• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

GM puts Volt engine plant on hold to conserve cash

Well you can gamble with foreign countries that control oil all you want, I won't have to in a few years as much as I do now.

Again, you are looking at it per year, I am looking at it that gas is going to skyrocket again and am planning on it accordingly. Also with the volt you are able to get a rebate from the government.

Hey if people want to remain ignorant and reliant on foreign oil as their primary fuel, that's up to them.

Me I will take my chance on Using American Energy as my primary source, not Foreign.

So lets get this straight...you're looking at purchasing the volt to avoid skyrocketing gasoline prices and relying on foreign sources of energy. Reasonable.

But then you cite a rebate check from the government. You really mean that some US taxpayers will be subsidizing your purchase. In other words, you will be subsidizing your purchase.

Coal is the primary energy course in generating electricity. Nuclear is 2nd with Natural Gas third and Hydro fourth. Oil is fifth. There is currently an assault on coal as an energy source. Nuke power ain't coming back soon. And Natural Gas has a highly volatile commodity price. With the current fetish with alternative fuels, how do you know that such alternatives won't be more expensive than oil? How do you know that cheap coal will be available to generate the electricity necessary to charge up your car?

More importantly, how do we know that the current electrcity generating infrastructure can adequately accomodate the increased demand for electricity generated by the introduction of such a vehicle? Hell, several parts of the US are already experiencing rolling blackouts several times a year now because they cannot provide an adequate supply of electricity.

Hence, it's not even remotely clear that the availability of such a vehicle is going to insulate the US from relying on foreign sources of energy or reduce long-term energy costs, particularly when you consider that such a vehicle will necessarily increase demand for energy.
 
So lets get this straight...you're looking at purchasing the volt to avoid skyrocketing gasoline prices and relying on foreign sources of energy. Reasonable.

But then you cite a rebate check from the government. You really mean that some US taxpayers will be subsidizing your purchase. In other words, you will be subsidizing your purchase.

Coal is the primary energy course in generating electricity. Nuclear is 2nd with Natural Gas third and Hydro fourth. Oil is fifth. There is currently an assault on coal as an energy source. Nuke power ain't coming back soon. And Natural Gas has a highly volatile commodity price. With the current fetish with alternative fuels, how do you know that such alternatives won't be more expensive than oil? How do you know that cheap coal will be available to generate the electricity necessary to charge up your car?

More importantly, how do we know that the current electrcity generating infrastructure can adequately accomodate the increased demand for electricity generated by the introduction of such a vehicle? Hell, several parts of the US are already experiencing rolling blackouts several times a year now because they cannot provide an adequate supply of electricity.

Hence, it's not even remotely clear that the availability of such a vehicle is going to insulate the US from relying on foreign sources of energy or reduce long-term energy costs, particularly when you consider that such a vehicle will necessarily increase demand for energy.

Well then I guess you won't be buying it, that's your choice.

Charge time can be done at night at low levels of public usage. Not everyone is charging their car at noon. The electric companies are already researching this and Nevada Power company (NV Energy) has already said to its customers that it can support it.

As for the rebate, my money is gone out of my paycheck no matter what, this way I get some of it back and put to better use, my use.

So enjoy your support of OPEC and stand proud and salute the flag as you are pumping each and everytime lol. Me, with my driving times and such it will be far and few in between.
 
Well then I guess you won't be buying it, that's your choice.

:roll:

Charge time can be done at night at low levels of public usage. Not everyone is charging their car at noon. The electric companies are already researching this and Nevada Power company (NV Energy) has already said to its customers that it can support it.

Boy, doing research is great. Nevada can support it only by diverting more water from the Colorado, something that cannot grow infinitely.

As for the rebate, my money is gone out of my paycheck no matter what, this way I get some of it back and put to better use, my use.

With the kind of thinking, why don't we just enact all sorts of policies confiscating our income to subsidize the individual consumption choices of everyone else? The money is going to be taken anyway. :roll:

So enjoy your support of OPEC and stand proud and salute the flag as you are pumping each and everytime lol. Me, with my driving times and such it will be far and few in between.

I love how you use gas consumption as some perjorative. Reveals your level of intellectual integrity.

BTW - nice duck.
 
Well you can gamble with foreign countries that control oil all you want, I won't have to in a few years as much as I do now.

Again, you are looking at it per year, I am looking at it that gas is going to skyrocket again and am planning on it accordingly. Also with the volt you are able to get a rebate from the government.

Hey if people want to remain ignorant and reliant on foreign oil as their primary fuel, that's up to them.

Me I will take my chance on Using American Energy as my primary source, not Foreign.

I'm not criticizing your choice or arguing that there aren't benefits to the hybrid.

Folks were criticizing GM for halting production development. My point is that the market drives demand for such vehicles, and at $2/gal for fuel with a recession, I question whether there is going to be much demand for these vehicles. Apparently GM questions that as well. At $4/gal, a hybrid makes twice as much sense from an economic perspective.
 
Boy, doing research is great. Nevada can support it only by diverting more water from the Colorado, something that cannot grow infinitely.

You act like the ENTIRE population is going electric, it isn't. As for NV electric saying they can support it you will have to show proof to your assertation that they will be diverting more water from Colorado to do it.

With the kind of thinking, why don't we just enact all sorts of policies confiscating our income to subsidize the individual consumption choices of everyone else? The money is going to be taken anyway. :roll:

LOL you asked why I was complaining about my money being returned, I wasn't complaining, you were. Nice duck yourself.

I love how you use gas consumption as some perjorative. Reveals your level of intellectual integrity.

BTW - nice duck.

And again, you make assumptions that everyone is going to go electric. They aren't. As Kernal and Gill pointed out some just simply cannot.

I for one assumed you would welcome those that can go electric do so to lessen the use of foreign oil. I guess you aren't and you support OPEC.

As more and more people show interest in electric and as the technology grows, the demand for better electric infrastructure will also increase.

People won't be able to turn away nuclear power so easily and it will create jobs in America. I don't understand why you are so against it. Are you against American made or something?
 
I'm not criticizing your choice or arguing that there aren't benefits to the hybrid.

Folks were criticizing GM for halting production development. My point is that the market drives demand for such vehicles, and at $2/gal for fuel with a recession, I question whether there is going to be much demand for these vehicles. Apparently GM questions that as well. At $4/gal, a hybrid makes twice as much sense from an economic perspective.

Well that is going to have to be for others to decide. I would gladly choose using American power over foreign oil.

If others don't want to, that's their choice. But the technology is out there and $2 gas will not stay forever. We saw how quickly gas can rise in just a year and then two years.

If people don't want to learn from their mistakes, they deserve what they get.
 
Well that is going to have to be for others to decide. I would gladly choose using American power over foreign oil.

If others don't want to, that's their choice. But the technology is out there and $2 gas will not stay forever. We saw how quickly gas can rise in just a year and then two years.

If people don't want to learn from their mistakes, they deserve what they get.

The technology is available to produce the cars, though, of course, the government feels compelled to subsidize their cost as they do with other hybrids. The problem is that the nation's infrastructure ain't prepared to accomodate this increase in electrical demand.

At best this is a transition vehicle. At worst, it's a waste of energy and resources that will inevitably cost us far more than we can save.
 
Well that is going to have to be for others to decide. I would gladly choose using American power over foreign oil.

If others don't want to, that's their choice. But the technology is out there and $2 gas will not stay forever. We saw how quickly gas can rise in just a year and then two years.

If people don't want to learn from their mistakes, they deserve what they get.

Maybe true. People will generally do what they perceive is their economic interest, even if the perception is wrong. And producers ultimately have to produce what the market wants.

If we want more people to consider things like hybrid cars, you have to make it more economically reasonable to do it. Either the car has to be less expensive or gas has to cost more.
 
Well that is going to have to be for others to decide. I would gladly choose using American power over foreign oil.

If others don't want to, that's their choice. But the technology is out there and $2 gas will not stay forever. We saw how quickly gas can rise in just a year and then two years.

If people don't want to learn from their mistakes, they deserve what they get.

The technology is not truly out there, unfortunately, because I don't believe electric cars are the answer.

Let's say the Volt existed, and it was a truly great car. To support American made cars, as well as slow the dependence on foreign oil, Americans were buying them in droves. With all of these cars needing electricity, what do you think would happen to the power supply?

I remember the blackout we had a few years back. A few too many people were running their air conditions a little too high during a heat wave and BAM. Now imagine tens of millions of cars.
 
The technology is not truly out there, unfortunately, because I don't believe electric cars are the answer.

