Do you think car companies are holding back fuel alternative vehicles?

Answer 1

Car companies are big business and famous for stiffling innovation. In the 1950s the held back on safety glass and seat belts. They avoided disk brakes for many decades. Many people were maimed and killed as a result.

But car companies don't benefit from avoiding alternative technologies if they are cheaper. They are simply not really cost effective.

In the 1970s the US car companies had a lot of trouble from small Japanese and European cars, because that is what the customer wants.

Customers buy SUVs because that is what they want, me I have never owned a car because I think they are a stupid way to get around.

Answer 2

Driving electric wouldn't be possible in California. There's allready an electricity shortage here supposedly, where is anyone gonna plug in a car during rolling blackouts? Where does that electricity come from, coal pehaps, and is that better for the enviroment? My point is that there are problems with all the alternative fuels that need to be worked out. Thats not car company's problem they just build and sell what people will buy. After all they're car companies, not electric co or gas co. The green people who make the government make the manufacturers build alternative cars should go and figure out the answers to the problems slowing the evolution of alternative fuel if they want these cars built, do something to help rather that sit and wait and pester. So the question about car companies holding ALT fuel back; in my eyes they're the only ones doing anything for that cause!!!

Answer 3

------
Holding back may be the wrong term - it is more likely that big automakers just have little incentive to take big chances on alternative technologies.
*
Example: I will show you a car made by a very small company. This is an electric truck:
*
http://phoenixmotorcars.com/models/fleet.html
*
The Phoenix electric pickup truck - this completely gas-free vehicle, using new, advanced Altairnano batteries (based on research from MIT) - can:

-Travel up to 250 miles per charge
-Carry 5 passengers plus cargo at 95mph.
-Charges batteries in as little as TEN MINUTES.
-Has batteries that last 250,000 miles (never need replacement.)
*
This is a real car, being built for fleet customers like PG&E right now. Electric cars are very cheap to drive, since electric motors have only one moving part, and can run decades with no maintenance. The electricity to drive is only a penny or two per mile.
*
So why don't big car companies make these? Because they will make lots more money from less reliable cars that break more often, and need more regular service. From the automakers' point of view, electric vehicles would require massive restructuring of engineering personnel, factories, and dealerships, so why take the risk?
*
What can you do? You can buy an electric car. They are hard to find, but they are out there. The Phoenix above will be for sale to the general public next year. It will be expensive, but you can make it up in gas and maintenance savings. The only way these cars will get cheaper is if lots of people buy them.
*
Or, buy an old technology electric car for as little as $5000. Here's a link:
*
http://www.squidoo.com/cheap-electric-car/
*
-----

Answer 4

Yes and no. They don't want to make them because there isn't the infrastructure to support them yet (seen hydrogen at your local gas station lately?), so they will have trouble selling them. This means a lot of money being spent designing, with low returns - they stand to make a loss.

Of course, the opposite is also true. Gas companies don't want to spend the money developing the infrastructure because there aren't cars on the road that need it. It's a catch-22 situation, and will probably require legislation to force the companies to invest the capital needed to make it work.

Answer 5

Everyone seems to think hydrogen is the solution. Automotive companies promise hydrogen, but most agree it is off in the future (10 years). I've heard that Honda promises one much sooner. Industry insiders scratch their heads about that.

The fact is it is more effective (and efficient) to improve the internal combustion engine to a point that makes hydrogen energy look dirty (at least the energy used to create hydrogen).

As far as "unheard of" alternative fuel vehicles, I can't imagine that. The automotive industry is extremely competitive, and I think William Clay Ford (a virtual hippy compared to any other high level auto exec.) would bust it out to save his family fortune/name/reputation/history...

Answer: No.

Answer 6

No , I think oil companies are holding back fuel alternative vehicles.

Answer 7

I think if the gas companies would stop convincing brilliant people from selling out on their ideas, we would have had gas alternatives long before now.

Answer 8

no.. that would not make good dollars or cent$ they respond to the market... if the market wants SUVs.. thats what you get... if they want small cars that crush to the size of a coke can when they hit an insect... thats what you get...

the market sets everything... anyone that thinks different... well lets just say they are special and leave it at that

Answer 9

Why would they do that? They want to sell cars, believe me. They respond to markets.

Answer 10

Hmmmm....

Yes.