Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
I could see Government Motors not selling any, but Nissan? I am saddened by this.
GM sells just 281 Chevy Volts in February, Nissan only moves 67 Leafs
by Sebastian Blanco (RSS feed) on Mar 1st 2011 at 7:47PM
Peruse Chevrolet's February sales release, and you'll notice one number that's blatantly missing: the number of Chevy Volts sold. The number – a very modest 281 – is available in the company's detailed data (PDF), but it certainly isn't something that GM wants to highlight, apparently. Keeping the number quiet is a bit understandable, since it's lower than the 321 that Chevy sold in January.
Nissan doesn't have anything to brag about here, either (and it didn't avoiding any mention of the Leaf sales in its press release). Why? Well, back in January, the company sold 87 Leafs. In February? Just 67. Where does that leave us? Well, here's the big scorecard for all sales of these vehicles thus far:
Volt: 928
Leaf: 173
Ouch. The big questions, of course, revolve around one word: "Why?" Is ramping up production and deliveries still a problem? Is demand weak? Are unscrupulous dealers to blame? When will sales start to climb? And what are these numbers doing to plug-in vehicle work at other automakers? We don't know all the answers, but for more on February auto sales, click here.
Tags: auto sales, breaking, electric vehicle, leaf, leaf sales, plug-in hybrid, volt, volt sales
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Hardly surprising really. The electric car market is an absolute joke and its really only because of pressure from the eco-nuts that these things ever made it to market. Under normal circumstances, any right thinking CEO would laugh the idea out of the office.
Its all very well wanting to cut emissions and carbon footprints but where is the sense in swapping petrol emissions for power plant emissions due to having to charge the damn things? And for the pedants, yes obviously the emissions total is reduced but still, its woolly thinking all the same.
Secondly, the tech just doesn't cut it. If I had a daily commute of 60 miles or so, why would I swap my high MPG diesel car for an electric car that I have to stop and charge up halfway for eight hours because it doesn't have the range?
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
Whats the rang eon the things? If the electric grid were powered by unicorns or maybe nuclear I'd proffer it'd be a better deal.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
I think the Top Gear team (semi-seriously) worked out that trying to charge an electric car using a small wind turbine in ones' garden would take on the order of 16 days or something crazy...
Although, once we master the technology remote energy transfer (way, way, way, waaaaaaaay in the future), electric cars could become potentially useful. Imagine if your car automatically topped itself off from the nearest satellite. You wouldn't even have to take it to a charging station. Hell, being stuck in traffic would be fine.
'course, the technology is decades, if not centuries in the making. But with the vegetarian diets most hippies are sporting, they may just live long enough anyway.
Mind you if I could afford it I'd also get solar panels on the roof of my house and a stairwell in the backyard leading up to them so I could clean them without having to use a dinky ladder.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
Frazzled wrote:Whats the rang eon the things? If the electric grid were powered by unicorns or maybe nuclear I'd proffer it'd be a better deal.
100 miles on the Leaf, 40 miles on the Volt.
It's not a bad concept, but it's only useful on a to-and-from work scale. I don't think I could even make it to the LGS and back on 40 miles.
I'm not willing to spend $30,000 on a vehicle to commute to-and-from work. But like Melissia, if I had money to waste, I'd probably buy one over a Lexus or some other luxury car.
Well, as long as we're talking impossibilities, I'd buy one for the work commute and a Lambourghini to drive around town.
I think the real future in sustainable transport will be from hydrogen fuel cells or something similar - ie. an electric car but one that generates its own power to recharge itself.
Hybrids are the current future. Hybrids with that technology that allows one to use the excess energy generated when breaking to recharge the battery.
Hydrogen cars are a distant future. The infrastructure hasn't been built yet.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2011/03/04 12:44:52
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
filbert wrote:I think the real future in sustainable transport will be from hydrogen fuel cells or something similar - ie. an electric car but one that generates its own power to recharge itself.
I would agree. There are few disadvantages with this technology (other than the oil ecconomy will collapse - hence their resistance to alternate power sources for so long, but they have held the world to ransom long enough anyway) and many advantages.
If I had the money and the fuel stations were available, I would buy one in a second (or convert a petrol car to have a hydrogen based power system).
I think as soon as the ball gets rolling on the infrastructure, it will wipe out oil based fuel car sales almost overnight.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/03/04 12:52:09
Fafnir wrote:Although, once we master the technology remote energy transfer (way, way, way, waaaaaaaay in the future), electric cars could become potentially useful. Imagine if your car automatically topped itself off from the nearest satellite. You wouldn't even have to take it to a charging station. Hell, being stuck in traffic would be fine.
'course, the technology is decades, if not centuries in the making. But with the vegetarian diets most hippies are sporting, they may just live long enough anyway.
