No Volt Batteries from a Plant that got $150 million tax dollars

[The Lone Bolt]

So the link you provided cites a study by the Union of Concerned Scientists. I visited their website. Here's some more reading from them:

State of Charge: Electric Vehicles’ Global Warming Emissions and Fuel-Cost Savings Across the United States
Electric cars produce lower global warming emissions and cost significantly less to fuel than the average compact gasoline-powered vehicle.

Download: State of Charge--Executive Summary | State of Charge--Full Report | State of Charge--Technical Appendix
UPDATE June 2012: Report and infographic updated with new 2009 power plant data.

Electric Vehicles and Global Warming Emissions
Electric vehicles (EVs) burn no gasoline and have no tailpipe emissions, but producing the electricity used to charge them does generate global warming emissions. The amount of these emissions, however, varies significantly based on the mix of energy sources used to power a region's electricity grid.

For example, coal-fired power plants produce nearly twice the global warming emissions of natural gas-fired power plants, while renewable sources like wind and solar power produce virtually no emissions at all.

The UCS report, State of Charge: Electric Vehicles' Global Warming Emissions and Fuel-Cost Savings Across the United States, compares the global warming emissions from EVs with those from gasoline-powered vehicles and finds that:

Nationwide, EVs charged from the electricity grid produce lower global warming emissions than the average compact gasoline-powered vehicle (with a fuel economy of 27 miles per gallon)—even when the electricity is produced primarily from coal in regions with the “dirtiest” electricity grids.

In regions with the “cleanest” electricity grids, EVs produce lower global warming emissions than even the most fuel-efficient hybrids.

EVs charged entirely from renewable sources like wind and solar power produce virtually no global warming emissions.

Charging Up: How Clean is Your Electricity Grid?

The report evaluates regional electricity grids across the United States based on the global warming emissions produced from electricity generation, and then compares the emissions generated by charging an EV with those produced by gasoline-powered vehicles.

The report finds that:

Nearly half of Americans (45%) live in the “best” regions where EVs produce lower global warming emissions than even the most fuel-efficient gasoline hybrids on the market today (greater than 50 mpg).

Another third (38%) live in “better” areas where EVs produce emissions comparable to the best gasoline hybrid vehicles (41 – 50 mpg).

A minority (17%) reside in “good” regions where emissions from EVs are comparable to the most fuel-efficient non-hybrid gasoline vehicles (31 – 40 mpg).

http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles...tric-cars.html

[BroncoBeavis]

Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt

So the link you provided cites a study by the Union of Concerned Scientists. I visited their website. Here's some more reading from them:



http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles...tric-cars.html

Nationwide, EVs charged from the electricity grid produce lower global warming emissions than the average compact gasoline-powered vehicle (with a fuel economy of 27 miles per gallon)—even when the electricity is produced primarily from coal in regions with the “dirtiest” electricity grids.

Neat comparison. Again, same game here. You're comparing a $50,000 compact electric with a compact gas-powered car that only gets 27 mpg?

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/02/25/2...0-mpg-highway/

1999 called. It would like it's fuel mileage standards back.

Some more reading.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news...-1226073103576

Turns out churning out and stuffing a bunch of cars full of cells and cells loaded with heavy metals isn't quite so eco-friendly as it sounds.

[Pony Boy]

Update

Factory has yet to ship out a single battery
"It's really sad that all these people are sitting there and doing nothing, and it's basically on taxpayer money."

HOLLAND, Mich. (WOOD) - Workers at LG Chem, a $300 million lithium-ion battery plant heavily funded by taxpayers, tell Target 8 that they have so little work to do that they spend hours playing cards and board games, reading magazines or watching movies. They say it's been going on for months.

"There would be up to 40 of us that would just sit in there during the day," said former LG Chem employee Nicole Merryman, who said she quit in May.

"We were given assignments to go outside and clean; if we weren't cleaning outside, we were cleaning inside. If there was nothing for us to do, we would study in the cafeteria, or we would sit and play cards, sit and read magazines," said Merryman

http://www.woodtv.com/dpp/news/targe...employees-idle

[lonestar]

I have a 1997 Honda civic in the driveway that gets 37 MPG the last time I checked around town. Why the technology has not improved since then is beyond me.

Why would I get a hybrid spend 30K plus to get a car that gets me 10 MPG more. Not to mention the thousands of dollars in maintenance when it is time to replace said batteries and add disposal of same to the ecology.

Sorry folks but electric is IMO not the way to go.

[The Lone Bolt]

Originally Posted by lonestar

I have a 1997 Honda civic in the driveway that gets 37 MPG the last time I checked around town. Why the technology has not improved since then is beyond me.

Why would I get a hybrid spend 30K plus to get a car that gets me 10 MPG more. Not to mention the thousands of dollars in maintenance when it is time to replace said batteries and add disposal of same to the ecology.

Sorry folks but electric is IMO not the way to go.

EVs are the future. ICE technology is a dinosaur headed for the tar pit.

Battery technology is rapidly improving. Batteries are becoming cheaper, lighter, smaller, more energy-dense, and more robust. Rapid charging and battery swapping are becoming available.

By 2030 EVs will be cheaper, far more reliable, safer, and better performing than their ICE counterparts. By then consumers will view ICE cars as noisy, unreliable, under performing, polluting, expensive pieces of junk.

[lonestar]

Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt

EVs are the future. ICE technology is a dinosaur headed for the tar pit.

Battery technology is rapidly improving. Batteries are becoming cheaper, lighter, smaller, more energy-dense, and more robust. Rapid charging and battery swapping are becoming available.

By 2030 EVs will be cheaper, far more reliable, safer, and better performing than their ICE counterparts. By then consumers will view ICE cars as noisy, unreliable, under performing, polluting, expensive pieces of junk.

OK but until then I'm going to drive my honda till it stops..

NO sense in spending BIG money on a car that will marginally replace it..

you greenies just do not get it..

[barryr]

Originally Posted by Pony Boy

Update

Factory has yet to ship out a single battery
"It's really sad that all these people are sitting there and doing nothing, and it's basically on taxpayer money."

HOLLAND, Mich. (WOOD) - Workers at LG Chem, a $300 million lithium-ion battery plant heavily funded by taxpayers, tell Target 8 that they have so little work to do that they spend hours playing cards and board games, reading magazines or watching movies. They say it's been going on for months.

"There would be up to 40 of us that would just sit in there during the day," said former LG Chem employee Nicole Merryman, who said she quit in May.

"We were given assignments to go outside and clean; if we weren't cleaning outside, we were cleaning inside. If there was nothing for us to do, we would study in the cafeteria, or we would sit and play cards, sit and read magazines," said Merryman

http://www.woodtv.com/dpp/news/targe...employees-idle

This kind of crap is considered "progress" by the liberal fools. And they want the government to spend more on more of this and make sure they are unionized of course.

[lonestar]

Originally Posted by barryr

This kind of crap is considered "progress" by the liberal fools. And they want the government to spend more on more of this and make sure they are unionized of course.

I guess those are some of the jobs Nobama has created.

Wonder if they get overtime if a card games goes long.

The lengths the moron in chief will go to to stay in office.

Just a small part of the overall picture.

[barryr]

Originally Posted by lonestar

I guess those are some of the jobs Nobama has created.

Wonder if they get overtime if a card games goes long.

The lengths the moron in chief will go to to stay in office.

Just a small part of the overall picture.

This and more "shovel ready" jobs he later had to admit don't even exist, but threw millions at these imaginary jobs anyway and where the money went and who is accounting for it is anyone'e guess.

[The Lone Bolt]

More evidence that EVs are the future:

Better Battery-Control Software Could Double Charging Speed: Research

New battery charge estimation algorithms developed by engineers at the University of California (UC), San Diego, are on the verge of vastly improve the capabilities of current lithium-ion batteries.

The changes center around improving charging times, potentially allowing for batteries that charge twice as fast as those currently available.

------------------

Essentially, the new methods improve virtually every aspect of modern batteries.

They'll be cheaper, for a start--as much as 25 percent less than current batteries. They'll charge quicker, the battery's size can be reduced, and they can be used with more powerful electric motors. And because the state of the battery is more closely monitored, none of the efficiency improvements come at the expense of safety.

Ultimately, that would mean quicker, cheaper, faster-charging electric cars, using technology little different to the batteries already used.

It's only one of many other battery technologies currently in development, but the bottom line is that electric cars are only set to get better.

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/...speed-research

[lonestar]

Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt

More evidence that EVs are the future:



http://www.greencarreports.com/news/...speed-research

Thanks for sharing but it is not NOW.. if you want to tout the future start your own thread..

get back to topic about the existing folks sitting around doing nothing after getting $150,000,000.00 in tax dollars to start this plant that has not produced a DAMNED thing..

be as green weenie in your own thread as you want....

