| Page: 1 | Rating: Unrated [0] |
Sure Sign The War Was Entirely For Oil
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» mdc replied on Thu Apr 10, 2003 @ 9:49pm |
 Coolness: 149500 | GM pulling plug on electric cars
Wednesday, April 9, 2003 Posted: 9:40 AM EDT (1340 GMT) 
GM is taking electric cars, like Greg Hanssen's, above, off the road after the leases expire. SACRAMENTO, California (AP) -- The celebrated ride of the car that spawned the nation's toughest emissions regulation ends at a parking lot in Southern California, where a growing fleet of General Motors electric cars awaits an uncertain fate. Dozens of the green, metallic blue and bright red futuristic autos are lined up behind a chain-link fence at the edge of a freight rail line in Van Nuys, a sure sign the world's largest automaker has pulled the plug on a vehicle it heralded as recently as two years ago as "the car of the future." As California retreats from its strict pollution regulation, GM is taking the cars off the road when leases expire because it can no longer supply parts to repair them, said GM spokesman Dave Barthmuss. The automaker is shipping the cars to museums and universities for preservation, sending them to a research lab in New York, "cannibalizing" them for parts for the few still on the road, or scrapping them. It's a long way from a program once touted as the company's clean air centerpiece, and it comes as fans in California fight to keep some electric cars on the road as the state rewrites its so-called zero emissions vehicle rule. To the scores of drivers who embraced the technology, GM's effort to get the cars off the road is a heartbreaking prelude to the imminent death of the battery-powered vehicle as state air regulators continue to weaken rules that would have required 10 percent of cars for sale this year be nonpolluting. "They've gone from being regulators to just asking politely, 'Gee, industry, would you do this?'" said Greg Hanssen, of the Production Electric Vehicle Drivers Coalition, which has lobbied for more battery-powered cars. "To us driving battery electric vehicles, we're saying, 'Hey, you've left us hanging out to dry.'" New plans It was only after seeing the promise of the first GM electric car in the late 1980s that California launched its ambitious zero emission vehicle program in 1990 to help clean up America's smoggiest skies. New York and Massachusetts followed suit and other states are mulling similar regulations and watching to see how California's rule-making plays out. Over the past decade, state regulators have caved to pressure as car makers vigorously fought at hearings and in court to halt the regulation. Major automakers have stopped production because the vehicles were limited to a range of about 100 miles, required lengthy recharges and their high cost made them unappealing to a wide group of drivers. The California Air Resources Board is poised to make changes that reflect that the cars are a commercial failure and to promote more promising technologies that have emerged. The board's staff has suggested a new plan letting auto companies reach the 10 percent quota with a combination of low-polluting gas-powered vehicles, gas-electric hybrids and a couple hundred fuel cell cars down the road. Automakers would also be able to apply credits for electric cars it once put on the road and electric golf-cart style vehicles that zip through neighborhoods, office parks and campuses. Honda concluded that the limited popularity of the electric car wouldn't effectively contribute to cleaner air, said vice president Ben Knight. "I think it is a small group that is very interested in that particular technology," Knight said. "Some of our customers would tell us that they did, it took a while, but they did understand why their friends and neighbors weren't leaning toward leasing a battery electric vehicle." Honda is now focused on its hybrid models, natural gas-powered vehicles and fuel cell program. It plans to have five fuel cell models, which run on the electricity from a chemical reaction between oxygen and hydrogen, in the Los Angeles city fleet by June. The fuel cell cars have already doubled the range of electric cars. Supporters of battery-powered vehicles say the auto companies never seriously gave the cars a chance and didn't do enough to improve the technology or promote the cars to the public -- claims automakers dispute. Staying on the road? S. David Freeman, chairman of the California Consumer Power and Financing Authority, said there were long waiting lists of people who wanted the cars when he ran the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. Freeman has followed the technology since he was head of the Tennessee Valley Authority in the late 1970s and said automakers predicted the demise of the vehicle before it ever hit the road. "They've been singing that tune while they built the dang things," Freeman