Althouse: "You will never see a Ferrari electric because I don't believe in electric cars..."

August 21, 2011

"You will never see a Ferrari electric because I don't believe in electric cars..."

"... because I don't think they represent an important step forward for pollution or CO2 or the environment."

46 comments:

edutcher said...: Considering nobody wants them - if you go by Costco's decision to pull free electric chargers from their locations, it would seem to be a very wise move.; 8/21/11, 12:00 PM
themightypuck said...: Electric cars are awesome. They just aren't ready for prime time because batteries suck and have their own environmental problems. Gasoline is king but electricity is amazing. And the USA has all sorts of energy reserves that can be more easily converted into electricity than gasoline. As for CO2, there is no way to reduce CO2 emissions enough to seriously impact global warming. If global warming is going to cause environmental catastrophes, the only way to stop it will be a combination of spot engineering (dikes, irrigation, etc.) and grand innovation (carbon sequestration, weather control).; 8/21/11, 12:09 PM
Curious George said...: The only people who would buy an electric Ferrari are the same one's that think a small "carbon footprint" should apply to everyone...but them.; 8/21/11, 12:09 PM
Carol_Herman said...: Didn't COSTCO just pull its plugs from its parking lots? It said nobody used them.

The electric cars have two big faults. In accidents, it can fry a medic, who comes over to try and get you out.

And, getting rid of the batteries, when you need new ones ... is a trick and a half.

Maybe, you can just turn these cars into planters? You can plug the sprinkler system in, too. To take advantage of making lightening appear ... when you water the container.; 8/21/11, 12:10 PM
Curious George said...: "themightypuck said...
Electric cars are awesome. They just aren't ready for prime time because batteries suck and have their own environmental problems."

"So other than that how was the play Mrs. Lincoln."; 8/21/11, 12:11 PM
Gabriel Hanna said...: The problem with electric cars is energy storage.

A ten-gallon tank of gas stores about 40 kw-hr of energy, accounting for the inefficiency of an IC engine. An electric car, even though it works near 100% efficiency, if it stored the same amount of energy, would require:

$20,000 worth of batteries
$40,000 worth of flywheels
$240,000 worth of capacitors

This doesn't even count the WEIGHT, which of course is a factor for batteries (or flywheels). This is why electric cars have such a tiny range of 50-100 miles, and why the only "electric" cars that sell are hybrids.

But what does a gas tank cost? $1000? $500? And you can "charge" it in a few minutes.

The only cheap form of electrical storage is in hydroelectric reservoirs, which are inconveniently large for personal vehicles.

Until cheap, portable, methods of electrical storage are worked out--and there is a lot of research in that direction--electric cars will never be more than toys or for city people.; 8/21/11, 12:12 PM
DADvocate said...: Battery technology needs to come a long way before electrics are truly viable. Plus, electrics just relocate that source of CO2 production, not remove it.

What about the environment costs of battery production and dead battery disposal? There're lots of toxic chemicals in those batteries.; 8/21/11, 12:13 PM
Cedarford said...: Sales of the Chevy Volt have been "very disappointing" - 3200 sold so far, less than the Nissan Leaf - with Obamites calling for a 1 dollar to 2 dollar a gallon tax on gasoline to "help consumers make good forward leaning transportation decisions" - more hybrids and electric cars.

John Hayward - No one purchasing a Volt has the faintest clue what it really costs, because of all the taxpayer subsidies plowed into production, and hefty rebates offered at the point of sale. $400 million in federal subsidies were extracted from the taxpayer to fund Volt production, and buyers have enjoyed a $7500 federal tax credit.

That means each of the 3200 Volts sold thus far has rolled out of the lot with $132,500 in taxpayer subsidies stuffed in the glove compartment. They sticker at $41,000, so that means each Volt sold thus far actually costs $173,500, with only $33,500 paid by the actual purchaser.

What if GM’s rosy sales predictions come true? Assuming the $7500 tax credit says in place, that would bring the total subsidies paid for Volt production and sales up to $700 million. Divided by 40,000 automobiles, that works out to $17,500 in subsidies apiece. The Volt is about to have a price drop to $39,995, so by 2012 the true price of each car would be a mere $47,495.

On the other hand, if sales hold steady or decline as the CNW study predicts, we’d see about 7000 Volts sold through 2012 at best. That would work out to total taxpayer subsidies of $64,642 per vehicle, for a total per-unit price of roughly $104,000.

