An electric solution for Trollhättan?

As we could read last week an electric cars consortium has entered the bidding process for Saab. They act very secret but as I learned just recently it’s not the BAIC thing that was rumored about before. It looks more like some Japanese companies related to the automotive business got together to place a bid. While we don’t know much more about who they are yet we know that their plan is to build electric cars only in Trollhättan.

But can that work? In any case it is a pretty ambitious plan given how hard the pure electrical car companies like Tesla had to fight for survival ever since. I know that the electric cars is often praised as the saviour from carbon dioxide and the key to future mobility. It is the loved child of many politicians and even here in Germany the government wants to see one million electric cars on the road until 2020. But is the electric car really the answer? Is it the key? For me the answer is clear: No.

Let’s take a look at the reality electric cars have to face today. One big hurdle is their price. A rather small car like the Nissan Leaf costs about Euro 36k in Germany, the semi-electric Ampera starts just below Euro 44k. Given the fact that for example the Astra starts somewhere around Euro 18k this is a huge hurdle for sales. Even if the price for electricity is a lot lower than for fuel you can drive quite a bit before you break even on the extra price. Also worth mentioning is that there are for sure many people who can’t or simply don’t want to spend the extra money just to be environmentally correct. In many countries governments give a special tax benefit to encourage people to buy electric cars despite their price. This is something that works to a degree but cannot be the way to go forever.

All these issues about the car itself have made the way pretty bumpy for the companies behind them. Looking at Tesla their track record after fifteen years of work are some two thousand cars on the road and a slight chance to make a profit in 2012. The Nissan/Renault alliance is said to have spent about four billion Euro on their electric car programme. It would be interesting to look at this from an economical view and to calculate how many they’d have to sell to break even. And to put that in relation to the said consortium. How much money would they have to spend to get this running, let alone to be viable in ten or more years? Look at the Volt. Not the worst concept but through price and fire issues it is not where GM executives wanted it to be. No matter if they put their bet on the wrong horse or they just executed it poorly, this will cost a lot of money. GM should be able to handle that but how about a pure electric car company? It would make them shut down pretty quickly.

Not to forget that any manufacturer of electrical cars must be prepared for the next round. Once there are more of that kind on the market the selling point will be economy again. Even before the return on the first investment has come they may have to invest again to meet new demands, be it by customers or law, just like it is with the internal combustion engines today. Only in a significantly shorter timeframe.

But you have to look at more than just the car itself when judging the environmental value of electrical cars. Where does the energy comes from. The range extender thing is not free of emissions. It reduces them for sure but in the end it is still dependent on oil if you want to drive more that 40-80 kilometers (as Opel states for the Ampera). If you want this to be more than a bridge technology you need to use alternative fuel in there, too. BioPower would surely be a fit in there.

For all those pure electrical cars it depends on where your electricity comes from. To be really emission free you’d need to get your electricity from renewable sources. I know there are still some out there who consider atomic energy as emissions free but would I like to replace 129 grams of CO2 per km by 10 grams of nuclear waste per km? No, not at all. Looking at Germany we will shut down all our nuclear plants within the next ten years so the electricity above the one that can be produced from wind, sun, etc. will most likely come from coal plants. Not that good either. If you seriously follow the chain of electricity back you have to admit that “emissions free” is hard to get today.

This leads me to another thing you have to look at: infrastructure. This is not aimed at the plug in stations, those can be installed by skilled people wherever you need them. If you want to get a serious amount of electrical cars running you also have to look at the electrical grid in your country. While the western world may have a proper one you have to consider a serious increase in electricity that not only has to be produced but also delivered to the customers. An interesting example that you could to a certain degree adapt is India. People earned more money so more could afford an air condition for their home. This seriously lead to trouble with a weak electrical grid. The local electricity companies would need to invest in this. And while the investment itself may not be the main problem in Europe I can tell you that it is a huge problem in Germany to build a new high-tension line from the north sea through the country to deliver the power from the wind turbines to the industries and homes in the south of our country. The reason? Nobody wants to live beside that line because of the electro smog.

So looking at all this, is the electrical car bound to go down the drain? No, it will surely find its place in the concept of future mobility. Even I could use one to drive to work daily. And for many of those pizza delivery guys it would make sense, too. But it is in no way the only answer to our problems. Hydrogen could be another piece in this puzzle, but due to the logistic difficulties maybe more for city busses and other fleets that return to one refilling station frequently. But for those average drivers you may need to offer some kind of fuel that you can just fill in your tank as you did it with today’s gas or diesel. Ethanol is certainly an option. The main backlash with this is that it was too often made from corn and other food but current generations of Ethanol can be made from many different kinds of waste. We are not yet as far as the DeLorean in Back To The Future took us but we can get pretty near to that.

My main point in all this is that we should not make the same mistake we made in the past: set all on one card. Back then it was oil, now it seems to be electricity. There are many interesting technologies out there so we should not put all on a single one, we should rather use every one at what they are best at. For example electricity for shorter distance, ethanol, with or without range extender for those who need to drive far. The fuel cell is also interesting, maybe even for supplying homes with energy. We have to substitute oil in many places of our everyday life so we need many alternatives.

But let’s now get back to where this post started: the electrical consortium. I would not want Trollhattan to place their bet on just one card. Maybe it would be a big number of initial jobs that came with that plan but they are all dependent on the success of the electric car alone. I strongly believe that an affordable electrovehicle can only be made by a company that has also other products in the market to compensate the first decade of losses. Saab was on a pretty good road with BioPower, eAAM and ePower. I would want to see a company like Mahindra & Mahindra pick this up and add the finances to make it fly. As I stated before I heard from several sides that they have a solid plan that should be pretty close to what we Saab Fans long to see while with said consortium it is pretty likely that the cars won’t even be branded Saab.

ryanonsrc
Member
4 years 5 months ago

I definitely agree Till. Putting all eggs in the electric-car-basket is a risky proposition and one that a rebooted Saab frankly cannot afford. As Saab’s legacy is goes way beyond any particular type of engine, a successful bidder will have to not have such a narrow focus, My money continues to be on Mahindra & Mahindra.

saaburban
Member
4 years 5 months ago
Yes, yes, yes! – Could a japanese / scandinavian eco branded car brand sell….and give the germans some competition…. Hell ya! – Could a 100% electric company located close to the hydropower dam of swedens largest river, be run on 100% green energy.. Hell ya! – Is there a market for electric cars, no… But gov. all over the globe are changing the rules of the game, and it might go faster than any of us would think. If the company can make hybrids to Japanese quality, Scandinavian design….. A nordic-nippon car might be parked at a driveway near u..… Read more »
dcpattie
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Has it been a full year since “Saab Automotive” actually produced a car (not counting ANA).

What is taking so long?

I sure as hell hope ideology is not steering the Bankruptcy administrators away from a viable option (BMW, M&M) toward electric only which would take an extra few years to get off the ground!

Kimberly
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Electric cars are not practical until you can get the refuel/recharge time under five minutes (or hot swap battery packs without having to unload the trunk/boot), and range is extended to over 350 miles/530km with climate control and lights on. Until then, they are a solution only for a very niche market which exhibits very high smug emissions.

zippy
Member
4 years 5 months ago

It will never work.

As fir Germany shutting the nuclear power plants, quite possibly the stupidest idea I have ever heard. The “problem” doesnt just go away when you shut the down.

nordican
Member
4 years 5 months ago

I agree. They should be kept operational until nuclear fusion reactors start to become a reality. Scientists around the world are working hard on this ultimate solution, it’s the ‘power of the sun’ and has virtually no waste products…

JerseySaab
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Right – we’re about 10 years away from practical fusion power, and have been for the last 60 years.

Eagle63
Member
4 years 5 months ago

We know it IS possible; the question is are we smart enough to make it into reality? Do we have the perseverance to make this a reality? It is obviously very hard to do, but so was landing men on the Moon back in the late 60s, when mankind proved that even the most ‘impossible’ things could be done, not because it is easy but because it is hard…..: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ateh7hnEnik

davidgmills
Member
4 years 5 months ago
If you haven’t heard about thorium as a nuclear fission fuel, it is about time. It was the fuel many giants of nuclear physics thought was by far the better fuel source. In the 1960’s and 70’s in Oak Ridge, Tn. American physicists figured out how to make nuclear power from thorium, an element that is about 100 times as abundant as the Uranium 235 we use for fuel. The US government rejected thorium as a source of power because it is far too complicated to enrich it enough to make nuclear weapons out of it. The thorium process developed… Read more »
Nate 9-3
Member
4 years 5 months ago

+1 for even knowing about thorium and +1 again for the excellent breakdown.

The problem is not energy…the problem is that free and easy energy is difficult for others to profit from.

davidgmills
Member
4 years 5 months ago

I could explain a lot more but this is a car forum not an energy forum. And since I am a lawyer not an engineer, (although I do have a pretty good background in chemistry) it does get over my head in a hurry.

DreamChaser
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Wow, that’s all very interesting! Thanks for the info.. 🙂

Edis
Member
4 years 5 months ago
Sounds like the typical misinformed arguments about thorium you can read online. First off, thorium is about 4 times as abundant as uranium, but unlike uranium thorium does not have any fissile isotopes. A normal light water reactor is using both 235-U which is fissile and 238-U which is fertile as a fuel. The latter is transmutated into 239-Pu which is fissile in the reactor. However, since a light water reactor consumes more fissile material than it produces, eventually new fissile 235-U have to be added (while fission products have to be removed). Like 238-U, 232-Th is not fissile but… Read more »
Kimberly
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Thorium reactors and household dorm fridge-size pebble reactors become practical. Designs exist, it’s just not commercially viable because everyone* is afraid of nucyooolear now.

* read: everyone who doesn’t understand nuclear tech

saabserb
Member
4 years 5 months ago
Very well written article Till72! Electric cars will just be one of the possibilities in the future, I bet on Hydrogen. Two reasons (beside the ones from the article): 1. Hydrogen will still need gas stations, which is a good way to switch the business for the petroleum giants, which certainly can influence the future of the automotive industry. They will still be in the game, which can not be the case for electric cars. 2. “Charging time” for the hydrogen cars will be similar to the current gasoline, which is definitely not the case for the electric cars. It… Read more »
900 classic cab
Guest
4 years 5 months ago

Nice reading. I also agree it would be a mistake if someone will only bet in electric cars…

900 classic cab
Guest
4 years 5 months ago

Has anyone driven the Hybrid Citroen DS5 ? That might be a clever solution.

ivo 71
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Well, it’s another hybrid, only one that marries a diesel engine to the electric part. A diesel engine does, of course, consume less oil so in that sense it’s more clever than a gasoline/electric hybrid. But diesels also have less pleasant, issues such as weight, cold engine sound levels, poor acceleration from standstill, small-particle emissions causing lung and airway problems, soot and that horrible fifties’ industrial smell…

Is it THE solution an oil-starved, polluted world is waiting for? I don’t think so. But is is a nice-looking car.

Ivo

JerseySaab
Member
4 years 5 months ago

The world as a whole is neither “oil starved” nor “polluted.”

GerritN
Member
4 years 5 months ago

The world is definitely starving for oil and the biggest ‘pollution’ seems to be CO2. Although I’m very skeptic about the whole CO2 industry (the CO2 trading business is just ridiculous) at this point it is probably better to be safe than sorry. Although I must admit that I really appreciated the very mild winter that we had (because of global warming).

Angelo V.
Member
4 years 5 months ago

If we have an unusually cold Winter next year, does that mean global warming is over?

GerritN
Member
4 years 5 months ago

According to some idiots statistics skill, yes!

Angelo V.
Member
4 years 5 months ago
So let me understand: If it’s hotter than normal, it’s global warming. If it’s cooler than usual, it’s global warming. Too dry? Global warming. Too much rain? Global warming. More tropical storms than average? Global warming. Fewer tropical storms than average? Global warming. More snowfall than average? Global warming. Less snowfall than average? Global warming. La nina? Global warming. El nino? Global warming. I think I got it: It’s global warming no matter what. Explain the ice age too me. That was before we were burning fossil fuels, wasn’t it?
jonthaa
Guest
4 years 5 months ago

So let me understand: you have no problem driving a contraption that is a straight result of science. But you do have a problem when the same science tells you about global warming? That’s like a creationist not realizing that the computer he’s using to spread the word contradicts his very beliefs. It’s about weather extremes on one hand (the amount of deviation) and longer-term climate statistics on the other (noticeable temperature rises). Long term meaning tens of years, not thousands of years like in the ice ages.

