“GM is on the dole and they’re building stuff that won’t make money, won’t confer a strategic advantage ”
I’d say the Escalade confers an advantage

“The legions of these things roaming the prairie are the big reason I no longer drive a subcompact car. You don’t have to putt along in your Ford Aspire too awfully long watching these things – and Hummer H2s and whatnot – careening along with a moron at the helm, yakking on his cell phone, eating breakfast, reading or maybe all three at once before you realize that owning a subcompact is sort of a bad idea. Their bumper is aimed at my head.”
Do you complain about commercial trucks?
Minivans?
I have a bigger problem with your typical kids in “tuner” Civics and WRXs

“It tows 5800lbs. The Lambda quads do 5000lbs. What’s the point of this marginal 800lb tow rating, from a utilitarian perspective?”
The BOF SUVs probably feel better while towing.
I don’t trust FWD based vehicles for towing regardless of what the car maker says.
They should have made Hybrid long wheelbase SUVs

“You might also consider that the highway fuel economy of these behemoths could almost be matched, much cheaper, by other GM GMT900 behemoths if GM cleaned up the aero, as they did on these, and installed a VCM engine, as they did on these. And they could do that without losing the original tow rating. And improve the fuel economy of all the SUVs they built, rather than just a blingy and expensive few.”
The regular SUVs get fantastic mileage for what they are. You’ll never match the Hybrid city mileage

anoldbikeguy writes, “We care about the environment and something like this is a way to meet all of our needs.”

I see. You need a 3-ton behemoth to tow more CO2-emitting toys a couple hundred miles in rural driving but this particular 3-ton behemoth emits 20% less CO2 than other 3-ton behemoths when driven in the city that you don’t live in.

I’m sure Mother Nature appreciates your concern.”

That is hilarious! It just goes to show how out of touch you are to the real world. I have four vehicles for the four drivers in my family. Two are four cylinders – a pickup and a sedan. The third is a sports sedan with a six that has a long term average of 25.5 MPG over three years.

When we use the van, it is needed – and gets better economy than driving two of the others that would be required if we used them to move the same amount of people. Get over it!

Some of us need a bigger vehicle on a regular basis and having the option of one that uses a significantly lower amount of fuel is not a bad thing!

And about our toys ’spewing CO2′. You are really out of touch here as well. I have planted over six hundred trees at our property up north, the boat has a six cylinder four stroke (GM 4.3L, imagine that) that uses significantly less fuel and emits significantly less pollutants than any Honda, Yamaha or Suzuki outboard that has suffient power to move our boat – which is one of six that we have – we have a sailboat, rowboat, canoe and two kayaks that don’t use any fuel.

Get off of your high horse – just because I have achieved the ability to obtain things that you have not does not enable you to take the high road. Those of us who take the right steps to limit our emissions while enjoying the fruits of our labors for ourselves and our families are not a problem. Those who think that anyone who does not believe that their inherent (and many times ludicrous) beliefs trump others are obviously wrong headed and don’t understand that there are a huge multitude of needs in our society and picking the optimum methods to meet our and societies needs overall is the way that we can all optimize our world.

A warlord-led country is the end result of unrestricted laissez-faire capitalism.

Laissez-faire will always lead to the concentration of wealth. The concentration of wealth leads to the concentration of power. The concentration of power leads to it’s institutionalization, sometimes with laws, often with guns.

Communism is similar, except that the process sees the concentration power first, and wealth following after. The reason the US, and other western nations, aren’t a totalitarian state is that they haven’t allowed wealth and power to concentrate quite as quickly. The reason they don’t allow this is that there are restrictions on people and organizations, but not so many restrictions as to allow their abuse.

The end result of any society without safeguards against such concentration is totalitarianism. How you get there is irrelevant.

It’s interesting that you chose to ignore my post about your ineligibility to draw any sweeping generalization of anyone unless you spoke to a statistically significant “ample”…

“You might want to read the entries on the National Review’s Corner blog today. You’ll find that conservatives can be nuanced in their approach.”

And you might want to read The Nation regularly and you’ll realize how much broader the horizon than right and left…

FYI this is another stupid thing I hate in American politics, this very narrow *mainstream* political spectrum here.

“For the matter, though, Obama is left of center politically and has surrounded himself by hard lefties for most of his life.”

For the matter it is NOT true at all.
Obama is and always WAS a centrist himself and you can clearly see it in his cabinet, in his choices.

People around him came from various directions (including wacko Christians, hardcore free-market lobbyists, socialists etc.) but when someone believes in minorities, in liberal values then it’s not a surprise he won’t hang out with downright scumbags like Rove etc.

“As for “the rest of the world”, a great rabbi once said that since the ‘rest of the world’ was silent during 1933-1945, or worse, he presumes that now they have nothing of value to say.”

Too bad the great rabbi forgot to mention that as part of the European arms and industrial lobby a lot of them (rich European Jews including Germans) financed Hitler’s rise to power from 1926-28 and on – typically Jewish bankers, managers, industrialists because he was serving their interests (fighting socialists, the unions etc.) and they thought they can control and use him later (much like any politician is controlled today by big business.) When he went berserk, a lot of people in Europe felt these rich folks got what they deserved. However the great rabbi also forgot to admit that MANY people and countries tried and DID the right thing, even when they were annexed or occupied by the Nazi Germany.
Anyway, I think it’s completely irrelevant here, it has nothing to do with stupidity of the right-wing America versus rest of the world today.

It’s called “proportion” – it’s kinda surprising you never heard of it, despite all your “professional and academic environmental experience”, khm – and *proportinally* I BET you are more damaging.
Speaking of your “professional and academic environmental experience” versus Gore et al – I’m sure there’s a good reason how it escaped your attention during the past few years but they never touted *their* “professional and academic environmental experience” (it’s always risky anyway, you know, how it plays out, especially online :p) because they had at least the better half of the world’s entire scientific community to back their statements.

” To begin with they have little standing to comment on the subject.”

I’m sure managing “waste streams for a large industrial lab” and your “more professional and academic environmental experience” gives you a leg up against Gore but I am not really sure about your credentials when it comes to calling out the entire scientific community…. are you sure you’re ready for such a debate?
And since you’re so worked up on “professional and academic environmental experience” why is it that you discredit Gore et al off hand but somehow you think you deserve the answer from scientists with much higher pedigree than yours…?
Don’t you think there’s a double standard…?

” When you add in their hypocrisy the standing goes negativ”

Ahh, the usual bottom line argument… you could be a great accountant, I’m telling you. ;)

Ahh I see: so it’s all about the bottom line?
Interesting approach to our living nature…

Out of professional curiosity: how many extra bees or mosquitoes worth a dead polar bear in your world?

“As for extinction, it’s been happening since the pre-Cambrian age, at least. Species die out for all sorts of reasons.”

Ah, a quick empty cliche – s you’re proposing we just ignore it altogether?

In case you haven’t noticed you’re arguing about a part that WAS NOT quoted here – ergo most likely I did read it, don’t you think?

“I read the article and respectfully disagree with RF’s characterization.”

I’m sorry but what does it have to do with his obvious BS about this hybrid gas-guzzler besting V6 sedans in mileage?

@k.amm

“You contradict yourself in two paragraphs. You say that anyone who thinks laissez-faire free-market capitalism has a chance is clueless, and then in the next paragraph describe the reality of American economics, which as you mention, is decisively non-laissez-faire or free-market. Which is it?

Err where did I say the two are the same? :)

Joking aside the current American economy, this destructive monopolistic corporatism and this whole depression is exactly the only results you can expect from those lunatic laissez-faire ideas. This system was rotting for very long time and all the politicians etc were clueless or bought off to either shut up or to tell you otherwise.

What’s actually surprising me is this level of brainwash these parasites achieved on ordinary Americans. One would think that at least for a year or so now any idiot who still praises this utterly retarded, corrupt, broken system should be yelled down in Congress immediately – but no, most of the people instead still buy into all the ignorant crap about that ‘horrible socialism’ (WHOA!OMFG!) these paid shills in Congress and other forums spread…

I mean I saw enough brainwashing during my first 20 years back in the Commie era but it never really worked on me or anyone I know in my generation (people in their 30s and 40s now) – why this McCarthy-like BS is so pervasive here, I don’t get it.
Of course, due to the political system almost all politicians here get dirty so *their* interest in saving as much as they can from the current (disgusting) status quo is at least obvious but it doesn’t explain why common people cannot see when the system is dead broken (they didn’t see it was working *against* them for long time either)…

What I was saying is if you are to rebuke someone’s claims about socialism’s supposed superiority you have to forget laissez-faire because one has to point only to the current mess to kill your argument forever. :)

Efficiency costs. 2Mode isn’t expensive for what it is, and in this vehicle its option cost isn’t prohibitive as a percentage of the price of the vehicle it’s offered in.