So, here are some lessons for those foolish enough to continue believing in the “green economy,” and wondering why billions of dollars have been seized from future taxpayers without visible benefit to employment or GDP:

1. Very few people want to buy a crummy little electric car for $40,000.

2. Nobody can make a crummy little electric car that sells for $40,000.

3. Absolutely no one wants to buy a crummy little electric car for the true price of over $100,000 apiece.

4. It is an outrage to compel taxpayers to subsidize the fantasy of a tiny group of politicians and their followers that crummy little electric cars can be sold for $40,000.

5. There is nowhere taxpayers can go to get their money back after this miserable failure, so it is vital to ensure that people who support nonsense like the Volt, and the rest of the Obama “green jobs” agenda, are never elected to any office, anywhere, ever.; 8/21/11, 12:15 PM
Michael said...: People do not wish to be reminded that the electricty, so clean, comes from coal plants.; 8/21/11, 12:19 PM
themightypuck said...: @curious george

touche

The electric car industry should probably not be subsidized (although I don't mind throwing government money at that industry if we're going the be throwing the money around anyway). Without massive battery innovation electric cars will always be a niche. At least I can imagine innovation in that direction so I understand the desire to work on it even though any real change is going to come from some disruptive technology we haven't thought of yet; 8/21/11, 12:20 PM
jr565 said...: Mighty puck wrote:
Electric cars are awesome. They just aren't ready for prime time because batteries suck and have their own environmental problems.

those seem to be the only reasons anyone would buy an electric car (batteries and impact on environment). If those reasons are not ready for prime time, then electric cars, in fact suck.; 8/21/11, 12:23 PM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: Electric cars are completely impractical ( stupid ) for the majority of the population and for the majority of the geographic areas of the United States.

People have better uses for their hard earned money than to buy a vehicle that is basically unusable.; 8/21/11, 12:35 PM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: Didn't COSTCO just pull its plugs from its parking lots? It said nobody used them.

People who shop at COSTCO will not be shopping in an electric car.

When you go to COSTCO, you are buying in bulk. Hell, just a package of Kirkland toilet paper would fill up the entire vehicle.

You need a pickup or SUV with some serious cargo space for several ice chests as well as all the groceries. Also a vehicle that can carry some serious weight.

Green weenie mobiles will not do it.; 8/21/11, 12:42 PM
chuck b. said...: But Ferrari is working "very hard" on a hybrid.

The San Francisco Costco parking lot is, right at this very minute, chockablock with green weenie mobiles.; 8/21/11, 12:45 PM
sorepaw said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 8/21/11, 12:49 PM
MikeinAppalachia said...: mightypuck-
You forgot the obigatory "I don't care," before "Electric cars are awesome."; 8/21/11, 12:51 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Only libruls, who should be committed to an insane asylum for their War on Math, still believe in this green economy crap.; 8/21/11, 12:52 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: BTW , why do libruls hate Walmart but love Costco?; 8/21/11, 12:53 PM
Brian Brown said...: If only we could start getting people to say the say thing about recycling...; 8/21/11, 1:01 PM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: The San Francisco Costco parking lot is, right at this very minute, chockablock with green weenie mobiles.

Well.....San Francisco. The people don't drive much in the City (I know, I used to live there and never drove my car) They also have the luxury of being able to go to the store/Costco on a more frequent basis so their cargo is smaller.

My monthly or every other month trip to Costco requires a 180 mile round trip over a 4800 foot mountain pass. An electric car can't even MAKE it to the Costco lot much less haul all the goods back home.

We never get out of COSTCO for less than $300 and with less than several hundreds of pounds of stuff.

The place is a money machine and will be even more so as inflation rises.

I wouldn't drive an electric car if you GAVE one to me.

However, I would make an exception and drive this hybrid; 8/21/11, 1:04 PM
Henry said...: Way to go, Luca di Montezemolo. From now on I'm buying NOTHING but Ferrari's.; 8/21/11, 1:15 PM
Anonymous said...: "BTW , why do libruls hate Walmart but love Costco?"

health insurance.; 8/21/11, 1:15 PM
PaulV said...: I want a coal fired Ferrari electric sports car.

WV;kookas
I would be real kook as then babe; 8/21/11, 1:15 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: He's right.; 8/21/11, 1:30 PM
chuck b. said...: I agree, there is little sense in foisting electric cars on people who live in the country.

But that does not mean gas cars are the best choices for people who live in the city.

We have a Volt--my gay husband lined up to get one the first chance he could, and we have the 105th car off the assembly line. (Yes, I am embarrassed about the whole gov't subsidy thing. But it's not my car. [Well, yes, technically, it is my car too, but...]) Anyway, he gets a new car every 5 years and got swept up in the hype back when gas was closing in on $5. As I guess it is again now. Me, I drive my cars until they give up the ghost as unambiguously as possible.

I must say, The Volt is a fun car to drive, and getting into my Passat afterwards feels like stepping back in time. The drive on highway 128 through Anderson Valley and 116 through west Sonoma felt extra-special. (That said, as it's the only electric car I've ever driven, and maybe one of a dozen cars total that I have ever driven, I don't have a lot to compare it with. But still. The torque. Oh, the torque...); 8/21/11, 1:30 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 8/21/11, 1:31 PM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: I agree, there is little sense in foisting electric cars on people who live in the country.

But that does not mean gas cars are the best choices for people who live in the city.

I agree as well. If I lived in the City again, I would probably have a hybrid or electric car. It makes sense for those areas.

CHOICE is the word.

However, the Government, the green movement and Obama are purposely forcing gasoline prices to go sky high. They are also through EPA regulations that are impossible to meet strangling the automobile industry.

They are trying to FORCE the "green" (Barf) vehicles upon all of us. Not just the urban areas but ALL of us.

If the market dictates and people CHOOSE to use electrics and hybrids then those products will prevail. Social engineering, forcing the product does nothing but hurt the majority of the people.

Like Obama says if your car is too expensive to drive because he has created high gas prices.....buy a new car. What a dope. If you can't afford to fill up your gas tank, how in the fuck does he expect you to be able to pony up 40K for a new hybrid.

Blind ideologues.....DIE!!!; 8/21/11, 1:43 PM
Michael said...: Chuck B: I would be curious to know if you traded in a car for the Volt and if so did you factor in the carbon cost of building a new car, the carbon cost of your old car still cruising about, and the use of coal to produce the electricity to store in the battery to make your Volt run. I am as in favor of sanctimony as the next guy but did you do a little arithmetic in the process or just go immediately to the 40K bumper sticker?; 8/21/11, 1:58 PM
chuck b. said...: "I am as in favor of sanctimony as the next guy..."

Yes, you've made that clear.

And as I made clear, it's not my car.; 8/21/11, 2:05 PM
Michael said...: ChuckB: You might want to consider the nature of your marital communications as reflective either of your bad temper or the fact that you have no choices in such matters. Cheers.; 8/21/11, 2:13 PM
chuck b. said...: Some people will be surprised to learn that not all parts of the country get electricity from coal. Most electricity in California comes from natural gas. I think the whole west coast is like that.

Also, some may also be amused (or perhaps enraged--you guys are kind of weird, imo) to know that we also have a small PV system. Even in foggy San Francisco we haven't paid more than $20 a year in electricity since the system was installed in '02, close to the one year anniversary of 9/11.; 8/21/11, 2:16 PM
Michael said...: Chuck B: $20 a year in electric bills? Chuck B, we were born at night but not last night. When you sling bullshit try to tone it to a somewhat believable level. It is highly unlikely you can power a small apartment for that amount. What kind of batteries are you using?; 8/21/11, 2:27 PM
gadfly said...: @themightypuck:
"... the USA has all sorts of energy reserves that can be more easily converted into electricity than gasoline."

That would be methane, the other hydrocarbon that God conveniently buried with our our oil deposits.

"As for CO2, there is no way to reduce CO2 emissions enough to seriously impact global warming."

There is scientific evidence which shows that atmospheric warming causes increases in CO2, not vice-versa. Let's save our money and quit funding these AGW nutcases - this nonsense is being driven by the largess made available by the politicians.; 8/21/11, 2:48 PM
John henry said...: I am a member at both Costco and Sam's Club.

People frequently conflate the two stores as similar but they are radically different from each other.

Costco's target market is families who want to buy in bulk at low prices.

Large quantity retail.

Sam's target market is businesses who want to buy supplies as well as stuff for resale.

Small quantity wholesale.

There is considerable overlap but they do have very distinct target markets.

