Chevy Volt Costs Taxpayers Hundreds of Thousands of Dollars Per Car: Green Fail?
Fef
2012/07/17 17:34:22
|
|
|||||
|
58 votes
|
|
87% | |||
|
9 votes
|
|
13% | |||
Green energy costs money to research, develop, deploy and convert the public. America and other nations have used public funds paid by taxpayers to "make the switch" to Green energy. Sometimes Green investments fail, like Solyndra and numerous other solar power and alternative energy companies. The investment costs more than the company can sell the product.
The government has touted its investment in the Chevy Volt, but has the Green investment in the worked or failed? The plug-in hybrid electric vehicle manufactured by General Motors costs taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars per car, and GM has sold nearly 20,000 cars.
The EPA has rated the Chevy Volt as the sixth most fuel-efficient compact car with a gasoline engine sold in the United States. The 2012 Mitsubishi i-MiEV nearly doubles the fuel efficiency of the Chevy Volt.
Has the Green investment in Chevy Volt worked? Seton Motley from Newsbusters.org criticizes the government for the Volt's failure while the media has hailed it a success:
GM-Volt.com reports on the cost of the Chevy Volt:
The New York Times reports:
LessGovernment.com reports that taxpayers also pay for the tax subsidy of each Chevy Volt sold:
x
The government has touted its investment in the Chevy Volt, but has the Green investment in the worked or failed? The plug-in hybrid electric vehicle manufactured by General Motors costs taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars per car, and GM has sold nearly 20,000 cars.
The EPA has rated the Chevy Volt as the sixth most fuel-efficient compact car with a gasoline engine sold in the United States. The 2012 Mitsubishi i-MiEV nearly doubles the fuel efficiency of the Chevy Volt.
Has the Green investment in Chevy Volt worked? Seton Motley from Newsbusters.org criticizes the government for the Volt's failure while the media has hailed it a success:
The President is running in large part on the bailout’s $30+ billion loss, uber-failed “success.” And the Press is acting as his stenographers. An epitome of this bailout nightmare mess is the electric absurdity that is the Chevrolet Volt. The Press is at every turn covering up - rather than covering - the serial failures of President Obama’s signature vehicle.
GM-Volt.com reports on the cost of the Chevy Volt:
According to multiple GM executives there is little or no profit being made on each Volt built at a present cost of around $40,000. Furthermore, the $700 million of development that went into the car has to be recouped.
The New York Times reports:
(A)dd $240 million in Energy Department grants doled out to G.M. last summer, $150 million in federal money to the Volt’s Korean battery supplier, up to $1.5 billion in tax breaks for purchasers and other consumer incentives, and some significant portion of the $14 billion loan G.M. got in 2008 for “retooling” its plants, and you’ve got some idea of how much taxpayer cash is built into every Volt.
LessGovernment.com reports that taxpayers also pay for the tax subsidy of each Chevy Volt sold:
That finds that the unprofitable, unpopular, repeatedly and six month covered-up combustible Chevy Volt – receives up to $250,000 per car sold in government subsidies.
x
Read More: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/seton-motley/2012/07/...
Top Opinion
-
krayzrick 2012/07/17 17:50:27
It might take them longer to recoup their expenses, but the things they have learned may just give them a competitive edge in this technology for many years to come.
This administration privatized the risk and is attempting to socialize the gain; a gain that is never going to happen; but for now, it's window dressing and pabulum for the hysterical left.
The federal government cringes at the thought of any mass produced high mileage vehicle in this country, and why...because tax revenues from the purchase of fuel will drop by 200%. Watch the video and draw your own conclusion:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I'll keep driving my 2012 Silverado truck that gets 20 MPG.
Smelting of the metals used in its manufacture produces pollutants that outweigh the lifetime savings in pollutants through its use.
Other than that, its a great green... er.. success???
If you want green, look at the bottom line, if it's more expensive it's probably not green.
Nuke is the only viable way to go for electricity.
Diesel is much more viable than gas-hybrids.
Solar is horrible for the environment, and wind is killing lots of endangered birds, both are inefficient and intermittent.
I heard they have haulted production because of low sales,
http://crooksandliars.com/kar...
Meanwhile, in reality, obaaaama has dumped millions of dollars down the drain in what boils down to a publicity stunt. He has given green technology a bad name.
I'd love to have an electric car, solar panels covering my roof, a bank of AGM batteries, wind generators and geo-thermal heating and cooling but I just cannot afford all that. I want to live off the grid with my guns and my religion but can't afford to. Who can?
Examples of efficient cars (including EVs) in production that I can name off of my head and automakers who have gone green and make green cars: Fiat 500, Subaru, Tesla Motors, Smart, Toyota and their Prius, Honda and their Civic hybrids, the majority of the vehicles presently in production from the French automakers Renault and Peugeot, Nissan and their Leaf, and many more which I cannot presently name off of the top of my head.
Just because America fails miserably at something doesn't mean the whole movement is a failure.
Japan, nearly 20yrs ago, versus California. $6B versus $70B; probably double that over the lifetime of a government run project. They are already going 50% faster too. In other words, no innovation, exorbitant costs, and untold opportunities lost -- improving municipal transportation.