Let's say the Volt existed, and it was a truly great car. To support American made cars, as well as slow the dependence on foreign oil, Americans were buying them in droves. With all of these cars needing electricity, what do you think would happen to the power supply?

I remember the blackout we had a few years back. A few too many people were running their air conditions a little too high during a heat wave and BAM. Now imagine tens of millions of cars.

Not according to these people:

Utilities Have the Electric Capacity

Over 40% of the generating capacity in the U.S. sits idle or operates at a reduced load overnight, when most PHEVs would be charged. That means tens of millions of plug-ins could be charged every night without the need to build additional electric generation capacity. For example, Southern California Edison, an investor-owned utility, estimates that 4 million plug-in hybrids could be charged without exceeding its existing peak load. Millions more could be fueled within existing capacity.
Plug-In Partners
 
The technology is not truly out there, unfortunately, because I don't believe electric cars are the answer.

Let's say the Volt existed, and it was a truly great car. To support American made cars, as well as slow the dependence on foreign oil, Americans were buying them in droves. With all of these cars needing electricity, what do you think would happen to the power supply?

I remember the blackout we had a few years back. A few too many people were running their air conditions a little too high during a heat wave and BAM. Now imagine tens of millions of cars.

And again you are assuming everyone will be charging their vehicles at the high point during the day.

You are also using your electric company. Maybe yours can't support it, but if the demand is out there, then upgrades can be done. Nuclear power can more easily be introduced favorably as well.

Also the volt is not a pure electric car. It is a hybrid. As such it is not going to replace ALL vehicles, but if you can shorten the amount of gas used by in city drivers, isn't that worth investing in?

As for your comment that "to support it, people have to buy it in large numbers", that is true and it isn't. Long term you are correct, short term you are not correct. Take a look at the personal computer. How many had them when they came out and what was their cost? Pretty high cost and low usage.

As more people used them, the technology advanced and they became more affordable. The same will eventually happen with electric cars.

To me it is worth the investment. I and others plan to buy the car. We'll see when gas prices go back up, who is complaining.
 
Last edited:
And again you are assuming everyone will be charging their vehicles at the high point during the day.

You are also using your electric company. Maybe yours can't support it, but if the demand is out there, then upgrades can be done. Nuclear power can more easily be introduced favorably as well.

Also the volt is not a pure electric car. It is a hybrid. As such it is not going to replace ALL vehicles, but if you can shorten the amount of gas used by in city drivers, isn't that worth investing in?

As for your comment that "to support it, people have to buy it in large numbers", that is true and it isn't. Long term you are correct, short term you are not correct. Take a look at the personal computer. How many had them when they came out and what was their cost? Pretty high cost and low usage.

As more people used them, the technology advanced and they became more affordable. The same will eventually happen with electric cars.

To me it is worth the investment. I and others plan to buy the car. We'll see when gas prices go back up, who is complaining.

Let me just start by saying I am all for saving the environment. It's an issue that is near and dear to my heart. Having said that, I'm not prepared to jump the gun and sing hallelujah at any of the " alter oil" ideas/plans that will save us from pollution and the big bad oil guys. The solution of "just supplying more energy" is not as easy as you make it seem. With more demand on electricity will come a higher price... just like oil. My house has been smart metered to avoid what happened a few years back, because our old and faulty grid can barely handle peak hours. In order to create this electricity that we need, we will need a lot of oil. Funny how that works.

There is nothing out there--at present (hey, I can be optimistic!)--that is as wonderful as black gold. The amount of energy required to produce it is miniscule compared to what it takes to provide electricity/ethanol/hydrogen, etc.

-------

"What About Super Fuel Efficient
and/or Electric Cars?"



Hybrids:

Hybrids or so called "hyper-cars" aren't the answer either because the construction of an average car consumes the energy equivalent of approximately 27-54 barrels (1,110-2,200 gallons) of oil. Thus, a crash program to replace the 700 million internal combustion vehicles currently on the road with super fuel-efficient or alternative fuel-powered vehicles would consume the energy equivalent of approximately 18-36 billion barrels of oil, which is the amount of oil the world currently consumes in six-to-twelve months. Consequently, such a program (while well-intentioned) would actually bring the collapse upon us even sooner.

