> -----Original Message----- > From: brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com [mailto:brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com] On > Behalf Of xponentrob > Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2009 11:50 AM > To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion > Subject: Re: Scouted: U.S. to collapse in next two years? > > Sheesh Dan! You are exaggerating your argument a bit don't you think? > Looking around, I can't find many cars that are even close to 11K MSRP > excepting a few Kias and the Toyota Yaris Chevy Aveo, and Nissan Versa; > and none of them are getting the kind of gas mileage you specify. Indeed, > only the Yaris breaks 30 MPG. (Granted, cars are selling at an average of > 14.9% below MSRP these days)
OK, I was doing milage from memory. But, my bigger Escort gets 30, so I thought these smaller cars got a bit more. But, let's just take 30. At $1.50/gal, that's 5 cents/mile. Lets say these cars are kept for 150k, which is on the high side...that's 7.5k for gas. The break even point, assuming CDs pay zero, with the MSRP discount, is close to $6.00/gal. And, that's comparing with a smaller car. > > Vaporware? The Tesla can be bought. The others are still being configured and are not available for sale. I've always been skeptical about what the price and performance will be. The engineering rule is that projects take twice as long and cost twice as much. Cutting this factor down, because they are in prototype stage, a conservative estimate is that costs are 30% higher than discussed. They talked about 5 people, they talked about 240 miles, but never said that 5 people could be taken 240 miles. My guess is that the 5 person seating is tight, and only for the 80 mile version of the car....otherwise they'd explicitly say otherwise (If I were the project manager I'd be all over the tech. writer's back to make sure that the capacity was stated explicitly if it existed...if it wasn't there, I'd be happy with what they wrote). Second, the 240 miles would probably be under ideal conditions. I'm not opposed to electric cars, I just try to use the rules of thumb I've learned from engineering on all comers...those I'm rooting for as well as against. Realistically, after a recovery, long term gasoline prices should average in the $2.50 range. I know that if we could get $80 oil (in 2008 dollars) promised for the next 10 years, everyone in the oil patch would be very very happy. Electric cars will have to compete against that. So, the math has to work out that way....the lower payments on gas will have to balance the higher payments on the car note for the average Joe and Joan. > I understand the argument you are trying to make. The key is battery > development. And there are economic issues that could miscarry the entire > trend............... if normal and simple economics were to hold sway. But > I don't think those kinds of economic arguments will hold in the long run. > There is political will running in from several directions that will > create a sort of ad hoc alliance to promote hybrids and BEVs. I believe that. I wouldn't doubt that people will be able to pitch for over 100 billion in government money for projects. The question is whether it will have more of a real impact that the 30 billion/year we have thrown at ethanol. > It appears that concern over "Peak Oil" is growing. > There are National Security issues due to the large amount of imported oil > from less than friendly cultures. People are generally disgusted > with importing oil from less than friendly cultures. Yes, but where is the support for a gas tax that will further limit consumption. I'll know when folks are serious about it when they agree to a $3.00/gal tax matched with a tax rebate program that renders a net neutral disincentive to use gasoline. This will happen when 1) It just froze over 2) Pigs fly 3) Fill in the blank. > Environmental concerns over Greenhouse Gas emissions. > Environmental concerns over pollution emissions. / Medical concerns over > pollution emissions. > People worry about future "Gas Price Shocks" such as we had last summer. > Large auto manufacturers see startups like Tesla as a "Threat". Well, that all sounds good, but the numbers don't seem to match. According to CNN, SUV and Trucks are now outselling cars again http://money.cnn.com/2008/12/22/autos/trucks_back/ I think that folks are very interested in other people sacrificing for the environment and to stop those nasty folks in the Mid-East from getting more money. But, as long as gasoline prices stay under $3.00 (which I expect for the next 5 years....the June peak was a bubble), not much will be done to change buying habits. > It seems to me that you are looking at where we are with an eye >to the next few years. I'm looking at where the trends seem to be >taking us with and eye to the next decade, maybe 2. That difference in >range can give a lot of variance to what the trends will tell you. Amirite? I'm just trying to get the best data I can, discounting claims of future breakthroughs because I've seen a zillion of them. I don't see today's electric cars having much to do with long term solutions. Long term solutions might very well include electric cars, but I think the government should not be in the business of subsidizing electric cars. Rather, it should be in the business of funding research in the litany of areas that might work and then let companies use that research to fund concerns that make economic sense. Personally, I'd bet a beer that bioengineered fuels, that have >10x the efficiency of ethanol production will have a significant market share in 10 years (say 10% of jet fuel), but electric cars will not be a significant player (>5% of cars sold worldwide in 2019) in that time. But, I have no problem in placing chips on battery development, because the payoff from a given winner should be substantial....we just don't know which bet will pay off. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
