Counting all vehicles sold since 1999 at over 193 million and about 1.2 % of this number is hybrids and all electrics do not even make into a rounding error. I guess you may have a point about my skeptism. As far as complication, I drive a 1968 Pontiac! Think about the ease I have in repairs (if needed). Changing oil is not a warranty issue.
I will give you this, Toyota has a good record. but the bulk of sales are with the last 5 to 7 years. Again, at these low volumes, they should be making good cars!
Point 1: I'm not boycotting the Volt. Just saying that the corporatism that goes into gov't having the taxPayers foot the bill on some items and not others is a bad thing.
Point 2: Boycotting food would be difficult (although doing it for a short stint probably would not hurt me). I am against subsidizing farmers, and regulating them (ie: tobacco allotments). I really am a free-market guy. I can provide mucho evidence of abuse of the corporate entitlements ... but that is off topic. I'm glad Volt owners are happy with their Volts ... I just think it's wrong that I had to pay for 70% of the vehicle.
OK, one good example, at Camp LeJeune ... they had a huge media parade about putting solar panels in on all the barracks. Sounded great. I was one of the few who looked at the numbers for the article. If the panels last 75 years with no operating costs, they will pay themselves off. Problem is, they only last 25 years and they do have operating costs. So it is once again the gov't throwing away tax payer $s. Technology will get there. The technology of yester-year did not get here based on gov't subsidies. Technology is a good thing in and of itself ... let it earn its way ... and let's avoid resource mis-allocation because of political whim (note, I'm not picking a political side, I'm not calling anyone an xxx-tard ... I'm just saying stop forcing tax payers to fund political expediency).
Bias from the oil boogieman... er, companies? Really? Couldn't possibly be that the general public just thinks they suck, and would rather have a real car that can actually haul 4 normal adults at greater than the speed limit?
Lots of comments on this article, but didn't notice anybody bringing up this issue so I'll ask: with a plug-in hybrid, if you never run the engine because your commute and charging renders it unnecessary, doesn't the gas go bad? I've had this problem in smaller ICE motors (e.g., lawn mowers), so I wonder if it's an issue with the smaller engine of the Chevy Volt.
Republican wars continued by the Democrats! Farming got involved as someone compared farm subsidies to EV subsidies. Both are crony capitalism corrupting free markets!
I am not opposed to hybrid owners enjoying their cars. They made a free choice to pay the extra cost. And it seems that several have calculated savings by driving one frequently. Kudos to them. But their free choice should not be at my expense (tax subsidies). Eating, everyone has to eat!
I am investigating purchasing a hybrid and will probably buy one within a year or two. But it will be my choice. I appreciate articles the DN brings to its readers so we can make informed choices. Politics aside, reality is a better teacher!
Wow, talk about philosophical reality! Watch a movie!
You do understand that private sector decisions that are bad usually end up as businesses that no longer exist. Unless you advocate bailouts! But Detriot is the model of political ideology leading to utopia. As far as getting rid of people, pro-choice is already taking care of that!
This is not supposed to be about politics, but if that is what you want?
This just demonstrates self confirmation as a behavior. When asked about a decision people made that is conteversial, or expensive, they tend to justify the decision. They do not however tend to make the same decision again.
So, when a VOLT buyer is asked if he likes the car, and if he would do it again, it says "yes, what a smart decision I made!", thus self confirming. However, when going to buy another vehicle, or replace that one, he makes a different choice.
Current hybrid vehicles do not make economic sense, nor do they make environmental sense, nor is their lifecycle energy use better than similar gasoline powered vehicles.
Hybrids are energy entensive to build, and the systems are energy intensive to recycle, the "savings" are minimal at best, and with grid power from coal and distribution losses considered, may actually use more energy per mile than conventional vehicles.
If you want one, buy it! But don't fool yourself into thinking you are doing the environment any favor or saving any money.
The government uses taxes, and the stick, to encourage some behaviors and discourage others. It discourages me that we do this since this is just the majority, or the politically connected enforcing thier beliefs on others.
I am amused sometimes to hear someone complaining about homosexuals not being able to marry, and then driving off in a hybrid car. You do realize this is exactly the same?
This "oh well, that is government does" attitude is discouraging. With that attitude things can get pretty bad because governments are historically terrible.
A half century ago, cars were still built by people, not robots. Even on some of the countryís longest assembly lines, human workers installed windows, doors, hoods, engines, windshields, and batteries, with no robotic aid.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.