Group Plug

News & Analysis
In the News Gristmill Blog Muckraker Features

Columns
Ask Umbra Victual Reality Weekly Recipes The Bottom Line From A to Green The Grist List

Support nonprofit, independent environmental journalism.
Donate to Grist.

ADVERTISING POLICY

[Advanced]

Tools: print | email | write to the editor | subscribe | RSS

Big Three automakers get plug-in funding from feds

Posted at 1:37 PM on 13 Jun 2008

The U.S. Big Three automakers will get $30 million over three years for plug-in hybrid R&D, the Department of Energy announced Thursday. While less than automakers wanted -- last year they pushed for $500 million -- each welcomed some funding for various aspects of plug-in research. Chrysler plans to build a test fleet of 80 plug-ins, including 10 adapted Dodge Durangos and Chrysler Aspens; General Motors will also build a fleet, as well as focusing funds on enhancing engine innards; and Ford will work on a project "to identify a pathway that accelerates mass production of plug-in hybrid vehicles." DOE wants cost-competitive plug-ins ready for wide use by 2016; General Motors has said it'll have plug-ins available by 2010, but warns the cost will likely be high until a cheaper battery is developed.

sources: The Detroit News, Detroit Free Press, MotorTrend

ADVERTISING POLICY

< Previous | Next >

Comments: (4 comments)

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have a Gristmill account, log in below. If you don't have a Gristmill account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

What would be really neato...

is if oil profits were taxed--say, a paltry .001%--and reinvested in plug-in technology. And it would at least double this ridiculous amount. Probably piss a few oil execs off too.

by guade00 at 7:47 AM on 15 Jun 2008

corporate welfare

these guys don't deserve any government money.

by earlysnows at 5:21 PM on 16 Jun 2008

Taxes are never the answer...

We live in a capitalist society--there is nothing wrong with a company making money, that's what they are supposed to do! Taxing the oil companies would just ripple down. Less profits means lower dividends for shareholders, less money for people saving, or already in retirement. Not just "the rich" own stock in these companies. If you are invested in a mutual fund, IRA, 401K, or other investment vehicle the chances are pretty high that some of your money is invested in oil companies--you would be taxing yourself. Speaking for myself, my taxes are already high enough.

A better idea would be a grant program to support start-up businesses in this area. That would help out small businesses, which drive our economy. It would also most likely create new jobs--expanding our economy and naturally increasing the tax base, these funds (taxes from new jobs) could then be used to pay for the grants.

We could also form partnerships with other countries--similar to NAFTA and CAFTA, except the primary goal would be to identify and develop feasible alternative energy solutions jointly. To my knowledge this doesn't exist today. Setting guidelines and "targets" doesn't solve the problem. Sharing research and development experience (and costs) would help.

Interested in Online Home Business? Get free tips and resources here : http://www.happyonlineworker.com

by ajazzfan at 4:40 PM on 17 Jun 2008
[ Parent ]

Consider this

One-and-a-half minutes in Iraq costs $30 million dollars.
http://greyfalcon.net/iraqvsenergy.png

And thats in addition separate from the $14 billion dollars in annual direct subsidies and tax breaks we give the oil industry.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/18/washington/18cnd-royalt ...

If you are really against Corporate Welfare, then atleast call for it on all sides. Otherwise you are just using that position as a excuse.

Increasing Mileage, far and away, is the best thing we can do to reduce emissions, and from that reduce our oil consumption.
http://greyfalcon.net/oilvsethanol.png

Electricity only costs $0.70 a gallon equivalent, and we got plenty of it.
http://greyfalcon.net/plugins7

Then again, I also can't understand why some people believe that paying taxes with high interest foreign loans, is better than paying taxes directly.

It costs more money! And it devalues the dollars like crazy!

And yet because it's more complex, and dogmatically supported by the likes of Reagan, Bush, Cheney, that it's perceived as a "good" thing.

It's horrible.

http://greyfalcon.net/doonsbury.png
http://greyfalcon.net/debt2.png
http://greyfalcon.net/canadadollar.png
http://www.hightowerlowdown.org/node/1603

-David Ahlport

by GreyFlcn at 7:43 PM on 17 Jun 2008

The comments of Grist users reflect the opinions of those individuals only, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of Grist, its staff, its board members, their psychotherapists, or their aestheticians. Got it?