Angelo V.
Member
4 years 5 months ago

No, actually, scientists didn’t invent cars. Inventors with scientific backgrounds maybe, but not the politically driven academia scientists that are making this ridiculous argument—-which is a rouse for redistribution of wealth. In no way, shape or form should industrialized nations be taxing their citizens for energy use and then sending the money to the corrupt United Nations, which is what is being suggested—and supported with “scientific evidence.” It’s junk science, a farce, a hoax, in my opinion.

davidgmills
Member
4 years 5 months ago
Actually, I used to think Al Gore’s “an Inconvenient Truth” was the best documentary ever. I no longer do. There are actually some very good scientists (astro physicists primarily) who are proposing the theory that the recent increase in temperature was due to variations in the magnetic field of the sun, not due to CO2 output. Google Svensmark. He’s a Dane. He’s not a Rupublican. The sun is amazingly constant in its thermonuclear output, its chemical output, and its gravity, but it is highly variable in its electro-magnetic output. (The four forces). According to Svensmark’s theory, when the sun’s maganetic… Read more »
Edis
Member
4 years 5 months ago

No, weather is not climate.

The worlds average temperature can change significantly from one year to the next, much more than what global warming has contributed with so far. This from year to year changes is mostly related to climate patterns like El-Nino and others.

To look at climate change you need to look at the average temperature trend over a long time period, several decades to draw a conclusion.

rune
Member
4 years 5 months ago

‘Better safe than sorry’ in this case does not cut it.

The global community faces a wide variety of challenges. Some are related, and if we waste time (and money) fixing the wrong challenge, then we will definitively struggle fixing the real challenges.

CO2 is vital to all life on this planet. Plants need more CO2 to grow, and quite frankly: This planet need less oxygene in order to keep its animal population in check.

To claim that CO2 is a threat in any way is such an extraordinary claim that it requires extraordinary proof.

Angelo V.
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Agreed. The amount of untapped oil reserves is staggering—-enough for decades. Human activity is not dooming the planet either. Such talk is political, not scientific. Unfortunately, many scientists/academia have joined forces with politicians, destroying their credibility and making the waters “muddy.” Now THAT’S pollution.

davidgmills
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Many scientists have also joined forces with industry and as a result you have two opposing camps. Often both sides seem radical (and often seem bought and paid for by their particular camp) and so the public has become extremely skeptical of all things science and deservedly so.

Angelo V.
Member
4 years 5 months ago

I agree with that.

ivo 71
Member
4 years 5 months ago
Whatever the truth about global warming, pollution etc. may be, it is an undisputed and undsputable fact that -reasonably accessible- oil reserves are getting depleted. Decades is just a flick of time, having enough for decades means that we are simply going to run out of the stuff in a couple of years as countries willl be increasingly hoarding it for strategic purposes. Yes, there is shale oil and possibly more oil in inaccessible parts of the world such as the bottom of the deep seas but the cost of extracting it may well make products from that oil prohibitively… Read more »
Angelo V.
Member
4 years 5 months ago

I would love to see an alternative fuel vehicle that is affordable and fun to drive—-with a range like a gas engine car, reliable, etc. Put me on that waiting list. Right now, the internal cumbustion engine is king. The golf carts they’ve tried force feeding us are garbage, utter junk.

ivo 71
Member
4 years 5 months ago
I agree on the IC engine but the point is that it doesn’t have to be fed gasoline or another oil-based distillate to remain useful. Nitrogen engine technology is already technically available, BMW have been running a test fleet for years. All that is needed now is a gas station grid with stronger tanks and a few mods to the gas engine. No-one is pursuing that, of course, because oil companies, you know, the guys who either run or supply fuel stations, make zilch on nitrogen. Then there is biogas/methane and alcohol made from sugar molasses (mos cars in Brazil… Read more »
Edis
Member
4 years 5 months ago
There is no such thing as a nitrogen engine; nitrogen is an inert gas. Making an engine to run on hydrogen on the other hand is possible, but there is no free hydrogen availible on earth so hydrogen can only be used as an energy carrier not an energy source. Today the only cost effective method to produce hydrogen is from natural gas which make it pointless as a means to power cars. Liquid Natural Gas is not something that is suitable for cars which tend to use CNG instead, that is Compressed Natural Gas. However, natural gas is not… Read more »
alwaysSaab
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Thought there ought to be some definite time frame for bidders to place a bid and another for the Administrators to consider and decide on one bid that is most viable for the company. How can this Consortium come in at this time when the whole world is waiting for some announcement on the conclusion of the bidding process which started almost 3 months ago? When this is allowed, there is no end to this saga and the company chances of a revival is definitely going to take a hit.

kochje
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Agree with you; This is a complete new direction and has not much to do with the saving of the Saab brand. If the bid of this group (Japanese?) will be honored and IF they start developing and building electric cars that might be good for Trollhättan while it creates work.
However the product which might come off the production band will not be a Saab so we will definitively lose our beloved brand.

saabserb
Member
4 years 5 months ago

I guess that it is as the administrators have been saying many times: “No doors are closed”. At least until the final sale contract is sealed. It is sad and nerve-breaking but is true. The administrators only interest is to get the best deal, even in the last minute.
The time plan is more for the administrators and their team. I guess that they have now two-three most interesting parties to play with, and the rest are considered as non-interesting (which doesn’t mean that the rest can not come back with an improved bid and get back in the game).

alwaysSaab
Member
4 years 5 months ago
This is what I feared most as there is no definite time for a closure. Imagine in the case of an early bidder that put in something he thought will work for the plant, the workers, the employees, suppliers etc and his plan is to re-start production asap. With these uncertainties throwing in, there is a cost, not only to this bidder, but also to the other stakeholders. For instance, an ex-Saab worker can’t be waiting indefinitely for a resolution, he has to feed himself as well as his family as well as may be, some other commitments. Even the… Read more »
nordican
Member
4 years 5 months ago

I’m afraid your going to be right….

RS
Member
4 years 5 months ago
I believe those advocating nuclear energy on SU are talking about Thorium reactors (that btw sound almost too good to true) as there would be virtually no waste coming out from the process. ”The Nissan/Renault alliance is said to have spent about four billion Euro on their electric car programme. It would be interesting to look at this from an economical view and to calculate how many they’d have to sell to break even.” If they have spent 4 billion on electric cars that number translates to roughly a million vehicles sold just to get back in black. Wonder where… Read more »
davidgmills
Member
4 years 5 months ago

See my post above for more info on thorium.

Peter Christy
Member
4 years 5 months ago
I remember reading an article some years ago on the practicalities of electric vehicles. If someone could wave a magic wand and convert every vehicle here in the UK to electric power overnight, we would need to build – at a conservative estimate – around 35 new nuclear power stations to provide the power for them! And that is a conservative estimate! A more realistic one was 50 such stations! Add to that the danger involved in electric vehicles! I would not fancy being in an electric vehicle involved in a motorway shunt, to find that all the metal parts… Read more »
Thylmuc
Member
4 years 5 months ago
Did some quick research on the Internet. Here is what I found out: -Sewage in the UK (in 2000): 1.130 million tons. -oil consumption in the UK (2010) 84.71 million tons. -potential of biogas from sewage. _max_ 100 cubic metres biogas per ton, containing a maximum of 75 % methan fuel. -energy content of 1 cubic meter methane seems 11.1 kWh, i.e. 1 cubic metre is has about the same energy as one litre oil (0.9 kg) -Therefrom: 100 cubic metres x 0.75 x 0.9 = 67 kg oil equivalent from one ton of sewage. -67 kg x 1130066 tons/1… Read more »
Thylmuc
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Uups, I need to correct myself. Evidently, the research was to hastened. As usual. I compared dry sludge with fresh mass. Sorry. Assuming a 90 % water content, that would indeed mean that 0.8% of the mineral oil could be replaced. Assuming 95 % that would even go up to a whooping 1.6%.

Bravada from GMI
Member
4 years 5 months ago

I am not quite sure about the accuracy and relevance of your “sewage in the UK (in 2000)” number. As recently as 2007, the amount of sewage produced in England and Wales was referred to as “10 billion litres of sewage produced every day” (http://www.parliament.uk/documents/post/postpn282.pdf).

Of course there is sewage and sewage, you might have been referring to pre-treated waste, but I believe even at 10-to-1 dehydration in the treatment process, there is still more sludge available than that.

Thylmuc
Member
4 years 5 months ago
That is sewage, not dry sludge. The number on which I based my calculations was dry mass, and might well be from the same source, because I had also seen that 10 billion litre number. The energy levels were from German Wikipedia, and were for fecal matter (“fresh mass”) from swine and cattle etc. which is more concentrated than human sewage downed the drain. But even if I had a huge error factor, there are two things to observe: 1. The potential contribution is still minute 2. The calculations I had made should have been made by those that are… Read more »
Bravada from GMI
Member
4 years 5 months ago
Wait a petty moment. I do believe the solid mass content in municipal sewage is some 1-5%, the same for most industrial waste (automotive wastewater would have a higher quotient, it’s basically sludge, i.e. 10% solid mass). So, if there is 10 bln of sewage being dumped DAILY, it’s at least 100 mln solid mass to be recovered in the form of biosolids (sludge is somewhere in between, as it is a less hydrated form of sewage). 100 mln DAILY is some 30 bln annually, not 1 bln. This changes the potential contribution from insignificant to rather massive. And we… Read more »
Thylmuc
Member
4 years 5 months ago
This is my source: http://www.defra.gov.uk/publications/files/pb6655-uk-sewage-treatment-020424.pdf On page 1, it mentions 11 billion litres sewage per day. On page 9, it states: “In 1999 the UK produced 1,130,066 tonnes of sludge dry solids. This averages to about 20kg generated by each person.” This appears somewhat more plausible than the 30,000,000,000 kg/60,000,000 inhabitants = 500 kg of dry feces you would come up with. Human feces contains about 75% water, so the err “run-through” would be 2000 kg per year. However, upon further consideration, it became clear that this statistics totally disregards sludge from animal stock. But even then, how much more… Read more »
davidgmills
Member
4 years 5 months ago

See my post on thorium reactors which can be used to make methanol cheaply as a by product of the production of electricity. There is another fuel (can’t remember the name which makes a fuel that will simulate diesel.

Thylmuc
Member
4 years 5 months ago
Unfortunately, also that will not work, Or will be a daunting task. And I don’t mean the Thorium, no idea about that, but in the end, the source for carbon in a hypothesized methanol economy (Olah etc) must be from air carbon dioxide. There is presently no method to efficiently extract that carbon dioxide from the air, and according to yet another quick and dirty pocket calculator use I did yesterday, it would be neccessary to extract all the carbon dioxide from 475 million cubic _kilo_meters of air per year, to fully substitute oil and coal. (I hope there is… Read more »
davidgmills
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Right you are about dimethyl either (I could not remember the name of it). In a thorium reactor, due to the high heat (which is waste heat) hydrogen is easily split from water. Then it is easily combined with CO2 from the atmosphere. I would be interested in your take on the video I have linked, which describes this process, but perhaps not in the detail you would like.

Thylmuc
Member
4 years 5 months ago
Without doing research into this, I have the feeling that this cannot be correct. If you mix hydrogen with air and heat it or whatever, it will predominantly bind with oxygen, not carbon dioxide. Only if you remove the oxygen, this reaction appears possible. This in turn leads to the above described situation that an extraction step for the carbon dioxide is required. Must say that I read Olah’s book and found the idea quite fascinating, but he really ends with speculations on future improvements for the extraction of carbon dioxide and had to admit that he has no solution… Read more »
Bravada from GMI
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Do we have any idea how much air-bound carbon do plants process? Perhaps your number is not so astonishingly huge when compared to that. Did you attempt to replace all of coal and oil used globally per year?

davidgmills
Member
4 years 5 months ago

You could with thorium. There is enough of it to supply the world with current energy requirements for the next 1,000 years. Plus there is a lot of it on the moon.

Thylmuc
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Yep, all of it. Assuming 10 billion tons of carbon per year (molar mass 12), this means 44 billion tons of carbon dioxide (molar mass 44). At 0.039 % content in air, I arrived at the number above.

