backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 46 comment(s) - last by Starcub.. on Jul 22 at 4:51 PM
Nissan wants to stop sourcing hybrid components from rival Toyota

Hybrids are in demand around the world today as many governments offer rebates and incentives to get consumers to buy cars that get better fuel economy. Most of the world's automakers are working on hybrid and electric vehicle technology.

Nissan offers a hybrid Altima in the U.S. that uses components that it sources from rival Toyota. Reuters reports that Nissan has said it will develop its own hybrid vehicle technology so it can stop sourcing components form Toyota. Nissan says that it will use its own hybrid technology in a version of its home market Serena minivan in 2011.

Nissan also said that it plans to offer its own luxury car in the Japanese market in 2010 using its hybrid technology. Reuters reports that Japanese carmakers are under pressure to offer hybrid cars in Japan despite the fact that many Japanese automakers were set on working towards full electric vehicles. The hybrid vehicle is now becoming a stepping stone on the road to full electric offerings.

Analyst Yoshihiko Tabei from Kazaka Securities said, "The plan underscores the increasingly difficult outlook for relying on electric cars as mainstay products so soon. Nissan's long-term focus will probably remain on electric cars, but it needs hybrid cars as bridge products for the next decade or so."

Reuters quotes a Nissan spokesperson saying that the company is considering various options for hybrid technology, but has not decided on plans past the luxury vehicle launching next year. Nissan has previously stated that it plans to begin offering full electric vehicles for sale in Japan and the U.S. in 2010 with global roll out in 2012.

Analysts report that Nissan moving from hybrid technology sourced from Toyota to its own technology won’t really save large sums of money for the automaker, but will help Nissan cultivate its technological development and secure a stable supply of hybrid components. Hybrid vehicles are big sellers in Japan with the Prius topping the Japanese sales charts in May.

Tabei said, "Developing on its own will help Nissan build its technology and data, which will be key to enhancing electric cars in the future. There is also some risk in keeping the supply of core components in the hands of a competitor."

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Why the sponsoring?
By Triple Omega on 7/19/2009 12:00:16 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Hybrids are in demand around the world today as many governments offer rebates and incentives to get consumers to buy cars that get better fuel economy.

I still don't understand why governments are pushing hybrids that have worse fuel economy then a lot of other petrol and diesel cars so much. It's like they blindly jump on the bandwagon and not even realize that it's not what they think it is.

Hybrid technology is nice, but until they actually get better fuel economy then their fossil fueled competitors, they shouldn't be sponsored IMHO. Let them use that money to build a hydrogen infrastructure instead. At least that is a more safe future investment then hybrids that might never be more economic or be economic when everyone is off fossil fuels already.




RE: Why the sponsoring?
By FITCamaro on 7/19/09, Rating: 0
RE: Why the sponsoring?
By Triple Omega on 7/19/2009 12:24:13 PM , Rating: 3
But if it's so evil why not sponsor hydrogen then? Those hybrids are still half-demon after all.


RE: Why the sponsoring?
By Jedi2155 on 7/19/2009 1:48:01 PM , Rating: 2
They have been sponsoring hydrogen (throwing hundreds of million into it yearly) for over a decade. Its just not ready yet.


RE: Why the sponsoring?
By jconan on 7/19/2009 2:11:21 PM , Rating: 2
it still takes quite a bit of energy to make hydrogen... hydrogen unless like gas or water is not environmentally friendly because of energy costs to produce hydrogen until it uses next to no energy to produce it, it is not eco-friendly.


RE: Why the sponsoring?
By onelittleindian on 7/19/2009 3:19:15 PM , Rating: 5
"until it uses next to no energy to produce it, it is not eco-friendly."

Don't hold your breath there Spanky. You can't produce hydrogen (or anything else in this universe) with less energy than you get out of the final product. There's a little problem called "conservation of energy".

That's why oil will remain king until we wise up and start building nuclear reactors. Oil already has the energy in it. Our 'production' is just changing the form slightly.


RE: Why the sponsoring?
By Mojo the Monkey on 7/20/2009 12:49:09 PM , Rating: 2
well.... what if we give the hydrogen cars a bunch of speed holes to make them faster?


RE: Why the sponsoring?
By Starcub on 7/22/2009 4:51:24 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
That's why oil will remain king until we wise up and start building nuclear reactors. Oil already has the energy in it.

