Posted on 06/28/2006 11:20:15 AM PDT by aculeus
Of course not. The world has lots of pompous rich idiots.
The question they don't ask is what will they burn to get the electicity to run the car.
I'm sure GM could have produced a boutique-mobile, as well.
Unfortunately, the average person has more demanding requirements.
~snicker!~ Love that remark - given that there are plenty of six-figure cars to buy out there...last one to own an Escalade has to close the garage...
" ''None of the energy that goes into an electric car comes from the Middle East.''"
Why,of course not. Electricity is generated by combusting pig manure in the presence of catalytic, bleached peanut husks. No oil is converted into electricity for powering electric cars at all.
"But the self-described ''closet gearhead'' didn't feel comfortable buying a hot rod that guzzled gas from the Middle East or some other troubled region."
So instead, he uses electricity that was produced from Sulfur emitting coal or stored water that destroyed a beautiful canyon in the Sierra Nevada Mountain range.
In other words, he is an idiot.
"So instead, he uses electricity that was produced from Sulfur emitting coal or stored water that destroyed a beautiful canyon in the Sierra Nevada Mountain range.
"
Well, if we actually built some nuclear power plants, it would be a different story.
Exactly. Nuclear power, anyone?
Up to, and including, the 1980's hair band!
http://www.vh1.com/artists/az/tesla/bio.jhtml
EVERYBODY KNOWS ELECTRICITY IS FREE!...........
How about the 200+years worth of coal out there? Or 1,000+ years of energy yielded from a breeder reactor? Or maybe that giant fusion reactor at the center of the solar system?
They're all better than burning petroleum. Not because using petroleum is bad, but because using petroleum to power cars is a bit of a waste considering just how useful a substance it is chemically.
They probably wouldn't reduce greenhouse gases, because the same people would be against building new nuclear plants - or even hydroelectric dams, since a fish might die or be forced to relocate.
And they aren't interested in reducing our dependence on "foreign oil". They are interested in reducing the use of oil, period. They don't give a hoot about where it comes from. The "foreign oil" argument is a ruse.
That would require looking past the end of the nose they use to condescendingly look down upon us...
This cracks me up. It takes X amount of energy to move a car from 0-60 mph, whether it is electric, gas, steam or pedal powered. That energy has to come from somewhere, if you plug your car in at night does it rally matter if you get that energy from a huge furnace at the power station or from hydrocarbon chains locked in gasoline? The more "performance" the vehicle has the more energy it wastes, which while being a lot of fun still isn't doing anything to lower our energy consumption, he is just getting it from a different source. And this guy is held in high esteem by his peers in Silicon Valley?
How can a statement this idiotic make it into a publication called "Technology Review"?
If they can build this car with an investment of only $40 million, then they deserved to be worshipped like gods.
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.