Posted on 01/31/2005 8:17:49 PM PST by newgeezer
NEW ORLEANS (Reuters) - The head of Nissan Motor Co., breaking ranks with some of his leading rivals, said on Saturday that building fuel-sipping hybrid vehicles makes little sense in today's world because of their high costs.
"They make a nice story, but they're not a good business story yet because the value is lower than their costs," said Nissan Chief Executive Carlos Ghosn.
Nissan will, in fact, start manufacturing a gas-electric hybrid version of its Altima sedan for the U.S. market in 2006.
But Ghosn said the model was only intended to help Japan's second-largest automaker comply with strict fuel economy and emissions standards in states like California, not because he expects it to be a money-maker.
Nissan will license some technology for the hybrid Altima from Toyota Motor Corp., which is the world leader in hybrid production along with Honda Motor Co. Ltd.
The hybrids made by Toyota and Honda are in high demand, but production levels are still relatively small.
Toyota plans to nearly double production of its hybrid Prius car for the U.S. market this year, with production totaling some 100,000 vehicles.
Ford Motor Co. is alone among U.S. automakers in producing mass-market hybrid models; Ford recently announced plans to introduce four new models between this year and 2008.
Ghosn's comments, which are likely to draw criticism from environmental groups, came in an address to the National Automobile Dealers Association, which opened its annual convention in New Orleans on Saturday.
In his speech, he noted that only about 88,000 of the 16.9 million light vehicles sold in the United States last year were hybrids, adding that they are still considered "niche" products and something way outside the automotive mainstream.
He also poured cold water on hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, which many automakers see as the industry's next big technological breakthrough.
"The cost to build one fuel cell car is about $800,000. Do the math and you figure out that we will have to reduce the cost of that car by more than 95 percent in order to gain widespread marketplace acceptance," Ghosn said.
Ghosn, who is credited with a dramatic turnaround at Nissan, is poised to take over as chief executive at France's Renault SA in May.
His future role, simultaneously running operations at two major automakers, is thought to be an industry first.
Nissan -- owned 44 percent by Renault -- scored the biggest sales jump of any major car maker in the United States last year, with a 24 percent surge to 986,000 vehicles.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All rights reserved. Users may download and print extracts of content from this website for their own personal and non-commercial use only. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters and the Reuters sphere logo are registered trademarks or trademarks of the Reuters group of companies around the world.
© Reuters 2005
Roger that ~ if it doesn't have a big booming V8 engine; park it!
Which one do you drive?
A man after my own heart, love those cars.
I'll drive my supercharged 2001 5.4L 425HP Ford F-150 SVT Lightning for the time being.
V8's forever!
Keep this up and I will have to start chuckling.
I was talking on instant messenger. The computer equivalent of talking on a cell phone.
A Prius... got it because I had a 35 mile (each way) commute. I was really suprised at how, well, big it is. With the seats down last weekend I was able to take a bunch of 2x4x8s from home depot without a problem.
I've sent your address to Home Depot, I'll bet they've been wondering where those 2X4s went.
Those "slave wages" are the best wages those women who move from the interior to the Pearl River Delta have ever seen in their lives. It beats workin' on the farm.
With the current state of the world economy i.e. strong growth and high demand for petroleum products, I believe that if America cut it's demand for OPEC oil, currently at 16% of our use, OPEC would be able to raise prices to make up for part of the revenue shortfall. India, China and the other heavy users would pay the price simply because they need the product. It would be a balancing act for OPEC to keep the prices low enough to sustain the worlds economic growth yet high enough to make up for the income loss from America not purchasing from OPEC any longer. If they push it to high the worlds economies slide into recession and nobody will need their oil, at least not much of it. I realize this flies in the face of the market mechanics of supply/demand but it just may work.
If America stopped buying Arab oil, the only way they will be able to raise prices would be to drastically cut production, not only by the 16% we would no longer be using but also enough to cause a shortage so they could raise the price.
Put another way, if they raise the price, people buy less. It might work in the short term, but everyone knows that the Middle East is not the only place where there is oil. If the price goes up enough, there are a lot of oil fields elsewhere that will suddenly become economically viable.
So the Arabs might be able to raise the price, but they could end up with less revenue.
If that's true, if the EPA is that stupid, then they've got an omelet on their face. Someone should check this out.
I used to own a pickup truck, but I never felt the need to start it in the morning, let it idle while I went back to shower and shave while it stank up the neighborhood like my neighbor did every day. He had a fairly new model too. Why didn't he just drive it to warm it up?
Ot's ok. I'm sure the steam engine had it's naysayers too........
I just saw an old sexed-up Plymouth Bacaruda auctioned for $250,000.00!!!
I wonder how many American cars make it to 150,000.
Seriously, the battery technology is improving rapidly and they are getting more cycles out of actual use than the design required. There is also a secodary market for the batteries at the mobile platform EOL so it is not a total loss if traded in.
Are you sure you understand all you know about that?
Nope. Are you?
Do you think that the opponents of the steam engine knew everything about the technology?
How many detractors do you think Edison had? Are you on his level?
Every american car I've owned since 1964 has gone at least 250,000 before any significant engine work. I've run several Ford ranger pickups over 300,000 in severe job site conditions of highway and subdivision construction. Rarely even open the radiator cap for the first 100,000 and oil changes average once per year using straight SAE 30 rather than multi grade; it's better for the engine in most climates.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.