🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <2hh5c6$ot2@skates.gsfc.nasa.gov>,
James G. Acker <jgacker@news.gsfc.nasa.gov> wrote:
>Ted Holden (medved@access3.digex.net) wrote:
>: In article <2h65su$sme@skates.gsfc.nasa.gov>,
>: David Graham <dave@gyrfalcon.gsfc.nasa.gov> wrote:
>: not into EV's for < 5K dollars.  THAT I suspect, the average driver in 
>: the DC area might buy into.  Good also would be avoiding the lead-acid 
>: batteries which GM is still using and go with the newer battery compounds 
>: being used in laptop PC's.


	From a pollution standpoint, LA batteries are probably a lot more
	benign than, say, NiCd batteries.  



>	It's a good idea, but...  I read that the developers of the Impact
>wanted two things -- something that could keep up on the highway and
>something that would be quote "affordable" unquote.  Only by using
>conventional lead-acid batteries could they pull off an electric car
>for under $30,000.


	I thought the Impact was going to be introduced at a little less
	than twice that cost, despite initial goals of an <$10k car.


>   The more advanced batteries cost too much!


	And they're hard to dispose of properly.

-- 
New .signature under development.  Start your development now!  Beat the crowd!