In comarison to the overall throughput, or to the volume of the atmosphere, it is a small number. But this is irrelevant. It still is a huge number for industrial processes.

jonthaa
Guest
4 years 5 months ago

35 nuclear reactors? Sure… Do yourself a favor: calculate the amount of fuel we burn for continental transportation. Then convert that to electricity. And see how much more miles you get out of that. So even if we do NOT build those reactors, but build oil based power plants instead, we still have a win.

xelav
Member
4 years 5 months ago
Danke till, nice and good written article. I totally agree. And @ Alwayssaab: you took the words right out of my mouth. Draw a line, until here and not farther. Tomorrow might be a nice day for good news! Pressconference day. By the way here in the Netherlands an Opel Ampera starts at €44500! I’d rather had a Volvo v70 t5 for €44495! Electricity as an extra in a diesel or petrol car is IMO a good alternative to reduce fuel consumption . Drove a Peugeot 3008(ugly) with diesel and electro motor on the rear axle, and I was positively… Read more »
Bob Conolty
Member
4 years 5 months ago

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!

aus715
Member
4 years 5 months ago
On one hand, this was was always going to happen. The SweGov are certainly looking to bolster their green credentials in all of this. ‘Brand’ now potentially means little and it is disheartening to say the least that this electro consortium may in reality only want the hi tech factory. On the other, it is plain that the time that has elapsed in this drawn out process, has meant that SAAB as we know it is very nearly extinct. Every week that passes in this fast paced world sees another model launched from another manufacturer and the brand awareness one… Read more »
Turbo9000
Member
4 years 5 months ago
You’re right. But all this s..t going on (and much more like this) is just the ‘writing on the wall’ of the decline of the Western Civilization as we know it. There was a golden time when we pushed the boundaries of what was possible and in a short timeframe increased our technical capabilities tremendously (like the jet engine, breaking the sound barrier, manned flights to the moon, Concorde, Space Shuttle, turbocharging for everyday use etc..). But we’re no longer the ‘boldly going’ species anymore; we’ve become inward looking and obsessed by environmental issues which wouldn’t be an issue if… Read more »
davidgmills
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Read about thorium reactors. It might change your pessimistic view of the future. It did mine.

Turbo9000
Member
4 years 5 months ago

I do like the Thorium idea, hopefully something meaningfull will come out of it.
Still, for now at least, it seems our best days are behind us..but that’s always extremely difficult to admit and the notion will always be met with violent opposition..
Although one need only to compare the ‘Opelified’ Saabs of the last few years with the magnificent 9000 Aero to see that newer or more modern is by no means always better ..

leriksso
Member
4 years 5 months ago
At first, thx for the the article Going solely on electric cars is now pure suicide for that industry. And then not mark the cars SAAB destroys everything Saab built up over the years. Saab stands for quality. We are many – We are SAAB. ….never dye Have not said that I am opposed to electric cars, but it does not work with “dinky toys” (feels like that) today, the technology need more time to caught up. Perhaps a bit conservative but I would not buy any electric car, and certainly not for those prices. Next car going to be… Read more »
nils
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Oil prices will continue to go up. Better to think ahead than be stuck in the past.

The 9-3 Electric is pretty impressive, if it could be sold for a price that is low enough to attract buyers, I would be among them. However, at an USD 45k price tag, electric cars are currently too expensive.

Thylmuc
Member
4 years 5 months ago
The bitter truth is that there is no solution. Further basic research is required. The only thing we can and should presently rule out is any further pressure on our ecosystems by still trying to get more stuff out of them. The latest news I read today is that “biodiesel” actually has a worse carbon dioxide balance than mineral oil, due in significant part to the fact that despite all promises and allegations to the contrary, more rain forrest is sacrified. Of course, not to produce biodiesel. But to produce food that is now required to be imported, since e.g.… Read more »
Trollblazer
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Electric cars make me angry…; so angry that if they turn our beloved Saab into an electric-only brand I’m seriously considering buying a Raptor…!

Rolf Hägg
Guest
4 years 5 months ago

I too will sell my Saabs if they go electric.

Quixcube
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Why? If a tarnished brand image is your big concern, sell them now.

Rolf Hägg
Guest
4 years 5 months ago
Why? Because this is a foolish venture that will only result in failure and only delay the inevitable as it stands now. Electric cars are fools gold and politician ammunition. Who in their right minds would pay 40k plus to have a tiny little car that is only capable of 50 miles or so per day? There is no place to re-charge these things and nobody wants them, especially for the price they go for. I’d love to see this sales model. Regarding the brand image, there is no brand therefore no image. Ask anyone that doesn’t know this site… Read more »
Angelo V.
Member
4 years 5 months ago

+9000000000…..

Angelo V.
Member
4 years 5 months ago

They don’t make me angry, they make me laugh. I laugh at the stupidity of it all.

DreamChaser
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Electric cars might work withiin cities and could replace absurd cars like the Smart, but it would never work for long-distance driving, over mountains, in winter etc.

Trollblazer
Member
4 years 5 months ago

For those who don’t know what Raptor is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3DPkGSOK7M
Try THAT in your puny electric vehicle…. 😉

ivo 71
Member
4 years 5 months ago
So why not combine conventional and electric car production? If one of the automotive suitors would team up with one of the electrics people then the basic Saab automotive architecture could be used to put the electric stuff in and be marketed alongside the more conventional automobile lineup. There is surely more than enough production space available on the Saab ‘campus’ to house both directions? Moreover, the electrics people would save billions on not having to develop a new platform to put the electrical tech in- and onto. Benefits of scale and synergy… Another extra benefit for the THN region… Read more »
Simply9-5
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Well ignoring the infrastructure needed, the high cost of electric cars, the loss of the Saab name, the huge issues involving the batteries, the likelihood that much of the production facilities will not need that much of a staff, therefore not helping the unemployment, the time it would take to develop these vehicles for any type of road use within the United States or whatever countries they want to market them, the overall distaste people have for electric vehicles, the horrible record nearly every company that has ventured into electric cars has gained………………………………Then it’s a great idea!!!!!

hans h
Member
4 years 5 months ago

I agree.
If not for……all of the above…..then it’s a great idea.

hilmar
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Just thought about Mr. Reinfeld selling his BMW or whatever and placing himself and his staff into EV … 😉 But perhaps only some people should buy EV to justify the big carbon dioxide emission of the governmental vehicle fleet ? Don´t know how this EV-Illusion on its own should work. Only with hybrid or developing fuel cells.

Angelo V.
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Saab as an electric car company, probably not even named Saab = Game Over
Saab purchased by a car company to produce gas powered cars = Saab Saved

Quixcube
Member
4 years 5 months ago

“Saab purchased by a car company to produce gas powered cars = Saab Saved”

Maybe too simple.

