In The Wall Street Journal [sub], Daimler CEO Dieter Zetsche and GM Car Czar Bob Lutz discuss their respective companies' approach to environmentally-friendly vehicles. Dr Z wants to sell more diesels. (And there you have it.) Maximum Bob eschews oil burners to hang his proverbial hat on E85. Of course, Lutz' preference for corn juice will cost consumers plenty through government spending on ethanol infrastructure and corn price supports. But the winner of TTAC's first annual Bob Lutz Award reckons developments in corn breeding will blunt E85's inflationary impact on food prices. "So I think that people who say, well, the ethanol industry is taking food from the mouths of babies and it's driving tortilla prices up– I think these are highly suspect conclusions." Meanwhile, both executives say Daimler's success selling the smart in the U.S. heralds the end of the efficiency vs safety debate. "There are no statistics that would support [the idea] that you are less safe in the smart than you are in any kind of vehicle," says Dr Z. Lutz appears equally oblivious the laws of physics, stating "If a vehicle is registered for sale in any developed market of the world, it is going to be an extremely safe vehicle."
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
They have had success selling the Smart car?
And why do they call it a Smart car?
This is what happens when a Smart and an S-Class hit head on.
OK Lutz is nutz on the E85 thing, though he was right with Diesel being a bad plan for the US (light vehicle market).
As for Zetsche, of COURSE he thinks “Diesel” is the way to go. He’s German. Even when he lived in the states for years (OK I admit it, he lived in la-la-dreamland of rich Suburbs in Detroit, not in the real world of the rest of us) he still thinks diesel is da answa. Nope.
E85 is bad because once the tax monies stop flowing to make it affordable and/or people wise up and start to realize that the food prices going up 50% here, 100% there, 200% over here, etc., is due to the imbecilic concept of growing corn to make ethanol to fuel SUVs (so their mileage can plummet from 13 to 9 or 8 mpg).
Diesel doesn’t work well because our diesel fuel infrastructure can’t handle any more demand (lots of reasons, one of which is the fact that the oil companies have not built a new US oil refinery since 1976).
So, the answer is obvious, Captain Obvious! Smaller gasoline or gas-hybrid vehicles, along with utility trailers for those few times when you actually need to haul something big.
Ironically, only Hyundai and Toyota make cars with anything resembling a tow capacity.
Sonata and Elantra 1500 pounds, Corolla 1500 pounds, Camry (not hybrid) 1000 pounds.
We pull a 1350 pound pop-up with our 2007 Sonata four cylinder and it does fine. The 2009 is going to be even better, with a 5 speed auto (not 4 speed as now) and an additional dozen ponies, as well as better MPG. (Of course, towing means MPG drops to the low 20’s – “DUH” – but is is significantly better than 6 or 8 mpg of a motor home). Plus we paid cash for the pop-up, new.
I’m not sure I know what that tape represents, Ed- not knowing German. Yes, the Smart did get pushed backwards and roll on its roof, but the passenger compartment seemed to retain its integrity. Would I rather be in the C-class during the accident? Sure, but if I lived in a crowded city, I’d probably rather live with the Smart right up until then.
As I can tell, the Smart is constructed well, and is very safe for its size. So is the C-class, which wouldn’t do too well in a head-on with a garbage truck, would it?
My rapidly increasing grocery bill is not a crock of sh*t.
I wasn’t trying to make the point that the Smart is a deathtrap. Obviously, anything that size is going to get messed up in a head-on collision with an S-Class, but I think the Smart did about as well as could be hoped for. I think the guy in the video says that access to passengers was an issue for the Smart (my german is not what it once was), but the video shows them just rolling the thing over…
I was skeptical of the Smart at first, but I’ve seen a few of the around town now, and the seem well-suited as urban transport pods. Plus my kids go apeshit whenever they see one, and I can’t help but get caught up in their excitement.
What does your grocery bill have to do with this, ash78? If you place blame on the diversion of crops to fuel, look also at how far your food travels from farm to market. It takes a lot of diesel fuel, or worse, jet fuel, to keep a modern supermarket stocked. Sadly, the world just doesn’t owe us unlimited cheap fuels to put tomatoes on your table in February.
Seriously. Start paying more attention to the cost value equation and your grocery bill will go south while your health goes up. Or, you could hope someone else does something about it, while you blame the world.
“So I think that people who say, well, the ethanol industry is taking food from the mouths of babies and it’s driving tortilla prices up– I think these are highly suspect conclusions.”
Yeah, just because the price of corn itself is going up doesn’t mean that the rise in the price of Masa and corn flour tortillas is necessarily related. Maybe it’s just the tortilla manufacturers gouging their customers.
It is NOT someone’s imagination gone wild to say that corn planting for ethanol has driven up prices of food, it’s a well established and proven fact.
C’mon people, get your heads out of the US once in awhile and look at the internet news to see what goes on elsewhere.
Mexican farmers are selling corn (a staple food for Mexicans) to the US to make extra ethanol, and food prices have tripled for Mexicans. Did you not hear about the food riots? When paying for food is (say) 30% of your budget, tripling the price has GOT to hurt.
Interestingly, at the turn of the 19th Century, food was approximately 54% of the average household expenditure in the US; now it is about 3%.
Ethanol sucks in so many ways, including the fact that while driving on ethanol, you are literally starving children elsewhere. How do you feel about that, E85 drivers?
Or don’t you care? Obviously, our esteemed government and food conglomerates are in the “don’t care” camp.
http://www.ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/February08/Features/CornPrices.htm
Data from the USDA on how the increase in corn price has actually affected grocery prices.
You guys realize that 3 years ago, the government was paying billions of dollars in corn subsidies because the price was WAY below the cost of production for US farmers. So now that the government has created a new market for corn, everyone bitches because we’re not paying price support subsidies. I’m just guessing here but I think part of the reason Mexican tortilla prices have gone up as much as they have is because the government isn’t giving as much food aid to Mexico because of the increased prices.
And here’s something else to think about. There are millions of Mexican corn farmers who are probably doing better because of increased corn prices.
Yes, ethanol from corn is a bad deal in many ways. But that’s not all biofuels. I use soy-based biodiesel. Now you can say I’m stealing the beans off those tortillas, but at least the energy balance is positive.
Now you can say I’m stealing the beans off those tortillas, but at least the energy balance is positive.
And, we’ve always known that beans are a good source of gas.
(Couldn’t resist the temptation.)
Food prices in the next few years are going to do what oil prices did in the last few. Global excess supply of grains used to be substantial, now the world demand is about even with supply.
Supply and demand curves usually tell the picture for those that are will to look at as many issues that effect supply and demand independently.
As soon as the government subsidizes anything, they screw it up. The irony of this is that it is the most upheld capitalist market in the world that does the most damage with such a socialist tool. E85?
Environmental concerns have been around for years and people in the auto industry poo-poo them. Peak oil had economists on their side (and even some oil industry execs) and people still laughed at them for years. Food shortages were coming anyway but E85 sped things up a bit. For people that read the news (globally) and are careful about their sources of “news” in the US (read: stay away from Fox) these issues coming down the pipe are going to substantially change our societies.
In spite of the fair and balanced arguments that are out there people still think things are going to get better with oil. Here is a great article that talks about many of the the oil price issues:
http://www.thestar.com/comment/columnists/article/346541
Here is an article which talks plainly about food riots, food shortages, massive worldwide increases in food prices.
Note that biofuels IS noted as one reason for the problems (not the only reason, but also not immune from blame).
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8VJULF00&show_article=1
No, “biofuels ARE one reason for the problems.” Or is that two reasons? Make that three reasons, ethanol, biodiesel and WVO (waste cooking oil) Plus the ideal but non-obtainable cellulosic biofuels we hear about. At these prices, won’t the new biofuels techs arrive that much sooner, as escalating prices make them economical?
Anyway, calm down, fellas. I guess I’m off the biodiesel bandwagon. Today, in Denver, I was offered B100 at $6.11 per gallon. At that price, it’s no longer a fuel, it’s an additive.