A message from Bob Lutz......
11-16-2007, 01:47 PM
#48
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 1,646
I'd strongly disagree wth that. Your only changing the source of the dependance. Unless drilling meant you could add $0.50 - $1.00 tax to each consumer gallon of gas for a pump price between $2.50-$3.00 per gallon, we'll end up in the same hole we're in now before too long.
11-16-2007, 04:46 PM
#50
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,502
For those too lazy to click on the PDF, Persian Gulf military expenditures amount to roughly $1 per gallon of gas (and that was pre-war).
Still agree that ethanol hasn't shown results worthy of the PR campaigns from General Motors and Archer Daniels Midland tho.
11-16-2007, 06:52 PM
#51
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Springfield,OH. U.S.A.
Posts: 2,947
It may not contain as much energy per unit, but I'm more concerned about decreasing our dependency on oil than losing a couple of miles per gallon, and also decreasing our depencency on other countries.
That will go a long ways to lowering fuel prices on the rest of the fuel, and maybe toward making the world a little more peaceful.
That will go a long ways to lowering fuel prices on the rest of the fuel, and maybe toward making the world a little more peaceful.
11-16-2007, 07:30 PM
#52
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 689
If grain market prices are below the cost of production, that's because there's TOO MUCH GRAIN ON THE MARKET. Subsidies make the problem *worse* and lead to artificial market distortions like the flood of super-cheap corn syrup presently making America obese.
11-18-2007, 10:48 PM
#54
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 757
Seems like an oversimplification to me (although you're not one to oversimplify things).
Most people are missing the whole "no silver bullet" idea and judging every alternative fuel by its ability to completely supplant gasoline.
The bottom line is that nothing on can replace gasoline. Corn ethanol would require too much of our nations resources, liquid coal would dramatically increase our carbon emissions, hybrids only mitigate the problem, and other solutions like solar and hydrogen power remain beyond our scientific horizon.
The other bottom line is that there is no need to replace gasoline. All we need to do is create a viable alternative to imported oil. This may be accomplished by developing a number of smaller alternatives. If ethanol, hybrids, domestic oil, coal, hydrogen etc can individually knock out a small percentage of our oil use, they will collectively break the hegemony of imported oil, and prices will decline dramatically.
Given these realties, I think GM is showing incredible foresight (shocking, I know). While certain Japanese car companies market their one "alternative," GM is quietly preparing cars that can and will employ a variety of methods to save of gas.
Most people are missing the whole "no silver bullet" idea and judging every alternative fuel by its ability to completely supplant gasoline.
The bottom line is that nothing on can replace gasoline. Corn ethanol would require too much of our nations resources, liquid coal would dramatically increase our carbon emissions, hybrids only mitigate the problem, and other solutions like solar and hydrogen power remain beyond our scientific horizon.
The other bottom line is that there is no need to replace gasoline. All we need to do is create a viable alternative to imported oil. This may be accomplished by developing a number of smaller alternatives. If ethanol, hybrids, domestic oil, coal, hydrogen etc can individually knock out a small percentage of our oil use, they will collectively break the hegemony of imported oil, and prices will decline dramatically.
Given these realties, I think GM is showing incredible foresight (shocking, I know). While certain Japanese car companies market their one "alternative," GM is quietly preparing cars that can and will employ a variety of methods to save of gas.
Last edited by dav305z; 11-18-2007 at 10:53 PM.
11-18-2007, 11:32 PM
#56
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 213
Actually, you are wrong on a few things. Yes, a speech writer puts suggestions before Mr. Lutz -- and guess what? He changes just about everything -- the man's amazing. He answers nearly all of his email.......and I've seen the scripts he's written..........
Pure PR for E85? If that's the case, why aren't other manufacturers able to say that they have 2.5 million cars and trucks on the road today (and 2 million of them are Chevrolets....) You DO realize, don't you, the purpose behind E85......renewable fuel source -- made from different materials --lessen dependence on foreign oil........yadayada.......
Speaking of sophistication -- the Tahoe Hybrid gets the same fuel economy in the EPA city rating as a 4-cylinder Camry -- however, you should also note that: The Camry cannot tow 6,200 pounds -- it cannot seat up to 8 people (unless some are in the trunk......) -- and the Camry certainly doesn't have 300+ horsepower with active fuel management -- oh yes -- and it doesn't have
4wd availability.......further, we've made no mention of the thousands of GM Hybrid Buses that are in many major cities across the country. So yes...Toyota sells a lot of Prius...however, let's talk about what's better for the environment in the bigger picture -- do you start with small cars and go up -- OR -- do you start with the big stuff that has a larger environmental impact and go down the scale???? Go do the math.
You have a point with Toyota in OVERALL fuel economy -- and there's a reason for that -- Toyota doesn't offer as wide an offering as GM does. (just look at the truck segments alone......) and thus -- based on each segment in the larger picture, we win.
Your last paragraph tells a lot --about the challenges we face.
".........Overall to me this press release seems like it's stretching a lot of GM's minor achievements to make them sound like they're a lot more than they really are........."
