Republican Party, Teabag Party and the Libertarian Party absolutely SUCK!

[me]

AGAIN..... that isn't the point!

I ask you again ... was it, or was it not a deceptive post to state that the Obama administration loaned millions to Fisker only to have them outsource manufacturing to Finland?

Simple question, really.

No it was not deceptive to post that because that is exactly what happened.  80 to 120 jobs here...wow that should set the economy right real quick.  It was pure speculation on a car that very few people can afford and no one may even buy it.  That means the company may not even get out of the gate, the loan won't get paid back, and millions of our money will again be wasted with no jobs created or very few temporary ones at most. What happened to all those "shovel ready jobs" that were supposed to be getting funded anyway?  You know, the ones that were to put people here to work immediately. 

Answer HH's question.

that's if it isn't a bust like the Chevy Volt........only selling less than 4000.

Troll, why is it you are okay for SOME money to going to "foreign auto's"?  I thought you was true blue Ameican? I guess since it was Obama and the democrats that made this deal it is OKAY? right?

[me]

Update: Fisker Karma Electric Car Gets Worse Mileage Than an SUV




The Fisker Karma electric car, developed mainly with your tax money so that a bunch of rich VC's wouldn't have to risk any real money, has rolled out with an nominal EPA MPGe of 52 in all electric mode (we will ignore the gasoline engine for this analysis).

Not bad?  Unfortunately, it's a sham.  This figure is calculated using the grossly flawed EPA process that substantially underestimates the amount of fossil fuels required to power the electric car, as I showed in great depth in an earlier Forbes.com article.  In short, the EPA methodology leaves out, among other things, the conversion efficiency in generating the electricity from fossil fuels in the first place [by assuming perfect conversion of the potential energy in the fuel to electricity, the EPA is actually breaking the 2nd law of thermodynamics].

In the Clinton administration, the Department of Energy (DOE) created a far superior well to wheels MPGe metric that honestly compares the typical fossil fuel use of an electric vs. gasoline car, using real-world power plant efficiencies and fuel mixes to figure out how much fuel is used to produce the electricity that goes into the electric car.

As I calculated in my earlier Forbes article, one needs to multiply the EPA MPGe by .365 to get a number that truly compares fossil fuel use of an electric car with a traditional gasoline engine car on an apples to apples basis.  In the case of the Fisker Karma, we get a true MPGe of 19.  This makes it worse than even the city rating of a Ford Explorer SUV.

Congrats to the Fisker Karma, which now joins corn ethanol in the ranks of heavily subsidized supposedly green technologies that are actually worse for the environment than current solutions.

Postscript:  I will say, though, that the Fisker Karma does serve a social purpose — Hollywood celebrities and the ultra rich, who want to display their green credentials, no longer have to be stuck with a little econobox.   They can now enjoy a little leg room and luxury.

Updates: Just to clarify, given some email I have gotten.   Most other publications have focused on the 20 mpg the EPA gives the Karma on its backup gasoline engine (example), but my focus is on just how bad the car is even in all electric mode.    The calculation in the above article only applies to the car running on electric, and the reduction in MPGe I discuss is from applying the more comprehensive DOE methodology for getting an MPG equivalent, not from some sort of averaging with gasoline mode.  Again, see this article if you don't understand the issue with the EPA methodology.

Press responses from Fisker Automotive highlight the problem here:  electric vehicle makers want to pretend that the electricity to charge the car comes from magic sparkle ponies sprinkling pixie dust rather than burning fossil fuels. Take this quote, for example:

    a Karma driver with a 40-mile commute who starts each day with a full battery charge will only need to visit the gas station about every 1,000 miles and would use just 9 gallons of gasoline per month.

This is true as far as it goes, but glosses over the fact that someone is still pouring fossil fuels into a tank somewhere to make that electricity.  This seems more a car to hide the fact that fossil fuels are being burned than one designed to actually reduce fossil fuel use.  Given the marketing pitch here that relies on the unseen vs. the seen, maybe we should rename it the Fisker Bastiat.

Update #2: I suppose it is too late for this plea, commenters who wish to hypothesize on methodological flaws are highly encouraged to read the original linked post explaining the math.  For example, a number of folks have suggested I missed the fact that refining takes substantial energy as well.  In fact, the DOE methodology used doesn't just penalize electric cars for combustion inefficiencies in the power plant, it also penalizes gasoline cars for the energy in gasoline refining and transportation.

