Site Search:
 
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

More evidence that government want green cars to fail.
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
some waygug-in



Joined: 25 Jan 2003

PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 11:36 pm    Post subject: More evidence that government want green cars to fail. Reply with quote

http://autos.msn.com/advice/article.aspx?contentid=4024974&GT1=10365


Dirty Secret: Green Cars
Automakers Won't Sell You

by Lawrence Ulrich

Buying these environmentally friendly cars often depends on where you live.

PZEVs such as this Ford Focus are so clean that hydrocarbon emissions from grilling a single burger are equivalent to a three-hour drive in this car.


On a recent run from Boston to Cape Cod, I test drove the 2008 Honda Accord, the latest version of this family favorite. The new Accord boasts an environmental first: a six-cylinder gasoline engine that's cleaner than many hybrid systems.
There's only one catch: You can't actually buy this ultra-green Accord, or the four-cylinder version that also produces near-zero pollution. That is, unless you live in California, New York or six other northeast states that follow California's tougher pollution rules. Only there can you buy this Accord, or the roughly two dozen other models that meet so-called Partial Zero Emissions Vehicle standards, PZEV for short.

Not only can't you buy one, but the government says it's currently illegal for automakers to sell these green cars outside of the special states. Under terms of the Clean Air Act�in the kind of delicious irony only our government can pull off�anyone (dealer, consumer, automaker) involved in an out-of-bounds PZEV sale could be subject to civil fines of up to $27,500. Volvo sent its dealers a memo alerting them to this fact, noting that its greenest S40 and V50 models were only for the special states.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Masta_Don



Joined: 17 Aug 2006
Location: Hyehwa-dong, Seoul

PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 11:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I thought it was all Ron Paul's fault.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mindmetoo



Joined: 02 Feb 2004

PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 3:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I believe car companies cannot sell experimental vehicles to consumers because when car companies sell cars to consumers they are held to some important laws. For example, they're required to stock parts for any model car for x number of years. It may seem like a big conspiracy but it has more to do with consumer protection laws.

There may be other after market responsibilities a car company has to follow, maybe like keeping track of real world safety performance.

In short, it's simply not worth a car companies time to comply with consumer protection laws for the sake of a dozen cars.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Juregen



Joined: 30 May 2006

PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 6:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mindmetoo wrote:

There may be other after market responsibilities a car company has to follow, maybe like keeping track of real world safety performance.

In short, it's simply not worth a car companies time to comply with consumer protection laws for the sake of a dozen cars.


This happens a lot with technology as a whole.

The biggest issue is capacity. Will enough people buy it to make it worth while?

In such situations, you really need a good government to support change.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
keane



Joined: 09 Jul 2007

PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 6:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mindmetoo wrote:
I believe car companies cannot sell experimental vehicles to consumers because when car companies sell cars to consumers they are held to some important laws. For example, they're required to stock parts for any model car for x number of years. It may seem like a big conspiracy but it has more to do with consumer protection laws.

There may be other after market responsibilities a car company has to follow, maybe like keeping track of real world safety performance.

In short, it's simply not worth a car companies time to comply with consumer protection laws for the sake of a dozen cars.


Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!


Edited:

I just showed this to my spouse. We concur on my original response:

Hahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaa!!!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mindmetoo



Joined: 02 Feb 2004

PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 2:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

keane wrote:
mindmetoo wrote:
I believe car companies cannot sell experimental vehicles to consumers because when car companies sell cars to consumers they are held to some important laws. For example, they're required to stock parts for any model car for x number of years. It may seem like a big conspiracy but it has more to do with consumer protection laws.

There may be other after market responsibilities a car company has to follow, maybe like keeping track of real world safety performance.

In short, it's simply not worth a car companies time to comply with consumer protection laws for the sake of a dozen cars.


Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!


Edited:

I just showed this to my spouse. We concur on my original response:

Hahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaa!!!!


EFL, given your performance on this board, your wife has no doubt long learned she needs to simply agree with you or suffer your wrath. I pity her.

Anyway, the fact remains, there's a rather simple non-evil reason why car companies might not be selling their small experimental electrical cars. Doing so means having to comply with after market trade laws meant to protect consumers.

See, EFL, the difference between me and you is before putting on the tin foil hat (or running to my wife for help) and creating a new sock and jumping on Dave's to lecture the world about what part of the sky is about to fall, I first look for a more prosaic explanation. "Hrm, could there really be a massive conspiracy or is this just some tin foil hat trying to fit the evidence?"

Now here comes your customary biatch slap. You ready for it, EFL? You must. Gopher gives it to you enough:

http://www.evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=457

Quote:
"'Maintaining service and parts, along with customer-service representatives, gets pretty expensive for a fleet of 600 vehicles,' said GM spokesman Joe Lawrence.

"If the cars were kept on the road, GM would be required to provide replacement parts for 10 years. Because many of the parts were made in a single run, GM has to cannibalize off-lease vehicles for parts, Lawrence said.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ya-ta Boy



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 3:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
California, New York or six other northeast states


Hmmm...let's see. That's a total of 8 states. Seven of them in one compact area and the other the largest state by population and with a different climate.

Sounds like a good strategy to test new technology while waiting for the other states to adopt the more stringent California-type anti-pollution laws.

Once more, federalism sounds like a good working model.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
some waygug-in



Joined: 25 Jan 2003

PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 3:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mindmetoo wrote:
I believe car companies cannot sell experimental vehicles to consumers because when car companies sell cars to consumers they are held to some important laws. For example, they're required to stock parts for any model car for x number of years. It may seem like a big conspiracy but it has more to do with consumer protection laws.

There may be other after market responsibilities a car company has to follow, maybe like keeping track of real world safety performance.

In short, it's simply not worth a car companies time to comply with consumer protection laws for the sake of a dozen cars.



Rolling Eyes

Did you even read the article?

This is not some "experimental" car, it's the new Honda Accord.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
huffdaddy



Joined: 25 Nov 2005

PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 3:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mindmetoo wrote:

In short, it's simply not worth a car companies time to comply with consumer protection laws for the sake of a dozen cars.


But shouldn't that be up to the car companies, and not the federal government?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
mindmetoo



Joined: 02 Feb 2004

PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 3:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

some waygug-in wrote:
mindmetoo wrote: