If ever you had the ability to write to a "snoozepaper", now's the
time.

Just write an email to letters@... answering some of the
bogus letters against Boschert's excellent Op-Ed piece, which only
had the space to adumbrate the issues: the Times should give her
more space, or at least, deal with the issue more thoroughly.

If this email gets cut off, the text is on
http://EV1.org/linklatx.htm

Small link to the letters on http://ev1.org/linklat.htm
(this will automatically take you to the Times letter page)

Here's some sample answers, feel free to borrow or reuse:

"Letter writer Oatway raises the issue of where the electric power
would come from for plug-in cars. Many EV drivers have installed
their own solar rooftop systems, which they find are paid off in
about three years using money they save from not buying gasoline.
"Even plugging-in to off-peak power is less expensive as well as
much cleaner than gasoline, both in the source of the fuel, and in
downstream emissions. There is excess electric capacity at night,
charging up a fleet of EVs actually helps the grid balance loads and
reduce pollution.
"EV drivers who make their own electric find that even a modest roof
can supply more than enough electric to power one or two Electric
cars.
"Daytime peak electric is worth more to the utility, and producing
daytime power not only pays for overnight charging, but helps avoid
grid blackout and lowers demand on local transformers.
"This is the idea of 'EV-PV', where the plug-in car and solar power
work together to clean our environment.
"The Times should allot more space to this issue, and give Boschert
a chance to explain how it works, and answer some elementary
concerns."
"The fact that so many wrote on this critical issue shows that it's
a hot topic, and deserves much more coverage.

----------------------------

"Letter writer Landel's experience mirrors ours, that people want
plug-in production Electric cars. The California Air Resources
Board ("CARB") has failed to stand up to the oil and auto
companies. By allowing them to crush clean plug-in Electric cars in
exchange for Hydrogen research, CARB has sold out to dirty air,
destroying clean air and our future in a sea of toxic auto and
refinery emissions that it studiously ignores.
"Regulators must balance the failure of Hydrogen cars against the
success of Electric cars. CARB staff reveals that there are still
no Hydrogen cars that were ever sold to the public, and there won't
be anytime soon; there are only 93 Hydrogen cars in California.
"There are over 300 production plug-in Toyota RAV4-EVs, last sold in
Nov., 2002, owned by the public and still in daily use in California
(and exported to Florida, Hawaii, Colorado, etc.).
"Thus, even after CARB allowed auto makers to crush the Electric car
in favor of Hydrogen, these 328 Toyota RAV4-EV remain the only Zero
Emission Vehicles owned by the public, and more than three times the
total number of Hydrogen cars on the road to date.
"This shows that Electric cars are safe, have found loving owners,
and, even if a few Hydrogen cars are put on the road, they will
never be sold to the public.
"Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) cars use a clean fuel, and also
outnumber Hydrogen cars by many times. CNG is much more promising
than Hydrogen at a fraction of the cost, doesn't require a new
fueling infrastructure, and already have a proven fleet of thousands
of vehicles using existing technology that can easily be scaled from
buses, garbage trucks, vans and pickups down to small cars.
CARB needs to reverse course and use its $350 million budget to do
its job, instead of holding endless hearings and submitting to Big
Oil. The illusion of Hydrogen must be supplanted with the reality
of existing clean plug-in Electric cars, and CARB must enforce the
Zero Emission Vehicle mandate that it abandoned in 2003.
"The Times could do an estimable good service by recognizing the
success of the Toyota RAV4-EV, and help force it back into
production. Design work was suspended on the RAV4-EV in 1997; new
models should be developed and sold to the public. That's CARB's
job; they must be held to it, and not allowed to submit to Big Oil.

--------------------------------------

"Letter writer Masters is wrong about fuel cells, which are
not 'renewable batteries', and wrong to attack Boschert personally
(using emotionally charged words such
as 'delusional', 'sophistry', 'mischaracterizes', 'conspiracy
thesis', 'disingenuous') instead of answering her argument.

"Masters reminds one of the old lawyer saying, '...if you can't
argue fact, argue the law. If the law is against you, impugn the
Judge, or attack the Court itself...'.

"While Ballard is still receiving money for research, there are no
production fuel cell cars that have ever been sold to the public,
and there won't be. Honda's demonstration 'sale' of 2009 fuel cell
cars turned into a 3-year "boomerang" lease, when they realized that
these $1 million cars could be dismantled and sold for parts for
more than the proposed sale price of $104,000.

"There's little prospect of lowering the cost of the expensive fuel
cell stack, or the high-tech Hydrogen tanks required. Each Honda
FCX, moreover, requires a substantial Lithium battery, with its high
cost and limited service life, to enable the fuel cell to deliver
smooth power and to store energy from regenerative braking.

"The technical-grade Hydrogen required to run fuel cells costs the
equivalent of $18 per gallon, according to one AQMD supervisor, and
this can never be reduced due to the scrubbing required to remove
impurities such as hydrocarbons.

"Even worse, the fuel cell car uses Oxygen from the air, which is
contaminated by ambient hydrocarbons. It's not practical to carry
both bottles of compressed Hydrogen and Oxygen. This may be the
main reason why extensive and expensive research has extended the
life of the $300,000 fuel cell stack only 50%, from two years to
three years.

"Even if the price is lowered to $30,000, or $3,000, who would buy a
car knowing that the engine would only last three years?

"Ballard, while doing interesting research, is finding no
application of that research to mobile platforms such as cars. Fuel
cells will be practical in stationary applications long before they
are ever ready for cars, if ever. Probably, never."
--------------------------------------

Small link on http://ev1.org/linklat.htm
(this will automatically take you to the Times letter page)

Here is the text of the letters:

Alternatives to alternatives

---

Re "We need Voltswagens," Opinion, Nov. 19

Sherry Boschert omitted the critical flaw of plug-in electric
vehicles: The energy to charge the batteries must come from sources
typically dirtier than burning gasoline in an internal combustion
engine. Much electric power generated in this country comes from
coal. Failure to consider the damage done by additional coal burning
is naive. If we gain the additional energy by building nuclear power
plants, the issue of nuclear waste must be addressed.

A better approach would be to replace gasoline engines with clean-
burning and more efficient diesel power plants, and use a hybrid gas-
electric system in every vehicle. That would dramatically reduce
petroleum usage for transportation and make a positive impact on
global warming and the U.S. balance of payments.

Thomas Oatway Valencia

---

As the driver of a production electric car, I am constantly
approached by people who want to learn more about my car and where
they can get one. When I respond, "You can't," they walk away
shaking their heads. If the auto companies could respond to the
California Air Resources Board with viable vehicles many years ago,
why does the board resist them today? Because the board is willing
to accept the almost-but-not-quite possibility of hydrogen over
proven, available battery electric vehicles in its portfolio of
solutions.

Kevin L.E. Landel Cardiff

---

Total turnover to alternative vehicles is not going to happen in the
near future. If tomorrow all new cars were alternatively powered,
the marketplace and people's financial ability to purchase new
vehicles would still dictate a time span of decades before the
turnover is complete. Global warming, however, is not listening to
the marketplace or finance; it is proceeding at its own steady pace,
and will continue unless there are changes.

What is needed is a hybrid driving sensibility: Drive as little as
possible and start taking mass transportation.

Matthew Hetz Los Angeles

---

Boschert's diatribe against California's visionary support of
hydrogen fuel cells (refuelable batteries) mischaracterizes events
to suit her conspiracy thesis. The most disingenuous example was to
flatly say that fuel cell developer Ballard Power Systems "bailed
out after pouring millions of dollars into fuel cell vehicles." In
fact, Ballard received value equivalent to $168 million cash and
retains nearly 20% of the new company that will leverage the
marketing and engineering expertise of Ford and Daimler. Ballard is
infusing the joint venture with an additional $60 million and
continues its own manufacturing to meet a strong and growing global
demand for the larger public transit and stationary fuel cell
engines it has developed. Boschert has fallen victim to her own
delusional hype, and it now becomes difficult for the unwary to
differentiate between her sophistry and her subject, making her
article, as well as her book, "Plug-In Hybrids: The Cars that Will
Recharge America," puzzling footnotes in the real story of the
ongoing development of the electric car.

Richard D. Masters Independence, Calif.