric Car
- pstroll, on 02/05/2009, -14/+48Who killed the electric car??
The Laws of Thermodynamics and Economics that's who! - MalaysianMafia, on 02/05/2009, -8/+41and this is why we shouldn't be bailing them out.
- apena89, on 02/05/2009, -3/+33Funny how it isn't a conspiracy since everything in that movie has facts to support it. I guess the newspapers running stories about GM repossessing the EV1 were never published, and the committee who voted against the people to keep their EV1s also never happened.
No offense, but tell your "friends" that they are stupid. - zacharytelschow, on 02/05/2009, -10/+36An inferior vehicle at a higher cost certainly didn't need killing.
- jm1234567890, on 02/05/2009, -2/+27Of course an electric car is not for everyone. However, some people only commute in the city and the range of an electric vehicle is fine.
- staticsynapse, on 02/05/2009, -0/+23Yeah, exactly. If you've actually seen the movie you know that it places the blame on many factors, the manufacturers, the consumers, big oil, and the c.a.r.b. backing down from its decision.
- casuallyevil, on 02/05/2009, -16/+38The oil companies delayed (not killed) the electric car by having a cheaper alternative that didn't require billions of dollars in additional capital investment and relied on technology that was not only possible at the time, but actually existed and had decades of proof-of-concept. In other words, blame economic and technological reality, not the "evil corporations!!!111".
I don't see you building your own car company to build a vehicle nobody will buy, why do you expect others to do it? - MothBoy, on 02/05/2009, -2/+20You just gave a poor rendition of the stupidest argument against electric cars.
First off, your scenario is flawed. Instead of 300 miles in 13 hours, why not say 600 miles in 16 hours, then recharge overnight? That gets you cross country in 4-1/2 days. How many times in your life have you driven cross country period, let alone in less than 4-1/2 days? That is even ignoring the fact that an 80% charge only takes about 2 hours, nowhere close to your nine, so that you could actually do a 300 plus a pair of 240s in about 15 hours. Again charge over night and you are cross country in 3-1/2 days. Back to remedial math with you.
Second, most electrics being developed either have a range extending generator, or can tow one for a special trip like this, which increases your range far beyond what a normal car can go, so you and your buddy can take shifts and make FEWER stops in your electric than you would in an ICE car.
If you really want to go cross country, why don't you hop aboard one of those big diesel electrics that run on the rails. Since the vast majority of trips are well within your stated 300 miles, and you wake up with that full range every morning (as opposed to your ICE), an electric is actually MORE convenient because you NEVER have to go the gas station, whereas now you waste a trip to fill up every week or two.
Finally, electric cars running on coal power are still cleaner than ICE, while reducing our foreign oil use dramatically. Electricity from natural gas is much much cleaner, and nuke, hydro, solar and win would miraculously clear our skies while at the same time getting us independent of the middle ease and Venezuela. - 69fezz96, on 02/05/2009, -4/+21Welcome to the "State of Denial".
- elektronjunge, on 02/05/2009, -10/+26Although not entirely them the demand wasn't exactly there either.
- ebaymag0t, on 02/05/2009, -6/+21Funny, I didn't see anyone say,"***** oil companies."
- douglasr007, on 02/05/2009, -3/+15You do realize the cars were only on a lease program. No one who had the car was actually an owner of the car.
- farfromsubtl, on 02/05/2009, -2/+132006 just called... they want their blog post back.
- Nabeelco, on 02/05/2009, -4/+15Actually, you are totally wrong. The reason we came this far IS because we sacrificed ourselves.
The times that humanity advanced scientifically and technologically the most is when we shared the most resources and information. - geoffg, on 02/05/2009, -6/+16They should just change every title on the front page of Digg to "How my perception of how the world works explains why my parents still subsidize me..."
- jynweythek, on 02/05/2009, -4/+13wow, I bet the oil companies are the ones who keep all of GreenOptimistic's perpetual motion machines from being fully developed, too! Clearly, ExxonMobil is the only reason the "Wood-Iron Friction" miracle machine hasn't hit the shelves yet.
- bodegit, on 02/05/2009, -3/+12Why would you want to carry liquid stored potential, when you can transport electricity via an already installed grid? Do you think magic elves are pissing gas under the pump. Do you have any idea how much wasted energy and pollution comes out of the mining, drilling, transporting, refining, then transporting again. Tanker trucks hauling gas across the country probably burn as much fuel as they carry. Don't get me started on oil spills in the ocean.
Better Place is installing electric vehicle battery swap stations in California and many nations. You subscribe to the service and the car is free, the swap is automated, and it takes a couple minutes. Look it up. - Renton, on 02/05/2009, -3/+12Yeah, screw all the people that only use their car to drive to work and do errands around their city. Twoblink likes to drive cross-country regularly, therefore electric cars shouldn't even be an option.
