Category Archives: Alternative Energy

Why Continue To Provide Subsidies For Electric Cars?

Posted on December 4, 2012 | 1 comment

The Spark is Chevy’s new entry into the electric vehicle race.  Unlike the Spark’s big brother, the Chevy Volt, the Spark is all electric. (The Volt it is a hibrid as it has a backup internal combustion engine.)  Chevy has not specified a range with a full battery charge or a price.  But the Associated Press (AP) reports that the range will probably be like the Ford Focus—76 miles on a charge–and at a price less than $25,000 when the Fed’s $7,500 is deducted.  
 
What is wrong with this picture?  The gasoline powered Spark sells for $12,245 without any Federal subsidy.  So the production cost with profit (maybe) for the electric Spark is in the range of $32,000.  The gasoline powered Spark goes out of the showroom at roughly $20,000 less.  And even with the Fed Subsidy thrown in for the electric version, the gasoline version cost half as much.    
 
According to the Denver Post: “Since 2008, taxpayers have spent or provided loan guarantees of $6.5 billion for electric vehicles. That includes $2.4 billion for battery and electric drive component manufacturing, $3.1 billion in loan guarantees for electric vehicle projects, and $1 billion in tax credits for the vehicles.”
 
The Detroit News reports that GM plans to build 500,000 electric vehicles by 2017. Assuming they do this and sell that many cars,  you and I–the taxpayers are on the hook for $7,500X500,000= $3.750 billion.  And that would not include the subsidies given for sales of other manufacturer’s electric vehicles in that time period.  Suspending your view of the advisability of having subsidies for these cars in the first place,  do you think that if sales are that robust, they should continue to be given subsidies?  I don’t.
cbdakota

1 Comment

Posted in Alternative Energy, Batteries, Electric Vehicles, fossil fuels, Green Jobs, Personal Automobiles, US Auto Manufacturers

President Obama’s War On Fossil Fuels Slips Into High Gear

Posted on November 28, 2012 | Leave a comment

The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) summarizes some major Obama Administration regulations (economically significant rules that impose annual costs of $100 million or more) that are soon to be released.  These are largely rules written earlier this year but held up because they were potential liabilities for the Obama presidential campaign.  Now that he has won re-election,  its Katy bar the door.  This posting will feature those that affect energy.  There are others that will also have a very big impact such as Obamacare.  The WSJ’s summary of those can be seen by clicking here.   
The Obama Administration’s war on fossil fuels goes on.  Fracking is not safe even though it has the potential of lifting the economy out of the dole drums.  One has to wonder where the President’s priorities lie.  Is it bring about a recovery or to bring about a socialist state?
The WSJ Energy Rules Summary: 
 
• Energy. In the lead-up to November, the Environmental Protection Agency stood down under White House pressure, delaying rules for ozone air quality and industrial boilers, and deferring carbon standards. Now EPA chief Lisa Jackson has the run of the place.
She will resume the Administration’s anti-carbon agenda through “new source performance standards,” which will set greenhouse gas emissions for new power plants so low as to prevent their construction. Look for this early in 2013.
She’ll follow with standards for “existing” sources that make coal-fired plants uneconomic to run. Inside of a decade, Ms. Jackson may wipe out what used to make up more than half of U.S. power generation. Environmentalists will write books about it, even if her agenda has received almost no public scrutiny or debate.
The oil and gas industry is also targeted, hydraulic fracturing (fracking) in particular. The EPA has already issued a rule on shale production emissions and has one coming on diesel fuel in fracking. The Interior Department is promulgating rules on fracking on federal lands, and other rules can’t be far behind, probably using the pretext of drinking water under the Clean Water Act.
The EPA’s sleeper issue is the National Enforcement Initiatives agenda, which is designed to use the agency’s existing legal powers for inspections, requests for information, penalties and so forth to make new de facto rules. The EPA now blackmails businesses into “super compliance,” or settlements far more stringent than the law requires, or else risk years of expensive litigation.
 
cbdakota

Leave a comment

Posted in AGW, Alternative Energy, cap and trade, Domestic Energy, Energy Development, Environment, fossil fuels, Fracking/Shale Gas, Government Regulations, US Manufacturing Companies

Tell Congress To Not Renew The Production Tax Credit

Posted on November 27, 2012 | Leave a comment

Here’s a deal for you. Its called extending the Production Tax Credit (PTC) for one year.   For $12.2 billion you can prevent the loss of 37,000 jobs.  That translates into a cost of $330,000 per job saved.  And you also get expensive, unreliable wind generated electricity as part of the deal.  Now who is it that thinks we should take this deal?  Let’s see, oh yes, it is the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA).  By-the-way,  you will have to do this deal again the next year and the one after that and……..

Leave a comment

Posted in AGW, Alternative Energy, CO2, Energy Development, EPA, fossil fuels, Green Jobs, Windpower

“US Energy Independent By 2035”-International Energy Agency

Posted on November 14, 2012 | Leave a comment

The International Energy Agency (IEA) released their 2012 edition of the World Energy Outlook (WEO) on Monday, 12 November 2012. The take-away from the report is:
The WEO finds that the extraordinary growth in oil and natural gas output in the United States will mean a sea-change in global energy flows. In the New Policies Scenario, the WEO’s central scenario, the United States becomes a net exporter of natural gas by 2020 and is almost self-sufficient in energy, in net terms, by 2035. North America emerges as a net oil exporter, accelerating the switch in direction of international oil trade, with almost 90% of Middle Eastern oil exports being drawn to Asia by 2035.  
 
The new oil and natural gas production in the US will not only result in lower domestic prices for gasoline, electricity and heating oil, it could result in delivering our nation from the endless traumata that are the turbulent Middle-Eastern nations.  Will we feel it necessary to defend shipping routes any more?  Will we need to provide F-16 fighter planes to Saudia Arabia? I wonder if the European or perhaps the Saudis, are becoming nervous thinking that they might have to do for themselves what we have been doing for them.  Maybe the Chinese will take up the slack.  I’m not sure that is a comforting thought.  

Leave a comment

Posted in AGW, Alternative Energy, CO2, Energy Development, fossil fuels, Fracking/Shale Gas, Global Temperatures, Middle East Resources, Nuclear Energy, Oil and Gas Exploration, solar cells, Windpower

Chemicals Manufacturing Looks For Booming Business–Only Obama Can Put This Good News Down.

Posted on November 5, 2012 | Leave a comment

The price of natural gas has plummeted and chemical manufacturing firms are going to take advantage of the low cost feedstock.   A Forbes posting by Agustino Fontevecchia leads with this:

The $3.5 trillion chemicals industry provides a good vantage point from which to observe the state of the global economy, as many of its products stand at the beginning of the supply chain. From consumers to construction, the chemicals industry is set to boom in the U.S. given the explosion of shale plays and the cheap price of natural gas compared to the rest of the world, according to Anton Ticktin, a partner at chemical industry focused M&A advisory investment bank Valence.

“Chemicals go into everything, they are the part of the first step into the creation of so many different products,” explained Ticktin, “the gives you insight into the state of so many industries and sectors” such as the consumer, through plastic bag volumes for example, and construction, through sales of paints and coatings.

The low priced natural gas will result in many industries improving their balance sheet.  Ticktin adds:

And investors can get a cut of the action. Years ago, major chemical companies like Du Pont and Dow Chemical began to move their operations overseas. But today, companies with access to feed stocks that are associated with the production of natural gas, such as propane and ethane, will see a boost in their performance. Major oil and gas companies like Chevron, Exxon Mobil, and Royal Dutch Shell are well positioned to benefit.

Companies in the coatings and paints business will also do well, according to Ticktin. Sherwin-Williams and PPG, for example, are trading near their 52-week highs, while Du Pont and Dow Chemical are on their way back.

The bottom line is that through the lens that is the chemicals industry, Ticktin is seeing the U.S. recovery strengthening vis-à-vis the rest of the world. While GDP is still lagging, the rise in volume and sales seen in the chemical industry should be a good omen for the broader economy.

Team Obama wants to kill fracking.  The EPA is moving forward with a study to determine the safety of Fracking.  The EPA has chosen not to select, as members of this committee, anyone from industry.  To say it another way, if you know anything about fracking and how safe it is and how it can continue to be that way, they DON’T want you.  API Executive Vice President Marty Durbin makes the case regarding the Science Advisory Board (SAB) being assembled by the EPA:

It’s a perspective the SAB panel needs as it delves into hydraulic fracturing issues. Unfortunately, EPA has declined such expertise in the past. Durbin:

“From our perspective, critical opportunities to leverage the tremendous knowledge and experience base offered by industry have been repeatedly missed.”

For example, no industry experts were selected for SAB’s hydraulic review panel announced in January 2011. Instead, while members were technical experts in their respective fields, most had virtually no relevant knowledge or understanding of oil and natural gas operations in general and hydraulic fracturing in particular related to their respective areas of expertise. Durbin:

“API, therefore, strongly recommends that the ad hoc Panel members have direct experience working in the modern oil and natural gas industry. … We note that industry representatives have a long record of valuable, unbiased participation in many other SAB Communities and Panels. It is those very individuals, with extensive field experience and first-hand knowledge of the techniques used in drilling and completions, who are critical to the examination of the very specialized processes and the research addressing those processes.”

See more from this  posting by clicking here.

cbdakota

Leave a comment

Posted in AGW, Alternative Energy, Domestic Energy, Energy Development, Environment, EPA, fossil fuels, Fracking/Shale Gas

Electric Cars and Battery Systems are a Bust

Posted on September 27, 2012 | 2 comments

Despite President Obama’s boast that HE was going to bring about the era of the electric car, it isn’t happening.  Yes, he did what he could.  He hoped that by not allowing the use of the most of our Federal lands, he could short the supply of crude oil and thus drive the price of gasoline up to a point where people would have to buy electric cars. It did not work because he could not stop the States and Private owners from developing their lands.  It is now routine to see new supplies of natural gas and crude oil being brought on-line.  He tried to do it by massive infusion of tax payer’s money into electric vehicle and battery production.  But the cars being produced just aren‘t cutting it with the buying public.  The prices are too high. Limited vehicle range coupled with long recharge times are not helping win them over either.  A lot of the EV problems can be attributed to their batteries which are too big and heavy, cost too much and have questionable reliability.

Toyota sees the writing on the wall and has announced that it is getting out of the EV business for now.  They will continue to produce and sell their popular Pris hybrid.

EV sales versus Obama’s goal   

The President’s said that he wanted 1 million EVs and hybrids on the road by 2015.  The Department of Energy released their analysis in 2011 that said 1 million was achievable.  However, sales of the hybrid Volt are a little over 20,000 since introduction in late 2010.  Sales of the EV Nissan Leaf are even smaller. See here ( https://cbdakota.wordpress.com/2012/09/11/president-obamas-pants-on-fire-acceptance-speech/)for additional discussion of 1 million cars goal from President Obama’s acceptance speech at the Democrat Convention.  Analysts from all over are saying it is time to back off this goal.

Hysteria from the Environmentalists

The documentary “Who killed the Electric Car?” was winning awards for its”brilliant detective work” demonstrating how the”evil” corporations did the 1990ty’s EVs in.  The awards were meted out by the same folks that still think the widely discredited “An Inconvenient Truth” is gospel.  It is going to be much tougher to invent a story for this round of EVs and hybrids, when the truth is that the consumers really don’t want these vehicles.  Sure, a small group wants them and they are the ones that go to the Sundance Film Festival.  They can buy a $110,000 Tesla and can afford to not make practical choices for their transportation.

Let’s see now, GM has put up $1.2 billion developing the Volt.  The Feds give a tax rebate of $7,500 to the buyer of a Volt—and they are talking about upping that figure. The dealers have been discounting the Volt to get them off their lots.  This year the factory producing the Volt has twice stopped production when the unsold inventory reached 85 days. And depending on how one does the calculation, GM loses about $50,000 on each Volt sold according to Reuters.

A new factory is being built in Tennessee to manufacture Nissan Leafs.  Nissan got a $1.5 billion low interest rate loan from the Feds for the construction. Nissan says the factory can produce 150,000 Leafs each year.  Sales of the Leaf through August this year are 4,228.  One has to wonder if Nissan Management isn’t concerned that they overbuilt this factory or perhaps even built it at all. 

And the battery maker story is even worse, in my opinion.  A123 got loans of $250 million from the Feds.  A123 was facing bankruptcy when the Wanxiang Group, one of China’s biggest auto suppliers purchased 80% ownership in the company.   Ener1 got $118 million in pledges from the Feds and another $80 million in State and local pledges.  It was declaring bankruptcy when Boris Zingarevich, a Russian businessman with ties to former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, bought them out. A123 and Ener1 are suppliers to our military as well as to the EV and hybrid manufacturers. The battery technology developed (paid for by us taxpayers) is now in the hands of the Russians and the Chinese. 

So, large amounts of money have been spent developing EVs and hybrids.  GM and probably Nissan are losing substantial amounts of money every day as they continue to produce the Volt and the Leaf.  The gasoline price is much higher than it was in the 90tys when that generation of EVs failed.  It will be very hard to generate a believable story line for a new documentary on what” killed the electric car” this time  unless they say  the customers did not want them.  Obviously that was the reason back in the 90tys, too.

Will there ever be a time for EVs?  Probably.   But it is not now.

cbdakota

2 Comments

Posted in Alternative Energy, Batteries, Electric Vehicles, Energy Development, Environment, fossil fuels, Green Jobs, Off Shore Resources, Oil and Gas Exploration, Personal Automobiles, US Auto Manufacturers

Will The Solar Industry Survive?

Posted on September 21, 2012 | Leave a comment

Manufacturers of Solar Panels

Since the demise of the German solar panel industry, the major solar panel manufacturers are mostly Chinese. There are others such as Sunpower (French) and First Solar (American).   Sunpower, formerly an American firm, is now owned by TOTAL, the French petroleum giant.  Sunpower, formed in 1985, had stopped producing solar cells last year.  They were nearing bankruptcy having lost some $600 million.  However, they were able to restructure when TOTAL bought 60% of the company.  While the company has survived, the market does not have much confidence in its future.  In October, 2009 Sunpower shares sold for about $32.  Those shares now sell for $5.   Across the World, the subsidies that have been doled out for solar energy projects are diminished or have vanished altogether.  As of September, none of these firms are making a profit. 

Why Are The Solar Panels Makers Not Making a Profit?

A posting by the Telegraph (UK) reports on the Chinese solar panel makers’ financials: ”China’s big five firms are all reporting disastrous trading and heavily indebted balance sheets. At the end of the first quarter, JA Solar listed debt and liabilities of $1.5 billion, Trina Solar had debts of $1.08 billion, and Yingli had debts of $3.44 billion.  Suntech, once held up as a model company, could have to pay $690m in collateral related to a possible fraud, and it also has a $541m convertible bond payment in early 2013. Its total debts are $3.58 billion.  In the first quarter, LDK lost $185.2m as sales dropped by nearly 75pc.”

The manufacturers, particularly in China are increasing their production capacity so that it far exceeds solar panel demand and ironically, at a time when demand is slowing due to reduced or eliminated US and European government subsidies given to builders of solar farms. Further acerbating the profit problem is that some of the Chinese manufacturers are reported to be selling below the cost of manufacture (this is Dumping). The US has imposed a tariff on imported Chinese solar panels. The Europeans are charging the Chinese with “Dumping” and the result will be that the Chinese will lose that market too.  

China seems to be of two minds here.  The government is supporting these expansions because the government needs new jobs to contain China’s huge, annual increase of job seekers. Many believe that they will continue to build solar farms for the same reason. The competitiveness of all this is often secondary in a government run economy. Remember that the Soviet Union did this before they went broke.  Our government is not too far off of that track themselves when it comes to “renewable energy”.

Are Solar Farms Competitive?

Solar farms are the least competitive form of renewable energy.    

The US Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration (EIA) says that solar projects provide the most expensive power.   The EIA estimated levelized cost of new generation resources coming on line in 2017 are:

Type of Generation Cost   $/megawatt-h
Natural Gas- Conventional Combined Cycle 66.1
Conventional Coal 97.7**
Advanced Nuclear 111.4
Wind-On-Shore 96.0
Solar 152.7
  **potential C tax included

                                                                                                                                  

Solar is 2.3 times more expensive than natural gas.   The only reason anyone builds solar farms is because the Federal government loans the crony capitalists the money at basically no risk to the borrowers and then the States require the utilities pass on the cost on the their customers. The consumer pays at least 50% more for this form of electricity.  

The on-line German “Focus” posted an interview with Klaus Dieter Maubach, the Technology Chairman of E.On a major German power company and Maubach said:  (This quote is a translation from the German by Google translator)  “Germany’s solar industry will disappear in the next five years in the face of competition from China. Not a single worker is still working at the German solar companies, as the latter are then all broke, it cited the Bloomberg news agency.”  The English also are becoming tired of supporting renewable solar.  The Spanish and Italian governments are reducing subsidies dramatically.   My guess that no matter which man, Obama or Romney, is elected President, the US government subsidies for solar will not be renew.  

Perhaps more money should be directed toward the development of Thorium reactors. We need to talk about these reactors in a posting.

cbdakota

Leave a comment

Posted in AGW, Alternative Energy, Domestic Energy, Energy Development, Green Jobs, Nuclear Energy, solar cells

Contrasting The Keystone Pipeline And Solyndra

Posted on September 14, 2012 | 1 comment

Rep. Fred Upton(R- Michigan) illustrates the huge divide between the Obama view and that of Congressional Republicans when he contrasts the difference between the Solyndra and the Keystone Pipeline energy projects. Upton says:

 “These two energy projects tell a dramatic yet revealing story, one that explains our slow economic recovery, our burgeoning federal debt, and our over reliance on Middle Eastern oil.   Solyndra – a bankrupt, federally subsidized solar project – and the proposed  Keystone pipeline carrying oil from Canada – are really symbols of a larger narrative, serving as examples of two distinct economic and governing philosophies. The Keystone approach supports free markets, encourages private investment and relies on technology instead of regulatory mandates to produce energy. The Solyndra model advocates prescriptive and detailed Washington planning, massive federal spending, and recasts energy bureaucrats as venture capitalists.”

 President Obama stymied attempts to authorize the Keystone pipeline saying that it was environmentally problematic because it would be built, in part, over a  major mid-American aquifer.  The pipeline’s proposed path was rerouted but still Obama would not give it the go-ahead.  It is widely understood that his in-action was taken to appease extreme environmentalist groups that are major campaign contributors.  Keystone would have the near term effect of employing thousands of people to build the line. It would have added to the Nation’s crude oil reserve and be supplied from a friendly country- Canada.  However, his inaction has resulted in the Canadians signing an oil sales agreement with China to be supplied from this same resource.  And get this— build a pipeline to the Pacific coast where the crude can be shipped by tanker to China.

Instead, Obama has been picking “renewable energy projects” to fund.  Solyndra is just one example of the many companies that his Administration has picked that have gone bankrupt.  Solyndra was given over $500 billion of taxpayer monies and those are all lost.  In Obama’s Presidential Nomination acceptance speech at the Democrat Convention, he promised to do more of this.  UGH!!

Upton sums up his case here:

“It’s time to start looking forward on energy policy and embrace the possibility of North American energy independence. Given the slow pace of Washington’s bureaucracy, policymakers are often busy solving yesterday’s problems. This rearview mirror approach afflicts Mr. Obama and his Democratic allies in Congress. They lack the vision to realize the energy world has changed dramatically even since the president took office. We now have the opportunity to significantly expand our North American energy supply – not through new regulations or federal subsidies, but by simply making commonsense policy decisions. We need to seize these new opportunities and adapt, not continue to support old policies conceived in a world when energy scarcity was in vogue.”

To read the full posting by Representative Upton click here.

cbdakota

1 Comment

Posted in AGW, Alternative Energy, Domestic Energy, Energy Development, Environment, fossil fuels, Oil and Gas Exploration, Uncategorized

President Obama’s Pants-On-Fire Acceptance Speech

Posted on September 11, 2012 | 2 comments

The President’s acceptance speech at the Democrat Convention last Thursday was a pants-on-fire moment when it came to his energy program. (There were other topics besides the energy program in that speech that also rated high on the pants-on-fire meter—but this is an energy blog.)

The President claims responsibility for the decline in the use of imported crude oil.  “In the last year alone, we cut oil imports by 1 million barrels a day, more than any administration in recent history”. There are two primary reasons for this decline. First is because the manufacturing sector is still suffering from this less than robust economy—here his claim rings true as he is responsible for this economy.  The second is that the States and Private property owners have managed to overcome his and his administration’s efforts to stymie the development of oil and natural gas fields. Yes, oil and gas production are up but not on Federal lands where the President has the “say so”.  Oil production declined 11% and natural gas declined 6% on Federal lands from fiscal year (FY) 2010 to FY 2011.  At the same time on State and Private Lands’ oil production increased by 14% and natural gas by 12% over that same period.

 He said: “…. where we develop a hundred-year supply of natural gas that’s right beneath our feet. If you choose this path, we can cut our oil imports in half by 2020 and support more than 600,000 new jobs in natural gas alone”. While he is claiming credit for the natural gas, it really is No Thanks to Obama who has sent the EPA out to find reasons to rein in (i.e., reasons to stop fracking of shale) this State and Private land activity.  

Oil and natural gas production from State and Private Lands will continue to increase and will be the driver of the US economic recovery.  Not the “green” jobs that he has been promoting.  “We have doubled our use of renewable energy, and thousands of Americans have jobs today building wind turbines and long-lasting batteries”. While Obama wants you think that wind and solar are soon to replace fossil fuels (oil, natural gas and coal) that is not happening. Fossil fuels supplied 78% and nukes another 11% of the US energy needs in 2010.  Wind supplied about 2% and solar was barely above 0 %. That they are that much is a testimonial to the crony capitalism being practiced by the Federal government by subsidizing the capital cost of renewables installation. This practice leaves the rate payers holding the bag for the high cost of the electricity that renewables create.   It looks like the US will be joining most of the rest of the world that have become disillusioned with wind and solar when Congress doesn’t renew the subsidies next year.  Adding to their dismal performance is the fact that for every new Kw of wind and solar power, a corresponding amount of fossil fuel supplied energy must be built because wind and solar are too unreliable (the wind blows sometimes and not at others and we know the sun is not always shining) for the nation’s power grid to rely upon.  So not only are these unreliable renewables not competitively priced, the global warmers don’t get a reduction in CO2 emissions.

“After 30 years of inaction, we raised fuel standards so that by the middle of the next decade, cars and trucks will go twice as far on a gallon of gas”. Despite the implication that he has accomplished something, this new standard is in effective 2025 and there are many reasons to question if it can be met. This will only be realized if significant numbers of electric vehicles replace gasoline based vehicles.  And how is that program going? The hybrid Chevy Volt, the leading US manufactured vehicle, has sold through August about 13,170 making it unlikely they will meet the 2012 forecast of 45,000. The Volt is brought to you by Government General Motors (GM).  Through August, the best-selling all-electric car, the Nissan Leaf, had sold 4,228 vehicles versus the 2012 forecast of 20,000.  The electric vehicles are neither affordable nor efficient for the overwhelming majority of consumers who commute for work.  The Volt’s selling price is about $45,000 before the Government tax incentive of $7,500.  Even at that price, a recent report says: “Nearly two years after the introduction of the path-breaking plug-in hybrid, GM is still losing as much as $49,000 on each Volt it builds, according to estimates provided to Reuters by industry analysts and manufacturing experts.”  A little perspective, the projected US  2012 sales of vehicles is about 14 million.  There are something like 250 million registered vehicles in the US.  Even if the Volt were to sell 45,ooo it is drop-in-the-bucket. 

He says that man-made global warming is “not a hoax“.  He is wrong.  His EPA is writing regulations that will imposed a “cap and trade” program on the use of fossil fuels.  Cap and Trade failed attempts at passage in Congress.  Here he is usurping the legislative role of Congress.

The President’s energy program is a threat to all of us, and especially our children who are going to have to pay higher energy cost while having to cope with the massive debt this Administration has racked up.  

cbdakota

2 Comments

Posted in AGW, Alternative Energy, cap and trade, CO2, Domestic Energy, Electric Vehicles, Energy Development, EPA, fossil fuels, Government Regulations, Green Jobs, Nuclear Energy, Oil and Gas Exploration, Personal Automobiles, US Auto Manufacturers, Windpower

Volt Sales UP But Little Likelihood Of Meeting Sales Forecast

Posted on September 6, 2012 | Leave a comment

GM reports that more than 2500 Volts were sold in August.  They also announced that they would stop production of the Volt for a month.  Volt production capacity is way in excess of current sales.  This is the second stoppage of Volt production this year. Total Volt sales through August appear to be about 13,170 which are well short of the 2012 forecast of 45,000 hybrids.

Nissan’s Leaf sales in August were 685 EVs versus 395 last month. Through August, sales have amounted to 4228 vehicles.  With four months left to go in the year, the auto media reporters are beginning to question Nissan’s many statements that they will sell more than 20,000 this year.  A penetrating insight by these reporters –Snark.

I guess it is late reporting of sales or losses thereof, but it is hard to make an exact accounting of the monthly sales figures.  The numbers change a lot. The auto industry accountants must have attended the same University as did the ones who issue the weekly national employment/unemployment figures.  Each week the old forecast is amended.

cbdakota

Leave a comment

Posted in Alternative Energy, Batteries, Domestic Energy, Electric Vehicles, fossil fuels, Green Jobs, Personal Automobiles, US Auto Manufacturers