Camry hybrid: How hot will it be?

Could the Camry hybrid challenge the Prius?

The Toyota Camry hybrid is months away from going on sale and the price still hasn't been officially released. Yet, dealers are already taking orders on Toyota's newest hybrid.

Now, this isn't that unusual in the world of hybrid cars. Preorders were also common on the Highlander hybrid and the Lexus RX400h before they were officially launched. Yet, the sales hype behind both the Highlander and the RX400h hybrids eventually waned a bit, especially compared to the Prius hybrid.

So, how will the Camry hybrid compare?

The Toyota Camry already owns a very loyal following. Will this core customer group drive Camry hybrid sales? Ultimately, that will probably depend on pricing, but current owners offer a huge, potential customer base.

Additionally, many potential hybrid buyers have complained that the Prius is just too small, otherwise they would have purchased the vehicle. Many of these potential customers have expressed strong interest in the Camry hybrid. Will this segment outnumber current Camry owners seeking an upgrade?

It's also possible that those putting down-payments on the first hybrid Camrys are simply hoping to lock in tax credits. As I blogged yesterday, Toyota hybrid tax credits will expire before the end of the year, so placing a down payment as quickly as possible isn't a bad idea.

One can be sure; however, that the entire auto industry will be nervously watching the launch of the Camry hybrid. If the hybrid Camry is as popular as the Prius hybrid, the hybrid revolution will reach critical mass much sooner than anyone is expecting. If this happens, competitors beware, for only Honda is positioned to face this challenge.

Even Toyota might not be ready for such acceptance, so I wouldn't be surprised if Toyota prices the Camry hybrid fairly high simply so that it can adequately supply demand - at least in the short term. Until the hybrid supply chain is a little more robust, Toyota just might not have much choice, although I'd love be wrong.

Interested in a hybrid vehicle? Now might be the best time

So, you're thinking about buying a hybrid vehicle, but you just aren't ready? Well, now might be your best opportunity.

In the last several weeks gas prices have dropped, yet last week's suicide attack on a Saudi oil refinery could have pushed the price of gasoline up far more than Katrina. Almost certainly, we are in the calm before the oil price storm and gas prices will eventually spike this year. When that happens, as it did after Katrina, interest in hybrid cars will also spike.

Even without a spike, tax credits for Toyota hybrids will expire before the end of the year. So, if you are interested in a Prius or Highlander hybrid you should act now, if the credit is important. Interest in the Prius is always high, but if gas prices skyrocket again, finding a Prius could prove almost impossible.

While tax credits for the Honda Civic hybrid or the Ford Escape hybrid, for example, will probably last through the year, finding one of these vehicles might also prove nearly impossible following another surge in energy prices.

So, if you want to buy a hybrid this year, now could be the best time. Of course, if you are waiting for the Camry hybrid, there isn't much you can do until at least May.

Toyota Camry hybrid coming in May

According to an article in the Detroit News regarding the new Camry, the Toyota Camry hybrid should be available for sale in May. While Toyota has not set a price for its newest entry into its line of hybrid vehicles, Toyota is preparing to make about 60,000 hybrid Camrys per year.

Oil independence: Do Americans really care?

In order to achieve oil independence, Americans will have to make some tough decisions according to the article, Does America Want Oil Independence?. Still, hybrid cars and alternative fuels are a strong step in the right direction. While the article also plugs plug-in hybrid vehicles, I think it indirectly points out that flex-fuel plug-in hybrid vehicles offer the best path towards beginning a real push for oil independence. Nonetheless, without a majority of Americans pushing for oil independence, many analysts think real change is almost impossible.

Thus, the question remains, "Do the majority of Americans really care about oil independence?"

Why I like the flex-fuel Ford Escape hybrid

Lately, there has been a lot of buzz around ethanol, and suddenly GM has gone green by going yellow. Yet, a closer look at the numbers highlights some serious issues.

There are 168,987 gasoline pumps in the United States and only 608 of them offer ethanol (AutoWeek). In a previous post, Help us Detroit, I called GM's ethanol campaign pure smoke and mirrors.

If GM has put millions of ethanol vehicles on the road, where are they filling up? Also, why are the far majority of ethanol vehicles large SUVs and trucks? Isn't it ironic that most buying this technology aren't using ethanol, yet GM still receives CAFE credits for using the technology? If GM cares so much about ethanol, why isn't the technology in all vehicles, rather than just vehicles near failing CAFE?

Yes, ethanol offers great potential as a fuel, but not today. In fact, some analysts suggest that it could take 15 years before ethanol could really start making a difference, which is why I like the flex-fuel Ford Escape hybrid.

The Escape hybrid is already a great vehicle, reducing the conventional Escape's fuel consumption by between 20 and 30 percent, while also significantly reducing pollution. The flex-fuel Escape hybrid vehicle offers these same gains, plus the ability to use ethanol.

In 10 years, both ethanol and the technology behind hybrid cars will advance, but neither will offer a real solution to oil dependence. In 10 years; however, a plug-in flex-fuel hybrid vehicle could easily and economically function without oil - not just foreign oil - while continuing to push the bar for fuel economy.

I like ethanol and I like hybrid vehicles, but I really like flex-fuel hybrids. And if plug-in technology is added to those flex-fuel hybrids we add even greater fuel economy, while sparking greater competition and variety in fuel choices.

Shouldn't something as important as energy be about choice, especially in today's world?

Hybrid cars and Gas costs: Still a huge misunderstanding

Fortune Magazine is publishing an article on the development of the Toyota Prius in its March 6th issue. As a preview, Alex Taylor III wrote the article, Toyota's recipe for success.

Taylor doesn't seem critical of hybrid cars and appears to try to be objective in touching on the major hybrid issues. He is, ultimately, laying down the foundation for how Toyota's hybrids might completely dominate the future of automobile sales after all.

Still, he notes, "Critics complain that hybrids are inherently uneconomical because the $3,000 or more the technology adds to the cost of the vehicle can't be recouped with greater gas mileage; that they didn't improve fuel efficiency that much; and that some American models were being built more for performance than to benefit the environment."

To which Taylor states, "The knocks against hybrids are all true. But what the critics didn't put a price on was the value of being seen as eco-sensitive without giving up performance."

"Does it save enough money to pay for itself?" asks Jim Press, president of Toyota Motor Sales in the U.S. "That's not the idea. What's the true cost of a gallon of gas, if you factor in foreign aid, Middle Eastern wars, and so on? The truth is on our side."

While I agree with Mr. Press about real cost of gasoline, I have a bigger issue. Are hybrid vehicles "inherently uneconomical"?

There is simply no way that you can argue that a Toyota Prius is "inherently uneconomical", even without the current hybrid tax credit, and I'd say that the Honda Civic hybrid is close to this category as well. These vehicles are cost effective and do recover their costs for many drivers, especially those that drive in urban areas.

But let's just run a few simple numbers. In Southern California, where I live, it isn't uncommon to spend $100.00 per week on gasoline. That would add up to $4800.00 per year. Let's say a hybrid saves 20% - even though many save more - on your fuel needs. That would be roughly a $1000.00 per year. In 5 years you've saved $5000.00? What's the problem?

O.K., let's cut that it in half. $50.00 per week, $2500.00 per year and after 5 years you've saved $2500.00. Still not bad, and on the Civic and Prius you've recouped your costs. That's at current gas prices, which could go up significantly in the next 5 years. So, what's wrong with this bet, especially if protecting the environment is an important concern? This isn't treehugger craziness, it's just common sense.

To describe hybrids as simply "inherently uneconomical", is simply "inherently ignorant." Hybrids like the Prius recover their costs, while significantly reducing emissions. You're not losing money to be green. In fact, for many drivers it is a cost benefit to own a Prius.

Yes, cost-effectiveness isn't true for all hybrids, but it will be true for most hybrids in the future based on emerging hybrid technology. Most hybrid buyers understand this investment in the future angle, in addition to the real cost of gasoline and oil dependence.

That's why we shouldn't have capped tax credits for hybrid vehicles. Instead, we simply should have ended the $25,000 + tax deductions for the Detroit's worse gas-guzzlers.

That's "inherently uneconomical" for the welfare of the United States.

Update on Toyota Prius hybrid patent lawsuit

I watched a special on CNBC's Squawk Box regarding the patent lawsuit that has been filed against Toyota and its hybrid vehicles. There is a bit more to this lawsuit than I originally thought. Nonetheless, Toyota is and has been well aware of this patent and contends that they are not violating the patent. Still, even if Toyota loses this suit, it shouldn't mean the end of the Toyota Prius and the Highlander hybrid in America. If Solomon Technologies wins this patent dispute, they are seeking damages, not sales prevention. Still, I can't help but wonder why wasn't Ford, which uses technology similar to Toyota, also named?

Fit Honda adding another hybrid vehicle to lineup

Honda set to offer the first subcompact hybrid.

In 2007, according to unofficial reports, Honda will begin offering the Honda Fit Hybrid, a subcompact hybrid. With a starting price of just $11,790.00, the Fit hybrid should shake up the world of hybrid cars.

According to the report, the new Fit will achieve fuel efficiency in the range of the Toyota Prius hybrid or the Honda Insight hybrid.

Some analysts already speculate that this move is a sign that Honda now believes that hybrid vehicles will have a much more critical role in the future. In the past, Honda has indicated that it wasn't sure about the future of hybrids. In addition to the Insight and Fit hybrids, Honda also offers the Civic hybrid - now in its second generation - and the Accord hybrid.

Ironically, this will be Honda's fourth hybrid car. GM, on the other hand, has stated that it is mostly interested in putting hybrid technology only in its large vehicles. Thus, one cannot help but wonder if GM is not sealing its fate with its stubborn refusal to challenge Japan in small cars and the new battle for fuel efficiency supremacy.