Saab purchased by a car company to produce clever, desirable cars that people will notice and take home = Saab Saved

There is more than one way to get there. Don’t rule out the competitive edge that a well executed hybrid drive train could bring in a very crowded “me too” marketplace.

hilmar
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Exactly.

Angelo V.
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Don’t rule out that pushing something on a market that doesn’t want it equates to shooting millions more dollars down a rat hole. Big waste. If they want to dabble in the boring and miserable future, fine—-we also need real cars to buy in the interim.

Peter Gilbert
Member
4 years 5 months ago
Even GM cannot give their Chevy Volts away with massive subsidies. How can we expect SAAB to compete. We just had the Fiskers Karma fiasco a couple of weeks ago with the failure during its testing with Consumer Reports. Now I read a comment how Germany wants a million electric cars. Well electricity is not free. The Germans are foolishly fazing out nuclear power and looking at wind turbines which are intermittent in generating at the best. Each turbine consumes 300 gallons of lubricating oil per year. Governments are seeking cap and tax schemes to steal more (conscience) money from… Read more »
Thylmuc
Member
4 years 5 months ago
It goes without saying that the German governmental plan will fail, since there are no electric cars that the Germans would accept, even though they tend to be a bit fanatic in regards to ecology (myself included). When converting the entire “car fleet” to electricity, and assuming that these were normal cars, not some ultra light, ultra dangerous two seaters, I reckon the electric energy consumption to increase by 30-40%. But I don’t see power generation as the main problem here. It is really amazing to see how wind and solar energy flourish in Germany. There are times when almost… Read more »
Thylmuc
Member
4 years 5 months ago

addendum: Regarding the intermittent energy production, there are actually quite a number of people who believe that electrical cars might be the saviour here, because the use of “inteliigent loading” could help mitigate that problem. The cars would then be charged when the winds blow.

Not sure if that works, but at least, it is something to think about.

ivo 71
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Thought about it. How do you move around when the winds don’t blow? Moreover, electricity is needed for other purposes than driving around, like industry, business, communications, heating… What gets precedence during windstill periods? The whole electric vehicle issue hinges on energy storage technology (read batteries) and, secondarily, the speed of recharging the batteries. An adequate solution for either just isn’t there yet and doesn’t seem to arrive any time soon. As long as that is the case, EV’s will remain a pie in the sky.

Ivo

Thylmuc
Member
4 years 5 months ago
That is what I try to communicate – in regards to all approaches. There is no solution yet. But more contretely, I can say that the proponents of this approach evidently assume that if there is no wind, it generally tends to be sunnier, so that solar power will replace the wind power. They further assume that in the greater scheme, there will always be some wind somewhere (e.g. in the EU). Quite clearly, significant over capacities of wind mills will be neccessary in the long run. Concerning storage, aside from batteries, there are storage power plants that work on… Read more »
ivo 71
Member
4 years 5 months ago
There will always be a need for a full-scale redundancy power generation system in the shape of stand-by conventional coal-, gas-, biomass- or whatever else-fired generation facilities. These reserve plants, which would need to be able to generate 100% of Germany’s power demand for emergencies, will have to be kept running indefinitely at stationary rpms since they take quite a bit of time to get started up and on line from full shutdown. And it really hardly matters on what rpms the generating turbines run, the fires will have to burn and the emissions will still be there. Not as… Read more »
Peter Gilbert
Member
4 years 5 months ago
Even GM cannot give their Chevy Volts away with massive subsidies. How can we expect SAAB to compete. We just had the Fiskers Karma fiasco a couple of weeks ago with the failure during its testing with Consumer Reports. Now I read a comment how Germany wants a million electric cars. Well electricity is not free. The Germans are foolishly fazing out nuclear power and looking at wind turbines which are intermittent in generating at the best. Each turbine consumes 300 gallons of lubricating oil per year. Governments are seeking cap and tax schemes to steal more (conscience) money from… Read more »
baas900i
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Most taxis here in Australia run on gas but it has increased in price by 80% in the last three years, government subsidies for CNG installation are nearly at an end, I think the diesel hybrid will be the near future, electric cars are fine as radio controlled models when your aged 10 otherwise it’s easier to flush the money down the dunny….

saabdog
Member
4 years 5 months ago

I’m getting bored and frustrated with this whole electric car thing. Wake me up when Saab has a proper new owner that has a clue, and not some electric wet dream. Really, people. This whole exercise is ridiculous. OK, I’m ready…now start hitting me with the insults…

GerritN
Member
4 years 5 months ago

OK, you’re a bad, baaaad dog…..and are destroying our planet…

DreamChaser
Member
4 years 5 months ago

+1 😉

Daniel B
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Is it just me or hasn´t the last few days been VERY silent….?

hans h
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Very!

I suppose it means something. A failure now would have made headlines. 🙂

leriksso
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Very silent…scary silent ….

GerritN
Member
4 years 5 months ago
As was pointed out generating the power needed to drive your car is the main issue. With fossil fuel it’s great, nature has spent all this time to convert solar energy into a compact, high energy density compound. It’s great stuff, you can carry it safely in your pocket, pour it in a simple combustion engine and off you go. Fissionable materials are another high energy density carrier that nature has provided us with. Basically when the nuclei break into smaller pieces the sum of the binding energy inside the pieces is smaller than the binding energy in the big… Read more »
DreamChaser
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Indeed pluginns will never work. But, a small gas-turbine driving electric motors could work, and above a certain speed the gas-turbine can take over and provide power directly.
turbine engines can be made to work on many different kinds of fuels…
Besides, the sound of a turbine engine fits nicely with a Saab… 😉

Edis
Member
4 years 5 months ago
Small gas turbines have really low efficiencies, so they are not a desirable option. They can be made on many different kinds of fuel in theory, in practice they are more limited. While plug in cars can solve all the problems currently associated with electric cars, they have one problem: they are far too expensive. I should also add that electric powertrains have significant powertrain losses. The main advantage with hybrids is not to run the engine at a certain speed, but to avoid low loads as engine efficiency drops with decreasing load. Since the engine of a car have… Read more »
nichell
Guest
4 years 5 months ago

Should the Swedish government force Swedes to drive electric cars? It may make sense since it’s a liberal, socialist state and this may fit in nicely with their agenda of control.It’s all about regulating and control.

No 9
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Excellent post till. I keep saying no silver bullet will solve this dilemma. Reducing our needs for energy must also be part of the equation. As China, India and Africa come on line, remaining stocks of natural resources look bleaker by the day. Go ahead motor heads, call be a tree huger if you want. It won’t change the bare knuckled truth.

davidgmills
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Thorium is that silver bullet. See my post above.

Thylmuc
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Had a look into the Th cycle. It seems that most experimental reactors (there were quite a number of them) used highly enriched 235Uranium as a neutron source. That is nuclear bomb material. I wonder if it would be politically possible to set up such reactors again. For example, would countries that are legally bound by the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and do not possess nuclear weapons right now be allowed to produce/import such Uranium?

davidgmills
Member
4 years 5 months ago
They only use Uranium 235 is the initial neutron source to get the reaction started. After that, Thorium turns into Uranium 233 and Uranium 233 is what drives the reaction after that. (can’t make bombs from uranium 233). So very little uranium 235 is used and only as start up. Likewise, other sources can be used to start the reaction such as nuclear waste which are not bomb grade. You need an initial neutron source to start the reaction but once the reaction produces uranium 233 (or a sufficient amount of it) then the reaction continues without further neutron input.… Read more »
davidgmills
Member
4 years 5 months ago

You seem pretty bright. I would be curious on your take regarding the thorium video I posted. It may also answer your questions on methanol. Sure it is a lot of CO2 to take out of the atmosphere, but with the waste heat generated from this kind of liquid salt reactor, the proponents think it is feasible.

Thylmuc
Member
4 years 5 months ago

You are right, my mind is as sharp as a razor. Or how do you call those curved yellow tropic fruits? 😉

Frankly, I can’t judge this technology. I do have that funny feeling though that after about 20 (!) Th-based experimental reactors, there must be a reason why most have been closed down.

http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/TE_1450_web.pdf

davidgmills
Member
4 years 5 months ago

They were all solid fuel except for the one at Oak Ridge. Thorium loses much of its advantage in a solid fuel configuration.

No 9
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Wow! Why have we heard so little about this? Sounds delightfully interesting. I think I will start prospecting for Thorium!

davidgmills
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Prospect for rare earths. They are worth a fortune if you can get the thorium out of them. Then you can give the thorium away because it is so ubiquitous it is virtually worthless.

xlx
Member
4 years 5 months ago
If most of us know/believe, that electric cars are not there yet for all the reasons named in the article, what leads a huge japanese consortium to think different ? Why would they put hundreds of millions of euro in a business which doesn’t bring margins early enough ? They don’t sell enough of these small strange things, neither some competitive models to Ampera/Volt/etc. Imho it is not that simple, that they want just build electric cars there. There must be a kind of plan for hybrids. Or cars which are not meant for the road (that would be a… Read more »
Thylmuc
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Maybe they base the cars on fuel cells and hydrogen tanks? There is an initiative by Mercedes to develop an infrastructure for hydrogen supply.

Bob Conolty
Member
4 years 5 months ago

I take it the odds are against us and the situation is grim…

richard
Member
4 years 5 months ago

He’s not dead, Jim.

muppen
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Today, the 2 april Saab is 75 year old.

ivo 71
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Well, would be 🙁 …

Ivo

hans h
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Saab AB is 75 years old. The parent company that is.

ivo 71
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Yep. But Saab Auto would be 65 years old this year.

Ivo

nichell
Guest
4 years 5 months ago
You know I’m perfectly happy with my ’92 Saab. I don’t have to take it to a Govt. facility to have an emissions test anymore because the State has determined that ’92 cars or older are exempted because they don’t have the equipment to test them. So that’s one way to stick it to the Government and the establishment. I drive to work with it every day and it looks like new..turns a lot of heads, because it’s becoming a rarity. I may drive it for years to come. Maybe I may buy a black ’92 Turbo. Heck with electric… Read more »
Angelo V.
Member
4 years 5 months ago

+9000

saabdog
Member
4 years 5 months ago

I’m with you Vagabond. I drive a 1999 9-5…can’t wait until its past the point of being inspected. So sick & tired of regulations out the kazoo. Live free or die trying!

richard
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Yes, damn those pesky air quality regulations that evil governments dream up to try and protect the air we all breathe and share. Life was so much better when acid rain blanketed our communities. And we all know how altruistic corporations are when it comes to self-regulating their own pollution standards, so let’s just fill ‘er up with good ol’ leaded gasoline because regulations are anti-freedom.

Angelo V.
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Exactly Richard. You live your way and let me live my way. Last thing we need is a tyrannical government to play nanny. Funny how good they are at collecting and wasting money, isn’t it?

wishihadasaab
Member
4 years 5 months ago

I dont mind an electric future for SAAB but it doesn’t solve the current financial problems. They need a tangible project to sell in the meantime. Electric cars will be the dominant car in the future. The technology is not yet there but it will be if more companies think for the future. I do think SAAb needs to stick to eco friendly petrol vehicles, at least for the time being.

3cyl
Member
4 years 5 months ago

As regards employment, is there any feel for what the timeframe would be for Mahindra to have a product in production in Sweden and how that compares to the timetable for producing an EV there?

Anders
Member
4 years 5 months ago

In short, it´s not the time for production of electric driven cars. The time is right, the materiel is not good enough, there is no doubt in my mind how it will end.(again)

Alex740
Member
4 years 5 months ago
The largest problem with electric cars for me is just a practicality issue, I live in San Francisco where most people park on the street, where do they charge their cars? Install a charger for every parking space? Doesn’t seem practical at all. Not to mention what stops drunks from running around unplugging cars at 2am if you did? Also, at this point, the range and time to charge doesn’t make electric cars at all practical for those who have only one car. I’ve read about battery swapping which seems like a great idea for solving a lot of these… Read more »
3cyl
Member
4 years 5 months ago

A discreet roof solar panel should recharge the batteries in a few weeks..

dezzer
Member
4 years 5 months ago

B& Q DIY outlet is now selling a 15 mile extension lead !!!!!

spacy
Guest
4 years 5 months ago

OK, 2 points;

1. Tramlines under the Road with contacts under the Car, Yea maybe, but the pedestrians will all be dead/electrocuted..

2.. Where will all the ‘electric’ Planes land, in between all those wind turbines..