[lonestar]

Originally Posted by barryr

This and more "shovel ready" jobs he later had to admit don't even exist, but threw millions at these imaginary jobs anyway and where the money went and who is accounting for it is anyone'e guess.

just like the lone bolt wants to talk about the future this is wasted money TODAY.. wonder if this plant will be able to produce the "future" products when they even become viable.. Or if they will need to rebuild it to make the new stuff..

they were supposed to build a battery for the volt.. which is not selling and costing near $50,000.oo per unit to build..

I know that NObama is propping it up by buying the and sending them to Europe for embassy no bodies to drive.. because they had to divert $105,000.00 for a charging station in IIRC Belgium.. from there budget that was hard pressed enough to cut back on security for embassies..

just noticed this little blurb..

Is The Volt In Danger Of Becoming The Next Edsel?

Is the house of cards falling around the Chevrolet Volt? If you remember when GM was restructuring just a few years back, they described the Volt as a Must Have Item to be competitive.
An all electric wonder machine no less.

As the Volt came to reality one of the first big shockers we ran into (pun intended) was the addition of a gasoline motor to help the Volt along if battery power ran low. While there was an initial outcry at first, it soon died down as this was seen as a last resort assist from the pure EV experience. That was until we found out the Volt has the average range of a golf cart. That "assist" motor obviously would be used far more often than we were originally led to believe. But the hardcore fan said "hey we were still saving on the cost of fuel right?", so it all works out in the quest of leading edge technology.

That kept many of the skeptics quiet until the reality of sticker shock set in. There was simply no way to recoup any of the investment in fuel savings. If you wanted the keep the green in your wallet you had to lease and let the taxpayer foot the bill. Being "green" was going to cost both you and you neighbors

So now we look at the facts. While the Volt is selling better, than it used to, it can in no way be classified as a volume seller and recent reports indicate that this"must have" for GM is costing almost $50K per unit "sold". Do you really want such a money loser in the lineup? How long will the burden continue. Will sales ever increase? Has the Volt become the Edsel for this generation?

http://www.autospies.com/news/Is-The...t-Edsel-73014/

let me add..

Mon Sep 10, 2012 1:14pm EDT

(Reuters) - General Motors Co sold a record number of Chevrolet Volt sedans in August — but that probably isn't a good thing for the automaker's bottom line.

Nearly two years after the introduction of the path-breaking plug-in hybrid, GM is still losing as much as $49,000 on each Volt it builds, according to estimates provided to Reuters by industry analysts and manufacturing experts. GM on Monday issued a statement disputing the estimates.

Cheap Volt lease offers meant to drive more customers to Chevy showrooms this summer may have pushed that loss even higher. There are some Americans paying just $5,050 to drive around for two years in a vehicle that cost as much as $89,000 to produce.

And while the loss per vehicle will shrink as more are built and sold, GM is still years away from making money on the Volt, which will soon face new competitors from Ford, Honda and others.

GM's basic problem is that "the Volt is over-engineered and over-priced," said Dennis Virag, president of the Michigan-based Automotive Consulting Group.

And in a sign that there may be a wider market problem, Nissan, Honda and Mitsubishi have been struggling to sell their electric and hybrid vehicles,

GM's quandary is how to increase sales volume so that it can spread its estimated $1.2-billion investment in the Volt over more vehicles while reducing manufacturing and component costs - which will be difficult to bring down until sales increase.

But the Volt's steep $39,995 base price and its complex technology — the car uses expensive lithium-polymer batteries, sophisticated electronics and an electric motor combined with a gasoline engine — have kept many prospective buyers away from Chevy showrooms.

Some are put off by the technical challenges of ownership, mainly related to charging the battery. Plug-in hybrids such as the Volt still take hours to fully charge the batteries - a process that can be speeded up a bit with the installation of a $2,000 commercial-grade charger in the garage.

PLANT SHUTDOWN

The lack of interest in the car has prevented GM from coming close to its early, optimistic sales projections. Discounted leases as low as $199 a month helped propel Volt sales in August to 2,831, pushing year-to-date sales to 13,500, well below the 40,000 cars that GM originally had hoped to sell in 2012.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...88904J20120910

[The Lone Bolt]

Originally Posted by lonestar

Thanks for sharing but it is not NOW.. if you want to tout the future start your own thread..

get back to topic about the existing folks sitting around doing nothing after getting $150,000,000.00 in tax dollars to start this plant that has not produced a DAMNED thing..

be as green weenie in your own thread as you want....

It's relevant to you righties who claim that investments in EV research and tax credits for EVs are a big waste of taxpayer money. This is not the government picking winners and losers. This is the government investing in a promising tehcnonlogy that can end our dependence on foreign oil and clean up our environment.

As for those few green DOE investments that have not panned out, no investment portfolio has a 100% percent success rate. But you focus on the few failures while ignoring that the overall portfolio is doing very well.

[lonestar]

Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt

It's relevant to you righties who claim that investments in EV research and tax credits for EVs are a big waste of taxpayer money. This is not the government picking winners and losers. This is the government investing in a promising tehcnonlogy that can end our dependence on foreign oil and clean up our environment.

As for those few green DOE investments that have not panned out, no investment portfolio has a 100% percent success rate. But you focus on the few failures while ignoring that the overall portfolio is doing very well.

I do not care.. about what you believe this thread is about

No Volt Batteries from a Plant that got $150 million tax dollars..

want to talk about the future start a thread I'm sure you will have loads of nerds follow you there.. and y'all can have a nerd circle jerk..

Do I think we need to get more green? Hell yes just not with TAX dollars..

Let business invest their money while giving them some tax incentives..

that means to the far left IF they come out with a product that does make us more green they do not have to pay the full tax rate on them. they can make more PROFIT on those products.. it is win win for everyone..

YOU get green products and I do not have to pay for them..


ON a side note..
I drove by a home in So Cal last year it was on a hilltop, all the way up the hill were vineyards no road to the top that I could see.. but it had a heli-pad.

the guy that owned it all invented those foam rubber ear plugs most commonly seen at airports used by the ground crews..

his invention did not cost me a DIME yet, I get pay back because he is paying taxes on his wealth.. Thus keeping my taxes lower..

California makes money of the things he buys with his wealth in sales taxes.. the stores he buys at make money off the purchases he makes, there by employing more people who also pay taxes.

All of which do not cost me a DIME..

You want to invest in these green weenie companies be my guest just do not spend my tax dollars on it until we are out of debt..

BTW lots of those companies that got US dollars to start up green weenie companies were huge Nobama contributors so let be honest about the government picking and choosing winner or losers.. the only ones we are hearing about are Nobamas losers..

Had any of them been big winners well he would be touting left and farther LEFT..

[The Lone Bolt]

So I see you've trotted out the latest right wing horsesh-t on the Volt. Allow me to correct your misconceptions:

The Volt is selling very well -- over 16,000 units this year, far surpassing last year's total.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505145_1...f-nissan-leaf/

Not as well as their most optimistic projections but Volt sales are climbing.

And that crock about the Volt costing $89,000/unit to produce? They are counting the development costs toward the number of units produced so far, not for the total planned production for the Volt (and all of the other cars that will use technology developed for the Volt). That's like saying that an investor is losing 1 million per tennant on a highrise that cost $100,000,000 to build by counting only the first year's rent collected.

[The Lone Bolt]

Originally Posted by lonestar

I do not care.. about what you believe this thread is about

No Volt Batteries from a Plant that got $150 million tax dollars..

want to talk about the future start a thread I'm sure you will have loads of nerds follow you there.. and y'all can have a nerd circle jerk..

Do I think we need to get more green? Hell yes just not with TAX dollars..

Let business invest their money while giving them some tax incentives..

that means to the far left IF they come out with a product that does make us more green they do not have to pay the full tax rate on them. they can make more PROFIT on those products.. it is win win for everyone..

YOU get green products and I do not have to pay for them..

I drove by a home in So Cal last year it was on a hilltop, all the way up the hill were vineyards no road to the top that I could see.. but it had a heli-pad.

the guy that owned it all invented those foam rubber ear plugs most commonly seen at airports used by the ground crews..

his invention did not cost me a DIME yet, I get pay back because he is paying taxes on his wealth.. Thus keeping my taxes lower..

California makes money of the things he buys with his wealth in sales taxes.. the stores he buys at make money off the purchases he makes, there by employing more people who also pay taxes.

All of which do not cost me a DIME..

You want to invest in these green weenie companies be my guest just do not spend my tax dollars on it until we are out of debt..

BTW lots of those companies that got US dollars to start up green weenie companies were huge Nobama contributors so let be honest about the government picking and choosing winner or losers.. the only ones we are hearing about are Nobamas losers..

Had any of them been big winners well he would be touting left and farther LEFT..

I don't give a flying f-ck about rubber earplugs. Rubber earplugs don't get us off foriegn oil. Rubber earplugs don't clean up the environment.

Taxpayer money is appropriately spent in the public interest. It's in the public interest to accelerate the development of green technologies -- even if a few of these investments don't pan out.

Yes the government should be cautious. But a handful of failures doesn't prove taxpayer money is wasted on these investments overall.

[lonestar]

Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt

I don't give a flying f-ck about rubber earplugs. Rubber earplugs don't get us off foriegn oil. Rubber earplugs don't clean up the environment.

Taxpayer money is appropriately spent in the public interest. It's in the public interest to accelerate the development of green technologies -- even if a few of these investments don't pan out.

Yes the government should be cautious. But a handful of failures doesn't prove taxpayer money is wasted on these investments overall.

see you completely missed the point..

A guy that had an idea as simple as ear plugs is now a multimillionaire.


just because NObama is throwing billions at green weenie stuff does not make it happen any faster..

those companies have Zero incentive.. other than to spend the money they were given they have nothing invested in it themselves..

they are not out of pocket. have not lost their savings on an Idea..

the ear plug guy did and was rewarded..

you ****ing liberal green weenies just do not get it.

it is not big government that drives a good business man..

Even during the space race where trillions were invested.. most of the great ideas that came out of it were made from private enterprise..

Transistors, Velcro.. some of the by products of Kennedy telling us we would put a man on the moon..

He inspired us Nobama is giving money away and so far looks like most was wasted..

[lonestar]

Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt

So I see you've trotted out the latest right wing horsesh-t on the Volt. Allow me to correct your misconceptions:

The Volt is selling very well -- over 16,000 units this year, far surpassing last year's total.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505145_1...f-nissan-leaf/

Not as well as their most optimistic projections but Volt sales are climbing.

And that crock about the Volt costing $89,000/unit to produce? They are counting the development costs toward the number of units produced so far, not for the total planned production for the Volt (and all of the other cars that will use technology developed for the Volt). That's like saying that an investor is losing 1 million per tennant on a highrise that cost $100,000,000 to build by counting only the first year's rent collected.

Reuters is hardly a right wing source.. it is one of the most respected news sources in the rest of the world if anything tends to lean left IMO.. But hardly a CBS,NBC,ABC, CNN left....

in the real world that is how they measure the true cost of building things.. not in your left wing fantasy land..

so far they had sold 13,500 through sep IIRC and much of those sales were at a very low interest rate for that month prior to that it really sucked donkey balls.. and the promise of a $7,500 government rebate..

Believe in your own little fantasy world about how great NObama has been for the green weenie world and dream little life is good dreams tonight..

[The Lone Bolt]

Originally Posted by lonestar

see you completely missed the point..

A guy that had an idea as simple as ear plugs is now a multimillionaire.


just because NObama is throwing billions at green weenie stuff does not make it happen any faster..

Yes it does.

those companies have Zero incentive.. other than to spend the money they were given they have nothing invested in it themselves..

they are not out of pocket. have not lost their savings on an Idea..

All startups need investors to begin production. Doesn't matter if it's from the government or the private sector. And those startups are motivated to make a profit no matter who has provided the initial investment.

The Obama administration just stepped in to help out companies developing technologies that also serve the public interest.

the ear plug guy did and was rewarded..

you ****ing liberal green weenies just do not get it.

it is not big government that drives a good business man..

Even during the space race where trillions were invested.. most of the great ideas that came out of it were made from private enterprise..

Transistors, Velcro.. some of the by products of Kennedy telling us we would put a man on the moon..

He inspired us Nobama is giving money away and so far looks like most was wasted..

It looks that way to you because you are blindly buying into right-wing propaganda bullsh-t.

Here, allow me to educate you:

Here are 10 findings from Bloomberg’s report on the DOE’s loan guarantee program you should know:

1. Clean power generating projects. Bloomberg found 87 percent of the DOE’s loan guarantees were for power generation projects and the likelihood of default is much lower for those projects because they already have committed buyers (e.g., PG&E for the BrightSource solar thermal plant). Manufacturing, fuel production and storage projects made up the other higher-risk 13 percent.

2. An insurance fund covers the losses (and then some). The DOE allocated $2.47 billion in credit subsidies to act as insurance to cover project losses, and the fund more than covers both Solyndra and Beacon losses (and Beacon is selling its plant to pay back the loan). Bloomberg found that even if all of the eight remaining high-risk manufacturing and fuel production projects default, the insurance fund would cover all of them. In addition, the DOE actually budgeted for a failure of 15 percent of the total value of the loan guarantees, which is pretty high for a federal program, and in comparison, Bloomberg notes that commercial banking projects set aside 2.8 percent of the value of loans.

3. Cutting the program won’t help the budget. The report found “ending DOE’s loan-guarantee authority would have no budgetary impact and may jeopardize the remaining projects under review.” That’s because the commitments from the program aren’t included in the federal budget, which only encompasses direct expenditures. Though the report notes that defaults on the guaranteed loans can be costly.

4. The default numbers to date. So far, two of the 28 projects from the 1705 loan guarantee program have defaulted: Solyndra for $535 million and Beacon Power for $43 million. The Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing program has five loans that equal $8.4 billion and one outstanding conditional commitment. The 1703 loan guarantee program has four projects in the conditional commitment stage for $10.6 billion.

5. U.S. government loan guarantees aren’t new. Bloomberg notes that U.S. federal loan guarantees were first used during the Great Depression to help families buy homes. History lesson!

6. The DOE’s loan guarantees are a small piece of the pie. The U.S. government has $947 billion worth of loan guarantees across various sectors of the government like Agriculture and Treasury. The DOE’s 1705 loan guarantee program is only 1.7 percent of the government’s total loan-guarantee commitments, and the other loan guarantee commitments include high risk programs like the Treasury’s Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), mortgage-backed securities and individual home mortgages by three agencies (Agriculture, Housing and Urban Development, and Veterans Affairs).

7. Solar dominates DOE loan guarantee program. For the 1705 program, which has 28 guarantees, the DOE issued 16 to solar companies.

8. Other solar manufacturers with DOE loan guarantees face the same risks as Solyndra. Abound Solar, which received a $400 million loan guarantee; SoloPower, which received a $197 million loan guarantee; and 1366 Technologies, which received a $150 million loan guarantee, are subject to the same market conditions and risks that led to the bankruptcy of Solyndra.

9. Ways to de-risk future loan guarantees. Bloomberg says one way to lower the risks for future DOE loan guarantees is to make sure they all have “off-take agreements”: essentially, the project has a secured buyer. The power-generating projects (like a large solar thermal farm) already have this, and that makes them lower risk. But Bloomberg says perhaps manufacturing loan guarantees should have this component too, and should include agreements like having federal, state and local buildings agree to buy the solar panels created with the loan guarantee.

10. Solyndra was three percent of the DOE portfolio. This number has been bandied about before, but worth mentioning again. Solyndra represented three percent of the DOE’s entire loan guarantee portfolio.

http://gigaom.com/cleantech/10-thing...antee-program/

[lonestar]

Let me add from YOU source..

Car shoppers continue to prefer the Chevrolet Volt with its back-up gasoline engine to the all-electric Nissan Leaf, Raising questions about how big the U.S. market for pure electric cars can be.

considering that the volts batteries get you about 50 miles total..and it requires a gas engine to go farther..

if you will note that last line in that quote..

NO-BODY but you green weenies care..

Despite their lock on the EV market, the Leaf and Volt are failing to meet Nissan and General Motors' respective sales goals. GM had once hoped to sell 45,000 Volts in 2012, a number the car is not close to reaching despite being the number-one selling plug-in in America. Nissan, meanwhile, is also not on track to sell the 20,000 Leafs it had hoped for this fiscal year.

But they're not growing at a rate that corresponds to the rate of product introductions."

That means before plug-in car sales take off the price of gasoline will have to rise sharply or the cost of electric car batteries -- the costliest component of the car -- will have to fall, said Libby. So far, it's not clear when, or if, either will happen.

http://money.cnn.com/2012/10/19/auto...source=cnn_bin

even the Clinton News Network CNN sees it as a failure..

President Obama has put $5,000,000,000.00 (billion) in taxpayer money behind his goal of having 1 million electric cars on U.S. roads by 2015.

Whether the technology itself is a loser or consumers are merely slow to adapt to new things, car buyers so far haven't embraced electric vehicles in numbers close to Obama's goal. Electric-vehicle sales since 2011 totaled fewer than 50,000 through September, just 5 percent of the president's target.