A new plug-in conversion kit announced today, another coming soon.

Hymotion released a press release today announcing their new plug-in kit for hybrid cars.

At this time, Hymotion is offering the plug-in conversion kit for the Toyota Prius, but will soon offer one for the Ford Escape hybrid as well.

According to the release, the Hymotion Plug-in battery will "double" the fuel economy of the Prius.

Anthony Wei, Vice-President Business Development explains: "The secret ingredient to the 100 plus miles per gallon performance is the Lithium Ion Polymer technology in our PHEV battery. It's smaller, lighter, and more powerful than the NiMH batteries currently use in all Hybrid vehicle. This is the future."

For a single system the cost is $9,500. For those interested in starting a Prius conversion operation or for fleets, the Hymotion system is $6500.00 for orders of 1000 or more.

E-Drive, another plug-in provider offers systems that cost between $10,000 and $12,000, in comparison.

Additionally, I was contacted this weekend regarding the upcoming launch of another plug-in kit of sorts. Soon, a solar roof will be available for the Toyota Prius. This roof has been molded to perfectly fit the roof of the Prius and uses the sun to charge the hybrid batteries.

A formal announcement is due in a few weeks, so stay tuned.

More on plug-in hybrid cars.

Help us, Detroit....

Yesterday, I read an article that bothered me a bit. Daniel Howes, an auto reporter for the Detroit News, wrote an article, Help us, Mr. President, that really got under my collar.

Now, I like Howes as a reporter because I think he's pretty fair, especially compared to some of the other auto writers at the same paper. Still, you can't blame Howes for trying to save Detroit. What other choice does he have? In many ways, his job is probably dependent on the success of Detroit automakers.

What really angers me, I've realized, is Detroit automakers, especially GM.

Mr. Howes notes the legacy healthcare and pension costs of GM and Ford, while also complaining that Asian automakers have enjoyed unfair trade barriers. While I have sympathy for these issues, it isn't much.

Then, Howes states, "Nearly 20 GM models deliver 30 mpg or more; the first gas-electric hybrid SUV is a Ford; and Chrysler's Jeep Liberty is the U.S. industry's first diesel-powered SUV."

"Did Toyota and Honda set the standard in hybrids? Absolutely, and more models are coming. Same with Ford, GM and Chrysler. And GM and Ford have millions of ethanol-capable vehicles on the road today, a precursor to the ethanol-powered fleet that you say would free us from Oil Sheikdom."

Smoke and Mirrors

These statements are pure Detroit - deception and lies and the art of advertising.

First, in real world driving, GM doesn't have 20 models that achieve 30 mpg. Sure hybrid cars don't achieve EPA estimated fuel economy, but in reality almost every car misses their EPA numbers. In fact, the Jeep Liberty Howes mentions actually achieves 50% less than what the EPA estimates in city driving according to Consumer Reports.

Second, these faulty EPA numbers are used by GM and Ford to deceive CAFE. Consequently, many Ford and GM SUVs would not pass their CAFE requirements, if not for the EPA's inefficiency. Since this fact is well known by the government and industry alike, I'd call that U.S. protectionism - especially since SUVs have been Detroit's savior the last few decades.

Third, America's ethanol fleet, please! This one is the one that really sets me off, especially since I've seen at least 20 ads promoting how green GM now is because it has more than a million ethanol vehicles on the road.

Go Yellow? Go to hell GM! It has been a long running joke that almost everyone who drives a flex-fuel vehicle - one that can run on ethanol - doesn't even know it.

Why?

Ethanol is expensive most places it's offered, and ethanol isn't offered in very many places. Thus, a flex fuel vehicle really isn't much of a benefit to most, except Detroit automakers.

Adding flex-fuel capabilities to a large SUV only costs a few hundred dollars, but it enables vehicles that wouldn't pass CAFE to pass CAFE - EVEN THOUGH NO ONE IS USING THE FUEL. Thus, GM spends a few extra hundred deceiving the government - whom enables this deception - on vehicles it makes thousands of extra dollars in profits.

Who wouldn't take that deal? Here, you give me $500.00 and I'll give you $5000.00.

Thus, I'm supposed to be proud of GM for lies and deceit? Lies and deceit that don't reduce foreign oil consumption at all, but instead increase foreign oil consumption - this is something GM is spending millions bragging about?

Disgraceful.

How many more loopholes does the government need to give Detroit? I mean there is already a $25,000 tax deduction for the most offensive, gas-guzzling and polluting SUVs - which was only just reduced and doesn't even include depreciation deductions.

How much more does Detroit need?

Ford used to anger me as much as GM, but at least Ford has admitted the error in its ways and has taken a step in the right direction. Still, Ford needs to do much more, but I'm a huge advocate of the Escape hybrid.

If GM, on the other hand, wants my sympathy or wants my money, then GM needs to come clean. Since 9/11 GM has continued to promote it's most fuel inefficient vehicles as its marquee product. This is irresponsible and un-American.

