Impact of GM Destroying the EV1

by: Michael Fitzsimmons July 30, 2008 | about stocks: F / GM / HMC / TM    

Michael Fitzsimmons

About this author:
Become a Contributor Submit an Article
  • Font Size:
  • Print

The documentary Who Killed the Electric Car comes to a number of conclusions. On the encouraging side, the EV1 proved an electric car could be reliable fun to drive, and very well liked (one might say loved) by its owners. The car was clean, performed admirably, and a tune-up consisted of rotating the tires and topping up the windshield fluid compartment..

On the disturbing side, the documentary points out the complete failure of government at both the state and federal level to support the car - not merely by financial incentives, but by policy. The California Air Resources Board [CARB], the same bureaucracy that initiated the zero-emission policy in the first place, abandoned the EV1 at the very point in time the car proved it could meet the board's requirements. Bush and Cheney then pulled the bait-n-switch to hydrogen fuel-cells, a technology they both know will never be cost-efficient. The EV1's were then recalled by GM (GM) (the cars could only be leased - no leasers were allowed to keep them), and they were sent to the car crusher so all evidence of its success could be destroyed forever.

What are the economic, environmental, and political repercussions due to the demise of the EV1? The repercussions are gigantic.

Economically, the US is even more addicted to foreign oil and sends $700 billion a year to Russia, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, and Iran. The resulting trade deficit and economic reverberations have played a major role in the US dollar's 50% devaluation under the Bush administration. America's current economic stagnation due to its addiction to high-priced foreign oil is even harder to digest given the oil-induced inflationary environment its citizens are currently learning to live with. The economic implications of the resulting stock market sell-off will be felt by retirees, working people's 401k plans, and investors for years to come.

Meanwhile, some analyst are predicting bankruptcy for GM, who switched from making EV1's to Hummers. Meanwhile, thousands of GM employees and entire communities will feel the negative effects of GM's consistent reporting of billion dollar losses. It's interesting to note that GM, facing bankruptcy, losing market share to the hybrids and fuel-efficient vehicles Toyota (TM) and Honda (HMC) developed because of the CARB mandate, and seeing its stock price sink to decade lows, still doesn't mention reviving the EV1.

Environmentally, the lack of an electric car in the US has been disastrous. Some have estimated the US would be using 50% less gasoline today if the California mandate and EV1 had been allowed to take its natural course. Considering that each gallon of gasoline burned in an automobile's internal combustion engine can emit 15 lbs of CO2 into the atmosphere, well, you do the math.

Politically, it's just one more nail in the coffin of the American "democratic" system of government. The US at this point is more fascist than democratic. The industrial powers call the all the shots. If the EV1 is any indication, these industrial powers (like GM) seem hell-bent on destroying even themselves. Recent Bush administration-supported efforts by Bernanke and Paulsen show the government is in the process of nationalizing the country's mortgage market and will soon do the same to the banking industry - including the investment banks. This will be yet another mechanism of federal control (along with the wars on terror and drugs) in order to take US taxpayer money and give it to the small number of well connected in power. US capitalism is on its last legs.

All this is very interesting to me because I interviewed with the GM engineering group during the mid 1980s in Kokomo, Indiana. They were looking to hire someone to work on the electric car project, and wanted to hire me to work on the braking system. The idea was to reverse the electric fields during braking thereby re-charging the batteries. Interesting job, but Kokomo seemed a strange place to me, and the GM environment even stranger. The real estate agent showing me around asked what kind of car I had, and when I replied that I had a Toyota truck he said, and I quote, "that might work in San Diego, but you had damn well better get rid of that truck before you move here!" He was right too. Not long after returning to San Diego, I saw on TV Toyota trucks getting smashed in the parking lot of the mall right there in, you guessed it, Kokomo, Indiana. What a different world we might live in today had those workers been focused on making quality EV1 automobiles rather than destroying Japanese imports.

Bottom line: Hydrogen fuel cell technology isn't gonna happen. It's a distraction to keep us from realizing that electric cars are possible and WORK. We should be focusing our transportation effort on electric and hybrid plug-in automobiles and electrified high speed rail systems. We should build out the electrical infrastructure to support new energy supplies to fuel these transportation systems from wind, solar, and nuclear energy sources. Just as important, the 50 states should band together and call for a constitutional convention to dismantle the current United States government. We should start over with just the US Constitution and Bill of Rights to guide us. We need to take back our country's government from the fascist powers who are at this very minute plotting to take total control of it. The same powers that killed the electric car.

To put this all into perspective: Seeking Alpha commenter 'lminsky' just pointed out, in a comment he posted to my article on T. Boone Pickens' approach, for all the money the US has wasted in Iraq, it could have instead bought 100,000,000 hybrid vehicles to replace US citizens' gas-guzzling SUVs. Obviously this would have not only been a much wiser use of US taxpayer money, but would have cut foreign oil dependency, helped to clean up the Earth's atmosphere, saved many lives, and perhaps have rescued the faltering US economy and currency from its current oil-dependent death spiral.

Disclosure: The author does NOT own GM, but still drives a Toyota truck and will stay long energy stocks until the US adopts a comprehensive long-term energy policy.

Related Articles

This article has 69 comments:

  •  
    Jul 30 06:54 AM
    I admire the author's view in electrified high speed rail system.

    Please check out the electrified high speed rail system just available from Aug. 01, 2008 in China.

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    It is about $10 to run 70 miles in 28 minutes. Can you image that the similar train can take you from Philadelphia to New York City in 35 minutes ? The Amtrak now costs you 77 minutes and $87.

    Are we so behind in electrified high speed rail system, aren't we ?
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 07:16 AM
    When discussing why GM dropped the EV1, you forgot one issue, nobody wanted them with $1.25 fuel. GM knew that the cost to produce them was so high that no one would buy them, so they tried to lease them, still nobody wanted them. GM is not the government, they are responsible for financial performance and cannot continue to produce a vehicle that they can't sell or lease.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 07:19 AM
    You unfortunately omitted one item when discussing why GM dropped the EV1...nobody wanted them even at the subsidized lease price! GM is not some governmental agency that can spend without a return, that's why it was dropped.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 07:36 AM
    "each gallon of gasoline burned in an automobile's internal combustion engine can emit 15 lbs of CO2 into the atmosphere, "

    Let's do the math..... gasoline is a molecule of carbon, hydrogen and oxygen......... weighs about 7??? pounds a gallon....... combustion products are H2O... C0.... CO2 and soot.......where does the "15 pounds of co2" come from???
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 07:42 AM
    6.073 pounds per gallon.... (had to go look it up)......
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 07:57 AM
    Get a life. The EV1 was never designed for commercial production. The cost was out of sight. Even if mass produced it would have cost over double what a comparable gasoline powered car would cost. As for CO2 emissions, where does the electricity come from to charge the batteries. Much if it from coal. Also efficiency of electricity usage was a challenge. Nothing is free. The EV1 sounded good on paper, similar to hydrogen, solar wind, biofuels, but nothing is "free". All leave some sort of environmental foot print. Yes people are paid to count dead birds under wind farms..... We are an energy intensive country and will be as long as we want to be a world power. Some would like us to go back to the stone age, but I would prefer to develop coal gasifiaction, oil resources and promote conservation while developing a nuclear infrastructure. Drive a reasonable car that gets 30-35 MPG and rent a SUV or minivan for you trip to the beach. The ultimate answer in the next 50 to 100 years is nuclear. We need to start now. I will not be here, but my children and grandchildren will be.

