the coolest new car on the planet and its green!

[Greg Cuetara]

The question in my mind right now is are we shooting ourselves in the foot with the 'EPA' standands. I used to live in Colorado and in one season they added ethanol to the gas to reduce emmisions but I also saw a 20% drop in fuel economy so I saved 20% of emmissions / gallon but used 20% more gas so in the end it was a wash. I don't know much about cars but I know years ago cars got better economy because they were allowed to breath more but now with our 'standards' they can't breath and therefore less economy. There has to be a happy medium between emissions and fuel economy but if you only concentrate on the emissions you will lose half the story. (ie like the car above you have to look at the entire production costs and how much it takes to make the car green, i find it funny that most people think their plug in hybrid is more green but in fact if you have to burn coal to create elecricity to charge up your hybrid you are no more green than anyone else, now if you have solar that you are using to charge the car that is another story)

i heard of a ford over in europe that can get 40-50mpg but cant' be sold in the states....also what about the diesels in europe that are getting very high mpg with no hybrid action....can we look at the whole picture rather than a piece of the pie to make a decision.

[John Coloccia]

I'm guess I just can't get excited about a $100,000 "green" sports car that will likely be used to drive back and forth between the private jet and the mansion.

[Zach England]

Can I get the tires rotated at my local sewing shop?

[Greg Peterson]

The question in my mind right now is are we shooting ourselves in the foot with the 'EPA' standands.

China is starting to realize the false economy of lowered or no environmental restrictions. Between polluted ground waters, toxic air and dead rivers, the capital and human cost of allowing industry and capitalism to determine the standards is coming home to roost on the people that have to live in that environment.

Historically speaking, industrial capitalist have a particularly careless and short sighted view of environmental protections. The timber industry in Oregon is a fraction of what it was thirty or forty years ago. Left to their own interests, there would be practically nothing left today and the Oregon commercial fishing industry would be all but extinct by now. Logging practices have a direct relationship with Salmon runs as Salmon spawn in many mountain creeks where logging is desirable.

We had thousands of shelves in our warehouse that were clear vertical grain fir. And the grain was tight. Fifty years ago these shelves were as common as they were inexpensive. There's still old growth fir today, but not if commercial logging had had their way. Left to their own agenda, even the redwoods of California would be gone.

Superfund sights are further evidence that industry is a poor steward of the commons. Clean air and water are not something that can be regulated by on a monetary scale, they are a quite simply a fundamental requirement for everyone.

[Heather Thompson]

Ferrari GTO 250... trumps them all...in mine eyes

There are issues that make green cars less than green BUT the key is they are needed for the transition. They will spark innovation which can be channeled to be more and more green. One has to consider the big/long term picture. I am a born and bred petrol-head and there is no sound on earth like a gasoline I/C engine but electric will probably be the future of cars and that is just fine by me.

Ding Ding Ding, we have a winner here!!!! I to am a born and bred petrol-head, actually my winter project is rebuilding a 1975 Yamaha RD350B two stroke into a "Smokin" canyon carver, definitely not the greenest bike on the street. I saw this thread last year and bit my tongue, so many people look for the problems with change as opposed to looking for the solutions, we can not do this because of cost, production cost in energy out weighs claims of less pollutants over service life, etc etc etc. A few years back I became aware of a man by the name of Shai Agassi, he was a software guy from California who was attending a conference where the question was posed "How do you make the world a better place by 2020", it was meant to be a conversation starter but he took it to heart. Mr Agassi started a company called "Better Place", it is a dynamic approach to zero-emission vehicles powered by electricity from renewable sources which uses battery switch stations to allow for long distanc travel. The EV owner does not own the battery, kind of like taking an empty propane tank and swapping for a fresh one at the local store, this basically deflates the arguement of who is going to pony up when the battery gives up the ship. This is a link to the "Better Place" website, lots of good stuff here if you take the time to explore it. http://www.betterplace.com/the-compa...id/shai-agassi

Sawmill Creek is a group of folks that come together with shared interests, many questions are asked and solutions suggested, I do not ever recall a post that said this is not working for me so it can not be done. I have seen many comments like, I would have never thought of that, or thats a great idea and I added this to make it work a little better. Thinking constructively as opposed to destructively will make this a "Better Place".

[Kevin Gregoire]

i didnt make this post to talk about hybrids, i made it to show off one of the coolest looking cars i have ever seen.
it has to be one of the best looking 4-door cars ever to roll off a production line!
but it is cool it can go between fuel and electric, but if i had the money i would go with either a monster turbo motor
for it or a hi-perf electric but not both.

[Jerry Thompson]

That car is not green it burns hydrocarbons for the most part. Where doew the electric charge come from? Most likely a coal burner.

[Greg Peterson]

Kevin, I agree this car is a beauty. Art, however, is in the eye of the beholder. Aston Martins resonate for me, as do Ferrari's. And I'm not even a car buff. But beauty can not be denied.

As for green, I look forward to the day I don't have to budget for gasoline. My commute, as well an overwhelming number of commuters, would be more than adequately served by an electric vehicle.

Someone mentioned diesel efficiency in Europe. Diesel efficiency excels on highways. City driving, or congested commuting driving patterns, reduces diesel efficiency.

One thing that would be an immense aid to fuel economy in Portland would be synchronization of the traffic lights. It is absolutely maddening to travel anywhere in this city. You are constantly accelerating and stopping simply because the traffic lights are so poorly timed. Certainly the technology exists to control traffic with an eye towards efficiency.

[Jason Roehl]

I'm not against using alternate energy source, but the problem is that too many folks don't even remotely understand the chemistry and think that just throwing dollars at the research will overcome the hurdles. The reality is that many of the perceived hurdles are laws-of-nature-roadblocks that cannot be overcome. Take hydrogen-powered vehicles, for instance. Hydrogen does not exist in a free state--in nature it is always bound to one or more other atoms. Breaking it off of those other atoms always takes as much energy (or more) than it release when it is burned in an engine. Immutable fact--hydrogen is a less than 100% efficient means of transferring energy.

I don't think electric vehicles are "it", either--batteries will pretty much always be heavy, because for a battery to be useful in moving itself and a vehicle built around it, it needs to have a high charge density. That means large, heavy atoms that can pick up multiple electrons (like lead). High heat and current flow cause batteries to lose their internal structure. They might get a little better than they are now, but the electric vehicles on the market today have roughly the same performance (mediocre at best) as the EV1 from 15 years ago.

Wind and solar are "piddle power". You could blanket this country with solar panels and probably still wouldn't meet our current (pun--ha!) consumption. Ditto for wind turbines--which are bu'gly (yes, that's a contraction), IMO. There are several hundred of the eyesores 10 miles NW of me. Never mind that I pay about $0.10/KWh for electricity, while the average wind turbine in the U.S. costs about $25/KWh to install and operate over its lifetime. That $25 could feed quite a few people or warm quite a few senior's homes in the winter. All told the "renewable" sources of electricity total just a few percent (about 5%, I think) of our electric grid. The rest is coal, natural gas and nuclear. How would you do cutting your electric usage by 95% to eliminate the use of those "non-green" sources? I'm not interested in going back to the dark ages...

Don't get me wrong, I'm not against research into new technologies, but let's keep the big picture of theoretical limitations in mind when looking at these things so we're not throwing money at companies to produce "stepping stone" products that are a step towards something that can't work. There are many companies that have no qualms producing an item at a loss if a grant of some sort puts that balance sheet in the black. In other words, environmental sustainability must also include economic sustainability.

[Greg Peterson]

I don't think people are denying the technical hurdles. A couple of solar panels feeding a charging center at home and most folks would be largely done with gasoline. At even $3/gallon, the RIO would be relatively short.

In 2010 alone, China handed out $30 billion in low interest loans to the top five solar panel manufacturers. China clearly intends to own the solar market.

Germany has set up a distributed solar array wherein the government subsidizes the installation of solar panels on residential housing. The energy gathered is dumped onto the grid for all to use. Apparently this is less expensive than building another power generating plant (coal or nuclear). Imagine not having to pay an electric bill while also providing your commuting vehicle with the energy it requires.

Oil contains the greatest BTU potential of all energy sources. But it no longer need be the single, dominant energy source in the world. The drawbacks to oil are getting too messy, expensive and dangerous. We're pumping more oil than we have in eight years, one of our biggest exports in 2011 was gasoline and while our oil consumption is down the cost of gasoline is rising.

A barrel of oil, whether it comes out of Iran or Alaska, is sold on the international market. The US simply does not have enough oil to lower the cost. We are not an oil rich continent, at least compared to others.

I see nothing wrong with a sleek, cool looking green sports car raising awareness of going green. It doesn't have to be painful. Looks like it can even be pretty fun. If you have the bucks for now.

[Jason Roehl]

A barrel of oil, whether it comes out of Iran or Alaska, is sold on the international market. The US simply does not have enough oil to lower the cost. We are not an oil rich continent, at least compared to others.

That's not how the oil market works. There's a bunch of speculation driving the price up on futures contracts, but the price of oil you see on the nightly news is the spot price. Most oil companies drill, ship and run crude through their own refineries without it ever hitting the market. Much of this oil price nonsense could be fixed if the margins on speculation were increased to get more of the gamblers out of the commodities markets.

In addition, supply and demand curves are not linear. It doesn't take a doubling of supply to halve the price. Just a small increase in production can cause the price to plummet. The reality is that our distributions of goods and many services in the U.S. depends on oil. If fuel prices keep marching north like they are now, our economy will end up in round 2 of the recession in pretty short order.

[Greg Peterson]

Much of this oil price nonsense could be fixed if the margins on speculation were increased to get more of the gamblers out of the commodities markets.

Some would argue this is the free market at work. There would be much howling and gnashing of teeth if any attempt were made to reel in the speculators.

[Kevin W Johnson]

China is starting to realize the false economy of lowered or no environmental restrictions. Between polluted ground waters, toxic air and dead rivers, the capital and human cost of allowing industry and capitalism to determine the standards is coming home to roost on the people that have to live in that environment.

Historically speaking, industrial capitalist have a particularly careless and short sighted view of environmental protections. The timber industry in Oregon is a fraction of what it was thirty or forty years ago. Left to their own interests, there would be practically nothing left today and the Oregon commercial fishing industry would be all but extinct by now. Logging practices have a direct relationship with Salmon runs as Salmon spawn in many mountain creeks where logging is desirable.

We had thousands of shelves in our warehouse that were clear vertical grain fir. And the grain was tight. Fifty years ago these shelves were as common as they were inexpensive. There's still old growth fir today, but not if commercial logging had had their way. Left to their own agenda, even the redwoods of California would be gone.

Superfund sights are further evidence that industry is a poor steward of the commons. Clean air and water are not something that can be regulated by on a monetary scale, they are a quite simply a fundamental requirement for everyone.

You know, criticizing the EPA doesn't mean one thinks we should eliminate it. He is simply suggesting that we have a sensible balance as far as the EPA is concerned. Rather than the knee-jerk, burdensome regulations enacted without sound evidence, (CO2) well before the technology exists to enact those regulations with minimal impact to people's jobs and livelihood.

He also addressed how other countries have high-MPG vehicles that aren't allowed for sale here in the US, but you ignored that. There's certainly no reason why those vehicles can't be sold here in the states, even if they don't meet some "safety" standrards, there are segments in which they could be used, lower speed travel in large cities, for instance. I'd suggest that we also need to review the standards in which they are deemed "insufficient", as I can't imagine that countries in the EU allow unsafe cars, they do ban tables saws with arbors long enough for dado sets after all.

[Glenn Vaughn]

I have a 2008 Pontiac Solstice GXP - probably the same engine - 2.0 liter Ecotec. I have driven it to both coasts and averaged over 35 MPG on the trips. The car cost 1/3 of theFisker and is probably cheaper to maintain. The performance is better than that listed for the Fisker as well.

[John Coloccia]

It's even greener than anyone thought, unless you include the emissions from the flatbed.

http://autos.yahoo.com/news/bad-karm...eaks-down.html