Citing a Lack of Usage, Costco Removes E.V. Chargers

[Renae]

Costco, the membership warehouse-club chain, was an early leader in offering electric-vehicle charging to its customers, setting an example followed by other retailers, including Best Buy and Walgreen. By 2006, Costco had installed 90 chargers at 64 stores, mostly in California but also some in Arizona, New York and Georgia.


][][][

Plug In America, the California-based E.V. advocacy group, contends that the stations do get used, and is conducting arigorous grassroots campaign to save them. The group asserts that some of the units have been delivering free electricity to loyal E.V. owners for a decade or more, and that people regularly plug in.

][][][

Citing a Lack of Usage, Costco Removes E.V. Chargers - NYTimes.com

Costco, destroying the earth for the bottom line!!! :mrgreen:

 

[rathi]

Putting up 90 chargers was nothing more than a PR stunt anyways. For the time being, electric cars need to rely on conventional outlets and extension cords. As technology and production increases, gas stations probably will start including charging stations. The minimal infrastructure needed for a charging station means that you could include them in retail stores, but it hardly is a requirement.

 

[Deuce]

Putting up 90 chargers was nothing more than a PR stunt anyways. For the time being, electric cars need to rely on conventional outlets and extension cords. As technology and production increases, gas stations probably will start including charging stations. The minimal infrastructure needed for a charging station means that you could include them in retail stores, but it hardly is a requirement.

Uhh, the leaf was designed with a high-voltage charger in mind.

 

[j-mac]

Another in the long line of not so well thought out infrastructure ideas that are supposed to save us from evil oil. Meanwhile we can press forward killing the oil industry with nothing to take its place. Great plan libs.

J-mac

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Another in the long line of not so well thought out infrastructure ideas that are supposed to save us from evil oil. Meanwhile we can press forward killing the oil industry with nothing to take its place. Great plan libs.

J-mac

That darn liberal Costco, bunch of commie environmentalists

Oh wait Costco is an independant company seeking to make money and most likely installed the charging stations to attract certain customers. The plan didnt work.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

Hey man, wasn't my idea. I'm a progressive and I'm all about reducing fossil fuel use and preserving the environment. Which is to say, I'm all about things that ACTUALLY do that. Not things that just pretend to.

I'm for electric cars that *work.* And when I say work, I mean "are practical in the situations which drivers may encounter." Currently, there aren't any. And hybrids aren't any better. People who own hybrids thinking they're helping the environment clearly haven't done a bit of homework on it and bought it to seem "green" because that's seen as socially acceptable. If they had done their homework, they'd know that they could get any number of gas and diesel cars that actually have much, much better mileage. I similarly laugh at people who support ethanol for the same reasons - if they'd done their homework they would know they're not helping anything.

I like things that work. There's a lot more to it than image. "Green" tech that doesn't work is pointless. As such, I can't really blame Costco. It's a huge waste of their time and money.

Right now, if you wanna be fuel efficient and as green as is practically possible while still being in a car? Go diesel or Smart. Hybrids aren't even in the running. Hell, most European cars get as good of mileage as the best hybrids, and a lot of them do even better. Some hybrids get worse mileage than my dad's Taurus.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Hey man, wasn't my idea. I'm a progressive and I'm all about reducing fossil fuel use and preserving the environment. Which is to say, I'm all about things that ACTUALLY do that. Not things that just pretend to.

I'm for electric cars that *work.* And when I say work, I mean "are practical in the situations which drivers may encounter." Currently, there aren't any. And hybrids aren't any better. People who own hybrids thinking they're helping the environment clearly haven't done a bit of homework on it and bought it to seem "green" because that's seen as socially acceptable. If they had done their homework, they'd know that they could get any number of gas and diesel cars that actually have much, much better mileage. I similarly laugh at people who support ethanol for the same reasons - if they'd done their homework they would know they're not helping anything.

I like things that work. There's a lot more to it than image. "Green" tech that doesn't work is pointless. As such, I can't really blame Costco. It's a huge waste of their time and money.

Right now, if you wanna be fuel efficient and as green as is practically possible while still being in a car? Go diesel or Smart. Hybrids aren't even in the running. Hell, most European cars get as good of mileage as the best hybrids. Some hybrids get worse mileage than my dad's Taurus.

The Leaf and the Volt are fairly practical electric/hybrid cars. The Volt has the higher potential as a primary vehicle. It can cover around 40 miles on battery power which would cover the majority of trips made by people. The problem is that it is very expensive and does not have the interior to make up for that cost

As for some hybrids getting worse gasmilage then your dads Taurus. Yes some do, but they are also faster then your dads Taurus, more luxurious then the Taurus, and get better mileage then comparable cars. The Infiniti M35h does not compete with the Taurus, but the MB E350 and it gets better mileage then the MB 35 with better performance. Some hybrids are not about getting the best gas milage in the car industry, but improving efficiency in that particular car without a significant decrease in performance. Typically the Japanese are going this route, while the Germans downsize the engines and turbocharge them

 

[ecofarm]

Right now, if you wanna be fuel efficient and as green as is practically possible while still being in a car? Go diesel or Smart. Hybrids aren't even in the running. Hell, most European cars get as good of mileage as the best hybrids, and a lot of them do even better. Some hybrids get worse mileage than my dad's Taurus.

I don't think so. Last I checked, they were around 50mpg, easily twice an old toyota. I'm sure if you checked average mpg for similar vehicles, hybrids blow them away. I don't know from what cherry picking you get the above "data".

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

The Leaf and the Volt are fairly practical electric/hybrid cars. The Volt has the higher potential as a primary vehicle. It can cover around 40 miles on battery power which would cover the majority of trips made by people. The problem is that it is very expensive and does not have the interior to make up for that cost

As for some hybrids getting worse gasmilage then your dads Taurus. Yes some do, but they are also faster then your dads Taurus, more luxurious then the Taurus, and get better mileage then comparable cars. The Infiniti M35h does not compete with the Taurus, but the MB E350 and it gets better mileage then the MB 35 with better performance. Some hybrids are not about getting the best gas milage in the car industry, but improving efficiency in that particular car without a significant decrease in performance. Typically the Japanese are going this route, while the Germans downsize the engines and turbocharge them

It's still really limited in the American market, where it's not uncommon for a commute to be an hour or longer. Americans spend *a lot* of time driving. Also, 40 miles is generous. That's on the high end of what you might get on battery power. The way that Americans drive, dividing out the 35-40-ish mpg once it switches to gas, it's really not substantially better than a particularly efficient gas or diesel car. And the charge time isn't fast enough to make up the difference. In places where people drive for shorter stretches, it may be more practical and efficient. But it's still got a way to go to be worthwhile in America. And like you said, the cost is also prohibitive.

I suppose if your main concern isn't "green-ness" then some hybrids can be attractive options. But if you're going for green, they still aren't really competing.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

I don't think so. Last I checked, they were around 50mpg, easily twice an old toyota.

Depends on which one. Some get mileage as poor as 30mpg. And you can find a diesel car that will do better than 50, which is what the best hybrids do.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

I don't think so. Last I checked, they were around 50mpg, easily twice an old toyota.

Some do,some dont


GM has put a hybrid system in a full size SUV, it does not get 50 mpg. Infiniti has one in its M series cars and does not get 50 mpg. The do improve fuel efficiency by about 25% over comparable non hybrid versions though

 

[ecofarm]

Some do,some dont


GM has put a hybrid system in a full size SUV, it does not get 50 mpg. Infiniti has one in its M series cars and does not get 50 mpg. The do improve fuel efficiency by about 25% over comparable non hybrid versions though

A full-size SUV getting 50 is a hell of a lot more than 25% over the average full-size SUV, which does about 20. And I'm pretty damn sure the GM full-size non-hybrid is not doing 40mpg.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

A full-size SUV getting 50 is a hell of a lot more than 25% over the average full-size SUV, which does about 20. And I'm pretty damn sure the GM full-size non-hybrid is not doing 40mpg.

I stated the full size SuV is not getting 50 mpg did I not. It is getting about 25% better mileage then the non hybrid version. Ie 16 mpg vs 12 mpg

 

[ecofarm]

16 vs. 12, not. Most cars are like 50 vs. 30.

One nearly doubles their mpg with a hybrid. Pretending that is nothing is ridiculous.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

16 vs. 12, not. Most cars are like 50 vs. 30.

One nearly doubles their mpg with a hybrid. Pretending that is nothing is ridiculous.

I can name more hybrids that get less then 30 mpg then hybrids that get over 30 mpg.

None double their mpg

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

16 vs. 12, not. Most cars are like 50 vs. 30.

One nearly doubles their mpg with a hybrid. Pretending that is nothing is ridiculous.

On the high end. But there are other cars that are similarly sized that get as good of fuel economy. Some get better. And they're cheaper.

My point isn't that hybrid cars are *bad.* My point is that they actually aren't an improvement. You can buy a car with crappy mileage, and it could be either a regular car or a hybrid. I consider 30mpg crappy. Some hybrids only get around 30mpg. Some get less than 20.

You can buy a car with good mileage, and it could be either regular or hybrid. 50mpg is good. But it's not just hybrids that get that sort of mileage. Some regular cars get that even in similar size categories. You can find cars in the same size range with the same mileage, even if they're not hybrids. A lot of diesel cars of the same size actually do *better* than hybrids.

Or you can buy a car with *great* mileage. You will need to compromise on size in order to do that, not buy a hybrid. There are no hybrids with *great* mileage. Mostly diesel and really small cars.