I know a woman who owns several Chinese restaurants. She buys everything, food, plates, cleaning supplies etc at Sam's. She says it is cheaper than traditional distributors and easier as well.

Both Costco and Sam's are completely different from Walmart and I never understand why people even try to compare them.

John Henry; 8/21/11, 3:15 PM
John henry said...: Paul V,

I don't know about a coal fired Ferrari but the National Socialists made Volkswagens that burned wood.

http://strangevehicles.greyfalcon.us/HOLZBRENNER%20VOLKSWAGENS.htm

Let's hear a big hurrah for National Socialism. High speed trains, Autobahns and woodburning Volkys.

John Henry; 8/21/11, 3:20 PM
Automatic_Wing said...: Some people will be surprised to learn that not all parts of the country get electricity from coal. Most electricity in California comes from natural gas. I think the whole west coast is like that.

California still gets plenty of electricity from coal. They just import electricty from coal-fired plants in other states instead of burning it in state, which I guess makes Californians morally superior or something. The electricty generation mix in CA isn't substantially different than it is for other states, other than slightly greater use of hydroelectric due to proximity to dams.; 8/21/11, 3:22 PM
John henry said...: Some very large portion of LA's power used to come from a humungous coal plant on the Kapairowits plateau near the 4 corners of AZ, NM, CO and UT.

Much of the haze over the Grand Canyon used to be caused by that plant.

Santimonious bastards in LA. If they are going to use the power, they should at least suffer the effects of it rather than slough it off on others.

My info on this is perhaps 20 years old so I am not sure if this is still the case.

John Henry; 8/21/11, 3:29 PM
Alex said...: They just import electricty from coal-fired plants in other states instead of burning it in state, which I guess makes Californians morally superior or something.

Yeah I never understood this kind of self-absolution.; 8/21/11, 4:38 PM
Humperdink said...: $20/year for electric? I pay that per month just have the meter attached to the house.; 8/21/11, 7:33 PM
Hagar said...: This article reminds me of an old U.S. Bueau of Public Roads study I have a copy of. One of their categories was "Corvettes, Volkswagens, and other sports cars."

My electric bill for my 1200 square foot castle runs to about $140-150/month this summer.

I did not know that the Germans made factory wood burning cars during WWII, but in the occupied territories we certainly made all kinds of conversion kits to run automobiles on gas from burning wood, carbide pellets, and whatever else ingenious tinkerers could think of.

Kdf - Kraft durch Freude - "strength through joy" - was a Nazi slogan.; 8/21/11, 8:41 PM
themightypuck said...: @gadfly re There is scientific evidence which shows that atmospheric warming causes increases in CO2, not vice-versa. Let's save our money and quit funding these AGW nutcases - this nonsense is being driven by the largess made available by the politicians.

I'm no climate scientist. I'm just saying that even if you agree with the worst case scenarios posited by climate scientists, there is no predictable path to meaningful CO2 reduction.; 8/21/11, 10:30 PM
chuck b. said...: "California still gets plenty of electricity from coal."

7.7%.

http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/electricity/total_system_power.html; 8/21/11, 11:03 PM
chuck b. said...: "The electricty generation mix in CA isn't substantially different than it is for other states, other than slightly greater use of hydroelectric due to proximity to dams."

That statement appears totally false:

http://www.eia.gov/cneaf/coal/page/special/tbl3.html; 8/21/11, 11:12 PM
chuck b. said...: "What kind of batteries are you using?"

I don't spend enough time in the Althouse comments to keep track of who should be ignored, so I don't know if I'm even supposed to respond to you...But.

Did you see where I said we have a PV system? It makes electricity. We sell it what we don't use in the middle of the day at a higher rate than we pay for it at night. We don't have air conditioning. The furnace, drier, and water heater all run on gas. And I'm bored. I don't want to break down the math for you.; 8/21/11, 11:21 PM
Eric said...: But still. The torque. Oh, the torque...)

Yeah. That's a huge reason for an electric sports car, and why you need to spend at least $275k to get a Ferrari model that can beat a Tesla Roadster from 0-60.

Why doesn't he think they "represent an important step forward for pollution or CO2 or the environment"? If you want a zero pollution car you're pretty much stuck with hydrogen or electric, and hydrogen isn't coming to a dealer near you any time soon.; 8/22/11, 1:52 AM
Methadras said...: Enzo would roll over in his grave if they ever did that.; 8/22/11, 11:57 PM