Priligy online now, save money

JUN 26

Recent Comment

"This article is obviously a hoax. Last time I checked, Mercedes is pro..."

View all Comments

Mercedes to Cut Petroleum Out of Lineup by 2015


In less than 7 years, Mercedes-Benz plans to ditch petroleum-powered vehicles from its lineup. Focusing on electric, fuel cell, and biofuels, the company is revving up research in alternative fuel sources and theglobalobservatory.org efficiency.

The German car company has a few new powertrains in the line-up that European journalists have had the opportunity to test out in their facility in Spain. One vehicle includes the F700, powered by a DiesOtto engine that combines HCCI and spark ignition to get nearly the buy cialis online us same efficiency as diesel, but minus the expensive after-treatment systems. The engine can run on biofuels, and we may have a purchasable vehicle by 2010 – a year that seems to be popular for the debut of a lot of new alternative fuel car models, making ’08 and ’09 simply thumb-twiddling years for consumers. I don’t know, maybe car makers just like the roundness of “2010.” The company’s next big step will be to launch a Smart electric car which is fuel and emission-free.

Anyway, Mercedes is looking into electric vehicles, both battery powered and fuel cell powered. Not only are models in development, but we’ve also seen the company making steps towards their zero petroleum goal right now, from better cabs in London to Li-Ion battery improvements. The company also has about 100 Smart electric cars undergoing testing in London, with that favorite 2010 year as the projected market release date. Mercedes is making serious investments, already putting nearly $4 million into the pot of http://www.karlbarth.nl/viagra-and-women their long-term Sustainable Mobility plan, with another over $14 billion going in before 2014.

While car models may be able to run on fuels other than gasoline or diesel, we have yet to find a method of both running and producing vehicles entirely free of fossil fuels. I’m waiting for a mainstream car line that creates renewable fuel-powered, clean running vehicles made out of 100% recycled materials and manufactured in plants run on 100% renewable, clean power…Will I even be alive when that finally happens? I have hope.

Via AutoblogGreen, The Sun; Photo Leonid Mamchenkov

Hits: 69913
Comments (57)Add Comment
0
...
written by Ollie, June 26, 2008
I wonder when we'll see technology like this being produced in Australia
0
4 million?
written by Thaddeus van der Wienerkrinkel, June 26, 2008
Surely that should read "$4 billion" ? I may be wrong, but "nearly $4 million" just sounds like it should be a typo. I've lit cigars by setting fire to more than $4M in bills.
0
...
written by Rafucxsh, June 26, 2008
Its interesting that they all of them choose 2010. no coincidence I think, as Li-ion battery prices will fall drastically by 2009-10, by a 3rd maybe as the manufacturing industry steps up.
I'm waiting to see which company comes out with mainstream vehicle first. It'll change the amarragessansfrontieres.com company's image.
0
sounds like greenwashing
written by kballs, June 26, 2008
Sounds more like they're going to "dabble" in electric cars and fuel cells, and make all their gas hogs biofuel-capable (E85 and maybe something between B20-B100), which then means they'll still be burning petrol fuels (just like all GM's flex-fuel vehicles) because you can't buy biofuels easily or on a large scale, and the ones you can still have petrol mixed in in most cases (E85 means 15% gasoline, B20 means 80% petrodiesel).
0
sounds like kballs can't read.
written by lballs, June 26, 2008
Hi, my name is kballs and I can't read past "Mercedes-Benz plans to ditch petroleum-powered vehicles from its lineup"

ditch, as in, no more.
0
...
written by EV, June 26, 2008
2010? Maybe they've read one too many Arthur C. Clarke novels.
0
...
written by x, June 27, 2008
GE is taking a chance on mass producing an electric car that goes 40 miles, can plug into a regular electrical outlet to recharge, and has a small gas engine used only to recharge the battery if it gets low.

Perhaps other automobile companies are hedging their bets on a fuel power revolution.

