backtop


Print 22 comment(s) - last by superstition.. on Jun 15 at 8:15 PM


Ford C-Max Hybrid

Ford Focus Electric
Ford will not bring 7-passenger C-max to U.S.

The move is on to more fuel-efficient power trains for vehicles of all sorts. New, smaller and more efficient engines aren't only coming to compact cars; they are also coming to larger full size trucks and other vehicles. Ford is one of the manufacturers at the forefront of the tech push to make all of its vehicle models more efficient.

One of the most popular and interesting of the fuel-efficient vehicles is the Ford F-150 truck with the EcoBoost V6 engine option. A very significant number of those trucks are being sold with this powertrain. The impressive thing is that while the EcoBoost is more efficient, it also has similar power output as the V8 trucks offer.

Now Ford has announced that it will up the yearly production of hybrid and electric vehicles from 35,000 yearly to 100,000 yearly. Ford will focus on the five-passenger C-Max Hybrid and the all-electric Energi. This move will make the C-Max/Energi the only vehicles in the Ford fleet that aren’t offered in gasoline engine-only versions.

Jim Farley, Ford's vice president of marketing said, "The way we're executing our electric vehicles is a little different than other companies. We're not electrifying a certain vehicle and making a science project for a few people. We're electrifying our core (models)."

The increase in hybrid and electric vehicles also includes the current hybrids Ford offers like the Fusion, Lincoln MKZ, and the Escape SUV. Ford also recently announced that it would be making an increased investment into three plants in Michigan of $135 million and added 220 jobs to help build five new electric models by 2012.

The Detroit News reports about 170 of the 220 new jobs will be in the Rawsonville factory where the batteries for the EVs will be assembled.

In addition to the new C-Max and Energi, Ford will also add the all-electric Focus to the lineup next year. At this point, however, Ford is still not offering many details on the Focus electric with respect to how far the car will be able to drive on a single charge (100 miles would be a good guess). 



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: all well and good...
By superstition on 6/11/2011 2:57:58 PM , Rating: 1
Telegraph:

"Studies have estimated that the cost of the accident at Fukushima may rise as high as $250 billion over the next 10 years.

The nuclear fuel in three of the reactors at the Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear plant has melted through the base of the pressure vessels and is pooling in the outer containment vessels, according to a report by the Japanese government.

The findings of the report, which has been given to the International Atomic Energy Agency, were revealed by the Yomiuri newspaper, which described a 'melt-through' as being 'far worse than a core meltdown" and "the worst possibility in a nuclear accident.'"


RE: all well and good...
By Solandri on 6/12/2011 3:52:22 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
"Studies have estimated that the cost of the accident at Fukushima may rise as high as $250 billion over the next 10 years.

The world produces about 2500 TWh of electricity from nuclear power per year.
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/uploadedImages/w...

Average electricity prices worldwide are about $0.15-$0.20/kWh.
http://www.eia.gov/emeu/international/elecprih.htm...

2500 TWh * [0.15 to 0.2] $/kWh = $375-$500 billion. The world gets $375-$500 billion worth of electricity per year from nuclear power. Over the last 40 years, nuclear power has generated about 52,000 TWh, or $7.8-$10.4 trillion worth of electricity. You're suggesting we should throw all that away because one of just two catastrophic nuclear accidents in 60 years might cost $250 billion?
quote:
The nuclear fuel in three of the reactors at the Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear plant has melted through the base of the pressure vessels and is pooling in the outer containment vessels, according to a report by the Japanese government.

The findings of the report, which has been given to the International Atomic Energy Agency, were revealed by the Yomiuri newspaper, which described a 'melt-through' as being 'far worse than a core meltdown" and "the worst possibility in a nuclear accident.'"

If you google my name here, on slashdot, and on the mitnse.com, you'll see I'm not one to downplay the dangers of nuclear accidents nor radioactive substances. If people are downplaying the risks, I will call them out on it (mostly seems to be happening with the danger from Cesium-137). I do, however, try to put those risks in proper perspective. Statistically, for nuclear to become as dangerous as wind (the second safest power generation technology), Fukushima would have to kill on the order of 10,000 people.

Nuclear is one of those very, very safe technologies (the safest power source man has invented, statistically), which has the occasional very rare, but very bad accident. Consigning it to the trash bin because of those rare accidents (only 2 in history thus far) would be like banning commercial air travel. It too has the best safety record in its industry and accidents are very rare, but each accident kills a lot more people than most other transportation accidents. Consequently, some people develop an irrational fear of flying.


RE: all well and good...
By BansheeX on 6/12/2011 4:20:15 PM , Rating: 2
How much money has been spent going to war to keep oil priced in dollars? That includes all the costs of war, from the equipment, to the salaries and benefits, to the overpaid contractors, to the medical care for returning wounded. Trillions.


RE: all well and good...
By kattanna on 6/13/2011 12:32:10 PM , Rating: 2
you know.. i am getting REAL tired of idiots treating what happened there as a failure. 10's of thousands of people died and entire towns were washed away by a tsunami that no one thought was possible, yet the nuclear plant survived intact for the most part.

it wasnt a failure, it was a raging success.

from the IAEA themselves..

http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/2011/japanmiss...

quote:
"Our entire team was humbled by the enormous damage inflicted by the tsunami on Japan. We are also profoundly impressed by the dedication of Japanese workers working to resolve this unprecedented nuclear accident," said team leader Mike Weightman, the United Kingdom's Chief Inspector of Nuclear Installations.


you people need to remember that this was not brought about by human or tech failure, like chernobyl. this was brought about by the 4th largest recorded earthquake in history, and a tsunami that was a 40 foot+ tall wall of water.

maybe you should go read what the IAEA actually has to say about the whole thing instead of "studies" cherry picked by a newspaper to make catchy headlines


RE: all well and good...
By superstition on 6/15/2011 8:15:27 PM , Rating: 1
Why don't you go help out the workers at the plant? Maybe if you start dying from radiation exposure you'll have less energy to waste calling people idiots.


"The whole principle [of censorship] is wrong. It's like demanding that grown men live on skim milk because the baby can't have steak." -- Robert Heinlein














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki