Comments on: Advocate describes anti-electric car conspiracy

By: GasAlternative

GasAlternative — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 21:53:46 +0000

We have developed a design of an almost perpetual car which runs on battery power for almost unlimited distance against present and future battery technologies. This technology can also convert present Hybrid automobiles to run thousands of miles without charging the batteries. Interested parties can contact us at GasAlternative@yahoo.com.

By: Electric Car » Advocate describes anti-electric car conspiracy | Leftlane - Car

Mon, 19 Jun 2006 17:47:22 +0000

[...] Advocate describes anti-electric car conspiracy | Leftlane – Car In an interview with the Orange County Weekly , electric car advocate Doug Korthof explains how oil companies have prevented the development and sale of entirely electric cars by restricting the [...]

By: Adam

Adam — Tue, 23 May 2006 11:20:51 +0000

http://www.apple.com/trailers/sony/whokilledtheelectriccar/trailer/

By: digitalzombie

digitalzombie — Tue, 23 May 2006 03:09:16 +0000

#27 if you play stocks then research on GM stocks and their yearly earning. Their dividents are misleading too. They lie about their yearly earning. You know what forget it. You could do your own research.Toyota = beating the crap out of GM. GM is near bankruptcy. game over.

By: mdt

mdt — Mon, 22 May 2006 19:12:37 +0000

Detruction of the EV-1 is just another spasm in GM’s extended death throes. Hopefully when oil goes to $100+/barrel, we’ll see their obese cars disappear from our roads. It couldn’t come too soon. -mt

By: un

un — Mon, 22 May 2006 15:46:04 +0000

If there is a possibility that the resource (oil) on which your business depends might become rare or expensive, it makes good sense to invest in alternative technologies so that your company has a revenue stream (batteries) in the future. You could see the patent portfolios as a speculative investment in the future of these corporations.

One thing conspiracy theorists tend to lack is business (or common) sense.

By: LBJay

LBJay — Mon, 22 May 2006 13:14:24 +0000

Why did GM destroy the EV-1s? Because the way the Tax laws are written they could write off more the developement costs only if the cars were destroyed at the end of the trial. Sad but true.

By: profmathers

profmathers — Mon, 22 May 2006 03:10:05 +0000

Yeah, ’cause it’s not like GM didn’t destroy commuter rail in my state 50 years ago…

…oh wait…

By: Dean

Dean — Mon, 22 May 2006 02:37:28 +0000

Doug, #24, I watched the show today on the History channel re: this article.

I’m totally convinced. They will not relinquish control. These EVs are a threat. And now an ever-growing threat.

I’m sure you can see how they are concerned about the sea change coming.

By: GM#1andalwayswillbe!

GM#1andalwayswillbe! — Mon, 22 May 2006 01:29:22 +0000

#25 “They have executives stealing money from the company for their own personal gain and they some how manage to avoid bankruptcy for so long.”

Hey digitalzombie – any credible evidence to support your fantasy facts ? What are you smoking dude ?

By: Greenspeed

Greenspeed — Sun, 21 May 2006 23:39:31 +0000

IS electricity cheaper and less polluting than gasoline? (remember electricity has to be produced – as Cpt America asked) The fact is that all forms of electricity production are damaging to the environment and/or currently too expensive to be practicable. The reasons for the expense are not all in the nature of the method of production. Some are in politics – and maybe even conspiracy?

By: doug korthof

doug korthof — Sun, 21 May 2006 22:59:40 +0000

Whether it’s a conspiracy or not, the big question is why Chevron wants control of the batteries needed for Electric cars??

We drive the Toyota RAV4-EV every single day, have drive EVs for over 300,000 miles over the last 8 years, and many of the comments about how “evs are impractical” are just ignorant or vapid.

EVs work, and the batteries are already here; even lead-acid batteries were good enough for the EV1. EDriveSystems.com has shown that the Prius can be modified with a slightly larger battery pack, and gets up to 180 mpg. A production version would do even better, and would not cost more than $3K extra, it is thought.

By: Patrick

Patrick — Sun, 21 May 2006 22:38:51 +0000

It’s because GM has been sleazy since it was first started. At the beginning of its existance, GM purchased thousands of miles of railroad track and then deactivated them so that people would be forced to buy their automobiles for transportation. Now they’re doing sleazy business again, surprise surprise, GM sucks ass. And you can all hate on toyota, but…they’re going to be #1 in the world in a few years, while GM is down the drain, so you can all talk shit now but GM is being flushed down as we speak

By: alex

alex — Sun, 21 May 2006 20:19:56 +0000

ethanol powered cars is the future, or so they say(scientists). Just look at Brazil.