    Also quit harping on GM. They had/have to do something. With all of the legacy costs they have few options.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 07:59 AM
    The EV1 was an interesting engineering experiment for it's time. But it was just that, an experiment. It was launched with great fanfare to a lot of the Hollywood "beautiful people." (Anybody remember the interviews with such great engineering minds as Suzanne Summers?) I think the EV1 served it's purpose. GM gained knowledge that is likely being applied to the upcoming Evolt.

    The mainstream press is overlooking the big picture. If these pure electric cars are coming, and I think they eventually are, when are we going to begin the massive expansion of our electric power infrastructure that will be needed to recharge these things? I can just hear the news reports that will be broadcasts a few years from now:

    "Thousands of commuters were unable to get to work this morning after a massive power black out caused by high user demand swept through many parts of the nation. Hardest hit were the residents of Southern California as power grid officials struggled to meet the demands caused by the unrelenting heat wave and recent increased demands places on the grid by commuters needing to recharge their cars."

    Additionally, we will probably hear people complaining about their high power bills, much the same way they currently complain about their high gasoline bills.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 08:48 AM
    Those who commented the EV1 was never designed nor practical to produce as designed are probably correct. It costs a lot more and takes a lot longer to make a true cost effective production design. Hopefully the learnings for the EV1 will assist in true production designs.

    As far as the electrical supply, we have to think those anti nuclear folks. They and the don't drill in ANWR, don't drill offshore crowd might as well realize they are closet Al Qaeda supporters.

    I am not suggesting we don't hold companies responsible for safety and avoiding pollution. I have no problem with even holding their executives liable to criminal penalties for pollution and safety issues.

    Now if we could just hold those in congress liable for the lack of a policy to supply the energy this company needs.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 09:00 AM
    Young Tan: yes, we are behind the rest of the world. GM bought up the electric rail systems in most eastern cities decades ago and demolished them (much as they did the electric cars...) so that people in the cities would be forced to buy automobiles.

    miken: as the film points out, there was demand, and it was probably the first car ever made that was not sold to people who wanted to own them. and i dont buy the cost argument either - any car that is produced in small quantities would be expensive. the electric car is much much cheaper to build than hummers and SUV's. GM's strategy was to under market and under-cut demand because their ideology was dead set against the car. why do you think they destroyed them all and wouldn't let anyone keep (actually buy) and drive them?

    jackh: the internal combustion engine not only runs on gasoline, but also on air. that is why there is an intake manifold on autos. gasoline is 6.3 lbs per gallon. here is an article that will explain the emission question:
    www.fueleconomy.gov/Fe...
    but this article says it produces 20 lbs of CO2/gallon of gasoline..so, i guess i underestimated...

    Jacamar: exactly, it wasn't made for production - that's the problem. and that's one reason GM is on its knees. again, i disagree with the cost - much cheaper and simpler to build than hummers and SUVs. wrt charging, i mentioned in the article where the electricity should come from. wrt GM, someone needs to harp on them, apparently they arent able to figure out the oil impact on hummer sales, so i thought i would try to help them out. all these issues seem obvious to toyota and honda (although toyota started making huge trucks as well...at least the have the prius).

    blah: the reason the team at GM responsible for marketing the EV1 went to "hollywood types" was because GM refused to market the car like their other cars (you know, beautiful blonde chicks driving to the beach with the windows down and their hair blowing) so, the team decided to reach out to high profile people (mel gibson, ted danson, tom hanks, etc.) so that america (who is fascinated with such people) would at least get some kind of exposure to the car. the mainstream press may be over looking the issue of electric infrastructure, but i didn't in the article, nor does my energy policy:
    thefitzman.blogspot.co...

    the death of the electric car, killed by GM and the oil companies, was probably the single biggest reason the US economy, currency, and stock market are in the tank today. our dependency on 70% imported (and high priced oil) is simply unsustainable. if people dont wake up, the government will continue to take more and more control over our lives until the US will be unrecognizable as the great country it once was.