- Murdats, on 02/05/2009, -3/+12you don't need 50%+ market demand for a product to be worth it, but why would they destroy working cars as well, even when offered 15million to keep one?
- Ymeg, on 02/05/2009, -7/+16If you want to electric car to live, then donate your money to people who are developing such technologies and cars. The oil companies did not kill anything by selling their product. These companies have absolutely no obligation to develop electric cars.
- ALiberalMind, on 02/05/2009, -7/+15If you watched the film, they already refuted your two points. Technologically, the battery technology was available. At the end, there's someone who's customized his own car with lithium ion batteries that would have easily allowed the EV-1 to go 300 miles. Economically, the demand was there. People who knew about it loved it. Since it's electric, it has much lower maintenance compared to a clunky combustion engine and they certainly have better acceleration. Plus, you get the benefit of not producing emissions. The problem is that GM refused to spend any time promoting the product. If they had, they would've easily come out ahead of Toyota. Instead, the executives decides to promote the Hummer and we all know how that worked out to be. :-\ If the EV-1 was such a failure, why did GM take the time, effort, and MONEY to deliberately destroy every single one?
And let's be realistic. not everyone is going to start up a car company on a whim. That's why those companies are there so they can supply the product in order to meet demand. In fact, in the movie, they shows 78 EV-1s that were in a parking lot & about to be destroyed. Guess what, the activists got together and got 80 buyers. Yet, GM didn't heed the call for some reason.
So yes, it certainly is a big problem on the corporate end. When you make short-term goals a priority, you only end up with a long-term disaster. - inactive, on 02/05/2009, -4/+12hahaha, those GM people..
- Bodhinature, on 02/05/2009, -5/+13Anyone who has watched this movie knows the conclusion. Oil, technology, and consumers killed the electric car. Buried for inaccuracy.
- macdady843, on 02/05/2009, -4/+12The way I see it is that if the company doesn't sell a very large number of them then it's going to be hard for places to maintain them and it will in turn make the company look bad. Like if people can't get a part they need for repair or its expensive as hell because it's not mass produced.
The company would rather not deal with that kind of PR mess. - ultar6, on 02/05/2009, -0/+8Did you really have to ask that Captain Obvious? The inability to own an EV1 or a vehicle like it is, amazingly enough, the entire premise of the Digg article, the movie it links to, and most of the responses to the article. Did you watch the movie? Did you watch the whole thing?
Rather than claim any right to keep the car, these posters lament that GM chose to repossess the cars rather than sell them to those who already had them. - twoblink, on 02/05/2009, -26/+34BS. The idea of an electric vehicle is STUPID.
Let's take the TopGear example: I want to drive from Los Angeles to New York. 2800 miles. Let's give the electrical car a 300 mile range. So I drive 300 miles at 70mph average, so I'm out of charge in 4 hours (assuming I am not hitting any cold climates which reduces a batteries charge by as much as 40%) I then wait 9 HOURS to recharge. So 300 miles = 13 hours.
We do a little math; 2800 miles / 300 miles = 9.3 stops. 9.3 * 13 hours per stop = 120.9 HOURS. And we haven't even talked about what to do with the battery waste yet.
Diesel or Hydrogen, you gotta go with a LIQUID stored potential item so it's easy to carry, easy to add, without downtime.
I am all for saving the planet, but all you treehuggers have got to LEARN SOME MATH before you rinse your mouth with Al Gore's footwash water.
You want to screw over oil companies, take all the electric car money, and put it into diesel or hydrogen research. Diesel can be gotten from Corn or Algae, gets 2~3x the gas mileage, and renewable without dependency on the middle east.
Still don't believe me? Watch the Top Gear review of the Tesla electric car
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DM3WBOXTdw
vs the Honda Clarity
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52L-nQ-LTew - taibo, on 02/05/2009, -0/+7Car companies are required by law to have spare parts and such for cars still in service. Letting people keep the EV1 would've been expensive, especially with their still-***** batteries.
Just be glad that GM actually let this thing go all the way to production. Knowing how GM is, I find it impressive that they went with this thing for as long as they did. - MothBoy, on 02/05/2009, -1/+8You are talking about the Hummer, right?????
GM is desperate to sell-off Hummer.
GM is desperate to bring out the Volt, to try and get some customers. - deadasdisco, on 02/05/2009, -2/+9honestly, when was the last time you legally HAD to drive your car the fastest you could.
- staticsynapse, on 02/05/2009, -4/+11No, it's not amazing. Take into account charge times, special charging equipment (or lack of), one is only electric, one is hybrid, one is a two seater while the other is a four seater. We're talking about 2 COMPLETELY different cars here.