Also, let's not forget that there are other factors to consider in evaluating a car's eco-friendliness. For example, if you buy a well-made truck with crappy mileage and just drive it until it can't be driven anymore, there's a good chance you are being more eco-friendly than if you'd bough a little Japanese car and drove that until it couldn't be driven anymore. Why? Because the truck will probably last longer. And the pollution created in production is substantial. So substantial that it may cancel out the difference in gas mileage.

Some hybrid cars have issues like that which people don't consider when they're talking about eco-friendliness. They're costly and complex to make and create a lot of pollution in production, some people with the Pruis have reported going through tires at a high rate, and all that stuff factors into the equation.

 

[dontworrybehappy]

Not to mention the damage done to the environment to extract the lithium to produce the batteries for these hybrids. If people had a clue, hybrids would be reserved to the pages of Popular Science magazine, not actually in use.

 

[Demon of Light]

Not to mention the damage done to the environment to extract the lithium to produce the batteries for these hybrids. If people had a clue, hybrids would be reserved to the pages of Popular Science magazine, not actually in use.

Were we to cave to every little demand environmentalists made then we would still be living in caves. Sorry, but I think in this sort of situation environmentalists should politely shut the **** up. Maybe environmentalists, instead of acting only to obstruct progress, should start looking for ways to compensate for any potential environmental problems brought on by a given solution. Be a little proactive about protecting the environment, rather than just stopping anything and everything they think might be even a slight problem for the environment.

 

[NGNM85]

On the high end. But there are other cars that are similarly sized that get as good of fuel economy. Some get better. And they're cheaper.

It depends what kind of car you're comparing.

My point isn't that hybrid cars are *bad.* My point is that they actually aren't an improvement. You can buy a car with crappy mileage, and it could be either a regular car or a hybrid. I consider 30mpg crappy. Some hybrids only get around 30mpg. Some get less than 20.

To my knowledge there are no hybrids that are not SUVs which get this kind of mileage, although, admittedly, hybrid SUVs have better fuel economy than their non-hybrid counterparts. I drive a Prius, and I'm presently getting around 50 MPGs. My mother has an Insight, she regularly gets about 60 MPGs.

Some hybrid cars have issues like that which people don't consider when they're talking about eco-friendliness. They're costly and complex to make and create a lot of pollution in production, some people with the Pruis have reported going through tires at a high rate, and all that stuff factors into the equation.

I got my Prius used, and I had to replace the front tires, the ones that came with the car, after about three years. I haven't noticed any unusual degree of wear and tear.

It really can't be beat. I'm driving a fairly roomy four-door sedan, getting around 50 MPGs, and I think I bought if for five grand or less. With the money I'm saving on gas, the car is actually paying for itself. My only complaint is with the design. I like boxy cars.

 

[AdamT]

I can give you a real world example. My wife drives a Highlander Hybrid and gets about 31 mpg combined. A couple of her coworkers drive the non-hybrid Highlander and get about 20 mpg. So, about a 50% improvement over the non-hybrid.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

The low rolling resistance tires used on the Prius and similar vehicles wear quickly. Not as quickly as high performance tires do but faster then typical tires on family cars

 

[1Perry]

The Prius is a smart vehicle for today. It's affordable, it gets great mileage and it's an evolution to the next step. I have to wonder how much upkeep were on these units? Maybe it's because the electricity costs were getting too high for Costco?

If I could get a couple gallons of free gas for shopping there, I'd certainly consider shopping there more often. I wonder how profitable that would be though?

Costco is really under no obligation to pay for the transportation costs of others even if it was for reasons of cost.

 

[AdamT]

The Prius is a smart vehicle for today. It's affordable, it gets great mileage and it's an evolution to the next step. I have to wonder how much upkeep were on these units? Maybe it's because the electricity costs were getting too high for Costco?

If I could get a couple gallons of free gas for shopping there, I'd certainly consider shopping there more often. I wonder how profitable that would be though?

Costco is really under no obligation to pay for the transportation costs of others even if it was for reasons of cost.

I was in Vancouver a couple weeks ago and was surpised to find that most of the cabs there are Priuses. I guess the maintenance costs must not be too bad.

 

[rocket88]

That darn liberal Costco, bunch of commie environmentalists

Oh wait Costco is an independant company seeking to make money and most likely installed the charging stations to attract certain customers. The plan didnt work.

Conservatives love to go on and on about letting the market decide. Costco saw an opportunity to make more money, but the market wasn't there for it to be profitable. So they pulled the plug (pun intended).

The market decided, so there you go. Sounds like a process and outcome that Conservatives should be happy with.

 

[Helix]

i find it odd that many conservatives rejoice at any negative news story about non-oil fuels. for the past ten years, the message has been that anything and everything should be done to prevent terrorism, even if those measures are against the spirit of the constitution. cutting off money to terrorist organizations has also been cited as a key component of anti-terror measures. however, the predominant export of middle eastern countries (and, therefore, the predominant source of money for terror) is oil. it seems logical that a conservative would preferentially support fuels that do not fund terror. where is the disconnect?