This is so exciting, soon we will not be at the mercy of the oil producing nations. It will be a wonderment to see how this changes the geopolitical landscape, particularly in the mideast!
0
...
written by EV, June 27, 2008
X, it is GM, not GE that is doing the electric car.
0
That's pretty big news!
written by Car l, June 27, 2008
I would think that a major manufacturer planning to stop production on all petroleum based fuels would be a major item in the news. I'm surprised I havn't seen more on this.
0
...
written by John, June 27, 2008
Um, BULLSHIT
0
Remember Who Killed The Electric Car?
written by Me, June 27, 2008
Ummm, check me if I'm wrong Sandy, bit didn't GM already put an electric car on the levitra online in usa market in California, lease them to thousands of people who loved it, then took them all away and we like it inexpensive levitra crush them in the desert because they feared the staggering loss of only for you where to get viagra cheap aftermarket parts? Ever see "Who Killed The Electric Car"? What's different in corporate autoland these days?
0
what a shamelessly misleading article ti
written by jeremy, June 27, 2008
I love it when people say something really provocative in the title to get views, then NEVER MENTION IT AGAIN in the article. Go ahead, do a search for 2015. Aside from the title, it doesn't show up again.

The closest this article gets is stating the $14 billion invested by 2014. Except it gets that wrong, it's actually $14 MILLION, not billion. Or put another way, reality is 0.1% of what's stated.

But hey, at least you made it on Digg, right?
0
...
written by jeremy, June 27, 2008
my mistake, article says $1.4 billion instead of $14 billion. The truth remains at $14 million. Instead of being 99.9% wrong, it is actually just 99% wrong.
0
Bullshit
written by Kelly, June 27, 2008
What a load of bullshit. How much credibility does this site have?
0
Misleading
written by EdG, June 27, 2008
I suspect they're defining biofuel as not a petroleum fuel. They can convert existing diesel engines to biofuel right now. Not a big jump really.
0
Mercedes already *has* their electric ca
written by Oliver, June 27, 2008
... its called NECAR and it's being tested on streets throughout Europe for years now. They are currently in the fifth generation: NECAR 5. As far as I remeber, the whose "A-Klasse" line was initially built so they would have a lightweight platform for new technologies!
0
Double the battery life
written by Enrique, June 27, 2008
I don't see it as a complicated issue. Tesla is already running a car on a 250 miles re-chargeable battery. Whoever doubles the mileages will win the next auto race for a clean car.
With a 500 miles battery and govertnment provdiding free re-charges from solar stations, the game is over.
smilies/smiley.gif
0
McLaren?
written by Daniel, June 27, 2008
Does this include the good choice levitra pfizer canada McLaren?
0
Wow
written by JImmyDoDopp, June 27, 2008
I dunno guys. Mercedes is the epitome of luxury. I just dont see a successful Mercedes smart car. People who drive Mercedes dont care about gas prices.
www.Ultimate-Anonymity.com
0
RE: Remember Who Killed The Electric Car
written by Mike D, June 27, 2008
The difference in autoland is the increased push of market forces. Oil companies are price-gouging themselves out of business. The market's demand for non-gas guzzling vehicles is beginning to outweigh t he oil companies' sway over the auto industry. Because of the major hit of http://vignovin.com/buy-cheap-cialis the Prius, everyone is scrambling to get a piece of a pie that is growing exponentially every day.
0
Hmmm...
written by Kny, June 27, 2008
The "Smart-car" of Europe is actually manufactured by Mercedes...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_(automobile)

I'm sure it's not a big jump, and might be much less of an environmental bonus initially, but the signal is a strong one, and oil-based nations might be starting to worry.

Also, I think only americans have been able to not worry about gas prices for the last 20 years. For most of Europe, the mpg-rating has been a major selling point for decades.
0
Drop the "."
written by EcoGeek, June 27, 2008
I had a "." in where there shouldn't have been - it's $14 billion. That's Billion...with a B.

