I feel the same way about the banks. what a scam.

New research into end-of-life recycling hopes to strike a balance between recycling and other environmental priorities in part design. This philosophy, called Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), looks at part design as more than an end goal of how the part works with other parts. LCA wrestles and weighs every stage of the life cycle, taking into consideration the impact on humans and the environment, the resources used or depleted during manufacturing, waste management and end-of-life disposal.

The industry will need to make greater strides in Automobile Shredder Residue (ASR) and plastics recycling to get recycling levels beyond 85 percent, since cars built today increasingly contain more plastic than metal. Comprising 25 percent of every vehicle, ASR waste remains a difficult issue. Regardless, researchers, automakers and recyclers have the necessary incentives to push forward towards new answers and new technologies for auto recycling.

Due to the 85% mark, it does leave room to keep vehicles that can run on bio-diesel out of scrap yards in the short run. Additionally, the older diesel vehicles that can be repaired and kept running on bio-diesel from scap oil can give a stop-gap in the short run in addressing environmental justice. Some folks will not be able to afford the new environmentally efficient cars. Transition technologies are a part of the picture when weighing environmental justice.

So the issue of scrapping cars still remains a huge issue in the industry and has a long way to go in terms of regulatory issues. Keeping a car out of a scrap yard in the meantime IS still a good thing.

Though regulations in the United States are not as stringent, US manufacturers still respond because they must meet overseas regulations. All of the newer regulations, plus many of today’s voluntary programs both in the United States and elsewhere, build on the concept of Extended Product Responsibility (EPR). EPR moves a manufacturer’s responsibility beyond the manufacturing stage to the full life (and end-of-life) of a product. EPR is not the law in the United States, but there is a motivation for automakers to participate in voluntary recycling and take-back programs that follow an EPR model. By participating now, the industry provides a disincentive for the government to enact strict, mandatory regulations that would be more expensive and more complicated to implement.

http://auto.ihs.com/news/newsl…..ations.htm

I culd post a few more links but I think maybe I’ll work on a post regarding this issue for an Oxdown…

The only reason to “save the automakers” is to continue the massive corruption that is endemic to our society.

For those of us unfamiliar with this idea…which has been floated from the Obama camp…basically, companies and citizens would be allowed to trade in gas hog vehicles, (say the worst 20%) for the most efficient models (say 10%) on the market. This would include cars and trucks, commercial and private vehicles. How this program would work is not clear at this time…but it would lead to a much more efficient vehicle fleet. The costs to the government would be huge…but perhaps we could swing it with a peace dividend?

Ford used to make Escort/Tracers. These were, at one time, in the early-mid 1990s, the best selling cars in the world. Ford removed the extremely efficient 88HP engines from the line and the line suffered here and abroad as a result. The mph was reduced approximately 10-15% by going to a bigger “more zippy” engine.

I owned a Tracer because it was such a good car. It had more room than subcompact Hondas and Toyotas. Big Americans™ could fit in the front seats too. But, alas, the stupids at Ford went with “more pickup” rather than keep a great selling car fuel efficient. They reduced the efficiency and surprise! the Tracer stopped being the best selling car in the world.

Yeah, so if there is a bailout coming, it has to get back to making sure that American cars are competitively efficient…the gas pigs have got to be ended once and for all.

Walking…?? I live in nebraska. I couldn’t even ride a bike to my work from where I live. There is no bus that runs passed 5pm and I work until 8pm two nights a week and seven one night a week.

Besides all those buses still put out carbon dioxide.

We need to quit eating so many cows, change to alternative oils sources, hold the law breakers accountable. This will I think, create jobs in the long run.

In the meantime we have to help people stay in their homes, give them health care, and keep them from going bankrupt as they pay for healthcare.

There. That should do it Smaller cars, hybrids, small business loans to anyone wanting to develop alternative sources of energy.

We can do it…walking is fine…but that there would have to be some major changes in my city for that to be a reality. We don’t have much housing downtown where the jobs are…and nebraska is spread out…way out. Might work in some places.

We may all need to walk more, but we’re going to have to figure out how to replace one of the largest components of our nation’s economy in a hurry if the answer is simply to turn our back on American automakers and walk more.