See also:

The Inconvenient Truth About Hybrid Cars

Electric Vehicles:

Electric vehicles are incapable of replacing more than a small fraction (5 or maybe 10%) of the 700 million internal combustion engine powered cars on the road due to the limits of battery technology. Dr. Walter Youngquist explains:

. . . a gallon of gasoline weighing about 8 pounds has the same
energy as one ton of conventional lead-acid storage batteries.
Fifteen gallons of gasoline in a car's tank are the energy equal of
15 tons of storage batteries.

Even if much improved storage batteries were devised, they
cannot compete with gasoline or diesel fuel in energy density.
Also, storage batteries become almost useless in very cold
weather, storage capacity is limited, and batteries need to be
replaced after a few years use at large cost.

There is no battery pack which can effectively move heavy farm
machinery over miles of farm fields, and no electric battery
system seems even remotely able to propel a Boeing 747 14 hours
nonstop at 600 miles an hour . . .

Some promising research into new battery technlogies using lithium is being performed, but even the scientists at the forefront of this research admit, "We've got a long way to go."

See also:

Prius Batteries Creating Massive Environmental "Dead Zone"

Assumming these problems away, the construction of an average car also consumes 120,000 gallons of fresh water. Source Unfortunately, the world is in the midst of a severe water crisis that is only going to get worse in the years to come. Source Scientists are already warning us to get ready for massive "water wars."

Thus, the only way for us to replace our current fleet of gas-guzzling SUVs with fuel-efficient hybrids or electric vehicles is to seize control of the world's reserves of both oil and fresh water and then divert those resources away from the billions of people who already rely on them.

Even if we are willing to undertake such an endeavor, the problem will still not be solved due to a phenomenon known as "Jevon's Paradox," whereby increases in energy efficiency are obliterated by corresponding increases in energy consumption.

The US economy is a good example of Jevon's Paradox in action. Since 1970, we have managed to cut in half the amount of oil necessary to generate a dollar of GDP. At the same time, however, our total level of oil consumption has risen by about fifty percent while our level of natural gas and coal consumption have risen by even more. Thus, despite massive increases in the energy efficiency over the last 35 years, we are more dependent on oil than ever. This trend is unlikely to be abated in a market economy, where the whole point is to make as much money (consume as much energy) as possible.


This is a really great website with tons of info. There are link provided to the text I pasted here, so check it out:

Peak Oil: Life After the Oil Crash
 
There is nothing out there--at present (hey, I can be optimistic!)--that is as wonderful as black gold. The amount of energy required to produce it is miniscule compared to what it takes to provide electricity/ethanol/hydrogen, etc.

-------

"What About Super Fuel Efficient
and/or Electric Cars?"



Hybrids:

Hybrids or so called "hyper-cars" aren't the answer either because the construction of an average car consumes the energy equivalent of approximately 27-54 barrels (1,110-2,200 gallons) of oil. Thus, a crash program to replace the 700 million internal combustion vehicles currently on the road with super fuel-efficient or alternative fuel-powered vehicles would consume the energy equivalent of approximately 18-36 billion barrels of oil, which is the amount of oil the world currently consumes in six-to-twelve months. Consequently, such a program (while well-intentioned) would actually bring the collapse upon us even sooner.


Peak Oil: Life After the Oil Crash


The volt is not meant to replace all vehicles. I don't know where you claim it is.

However, for those that live in the city yes, it is a good thing. I can tell you one thing. The volt will be more useful to society than the Hummer or the corvette.

It isn't going to replace everything, but to claim that it is no better than the combustible engine of the everyday person driving around the city is just plain wrong.

The battery capabilities are increasing and from the looks of the data they are using 2002 data. A lot has changed since 2002.
 
The volt is not meant to replace all vehicles. I don't know where you claim it is.

However, for those that live in the city yes, it is a good thing. I can tell you one thing. The volt will be more useful to society than the Hummer or the corvette.

It isn't going to replace everything, but to claim that it is no better than the combustible engine of the everyday person driving around the city is just plain wrong.

The battery capabilities are increasing and from the looks of the data they are using 2002 data. A lot has changed since 2002.

What I'm saying is that the Volt or any electric car is not the answer to:
1) dependence on foreign oil
2) global warming

At least definitely not now, nor the near future.
 
What I'm saying is that the Volt or any electric car is not the answer to:
1) dependence on foreign oil
2) global warming

At least definitely not now, nor the near future.

I am not even contemplating buying the volt for gloabal warming, but yes, it is a start to ending our dependence on Foreign oil.