The source article states: "The company have already spent £2million on their new long-term Sustainable Mobility plan and are set to invest a further £7billion before 2014."

Million. With an M. For the first amount. And Billion. With a B. For the second amount.
0
wtf?
written by DSpider, June 27, 2008
Did you know that there's an engine that can run on WATER ? A regular gas tank can be converted to run on 80% water / 20% gasoline - resulting in a waaaaay lower emision than running on 100% gasoline ! General Motors have had it since the 60's or something, but never made it public because THEY WANTED PEOPLE TO PAY FOR GASOLINE. And they still do. Wake the viagra endurance f. up people !
0
...
written by tesla, June 27, 2008
The big American auto companies are going to go bankrupt if they don't turn their collective backs on big oil. Big oil has screwed them this time and unless electrical & hydrogen vehicles start hitting the markets, they will die in miserable corporate bankruptcies. They never did learn from the 70's.
0
Source?
written by sikma, June 27, 2008
whats your source?
0
...
written by Felicia, June 27, 2008
Whether this is true or not, this is deffinetly something to look into (consumers and producers). I really hope this article is true, as society needs to act quickly and become sustainable. I will be looking more into this company. We can all only hope this is really happening. smilies/smiley.gif
0
...
written by ...>>, June 27, 2008
Actually, the bit that *I* can't get by is the whole "I want everything running on 100% renewable power... like plants"

Uh huh. So while we continue to grow crops strictly to get around town... what is it, precisely, that we're going to be able to afford to eat?
0
Since when is E85 greenwashing?
written by Erik, June 27, 2008
Some people will never be satisfied. Rome wasn't built in a day, and a near-term solution that only uses 15% gas (Ethanol is basically gasohol) is fine by me.

But what would an eco-entrepreneur like me know, right? Unless we only ride around on bikes and grow our own organic hemp clothing, it must be greenwashing. Oi.
0
MERCEDES ITS ABOUT TIME
written by ASH, June 27, 2008
Mercedes, Its about time. smilies/cheesy.gif
0
...
written by a, June 27, 2008
Wow, what a load of crap, title should read.

"Mercedes Might Cut Petroleum Requirement Out of Lineup"

Nowhere does it say anthing about abandoning petrol, only that vehicles CAN run on other fuels, which you will not be able to easily get anywhere in mass quantities.

Another red flag is the fact that its Mercedes announcing this. Lets see, you have a luxury car company who, for its entire life, couldn't give a rats ass about efficiency, gas usage, and recycling suddenly switch to not using any gas? Not likely.

Mercedes is the appitomy of making gas guzzling, luxury at any cost, screw the environment cars. Their consumers could car less about saving money on gas, who the hell needs to save money on gas if you are wasting 50-100k on a car? This is total BS.
0
...
written by Jeremy, June 27, 2008
Seeing how gas prices are affecting customer satisfaction, this isn't a terribly dumb move. Maybe if Mercedes' rich customers get on the green bandwagon, it'll increase the trend.
0
2015 is too late
written by the apocalypse is near, June 27, 2008
2015 will be too late...the mayan calendar ends in 2012.
0
read between the lines
written by kballs, June 28, 2008
"Mercedes-Benz plans to ditch petroleum-powered vehicles from its lineup"

As many other have said on here, it doesn't say anywhere that Mercedes is going to build cars that won't run on petrol fuels, just that they are investing in alternatives and www.celebratinglife.org alternative fuel capable vehicles. That leaves a lot of wiggle room for speculation on either side, so all are welcome to discuss their prediction and the reasons why.

And about the buy super cialis complaints that I said E85 is greenwashing... IT IS. Unless you live in corn country. And even then it still is. You CAN'T BUY E85 outside of corn country. And if you can buy it in your town, great, be happy to be burning a fuel that is vastly increasing pesticide, fertilizer, and water use to the point of straining the mid-west aquifers, and destroying the fish in the Mississippi and Gulf of Mexico with algae blooms from fertilizer runoff. The reality right now is 95% of flex-fuel vehicles never burn a drop more ethanol than their non-flex-fuel counterparts BECAUSE YOU CAN'T BUY IT ANYWHERE.
0
a little skeptical
written by Tim, June 28, 2008
hmmm... this seems promising at first, but the terms of this plan seem to leave a lot of wiggle room, perhaps for hybrids that are not necessarily "petroleum powered" but still use petroleum. It also still allows mercedes to us biofuels. The arguments against biofuel cars are pretty well known by now, but if anyone needs a refresher, read this nice breakdown of their problems: www.brighfuture.us/new.
0
Errrrmmmm
written by John, June 28, 2008
But whaddiff we don'yt wanna drive glorified golf carts? And electricity still has to be produced somehow.

Ethanol is a friggin' JOKE, a payoff to Iowa corn jerkoffs. It's energy-negative and more polluting that petro fuels.

Algae biodiesel is thew way to go. http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/index.html
0
mercedes to cut petrol
written by truthynesslover, June 28, 2008
We had the electric car and they crushed it.Doesnt it make you wonder how many other technologies they are keeping secret?why couldnt the electric car have solar panels on the roofto keep the battery charged or small wind mills in the grill?The fact that our polititians went with corn for ethonol just shows how the best ideas dont always make it to the forfront.
0
Seriously,
written by DDP, June 28, 2008
Some of you people need to get a fucking grip. A car that runs on water? Windmills in a car grill to charge a battery? Cutting all fossil fuels from vehicles by 2015?

WTF? Seriously, if you don't understand any of the laws of thermodynamics, just STFU. Just stop commenting and go read a book.

Do most of you realize that most of our electricity in the US is produced by coal. I guess if it doesn't come out of the tailpipe, it doesn't count, right?

Hydrogen? Do you people realize how we produce most of the world's hydrogen? H2 is a very common element in the universe. But on earth (where we live, but some of you make me wonder), those H atoms are usually stuck to C atoms. Or O atoms that require energy input to break the best viagra bonds. As in, electricity.

There needs to be a lot of changes before we talk about any of this. 2015? I call bullshit.
0
Electric cars inevitable
written by Joe S., June 28, 2008
Electricity is a lot cheaper than gasoline right now. It'll be even cheaper after we reach solar breakeven in the coming months. The Germans see this happening because they're the most advanced nation when it comes to implementing solar power.

Meanwhile, back in America, we're still going bankrupt fighting twentieth century Oil Wars.
0
...
written by protothad, June 28, 2008
But whaddiff we don'yt wanna drive glorified golf carts? And electricity still has to be produced somehow.

Electric cars need not drive like golf carts. An electic motor has more torque and a better acceleration curve than a comparible gas engine, which is why a Tesla can outperform a Lamborgini. An electic engine is also more efficient... even if you generate the electicity with oil or coal, you use far less to go the same distance than when driving a gas powered car. The Tesla, for example, gets the equivilent of 110 mpg despite having performance like a gas guzzling 12 cylinder sports car.

Add to that the fact that electic cars will typically charge overnight, when utilities have unused capacity and buy canada in cialis often waste fuel keeping turbines spun up... and the ability to generate fuel from unables to further reduce cost.

The only current down side is limited range, but even that is less of an issue with newer battery tech and plug-in hybrids.

0
...
written by John, June 28, 2008
Yes, that's all fine and well, but we're overlooking something.

Conventional wisdom states that there are two pieces of machinery, that will never feasibly run on electricity, without which the way of life that has led this planet to sustain 6 billion humans, with room to grow, comes to an abrupt and unpleasant end.

They are the www.deboerderijhuizen.nl harvesting combine, and the cargo jet. To these, I would add a third, being the 18-wheeler, and a fourth, being the locomotive.

A couple posts above this one, someone references the laws of thermodynamics. Far be it for me to pretend to be a science nerd, but I must agree with the overall call of bullshit. The basic problem is one of energy storage per pound, when we're talking about tranaportation. Show me a battery that delivers the same power level at its last 1% of use that it did at its first 1%. Yet a gasoline or diesel engine runs at the same level of output on the last few ounces of fuel in the tank that it does on the first few.

A widespread adoption of electric vehicles will only result in more electricity needing to be generated, which simply transfers the pollution from your tailpipe to a utility company's smokestack. Nothing changes with a switch to electric vehicles, unless we go nuke in a major, major way - which will never happen due to the barrage of leftist clownshoes howling madly in mindless protest.

Oh, hydrogen cars? Yeah, we can get the stuff by zapping water to break the H2O bond. But hydrogen would have to be compressed to a liquid state for a vehicle burning it to have any decent range. Why don't they use propane in cars? Because a collision severe enough to rupture the viagra cialis online pharmacy fuel tank leaves an inconvenient CRATER in the road, and of course, kills or horribly maims all involved. Now, do any of you folks remember the Hindenburg? Dig out your copy of Led Zeppelin's debut album, if you need a reminder.

The reason I cite algae biodiesel as a viable, sustainable long-term solution is simple: it's not energy negative, and three of the four critical machines I've listed above can run on it with minimal retrofitting. (Some bright person will figure out how to make jet engines run on the stuff, and then we're golden.) Betweem Reno and Las Vegas there's not much except sand and scorpions. Several million acres of desert put into algae biodiesel production would pretty well take care of all our domestic needs; the only thing we'd need gasoline for is high performance vehicles like sports cars and motorcycles, and with jets, trains, combines and tractor trailers no longer competing for the finite supply of petro fuels, those prices would not be unreasonable. Nor would we be in any danger of exhausting the planet's supply of oil.

In closing, I'd like to point out that to the extent that the Earth is warming, it's not humans which are causing it. No, it's the Sun. Solar activity has been much higher that we're used to for some time now, and that's the real culprit. Why don't we hear this, you ask? Simple. The conservatives won't admit that the Sun is acting up because we have no way to control it and purchase viagra that means uncertanity, which is bad for the stock market. The leftists won't admit that the Sun is acting up because then they can't blame global warming (such as it is) on the conservatives.
0
...
written by JustJo, June 29, 2008
Horse. Shit.
0
Electric is best
written by William, June 29, 2008
@John - I've heard the argument before that electric cars only transfer the pollution to the power station smokestack and that it somehow negates the benefit of all-electric cars, but that's assuming that the power station will continue to burn coal as the primary fuel source. All electric cars are the best way to go right now. The infrastructure of getting electricity to customers is already in place, and by moving all cars to electric, the work in technology and efficiency moves from the individual car to the power company. If the power company is burning coal now, it would be more cost efficient to improve the emissions of the smokestack than it would to improve the emissions of a million cars that would get their energy from that power station. In the future, that power station may generate all of its energy from wind, hydro, or other sustainable source, making the viagra purchase uk entire process practically emission free.
0
Forget Cheap
written by anthony, June 30, 2008
Don't even think economics when looking at alternatives. Cheaper ha!. Only until enough vehicles use the alternative then watch the prices sky rocket. Hell if it ran on water, water would be (1.89 for 250ml of Evian X 4 X 4.54 = 34.22 a gallon). Whatever the commodity its price will rise immediately to gouge the consumer, look what happened to diesel, propane, natural gas...
As for bio-fuel, lets use all the agricultural land to grow fuel for a mechanical monster instead of for a human.
I wonder where they get the ingredients for all the batteries for electric cars, what happens to them when they expire, whats the long term effect and add to that the steel used for cars, refining the buy cialis online canada ore, the electricity used for that, generated how... wake up people...no matter what 'alternataives' we use we are still screwing the public and mother nature.
0
...
written by Gerg, June 30, 2008
They are the harvesting combine, and the cargo jet. To these, I would add a third, being the 18-wheeler, and a fourth, being the locomotive.


Uhm, except for the occasional steam train locomotives *do* run on electricity. Some have diesel generators on board but wherever the infrastructure's in place they run directly off the grid.
0
...
written by J O'Toole, July 05, 2008
I am amazed that the author failed to mention that a car that runs solely on water without need of refuelling or recharging stations, just water, was unveiled in Japan in mid-June 2008 per Reuters but also info available with web search.
This should be the topic crowding the media ways and amazingly, not a peep that I have heard and even this eco site article on cars has no mention of this vitally important developement.
0
DON
written by DON ROBINSON, July 05, 2008
WE ARE NOT OUT OF OIL.WE ARE BEING LIED TO, ITS ABOUT MONEY. PROPANE VERY SAFE, 20% LESS POWER/ 15 / 20% LESS MILAGE OVER GASOLINE. TANKS RATED 3 TIMES WORKING PERSSURE 1050 PSI. BURST.HOSE AND FITTINGS 1100 PSI. BURST.PROPANE IS A BY PRODUCT OF REFINING OIL TO MAKE GASOLINE, THEY USE TO BURN IT OFF.NOW ITS $ 3.75 GAL.YOU CANT HAVE YOUR CAR CONVERTED TO DAY, IN THE PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF CALIF.AND CANT SMOG ONE.NO EMISIONS.THANKS TO BURRATS
0
EVs and its infrastructure (originated i
written by jack marchand, July 07, 2008
July 7th 2008
Less talk....let's roll..!!!

er'' glide..!!!
check this...dates back to the 1960s http://trillions.topcities.com/dualmodemaglev.html
0
The Air Car http://www.theaircar.com
written by BreeG, July 27, 2008
The "air car" works on compressed air. Yeah, I know, where'dya get the compressed air, what's the footprint compressing air leave? To another concern expressed in an above post: I would offer that, because of the use of a regulator (which it must have), it will work as well on it's last PSIs as it will on its first PSIs. We already have the infrastructure: go fill up your tire with compressed air - same technology, same infrastructure. Not ready to go for 10-12 cars to recharge the air tank at the same time, mind you, but the compression works on electricity which can be produced many different ways and so is not tied to any ONE way. I don't offer this as the end of the discussion, but one which should be considered: http://www.theaircar.com/acf/
0
...
written by anon, July 30, 2008
Can someone educate to how will we continue to generate electricity that will fuel these vehicles? More emissions and cialis discounted more green house gases.

FYI - according to James Hansen the buy levitra us godfather of global warming movement, the problem is not the petroleum product based vehicles. It is the power plants.

Want to save the earth? Consume less electricity, not more.
0
Daimler and USAians...
written by sims, September 29, 2008
You see people, in Germany, Mercs are not all luxury cars. Many people have them - not just rich people. You can buy small Mercedes too. It's like Lexus. In Japan, Toyota is the poor mans car too.
0
...
written by ahmad 190, October 06, 2008
The name of God the Merciful
Peace be upon you and God's mercy and blessings I am Ahmed from Palestine from the city of the Nativity of Christ on the letter why you decided on Aug ideas and designs of motor vehicles, I hope they take into account that you will not lose anything by virtue of possibilities exist for you, and I have a hobby in innovation and design ideas have no physical possibilities And technical in this country to this area and others, Aldrahat, automobiles, shipping, buses, and I'm loving Almclarin and fast order cialis Almrsidis Benz is very, very, very special and I ask God to help us all
0
So SO many people uneducated
written by Justin, October 20, 2008
@DSpider: A car ran on water? Really? And GM pulled it because they wanted you to purchase gasoline instead? That doesn't even make sense. Why would GM want you purchasing gasoline instead of water? Try to think things through before you believe everything you hear. The logic is insane; as for whether or not a car has ever run on water, I doubt very much that to be true and would LOVE a source on it (I could of course be wrong, but it's not even the "GM produced a car that runs on water" that hurts my brain, it's the logic that "they want you buying gasoline" argument that is just cripplingly stupid).