    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 09:03 AM
    I haven't seen the documentary but plan to. I am sure that there's more to the story than the "Big bad GM angle" that gets played out constantly. If there wasn't, then there would be millions of Honda Insights on the road since GM gave up this segment of the market.

    Our governments -- unlike the Japanese, Korean, etc. -- do more to hurt industries than help. Most of the manufacturing jobs have gone overseas -- you'd think that someone would wake up here and try to help keep the ones that we have!!!
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 09:48 AM
    Re: Fuel cells, about 8 years ago Chevron teamed up with GM to work on a hydrogen infrastructure that used petroleum (of course) as feedstock to produce hydrogen and sell it through Chevron's distribution network. Basically the dark side trying to protect itself from obsolescence. To their credit, GM eventually must have concluded that Chevron rope-a-doped them into this lunacy, and deep-sixed the plan.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 10:07 AM
    If you really did watch the documentary - you'd note that Honda, Toyota, and Ford also crushed their Electric cars. One landfill documentary even caught Honda's getting crushed with their window stickers still in place (but the batteries were removed). GM made the biggest gamble - and they lost the most. Fact is that America wasn't interested. Unless you think that Honda and Toyota just mindlessly followed GM's lead - and abondoned the EV when they really shouldn't have. All are driven by profits, and the EV vehicles were not going to generate any. I know that when the media looks for a punching bag - GM is the first choice. Maybe take a breath - do a little more research - and realize that your article shouldn't single out GM. It's easy to make this argument in the beckdrop of $4.00+ Gasoline. But face it - when it was $1.25/gallon - it didn't make sense. CARB could have and shold have stayed the course. GM, Honda and Ford don't profit from gasoline - oil companies do. Times have changed. Government had their chance to help force the change - but when the pocketbook economics don't make sense at the kithchen table level - we don't buy into them. I don't have a lot of faith that a $40,000 small electric car will strike a cord all that quickly with mainstream Americans......
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 11:07 AM
    More Green B-S and self-promotion. For a variety of reasons, the Volt and its kin will only be "boutique" vehicles for several years. But, as the real goal of the e-Left is $6-8 a gallon gas prices, such attempts to divert our attention serve their purposes nicely.

    Meanwhile, Congress fiddles while Rome burns. As millions more Americans receive their pink slips, e-Democrats won't even ALLOW A VOTE on exploring the OCS and ANWR for more oil and gas. Fits their strategy of WRECKING OUR ECONOMY, so we vote for them to fix it.