If you show me those saying that the Volt is the end to the dependence on foreign oil I will say they is wrong. It is is a hybrid and as such will use gas when needed.

But for those that drive less than 40 miles a day it is the end of foreign oil for their car as a majority for their car source.

Isn't that better than nothing? I mean seriously. It is a start in the right direction. Over the decades of doing NOTHING about it, finally we have something that is American Made and trying to make a difference.

That is worth something to support, if not with money, than with just support of the idea IMO.
 
Last edited:
I am not even contemplating buying the volt for gloabal warming, but yes, it is a start to ending our dependence on Foreign oil.

If you show me those saying that the Volt is the end to the dependence on foreign oil I will say they is wrong. It is is a hybrid and as such will use gas when needed.

But for those that drive less than 40 miles a day it is the end of foreign oil for their car as a majority for their car source.

Isn't that better than nothing? I mean seriously. It is a start in the right direction. Over the decades of doing NOTHING about it, finally we have something that is American Made and trying to make a difference.

That is worth something to support, if not with money, than with just support of the idea IMO.

Thing is, TNE, it's takes a lot of oil to build the cars, and a lot of oil to run them. Not just the gasoline part... but the electricity.

From the same website:

People tend to think of "alternatives to oil" as somehow independent from oil. In reality, the alternatives to oil are more accurately described as "derivatives of oil." It takes massive amounts of oil and other scarce resources to locate and mine the raw materials (silver, copper, platinum, uranium, etc.) necessary to build solar panels, windmills, and nuclear power plants. It takes more oil to construct these alternatives and even more oil to distribute them, maintain them, and adapt current infrastructure to run on them.

Oil is truly "black gold":

Most people are stunned to find this out, even after confirming the accuracy of the numbers for themselves, but it makes sense when you think about it a bit: it only takes one ($3) gallon of gasoline to propel a three ton SUV 10 miles in 10 minutes when traveling 60 mph. How long would it take you to push a three ton SUV 10 miles?

While people tend to drastically underestimate the energy density of oil and gas, they drastically overestimate the energy density (and thus scalability) of renewables.


Peak Oil: Life After the Oil Crash
 
Double post please delete somebody.
 
Last edited:
Thing is, TNE, it's takes a lot of oil to build the cars, and a lot of oil to run them. Not just the gasoline part... but the electricity.

From the same website:

People tend to think of "alternatives to oil" as somehow independent from oil. In reality, the alternatives to oil are more accurately described as "derivatives of oil." It takes massive amounts of oil and other scarce resources to locate and mine the raw materials (silver, copper, platinum, uranium, etc.) necessary to build solar panels, windmills, and nuclear power plants. It takes more oil to construct these alternatives and even more oil to distribute them, maintain them, and adapt current infrastructure to run on them.

Oil is truly "black gold":

Most people are stunned to find this out, even after confirming the accuracy of the numbers for themselves, but it makes sense when you think about it a bit: it only takes one ($3) gallon of gasoline to propel a three ton SUV 10 miles in 10 minutes when traveling 60 mph. How long would it take you to push a three ton SUV 10 miles?

While people tend to drastically underestimate the energy density of oil and gas, they drastically overestimate the energy density (and thus scalability) of renewables.


Peak Oil: Life After the Oil Crash

My point is the alternative is to do nothing. Which is better? We know cars are going to be built. We know right now we use oil.

Are you seriously telling me the best alternative to dependence on foreign oil is to do NOTHING? That is what has been done for decades.

So my point yet again is, what is better, to do nothing or try to do something about it?

Electric Cars and Electric Hybrids are the start. And it is a hell of a lot better than doing NOTHING and just waiting.
 
There is no magic bullet. A car cannot liberate us from oil or any other such grand gesture. Plug in electrics/hybrid cars are one piece of a fundamental shift from oil and coal to renewable energy sources. It will take a long time and a lot of infrastructure will need to change, because oil is indeed a large part of the energy market. That's most of the reason that it's so much cheaper to suck oil out of the ground, ship it halfway around the world, process it into whatever form of fuel you need, ship it around some more, and still be one of the cheapest liquids you can buy. That's why it's cheaper per megawatt to do all that than to put up a wind turbine or a solar farm and just harvest free energy. If we really want to wean ourselves from oil that process has to happen at every level. Once we do, however, each piece of that chain will be cheaper than oil ever can be, being a scarce resource. Between solar, wind, and wave energy there isn't a spot on Earth that doesn't have the potential to harvest energy, if only we can get to the point where it's as easy to utilize that energy as it is to use gas now. If you combine that with advance battery technology (such as nanotech supercapacitors - look it up, really cool stuff) that will make portable energy cheap and easy as well, and mankind has the potential to undergo a completely different kind of revolution. The problem is, if you look at any one piece of that process in isolation, as is common in politics, it looks weak and unprofitable.

