How much oil and gas did it take to make 220,000 cars? Another point is we are most likely 2-3 years away from a strong plug in auto movement.

How much energy lost in the future, because 220,000 people have new cars today that they might have held a few years out on, and in that time would have bought an electric car?

How much harder will it now be for companies to make a return on alternative fuel cars over the next three years, when the number of buyers have gone down due to car sales from this program?

It's easy to try and fix a problem. It's a whole lot harder to do so.

If you look at the vehicles in the video none of them seem to be more than (about) 5 or 10 years old which means that the old gas hogs with poor emissions are not the ones that are being distroyed. All that is going to happen is that the price of these used vehicles in this age bracket will increase because of the quantity that were destroyed (for no reason), people who owned older cars that really should be replaced will hold onto them for longer because they can't afford to replace it with a newer (more efficient) car, and rather than having a 25 year old car that burns oil off of the road you have a fuel efficient 7 year old volvo off the road.

Beyond this, a large portion of the cars (potentially the majority) that will be bought will have been manufactured in Canada, Mexico, Japan, or South Korea which means that the American's are borrowing money from China to stimulate the economies of foreign countries; while (as a Canadian) I apprieciate this it is a really moronic thing for a country to do.

Now, these cars will be recycled but until there is a demand for the materials from these vehicles they won't be processed and will sit on a lot rusting for no good reason.

Well, if the purpose of trading in "clunkers" was somehow enforced it wouldn't be simply losing probably decent cars like that Volvo. The idea was cars that we see daily on roads spewing smoke and probably needing yearly fixes was to be traded in. Its a good plan with great intentions. However, the people who will take advantage of it have money to spend in car payments and thus wouldn't be driving pure 'clunkers' in the first place.

The purpose was to get cars with 18 mpg or less off the road, and get cars at 28 mpg or more in there place. The quality of the car traded it was/is of no concern to the government.

if that car gets 18 miles or less to the gallon, and is driven every day, it's exactly the car targeted for this deal.

If that's good or not, is up to the people to judge, but please don't suggest that this kind of thing was unexpected, or even undesired by the people who formed the plan.

When I read the description of the plan from various sources before it launched they all described the situation as 'clunkers', meaning cars that should be retired. Not cars that are simply 18mpg.

The problem was the lack of foresight in that people with clunkers are typically those who simply can't afford car payments. So they wouldn't even consider trading it in as they couldn't afford the eventual car payment.

The other fault was the lack of advertising as to when it actually started. Those not really looking for cars, i.e. those with clunkers as described above, had no idea it was in affect. Example, my father in law with a 20 year old van that really is a clunker. He wanted to use this to get a newer van. However, I had to break the news to him yesterday when he brought it up that it already passed and he needs to call dealers to see if/when it may get renewed.

Its a good idea. Just poorly implemented.

The program is still going on, so he can still trade his van in.

It's funny how this is spinned here. We have the same thing in Germany - you get 2.500€ (3600 $) and have exactly the same conditions (total sum 1,5 billion € - 2,162 billion $). Here it's just viewed as a success, as it really helps the automobile industry.

The news from the US, I've just read is, that Ford has made 2,7% more volume of sales then in the same month last year - for the first time they actually sold more cars in 1,5 years.

But where does the $4,500 come from?

Yes. We sell cars, but if the total return to the government over the entire thing is less then $4,500, then it's another social program we can't pay for.

Yes, it's great for Ford. Aside from being great for the auto industry, it's not that great.

How does the engine seizing make me feel. Well it makes me feel damn good. We all gripe about high prices at the pump, and this is making sure that gas wasters will never make it back into the market. This may save upwards of a hundred million barrels of crude annually. More to the point people shouldn't be driving these Dinosaurs anyway.

For those saying wait. Electric still has storage issues, and fuel cells do not have a commercially viable form of storage yet. So we are still going to be gripped by gas engines for quite a few years yet. So we are still going to have another gasoline generation. I am sorry, but it is going to take more time then you are thinking. Meanwhile keeping the automotive industry healthy will actually accelerate development.

I'm not sure whether that Volvo was the S40 or the S60 but either way it is a car that gets somewhere between 22 and 24 "Combined" MPG which means that the only sedans which get dramatically better fuel economy are hybrids. Now, I could be wrong but looking at the video I saw mostly what looked like 5 to 10 year old cars which were mostly in good condition and the owners were likely going to buy a new car anyways.

Now, being that the people who own the 10 to 20 year old junkers that have awful fuel economy (and burn oil) tend to replace their cars with these 5 to 10 year old used cars how do they replace their cars with something more environmental when you destroy these cars? Seriously, wouldn't you rather have had the 10 to 20 year old car that puffs blue smoke and gets 15MPG off the road than this reasonably Efficient Volvo?

If this program is kept alive for any period of time all that is going to happen is the price of used cars are going to be pushed up to a level where people are "Forced" to take on more debt than they can handle; which is the kind of actions which caused the current recession in the first place.