OK -- so show me a car company that has all of the below:
>over 2.5 million E85 vehicles on the road TODAY....
>7 different vehicle lines at Chevy alone that have Active Fuel Management to get you class leading fuel economy without sacrificing towing capability or power......
>plans for over 100 Fuel Cell vehicles on the road in the next three months --
>Full size SUV that gets 20mpg city and 22 Highway --
>committment to build a mainstream electric vehicle by 2010 --
>First two-mode Hybrid truck within a year........
.......oh - -and that's just Chevy -- we haven't even gotten to Saturn or Cadillac..................
So -- yes -- it's PR -- but to say that it's a stretch..........don't think so! Minor? In what universe?
Pure PR for E85? If that's the case, why aren't other manufacturers able to say that they have 2.5 million cars and trucks on the road today (and 2 million of them are Chevrolets....) You DO realize, don't you, the purpose behind E85......renewable fuel source -- made from different materials --lessen dependence on foreign oil........yadayada.......
Speaking of sophistication -- the Tahoe Hybrid gets the same fuel economy in the EPA city rating as a 4-cylinder Camry -- however, you should also note that: The Camry cannot tow 6,200 pounds -- it cannot seat up to 8 people (unless some are in the trunk......) -- and the Camry certainly doesn't have 300+ horsepower with active fuel management -- oh yes -- and it doesn't have
4wd availability.......further, we've made no mention of the thousands of GM Hybrid Buses that are in many major cities across the country. So yes...Toyota sells a lot of Prius...however, let's talk about what's better for the environment in the bigger picture -- do you start with small cars and go up -- OR -- do you start with the big stuff that has a larger environmental impact and go down the scale???? Go do the math.
You have a point with Toyota in OVERALL fuel economy -- and there's a reason for that -- Toyota doesn't offer as wide an offering as GM does. (just look at the truck segments alone......) and thus -- based on each segment in the larger picture, we win.
Your last paragraph tells a lot --about the challenges we face.
".........Overall to me this press release seems like it's stretching a lot of GM's minor achievements to make them sound like they're a lot more than they really are........."
OK -- so show me a car company that has all of the below:
>over 2.5 million E85 vehicles on the road TODAY....
>7 different vehicle lines at Chevy alone that have Active Fuel Management to get you class leading fuel economy without sacrificing towing capability or power......
>plans for over 100 Fuel Cell vehicles on the road in the next three months --
>Full size SUV that gets 20mpg city and 22 Highway --
>committment to build a mainstream electric vehicle by 2010 --
>First two-mode Hybrid truck within a year........
.......oh - -and that's just Chevy -- we haven't even gotten to Saturn or Cadillac..................
So -- yes -- it's PR -- but to say that it's a stretch..........don't think so! Minor? In what universe?
I think part of the perception issue that GM is going to have to overcome is their focus on regular passenger cars. There are other companies with sedans that get almost 40 MPG highway WITHOUT hybrid or other cutting edge technologies. You want to get peoples attention? Get that Cobalt to hit OVER 40 MPG highway, naturally aspirated, with no electric or hybrid assist. I bet you can do it: work on the aerodynamics, engine tuning, gearing, tires, etc.
I'm telling you, the magic number is 40. The first company to go over 40 MPG highway without hybrid or other stuff is going to turn alot of heads. Work on that, and in the mean time you can release all the other hybrids, while I sit and wait for my Z28 Camaro that barely gets 20 MPG but I really don't give a turkey
I digress...... for those who care, perception can be a hard thing to overcome. GM is not seen as a green company by the tree huggers and leaf blowers. Doesn't matter to me personally, but I would like GM to appeal to everyone. It's good for business.
Last edited by fastball; 11-18-2007 at 11:36 PM.
11-19-2007, 08:19 AM
#57
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Chicagoland IL
Posts: 16,179
11-19-2007, 10:07 AM
#58
Prominent Member
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,282
Charlie,
You need to get new resources and stop quoting from oil company sponsored sources.....read this again...
http://www.ethanol.org/pdf/contentmg...gy_Balance.pdf
11-19-2007, 10:17 AM
#59
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Greenville, SC
Posts: 1,897
Charlie,
You need to get new resources and stop quoting from oil company sponsored sources.....read this again...
http://www.ethanol.org/pdf/contentmg...gy_Balance.pdf
You need to get new resources and stop quoting from oil company sponsored sources.....read this again...
http://www.ethanol.org/pdf/contentmg...gy_Balance.pdf
My future camaro will hopefully be flex fuel. We have 4 stations in my area, one is 1/2 mile from my job, the other 2 miles from my home.
Yes, I understand the fuel mileage will suffer, but if I can afford it, it's my little way of saying F-U to the middle east and "thank you" to OUR farmer's.
11-19-2007, 12:43 PM
#60
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 757
The bottom line is there is nothing out there today that provides a good replacement for gasoline - that's why we use gasoline. However, our nation seems to be making the decision that national security and environmental concerns demand we try even imperfect solutions as a way to get off foreign oil. Corn ethanol is one of those imperfect solutions. Shoot it down, and we'll be right back to square one - gasoline.