GM is on the dole and they’re building stuff that won’t make money, won’t confer a strategic advantage and does zippo to counter the problems that beset us.

The first is irrelevant. 2Mode will make money if it sells and it does offer real advantage in light-duty trucks and possibly other vehicles if economies of scale are reached. It’s early.

And the natural habitat for these things is University Ave? What for?

I made no comment on what the natural habitat might be. Point is, people in that locale bought them and they had their reasons, whatever they were. It’s their call, not yours.

What’s the point of this marginal 800lb tow rating, from a utilitarian perspective?

Tow capability is thrown it. It’s not the primary motive for purchase. Lambdas are not full-frame vehicles. They are also smaller. Some buyers have a preference for body-on-frame trucks. This is a more efficient way to accommodate them, wrt fuel.

…too few are used in a way that couldn’t be matched by something a lot smaller.

Not for you or me to say.

You might also consider that the highway fuel economy of these behemoths could almost be matched, much cheaper, by other GM GMT900 behemoths if GM cleaned up the aero, as they did on these, and installed a VCM engine, as they did on these. And they could do that without losing the original tow rating. And improve the fuel economy of all the SUVs they built, rather than just a blingy and expensive few.

Yup, but there’d be no improvement to city mileage, which is the driving condition many urban buyers of SUVs find themselves in for 80% of their driving. For same vehicle type, the city improvement is huge.

Phil

I see. You need a 3-ton behemoth to tow more CO2-emitting toys a couple hundred miles in rural driving but this particular 3-ton behemoth emits 20% less CO2 than other 3-ton behemoths when driven in the city that you don’t live in.

I’m sure Mother Nature appreciates your concern.

You forgot “ridiculously expensive.” I’d be willing to adopt a “wait-and-see” attitude on this but you should remember that this is the third badge-engineered GMT900 lard-assed hybridized vehicle and its siblings adorn dealer lots for months and months and months. Cadillac owners might be willing to go the extra dozen kilobucks but for most of the SUV market these things are pointless.

GM is on the dole and they’re building stuff that won’t make money, won’t confer a strategic advantage and does zippo to counter the problems that beset us.

And the natural habitat for these things is University Ave? What for?

The legions of these things roaming the prairie are the big reason I no longer drive a subcompact car. You don’t have to putt along in your Ford Aspire too awfully long watching these things – and Hummer H2s and whatnot – careening along with a moron at the helm, yakking on his cell phone, eating breakfast, reading or maybe all three at once before you realize that owning a subcompact is sort of a bad idea. Their bumper is aimed at my head.

It tows 5800lbs. The Lambda quads do 5000lbs. What’s the point of this marginal 800lb tow rating, from a utilitarian perspective? And the utilitarian point of view is often a red herring… too few are used in a way that couldn’t be matched by something a lot smaller.

You might also consider that the highway fuel economy of these behemoths could almost be matched, much cheaper, by other GM GMT900 behemoths if GM cleaned up the aero, as they did on these, and installed a VCM engine, as they did on these. And they could do that without losing the original tow rating. And improve the fuel economy of all the SUVs they built, rather than just a blingy and expensive few.

Ressler: “Can we abandon the pejorative, “Gas Guzzler?””

I’m so very surprised someone so sensitive to the use of pejorative language never managed to parse “rice ready, not road ready.”

I see Escalade Hybrids in and around Los Angeles a couple of times a week. It’s not difficult here to spend a fortnight at a time driving nothing but slow city streets and freeways. A large, comfortable vehicle that turns in 20+ mpg during successive days and days of city driving would be welcomed by a lot of SUV drivers here if they only knew about GM’s 2Mode. In California, there is a significant population that is interested in fuel economy for other reasons than concern over the cost of fuel, while having no interest in a small front-wheel drive hybrid (or traditionally-powered) car.

Further, this vehicle so villified will impose a smaller city-transit carbon footprint than the vast majority of luxury sedans infesting our streets and boulevards here in SoCal. The primary obstacle to better sales performance of the GMT900 2Modes is inept and anemic marketing, not the price. Price is secondary but important. I’d much rather see the price differential over a gasoline GMT900 be $5,000 instead of $15,000, but in some locales, the difference is being paid because it’s still affordable for many.

Can we abandon the pejorative, “Gas Guzzler?” It seems particularly that New York, San Francisco and Boston writers who don’t own cars and frown on driving slap this label on any vehicle that uses more fuel per mile than whatever mouse hauler is their latest environmentally-approved reference. No need for our host to perpetuate the anti-car crowd’s favorite cheap shot. A large, comfortable vehicle that can roll through grinding city traffic all day at 20 mpg is not “guzzling” gasoline in 2008. It’s doing better than what most people in socially-acceptable semi-lux and luxury sedans rolling under the same circumstances can claim for their iron.

No, I’ve not owned an SUV. I look forward to the day when forward vision on the road is restored by declining incidence of tall trucks presently blocking my view. And yet, given the segment’s size, I see only good that the 2Mode option exists for weightier iron and hope to see its incidence expand in vehicles appropriate to its strengths. In a pickup, it’s a contender for some of my dollars.

Phil

I don’t need an SUV – I would be very happy to have a van with these capabilities, but that is not available. This is a good alternative – my current van is rated 13 city and 17 highway; when used for non towing duties, it gets 15 mpg. A twenty five per cent improvement in fuel economy would be awesome. And I have ridden in a new Escalade – one of my employees has one – anyone who describes this as a POS is totally delusional. As a luxury vehicle with substantial capabilities over other luxury vehicles it is extremely competitive. Lose your ludicrous assumptions and look at the real world!

I was shouted down (that’s hardly respectful to me) and then told I could ask questions during the signing. When I tried, I was told to leave or they’d call the police. You may think my actions were inappropriate. I think that indoctrinating children about global warming hysteria is worse.

Funny thing is that I’m working on a book that will almost certainly get me an invite to speak at this book fair if I manage to finish it. I plan on walking into the building director’s office, handing her a copy and ask how she’d like it signed.

She made it the topic of discussion when she lectured us about not leaving computers running. At least she could have put the projector in standby mode. Of course that would take some technical ability like RTFM. She also used a microphone to speak to a crowd of about 30 people.

How many passengers?

Two. David and her co-authoer.

Comfort is also a factor.

No doubt. When you’re used to 25,000 sq ft vacation homes, you have to roll in style. A million dollar tour bus is more luxurious than a Red Roof Inn, not that Laurie would stay at something so plebian.

A less fuel efficient vehicle using biodiesel is a decent comprimise, again in my opinion.

Which is why I suggested a Suburban. Of course a tour bus that gets 6 mpg is not a dreaded evil SUV that gets three times that or more on the highway.

Can a Suburban run on bio-diesel? (I honestly don’t know.)

AFAIK, any diesel engine can be converted to bio-diesel.

So when I make a comment about environmentalists I’m using anecdotal evidence in support of my statement but when you stereotype conservatives that’s just hunky dory.

You might want to read the entries on the National Review’s Corner blog today. You’ll find that conservatives can be nuanced in their approach.

For the matter, though, Obama is left of center politically and has surrounded himself by hard lefties for most of his life.

As for “the rest of the world”, a great rabbi once said that since the ‘rest of the world’ was silent during 1933-1945, or worse, he presumes that now they have nothing of value to say.

I don’t care if they want to live in 100,000 sq ft mansions. I just don’t want hypocrites lecturing me when I’m more environmentally benign than they are. I managed waste streams for a large industrial lab and I have more professional and academic environmental experience than Gore and David put together. To begin with they have little standing to comment on the subject. When you add in their hypocrisy the standing goes negative.

The question was about polar bears. One species is in decline, the other species are increasing.

As for extinction, it’s been happening since the pre-Cambrian age, at least. Species die out for all sorts of reasons.

Did you bother to read all of Burgess’ article? I read the article and respectfully disagree with RF’s characterization.

Robert, if you’d read the dead tree version you would have seen an adjacent article touting Car Tatts.

Using the same truck platform GM could offer a no-frills 2WD l hybrid contractors version that provides power for the job site. Having an electric PTO could also appeal to Ambulance and other niche markets.

I still don’t get it though. Laissez-faire isn’t embodied in a warlord-led country. Indeed, a “warlord lead country” is just a very primitive form of totalitarianism; the warlord is the government. Touch the warlord up with some Ministerial appoitnments and a palace with much pomp and protocol, and now he is the king, emperor, or whatever. Dilute the king’s power through a parliament, and you have diluted the power of one man over the state but have not diluted the power of the state itself over all men.