Isn't that how radio was invented?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
SilverMK2 wrote:
filbert wrote:I think the real future in sustainable transport will be from hydrogen fuel cells or something similar - ie. an electric car but one that generates its own power to recharge itself.
I would agree. There are few disadvantages with this technology (other than the oil ecconomy will collapse - hence their resistance to alternate power sources for so long, but they have held the world to ransom long enough anyway) and many advantages.
If I had the money and the fuel stations were available, I would buy one in a second (or convert a petrol car to have a hydrogen based power system).
I think as soon as the ball gets rolling on the infrastructure, it will wipe out oil based fuel car sales almost overnight.
Hydrogen, its the Bomb!!!
(actually I agree. Hydrogen is the future, when tied to that thar miracle sciency power generation).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/03/04 13:18:29
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
filbert wrote:I think the Top Gear team (semi-seriously) worked out that trying to charge an electric car using a small wind turbine in ones' garden would take on the order of 16 days or something crazy...
That's because garden turbines are useless gimmicks, bought by MPs and celebs hopint to look 'green'. You'd have to put an enormous one up to be economically viable and the neighbours might complain when a 200 foot propeller is looming over their homes.
n0t_u wrote:Whatever happened to this motor idea? From about 4-5ish years ago.
Maybe the same thing as this?
With something to produce the energy from the movement of the axels or braking to be stored in a battery and back up battery.
The only drawback would probably be the magnetism. Or am I just being naive?
And the fact that their claims are impossible. But I'm sure that's only a small obstacle...
They aren't selling because people are (apparently) smart enough to realize that its not only economical, but its also not good for the environment. The batteries in the volt need to be completely replaced (not recharged, REPLACED) every 5 years or so at a cost of about 16,000 US dollars. The old batteries get tossed in a landfill where they most likely leech corrosive/toxic materials. The alternative is to buy a completely new vehicle, in which case the old one may very well end up in a scrapheap or a landfill depending on its overall condition.
Either way, these electric cars are the same as hybrids and ethanol fuel additives. Half-assed measures that make people feel better about themselves but in reality don't really do anything at all to help the environment (ethanol for instance may actually be WORSE for the environment than gasoline when all things are considered).
CoALabaer wrote: Wargamers hate two things: the state of the game and change.
I personally cant justify paying that much on a car that would not only be a big ol annoyance with keeping it charged and if I drained it, Im basically stuck at home till its charged. Screw that, I can keep my current car, and by the time the repair bills and such catch up to what those cars cost, the technology for them will be cheap enough and practical enough for me to actually think about doing it
chaos0xomega wrote:(ethanol for instance may actually be WORSE for the environment than gasoline when all things are considered).
I would be pretty interested to hear your sources on this, as for part of one of my chemical process engineering modules we had to look at biofuels and various means of producing them, their overall impact, etc.
Other than replacing (in some cases) land that could be used for crop growing, the environmental impact was, from memory, not very large at all, especially compared to the impact of burning oil products.
Granted I was mostly focused on using GM/selective pressure to get certain algae to produce diesel, so I may be wrong.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2011/03/04 13:55:12
What about the market for Environmentally friendly commercial vehicles.
I seem to remember seeing something on the news saying that the take up was quite good and also used to see quite allot of them (upto to say 7 1/2 tonne lorry size) delivering in London where the congestion charge made them even better value?
How do you promote your Hobby? - Legoburner "I run some crappy wargaming website "
SilverMK2 wrote:I would be pretty interested to hear your sources on this, as for part of one of my chemical process engineering modules we had to look at biofuels and various means of producing them, their overall impact, etc.
Depends on where they source them from. There's no point in cutting down rainforest to create agricultural land to grow biofuels. Also most biofuels are made from food crops which doesn't make much sense either because that cuts into food supplies. Biofuels are better sourced from plants that can be grown in non-agricultural land, that way they complement rather than compete for space.
chaos0xomega wrote:They aren't selling because people are (apparently) smart enough to realize that its not only economical, but its also not good for the environment. The batteries in the volt need to be completely replaced (not recharged, REPLACED) every 5 years or so at a cost of about 16,000 US dollars. The old batteries get tossed in a landfill where they most likely leech corrosive/toxic materials. The alternative is to buy a completely new vehicle, in which case the old one may very well end up in a scrapheap or a landfill depending on its overall condition.
Either way, these electric cars are the same as hybrids and ethanol fuel additives. Half-assed measures that make people feel better about themselves but in reality don't really do anything at all to help the environment (ethanol for instance may actually be WORSE for the environment than gasoline when all things are considered).
You could recycle the batteries like we do in Europe and Japan.