said. "Back in 1990 when the Air Resources Board laid down the zero emission rule there were no electric cars, it was a dream. Now that the dream is a reality, they're prepared to abandon it." Unlike GM, Honda extended leases for some drivers, and about 100 of its original 300 or more EV Plus cars are still on the road. Of the more than 1,000 two-seater sporty EV1 cars built by GM, only about 375 are on the road. The plan is to have them off the road by the end of next year. Hanssen's lease expired last month and he surrendered his EV1 to GM as the Air Resources Board was set to vote on restructured regulations that promote the development of the hydrogen-powered fuel cell vehicle. There's a chance when the board meets later this month that the regulations will be rewritten to encourage electric vehicle production, and EV1 drivers are hoping GM -- which spent over $1 billion on its electric car program -- will be persuaded to extend leases or lease cars that were previously returned. But drivers who embraced the technology are not counting on a new lease on the life of their aging electric car. Hanssen refinanced his house and, like other drivers about to lose their EV1, bought an electric Toyota RAV4, which was sold instead of leased. "There's a chance (the board) will come out with some juicy incentive to keep these cars on the road," Hanssen said. "It wouldn't be all too surprising if they just scrapped the vehicles." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Copyright 2003 The Associated Press . All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» PookStah replied on Thu Apr 10, 2003 @ 10:46pm |
| Coolness: 106600 | ugh... this war is soo stupid...and on top of it..illegal
pfft!!! :angry ***** bOOyAH mandee |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» OMGSTFUDIEPLZKTX replied on Fri Apr 11, 2003 @ 3:31pm |
| Coolness: 67200 | Afrokaboobie
how is that a "sure sign the war was entirely for oil"? I don't think you read the article since it says nothing about war, oil, or anything else related to it. Infact, the reason given for pulling the cars off the streets were: --- Major automakers have stopped production because the vehicles were limited to a range of about 100 miles, required lengthy recharges and their high cost made them unappealing to a wide group of drivers. --- The cars were inefficient and weren't viable. Has nothing to do with oil. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Fri Apr 11, 2003 @ 3:46pm |
 Coolness: 686275 | Oh yeah. News articles are COMPLETELY truthfull all the time and would NEVER lie or tell a story for anything that it isn't, 'cause that's wrong and the public has a right to know!
*turns on CNN* |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Fri Apr 11, 2003 @ 5:10pm |
 Coolness: 92375 | No, the war was not entirely for oil. For the best article I've seen on why the US went to war with Iraq, check this out:
[ www.salon.com ] It is basically an examination of the pro-Israel neo-conservatives in Washington who are behind the decision to attagk Iraq. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» OMGSTFUDIEPLZKTX replied on Sat Apr 12, 2003 @ 8:47pm |
| Coolness: 67200 | That article is further supported by Project New American Century and by not so simple numbers.
[ www.newamericancentury.org ] Their attempt to take over has been in the planning for a while, but I wouldn't call it "neo conservatism". More like Nixonism. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» soyfunk replied on Sat Apr 12, 2003 @ 9:48pm |
 Coolness: 127455 | they got a fuck PORCHE suv
FUCKEN PORCHE SUV !!!?! things are falling apart DAVID SUZUKY SAVE US!! |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» mdc replied on Mon Apr 14, 2003 @ 10:43pm |
| Coolness: 149500 | yeah i know.. but its fun to make wild accusations with limited and mostly useless proof |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Mon Apr 14, 2003 @ 11:21pm |
| Coolness: 686275 | The porche SUV is loaded with a 911 turbo engien. My dad is looking at that and the Murano. :) |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» mdc replied on Tue Apr 15, 2003 @ 11:26am |
| Coolness: 149500 | the murano rocks!!!!!
my dad just got one... its actualy more fuel efficient than the dodge caravan we had until two weeks ago.. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Tue Apr 15, 2003 @ 6:35pm |
| Coolness: 686275 | Yeah, I love that one! Don't you love the seamless gear changing? That was so freaky! And it's so damn comfortable! It looks small from the outside but the inside is huge! |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» mdc replied on Wed Apr 16, 2003 @ 11:05am |
| Coolness: 149500 | exactly...
mutitronic transmission... its great... no gears! |
Sure Sign The War Was Entirely For Oil
| Page: 1 |
[ Top Of Page ] |
Post A Reply |
You must be logged in to post a reply.
[ Top Of Page ] |