As other DT posters have previously pointed out, oil has very little to do with energy production. Oil in fact, as an energy source, is on its way out. Hybrids and eventually full electric plug-in vehicles are the wave of the future.

As for nuclear reactors, they have their own problems, not the least of which being lifecycle cost. The future for energy production is in renewables, particularly solar and possibly wind/ocean currents as they hold the greatest promise for meeting future energy demand.


RE: Why the sponsoring?
By Oregonian2 on 7/19/2009 2:57:13 PM , Rating: 2
But all current hybrid cars ARE internal combustion engine vehicles. All of their power (other than for those modified for plug-in electric use) is from gasoline, so they are 100% gasoline internal combustion engine vehicles as well.


RE: Why the sponsoring?
By Samus on 7/19/2009 3:06:25 PM , Rating: 2
The engine spends a lot of time off, and the technology makes a lot of sense for around-town commuting, taxi cabs and heavy stop and go traffic. I live in San Diego, and even when I go up to LA, I'd say 1 in 20 vehicles is a hybrid (usually a Prius.)

Where I'm from in Chicago, I never see a hybrid, except when I'm sitting on 94 in stop and go. Then I notice them, and think "Yep..."


RE: Why the sponsoring?
By Lord 666 on 7/20/2009 8:17:34 AM , Rating: 3
And that's the problem... When will any automotive manufacturer release a hybrid diesel?

Nissan was supposed to start shipping a 2010 diesel Maxima, but its almost 2010 and no update.

if they want to make a name for themselves along with profit, pair a diesel with hybrid capabilities. VW has demonstrated a diesel/hybrid that will get 70mpg, but have not made plans on selling it. VW and Nissan (in the US) are botique shops and can do limited test runs.

There is no try, only do.


RE: Why the sponsoring?
By Spuke on 7/20/2009 1:17:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Nissan was supposed to start shipping a 2010 diesel Maxima, but its almost 2010 and no update.
There were a bunch of diesels coming but the recession killed all of that for now.


RE: Why the sponsoring?
By Lord 666 on 7/20/2009 5:52:20 PM , Rating: 3
Owning a TDI, its enabled me to save money during the economic slump. Same reasoning for purchasing CFLs; slight premium now for cost savings later.

I only use the CRV to/from mass transit for work and for going to the park with my kid and her bike. For the same ~14 gallon tank, its my choice if I want it to last 250 or 500 miles. With gas/diesel prices being almost the same and total weekly mileage around 500 per week, that's an easy cost savings of $25 per week.

At the end of the day, both vehicles do the same thing by getting us from point A to B. Regardless of the economy, the TDI makes more sense to me. I'm not the only one as more than 80% of the Jetta wagons are TDI and overall diesel sales are strong for VW.

That being said, most car manufacturers make illogical product mix decisions. We both agree they cater to the masses on options, but further delaying cars that will help meet the 2016 requirements NOW is just plain stupid.


RE: Why the sponsoring?
By Spuke on 7/20/2009 7:26:14 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
but further delaying cars that will help meet the 2016 requirements NOW is just plain stupid.
I don't think they have much of a choice. You can't sell a car that hardly anyone is in the position to buy. VW's US customers are more informed about diesel than say Honda's. Not to mention, VW's total US sales are paltry making it nearly a niche automaker. I mean, the Accord alone is only 10k units short of VW's TOTAL US sales for the month of June.


RE: Why the sponsoring?
By ChoadNamath on 7/19/2009 12:43:11 PM , Rating: 4
What hybrid vehicle gets worse fuel economy than its gasoline-powered competition? The market for super-mileage cars like the original Honda Insight is limited, so it's the hybrid Ford Escapes and Fusions that will really drive up sales and make a bigger dent in gasoline usage. Hybrids don't need to set records when it comes to fuel economy, they just need to do better than the cars they're replacing.

If someone is replacing a Toyota Corolla with a hybrid Ford Escape, then it's a problem, but it's much more likely that the hybrid Escape is replacing a regular gasoline-powered SUV.


RE: Why the sponsoring?
By quiksilvr on 7/19/2009 1:23:35 PM , Rating: 2
The real issue is that hybrids are part PETROL engines. The most ideal solution would be a hybrid DIESEL engine. And if they want a biodiesel, they should use NPHO (Non-Psychoactive Hemp Oil) as the fuel.


