GM Volt! Is it the solution to Foreign Oil?

[Sarah G]

The Volt is an awesome car but too expensive right now.

Always happens with new technologies. They always start out very expensive and the price goes down at they start to perfect it. Remember the first cell phone! LOL, the first ones were 100 fold more expensive that they are now.

Take the Motorola Dyna TAC:
The DynaTAC's retail price, $3,995 and I believe they paid upward of $2 a minute!

Motorola DynaTAC - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What you will see with the Volt, the Model S, Nissan's, Chysler, Ford's. Honda's, Mistubshi etc., in other words the first generation of electric cars, be bought up by the upper middle class and upper class people first. Second generation will be more middle classers. Third generation will all the middle class, with the lower class buying the used 1st generation autos.

The revolution starts in 2010, the revolution will be completed by 2020! My kids will laugh at when I tell them stories about their old man's gas powered car and they will say I couldn't imagine such a thing! Probably the same thing when the generations started to switch from horse and buggy to cars!

Oh I agree. And with those big phones, they were so heavy and clunky AND expensive..

I just love the look of that VOLT. It's kind of small but it looks sturdy and so high tech.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Are we just supposed to take your word for it!

You can either do that or google it yourself. The result will be the same. However it's obvious you didn't even read what I posted.

 

[Navy1960]

The Volt is an awesome car but too expensive right now.

The slated cost of the Nissan Leaf Sarah is around 28 to 34 K that puts it in the Toyota Prius territory. If this is true, then while if you ask me thats still a lot, in the scheme of things considering your yearly fuel bill will be basically zero , and whatever the offset is in your utility bill is it might not be all that bad. However, it's still a lot more expensive than a lot of other high milage car's .

 

[Sarah G]

The Volt is an awesome car but too expensive right now.

The slated cost of the Nissan Leaf Sarah is around 28 to 34 K that puts it in the Toyota Prius territory. If this is true, then while if you ask me thats still a lot, in the scheme of things considering your yearly fuel bill will be basically zero , and whatever the offset is in your utility bill is it might not be all that bad. However, it's still a lot more expensive than a lot of other high milage car's .

You make a good point there. I really like Nissan too...

I see a lot of Prius cars on the road lately, have you looked at them?

 

[GHook93]

Are we just supposed to take your word for it!

You can either do that or google it yourself. The result will be the same. However it's obvious you didn't even read what I posted.

I read your bullet points, but that was it. The person that makes the claim should back up the research with proof, not the other way around.

 

[Navy1960]

The Volt is an awesome car but too expensive right now.

The slated cost of the Nissan Leaf Sarah is around 28 to 34 K that puts it in the Toyota Prius territory. If this is true, then while if you ask me thats still a lot, in the scheme of things considering your yearly fuel bill will be basically zero , and whatever the offset is in your utility bill is it might not be all that bad. However, it's still a lot more expensive than a lot of other high milage car's .

You make a good point there. I really like Nissan too...

I see a lot of Prius cars on the road lately, have you looked at them?

You might be surprised at the sheer number of hybrid cars that owe their existance to technology developed around the Prius platform Sarah. In fact Ford spent quite a lot on toyota for it's own hybrid development. While I honestly don't care much for the looks of the Prius and the way it's laid out. I especially don't like the center layout of the instrument cluster because in my opnion it takes the drivers eyes off the road. Actually when I see one we have sort of a running joke between my daughter and I on the Prius " there goes an upsidedown bathtub" . It is however from a mechanical standpoint a well developed car and deserves all the accolades it gets.

The preliminary agreement between Ford and Aisin AW Co. marks a change in strategy for Toyota, whose U.S. partner up to now has been General Motors Corp. It also emphasizes the growing need among the world's top automakers to develop new partnerships to keep up with cost-cutting pressures and technological advances.

Aisin AW plans to supply Ford with electric motors for use in 10,000 to 20,000 gas-electric hybrid vehicles a year beginning in 2003, according to an Aisin AW spokesman, Hirotake Kondo. Mr. Kondo said that a final contract hasn't been signed. Aisin AW is a subsidiary of Aisin Seiki Co., a major auto-parts maker.
Ford To Buy Hybrid Engine Parts From Toyota Affiliate | Autoparts Report | Find Articles at BNET

 

[Midnight Marauder]

The Volt is an awesome car but too expensive right now.

Always happens with new technologies. They always start out very expensive and the price goes down at they start to perfect it. Remember the first cell phone! LOL, the first ones were 100 fold more expensive that they are now.

