GM to halt production of the VOLT

[kallend 1,653]

Quote

Quote

But no-one is disputing (well, except brenthutch) that there are local and temporal variations in conditions. That is why we look at long term trends and try to filter out short term fluctuations.

Indeed.

Quote

Looking at long term trends, the MASS of ice in both the Arctic and Antarctic is decreasing.

Disagreed re: Antarctic. Agreed re: Arctic.

GRACE satellite results previously posted. Go tell NASA their satellite is wrong.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 2,442]

>Why? I stated above that climate change is a factor.

Yes, but I thought you were also making the suggestion that warming was not the (or a) primary factor. If I misunderstood you, then I apologize - I do agree that many factors influence breakup of Arctic ice.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

GRACE satellite results previously posted. Go tell NASA their satellite is wrong

I'm not saying the satellite is wrong. What I will suggest is that the analysis of the data from GRACE could be improved. For example, data analyzed by GRACE satellite had by 2009 shown a rise in sea level that disagreed with global tide gauges. Furthermore, different techniques of data reduction existed, and these techniques showed differences.

Which technique is correct? Who the hell knows?

I'm not questioning what data is being produced. But how is that data being analyzed is always a question. Tell me the data analysis techniques.

did you know that there are gravity anomalies that were detected everywhere? Land. Ocean. Tropical. Equatorial. Temperate? Polar? You name it! Much is seasonal. But looking at the histories some of it is curious (i.e., Greenland was consistently gaining mass through 2005 then declining afterward. )

The GRACE is fantastic technology and it will be a few more years until it is perfected. Significantly, GRACE data in the short term (<10 years) is problematic because of issues of post-glacial rebound (even Greenland and Artarctica are feeling it - as the crust rebounds from less ice mass it gains altitude but increases the gravitational field. GRACE is also subject to interannual variations of compaction and accumulation that affect the measurements (actually, compounding the problem).

For now, the GRACE has a pretty low signal/noise ratio. Over time it should improve.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[kallend 1,653]

Quote

Quote

GRACE satellite results previously posted. Go tell NASA their satellite is wrong

I'm not saying the satellite is wrong. What I will suggest is that the analysis of the data from GRACE could be improved. For example, data analyzed by GRACE satellite had by 2009 shown a rise in sea level that disagreed with global tide gauges. Furthermore, different techniques of data reduction existed, and these techniques showed differences.

Which technique is correct? Who the hell knows?

I'm not questioning what data is being produced. But how is that data being analyzed is always a question. Tell me the data analysis techniques.

did you know that there are gravity anomalies that were detected everywhere? Land. Ocean. Tropical. Equatorial. Temperate? Polar? You name it! Much is seasonal. But looking at the histories some of it is curious (i.e., Greenland was consistently gaining mass through 2005 then declining afterward. )

The GRACE is fantastic technology and it will be a few more years until it is perfected. Significantly, GRACE data in the short term (<10 years) is problematic because of issues of post-glacial rebound (even Greenland and Artarctica are feeling it - as the crust rebounds from less ice mass it gains altitude but increases the gravitational field. GRACE is also subject to interannual variations of compaction and accumulation that affect the measurements (actually, compounding the problem).

For now, the GRACE has a pretty low signal/noise ratio. Over time it should improve.

That's like criticizing Columbus for not coming to America in a 747.

The overwhelming preponderance of evidence is in support of AGW, and some 98% of climatologists are in agreement on that.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[brenthutch 388]

But what does that have to do with the pathetic
sales releslts of the Volt?

[billvon 2,442]

>But what does that have to do with the pathetic sales releslts of the Volt?

From Motor Trend:

==========
The Chevrolet Volt may finally be getting traction in the U.S., with sales of 2831 units marking the car’s best-ever monthly sales performance. Through the first eight months of August, 13,497 Volts have been sold. The Cruze compact beat that number in August alone, with 25,975 units sold, a 19.1-percent increase over August 2011. The Sonic also performed well, with 8703 sales and 2630 Sparks sold, taking Chevrolet’s subcompact total over 10,000 units in August.

