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
Hmmm...I bet the same thing happens when you raise taxes as well.
Personally, I like the GM displacement on demand technology to extract 28-30 MPG with 300+HP out of a REAL car with great styling, comfort, good durability, support Americans, and blow the doors off most of the ugly riceburner boxes on the road.
Explains why Europe can't meet the Kyoto accord.
Nader was an extreme reaction, granted. But his action did push Detroit (and the world) to make safer, more economical, more fuel-efficient cars. And for those against govt. legislation, remember that only the pushing made big business make the changes -- otherwise they could have continued producing the same-old, same-old with no pressures.
Horses made more sense than the first cars.
Sometimes you have to pay in order to make progress.
Most technologies in time if developed will become more cost effective.
He's right...and he's moving there headquarters from liberal hell California to my city of Franklin, TN!
Prolly makes more sense for the USA to go for coal-oil conversion and burn the resulting gasoline in fuel efficient non-hybrid automobiles.
By coal I mean our huge Western coal reserves.
I bought one. It's cool and it's fast (255hp) but it doesn't get 38 highway. Well, at least not the way my wife drives it ;-)
The quality while new or newer is may be high, but like VW it drops off quickly. Furthermore the Korean vehicles are in the basement when it comes to safety.
Which is the whole point. The ChiComs do not want any money leaving the country.
What doesnt?
Problem is a lot of these projects are just PR. Hybrid became a fashion word used to proove something to green doofuses. People are paying extra for these things because they're so buzzword compliant, meanwhile my normal Sentra gets almost the exact same gas milage. I don't have a problem with developing fuel efficiency, but not every project under the banner of efficiency is actually useful.
How do you define "slave wages?" Did it ever occur to you that those women who leave the farm to work in factories in the Pearl River Delta are making eight times as much as they did on the farm? That many would be consigned to a life of prostitution if it weren't for the factories?
You got your crystal ball hooked up with an NOX kit? Trying to guess the future of automotive trends is dangerous business, just ask John DeLorean. It is best to deal with the facts as they stand today and not make so many assumptions. One thing you may not be aware of, is that in Korea there is a heavy penalty for owning a car older than 10 yrs. Therefore they do not design cars to last as long as other countries.
I think you have entirely missed my point and if you want to argue about factory workers and prostitution in China you might want to take it up with somone else.
PS. What is the difference between slave labor and free labor?
Contrary to Bircher propaganda, most of the folks who work in factories in China are paid wages and are free to work wherever they can find a job. Most factories in China are owned by private individuals, many of whom are part of the Chinese diaspora in Hong Kong, Singapore, Malaysia, etc.
There are factories in the prisons in China, but most of the goods produced go to the military or to the domestic market, not for export.
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.