|
Energy
Security and Global Warming: What GM is doing
Wednesday,
March 21, 2007
(Continued
from Page
1)
GM is not doing nearly
enough
Ultimately, GM is doing far too little regarding both
energy security and global warming - as is every other
automaker. Even worse, as far as GM, is the constant nod
towards ethanol, as if ethanol is some magic bullet that
means both Americans and GM don't really have to make any
serious changes. For example, as long as you have a
flex-fuel Hummer the world will be funky dory.
GM shouldn't even try to tell America what they are doing
because what they are doing is not nearly enough - not
even close. At best, GM has taken a few baby steps
forward.
Still, it isn't just GM. Not ONE automaker is doing
enough. American consumers aren't doing enough. Congress
isn't doing enough. Doing the right thing will require
nothing less than a revolution in both technology and in
consumerism.
Inevitably, it really isn't all GM's fault - not by a long
shot. There is plenty of blame for every automaker, almost
every politician, and almost every American citizen. We
can ALL do better.
Most important, GM needs to stop talking about alternative
fuels so much and stay focused on alternative technologies
which can revolutionize the efficiency of automobiles,
such as the Chevy
Volt. This kind of automobile, as Bob Lutz has stated,
"is a game-changer". Instead of launching the
Volt in 2010, get the Volt on the road in late 2008 as a
2009 model, as Toyota plans to do with its third
generation Prius - then I'd believe that GM has made
energy security and global warming a real priority.
Until then GM should mostly shut up, especially regarding
bio-fuels. In reality, neither GM nor any other major
automaker has made either energy security or global
warming a priority. So stop pretending. Shareholder value
and profits are far more of a priority - and maybe a good
part of the problem - than is energy security or global
warming for the automotive industry.
Just as an alcoholic, you can't really move forward until
you admit that you have a problem. Well, automakers,
consumers and politicians have a serious problem. Can we
change, or will we wait until change is forced?
Previous
(Page
1) (Page 2)
posted
by Dahcredyns at
- Francesco
DeParis said...
-
GM needs an edge to
compete with the Asian automotive tigers. Although
they have been very slow to respond to automotive
trends...they might be finally "getting it".
Their push to produce E85 vehicles deserves great
praise. Please remember that flex fuel vehicles can
run on both gasoline and ethanol, so they are
providing solutions for everyone. I speak daily on
biofuel on my alternative energy business blog: Energy
Spin
- Dahcredyns
said...
-
How does a flex-fuel
vehicle running on gasoline benefit anyone? Please
remember that many of GM's flex-fuel vehicles would be
in violation of CAFE if not for the flex-fuel
technology. Consequenlty, those flex-fuel vehicles
running on gasoline - which is the far majority of
GM's flex-fuel vehicles - are basically violating
CAFE.
It is absolutely ridiculous to give GM credit for
finding loopholes to violate the law while increasing
foreign oil dependency and pollution.
Besides, corn-based ethanol is not environmentally
friendly.
In reality, GM deserves very little credit for
flex-fuel. In reality, GM's flex-vehicles are creating
more pollution and foreign oil dependency than allowed
by CAFE. In reality GM should be paying massive fines,
not be given massive praise.
|