By: Dean

Dean — Sun, 21 May 2006 18:56:47 +0000

Yeah, maybe if oil goes to $150/barrel some will wish this never was sent to the grave.

Hmmm, little to no maintenance, decimation of the service garages, decimation of the replacement part market …

Yup, a no-brainer.

By: Jim in LA

Jim in LA — Sun, 21 May 2006 05:58:41 +0000

EV-1s are curiosities, and some should be preserved (or, should have been) for posterity.

all those worthless “charging stations” at Ralphs Supermarkets, etc. are mute testimony to the presence that once was the EV-1.

kind of like hitching posts in the modern era.

By: manny

manny — Sun, 21 May 2006 03:58:46 +0000

support wouldnt be that much of a problem, as korthof said, ev cars require less mainenence… and hes not crazy…
*end sarcasm*
those cars do look pretty all stacked…

By: chris

chris — Sun, 21 May 2006 01:40:29 +0000

GM crushed the EV1′s because they wanted no part of the legal requirements to support them. Per law they have to keep maintenence and replacement parts available for so many years. They could be liable to any stupid folks sueing them for anything that happened to the EV1(fires, etc.).

And why would GM want to sell them for only $25k? There were so few built that the money made would never support the tool upkeep needed to supply parts. These were hand built cars with proto tools. Program was a learning experience but a failure because not other manufacturer made their own cars and GM had to suck up millions in development and tools. Yes it could have been a PR bonus like the hybrids but when they were out they never got much positive press for GM.

By: 1c3d0g

1c3d0g — Sat, 20 May 2006 20:11:52 +0000

Very well said, Josh, Michael and Sean.

By: Scott

Scott — Sat, 20 May 2006 20:02:50 +0000

bump

By: Jason

Jason — Sat, 20 May 2006 20:00:25 +0000

Here’s a pic of the guy

http://img118.imageshack.us/img118/1126/tinfoilhat6po.jpg

By: Mike the tabloid reporter

Mike the tabloid reporter — Sat, 20 May 2006 19:30:53 +0000

This just in!
Jesus had not one, but three, THREE wives!
Jesus often slept with all three of his wives on the same night, consecutively, without the wives knowing!

By: Sean

Sean — Sat, 20 May 2006 19:25:42 +0000

I think its great that they are trying to get rid of Toyotas, maybe theyll find a way to get rid of the rest of them…

By: Danny from Los Angeles

Danny from Los Angeles — Sat, 20 May 2006 18:13:58 +0000

the oil companies do own MANY patents on alternative fuel technology. The patent business is big business too.

By: Michael Spadaro

Michael Spadaro — Sat, 20 May 2006 17:58:46 +0000

This “conspiracy” theory is BS. Until and unless a “superbattery” (that can recharge itself while in use) is invented, there will be no fully electric cars built.

By: peter g

peter g — Sat, 20 May 2006 17:55:06 +0000

Maybe it’s true about the conspiracy? And maybe GM and the others have done us a favour? The electric car has always seemed to me to be an inferior and highly impractcal technology. Come up with something new, a “smart fuel”, and see what’ll happen to the US trade deficit: It’ll be gone.

And what will the Chinese do then?

By: Captain America

Captain America — Sat, 20 May 2006 17:36:56 +0000

well what does this guy think electricity just magicly appears from a never ending source?

By: Craig

Craig — Sat, 20 May 2006 17:34:00 +0000

I agree with specialk. Maybe the high cost was a factor… to outright crush the majority of EV-1′s never made sense to me.

Electrics probably would have less maintinence though.

By: Josh

Josh — Sat, 20 May 2006 17:31:28 +0000

Thank g-d someone in america and protect there induestry… GO GM!!!!
now if the fing textile (clothing) and steel and eletronic industries got there shit together maybe we can fix that trade deficit…

By: specialk

specialk — Sat, 20 May 2006 17:22:07 +0000

i have a very stupid question but……why were they destroied?

By: DAV

DAV — Sat, 20 May 2006 16:59:46 +0000

not to mention that they were really ugly.