i think a lot of "good ideas" start out poorly executed. Just as with the battery problems and the gas pedal or electronics... it will get cleaned up and fixed but in the meantime those Fords (who used to have the tire problems from Firestone which were made by the same factory as other brands by the way) are selling at 25% higher rates...and Toyota dropped 15%...

>Right - those use nickel metal hydride battery which is the problem. I think Tesla motors has the right idea...
>http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/03/tesla-electric-car-batteries-non-toxic-recycled.php
>
>
>>Up until the latest models, it would be better for the environment if you drove a Hummer:
>>
>>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/20/AR2009062001523.html?sub=AR
>>http://www.greenhybrid.com/discuss/f33/toyota-prius-bad-environment-12657/
>>
>>And:
>>You would do better in a Hummer. Manufacturing the Toyota Prius involves a shocking amount of pollution. A plant in Ontario, dubbed the "Superstack," mines and smelts the nickel for the Prius' battery, each of which then travels to Europe, China, Japan and the United States. How many Prius miles would it take to offset those trips? Canadian Greenpeace energy coordinator David Martin says the vast amounts of sulfur dioxide released over northern Ontario cause acid rain, which in turn destroys plants in the area, resulting in mudslides. In fact, the surrounding environment is so damaged that NASA uses the "dead zone" for testing moon rovers.
>>
>>Now for the bad news: The Prius' EPA mileage estimates have dropped for 2008 by 25 percent due to modified standards. The hybrid now averages a puny 45-mpg---not much better than cars at half the price. The Prius also costs more to operate and has a shorter life span than a Hummer, probably the most hated of all vehicles among environmentalist wackos. The Prius has a life expectancy of only 100,000 miles, and it costs an average of $3.25 per mile to operate. By contrast, the Hummer costs $1.95 per mile for a 300,000-mile lifetime
>>
>>
>>Now, that has all changed (supposedly) in 2009. A lithium battery and the whole process is (supposedly) streamlined. I'm waiting for factual articles.
>>
>>There are Greenpeace articles all over the web on it too.
>>
>>
>>>I really think it depends on the type of battery. According to the U.S. government, lithium ion batteries aren't an environmental hazard. "Lithium Ion batteries are classified by the federal government as non-hazardous waste and are safe for disposal in the normal municipal waste stream," says Kate Krebs at the National Recycling Coalition. While other types of batteries include toxic metals such as cadmium, the metals in lithium ion batteries - cobalt, copper, nickel and iron - are considered safe for landfills or incinerators (Interestingly enough, lithium ion batteries contain an ionic form of lithium but no lithium metal). Plus don't forget that you can recharge these too.
>>>
>>>>I'm by far not an expert in battery technology, but everything I've read and heard about it says that while they save gas, they are worse for the environment in other ways. But then, who really knows? Even the global warming alarmists are starting to say their research is faulty.
>>>>
>>>>>Are you sure about that? I was under the impression that Lithium-ion battery was made out of Lithium - which would make it made mostly of salt...so I thought these were not that bad for the environment and 97% recyclable... is this not correct?