RE: Why the sponsoring?
By EVdriver on 7/19/09, Rating: 0
RE: Why the sponsoring?
By Solandri on 7/19/2009 6:56:57 PM , Rating: 2
All a hybrid does is allow you to use a smaller, more efficient engine to generate the same power, and recover and re-use the kinetic energy normally discarded as heat during braking. How, pray tell, do you come to the conclusion that this uses more energy?


RE: Why the sponsoring?
By onelittleindian on 7/20/2009 8:57:15 AM , Rating: 2
He didn't say it uses more energy, he said its more polluting. That's a simple fact. Unless you hang an ungodly amount of (expensive) plumbing off a diesel engine, it produces more pollution than a gas powered one. That's the reason so few diesels in the US.


RE: Why the sponsoring?
By quiksilvr on 7/21/2009 4:10:02 AM , Rating: 2
That's not the case anymore. And if its pollution you're worried about, use NPHO. Furthermore, VolksWagen has developed the clean diesel engine which causes LESS pollution with regular diesel fuel and it doesn't add much complexity to the system. I guarantee you if we just kept at it and used diesel, we would have reached this point years ago.


RE: Why the sponsoring?
By Spuke on 7/21/2009 1:28:03 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Furthermore, VolksWagen has developed the clean diesel engine which causes LESS pollution with regular diesel fuel and it doesn't add much complexity to the system.
All US diesels (cars and trucks) are "clean diesels" now but that just happened within the last year or two. And that's mostly because we went to low sulfur diesel fuel (which clean diesels require). There were some new diesel cars and pickups coming (most of the automakers were introducing diesels in the 1/2 ton trucks) but the recession killed that for now. VW is offering the only affordable diesel cars currently. If you want a diesel car other than VW, you'll have to get a BMW (only speaking about CURRENT production).


RE: Why the sponsoring?
By EVdriver on 7/19/09, Rating: 0
RE: Why the sponsoring?
By Solandri on 7/19/2009 6:52:35 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I still don't understand why governments are pushing hybrids that have worse fuel economy then a lot of other petrol and diesel cars so much. It's like they blindly jump on the bandwagon and not even realize that it's not what they think it is.

Hybrid technology is nice, but until they actually get better fuel economy then their fossil fueled competitors, they shouldn't be sponsored IMHO.

Hybrids and diesels are not mutually exclusive. The battery, electric motor, and regenerative braking technology used in hybrids is independent from ICE technology. Any ICE vehicle will get better mileage if it is hybridized. Doing so may end up costing more than the money you save from the better mileage, but it will still get better mileage.

So it makes no sense to hold hybrid technology back because optimizations to an ICE can yield bigger improvements. There is nothing (except cost) stopping you from putting both in a new car.


RE: Why the sponsoring?
By XZerg on 7/19/2009 7:30:47 PM , Rating: 2
This is a multi-phase evolution which will be eventually good for us. How?

First get the manufacturers to focus on electricity being the source of energy to move the car. Let them play with something that their manufacturing capabilities allows them to without doing a total overhaul. It also allows them to offer to the vast majority of the people - the distance between refueling.

As the manufacturers manage to master the electricity storage as well as usage, the reliance over gas will stop. Now I am not here to judge whether gas is bad or good. The plan is to get the car to be 100% dependent on electricity.

So now you have cars that you can recharge/"refuel" at your own house or any electric plug-in. Convenience. Yes we will also conveniently get shafted by electric companies and battery makers but that's just point of the life.

So what happens when you are on the go and you run out of battery? Well this will require the overhaul of "gas" stations. There needs to be a standardized battery modules that you can buy and pull out your set of modules and put in the charged ones. Depending on how the stations brand setup their policies, they could allow you to exchange empty ones for charged ones for a fee. Obviously they also might want their cut for the battery degradation too.

Overall now you have an environment in the city where you have very little smog. So does this solve the pollution problem? No.

You have just moved the pollution from the city to a remote location. The electricity generation could be then refined separately letting the sources battle it out - solar, wind, nuclear, thermal, coal, lightning, ...

This way you essentially have removed your total dependence on gas with any of the sources of energy.