    If Americans are dumb enough to buy this nonsense, we'll deserve what we get. More of the same!
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 11:17 AM
    If the R's in the Senate fall below the 40 committed votes they need to block the so-called, "Change we can believe in," in this year's elections, we won't RECOGNIZE OUR COUNTRY when the D's and e's finish with us. Remember that when you vote on November 4.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 11:57 AM
    The author here sounds like an EV-1 salesman (although the car could only be leased because of safety regs and high price : it cost over 3 times more than the competition) I love the ficititious exaggerations also - the claim that the EV-1 required no tuneups and was ultra reliable. The fact is that the EV-1 was recalled more than once for reliability problems and my first "tuneup" for my 1996 Buick was at 100,000 miles and consisted of replacing the spark plugs, at a cost of ten dollars. These kinds of articles with their lies about how cheap it is to operate an electric car are should be considered pure fraud - not even the lowest used car salesman would stoop to such lies - take the battery pack of the EV-1, for example. At 1200 pounds (1) it cost over $20,000 and lasted about 5 years, which, if this author can handle the simple math, turns out to be equivalent of $36 per gallon gasoline for a 22 MPG vehicle. And California laughingly calls a battery-only electric a "zero emissions vehicle," despite the fact that not one electrical outlet in California can provide zero emission electricity that can be used to recharge the batteries. In the EV-1 that was a 8 hour period. And the EV-1 couldn't go anywhere - it had a driving radius of less than 40 miles, and even then it couldn't go there when you wanted to travel. The EV-1 was a total flop, as were those other "invisible" electric cars of the 1990;s : the Toyota Rav4 electric (program cancelled for lack of public interes) and the Honda EV (cancelled after 6 months for lack of public interest). Somehow, that totally
    fictitious film "Who Killed the Electric Car?" a long succession of lies and half-truths, only sems to know about the EV-1. Why is that?
    What deal did Chris Paine make with Honda and Toyota that led him to rewrite history and fail to point out that they killed their electric programs just like GM did and for the exact same reason? Why is
    the American public so dumb about the problems with electric cars?
    Well, folks, you all will have the opportunity to put your money where your mouth is - next year Mitsubishi will sell teir electrc car - it is cheaper, safer, and has a longer range than the EV-1 did, carries four times as many passengers and luggage and recharges in half the time and the battery packis cheaper ($19,000) and last about 5 years. It can travel 100 miles, which means a driving range of around 40 to 45 miles. Let's see you morons who think the EV-1 was a great car now go and buy a better and cheaper one. Now THAT would be poetic justice for all your lies.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 01:14 PM
    dpro: of course I watched it. yes the other companies crushed theirs as well. that said, you need to realize that foreign car companies like Toyota and Honda are in a somewhat different position than GM. being foreign, they needed to "play ball" with the powers that be in washington. i am sure once it became obvious the government was no longer supporting the effort, and in fact antagonistic to the effort, Toyota and Honda destroyed their cars to keep any proprietary engineering safe. to say america wasn't interested is a false statement. america was never even made aware of the effort in a straight-forward marketing fashion. also, to say that Toyota and Honda followed the lead is not fair since if the state and federal government didn't follow up with the necessary support for the electric car infrastruture and recharging stations, then what, those companies should go ahead anyway? you are correct however in your statement that the companies are driven by profit, though I would add short term profits (you're seeing the demise of the company now due to this short term view of economics). that is why they wanted to build hummers and SUVs, much bigger profit margins than the simple and inexpensive to build electric cars. and, as the documentary points out...no more sales of oil filters, air filters, spark plugs, etc. etc. i also agree (as i pointed out) that it was a failure of state (CARB) and federal governments to push the electric car solution as a long term strategic economic and environmental fix. i also disagree on your $40k price tag for an electric car. produced in quantity, a simple version could be half that. GM intentionally made the price to high for the trade-offs so they could focus on hummers, SUVs, and large trucks...and so they could go out of business like they are currently doing...

    paulk: the "e-Left" (new kudlow or rush L. label? nice...) doesn't control oil prices. peak oil and the realities of worldwide supply/demand will. i know you think drilling in ANWR and off the coasts is the complete solution, but i disagree. wrt wrecking the economy, as i have written many times to "conservative republicans" perhaps you can understand that bush has:

    1) ran up the deficits to ungodly heights
    2) devalued your US dollar by 50%
    3) is in the process of nationalizing (socializing) the US housing mortgage market after his minions at treasury and the fed and the ratings agencies brought about the financial "crisis" on purpose
    4) is pushing paulsen and bernanke to federalize the banking and financial systems.

    its pre WW2 germany all over again (fascism), but you republican ideologues are so blinded by your love of bush, limbaugh, and kudlow that you cannot even see what is happening right before your eyes...even as the markets swooning every day should be reminding you..

    if the article was as you say "nonsense", i assume that you support sending $700 billion to saudi arabia (the REAL country that attacked us on 9/11), russia, and iran. nice strategy there paul.

    wrt nov 4, both parties suck, but i really look forward to 8 years of mccain. perhaps we can get oil to $400/barrel and the S&P500 to under 1000. inflation will go up though...that much is for sure...so will the number of oil wars we get it. wake up man, jeez.

    theBike45: the EV1 was very unreliable when it had the Delco batteries in it (what a surprise). as soon as they put decent batteries in it, the car was *very* reliable according to the people who leased them and the mechanics that "tuned" them up. as far as the driving range of 40 miles (it was actually more like 70 miles) that suffices for 90% of the trips over 90% of people make every day. i stated above why Toyota and Honda bailed on the project - you can't fight the US government and its lack of iniative on the infrastructure required to support the car. meanwhile, it sounds like you are enjoying $4 gas, the US dollar getting hammered, inflation of over 10%, the stock markets sinking, and the bush crew taking over the entire american financial and banking systems as you currently read these words. nice. good strategy.


    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 01:16 PM
    The technology was too disruptive for our friends in Saudi, we could have perfected the technology for more than a decade now. Why destroy all of those EV1s? Imagine how much money big guys who depended on OIL if this technology becomes available to the masses.

    If GM could roll out EV1 as non-production model why would they roll out the AZTEK for production? that car is so ugly that I want to get paid driving it!
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 01:54 PM
    The bloggers of July 30th have most of the EV1 facts, and non-facts. Now if it could only be sorted out! Ain't it fun to beat-up the king, ie, in recent days, GM?
    Seriously, if this blogger-group could replace our federal congress, we'd have a real fighting chance!
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 02:05 PM
    Good to see that at least ONE writer gets it right! Great article, showing to me what a criminal cabal runs GM.

    Criminal in the sense of doing stupid stuff that benefits no one, not even their own stupid selves.

    For the cost of the Afgan and iraqi wars, plus 3 years "defense" budget, we could have produced and GIVEN AWAY not just 100M hybrids, but 100,000,000 EV1 PLUS the solar rooftop system needed to power them.

    But it doesn't take that; just the ability to BUY an EV1 allows you to use the money you save NOT buying gasoline to pay for a rooftop solar system. Thus, solarizing America becomes self-funding, taking money away from being wasted by Big Oil. No wonder GM, Toyota and Chevron colluded to kill the NiMH battery used in the EV1, RAV4-EV, HondaEV and RangerEV.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 02:06 PM
    If people bought the AZTEK, there's no reason they won't vote for Bush the second time..
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 02:07 PM
    PS, Toyota did NOT crush their RAV4-EV, they sold the last 328 off to the public between May and Nov., 2002; those are almost all running still in the hands of private citizens, being used to pay for rooftop solar electric systems.
    WWW.SealBeach.org
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 03:26 PM
    To the Fitzman:

    As is true on many of these blog sites, they are available to anybody regardless of common sense or facts. Do you really think think that GM would spend hundreds of millions designing, developing, testing and manufacturing the car only to kill it?? Does that make any sense to anybody?? If there was enough demand for the car, do you really think a car company who had a huge technological advantage on the competition throw it away??

    And GM bought all the electric railroads on the east cost to destroy them....wow! I hope that they don't let you out very often and when they do, you are well supervised.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 04:09 PM
    It's probably time to inject some facts about GM producing all those gas guzzlers and totally ignoring fuel efficient vehicles. All of the following are from the EPA FE ratings for similar powertrains:

    Vehicle EPA Combined City/Hwy FE

    Toyota Corolla 31
    Chevy Aveo 27
    Saturn Astra 27
    Honda Accord (L4) 25

    Honda Accord (V6) 22
    Toyota Avalon 22
    Chevy Impala 22
    Chevy Malibu 25
    Toyota Camry 25


    Want to compare trucks? GM wins.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 04:16 PM
    miken: yes, i do GM would do such a thing if the short term profit margins on SUVs, large trucks, and hummers were greater (and they were then, and are now) than the EV1. today of course, they can't SELL the SUV's, large trucks, and hummers now and the people that own them want to ditch them (as opposed to the people who leassed the EV1 who begged GM to let them KEEP them). again, short-term profits over long-term strategic (not to mention patriot) strategy and economics. wrt GM buying up the trolley and electric rail systems in the eastern US, this is a fact, not some opinion. do your own research..be sure you start with New York, Philadelphia, and Boston. and get back to me miken, i want to know what you discover. perhaps next time you'll do some supervised research before you stick your foot in your mouth and publish your erroneous opinions online for all to see.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 04:29 PM
    miken: you forgot to include the GM hummer, surburban, silverado and escalade as well as the toyota prius. could you please add those? also, the production numbers for each model.