Take the Motorola Dyna TAC:
The DynaTAC's retail price, $3,995 and I believe they paid upward of $2 a minute!

Motorola DynaTAC - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What you will see with the Volt, the Model S, Nissan's, Chysler, Ford's. Honda's, Mistubshi etc., in other words the first generation of electric cars, be bought up by the upper middle class and upper class people first. Second generation will be more middle classers. Third generation will all the middle class, with the lower class buying the used 1st generation autos.

The revolution starts in 2010, the revolution will be completed by 2020! My kids will laugh at when I tell them stories about their old man's gas powered car and they will say I couldn't imagine such a thing! Probably the same thing when the generations started to switch from horse and buggy to cars!

Do you understand how stupid this analogy is?

You're seriously comparing electronics with automobiles?

Automobiles haven't gotten any cheaper -- it's quite the opposite. They are also much more labor intensive to build, and they are far more complex than a cellphone.

If you think for just a second, you'll realize you're not comparing apples to apples, you're comparing apples to the human body.

What a stupid, and intellectually sloppy comparison.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Are we just supposed to take your word for it!

You can either do that or google it yourself. The result will be the same. However it's obvious you didn't even read what I posted.

I read your bullet points, but that was it. The person that makes the claim should back up the research with proof, not the other way around.

There were no "bullet points" merely statements of fact which you cannot challenge, so you ignore them.

If you're going to take the time to respond to it, try actually READING what I said:

Clicky

 

[GHook93]

The Volt is an awesome car but too expensive right now.

Always happens with new technologies. They always start out very expensive and the price goes down at they start to perfect it. Remember the first cell phone! LOL, the first ones were 100 fold more expensive that they are now.

Take the Motorola Dyna TAC:
The DynaTAC's retail price, $3,995 and I believe they paid upward of $2 a minute!

Motorola DynaTAC - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What you will see with the Volt, the Model S, Nissan's, Chysler, Ford's. Honda's, Mistubshi etc., in other words the first generation of electric cars, be bought up by the upper middle class and upper class people first. Second generation will be more middle classers. Third generation will all the middle class, with the lower class buying the used 1st generation autos.

The revolution starts in 2010, the revolution will be completed by 2020! My kids will laugh at when I tell them stories about their old man's gas powered car and they will say I couldn't imagine such a thing! Probably the same thing when the generations started to switch from horse and buggy to cars!

Do you understand how stupid this analogy is?

You're seriously comparing electronics with automobiles?

Automobiles haven't gotten any cheaper -- it's quite the opposite. They are also much more labor intensive to build, and they are far more complex than a cellphone.

If you think for just a second, you'll realize you're not comparing apples to apples, you're comparing apples to the human body.

What a stupid, and intellectually sloppy comparison.

I'm comparing new technologies. Cell phones started very expensive and got cheaper very quick and then the price increased since then.

Same with any technology, starts out very expensive, then decreases and then starts the price up surge!

 

[Cold Fusion38]

Hey any of you Neo-Cons want to tell us why having at least ONE of your houshold cars be a polug in electric ?

 

[Cold Fusion38]

Nobody?

 

[Navy1960]

Well Cold I'm old so I don't know if the word neo ever applies to me but I have been accused of being a republican a time or two * laughs* , so I will try an answer okay? I have no problems with a plug-in hybrid in fact it's my opinion that these types of car's are indeed a major part in finally being able to tell the likes of OPEC to take a long walk off a short pier. They represent one block in a number of blocks needed in a national enegry solution that's actually very seemless in my opinion as far as basica transportation goes. If it's a matter of styling and speed that as many can see has been overcome with the likes of the TESLA and lightning. So don't always assume that every republican or con is opposed to a plug-in solution in fact as I have had this conversation with you in the past, you are aware it's my contention that if thise nation promotes this, and an all-in program when it comes to domestic energy production and does so by accepting all views rather than a narrow view then we will finally be able to control our own destiny as far as energy goes. I can't tell you in a lot of ways how may benefits this will have not just obvious ones, but ones where we will no longer providing a financial source for organizations that fund terrorist groups around the world just to name a few.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

Well Navy you used the term plug in HYBRID which is NOT what I am talking about. I HATE hybrids as they take an already complex IC engine and ties it to an electric motor. Plug in electric on the other hand is a VERY simple piece of equip as far as how many systems it has that have to work together as a whole. BATTERY, MOTOR, CONTROL UNIT, and basics like suspension brakes and so forth.

 

[Navy1960]

Well Cold after reading my post assume there is an or between the plug-in and the hybrid. As my posting applies to both of them. In fact you know and I know the TESLA and the Lightning are both all EV's. As for hybrids, I see them as bridge technologies and as such these sorts of technologies have a very useful purpose to bridge the time gap as the EV technology matures. One other purpose it serves is while doing so, it allows for what I had posted previously to come about sooner rather than waiting. You know as well as I that while about 50% of all driving is less that 100 miles , today most of the these EV's will go about 300 miles. So while we wait to increase that some , these Hybrids too serve a purpose. So forgive the "or" omission there Cold.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

Oh and by the way Navy you strike me as a moderate Rep which I have no problem with at all. I think you present you views in a calm and well reasoned fasion. I hope we have more discusions because discusion is what is so lacking on these forums.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

Actually Navy I think the number of people who drive less than 100 miles a day is more like 80%.

 

[Navy1960]

I was taking that from some USDOT talking head. I'm sure it could be higher perhaps, would be an interesting stat. However if your GM you say the figure is more like 78%. So perhaps it is, and if so thats a good thing in my opinion and a bigger selling point for these EV cars.

A central factor in the Chevy Volt’s engineering design is that it can be driven for up to 40 miles on electric power only. A lot of electric car enthusiasts and manufacturers have come up with varying ranges for their vehicles. An example of this is the fact that the Tesla Roadster is designed to get about 250 miles on electric range.

Obviously GM wants to keep the Volt affordable and so arrived at a sweet spot figure of 40 miles. This distance was determined be achievable with a battery of 16 kWH weighing about 400 pounds in car similar in weight, size, and performance of the Chevy Cobalt.

GM cites the statistic that 78% of commuters drive less than 40 miles per day. The graphic above is the official GM slide referring to that data.I was able to locate the original study from which the information was gleaned.
How Did GM determine that 78% of Commuters Drive Less Than 40 miles per day? | GM-VOLT : Chevy Volt Electric Car Site

I found that for you..

I personally cannot see any aversion in these EV cars, it would seem to me if people have no problem charging their cell phones, lap-tops, razors, etc, to transition to a car would seem not that much of a leap. The one thing that would need to be done if these EV cars take off and it looks like they will is a big big upgrade in the energy production in this nation and personally I can only see that as a positive thing.

 

[GHook93]

Hey any of you Neo-Cons want to tell us why having at least ONE of your houshold cars be a polug in electric ?

I hope its soon becomes all cars in the household!

Why is it good:
(1) No foreign oil! Foreign is one of the leading culprits of our trade deficit. We get strong armed by rogue nations like Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Nigeria, Russia (although we don't receive oil from them) and Iran (ditto). Not to mention OPEC cripples us. Our oil addiction effects our foreign policy. Oil gives countries like Iran, Iraq, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela (honestly who would give a shit about Hugo Fat Ass's opinion if he didn't have oil) and Russia. No foreign oil would be like an economic nuclear bomb against these countries.

(2) No CO2 emissions with electric cars. Look I am becoming more and more skeptical on global warming, but it is still better to caution, esp if its something that won't hurt the economy, but will in fact help it.

(3) Oil is a commodity and when it goes up it effects everyone. No one foreign commodity should be so powerful that it can effect economy to such a great degree.

(4) Ending Oil ends Iran, Venezuela and Russia's economic power! Each one lives and dies with the price of oil. Imagine where they would be if oil decrease to less than a dollar?

(5) Oil is a fossil Fuel and nonrenewable. Its will eventually be used up. Better to get off it now when we have plenty of it, rather than when we have none of it left!

 

[Old Rocks]

Tech Esq, in the thread Game Changer points out that the answer for very much cheaper electrical storage may already be here. Should that be the case, the objections to the electrics will be moot. The only reason that people are not buying these in great numbers is cost. As cheap high efficiency solar appears to be in our immediate future, storage and generation both seem to be solved for the home owner.

 

[Hemperor]

I NEVER WANT or NEED a COAL-POWERED CAR.
Nor NUCLEAR-POWERED CAR. Do BRAKES CHARGE BATTERY YET ? Ju$t $pinning Wheels $HOULD CHARGE $ome

Nikola Tesla's Flying-Machione www DOT LOD DOT org
www DOT Hemp4Fuel DOT com

Enough evidence to prosecute Rumsfeld for war crimes/UK ‘must release’ Iraq war files
UN official: Enough evidence to prosecute Rumsfeld for war crimes

Killing over a million people is Genocide.

Also there are the deaths an injuries suffered by the soldiers who were sent to the illegal war.

The list of crimes is quite extensive.

There is also the abuse of power. I would even call it treason.

No one should ever again, be allowed to commit these types of crimes and those who did, certainly should not go free. They are criminals.

David Edwards and Stephen C. Webster January 26, 2009

Monday, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture, Manfred Nowak told CNN’s Rick Sanchez that the US has an “obligation” to investigate whether Bush administration officials ordered torture, adding that he believes that there is already enough evidence to prosecute former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

“We have clear evidence,” he said. “In our report that we sent to the United Nations, we made it clear that former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld clearly authorized torture methods and he was told at that time by Alberto Mora, the legal council of the Navy, ‘Mr. Secretary, what you are actual ordering here amounts to torture.’ So, there we have the clear evidence that Mr. Rumsfeld knew what he was doing but, nevertheless, he ordered torture.”

Asked during an interview with Germany’s ZDF television on Jan. 20, Nowak said: “I think the evidence is on the table.”

At issue, however, is whether “American law will recognize these forms of torture.”

A bipartisan Senate report released last month found Rumsfeld and other top administration officials responsible for abuse of Guantanamo detainees in US custody.

It said Rumsfeld authorized harsh interrogation techniques on December 2, 2002 at the Guantanamo prison, although he ruled them out a month later.

The coercive measures were based on a document signed by Bush in February, 2002.

There is a video at the source as well.

Source

UK ‘must release’ Iraq war files

January 28, 2009

The British government has been ordered to release the minutes of crucial ministerial meetings from 2003 at which the United States-led invasion of Iraq was discussed.

The information tribunal, which hears appeals under Britain’s data protection act, backed a decision to disclose minutes of cabinet meetings from March 13 and 17, where ministers held talks about whether the decision to go to war was allowed under international law.

The tribunal said: “We have decided that the public interest in maintaining the confidentiality of the formal minutes of two cabinet meetings at which ministers decided to commit forces to military action in Iraq did not… outweigh the public interest in disclosure.

The cabinet office has 28 days to decide whether to appeal against the ruling.

Announcing its decision on Tuesday, the tribunal said: “The decision to commit the nation’s armed forces to the invasion of another country is momentous in its own right, and… its seriousness is increased by the criticisms that have been made of the general decision-making processes in the cabinet at the time.”

A spokesman for Gordon Brown, the British prime minister, said: “We are considering our response”.

Blair criticised

Tony Blair, prime minister at the time of the invasion, was widely criticised for backing George Bush, the then US president, in invading Iraq to oust Saddam Hussein despite failing to secure a second United Nations resolution on the matter.

Ministerial discussions focused notably on Peter Goldsmith’s, the then attorney general, advice on the legality of war.

Blair’s government strongly resisted demands for the advice of its most senior legal adviser to be made public, until a large section was leaked during the 2005 general election campaign.

Goldsmith then denied ministers pressured him into changing his mind to rule that invading Iraq would be legal in international law even without a second UN security council resolution.

The information tribunal said that “there has… been criticism of the attorney general’s legal advice and of the particular way in which the March 17 opinion was made available to the cabinet only at the last moment and the March 7 opinion was not disclosed to it at all.”

The tribunal ruling backed up an earlier decision by Richard Thomas, the information commissioner.

Thomas said: “I am pleased that the tribunal has upheld my decision that the public interest in disclosing the official cabinet minutes in this particular case outweighs the public interest in withholding the information.

“Disclosing the minutes will allow the public to more fully understand this particular decision.”

Source

Blair and his cohorts should be tried for war crimes as well.

Others in the Bush Administration as well as Bush, should also be charged with war crimes and crimes against Humanity.

The weapons alone that were used, are one good place to start.

The war was based on fabricated information and lies.

Torture was condoned. Killing over a million people is Genocide.

Also there are the deaths an injuries suffered by the soldiers who were sent to the illegal war.

The list of crimes is quite extensive.

There is also the abuse of power. I would even call it treason.

No one should ever again, be allowed to commit these types of crimes and those who did, certainly should not go free. They are criminals.

Obama Revokes Bush Executive Order on Presidential Archives
Obama shuts network of CIA ‘ghost prisons’
Indexed List of all Stories in Archives
Published in: crime waron at 4:02 am Comments Off
Tags: Bush, crimes against humanity, fabricated information, illegal war, lies, Rumsfeld, Tony Blair, torture, UK, United Nations Special Rapporteur, war crimes,

weapons of mass desperation