RE: Why the sponsoring?
By RogueLegend on 7/19/2009 10:47:37 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I still don't understand why governments are pushing hybrids that have worse fuel economy then a lot of other petrol and diesel cars so much.


1) There are few, if any vehicles for which the hybrid equivalent gets worse gas mileage. Are there vehicles with standard ICE's that get better mileage than certain hybrids? Sure, but they're not direct equivalents. They're usually smaller and less well equipped. Let's not claim that oranges are better than apples. Manufacturer's would not be selling hybrid versions of vehicles if there were no benefit over their standard ICE equivalents.

Additionally, any car with a standard ICE still consumes gas in heavy traffic, whereas a hybrid can turn off the engine, and many hybrids can propel themselves at low to moderate speeds. My understanding, however, is that Mazda will begin to manufacture vehicles where the ICE will shut off in stopped conditions, but so far, they're the only ones.

2) Traditionally speaking, diesel has had a low penetration rate in the US, not just because of various stigmas against diesel (which, admittedly, have been all but eliminated) but also because diesel is traditionally more expensive than gasoline.

The point here is that not only do people have to be willing to purchase the vehicle (and for the most part, people are not willing to purchase them due to the aforementioned false perceptions against diesel) but they have to be willing to pay the increased cost of fueling it.

3) Diesel is a relatively tapped out technology, it is difficult to see many improvements being made over current diesel engines. Hybrid technology, however, still has a lot of development overhead; it will get better and cheaper as the technology improves. Additionally, it is possible to make diesel hybrids.

This is why governments are giving incentives for hybrids. They want to promote a technology which has definite growth overhead, and is flexible enough to enhance all current power trains including diesel, not just ICE's. At this point, it's all about how willing a manufacturer is to invest in the technology.


RE: Why the sponsoring?
By mmcdonalataocdotgov on 7/20/2009 7:22:59 AM , Rating: 2
Hybrid technology is low hanging fruit.

For example, if you make Altima a hybrid, it gets better mileage than if it were not a hybrid. So now your CAFE goes up. No sense improving the Sentra, since it already gets better mileage and hybridding won't improve it. Hybridding lowers fuel consumption for those cars that high mileage ICE and diesel won't cure. You can put a 1.3L in an Altima, but it won't go. The same with a Lexus LS600hL. It still gets better mileage than the ICE only version. Not everyone will drive a Yugo. Look at the chest-pounding Truck driving, send money to the Middle East for America posters here, for example.

Also, since going full electric would cripple an already overtaxed electric supply system, countries need time to beef up that infrastructure before they can let everyone use it. Hybrids generate their own electricity.

Also, hydrogen fuel production would cost energy right now, so that gets back to taxing the energy infrastructure. Plus spending on the fuel delivery infrastructure, and demand is not proven.

Arguably, hybrids are the only solution right now that will reduce load on energy infrastrcuture and energy consumption overall. So that is why I think they are going this way, and not rolling out a whole new energy infrastructure that while neat, would cost way too much in the short term. There is no short term money for unproven demand.


RE: Why the sponsoring?
By Spuke on 7/20/2009 1:28:50 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Look at the chest-pounding Truck driving, send money to the Middle East for America posters here, for example.
Why must these types of comments be made? This is really getting old. None of these cowardly comments would be made in person (which cracks me up) so why bother making them here?


RE: Why the sponsoring?
By Hiawa23 on 7/21/2009 9:28:18 AM , Rating: 2
I still don't understand why governments are pushing hybrids that have worse fuel economy then a lot of other petrol and diesel cars so much. It's like they blindly jump on the bandwagon and not even realize that it's not what they think it is.

Ford says the Fusion Hybrid gets 700miles to the tank, now my Honda Civic or Mitsu Lancer doesn't get that in 2 or 3 tank fillups, so I am assuming you mean, diesel vehicles. I would never want to buy a diesel vehicle, period. I do agree with you on the bandwagon thing.


Hybrid Cars
By bigdavebowler on 7/19/2009 12:53:48 PM , Rating: 2
People only buy hybrid cars to save money on gas. Some people don't really care about the environment because they do not know how damaging it was to build their hybrid cars. I think hydrogen cars are the way to go. Zero pollution is always better then some pollution.