Get with the program GM. Take some real responsibility. Admit some mistakes and talk to the people about the effort it will take to change. Tahoes, Escalades and Chargers aren't the answer. Help America - lead America - towards ending not just foreign oil dependency, but oil dependency and global warming emissions - not in some mystical future world of fuel cells, but today!

Let's Dare to Dream!

When GM shows some vision and some real leadership - first by accepting its failures and then with new products - I'll be the first in line to buy a GM.

Ultimately, GM has no one to blame but themselves, and forgiveness cannot begin without first accepting responsibility. Until then, I'll hope for bankruptcy.

Ford to redesign Escape and Mariner hybrids

Ford to update its current hybrid vehicles.

By the end of 2007 Ford plans to redesign both the Ford Escape hybrid and the Mercury Mariner hybrid for the 2008 model year. Ford is going to redesign it's smaller SUVs to give them a bolder design. The move also; however, probably spells the end for the proposed Mazda Tribute hybrid.

Bush keeps plugging hybrid vehicles

President Bush is plugging alternative energy on a two day trip starting today. One stop took Bush to Johnson Controls, Inc., an auto-parts supplier, where he promoted the development of new batteries for hybrid cars, including plug-in hybrid vehicles. Like many auto suppliers, Johnson Controls believes that Lithium-ion batteries will soon power most hybrid vehicles. (more)

Is 'I don't care' America's mantra?

Democrats often complain that George Bush doesn't have a mandate. I agree, but if Al Gore had won because of the popular vote, would he have had a mandate? Since both Bush and Gore could only muster up about 25% of the vote, wasn't the real mandate of the 2000 election, "I don't care"? In fact, has not only 'I don't care' become the mandate of most modern elections, but the mantra of America?

Speaking of politics, how about those tax incentives? No, I don't mean tax credits for hybrid cars and other fuel efficient technologies. Shoot, $3400.00 is small change compared to the $25,000 tax deduction you can take for buying a Hummer.

But who cares? If I can afford to gas-guzzle why should you care?

Sure, Nigerian rebels are kidnapping American oil workers and threatening to bomb foreign oil ships, and Iran is signing huge oil deals with China as it builds nuclear bombs. But who cares?

I mean so what if China started copying American oil consumption? Just because there wouldn't be close to enough oil for the world, who cares?

And that global warming mumbo-jumbo melting ice caps agenda, maybe that's just a part of your 'evolution' theory?

I say God bless American politicians. We cap tax credits for hybrids because we don't want too many of them and we cap them by manufacturer so that we can protect GM. Yet we don't put any limits on tax deductions for Hummers and other gas-guzzlers - we don't even monitor how many are using the deduction. Now that's American!

We're saving GM - isn't that what is important? With flex-fuel technology no one uses, faulty CAFE testing, and tax deductions we can make sure that GM will never have to take fuel efficiency seriously.

This is America, monkey boy, we don't have to think about the future or take responsibility for our actions and consumer choices - that's bin Laden's logic, not American logic.

Pollution, global warming, terrorism - who cares? In America cupholders are more important than fuel efficiency - at least for real Americans.

Lithium: Why hybrid vehicles will dominate auto sales by 2020

Hybrid cars will dominate new car sales by at least 2020.

When stories such as how the Greenland ice cap is melting twice as fast as was thought just a few years ago hit the press, those of us that worry about global warming get anxious and even angry. Still, I believe that in the next decade, the evidence of global will become so clear, that the majority of the world will demand action.

Such demand could justify the extra costs of hybrid vehicles, even if those costs can't be made up solely by saving money on fuel.

While hybrid critics might claim that such demand could benefit clean diesel instead of hybrid cars, those critics simply have no vision.

Why?

New research being done at Sandia National Laboratories, for example, demonstrates that a new generation of lithium-ion batteries will be ready to take over the hybrid battery market before 2010.

Once this transition takes place, lithium-ion batteries will be cheaper, lighter and far more efficient than the current NiMH batteries used in today's hybrids. This means cheaper hybrid vehicles that further reduce pollution while offering greater fuel efficiency and better performance than today's hybrid vehicles.

If this hybrid battery transition occurs by 2010, imagine the technological advances that will occur in this technology by 2020. If you are having problems with this visualization, think about the advancement of notebook computers from 1995 to 2005 and remember that software, computers, semiconductors and lithium batteries dominate the technology behind both hybrids and notebook computers.

By 2020, conventional vehicles simply won't be able to cost-effectively compete with hybrid cars.

Maybe, you say, but won't fuel cell vehicles be ready by then?

Maybe. Since the same batteries used by gasoline hybrid vehicles will probably be used by fuel cell vehicles, fuel cell vehicles could also gain from these advancements. Still, since Ford, GM, and Toyota, for example, believe that fuel cell vehicles will be fuel cell hybrid vehicles, hybrid vehicles will still dominate auto sales either way.

Today's hybrid cars won't save America, or the world, from global warming or oil dependency, but tomorrow's hybrids could. The more we invest in hybrids today, the sooner we'll have real tools to fight oil dependency and global warming, not just in America - the world's biggest global warming culprit - but in the entire world.

The potential of hybrids simply must be tapped. Sure, conservation, clean diesel, ethanol and bio-fuel can help, especially in the short term. Moreover, clean diesel, ethanol and bio-fuel can also be utilized by hybrid vehicles and should be used by hybrids.

Dare to dream that the world can end oil dependence and that the world can fight global warming because it can. Let's make it happen.

Washington Post rips hybrid's HOV access

I try to not get too involved in politics. When push comes to shove, it takes a lot of money to be successfully elected to higher office, and almost as soon as a politician is elected, they are already thinking about their reelection. Thus, I think politics - on both sides of the aisle - are about money. As a result I have little faith in either party and am a registered Independent.

Nonetheless, I thought the Washington Post was a liberal paper, but I guess not when it comes to hybrid cars, the environment, or foreign oil dependency.

Since Sunday the paper has taken an agenda against hybrid cars and HOV lane access. On Sunday, the Post printed an editorial calling for the end of HOV lane access for hybrids because "As plenty of the region's commuters know, hybrid vehicles are the main culprit in the ever-worsening traffic in the region's carpool lanes."

The Post points out that 22% of vehicles in the HOV lane are hybrids, which tops the 15% of illegal users also using the HOV lanes. Yet, does the Post care about the illegal users? No, only the hybrid vehicles, which the post states " Hybrids' environmental advantages have diminished as stricter federal rules have required gas-powered cars to have cleaner engines, starting with 2004 models."

So now the Post believes that current gasoline automobiles solve all of America's problems? According to the Post there is now no reason to worry about pollution, global warming, or foreign oil dependency?

I can't help but wonder what the editors at the Post drive, but I bet its BMW, Mercedes, and Lexus. Gas-guzzling means nothing to this fine group of Americans because the cost of gasoline means nothing to people who make the kind of money editors for the Post make.

On a side note, I also wonder how many editors at the Post have children enlisted in the Military - I'd bet not many.

While I understand that hybrids might cause problems for HOV effectiveness and that is an issue worth addressing, to claim that hybrid's environmental impact is now insignificant because of new gasoline vehicles is a complete travesty - an absolute joke.

Yeah, all the gas-guzzlers idling in traffic everyday aren't really a problem anymore, at least not if they are 2004 or later models - as long as you aren't worried about the billions of barrels of oil they waste every year in traffic. And, oh yeah, in congestion even 2004 gasoline vehicles create significantly more pollution than hybrids, but who really ever drives in congestion? Don't we all drive 55 mph on the highway all the time?

So, hybrids are the problem, I mean they do make up almost 1% of all vehicle sales in America, isn't that already enough? Isn't that enough change for one lifetime? Haven't we almost solved global warming and foreign oil dependency already anyway?

I say if you care about the environment, if you care about foreign oil dependency, or if you care about obscene oil company profits, then you should toast the post. Cancel your subscription.

If everyone in America drove a hybrid, such as the Toyota Prius or the Honda Civic hybrid, foreign oil would not be needed. That's a goal worth striving for and it's far more important than HOV congestion - by far.

Yet, this isn't even an issue for the Post. How pathetic.

Maybe, just maybe, in the short term, the Post could focus on the 15% of illegal drivers in the HOV lane. How much money could be made by fining all of those drivers? Additionally, HOV traffic would be less than it was before hybrids if illegal users were punished and forced to stop using HOV lanes.

But that's not the point of the Post. Instead, let's not focus on people breaking the law, let's focus on hybrid cars - didn't you know, they are America's real problem.

Diesel versus ethanol versus hybrid: Why not Dare to Dream?

"Advocates for diesel -- a less refined fuel than gasoline that burns more completely in the engine, delivering more power -- say it can cut oil use, perhaps more quickly and cost effectively than alternatives such as hybrids and ethanol." (CNNMoney)

Wow, diesel can cut oil use. Holy cow, somebody call up the Nobel committee!! We're ready to end foreign oil dependence!!

O.K., maybe not. While clean diesel is an excellent technology, it will never go far enough.

Diesel advocate Dieter Zetsche, CEO of DaimlerChrysler, "estimated that if 30 per cent of the vehicle fleet were powered by diesels, the United States could reduce fuel consumption enough to cut oil imports by the equivalent of what it buys each year from Saudi Arabia." (MotorTrend)

But what about Iran, Nigeria, and Venezuela, etc.? Why are we so content with such insignificant results and small goals?

Additionally, I disagree with the fuel efficiency of diesels. Advocates claim that clean diesel is 30% more fuel efficient - on the highway at least.

Yet new studies claim, "The worst traffic in the U.S. is getting even worse. It pollutes as the vehicles idle. It wastes the time of trucks and passenger cars. The annual delay per driver is in excess of 47 hours per year. It creates delayed shipments. It wastes more than 2.3 billion gallons of fuel each year." (Fortune)

In reality, diesel gas is going to have little effect on reducing fuel consumption in these conditions. Since census data suggests that the far majority of Americans are going to live around just a few large cities in the future, shouldn't congestion be the new standard for testing fuel efficiency?

