Interesting: Nissan chief: Hybrids make no sense

[go77306]

Nissan chief: Hybrids make no sense (http://www.cforum.net/forums/index.php?showforum=19)

[rage2]

Carlos Ghosn is a businessman. A very very smart and talented one at that. And it's true, hybrids do NOT make sense at all, both at the manufacturing level and consumer level. Costs are way too much to build, and really, even as a consumer, it costs more in the long run to operate a hybrid vs a normal gasoline model of the same vehicle.

The article shows Ghosn's business style, and why Nissan is so profitable compared to pre-Ghosn when they were close to bankrupcy.

[brandon]

Just gonna quote this so its easier to read.


Nissan chief: Hybrids make no sense


Reuters / January 30, 2005


NEW ORLEANS -- The head of Nissan Motor Co., breaking ranks with some of his leading rivals, said on Saturday that building fuel-sipping hybrid vehicles makes little sense in today's world because of their high costs.

"They make a nice story, but they're not a good business story yet because the value is lower than their costs," said Nissan Chief Executive Carlos Ghosn.

Nissan will, in fact, start manufacturing a gas-electric hybrid version of its Altima sedan for the U.S. market in 2006.

But Ghosn said the model was only intended to help Japan's second-largest automaker comply with strict fuel economy and emissions standards in states like California, not because he expects it to be a money-maker.

Nissan will license some technology for the hybrid Altima from Toyota Motor Corp., which is the world leader in hybrid production along with Honda Motor Co. Ltd.

The hybrids made by Toyota and Honda are in high demand, but production levels are still relatively small.

Toyota plans to nearly double production of its hybrid Prius car for the U.S. market this year, with production totaling some 100,000 vehicles.

Ford Motor Co. is alone among U.S. automakers in producing mass-market hybrid models; Ford recently announced plans to introduce four new models between this year and 2008.

Ghosn's comments, which are likely to draw criticism from environmental groups, came in an address to the National Automobile Dealers Association, which opened its annual convention in New Orleans on Saturday.

In his speech, he noted that only about 88,000 of the 16.9 million light vehicles sold in the United States last year were hybrids, adding that they are still considered "niche" products and something way outside the automotive mainstream.

He also poured cold water on hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, which many automakers see as the industry's next big technological breakthrough.

"The cost to build one fuel cell car is about $800,000. Do the math and you figure out that we will have to reduce the cost of that car by more than 95 percent in order to gain widespread marketplace acceptance," Ghosn said.

Ghosn, who is credited with a dramatic turnaround at Nissan, is poised to take over as chief executive at France's Renault SA in May.

His future role, simultaneously running operations at two major automakers, is thought to be an industry first.

Nissan -- owned 44 percent by Renault -- scored the biggest sales jump of any major car maker in the United States last year, with a 24 percent surge to 986,000 vehicles.

[911fever]

oh how times have changed in 5 years.
/thread revival!

[TYMSMNY]

LOL... 5 years later....

Nissan builds their Altima Hybrid. :rolleyes:

[SpeedyZ]

Originally posted by TYMSMNY
LOL... 5 years later....

Nissan builds their Altima Hybrid. :rolleyes:


Nissan will, in fact, start manufacturing a gas-electric hybrid version of its Altima sedan for the U.S. market in 2006.
But Ghosn said the model was only intended to help Japan's second-largest automaker comply with strict fuel economy and emissions standards in states like California, not because he expects it to be a money-maker.

Already been said in the article that the Altima hybrid was on it's way.

[KandabashiDevil]

Ghosn is one man ... Whose "style" has become irrelevant in the 5 years since the original article. His "business style" is a laughable joke. I'm sure the development team behind the Hummer could link an article on beyond showing how brilliant & profitable they were at one point in time also. Now those losers are shaking coffee mugs downtown for spare change.

Hybrid > Ghosn

Dinosaur mentality that refuses to acknowledge change will always fail.

[rage2]

If you dig deeper, nothing really HAS changed. It still costs more for a consumer to buy and operate a hybrid over it's lifetime vs an equivilent gas model. The difference is that some places has huge hybrid subsidies that lessen the impact, making it economical. I believe California has something like $12k worth of Federal + State tax credits on the Prius, that's why they're everywhere.

The gap in costs has lessened since 2005 though.


Originally posted by KandabashiDevil
Ghosn is one man ... Whose "style" has become irrelevant in the 5 years since the original article. His "business style" is a laughable joke. I'm sure the development team behind the Hummer could link an article on beyond showing how brilliant & profitable they were at one point in time also. Now those losers are shaking coffee mugs downtown for spare change.

Hybrid > Ghosn

Dinosaur mentality that refuses to acknowledge change will always fail.
Seriously, you should look at how well Nissan and Renault weathered and recovered from the automotive recession compared to the other companies. Irrelevant or laughable joke is definately not the words I would use to describe him.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by KandabashiDevil
Ghosn is one man ... Whose "style" has become irrelevant in the 5 years since the original article. His "business style" is a laughable joke. I'm sure the development team behind the Hummer could link an article on beyond showing how brilliant & profitable they were at one point in time also. Now those losers are shaking coffee mugs downtown for spare change.

Hybrid > Ghosn

Dinosaur mentality that refuses to acknowledge change will always fail.


You do know that Ghosn is backing his words up by releasing the 1st mas production electric car, Leaf right?

The only fault for Nissan is that they invested too much on trucks and yet to have a home run in the small car segment.

[scat19]

I just LOL when I see a hybrid. /thread

[duaner]

Electric cars make zero sense from an environmental perspective. People are too quick to jump on board because of the "zero emissions" without thinking through several other important issues.

[arian_ma]

Issues like "energy is energy and it doesn't matter if the CAR is electrical or not, the enrgy is still coming from somewhere (burning coal)"?

:banghead:

[syeve]

Hybrid cars are a "transition"...so is electric...

Nuclear cars is the way of the future

http://www.gear6.net/images/may06/dmc4.JPG

[syeve]

Originally posted by arian_ma
Issues like "energy is energy and it doesn't matter if the CAR is electrical or not, the enrgy is still coming from somewhere (burning coal)"?

:banghead:

Running full electric is MUCH more efficient than individual internal combustion engines....

According to the US Department of Energy, CO2 emissions for electricity generated from coal result in 2.05 lb (0.93 kg) of CO2 per kW·h or roughly 0.5 lb(CO2)/mi (0.14 kg(CO2)/km). CO2 emissions from electricity produced from all types of fuel using the mix of sources in the US as of 2008 results in 1.35 lb (0.61 kg) of CO2 per kW·h or 0.337 pounds of CO2 per mile (0.095 kg(CO2)/km) from an electric vehicle with a 0.250-kilowatt-hour-per-mile (0.155 kW·h/km; 0.56 MJ/km) energy consumption (typical). Gasoline used in Internal Combustion Engine automobiles produces 19.5 lbCO2/US gal (2.34 kg(CO2)/L) directly and an undetermined amount of CO2 in refining the crude oil, and transporting the gasoline to retail point of sale. With a US fleet average of 21.3 mpg-US (11.0 L/100 km; 25.6 mpg-imp) in 2008, this would indicate a CO2 production of 0.915 lb/mi (0.258 kg/km) driven. Electric powered automobiles, even using the most CO2 intensive coal produced electricity, produce half the emissions of gasoline powered automobiles


Furthermore...there is high level development of ZERO emission/waste nuclear power.

JaF-fq2Zn7I

[duaner]

Originally posted by arian_ma
Issues like "energy is energy and it doesn't matter if the CAR is electrical or not, the enrgy is still coming from somewhere (burning coal)"?

:banghead:
Part of it.


Electric powered automobiles, even using the most CO2 intensive coal produced electricity, produce half the emissions of gasoline powered automobiles
Such misleading arguments, even though they may be true, are also a part of it.


Issues such as where does the electricity come from, where coal comes from and how it is mined, how nickel is mined, what to do with batteries when they are no good, how many times during the life of a vehicle would they need to be changed out, the inherent hazards associated with batteries, etc.

There was even a TopGear video on youtube a while back where they showed over the lifetime of a Prius Hybrid and a M3, the M3 had a lower carbon footprint.

Found it:

http://www.greenfudge.org/2010/02/02/toyota-prius-more-environmentally-damaging-than-bmw-m3-according-to-top-gear/

The main problem is, when it comes to hybrid and electric vehicles, people tend to look only at the now and what is in front of them, remaining ignorant of the overall picture.

All I am really wanting to say is that they are not all they are cracked up to be and people should be a little more hesitant to jump on board. After all, if it sounds too good to be true, it usually is.

[syeve]

Like I said, they are transition technologies. Better than the status quo if you ask me. IMO nuclear with subsidized solar / photovoltaic / wind is the answer.

[97'Scort]

^ Screw wind power and solar. Geothermal district heating systems alone could cut US energy consumption by 20%. The best part? They're consistent.

[atgilchrist]

Transitioning from coal-fired power to natural gas alone would have nearly gotten the States' emissions the Kyoto Accord levels (even though they didn't ratify it).

[duaner]

Originally posted by syeve
Like I said, they are transition technologies. Better than the status quo if you ask me. IMO nuclear with subsidized solar / photovoltaic / wind is the answer.
Sure, maybe there are better ways to provide the electricity to charge the batteries but such cars would still have a larger carbon footprint than most gasoline powered cars.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all about finding alternative energy and clean powered vehicles. It's just that electric vehicles are being pushed so strongly as environmentally friendly when they are anything but.

Environmentalism and fear-mongering, that's where the money is at.

[syeve]

Originally posted by duaner

Sure, maybe there are better ways to provide the electricity to charge the batteries but such cars would still have a larger carbon footprint than most gasoline powered cars.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all about finding alternative energy and clean powered vehicles. It's just that electric vehicles are being pushed so strongly as environmentally friendly when they are anything but.

Environmentalism and fear-mongering, that's where the money is at.

The batteries are 100% recyclable.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=lithium-ion-batteries-hybrid-electric-vehicle-recycling

Their carbon footprint even under coal driven electric plants is less than half of an internal combustion.

IMO, the car is minor compared to the industries contribution to our global carbon footprint. The cattle industry has the largest footprint of any other.

http://www.encognitive.com/node/2186


Ocean shipping is also brutal, a close third is the airline industry.