:rantoff:
 
There is no magic bullet. A car cannot liberate us from oil or any other such grand gesture. Plug in electrics/hybrid cars are one piece of a fundamental shift from oil and coal to renewable energy sources. It will take a long time and a lot of infrastructure will need to change, because oil is indeed a large part of the energy market. That's most of the reason that it's so much cheaper to suck oil out of the ground, ship it halfway around the world, process it into whatever form of fuel you need, ship it around some more, and still be one of the cheapest liquids you can buy. That's why it's cheaper per megawatt to do all that than to put up a wind turbine or a solar farm and just harvest free energy. If we really want to wean ourselves from oil that process has to happen at every level. Once we do, however, each piece of that chain will be cheaper than oil ever can be, being a scarce resource. Between solar, wind, and wave energy there isn't a spot on Earth that doesn't have the potential to harvest energy, if only we can get to the point where it's as easy to utilize that energy as it is to use gas now. If you combine that with advance battery technology (such as nanotech supercapacitors - look it up, really cool stuff) that will make portable energy cheap and easy as well, and mankind has the potential to undergo a completely different kind of revolution. The problem is, if you look at any one piece of that process in isolation, as is common in politics, it looks weak and unprofitable.

:rantoff:

Don't disagree with what you have said, but if we do nothing where are we at? The same place we are now and the same place we were when gas prices dominated.

I'm not saying Electric or Electric Hybrid is the silver bullet to oil , but it is most definitely a start to something else other than just taking up the ass for the entirety of our fuel.

People should welcome new technology. Hell I remember talking with my grandfather when he talked about the past and he said the calculator wouldn't amount to anything because it was too expensive when it came out.

Just to give you folks another thing to worry about the middle east is with communication. It is quite clear fiber optics is the future. Guess where we have the most sand to make glass fiber optics. Oh yeah the middle east. We aren't done by a long shot there.

But if we do nothing, we recognize they hold all the cards and we must follow.

Is that what you all want?
 
Don't disagree with what you have said, but if we do nothing where are we at? The same place we are now and the same place we were when gas prices dominated.

I'm not saying Electric or Electric Hybrid is the silver bullet to oil , but it is most definitely a start to something else other than just taking up the ass for the entirety of our fuel.

People should welcome new technology. Hell I remember talking with my grandfather when he talked about the past and he said the calculator wouldn't amount to anything because it was too expensive when it came out.

Just to give you folks another thing to worry about the middle east is with communication. It is quite clear fiber optics is the future. Guess where we have the most sand to make glass fiber optics. Oh yeah the middle east. We aren't done by a long shot there.

But if we do nothing, we recognize they hold all the cards and we must follow.

Is that what you all want?

Sorry - that was supposed to be after Middleground's post. It just took me a while to write :mrgreen:
 
Source [Yahoo! News (AP) | GM puts Volt engine plant on hold to conserve cash]



picard-facepalm.jpg



Translation-- "Please environuts in office and envirowackos/man made global warming theory believers we need this bail out,see how we had to hold back on making this plant that makes engines that use clean electricity."
 
I disagree. That makes perfect sense. GM was poised to be the first auto manufacturer to develop an cheap electric car for commercial sales...now it seems likely that Toyota or Honda will beat them.
The technology to make a good general-use electric car does not exist at this time. This product is market effluvia, which begs the question of how the needed electricity will be generated.
 
The technology to make a good general-use electric car does not exist at this time. This product is market effluvia, which begs the question of how the needed electricity will be generated.

I am guessing you didn't see the link here:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...s-volt-engine-plant-hold-conserve-cash-4.html

The fact is many Electric companies are prepared for it, but the logic is not everyone is going to buy one right away so the electric grid is not going to be under strain right away.

This means upgrades and this means that nuclear power might finally be a viable and publicly accepted option in the future.

That's not a bad thing. The alternative is to remain a slave to foreign oil as a mjority. Which is better to research?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom