One point worth emphasizing here is in regards to the comments made by Jim Ostroff, the 's author of this and other excellent articles.
We, on vortex, especially moi, are often highly suspicious of the motive's of the Oil Companies. I have even seen the derogatory term: "PetroMafia" being used. ;-) How callous! LOL However, the auto companies (although not exactly eco-friendly in past years) are NOT necessarily aligned with the Oil Companies (let us remind ourselves) and often have a very different agenda. They (auto makers) want to sell cars. period. Even if the cars are plug-ins. However, there is a large amount of buit-in inertia in the industry. While it is true that massive obscene profits have enabled Petro Investments to often include large numbers of shares in auto stocks, the management and Boards of Ford, GM, Toyota, etc. are very careful to limit the outside influence. They fear the wrath of negative public opinion. Why? Again, their motive is to sell cars, not fuel. The gas guzzlers, so hated by the "green movement" and the Sierra Club, like the Hummer and other SUVs, were built in response to consumer demand, NOT due to oil company pressure on auto makers. Some of that demand may be understandable (large families and safer transportation) but some of it is misguided: like youn g adults wanting to imitate the California Guvernator driving his convoy of Hummers around the state. This is not to say that subtle spin (i.e. 'disinfo' aimed at consumers) is not applied by the PetroMafia in the Media ... but that is another issue. Here are some of Ostroff's insightful comments: "There is one point that needs to be addressed head on: The notion that there is a cabal, a hidden hand, that prevents plug-in electric hybrid cars, or other advanced technologies from being brought to market." "In reality, the force that drives such decisions is the marketplace- consumers. Gasoline-powered vehicles that get 30-40 mpg have been available for years. Automakers have sold them, but all things considered, not many. Around 75% of consumers buy SUVs, light trucks, vans and larger cars. Neither automakers nor oil companies are forcing consumers' hands or denying them a choice. Plug-ins and fuel cell-powered cars have been around for a while. Why don't automakers sell them?" "Few will buy them at prices of $100,000 and more. Technical advances make it likely that plug-ins can be made and sold at prices approaching gasoline-powered models by about 2010. GM is taking a gamble in committing to do so." [Here is a most important point:] "All things considered, small turbo-diesel-powered vehicles might be more economical. Don't forget, you pay for electricity." "A nationwide fleet of electric cars is out of the realm of possibility. The U.S.'s electricity infrastructure could not handle the additional load." BTW he (Jim Ostroff) is a very perceptive writer, IMHO. To me his comments are saying this: the best "green" choice for the near term is NOT the pure plug-in, but instead is an intermediate range of battery power along with a small, efficient ICE. Getting most new cars near the 100 MPG range, even if that is misleading because it does not include the fossil fuel burned to charge the batteries, could save the US economy half a trillion annually. This is almost enough, along with massive cuts in the defense budget, to enable the next 'regime' to salvage Bush's massive budget shortfall. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A0DE2DD1439F936A15752C0A9659C8B63 Jones