The reason they aren't selling is because of range. A 40 mile range is fine for commuting somewhere like London, where the average round trip is 20 miles.
Howard A Treesong wrote:Depends on where they source them from. There's no point in cutting down rainforest to create agricultural land to grow biofuels. Also most biofuels are made from food crops which doesn't make much sense either because that cuts into food supplies. Biofuels are better sourced from plants that can be grown in non-agricultural land, that way they complement rather than compete for space.
chaos0xomega wrote:(ethanol for instance may actually be WORSE for the environment than gasoline when all things are considered).
I would be pretty interested to hear your sources on this, as for part of one of my chemical process engineering modules we had to look at biofuels and various means of producing them, their overall impact, etc.
This:
Other than replacing (in some cases) land that could be used for crop growing, the environmental impact was, from memory, not very large at all, especially compared to the impact of burning oil products.
Additionally, corn/sugarcane farming can be pretty damaging to soil and requires a lot of water/irrigation, and then there is the fact that even if every acre of farmland in the US was devoted to ethanol production, we still would not have enough to meet the U.S. energy needs (and then we'd have to import all our food as well...).
Also, the burning of ethanol increases formaldehyde and acetaldehyde emissions.
I'm actually all for algae based biofuels (approximately 1/10 of the land used for corn production could be used to meet the entire US petroleum demand using algal fuels), unfortunately the present government administration does not seem to be serious about pursuing truly effective biofuels and green technologies, instead focusing on less efficient politically expedient methods.
CoALabaer wrote: Wargamers hate two things: the state of the game and change.
See, when I was looking into it, cellulosic ethanol production was promising to give much higher ethanol yields from the same amount of crop, meaning that although land was still being used to grow non-foodstuffs, you could get a much higher level of fuel from it.
You can also use much less damaging crop types than corn (which would be grown there for food anyway) to produce ethanol as well.
Have to admit that I had forgotten the production of nitrous oxides during the combustion of ethanol, though catalytic converters help to remove some of it. I'm not sure off the top of my head whether such pollution is better or worse than from straight petrol.
You can also use solar ovens to create fuel as well, though they are still very much in their infancy.
chaos0xomega wrote:(ethanol for instance may actually be WORSE for the environment than gasoline when all things are considered).
I would be pretty interested to hear your sources on this, as for part of one of my chemical process engineering modules we had to look at biofuels and various means of producing them, their overall impact, etc.
This:
Other than replacing (in some cases) land that could be used for crop growing, the environmental impact was, from memory, not very large at all, especially compared to the impact of burning oil products.
Additionally, corn/sugarcane farming can be pretty damaging to soil and requires a lot of water/irrigation, and then there is the fact that even if every acre of farmland in the US was devoted to ethanol production, we still would not have enough to meet the U.S. energy needs (and then we'd have to import all our food as well...).
Also, the burning of ethanol increases formaldehyde and acetaldehyde emissions.
I'm actually all for algae based biofuels (approximately 1/10 of the land used for corn production could be used to meet the entire US petroleum demand using algal fuels), unfortunately the present government administration does not seem to be serious about pursuing truly effective biofuels and green technologies, instead focusing on less efficient politically expedient methods.
Got to pay the corn farmers those nice subsidies to keep them happy.
Not to mention that our conversion of corn to fuel here in the US is making food prices around the world to skyrocket.
Any alcohol based fuel is very corrosive to the conventional engine. Hence why alcohol dragsters in the NHRA have their engines basically replaced after every run.
As to electric vehicles, does anyone remeber the Geo Metro, look at the MPG's on that little deathtrap.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/03/04 14:55:56
Catachan LIX "Lords Of Destruction" - Put Away
1943-1944 Era 1250 point Großdeutchland Force - Bolt Action
"The best medicine for Wraithlords? Multilasers. The best way to kill an Avatar? Lasguns."
"Time to pour out some liquor for the pinkmisted Harlequins"
While there is the range issue (before you switch to petroleum), there are other issues.
1) Price. They are more expensive than their non-electric counterparts. Sure, the government incentive helps, but it will take a while before you break even on gas costs.
2) Logistics. I've love to just plug my car in, but what if I don't own a home? How many apartment complexes have convenient electrical outlets for you to use in the parking area? What if I park on the street?
3) Guinea Pig. These are the first editions of new cars with new technologies. Most people who are interested do not want to be the first group who have to deal with all the kinks.
Same, my daily commute is <5 miles. If I didn't live in the wintry north I would ride my motorcycle every day. With the price of the Volt I can afford to drive my gas hogging 4wd jeep in the winter for the next 20yrs.
Poor orks... Why can't they be the good guys for once?
All they've ever really wanted is whatever you have...
Catachan LIX "Lords Of Destruction" 