Finally, as The Washington Times notes, “There is an upside in that electric cars might give automobile companies cover to continue to make gas guzzlers. Under the latest federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy requirement, car makers have to produce vehicle fleets that average at least 42 mpg by 2016. Companies with an average below that will have to pay a tax to the government. In order to avoid that tax, they will be willing to sell cars listed as having a high mpg at a loss. Each Volt sold will let GM sell nine cars that get 21 mpg without having to face the tax.” How convenient. But, the Times concludes, “If we can still have our Corvettes and Mustangs, the government can pretend the Leaf gets 1,000 mpg.”

Liberals think they’re fooling Mother Nature.

Good discussion.

As much as some people would love to feel good about the environment, Newton’s Laws of Motion comes into effect, “To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.”

John Mackey wrote an op’ed in the WSJ that drove these lefties nuts. I still wonder why organic is so expensive. This organic approach to environmentally correct cars fails to take in the long term problem.

Point is, has anyone considered the next “Cash for Clunkers” loony proposal for theses EV cars? What do you do with the batteries when they’re done?

I neglected to add you guys to my blog roll when my old blog died. Please forgive me.

Well, so much for my rants,
Kini

Anyway, Jeremy Clarkson did a test drive of the Tesla Roadster, complete with flame outs, and the battery draining at 150 miles or so, about half of what they claim it’s good for.

I once helped push-start a GI deuce and a half truck; looks like that was easier than pushing the Tesla to where they could plug the thing in to recharge.

And, as Jeremy asked the commie mayor of London in an interview,”Where does the electricity come from?”

In England, from a nuclear reactor.

In America, from a coal-burning plant.

Ooopsy, sorry … I mentioned it.