RE: Hybrid Cars
By Jedi2155 on 7/19/2009 1:51:34 PM , Rating: 2
The study of it using more energy in its initial manufacturing is ultimately flawed, a hybrid typically will use less energy over the life of the vehicle than a larger truck/SUV.

I've done a lot of research on the hydrogen economy, and sadly it won't come in time to help.


RE: Hybrid Cars
By Solandri on 7/19/2009 7:09:11 PM , Rating: 2
The hydrogen economy would work if we really ramped up nuclear power. The renewables like wind and solar are just too sparse to collect cost-effectively for conversion to hydrogen. Hydro is already close to tapped out. Wave energy is still in the early research stages. Geothermal is currently a viable candidate in only a few select locations. The only way we currently have to generate massive amounts of electricity to generate hydrogen with little pollution is nuclear.


RE: Hybrid Cars
By Keeir on 7/19/2009 9:18:05 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The hydrogen economy


I have never really understood why we would want the "hydrogen" economy. I am not an expert on Fuel Cells, but aren't even the very best fuel cells only around 50% efficient at capturing electricity? Then we have the losses from the creation of the Hydrogen, and then from the transportation of the Hydrogen.

We already have energy transportation systems that are 90%+ efficient. We already have motors that are 90%+ efficient. And we have energy storage systems that are 90%+ efficient. Lets work at making the energy storage systems less expensive? (And use Nuclear for the power)


RE: Hybrid Cars
By drnk on 7/20/2009 4:41:04 AM , Rating: 2
It's not convenient to use nuclear powerplants to produce electricity and to use that electricity to produce hydrogen!
Let's use that electricity to power elcetric cars, it's better this way.
Available nuclear powerplant are not so pollution-free as you may think!Nuclear waste are a big problem for us and it costs a lot (I mean A LOT!!) to store them safely.Also, the price of uranium is increased several times since few years ago, though it should be still not so expensive if compared to the others costs related to a nuclear powerplant.


RE: Hybrid Cars
By EVdriver on 7/19/2009 2:19:05 PM , Rating: 2
Hydrogen cars are the real dead ends. This has been well-known for almost a decade ( e.g. http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-hyd... http://www.efcf.com/reports/E17.pdf ).
Moreover there is no such thing as "zero pollution" only some pollution, the less the better. Hydrogen cars are less efficient and more polluting than hybrids, hardly better than ICE cars, but they cost 10-100x more.


RE: Hybrid Cars
By Oregonian2 on 7/19/2009 3:03:27 PM , Rating: 2
Hydrogen cars are roughly the same as electrics, and for the same reason. Power to move the car comes from some other source, the hydrogen (or charged batteries) provides only portability.

The pollution created for both Hydrogen and Electric cars depends upon the ultimate energy source. Now it COULD be clean power from solar, wind, or river dams, or it could be coal (from not yet cleaned power plants), natural gas, or Nuclear (most likely long term) plants.


RE: Hybrid Cars
By drnk on 7/20/2009 4:23:47 AM , Rating: 2
You hit the spot!Since on Earth there is no available source where to take hydrogen "as it is", hydrogen can only be obtained chemically from oil-related sources or produced by using electrolysis.
Actually, in order to get 1kWh of energy from hydrogen, we must spend 1.3kWh to obtain that same hydrogen!!Also, we must spend some more energy to put it in a tank and a lot more if we want to liquefy it.
In my opinion, hydrogen is good only if used as a "carrier" for energy when there is no other available solution and the power source is massive enough to make that 0.3kWh and the other spent energy negligible (e.g. nuclear fusion powerplant in the future).
Oh,one more thing.Hydrogen is no problem-free as some people thinks!For example, it's very troublesome when is time to store it, since it's molecule is very small.


RE: Hybrid Cars
By FishTankX on 7/20/2009 5:20:41 AM , Rating: 2
Hydrogen could be an efficent source of energy, given the right circumstances.

The sulfur iodine cycle, which uses nuclear power plants thermal output to produce hydorgen(thus allowing it to run at 100% all the time, producing a useful byproduct when the plant is not run at full throttle during times of power demand sag) is predicted to be about 50% efficent in real world. The max efficency of a fuel cell currently is about 60-70%.

Thus you get a nuclear power plant to wheel efficency of about 30%.

This is good enough to warrant consideration IF the fuel cells ever get up to snuff.


RE: Hybrid Cars
By Oregonian2 on 7/21/2009 6:52:47 PM , Rating: 2
In your example, hydrogen isn't the "source" of the energy. The nuclear plant is. Hydrogen is just an intermediate carrier used for portability (of the energy) into the car.


RE: Hybrid Cars
By drmo on 7/20/2009 9:52:05 AM , Rating: 2
" Actually, in order to get 1kWh of energy from hydrogen, we must spend 1.3kWh to obtain that same hydrogen!!Also, we must spend some more energy to put it in a tank and a lot more if we want to liquefy it. "

I don't know all of the numbers, but this argument only makes sense if you compare it to numbers for batteries/ other storage mediums. For example, according to this site: http://evbatterymonitoring.com/WebHelp/Section_1.h...
Lead batteries are about 76% (that would already be less than 1kWh for the 1.3 kWh input in your example), and if you keep reading, you find that the efficiency is actually less, because the chargers are inefficient as well.

The fact is, any energy storage medium is going to use more energy to produce than it will return.


RE: Hybrid Cars
By drnk on 7/20/2009 2:43:58 PM , Rating: 2
I'm sorry I don't have the time now to read that site you linked, but I will read it asap.

About hydrogen, my point is that actually I don't think it's so convenient to bet so much on hydrogen.Maybe it's not an efficient technology or, more likely, we are not yet ready to use it.
It's not easy to deal with hydrogen even if we talk about storing it.Scientists are spending a lot of resources to find a suitable and efficient way to store it without wasting too much energy.Unlike LPG or methane, hydrogen cannot be stored so easily, e.g. by filling a tank or a cylinder.
Oh, even if we are not yet ready for using hydrogen at it's best, I'm not saying that we should stop the research about it!


RE: Hybrid Cars
By Oregonian2 on 7/21/2009 6:55:34 PM , Rating: 2
That's exactly my point and the point he made giving numbers. Hydrogen is but a storage medium of energy to provide portability in the car. It is NOT a "source" of energy unless cold fusion or something like that comes about.


Diesel
By SirKronan on 7/20/2009 12:29:23 PM , Rating: 2
I really wish we didn't just push hybrids. Why can't we get more clean diesels? Diesel, for now, is about the same price where I live. Diesels could really be feasible. The Prius is a viable hybrid at a decent price, but pushing the hybrid Tahoe and other hybrids that, as many of you say, get worse gas mileage than the same sized vehicle would if it was a diesel makes no sense. I'm sick of this country's anti-diesel car mentality.

Why can't vehicles that work SO STINKIN' WELL in other countries be sold here? Why does everything have to be just gas, gas, gas?




RE: Diesel
By RU482 on 7/20/2009 2:27:51 PM , Rating: 2
you say diesel, for now, is about the same price where you live. WITH LITTLE/NO passenger vehicle demand for the fuel. Shift 20% of gasoline powered cars to diesel (regardless of efficiency gains) and the price of diesel WILL go up significantly.


RE: Diesel
By drnk on 7/20/2009 2:56:47 PM , Rating: 2
In some countries, diesel is less expensive than gasoline only because there are not as many taxes on it as there are on gasoline.Also, in some countries, although diesel is cheaper than gasoline, the value of cars that runs with gasoline is increasing because they can be converted to run using LPG or methane (veeeery cheap fuel!).


RE: Diesel
By EVdriver on 7/20/2009 4:35:59 PM , Rating: 2
Diesel ICE is a declining technology. It has already reached the top and will slowly fade away. Its NOx emmission is inherently high and particulate matter (PM) emission cannot be cured properly (there is no solution for filtering out <PM10 which extremely dangerous and causes lung cancer and other health problems), and both NOx and PM treatmets are expensive.
On the other hand gas ICE can be as efficient as a diesel (e.g. Atkinson cycle, HCCI) without any significant PM pollution (gas-hybrids are even better).


RE: Diesel
By Spuke on 7/21/2009 3:37:02 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Why can't we get more clean diesels?
Diesel cars do not consistently pass US emissions regulations (primarily California's regulations....largest US car market). The jury is still out on whether or not the "clean diesels" will break that trend.


"Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment -- same piece of hardware -- paying $500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be." -- Steve Ballmer











botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki