Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : VALENCE TECHNOLOGY (VLNC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MKT_entropy who wrote (25051)	11/12/2001 1:33:52 PM
From: Rich Wolf	Respond to of 27311

OT re EVs: I agree with not forcing a push to zero-emission vehicles (e.g., EVs), and with promoting hybrids instead. The article you linked seemed to support this position: <<California requires that by next year, 10 percent of vehicles sold must produce far less pollution than cars sold now. While 2 percent must have no emissions at all, the other 8 percent can have some, using technologies like more advanced versions of gas-electric hybrids now on the market, and seals that prevent fuel vapors from escaping. The proposed Northeast rule would push the plan back by four years. In the interim, it would allow automakers to earn credit against the future requirement by producing alternatives like hybrids. California also awards credits, but the Northeast plan would give far more. For example, the sale of one advanced hybrid next year would relieve the maker from having to produce 12 electric cars in 2007. The Northeast plan would also allow car companies to earn ZEV credits by using existing technology to cut pollution from light trucks, vans and sport-utility vehicles, which are not covered by California's plan. >> Thanks for the link.