H/T Bernie Wagenblast

This is vintage gold. The Chevy sponsored short film below helps show road safety from 1930s. Chevrolet also tries to convince us the new safety features of their latest cars make them the safest place to be, showing dramatic accidents to prove their point! Interestingly, the traffic fatalities statistics shows that cars were not actually the safest places to be in that era.  There were 34,494 fatalities recorded in 1935 in the United States, which had a population of 127 million at that time. With 228 billion vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and adjusted fatalities per 100,000 population 27.1, was not an ideally safe environment for travel by car. In comparison, today we have about 34,000 deaths for a population of 314 million, with an VMT of 2,954 billion and adjusted fatalities per 100,000 at 10.833.  Thankfully the technology has come a long way to make the cars safer and we have a few more options than a Chevy to look to for a safer ride. Nonetheless it is pretty cool to see how things were back in the day.

(Source:  GM’s Fast Lane Blogs, via TreeHugger )

GM Defends the Volt’s Design
A recent Carnegie Mellon University study (pdf) challenged the real-world gasoline savings and cost effectiveness of plug-in hybrids like the Chevy Volt. GM’s Vice President Global Program Management, Jon Lauckner, who has been involved in the Volt project responded on the company’s blog. Find out what he had to say below.

All-Electric Range

The first thing is the electric range of the car. Somewhat strangely, the CMU study found that “for urban driving conditions and frequent charges every 10 miles or less, a low-capacity PHEV sized with an AER (range) of about 7 miles would be a robust choice for minimizing gasoline consumption, cost and greenhouse gas emissions.”

7 miles? Really?

Well, Jon Lauckner responds:

I’ll cut to the chase; for starters, the study’s endorsement of plug-in vehicles with only a “token” electric-only range (seven miles) overlooks the inconvenience of recharging for the vast majority of drivers (approx. 90 percent) with a daily commute that exceeds seven miles. I mean, honestly, how many customers are going to stop every seven miles and wait at least 30 minutes (if a car has a high-capacity charger like the Volt with the same level of electrical energy to match it) for their battery to be recharged? […] And, if customers don’t recharge during the day, these “token” plug-ins will run primarily on gasoline. How is that consistent with reducing green house gas emissions and our dependence on petroleum?

Click here to read the entire article.