Comments on: RAN Supporters Shut Down GM Greenwashing Site!

By: jane

jane — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 14:17:53 +0000

i just loveeeeeeee the eviormant it so interesting i cannot believe this beatiful place is being destroyed please help me im losing control love janey joos

By: lilly

lilly — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 14:15:20 +0000

what are the layers of the rainforest

By: Antique Tractor Auctions

Antique Tractor Auctions — Thu, 07 May 2009 05:35:16 +0000

Nice looking blog. Which template are you using? Nice post as well!

By: Hut`ShmmY

Hut`ShmmY — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 11:33:52 +0000

GM GAGO KAH TALAGA PUTANG INA MO!!!!!!!!

By: The Understory » GM folds under pressure: greenwashing 2.0 and the aesthetic of authenticity

Fri, 15 Feb 2008 19:14:04 +0000

[...] been getting some good press lately about how GM’s public relations people decided to turn off some features on gmnext.com and hold a special forum in response to our supporters’ concerns about their [...]

By: Chia

Chia — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 19:16:52 +0000

What the heck, theres lots of vehicles out there that get way worse gas mileage than the Hummer. People just like to get on the bandwagon. When your weak Prius is in the ditch during a winder storm, whos going to pull you out?? And Im pulling a 6500lb trailer, is a Prius going to pull that also?? If you want to be green, stop driving. A 100mpg car is still using gas. And so does a Prius. I saw one at the gas station the other day next to me as I was filling up my 6.0L engine!!!!

By: The Understory » UPDATE: GM Responds to RAN Activists!

The Understory » UPDATE: GM Responds to RAN Activists! — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 23:02:54 +0000

[...] by Robin in RAN General on February 1st, 2008 Last week I told you that RAN supporters shut down interactive features on General Motor’s new greenwashing website, [...]

By: Christopher Barger

Christopher Barger — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 22:54:34 +0000

It’s great to see a healthy debate going about the role of both the individual and industry on important environmental issues. As I promised earlier, we are beginning a series of chats on GMnext.com and our first topic will cover the balance between how a company communicates its environmentally-focused actions and how it follows through on those actions.

To kick-off the series GM executive Brent Dewar will be on hand to discuss GM’s environmental policies and programs and answer your questions on Wednesday, February 6 from noon to 1 p.m. EST. To access the chat, go to the Live Chat section of GMnext.com and register with your e-mail address. On the day of the chat, click the “Enter Chat” button and join the conversation. Also, feel free to check out the video where Brent explains Brent explains his passion for the environment and the work he does for GM.

We’ll follow-up shortly with a schedule of additional chat participants that will include both GM and third-party experts to cover the topics being raised on GMnext.com including ethanol, hybrids, green jobs, the Chevy Volt and more. We hope you can join us.

Christopher Barger
Director, Global Communications Technology
General Motors

By: Catherine

Catherine — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 19:26:58 +0000

I just came across this site today and after reading all the blogs I must agree with the last one. We have until 2012 to get things right. But people and government do not really beleive this or they would take this seriously and all Americans and other countries would scramble to stop the destuction of our planet earth. Many of those who have money to burn think they will just buy their way though this disaster facing our world, but they are blinded by the gold in thier pockets. those who can’t afford to go green and want to have to just sit and make do with whatever they can afford. Politicians are blinded by power and greed; the few exceptions eventually give up in dispair of not being able to do what they really want to do to help this country and the world. We have a President who has shown by his deeds that he cares little to nothing about the earth’s environment. His head is stuck in the sand. theres no reversal of Global Warming.we only have from now ’til 2012

By: Gerald Griffin

Gerald Griffin — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 00:37:32 +0000

To RAN Staff, Well, we only have from now ’til 2012. What we will need more than ever is massive electric car conversions [from gas to electric] CEV’s, for older cars & trucks. The US Gov’t will have to give out grants to low to middle income people so they can have their older cars & small trucks converted. Will also need to convert all big trucks to bio-diesel or electric. Also the nations rail freight system & all tractor-trailer & hasmats will have to convert to trolley electric powered by wind, solar, & micro-hydro, or bio-diesel.The rail passenger lines & Amtrak will have to do the same.All oceanliners & ocean & lake freight will have to run on bio-diesel or electric. All passenger & freight airlines will be either bio-jet fuel or electric prop.All home or office heating oil will become bio-fuel. And no more coal-fired furnaces & power plants,as well as nuke plants, to be replaced by wind,solar, & micro-hydro. Is this what Al Gore said? NO—but I believe he said we have until 2012. After that, theres no reversal of Global Warming.

By: Luke

Luke — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:12:08 +0000

@Jennifer: The SUV strategy was a very conscious decision on the part of American automakers. They decided to market high-cost, high-emissions vehicles in order to make a large profit on each sale and compensate for the poor performance of their other offerings. Rather than innovating across their fleet in response to consumer disinterest, they decided on a marketing push to sell outsized monstrosities like the hummer in order to make up for losses elsewhere. It was a lazy, stopgap strategy that didn’t even help them in the long run.

Changing the behavior of individuals is important, sure, but people in positions to make large-scale decisions have a lot more ability to make rapid change. Saying that it should all be left to individuals reduces our ability to change things to the sum of our individual actions as consumers. The environmental movement, as RAN sees it, is about coming together as human beings–not just isolated consumers–and taking collective action to avert ecological disaster. If we’re to have any hope of avoiding the worst effects of climate change, we’re going to have to act collectively. That means convincing car manufacturers to take the leap and bring greener cars to market; it also means forcing them to conform to tougher fleet average emissions.

More of the decisions that truly affect our lives are made in boardrooms than legislative chambers. Limiting our voice in those decisions to the contents of our bank accounts is a recipe for tyranny and disaster.

By: Jennifer Harlan

Jennifer Harlan — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 19:12:09 +0000

OK, the comment about them producing the hummer is kind of silly. We live in a society that is driven by capitalism (not my picture of an ideal world, but, hey, I live in America). I think the hummer is a bad idea and a bad car for both the environment, and the pocketbook, but, I am not GM’s customer. I own a Toyota Prius, and my husband owns a Nissan Altima (would have been a hybrid, but we live in the wrong state for that). The american public enjoys their hummers, and they are willing to pay for them, and if GM wasn’t producing them, someone else would be. Yes, I think we should be pushing them to make better, greener, zero emission cars, but badmouthing them for producing something that obviously has a niche on american roads is unproductive. As technology gets better (through use and testing), as demand for the cars we want on the road increases, as demand for the monster trucks, suv’s, and hummers goes down, then GM and its competitors will switch gears and focus where we want. I think we should be focusing on the customers, not the car companies.

By: Chris Casper

Chris Casper — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 18:24:03 +0000

Doesn’t matter what GM offers for an explaination. They produce and sell Hummers so that is enough for me. I have a GM as our 2nd car, when it goes, my next car will be a Toyota as is the new Camry Hybrid we just purchased this summer.

By: Luke

Luke — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 18:26:17 +0000

@C. Lecznar: A lot of what RAN’s campaign has been about is pointing out the fact that viable technologies already exist that could really help the situation, but automakers have so far been unwilling to take the leap and bring them to mass market. PHEVs, for instance, already work well, yet all we have so far are vague promises and concept vehicles. So it seems that the automakers just don’t value low emissions as much as we feel they should. In that sense, we are expressing an opinion: they should get off their asses and bring the solutions that have already been shown to work to market. So far, they have been unwilling or too feeble to make the change.

By: Christopher Lecznar

Christopher Lecznar — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:43:50 +0000

I read through a few of those comments and was rather disapointed.(granted I wrote a one myself) Most of them were just people heckling GM. With that all we’re doing is attacking the effect rather than the cause; we will never accomplish anything as long as we keep attacking the effect. We need to give legitimate solutions to the problems and not just our opinions.

By: Doug Ward

Doug Ward — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 12:28:16 +0000

I’ll be interested to see what they have to say.
If they’d refocus the engineering dept to battery technologies instead of trying to put plasma TV’s in the back seat they might even accomplish something.Chrysler has a gemcar that is pretty neat.
All GM would have to do is upsize something like it with super battery technology and they’d have it. The fatcats in the M-pyre still want their fluff. THATS the problem

By: Nick

Nick — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 03:37:42 +0000

In response to Mr Barger’s post:

Wow – RAN has one of the biggest and most powerful companies in the world coming onto their blog to try and placate them in hopes of being left alone. Barger’s actions speak more powerfully than his words. Way to go, RAN!

By: Aaron

Aaron — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 01:06:19 +0000

Public forum on green jobs and 100 mpg cars hosted by GM? What will GM if the forum really represents what people really want: for automakers like GM to take responsibility for their environmental, economic and community impact (especially in Michigan) and to start producing the ultra efficient, oil-free, zero emission vehicles that we all really want to drive?

By: Robin

Robin — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 22:30:41 +0000

Sorry to reply twice, but while I was writing, Mr. Barger’s comment went up. I welcome the chance for continued dialog, but I want to make twwo quick clarifications.

He said that “We’ll welcome reasoned comments like the two comments you included above.” But that’s not true, GM is explicitly NOT welcoming any comments, reasoned or not.

Also, I think it is important to notice that GM only allowed us to post certain pictures from the event. At least two images didn’t pass their review, neither of which was offensive or rude.

My question for Mr. Barger: If each comment gets reviewed anyway, why not allow people to continue to comment and just delete any that are personally offensive?

By: Luke

Luke — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 22:28:14 +0000

Good work, Robin. I’m certainly looking forward to substantive discussion on the topics mentioned by Christopher above, and I don’t think I’m alone.