GMT900 SUVs including the Chevrolet Suburban, Chevrolet Tahoe, GMC Yukon, and GMC Yukon XL were all down at least 30 percent, and the Chevrolet Traverse crossover was down 40.2 percent. . ..
============

So what do you think explains the increase in Volt sales and the pathetic sales performance of SUV's?

[kelpdiver 2]

however, even down 30some %, the Tahoe still moved 5458 units in August, and 44,785 for the year thus far.

http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/01/chevrolet-tahoe-sales-figures.html

[DanG 1]

Quote

But what does that have to do with the pathetic
sales releslts of the Volt?

It's overpriced, doesn't perform very well, and is ugly.

How do you explain the success of the Prius?

- Dan G

[lawrocket 3]

Criticizing Columbus because he didn't come in a 747? I compre it more to criticisms of the people who analyzed the neutrinos and said they traveled faster than light. There were some things they didn't consider.

It's not criticism. It's pointing out problems that other scientists point out. It's like criticizing the people who looked at uranium to afgect the weather. "Nice idea, but let's see how this pans out. A little early to be making those promises.". You put the GRACE out there. I responded. Then you tell me not to criticize it?

And you cite the stat of 98%. I'll rererererereiterate - I believe that global warming is real and anthropogenic activities are contributory. However, I believe that the effects of global warming will be negligible. I findpredictions of catastrophe to be as based in science as. Any science fiction. "If the Antarcrtic ice cap melts..." Right. That's a legitimate threat.

>>> The overwhelming preponderance of evidence is in support of AGW

I'm not looking for preponderance of evidence when discussing multi-trillion dollar shifts in the economy. Give me "clear and convincing" at a minimum. But yet, I still believe in AGW

>>> 98% of climatologists are in agreement on that.

I've never been a bandwagoner.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[brenthutch 388]

Quote

Quote

But what does that have to do with the pathetic
sales releslts of the Volt?

It's overpriced, doesn't perform very well, and is ugly.

How do you explain the success of the Prius?

Uh, it is a GASOLINE powered car, no expensive, heavy, costly, battery. BTW the Prius doesn't even crack the top 15 selling vehicles in the US, hardly a resounding success. Compared to a Volt, yes. Compared to an F-150, hardly.

[brenthutch 388]

Quote

Quote

But what does that have to do with the pathetic
sales releslts of the Volt?

It's overpriced, doesn't perform very well, and is ugly.

How do you explain the success of the Prius?

The rappers like them?
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/05/26/casual-mafia-relishes-in-my-prius-rap-video-so-do-we/

[DanG 1]

Yeah, the Prius is doing really poorly:

Quote

In the U.S., typically Toyota’s top market for Prius, sales jumped 42 percent in the first quarter, and 56 percent through April to a record 86,027. U.S. sales of the model since its 2000 introduction, including the new variations, total 1.18 million vehicles, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Global sales increased 125 percent.

From http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-29/toyota-prius-escapes-niche-to-surge-into-global-top-three.html

I find it amusing that you want for alternative technologies to fail so badly that you'll delude yourself into thinking a successful car like the Prius is actually a failure.

And yes, the F-150 sells better. It's not in competition with the Prius. The F-150 sells better than anything, does that mean that all other cars are failures?

- Dan G

[normiss 633]

GM not looking good

They are still failing to perform in the industry.

[billvon 2,442]

>Uh, it is a GASOLINE powered car . . . .

It seems like only yesterday that the right wingers were predicting that the Prius would never sell, that the idiots who bought it would have to replace a $12,000 battery after a few years, that everyone who bought one was smug and pompous, that they won't ever save anyone any money, that Hummers would be more environmentally friendly.

Now after millions of hybrids have been sold they're claiming "well, they're like normal gasoline cars, the VOLT is the one that's all screwed up." In five years I predict they will be saying "well of course the Volt is selling - it's a GASOLINE powered car. It's the Model S that's all screwed up."

And on and on. I predict that technology will continue to advance despite the people who mock such advances.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Or...business as usual with business...ignore the targets until the due date and then claim they are a financial hardship in order to delay them again.

Or business is business and the Volt was forced onto the public and the public didn't want it. Since the public didn't want it, it didn't sell. Only an idiot would try to continue to sell a product the public does not want.

[billvon 2,442]

>They are still failing to perform in the industry.

Per the article, they are still performing pretty well - they have $33 billion in the bank and are only $5 billion in debt, and they're building good cars. The problem is that Ford and Chrysler (and Toyota and Honda) are doing just a bit better. Coming out with new cars a little sooner, having slightly better feature lists etc.

[stayhigh 2]

If volt's MSRP was at 30000. It might have done so much better.

Right now it is at 40000. People who can afford 40000 car aren't looking for gas saving or a shitty car.

Interior sucks, there are no space for cargo. It is practicaly Chevy cruze that has electric motor, and chevy cruze starts at 16k. I much rather wanna buy 15k worth of 86 octane gasoline.

Bernie Sanders for President 2016

[DanG 1]

Quote

If volt's MSRP was at 30000. It might have done so much better.

Right now it is at 40000. People who can afford 40000 car aren't looking for gas saving or a shitty car.

Interior sucks, there are no space for cargo. It is practicaly Chevy cruze that has electric motor, and chevy cruze starts at 16k. I much rather wanna buy 15k worth of 86 octane gasoline.

Exactly. It's not the concept of the Volt that's the problem. It's the shitty execution.

- Dan G

[brenthutch 388]

Quote

Yeah, the Prius is doing really poorly:

Quote

In the U.S., typically Toyota’s top market for Prius, sales jumped 42 percent in the first quarter, and 56 percent through April to a record 86,027. U.S. sales of the model since its 2000 introduction, including the new variations, total 1.18 million vehicles, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Global sales increased 125 percent.

From http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-29/toyota-prius-escapes-niche-to-surge-into-global-top-three.html

I find it amusing that you want for alternative technologies to fail so badly that you'll delude yourself into thinking a successful car like the Prius is actually a failure.

And yes, the F-150 sells better. It's not in competition with the Prius. The F-150 sells better than anything, does that mean that all other cars are failures?

Please point out where I claimed the Prius is a failure. I am all for alternative technologies, if they work in the marketplace. The Prius does, the Volt does not.

[DanG 1]

You didn't use the word 'failure', you just said:

Quote

BTW the Prius doesn't even crack the top 15 selling vehicles in the US, hardly a resounding success.

Quote

I am all for alternative technologies, if they work in the marketplace. The Prius does, the Volt does not.

So, you're now in support of the Prius. Aren't you the one who posted the old 'Hummer is better than the Prius' thread? How many Hummers do you see driving around these days?

- Dan G

[billvon 2,442]

>So, you're now in support of the Prius.

Give him a few years, he'll be supporting PHEV's over pure electrics.

[brenthutch 388]

I don’t support either.
Just pointing out that the Chevy Volt is not selling well enough to stay in steady production. And that, big, heavy, gas guzzling, global warming, planet destroying, polar bear killing, trucks, SUVs and full sized sedans are.

[normiss 633]

Depends on where you look I suppose.

[DanG 1]

Quote

And that, big, heavy, gas guzzling, global warming, planet destroying, polar bear killing, trucks, SUVs and full sized sedans are.

Cigarettes still sell pretty well, too. People don't always make the best choices. Putting the climate change aspect to the side, I'd bet that most people who buy a large truck or SUV don't really need one. The household budget impact of an F-150 is probably twice that of a Prius, depending on driving habits. It always boggles my mind when I see people driving giant trucks that have clearly never left the road, and probably never had anything bigger than a suitcase in the bed. These are the same people who slow down to 2mph going over speed bumps in their vehicle designed for the Baja 500.

- Dan G

[kawisixer01 0]

Personally I don't mind the looks of the thing. I have to say I'm very impressed when I see testaments from owners who claim to have driven thousands and thousands of miles without fueling up. I also love the fact that you are not tied to an electrical plug if you need to travel 1000 miles. That will be the largest hurdle for any alternative fuels vehicle. I am however not excited about the price. I am in the market for a car and would seriously consider the volt if not for the 40k+ price tag. I can buy a nicely loaded cadillac CTS for that. I think Chevy priced it high in order to try to twist the govt's arm into giving away huge tax funded incentives.