Laissez-faire implies a lack of coercive meddling on individual’s voluntary interactions – economic and otherwise – by other people. Whether these “other people” originate from the local crime gang or from the recognized government (which in many places is merely the most dominant local crime gang) is irrelevant.

The most laissez-faire environment I can think of right now in the world is this interwebs we are communicating through, and I don’t think its a coincidence that this is where the United States has “beaten” the rest of the world pretty badly in its technical invention, deployment, and the social revolution it has ushered into the world. Where we are the most regulated and straightjacketed by cops, bureaucrats, gatekeepers, and guilds in our economic endeavors (health care, financial markets, heavy industry) the United States lags.

GM is a great example of that. Many self-interests over time have used the law and corporate institutions to insulate themselves from reality, and apparently use the rest of society to involuntarily subsidize their miserable status-quo.

The problem I see with the vehicle is the business case… Who could possibly want it?

If you have to sweat cost of gas, you don’t belong in a Cadillac. You certainly can’t afford an extra $15K for a hybrid Cadillac.

If you don’t have to sweat the cost of gas but don’t want to leave a giant carbon footprint, you’re not going to want an Escalade even if it gets 20mpg… you’ll get something else. Someone who’s reasonably comfortable is probably thinking they’ll take a look at the new small Lexus hybrid.

If you don’t sweat the cost of gas but want an Escalade hybrid, you really don’t care about the fuel economy and you probably don’t care about saving the planet (you think ACC is a hoax or just don’t care one way or the other). So, why spend the extra $15K or whatever for it? It’s unlikely environmentalists have powerboats to pull.

If you need 8 seats, like your luxury and pull 5Klbs or less, GM has thoughtfully provided the Buick Enclave, at roughly half the cost of this thing with similar fuel economy. The Escalade tow limit is 5.8Klbs, so there’s not much lost there.

Really, who wants this? And the problem with Burgess is that he’s gushing over a vehicle that’s doomed.

The other issue I have with Burgess is that he seems to think enviros equate “hybrid” with “environmentally responsible.” While enviros sometimes misunderstand the true impact of some things, this thing is still a gas guzzler. Nobody’s going to be confused about that.

Pinkos like me can’t ignore the horrific failures of as-implemented communism, much as the proponents of laissez-faire can’t ignore the trainwreck of warlord-led countries where government is nonexistent.

The problem is that, the further you get to the extremes, the more radical the middle looks. This is why the average American conservative thinks Barack Obama is a dangerous red, while the rest of the world snorts at such an assertion.

I’m sure that, were you to have done so “off-line” you would have gotten a different response. You challenged a presenter in the middle of a lesson for children. I would have probably gotten the same if I had piped up about safe sex in a lecture about abstinence, or started making peacenik points during Rememberance/Veteran’s Day.

You picked a scab in a sensitive moment. You ought not to be surprised that you got their hackled up.

A Gaia equivalent to buying indulgences from the Catholic church.

Red herring. Pollution is real, the state of your immortal soul in the eyes of God is entirely up for theological debate

Carbon offset credits, as well as other pay-to-pollute schemes like taxes per tonne of garbage, as I explained, put the cost of polluting closer to it’s creation, rather than downloading it onto society as a whole. Pollution has a cost, by the way, and just because you can’t see that cost immediately doesn’t mean that it isn’t there.

It’s fun to watch both environmentalists and conservatives fracture into opposing groups in their discussions on offset credits. Ideological greens oppose it because it’s condoning pollution, and all pollution is bad, no matter the economic reality; ideological conservatives either give in to their knee-jerk anti-green tendencies, or view it as a tax, and all taxes are bad, no matter the economic reality.

You mean to realize how stupid Hayek’s praise of laissez-faire turned out be?
No offense but anyone who still thinks free market capitalism has any chance to rule again without causing huge unrest worldwide has absolutely no clue about history, economics and the human society (general comment, nothing personal. ;)).

As someone grew up under Comie regime I am really not in love with socialism but you really need a much better example than this utterly failed American pseudo-capitalism (it’s modern corporationism mixed with granted monopolies and predatory banking) to beat one’s claim of socialism being a better system…

You contradict yourself in two paragraphs. You say that anyone who thinks laissez-faire free-market capitalism has a chance is clueless, and then in the next paragraph describe the reality of American economics, which as you mention, is decisively non-laissez-faire or free-market. Which is it?