@ALL the people saying electric cars just transfer pollution: Seriously, just do a very basic Google search, I beg you. You can get 100% of your electricity from coal, you will still produce FAR less emissions than your internal combustion engine. I have heard this argument so many times now I can no longer be polite. It's like saying driving a Yaris is just as bad as driving a Corvette (after all, they both use gasoline, right?). Where will we get the energy to power all these electric cars you ask. We will likely get it from cleaner and cleaner sources as time goes on, but even if we don't it would still be less polluting than using gasoline for cars.
0
About time
written by hpjdmengines, November 24, 2008
It's nice to see a brand that says they will eliminate gas from their cars in the near future, rather than we plan to have all cars getting 40mpg by 2045.
0
First Chinese, Then Electric
written by Uncle B, January 28, 2009
Post (GRD) great republican depression, the remaining working population of America will drive Buick LeSabres and Cavalier-like cars made in China. These cars are a current-day reality on the streets of China, and await export to the U.S. on the docks of Shanghai as we speak! The elitist uber-rich shareholders of GM had GM America teach GM China how to build these cars using 85 cent and hour, Chinese peasant women, the supply of which is unending and self-regenerating in China. The Uber rich chose these women over the North American car builders for quite apparent economic reasons! The current “bail-out bullshit” is a smoke-screen devised by the Uber-rich bastards, to foist liablility for the large number of unemployed they intend to create, from the private sector, over to the public sector to relieve themselves of any undue expenses, before they collapse expensive North American operations in favor of highly profitable Chinese and buy viagra in canada Asian operations. Remember, they now own both, are dumping the American white elephant, and the workers, liabilities and all, for more profitable Asian production centers, so that they can be truly competitive with Honda, Hyundai and the like! It is a good, sound business strategy for the uber-rich shareholders, and by selling American stock and buying Asian stock, they slide away to new fields of immense profits, liability free as they collapse American corporations, and Yankee doodle gets it up the brown spot, hard, once again, and is left, smarting and holding the cialis in india bag! Any truly innovative and advanced ideas will be incorporated into the new Chinese built, highly profitable for shareholders, cars. The “Volt” is a 1969 chevelle body, complete with sheet metal and hydraulic support, engine removed, battery pack added, nightmare of 1930’s greasepit engineering - no servo’s, no drive by wire, no plastics, no carbon fiber, no magnesium parts, no aluminum, no advanced polymer composites - Hell, even Hyundai is trying to make better lighter bodies from recycled soda bottles, and Henry Ford did a number with Soy-plastics way back when! There is no way in Hell, that a major corporation in the country that put a man on the moon can be so backwards, unless they have other motivations.
0
fight against fossil fuels
written by krista, April 08, 2009
hey guys, i just stumbled upon this really cool website... www.faff.me

i am so broke and only today online us viagra they are offering a $1000 cash prize for putting up a video on youtube... i just had to participate! hoping to see you guys participating too :) cheers
0
...
written by Benetta, October 30, 2009
Nice post I Like your site very well and continue to do so. I have bookmarked your site.
Singapore Apartments
0
Are you serious?
written by David , July 02, 2014
This article is obviously a hoax. Last time I checked, Mercedes is producing cars that burn fuel. It's 2014 now. The author of this article should offer a public apology for such a blatantly false article. Idiot.

Write comment

security code
Write the displayed characters


busy
 

Are you an EcoGeek?

We've got to keep 7 billion people happy without destroying our planet. It's the biggest challenge we've ever faced....but we're taking it on. Are you with us?




The Most Popular Articles