Obama's $5 billion investment in electric cars includes loans and grants to car and battery producers, spending on charging stations and $7,500 tax credits to car buyers. Recipients of loans and grants include Nissan Motor Co., which got a $1.4 billion loan to build the Leaf and its battery pack in the United States; Fisker Automotive,

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/business/artic...#ixzz29sN5bOgT

GM’s addition of a discounted lease for the Volt, currently $299 a month for a car with a $39,145 base price, is boosting demand for the model, Jesse Toprak, an analyst at TrueCar.com, a vehicle pricing and data provider, said yesterday.

President Barack Obama’s administration, which targeted a market of 1 million such vehicles by 2015.

Buyers in markets such as California can now lease a Leaf SV hatchback for $199 a month for 36 months,

http://www.businessweek.com/news/201...able-car-sales

the only reason these cars are being leased not even sold are because of incentives they have to have to do so..

Which means in2 or 3 years all of these unit will come on the market FURTHER DILUTING the sales base for them.

The demand is NOT there..

[The Lone Bolt]

Originally Posted by lonestar

Reuters is hardly a right wing source.. it is one of the most respected news sources in the rest of the world if anything tends to lean left IMO.. But hardly a CBS,NBC,ABC, CNN left....

in the real world that is how they measure the true cost of building things.. not in your left wing fantasy land..

In the real world that is NOT how they measure the true cost of building things. In the real world the cost of developmment is spread out over the total planned production. Your ignorance is astounding.

so far they had sold 13,500 through sep IIRC and much of those sales were at a very low interest rate for that month prior to that it really sucked donkey balls.. and the promise of a $7,500 government rebate..

Believe in your own little fantasy world about how great NObama has been for the green weenie world and dream little life is good dreams tonight..

Yeah yeah yeah. And when Volt sales continue to rise I wonder what your new excuse will be...

[lonestar]

Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt

Yes it does.



All startups need investors to begin production. Doesn't matter if it's from the government or the private sector. And those startups are motivated to make a profit no matter who has provided the initial investment.

The Obama administration just stepped in to help out companies developing technologies that also serve the public interest.



It looks that way to you because you are blindly buying into right-wing propaganda bullsh-t.

Here, allow me to educate you:



http://gigaom.com/cleantech/10-thing...antee-program/

Not all start up companies require BILLIONS to get going..

as far as buying into the ear plug guy.. Yes I am a capitalist.. I believe in free enterprise..

not free handouts.

SO far I see in this thread alone with the volt battery maker

$150,000,000.00 LOST

[The Lone Bolt]

Originally Posted by lonestar

considering that the volts batteries get you about 50 miles total..and it requires a gas engine to go farther..

if you will note that last line in that quote..

NO-BODY but you green weenies care..

SMDH.

The Volt is designed to go only 40 miles all-electric because according to Dept of Transportation statistics 40 miles will cover 70% of all driver's daily transportation needs. And indeed Volt statistics back this up. The latest is that 60% of Volt owner's driving is all-electric. That has already saved over a supertanker of gas.

http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/n...0517_volt.html

The gas engine is to eliminate "range anxiety", so Volt owners can drive long distances when they need to.

even the Clinton News Network CNN sees it as a failure..

That's your spin. They are citing the highest projection, not what GM expected to sell.

the only reason these cars are being leased not even sold are because of incentives they have to have to do so..

Which means in2 or 3 years all of these unit will come on the market FURTHER DILUTING the sales base for them.

The demand is NOT there..

The demand is there or they wouldn't be leasing them. And by your standards Toyota should have given up on the Prius. They were slow sellers the first few produciton years. Now they are Toyota's best-selling models.

[The Lone Bolt]

Originally Posted by lonestar

Not all start up companies require BILLIONS to get going..

as far as buying into the ear plug guy.. Yes I am a capitalist.. I believe in free enterprise..

not free handouts.

SO far I see in this thread alone with the volt battery maker

$150,000,000.00 LOST

Jeez tone it down.

We have yet to see how this plays out. They may go back into production. The government may be able to recover losses if they don't. We don't know what amount, if any, has been "lost."

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt

So I see you've trotted out the latest right wing horsesh-t on the Volt .

You should know by now that lonestar trafficks exclusively in right-wing horsesh*t no matter what the topic of discussion.