Sounds like good news to me!

The hybrid technology works with whatever "primary" or "dirty" fuel you want to use, ethanol, LNG, hydrogen, etc., to extend the driving range and consume less of that fuel. The acceptable solution to replacing oil may be one of those combined with hybrid technology to give people the "comfort level" to make the switch.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TonyPSchaefer @ Dec 3 2006, 09:20 PM) [snapback]357226[/snapback]</div>

Well, marketing really is the "dismal art". We even recognize lying under the guise of "puffery", when it should really be actionable as fraud.

I noticed an interesting statement in that article:

"The Japanese government are investing more than $100 million in plug-in hybrid technology."

Hmmm....

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TonyPSchaefer @ Dec 3 2006, 09:20 PM) [snapback]357226[/snapback]</div>

I think GM is singing a slightly different tune now - Is Lutz still with them? At some point he and others hopefully realized that a 50% drop in CO2 levels per car is a necessary and worthwhile goal.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TonyPSchaefer @ Dec 4 2006, 02:20 AM) [snapback]357226[/snapback]</div>

Hi Tony,

How much I do not like TQM (Total Quality Managment) that Lutz needs to go back and study it for 4 years.

This article is telling us that he is going to do what is best for the his company with Hybrid Technology, and its like the customer does not exist. He is going to do Hybrids to help his company's CAFE situation. ARG!!!! The best thing for GM is to give the customer what it wants.

The people who want hybrids want the midsized Hybrid, either Prius or Camry, and the smaller Minivan hybrid. The people who want tow-vehicles, do not want hybrids. And the people who want SUV attitude statement vehicles are against anything that that would be better enviormentally, because they have been brainwashed to think that it would be a compromise for their reptilian brain satisfaction. The RX 400 H proves this false, and those things are quite quick. Hybrids do cost more upfront, but are economical over the life of the vehicle ( even if you trade it in as you get more for the trade-in). But, if you are stretching your budget to get into an SUV, like almost everybody I have talked about why they bought an SUV, they do not have the money for the Hybrid option, up-front, anyway.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TonyPSchaefer @ Dec 3 2006, 11:20 PM) [snapback]357226[/snapback]</div>

That's a good link, interesting to see how things change and how they don't.

But I can't believe people missed this part, and probably John1701A can expound on this, but Toyota developed their hybrid system on their own because they were miffed they were left out of the PNGV program (Partnership for Next Generation Vehicle), a Clinton-era program whose goal was to make an 80-mpg sedan that could be commercially successful. This was a partnership of our Big-3 (maybe others?) but Toyota wasn't invited or allowed in because of competitive reasons. So that's when Toyota went ahead with the first-gen Prius. Of course, Bush trashed the PNGV program, replaced it with the Fuel Cell initiative, and the American companies forgot all about high-efficiency vehicles.

Now they're back together for the exact same thing they were doing a decade ago, and people are hailing this "new" move. But now there's an economic urgency to completing the project, if still not a perceived environmental urgency. My apologies to the OP, but "unprecedented alliance" this is not.

It's a sick joke on us, again. Where's the commitment? They don't actually have to deliver anything. So all we'll end up getting is a small amount of vehicles based on an insincere effort.

The best supporting quote from that article was: "There is a place for plug-in hybrids, but most likely for city cars. Driving heavy and empty batteries across the country would be neither desirable nor fuel efficient."

Since when is driving that far even a concern? Of course, try asking a SUV owner what they think of the heavy and empty vehicles they drive all the time. Talking about not fuel efficient.

It's the same old spin. Keep the focus on long-distance highway cruising. Don't let people think about the fact that the typical daily commute doesn't resemble that at all. Neither does suburb driving, which many of us do extensively... and just happens to be the type of driving a plug-in hybrids would greatly thrive at.

My favorite quote though was the opening sentence: "Even those who strongly believe in advanced gas-electric hybrid vehicle technologies acknowledge that they have a long way to go." In other words, hybrids offer a tremendous amount of potential. At this stage, enthusiasts see upgrades continuing long into the future. Lots of opportinutity for on-going economic growth is fantastic! What's wrong with that? They make it sound bad thing. Geez!

> Even those who strongly believe in advanced gas-electric hybrid vehicle technologies acknowledge that they have a long way to go.

Since I only put 1000 miles a month on a car, and shoot for keeping one for 11 or 12 years, I figure this advanced gas-electric hybrid vehicle in my garage has at least 117,000 more miles to go. They are right, that is a long way.

> Even those who strongly believe in advanced gas-electric hybrid vehicle technologies acknowledge that they have a long way to go<
they mean the Chev Silverado Hybrid.