People don't want a car that goes 100 miles then charges for 9 hours on special equipment. They want the versatility of plugging in at home with no special equipment and driving to and from work all week on no gas and then being able to drive as normal (as far as they want) on weekends. - bboy1122, on 02/04/2009, -13/+19its a shame that we cant change from our basic selfish instincts
- umitseric, on 02/05/2009, -0/+6This video was shown in my AP Enviro class back in high school. Even after watching it as a class its hard to discuss the topic without sounding somewhat like a "conspiracy theorist"
- Gloony, on 02/05/2009, -2/+8I get tired of saying this, but: The only benefit from electric vehicles comes from leveraging the greater efficiency of large powerplants against individuals' smaller energy requirements, the efficiency gain is around 15% before taking into account grid and car losses assuming a combustion engine efficiency of around 40%. I'm not even going to go into grid transmission and electric motor inefficiencies that eat away at this, let alone the characteristics of the battery making process. Additionally, the world's slow uptake of renewable energy means that a significant proportion of the energy being consumed is still supplied from fossil fuel sources and out of sight is out of mind for most people.
The real benefit of electric vehicles come from the fact that they allow flexibility for the future - the power source is transparent to the end user.
Now I'm looking forward to being dugg down for not saying electric cars are made from bacon, rainbows and kitten-farts during a lingerie pro-league game. - wallace321, on 02/05/2009, -0/+6because that's what this is about. a fuel efficient car for the masses to take to the track...
- apena89, on 02/05/2009, -1/+7because electricity is actually very easy to produce compared to fossil fuels. And there are many conversion techniques like solar power or wind power. Once the oil companies lose the people's demand for oil, they or anyone else cannot charge up the ass for electricity as its so abundant.
- therusher, on 02/05/2009, -0/+6This documentary came out in 2006...
- twinklyJesus, on 02/05/2009, -4/+9It lacked:
1. affordability
2 reasonable maintenance costs
3. passenger capacity
4. luggage capacity
5. performance (ever try to get on the freeway in LA or Houston at golf cart speeds?) The EV1 was sluggish at best. They became a hazard to other drivers.
6. recycling those giant batteries is expensive and big brother doesn't pay for it. - Sarthax, on 02/05/2009, -4/+9How often do you drive cross country? The electric vehicle is a short distance solution. Considering most people drive thier cars to commute, shop, and transport to and from, why do you need to be able to drive cross country again?
- barktwiggs, on 02/05/2009, -1/+6Electric cars back in the 90's are great, if you don't like driving more than 60 miles and prefer heavy lead acid batteries. EV1 pioneered a lot of great concepts, but it wasn't ready for prime time.
- twinklyJesus, on 02/05/2009, -1/+6way to miss the point completely.
- HellifIno, on 02/05/2009, -0/+5Many parts of the pine tree are edible.
http://www.pineconefestival.com/facts.html
: P - jm1234567890, on 02/05/2009, -1/+6Yes, but oil was much cheaper back then
- trolleyfan, on 02/05/2009, -1/+6Ummm, that generator is running "for 10 hours on 5 gallons of fuel" while putting out roughly enough energy to drive the car at ten, maybe fifteen miles an hour - assuming no hills. So you need about four of them...which puts it up to ten hours on *twenty* gallons of fuel...which is worse gas mileage than my twenty-year-old Civic gets...
- ashwinmudigonda, on 02/05/2009, -9/+14
"Only when the last tree has died, the last river has been poisoned and the last fish has been caught will we realize that we cannot eat money."
So true. Man's avarice has no depths. - MothBoy, on 02/05/2009, -0/+5Trust me, I am not holding my breath for the Volt. My parents had an EV1 that had 120 mile range in 2000 with NiMH. That was a nice little car and most everybody lucky enough to win the GM lottery and get one loved them. I am not terribly impressed that over ten years later they have cut the range by 2/3.
The truth is, though, this time it is different. This time you have a bunch of startups (Tesla and others) plus established players like Mitsubishi going electric because it makes economic sense and is going to happen with them or without them. This is happening in the absence of government mandates, not because of them, and is being driven by economics. Once Toyota makes a real Prius (with a gas generator and a solely electric drive, not the Frakenstein electric assist of a traditional drive they use now), the game is over. That is a simple conversion to pure electric with extended range.
Personally I find it funny that a lot of people don't like electrics because they think they are being forced to give up there "choice" in cars. The fact is that big public planners have been trying for years to get people out of their cars and into buses and trains hate electrics because they will do the exact opposite. Electrics will actually keep personal transportation and roadways viable far into the future. - Nando76, on 02/05/2009, -1/+6This is a ridiculous arguement, if you need to drive across the country, you just rent a car. Problem solved.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 218 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is