This was mean’t to be light hearted, just in case someone takes it seriously.

.

Thylmuc
Member
4 years 5 months ago
Let’s take it seriously for a moment. Tramlines will not work in direkt contact, since as you pointed out, that would be too dangerous. There would have to be inductive charging, which however is very complicated and lossy. In order to assure safe tyre contact, these lines must be below the bitumen layer, and there must be inductive contacts below the cars that are movable (computer controlled), in order for them to follow the stretch of the lines. I think it is noteworthy that the first time I heard of the idea of tramlines, quite some years ago, was by… Read more »
saab99
Member
4 years 5 months ago

From Just-auto today:

There are some intriguing developments in Trollhattan at the moment. There’s obviously some value in the old Saab assets that are left, but it’s certainly not going to be easy for interested parties to come up with business plans that actually work. There does seem to still be some interest though. And I am reliably informed by my colleagues that the name ‘Springtime’ is not indicative of some kind of April fool.

Baver
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Noooooooo…..

hilmar
Member
4 years 5 months ago

?? Please, could you explain ? Any bad news ? I thought Springtime et al. would be interested to produce Saab.

Baver
Member
4 years 5 months ago

They represent the Asian (electric-only) consortium and while it may be short-term good news for the people of Trollhättan, it would mean the end of Saab as we know it to the outside world.

saabserb
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Spinning, spinning, spinning. The fact that anyone else keep their mouth shout doesn’t mean that the Springtime &Co are ahead of anyone. What have we heard from Mahindra? One TV Interview, just one! Nothing else! And I like that. I have never liked car salesman approach of e.g. Brightwell and now Springtime. It may happen that Springtime&Co wins this battle of SAAB. But believe me, that will not be an easy battle, and it is definitely not won yet!

It is still too early, keep calm and carry on!

hilmar
Member
4 years 5 months ago

No chance for hybrid or E85 ?

Yerrun
Member
4 years 5 months ago
Well written! three things… -In 30 years we’ll probably start with the first commercial fusion reactors and then this whole energy problem is kind of solved. -In the meanwhile, let’s develop electric cars but dont focus on this ridiculous lithium battery idea. Try super capacitors, try flywheels, try an entirely new battery concept. But not as they do now with the lithium battery cars. That will always be an evolution, not a revolution -Don’t change people who fall in love with a Turbo X for 4000€ registration taxes as some do (Read: the Belgian socialist government). It just isn’t THAT… Read more »
Angelo V.
Member
4 years 5 months ago

What a sad ending it will be, indeed, if some fools take over and build junky golf carts disguised as cars. Shoot me.

Allan B
Member
4 years 5 months ago
First, a quick aside: I think this thorium thing that davigmills has highlighted is absolutely fascinating. Surely it is a fuel of the future alongside wind, wave, solar, etc. All we need is a generation of politicians who actually want to use nuclear power to make life better for everyone, rather than to make weapons of mass destruction with electricity as merely a useful byproduct. Second, another digression: it seems to me the failure of the Volt to meet expectations is to me a failure of branding and market positioning, not of hybrid electric power. It is the equivalent to… Read more »
hilmar
Member
4 years 5 months ago

I couldn´t live with that Volvo thing. For me please a pure Swedish Saab diesel/ethanol-electric hybrid – 9X Air, BioHybrid or AeroX. It is just the design. 😉

Angelo V.
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Fine, make real cars along side golf carts. Just make real cars. If they try to go “full electric” it’s such a recipe for disaster, it’s laughable on the face of it—-more millions will go down a rat hole.

spacy
Guest
4 years 5 months ago

OT, just to take your mind to another world:

http://microcarmuseum.com/virtualtour.html

Type ‘Saab’ ito search & see what come’s up.

Enjoy

jonthaa
Guest
4 years 5 months ago
40% of all CO2 in the EU comes from buildings (houses, offices, …). By 2020, EVERY new building in the EU has to be a passive one: it should not consume more energy than it produces. For government buildings, it starts 2 years earlier. Now why would you think that the car industry will be able to escape that logic? Fosil fuel offers no long term solution to the CO2 output of our transportation system. You need alternatives, and the Oto-cycle doesn’t offer that. Electricity does, when captured in batteries. Hydrogin doesn’t, or not yet anyway, because its production is… Read more »
Kyle Merrihew
Member
4 years 5 months ago

Not a fan of this electric car talk….electric cars still have a long ways to go before they will be a practical solution for our environmental issues. I think they should be further researched and developed before they are put into production on a mass scale. I think saab was going in the right direction with their bio-power engines, but whoever buys them should not make electric cars the main focus.

Jesse Crandle
Member
4 years 5 months ago
I haven’t posted on here in a long time, but if anyone official is reading this I too would like to add my voice to the sea of people who agree electric is a poor decision. Although to be honest from a pure money standpoint I’m sure this would require lots of workers, lots of retooling, lots of EVERYTHING, all money being poured into Sweden, so unfortunately it might be how things go down. Besides what would ANY Japanese company need with Saab? As far as I know the Japanese have the most successful hybrids on the market right now,… Read more »
Angelo V.
Member
4 years 5 months ago
Thank you. My rants can be emotional because I saw Saab’s potential for many years—-saw GM squander it, saw some poor decisions made after that—-and it just irks me that people who are actually in charge can’t seem to see the forrest through the trees. I’m first and foremost, a car guy. I’ve loved cars since I was about 7 years old—-decades and decades in the past. I’ve always had a soft spot for Saab as I remember the funky 96 models driving around Harvey’s Lake Pennsylvania in the 60s and early 70s—-and I’ve always felt that with the right… Read more »
Daniel B
Member
4 years 5 months ago

This weeks pressconference will start just now.. Let´s see what happens…

Edis
Member
4 years 5 months ago
“For all those pure electrical cars it depends on where your electricity comes from. To be really emission free you’d need to get your electricity from renewable sources. I know there are still some out there who consider atomic energy as emissions free but would I like to replace 129 grams of CO2 per km by 10 grams of nuclear waste per km?” The amount of high level radioactive waste produced by a light water reactor is between 0.0000382 and 0.00491 grams per produced kWh. An electric car consumes about 0.25 kWh/km, so with an annual driving distance of 15,000… Read more »
wpDiscuz