    hey, i'm not saying the American consumer is blameless when it comes to the EV1. what i am saying is that there are times when government and industry "leaders" should take the time, expense, and trouble to educate and market to the public new and different technology for the good of the country and for the good of the economy. GM and the economy are now feeling the affects of their lack of effort in this respect.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 04:29 PM
    Miken - GM has done this repeatedly - that is spending millions or billions only to shut down the project.

    What did the Vega cost? What did the Corvair cost? What did the Fiero cost? What did/does Saturn cost (never has turned a profit)? What did the Aztek cost? Etc. etc. etc.

    Some of these project might have turned a little money in the end but nothing compared to what the same investments would have done for GM if they had spent the money on making existing products better with incremental improvements.

    Instead they spent money on dozens of SUV and truck projects while ignoring the rest of their products. Now, when once again the price of gasoline leaps - GM, Ford and Chrysler are caught with their pants around their ankles.

    Each time they reluctantly switch from their cash cows (no longer) to small vehicles. Each time they build products that barely make the grade. Meanwhile alot of us sit around and lament the fact that we would like to buy a GOOD product at a GOOD price with GOOD durability from an American company. I've owned imports with MUCH success since 1991. I WANT to buy an American product next time (40K miles more to go, to reach 200K miles) but WHY shoudl I reward them with my $20K for a marginal product? It only encourages them to build more marginal products and to continue rewarding the decision makers with excessive paychecks and bonuses. A Cobalt vs a Civic? Are you kidding - I'll take a Civic - THANKS!

    I'm down to deciding whether I'll buy a Focus 5-door (once they are available again) or an Astra 3-door if I buy domestic.

    I might just suck it up and buy a $40K Phoenix Motor Cars SUT. I can save $20K on gasoline over the lifetime of the product. I can prob get a tax-rebate of some sort (haven't looked). And I'm going to spend $20K for a vehicle anyhow. 100 mile range with typical creature comforts. My second vehicle never leaves the county anyhow and 100 miles will be PLENTY of range for my needs. Costs about 1/6th of the cost of gas right now and I expect gasoline to begin climbing again as the Chinese and Indians and all the other up-coming countries continue to buy cars around the world.

    I do dislike the fact that the PMC is based on an imported chassis but oh well - GM could build them too.

    I'm tired of the politicians running the country into the ground. Tired of the business people relying on the gov't to bail them out after taking advantage of common folks when these business people know what they are doing. I'm tired of plain old consumers whinning about the economy and rushing off to their favorite big box retailer to buy more stuff made in China and indirectly rushing jobs out of the USA. I'm tired of this rush to drill, tear, dig ever more resources out of Mother Earth to consume at ever faster speeds.

    We've got the tools, we've got the know how - we need the initiative to change our country (and indirectly the world) for the better. The right choices are not always the capitalist's cheapest choices in the short term but they always turn out to be the cheapest choices in the long term.

    Let's take a close look at the whole world and bring new ideas home and apply them. Let's re-evaluate how we spend our time and money and see if we really NEED to consume as much as we do in America. The sustainable future is not in consumption - its in conservation.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •  
    Jul 30 04:58 PM
    I privately built an electric car using the NiMH batteries removed from the EV1s before they were crushed. After four years on the shelf, the batteries, and the technology behind them worked well. It works, it's economical, and the next-best-alternative is plug-in hybrids (PHEV). We need this now. GM needs this to survive, as do all American Auto Manufacturers.
    Reply | Link to Comment
  •