Obama is attacking Romney over Bain Capital's unsuccessful run with a Michigan auto supplier, Cambridge Industries. Obama should be careful, because Romney's supporters might start reminding everyone what happened under Car Czar Steven Rattner.
A very "Private equity" like takeover of GM and Chrysler, under which plants, dealers, and many many jobs were cut, in order to re-organize the companies. The only difference here is that Rattner was using taxpayer money instead of investor money to back the re-organization, but his goals were essentially the same as Bain's would have been: improve shareholder (taxpayer) value by re-structuring the operations into profitable enterprises.
Thursday, May 24, 2012
Monday, May 21, 2012
EPA's Hybrid Payback Calculator
The EPA has posted a very nice interactive hybrid vehicle payback calculator. It lets you quickly adjust assumptions to see how long a hybrid or electric vehicle would pay for itself based on fuel savings.
For example, comparing a Chevrolet Malibu Eco to a base gasoline Malibu, 12,000mi/year, 60% city driving, gasoline at $3.75, the tool says that you would save a whopping $200/year on gasoline, and that the $550 MSRP difference would be paid off in 2.7 years.
Clearly, the Malibu Eco isn't an irresistibly good deal, because that $200/year in fuel savings is going to cost you several cubic feet of trunk space.
For example, comparing a Chevrolet Malibu Eco to a base gasoline Malibu, 12,000mi/year, 60% city driving, gasoline at $3.75, the tool says that you would save a whopping $200/year on gasoline, and that the $550 MSRP difference would be paid off in 2.7 years.
Clearly, the Malibu Eco isn't an irresistibly good deal, because that $200/year in fuel savings is going to cost you several cubic feet of trunk space.
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Ethics of Manuals?
Over at Salon.com, David Sirota asks if it is "ethical" to drive a manual transmission. The reason for his question is recent news that more people are choosing manuals, and also, that automatics are now sometimes equal to or better than manuals in fuel economy.
I find it odd that he only considers fuel economy in his question.
A more careful ethicist would also consider the resources going into the transmission. For example, a manual will over its lifetime consume one or two clutches. An automatic (unless it is one of those rare CVTs) will consume several changes of automatic transmission fluid, a.k.a. oil.
Also, consider that automatics usually cost about $1000 more than a manual. Why is that? Simply, omplexity. The automatic has more parts, including electronic controls. More parts means more manufacturing footprint to make it.
It seems to me that manuals are more "ethical" than automatics until such time as their fuel economy gains can overcome the manuals advantage in simplicity.
I find it odd that he only considers fuel economy in his question.
A more careful ethicist would also consider the resources going into the transmission. For example, a manual will over its lifetime consume one or two clutches. An automatic (unless it is one of those rare CVTs) will consume several changes of automatic transmission fluid, a.k.a. oil.
Also, consider that automatics usually cost about $1000 more than a manual. Why is that? Simply, omplexity. The automatic has more parts, including electronic controls. More parts means more manufacturing footprint to make it.
It seems to me that manuals are more "ethical" than automatics until such time as their fuel economy gains can overcome the manuals advantage in simplicity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)