Update #3: Here is a special bonus, Ray Lane, Chairman of Fisker Automotive, did an interview in 2009 praising the Obama Administration as the first time he has seen government successfully making private investments.  His one example:  Solyndra!

http://www.forbes.com/sites/warrenmeyer/2011/10/20/update-fisker-karma-electric-car-gets-worse-mileage-than-an-suv/

[The Troll]

     They use electricity.  You ever hear of solar, wind power made electricity.  These cars are for now and the future. 

  You don't like them, because you think they were sponsored by Obama.  What a fool.

[me]

     They use electricity.  You ever hear of solar, wind power made electricity.  These cars are for now and the future. 

  You don't like them, because you think they were sponsored by Obama.  What a fool.

And just how much of that is available?  Also, as previously stated by HH, how many of those are they gonna sell at that price and to who?  It is pure speculation because there has only been one made at this point.  Wouldn't it have been better to put the money in something that was already proven and kept it here in the US? 

[Bo D]

No it was not deceptive to post that because that is exactly what happened.  80 to 120 jobs here...wow that should set the economy right real quick.  It was pure speculation on a car that very few people can afford and no one may even buy it.  That means the company may not even get out of the gate, the loan won't get paid back, and millions of our money will again be wasted with no jobs created or very few temporary ones at most. What happened to all those "shovel ready jobs" that were supposed to be getting funded anyway?  You know, the ones that were to put people here to work immediately. 

Answer HH's question.

Since when is Delaware considered a foreign country? Didn't you post that the manufacturing was being outsourced to a foreign country?

HH's question has nothing to do with the original allegation of outsourcing.

[me]

Since when is Delaware considered a foreign country? Didn't you post that the manufacturing was being outsourced to a foreign country?

HH's question has nothing to do with the original allegation of outsourcing.

Are they building/manufacturing the car in Delaware now?  Will it still be being manufactured in 2014 if there is no demand for it?  It is at best still speculation with our money which is not creating jobs here now and may never create any of any significance. This is not a car that the average Joe can go out an purchase in case you didn't see the price.

Car Company Gets U.S. Loan, Builds Cars In Finland
"With the approval of the Obama administration, an electric car company that received a $529 million federal government loan guarantee is assembling its first line of cars in Finland, saying it could not find a facility in the United States capable of doing the work.

Vice President Joseph Biden heralded the Energy Department's $529 million loan to the start-up electric car company called Fisker as a bright new path to thousands of American manufacturing jobs. But two years after the loan was announced, the job of assembling the flashy electric Fisker Karma sports car has been outsourced to Finland.

"There was no contract manufacturer in the U.S. that could actually produce our vehicle," the car company's founder and namesake told ABC News. "They don't exist here." "

Via ABC News

Update: Fisker Karma Electric Car Gets Worse Mileage Than an SUV
"The Fisker Karma electric car, developed mainly with your tax money so that a bunch of rich VC's wouldn't have to risk any real money, has rolled out with an nominal EPA MPGe of 52.

Not bad? Unfortunately, it's a sham. This figure is calculated using the grossly flawed EPA process that substantially underestimates the amount of fossil fuels required to power the electric car, as I showed in great depth in an earlier Forbes.com article. In short, the EPA methodology leaves out, among other things, the conversion efficiency in generating the electricity from fossil fuels in the first place.

In the Clinton administration, the Department of Energy (DOE) created a far superior well to wheels MPGe metric the honestly compares the typical fossil fuel use of an electric vs. gasoline car.

As I calculated in my earlier Forbes article, one needs to multiply the EPA MPGe by .365 to get a number that truly compares fossil fuel use of an electric car with a traditional gasoline engine car on an apples to apples basis. In the case of the Fisker Karma, we get a true MPGe of 19. This makes it worse than even the city rating of a Ford Explorer SUV."

[Bo D]

Are they building/manufacturing the car in Delaware now?  Will it still be being manufactured in 2014 if there is no demand for it?  It is at best still speculation with our money which is not creating jobs here now and may never create any of any significance. This is not a car that the average Joe can go out an purchase in case you didn't see the price.

You are focusing on only the Karma model. The plant in Delaware will be designed for the lower cost models. Not that you would ever take time to read the link I posted.

Speaking of still being manufactured ... how's that Pontiac working out for you? Or Oldsmobile, Saturn, etc., etc....

[me]

You are focusing on only the Karma model. The plant in Delaware will be designed for the lower cost models. Not that you would ever take time to read the link I posted.

Speaking of still being manufactured ... how's that Pontiac working out for you? Or Oldsmobile, Saturn, etc., etc....

How much tax payer money went into those? 

[Bo D]

You know ... I should have learned long ago that you just can't argue with stupid. I can't figure out if you and HH are really that frickin stupid or if you are just being ignorant.

I quit.

[me]

You know ... I should have learned long ago that you just can't argue with stupid. I can't figure out if you and HH are really that frickin stupid or if you are just being ignorant.

I quit.

Which ever way you slice it our money was given to an unproven venture which will create no jobs for at least 3yrs here in the US and maybe not even then.  Why couldn't that money have been given to a business here in the US which was already operating and needed to expand or hire more people?  That "jobs" money is BS that is, so far, doing nothing no matter where they spend it in reality. 

[Palehorse]

How much tax payer money went into those?

The final production day for Oldsmobile was April 29, 2004.  So $0

The Bush administration said it would lend $17.4 billion to General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC, buying them a few weeks of financial relief but leaving the biggest decisions about the industry's future to President-elect Barack Obama.

Following the withdrawal of a bid by Penske Automotive to acquire Saturn in September 2009, all new production was halted on October 1, 2009.

The last Pontiacs were built in late 2009.

The U.S. government still owns a 27% stake in the company, and the Canadian government owns a 12% stake in the company. (GM) The Ontario government has owned a 3.8% stake in the company since 2009.

On 18 February 2009, General Motors and Chrysler again approached the US government, in regard to obtaining a second bridging loan of $21.6 billion. $16.6 billion of this would go to General Motors, while Chrysler would take $5 billion.

These loans were immediately followed by the demise of Saturn, Pontiac, and Hummer lines.

[me]

The final production day for Oldsmobile was April 29, 2004.  So $0

The Bush administration said it would lend $17.4 billion to General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC, buying them a few weeks of financial relief but leaving the biggest decisions about the industry's future to President-elect Barack Obama.

Following the withdrawal of a bid by Penske Automotive to acquire Saturn in September 2009, all new production was halted on October 1, 2009.

The last Pontiacs were built in late 2009.

The U.S. government still owns a 27% stake in the company, and the Canadian government owns a 12% stake in the company. (GM) The Ontario government has owned a 3.8% stake in the company since 2009.

On 18 February 2009, General Motors and Chrysler again approached the US government, in regard to obtaining a second bridging loan of $21.6 billion. $16.6 billion of this would go to General Motors, while Chrysler would take $5 billion.

These loans were immediately followed by the demise of Saturn, Pontiac, and Hummer lines.

And why was production halted on them?  No one was buying them because they either couldn't afford them, they were gas hogs, or they just plain didn't like them for one reason or another whether it was quality or size.  They could have been given all the money in the world but if they still weren't making something people wanted it wouldn't have done any good.  Government has no business investing in any business and the main reason is because it doesn't keep them responsible for bad decisions on their part.  The attitude becomes, "hell, we can do what we want and if it don't work the government will bail us out".   Or they take the money with the stipulation they produce what the government tells them they have to and it doesn't sell 'cause no one wants it and in the meantime they've blown the money on whatever and we lose again.  I personally wouldn't have a new car, any of them,  Anything newer than a '05'or '06' just isn't worth it.

[Exterminator]

You know ... I should have learned long ago that you just can't argue with stupid.

Welcome to the dark side! 

[Palehorse]

And why was production halted on them?  No one was buying them because they either couldn't afford them, they were gas hogs, or they just plain didn't like them for one reason or another whether it was quality or size.  They could have been given all the money in the world but if they still weren't making something people wanted it wouldn't have done any good.  Government has no business investing in any business and the main reason is because it doesn't keep them responsible for bad decisions on their part.  The attitude becomes, "hell, we can do what we want and if it don't work the government will bail us out".   Or they take the money with the stipulation they produce what the government tells them they have to and it doesn't sell 'cause no one wants it and in the meantime they've blown the money on whatever and we lose again.  I personally wouldn't have a new car, any of them,  Anything newer than a '05'or '06' just isn't worth it.

You really need to pay attention to life as you slack through it! They were shut down due to mandatory reorganization connected with bankruptcy proceedings and requirements connected with obtaining the government loans!

You also should consider the potential impact to the unemployment numbers that would have resulted from a total shut down of those businesses.

I'd hate to have to endure the crap you would be trying to pile on top of the POTUS had that been allowed to happen!

[Exterminator]

The automobile industry was not in danger of failing because no one wanted their cars; they were in danger of failing because, thanks to the fiasco with the banking industry, there was no credit available to both finance those cars and to carry their expenses between the time they incur them and when they sell the cars to cover them.