In congestion - or the driving conditions of the future - full hybrid technology, such as that powering Toyota and Ford hybrid cars, is the best.

Then there is the cost of diesel fuel, and even if those costs are eventually reduced, Americans will simply drive more and then we'll need that Saudi Arabian oil anyway. So, where is the gain?

Dare to Dream

Why are we so afraid to shoot for the moon? Why do we accept such complacency from governments, oil barons, and automotive corporations? Why don't we demand the best, most innovative fuel efficient technology available? Why don't we demand choice?

For example, instead of diesel, why not diesel hybrids? Even better, flex-fuel diesel plug-in hybrids or flex-fuel gasoline plug-in hybrids blow every competitor away.

The only technology that can compare to or surpass flex plug-in hybrid technology is fuel cell technology, but the costs are just to high at this time, and fuel cell vehicles will probably be hybrid vehicles anyway.. Flex-fuel plug-in hybrids, on the other hand, can already achieve well over 100 mpg, while offering numerous fuel choices, such bio-diesel, diesel, gasoline, ethanol, electricity, solar-electricity, wind-electricity, etc.

More important, as hybrid battery technology advances, the fuel efficiency of hybrid batteries will increase significantly while reducing costs - think notebook computers and their batteries.

Besides isn't capitalism supposed to be about competition? Where is the competition in today's energy paradigm?

Don't question the lack of competition because energy is cheap?

How many trillions will oil politics and oil-driven pollution end up costing the world? Has cheap oil really been such a bargain?

Obviously, cheap oil has been great for oil companies. Entire countries are driven by oil profits alone, and oil conglomerates set unbelievable records for profits, yet continually ask for tax incentives as if they have somehow lost money over the history of oil.

We the People

Ultimately, most American simply haven't demanded more. Instead we complain about high gas prices, about Bush's oil connections, about Haliburton, about Iraq, about Iran, and then we go buy a gas-guzzler.

Americans should Dare to Dream for energy independence just as we dared to dream for the moon. If America could become energy independent, then any country could become energy independent, and what would be so wrong with that? Bankrupt oil companies?

I say let's start judging our politicians, corporations, and other capitalists by their ability make our dreams reality, not by their ability to maintain the status quo.

Let's DARE TO DREAM!!!

Nissan still not sold on hybrids

In a recent interview with Fortune Magazine, Carlos Ghosn said the company still isn't sold on hybrid cars. "Before going to mass marketing, you have to make sure that, economically, hybrids make sense. In my opinion, it is still not done." No further word on the Nissan Altima hybrid; however. Hopefully, Ghosn's uncertainty won't delay the launch of the hybrid Altima.

Stop selling the Toyota Prius and Toyota Highlander hybrids?

Solomon Technologies, Inc. has filed a lawsuit against Toyota for patent infringement that seeks to stop Toyota from selling the Toyota Prius hybrid and the Toyota Highlander hybrid in the United States.

Thus far, for legal reasons, Toyota is not commenting on the case.

Still, it is kind of interesting that Solomon Technologies, Inc. didn't file a lawsuit against Toyota until September of 2005. They didn't realize their patent was being illegally used until then? Moreover, the Solomon site claims that its technology is used not only in Toyota hybrids, but also in the Ford Escape hybrid and the Honda Accord hybrid.

Is Honda or Ford paying Solomon?

Since Ford and Toyota negotiated on hybrid patents, it seems odd that Solomon's 'proprietary' patent could have been missed if Solomon and Ford have a relationship. If they don't have a relationship, why does the lawsuit only name Toyota?

On the face of it, this case seems derived to drive publicity to Solomon, but that is only my gut feeling. When I researched this company's stock and some other corporate information, I noticed that all questions were referred to the President of the company, which made me wonder if there are any other corporate officers in this company.

If an investor thought that Solomon had a case and that Solomon would eventually obtain a bucket of cash from Toyota, maybe a small stock purchase would be worthwhile? Is that Solomon's game? Again, I am just speculating.

Of course, on the contrary, Solomon could have a case, and what would happen to hybrid cars if Solomon wins?

Re: Buy a Hybrid, and Save a Guzzler

Dear Mr. Leonhardt,

Regarding your article "Buy a hybrid, and save a guzzler".

Wow, I didn't realize that because of CAFE buying a hybrid gives auto manufacturers the right to sell more gas guzzlers. Thus, "The hybrid, then, is just about the perfect example of what's wrong with our energy policy."

Why didn't I realize that?

Oh, is it because hybrids aren't really enabling that many more gas-guzzlers, at least not Toyota hybrids - but they could? Is that your point?

Boy, I love talking about hypothetical situations, but let's talk about facts for a second.

Toyota is by far the hybrid sales leader. Honda doesn't really sell gas-guzzlers, and GM doesn't even have any hybrids. Thus, I guess you're talking about Ford's 20,000 hybrid sales?

But wait a minute, aren't Escape hybrid buyers buying a hybrid SUV instead of a gas-guzzling SUV? So, where is this extra gas-guzzler demand coming from?

Just out of curiosity, how many gas-guzzlers have passed CAFE because of flex-fuel in the last decade, Mr. Leonard? Hundreds of thousands? Millions? Yet, you're focused on 20,000 hybrids?

How many SUVs actually achieve CAFE's 21.6 miles per gallon in real world driving? According to Consumer Reports, not too many.

So, how many millions of gas-guzzlers have benefited from inaccurate EPA numbers? Yet, the problem with the EPA is inaccurate hybrid fuel economy?

Is that why the new EPA fuel efficiency estimates are not going to be used to update CAFE?

But, let's get back to the problem, 20,000 hybrid SUVs.

So your answer is, "A substantial gas tax would be the simplest, with other taxes being cut to keep down the overall burden. Car buyers could drive whatever they wanted, as long as they were paying the full cost of their gas, and automakers would respond with creative products. If we're not capable of having a serious discussion about new taxes, the second-best option would be lavish incentives for companies to sell a fuel-efficient fleet."

Hybrids aren't fuel efficient?

Regarding your tax plan, which other taxes are going to be cut? Are we just going to leave that to the bureaucrats? I'm sure there won't be any loopholes created in that overhaul, and reducing enough taxes to offset the real cost of gasoline will be a very easy task.

Consequently, you are basically suggesting that until we can significantly change the American tax code, doing nothing is better than buying hybrid cars?

Better yet, you don't blame the EPA, automakers or the government for decades of inaction, you ridicule and belittle the buyers of hybrid cars instead?

Very few hybrid buyers think they are saving the world, Mr. Leonhardt, how dare you generalize their motives with your biased statements. Most hybrid buyers think they are sending a message that foreign oil dependency and/or pollution are important concerns, that's it.

That message isn't worth sending Mr. Leonhardt? Oh forgive us.

Anyway, hybrid car batteries could easily achieve the same kind of growth in performance and cost as what my laptop battery has achieved in the last decade. A hybrid battery that achieves twice the fuel efficiency at the same cost as today's hybrid batteries is definitely a stupid investment, huh?

Yeah, gas-guzzling until we overhaul America's tax code, that's the ticket.

3 Hybrid Vehicles are Best Values

According to Intellichoice.com three hybrid cars are "Best Overall Values".

The Toyota Prius, Toyota Highlander hybrid, and Ford Escape hybrid each won 2006 "Best Overall Value of the Year" awards.

Interestingly, contrary to hybrid critic opinion, hybrids were cited for low maintenance costs and high resale value. "These cars are proving to be a great economic bonus and not just in terms of fuel efficiency, "said IntelliChoice publisher James Bell.

Plug-in hybrid vehicles and pollution

Every time I write about plug-in hybrid vehicles, someone replies that electricity might seem cleaner up front, but not when you factor in the fact that large amounts of electricity are made by coal, etc.

I thought the same thing when I first heard about plug-ins. Since; however, I've learned about a few studies, such as one by Argonne Laboratories, which contradict the naysayers. According to science, electricity - ALL THINGS CONSIDERED - is still cleaner than refining oil into gasoline.

Plug-in hybrids certainly aren't the answer to America's pollution or foreign oil dependency problems, but they definitely offer another step towards these goals and they also increase visibility and momentum.

Equally as important, plug-in hybrids help drive more competition and innovation into the advanced batteries that hybrids use, escalating quality and performance for all hybrid vehicles.

According to the best scientific facts available, plug-in hybrid technology helps hybrids further reduce pollution and oil dependence. Until science demonstrates otherwise, Soultek.com will continue to promote plug-in hybrid technology.

Join our campaign for plug-in hybrids.

The Super Bowl and Hybrid Cars

Well, the game is over. Other than NFL Super Bowl officiating, the ads are still the buzz.

On Friday I wrote that I wasn't sure about Ford's plan to use Kermit the Frog as a "spokesfrog" for its Ford Escape hybrid. After seeing the full commercial, I'm still not sure what I think.

I definitely thought Toyota's hybrid commercial hit the mark, but maybe even more important, I thought GM's ads were pathetic.

I guess Ford is going after the American family with its Kermit ad and I think it works for that audience, however, that is also why I liked the Toyota Camry hybrid ad. I live in Southern California where Spanish is as common, if not more common, than English. Thus, I believe Toyota did an excellent job of speaking to this 'new' American family with a hybrid that could be a hit with Latinos.

On the other hand, who was GM speaking to? Rich people? People who like to spend more on their car note, than their rent - which is common in California? I'm sorry, but if the Cadillac Escalade and the Hummer are the best GM has to offer to America - amidst high energy costs, uncertainty in Iran, and the loss of 10's of thousands of auto-manufacturing jobs - then GM desperately needs new leadership.

I didn't expect GM to plug hybrid cars to America, but two extreme gas-guzzlers? What planet does GM corporate live on?

Is Kermit a good "spokesfrog" for the Ford Escape hybrid?

I like the Ford Escape hybrid. In fact, if you are concerned purely about fuel efficiency, but also need an SUV, then I think the Escape hybrid is Best of Breed.

So, is Kermit the Frog a good "spokesfrog" for the hybrid Escape?

I thought I'd wait and see before making any comments, but I saw a clip of the ad yesterday on CNBC. Now, it wasn't the whole commercial, but what I saw......, well, it just didn't impress.

Granted, Ford doesn't really need to advertise the Escape hybrid to sell the vehicle. Thus, this is a P.R. move and that's O.K.. Still, will Kermit the Frog bring good P.R.?

Maybe. Of course the entire commercial might be much better than the clip. Overall, however, I haven't been impressed with the marketing of hybrid cars.

Are strong political statements just too bold? Perhaps appealing to the family - which is why you would use Kermit - is a good idea.

DaimlerChrysler's Bold Hybrid Prediction

Dieter Zetsche, DaimlerChrysler CEO, predicted that diesel-powered vehicles would beat out hybrids in the US market in five to ten years. Wow! What a prediction from a company that essentially has no plans for hybrids. What else could Daimler say? "We think hybrid cars will dominate the automarket within 10 years, that's why we haven't built one."

If Ford or Toyota made such a statement it would mean something, but Daimler? That's like expecting Mike Holmgren, of the Seattle Seahawks, to pick the Steelers to win the Super Bowl. It just doesn't make sense.

GM putting its hybrid vehicle program into gear

GM announced yesterday that it would spend $118 million at a Maryland plant to begin mass-producing its dual mode hybrid vehicle transmission. "We believe the two-mode system will become the industry standard," Rick Wagoner said to workers at a presentation at GM's Baltimore transmission facility, where GM already builds a hybrid transmission for a small fleet of heavy-duty trucks and buses. (DetroitNews)

GM also added a new member to their 2008 lineup of hybrid vehicles. In addition to the Chevy Tahoe hybrid and GMC Yukon hybrid, GM will also offer a hybrid version of the Cadillac Escalade. All vehicles should hit the road in late 2007. (AutoWeek)

According to GM, its dual mode hybrid system will increase overall fuel efficiency by 25 percent. So, it seems odd that Wagoner would boldly state that the two-mode system will become the "industry standard".

Already, Toyota, Ford and Nissan beg to differ and so to will Volkswagen and Hyundai soon - with each automaker not using a dual mode hybrid system. Moreover, Toyota and Ford hybrids offer around the same fuel efficiency improvements as GM's dual mode system. So, Wagoner is being exceedingly optimistic, especially when Toyota will soon launch its third generation hybrid synergy drive, which is expected to increase fuel efficiency and performance, yet cut hybrid costs in half.

GM's hybrid system might have an advantage in the large SUV market, however, especially if towing is required. Still, I don't think that will be enough to make it the "industry standard".

Sanyo stakes future on hybrid vehicles?

"Sanyo Electric, a struggling maker of electronics, hopes to make the [hybrid vehicle] battery business a major driver of its profit recovery," according to MotorTrend. Sanyo will now supply hybrid batteries for Volkswagen's hybrid vehicles. Eventually, Sanyo would like to control 50% of the battery market for hybrids.

Another hybrid supplier means more competition and better pricing, and that old hybrid momentum just keeps rolling.

Don't like hybrids? Don't fricken buy one.

Are you a critic of hybrids cars?

What is your damn point? Are hybrid cars causing too much pollution? Are hybrid cars causing an increase in foreign oil dependency?

Are you worried that I'm spending too much on my hybrid? It's O.K. to over spend on horsepower that I can't legally use, but god forbid I spend extra money to reduce foreign oil dependency or reduce pollution?

Is that really your point?

Are there better technologies? Please, name one. The potential of hybrid cars has barely been tapped. Only in the short term can clean diesel, etc. compete with hybrids. Even so, why not go for the best fuel efficiency and least amount of pollution, such as a clean diesel hybrid? Oh, I'm sorry, are corporate profits more important than doing the right thing?

Even hybrid critics, such as John McCormick of the DetroitNews, states "Of course, most hybrids will still offer lower overall fuel consumption rates than conventional-vehicles and their tailpipe emissions will be much lower. But the striking appeal of their once high mpg figures will be muted." (more)

Exactly, I'm investing in lower fuel consumption and lower emissions. Have a problem with that?

So, you can sit in your foreign oil, terrorist-supporting gas-guzzler and question my investment in a hybrid car? No you can't. How can you put a cost on reducing foreign oil dependency, cleaning the environment and sending a message to automakers that these issue drive my automobile purchases? How dare you!?

If you don't like hybrids, don't buy one. Better yet, buy a gas-guzzler and keep giving your money to Osama and bury your head back in the sand.