Re: The deaf, dumb, and blind biofuel cultists have yet another heavy issue to explain away!

On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 17:54:44 GMT, "David Morgan \(MAMS\)"
<findme@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> mumbled:

>
>"Lobby Dosser" <lobby.dosser.mapson@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> offered in message...
>
>> "David Morgan \(MAMS\)" <findme@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>> > "Owl Cafe & Filling Station" <ethyl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote...
>
>> >> You are crazy and working for OPEC---but we KNEW that!
>
>> > I take it you failed to read the article and look at the references.
>> >
>> > Nothing short of 100% biofuel will do anything to alter the oil /
fuel
>> > crisis.
>
>> Genome Man building critters to eat CO2 and **** High Test. Don' worry.
Be
>> happy in your work.
>
>
>"Hi-Test" as you say, along with other petroleum based fuels, are what
need
>to be eliminated.  

Hoo boy...another whack job...

>Were it not for the oil barons, the entire planet would be
>running some 80% on alternative energy sources by now.  

Right....

>Money by way
>of cor****ate profits from the rapage of American's pocketbooks, has now
>purchased the corrupt US government while complacent people sleep.

Yawn...

>Who killed the electric car?    George W. Bush and Dick Cheney - oil
crooks.

Ah, nope, wrongo:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_EV1

In late 2003, GM officially canceled the EV1 program.[11][12] Despite
unfulfilled waiting lists and positive feedback from the lessees, GM
stated that it could not sell enough of the cars to make the EV1
profitable. In fact, during the later stages of development for the
car, GM officials claimed that they stood no chance of ever making a
profit on the EV1 itself.[citation needed]

Instead, the company hoped that the EV1 would prove their technology
and establish a "leader****p" position within the electric vehicle
market. GM itself did not expect to turn a profit on electric vehicles
for perhaps ten years after bringing the EV1 to market.[citation
needed] The end came when GM decided it was cheaper to sue the State
of California to roll back clean vehicle regulations than it was to
build electric vehicles.[citation needed] GM stated that they spent
over US$1 billion developing and marketing the EV1, though a ****tion
of this cost was defrayed by the Clinton Administration's US$1.25
billion Partner****p for a New Generation of Vehicles (PNGV)
project.[13][14][15] All manufacturers seeking to produce electric
cars for market consumption also benefitted from matching government
funds committed to the United States Advanced Battery Consortium. The
estimated research and development costs for the EV1 program to
production (prior to marketing and sale costs) was pegged by General
Motors as "slightly less than US$500 million".

When canceling the program, GM also cited a lack of demand for the
two-seater, particularly in light of its limited range and its
suitability to "warm weather" states only.[citation needed] During the
EV1's development phase, several Northeastern states moved to pass ZEV
laws similar to those adopted in California.[citation needed] General
Motors, along with many other prospective EV manufacturers, opposed
this movement[citation needed] despite the likelihood that such
legislation would have vastly increased the market for the vehicle.
While this may seem a sinister position to have taken, GM's internal
research showed that the EV1's range would be reduced by as much as
50% for use in cold-weather states.[citation needed] This was due
chiefly to the effect of ambient temperature on both the batteries and
the special low rolling resistance tires.[