Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Nordic Electric-Car Maker (Think) Goes Bankrupt

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 05:25 PM
Original message
Nordic Electric-Car Maker (Think) Goes Bankrupt
February 28,2006 | OSLO, Norway -- Think Nordic AS, the electric-car maker once owned by Ford, was declared bankrupt Tuesday after failing to meet wage and other payment obligations.

(...)

The company had been owned by Ford Motor Co. until late 2002, when Ford lost faith in battery-powered cars as a way of reducing pollution.

Under Ford, hundreds of the tiny, rounded, two-seat Think cars had been imported to the United States for a three-year test. About 300 were returned to Norway in 2004.

(...)

Despite efforts to develop new models and an 11 million kroner ($1.6 million) grant from the Norwegian Research Council in May, Think Nordic suffered chronic economic problems and was never able to resume full production. About 1,000 of the cars were made.

http://www.salon.com/wire/ap/archive.html?wire=D8G28JFO1.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
benburch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 05:27 PM
Response to Original message
1. A Damned Shame.
We need a stored energy car for use in cities where their limited range and speed does not matter at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
megatherium Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. A real shame. I still expect battery-electric vehicles to win the
alternative fuel race though. I gather there's been quite a bit of progress on batteries (more capacity, more charge/discharge cycles, less expensive). Soon hopefully we'll see plug-in hybrids. Within 5 years I'll bet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benburch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Actually, I would bet on flywheels.
MANY fewer toxic bits to dispose of.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
megatherium Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Where are flywheels now? Are they close to storing the kind of energy
needed to power a car a reasonable distance (e.g., 100 miles at freeway speeds)?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dead_Parrot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Yes, but:
You really don't want to be around a high capacity flywheel with a broken bearing. They tend to go bang: Slight safety problem if you smack into a wall...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benburch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 11:49 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. They have been designed to be adequately strong and armored.
And a tank of gasoline isn't very safe, either...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dead_Parrot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 12:09 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. True about the gas tank, but...
Edited on Wed Mar-01-06 12:11 AM by Dead_Parrot
...but even an exploding gas tank doesn't sent out chunks of carbon composite the size of your head at mach 2. Modern flywheels aren't buried several metres underground to stop mice nibbling at the wires...

And whilst you can slap lots of armour on them, you then have to accelerate the armour as well, so you need a bigger flywheel, so you need thicker armour, so... you see where that goes.

I'm not saying it's unsolvable, just explaining why we're not doing it at the moment. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dead_Parrot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 09:37 PM
Response to Original message
5. Who'd have thunk
That this manufacturer



lasted longer than this one?



:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dcfirefighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #5
9. What people want, vs. what people have to pay
People can use gas & oil while making the other 6.6 billion people on the planet pay for their emissions.

The true cost of gasoline, depending on who you ask, is $5-$12/gallon.

Our entire system of property rights and taxation favors endeavors that are labor-efficient, rather than 'land' efficient, with 'land' being natural wealth such as land, atmosphere, or oil. As such, land innefficient car culture is favored over land efficient transit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 04:02 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC