For 2008: Its Energy Independence, stupid

Tom Vilsack, the Democrat from Iowa, threw his hat into the race for the 2008 Presidential elections, and his platform is energy independence. Energy independence is the way to strengthen both National Security and the U.S. economy, according to Vilsack.

It's nice to see that energy independence appears to be gaining political importance, but let's hope it leads to real action and not just a lot of talk and pork-barrel legislation focused more on paying political favors than on results.

GM: SUVs, Flex-fuel SUVs, Hybrid SUVs, and Plug-In Hybrid SUVs

Is GM too reliant on SUVs when it comes to the American automobile market?

Biodiesel Hummers, Flex-fuel Tahoes, Dual mode hybrid Yukons, and Plug-In Hybrid Vues have been the focus of GM's green marketing efforts. Why are all of these vehicles SUVs?

The top selling hybrid vehicle in the U.S. is a small sedan, the Toyota Prius. Has GM just decided they don't care about this segment? At least in America is GM becoming a truck and SUV only automaker?

While I'm glad that GM loyalists will soon have an option to buy significantly more fuel efficient SUVs, where are the significantly more fuel efficient cars? GM must realize that many Americans are tired of where Detroit's focus on SUVs has taken America - world leader in global warming pollution, world leader in oil consumption, and completely dependent upon foreign oil.

If America simply got rid of all SUVs we'd be in a far better spot, but that's a whole other story. So, let's skip the SUV bashing. A hybrid SUV, especially a plug-in hybrid SUV, is far better than a plain old SUV.

Still, how about some hybrid cars? All these fuel efficient SUV efforts are important for GM's core customers; however, they will not be enough to convert many new customers to GM products.

Isn't it time for GM to take off the SUV blinders, or is it impossible for GM to succeed at anything other than SUVs and trucks?

GM's hybrid vehicle plans finally confirmed, or just pie-in-the-sky public relations?

Yesterday, after hearing Rick Wagoner describe the future for GM I wrote, "Unfortunately, however, GM's future plans are still pie-in-the-sky. Almost everything is still something GM is working on. When you consider that GM has been working on fuel cells for about two decades, how seriously can you take the automaker?" (more)

For example, GM announced they were working on a Saturn Vue Plug-in Hybrid Vehicle, yet they gave no timeline for when such a vehicle might be available. In fact, Wagoner said such a vehicle would be dependant upon clearing some technological hurdles regarding lithium-ion batteries.

Bob Lutz, product guru for GM, sees lithium-ion technology still about 3 to 4 years away. So, was the LA Auto Show a publicity stunt meant to achieve some positive P.R. while also providing a 3 - 4 year window where nothing has to happen?

Sure, Wagoner did describe plug-in hybrid vehicles as a "top priority" for GM, but he also gave himself a back door by noting the serious technological hurdles of plug-in hybrid technology.

While, GM is also close to finally offering its dual mode hybrid vehicles, it appears that GM is extremely committed to SUVs and is using hybrid technology, including plug-in technology, to provide green credentials for even its largest SUVs.

Consequently, I'm not sure if I'm really any more optimistic about GM than I was before I began to hear the I-car rumors. Nonetheless, I'm willing to give GM the benefit of the doubt - for now.

GM is supposed to go into more detail regarding these new developments at the Detroit Auto Show. There, hopefully, we'll also catch a glimpse of the new I-car.

If the I-car is actually a car and not an SUV, I'll be very impressed and much more hopeful.

GM 'officially' announces hybrid, electric developments

GM has now officially stated its commitment to alternative fuels and alternative technologies.

"I'm announcing today that GM is significantly expanding and accelerating our commitment to the development of electrically driven vehicles, beyond what we have already committed to with our fuel cell and hybrid programs," said Rick Wagoner, GM's chairman and chief executive. (more)

Unfortunately, however, GM's future plans are still pie-in-the-sky. Almost everything is still something GM is working on. When you consider that GM has been working on fuel cells for about two decades, how seriously can you take the automaker?

Still, I'm willing to give GM the benefit of the doubt - for now.

-- For more read -- GM working on Saturn Vue Plug-In Hybrid and GM to announce hybrid vehicle future today

GM working on plug-in Saturn Vue hybrid

According to the AP, GM is working on a Saturn Vue plug-in hybrid vehicle, although there is no timetable for when such a vehicle might be available. GM currently offers a hybrid Vue, but it is more of a mild hybrid vehicle. Ultimately, the production of the plug-in Vue hybrid will depend on lithium-ion batteries, something I wrote about earlier this morning. Consequently, it is a vehicle that shouldn't be expected, minimally, for at least 3 to 4 years.

Nissan Altima hybrid at LA Auto show

If you've been waiting to check out the Nissan Altima hybrid, you will finally be able to see it. Of course, you'll probably need to live in Southern California, where the hybrid Altima is debuting at the Los Angeles Auto Show.

GM to discuss its hybrid future today?

Today we find out a little more about the rumors that have been flying across the Internet regarding GM's turnaround plans. According to the Detroit News, GM's CEO Rick Wagoner is going to stress GM's new commitment to "energy diversity" - using "a variety of advanced technologies and fuels that emphasizes the use of electricity to power vehicles."

While GM has already announced plans to develop dual mode hybrid vehicles, the real buzz and speculation is regarding the I-car. The I-car, otherwise known as the icon car, is meant to emphasize GM's commitment to its green revolution, and most believe the i-Car is a plug-in hybrid vehicle that will be displayed in early 2007 at the Detroit Auto Show.

Still, this is pure marketing, pure buzz.

Already Bob Lutz, GM product engineer, whom not too long ago ridiculed the hybrid movement, has stated that lithium-ion technology - the key to plug-ins - is still 3 to 4 years away. Moreover, the Detroit News reported that "Wagoner won't commit to building a plug-in until the company can overcome technical hurdles and improve battery technology."

Hopefully, however, this isn't just a public relations move, but truly a new beginning for GM. I guess only time will tell.

-- See also - GM working on Saturn Vue plug-in hybrid vehicle

Commerical viability of plug-in hybrids to be tested in 3 year study

Argonne National Laboratory and the Electric Power Research Institute will conduct a three year research project to determine the commercial feasibility of plug-in hybrid vehicles for the U.S. Department of Energy.

"The objective of the multi-year research project is to provide a balanced and authoritative study of both the advantages of and the challenges to the design and commercial production of PHEVs. An assessment of potential social benefits of PHEVs, including reductions in imported petroleum-based fuels, enhancement of American energy security and air quality improvement will be key components of the study." (more)

Ed Begley Jr.'s electric SUV and tree-hugger haters

After I checked out a Yahoo video regarding Ed Begley's electric SUV, I thought I'd check out the comments. I was surprised at the negativity of some of the posts. Moreover, I was shocked by the amount of hate some have towards "tree-huggers". I guess it's probably no different than the hate some treehuggers have towards 'gas-guzzlers'.

Still, particularly since 9/11, isn't foreign oil dependency a national security issue? Consequently, isn't gas-guzzling far more than a tree-hugger issue?

What do 'gas-guzzlers' care about, if they don't care about global warming, pollution or national security?

Americans want 40 mpg cars, but how much will they pay?

A new survey by the Opinion Research Corporation demonstrates that, "more than three out of four Americans want the government to impose a 40-mile-per-gallon fuel-efficiency standard on American vehicles." (more)

Would those same Americans still want such a fuel efficiency standard if it was going to cost them an extra $5000 to purchase their vehicle? What if it was just $3000? What if it meant the collapse of the U.S. auto industry?

While surveys show that Americans are interested in fuel economy, far fewer Americans actually demonstrate this attitude in the show room. Sure, Americans might be moving out of some of the largest gas-guzzlers into slightly smaller gas-guzzlers, but the vehicles most Americans continue to purchase are nowhere near achieving 40mpg. Getting them to achieve 40 mpg isn't going to be cheap, at least not in the short term.

Consequently, I argued yesterday that tax incentives are key to achieving higher fuel economy. Ultimately, 40 mpg CAFE probably isn't going to happen, and if it does, there will be loopholes. Moreover, if Americans fully embraced advanced technologies, funded by consumer-based tax incentives, 40 mpg becomes a cake walk.

CAFE or Tax incentives: Best path to increased fuel economy?

Whether you want to fight foreign oil dependency or to help reduce global warming, increasing the fuel economy of automobiles is one of the best paths to achieving both goals.

So, what is the best path towards increasing fuel economy?

Many environmentalists, for example, believe that increasing CAFE to 40 mpg in the next decade is the best path. Yet, critics point out that CAFE has achieved very little since its inception. As a result America continues to increase fuel consumption year after year, critics often point out.

Additionally, the majority of Congress - both Democrats and Republicans - believe that increasing CAFE to 40 mpg would destroy the entire American automobile industry.

While I am an advocate for increasing fuel economy and even increasing CAFE, I do not believe that simply raising CAFE to 40 mpg is a very good solution. Technology must be a key component.

Inevitably, America needs a vibrant auto industry to help keep the economy strong. Surely, inept leadership at the Big 3 deserves much blame for their current weakness and our oil problems, as does every President and Congress in the last 20 years. Nonetheless, however, the past is the past, and it is time to move forward.

I say we can do better than 40 mpg in the next 10 years, far better. Hybrid vehicle technology is proving that we can surpass 40 mpg in the next decade if we use new technologies and start thinking outside of the box, and we should.

By giving citizens the financial power to offset the cost of hybrid technology with tax incentives, there will be plenty of reasons for automakers to start building more and more such hybrid vehicles. Additionally, tax incentives and some auto industry subsidies are a move that will pay for themselves in the long run via less military protection of oil supplies. Furthermore, would you not rather help subsidize American auto-workers to build super fuel efficient vehicles based upon important developing technologies, rather than to pay for their unemployment benefits?

Ultimately, foreign oil dependency and global warming do not have to be a crisis. Instead, let foreign oil dependency and global warming be an opportunity for American automakers to fully embrace advanced technology as the path to high-tech American jobs, a strong American economy, and a clean and secure country.

Ending foreign oil dependency as quickly as possible is one of the most important things the U.S. can accomplish in the next couple of decades. Achieving this goal will take far more than CAFE, it will take open minded consumers and a lot of tax incentives.

What will Ford's second generation hybrid powertrain offer?

While Ford has scaled back some hybrid vehicle plans, at least in the short term, the company is not ending its hybrid technology investment. In fact, Ford will be displaying its second generation hybrid powertrain at the Los Angeles Auto Show this week. The new powertrain will be displayed in a 2008 Ford Escape hybrid.

Toyota made huge gains in efficiency and power with its second generation hybrid drive compared to its first generation drive. As a result the Toyota Prius sent a notice to every automaker - the hybrids are coming, the hybrids are coming.

Could the second generation Ford hybrid powertrain provide a similar lift to the Escape hybrid or another Ford hybrid?

Perhaps.

Still, the next major revolution in hybrid technology might be dependant upon batteries, and those batteries - almost certainly lithium-ion batteries - might still be 3 to 4 years away from mass production viability. Even then, however, there might still be significant production limitations.

It will be interesting to see how Ford plays this angle. Will the second generation hybrid powertrain be optimized for both the current NiMH batteries and lithium-ion batteries? Is a plug-in option a possibility?

We'll soon find out.

Nissan stepping up hybrid plans

Nissan is going to develop its own line of lithium-ion batteries and use those batteries to produce electric cars available for sale in about 3 years. Since this report is coming out of Japan, it is hard to assess which markets Nissan is focused on for these new electric vehicles. In addition, to the electric vehicles, Nissan is also going to step up plans for hybrid vehicles, bio-diesel vehicles and diesel vehicles.

GM will probably save green revolution for Detroit

While GM is going to show the Saturn Aura hybrid and the GMC Yukon hybrid at the Los Angeles Auto Show, GM is probably going to save its major green offerings for the North American International Auto Show in Detroit according to the latest rumors. Nonetheless, GM's Rick Wagoner is still expected to touch upon GM's rumored green revolution at the Los Angeles Auto Show.

Hype continues to build around GM's possible plans to develop a new line of series hybrids as well as plug-in hybrids, in addition to full electric vehicles. Those plans might be mentioned at the Los Angeles Auto Show, but it appears that GM will wait for the Detroit Show to truly debut its green revolution.

Let's all keep our fingers crossed. If this is more truth than hype, it could be the greatest development to hit Detroit in decades.

Global Warming and Foreign Oil Dependency: Do you really need any more reasons to go hybrid?

Around ninety percent of Europeans believe that humans are causing global warming.

Do you agree?

If you do, then you realize how important it is that humans start taking much more responsibility for their contribution to global warming. One of the biggest impacts humans can have on global warming, especially in the U.S., is to reduce their automobile fuel consumption.

On the other hand, perhaps you are not yet ready to buy into global warming?

O.K., well what about foreign oil dependency? How do you feel about funding terrorism against the U.S.? How do you feel about putting an important aspect of the American economy into the hands of leaders of countries where the majority of their populations see America as an evil empire?

Regardless of whether you are concerned more about foreign oil dependency, or about global warming, isn't it time for a revolution against oil consumption?

While many are now clamoring for E85 and other forms of ethanol to address this problem, I think E85 is nothing short of a boondoggle, unless flex-fuel vehicles become significantly more fuel efficient.

Flex-fuel hybrids, for example, are an excellent idea.

On the other hand, flex-fuel Hummers aren't such a great idea. If we all drive flex-fuel Hummers or similarly sized gas-guzzlers, then we'll need all the ethanol we can make just to catch up with our increased fuel consumption.

Ethanol can be helpful, but it won't offer help much without significant gains in fuel efficiency.

Current hybrid cars offer nice gains in fuel efficiency today, but the real advantage of hybrids is their potential. In just another generation of technology - available in just a few years - average hybrid vehicles might achieve 100 mpg.

In the Southern half of the U.S. solar powered garages could power - theoretically - all of the fuel needs of these hybrids.

In the Midwest, home grown ethanol could be a good fuel for hybrids, but also for power plants that plug-in hybrids could plug into for clean electric fuel.

Perhaps in other areas, natural gas, hydrogen or even wind power makes me sense. Regardless, hybrids are able to utilize any of these fuels.

Flexible, adaptable and powerful hybrid technology offers a revolutionary tool to fight global warming and foreign oil dependency.

Invest in the future, make your next vehicle a hybrid vehicle.

Fuel efficiency (carbon) tax for gas-guzzlers?

In 2009 it will cost those living in London $48 dollars per day to drive in the city center, if they drive a gas guzzler. While this is a high fee, it is intended to reduce carbon emissions and make consumers responsible for their choices.

While President Bush hasn't been much of an advocate of the carbon trading system, many experts believe such a system is inevitable. Of course this carbon trading system would eventually have an effect on prices that consumers pay, but that price effect would probably be spread out amongst all products. Hence, the price of an economy car might see the same increase as the price of a gas-guzzler.

Would that be fair?

Consequently, would it be a good idea to create a carbon tax for consumers? Owners of SUVs and many other vehicles, such as gas guzzlers, regularly mention freedom of choice. Fine. Still, gas-guzzling does have an impact on the environment that affects even those whom choose not to drive gas-guzzlers to protect the environment.

Is that fair?

Thus, should these gas-guzzlers be forced to pay for their pollution and global warming emissions via a carbon tax or fee, especially when driving in urban areas where congested driving conditions cause the most pollution?

What do you think about a consumer based carbon tax?

Daniel Howes on the UAW and Big 3 problems

I read the automotive section of the Detroit News everyday, even though I don't live anywhere close to Detroit. So, why does a guy from Los Angeles care about the Detroit News? Because the Detroit News offers the pulse of the Big 3. While I've always considered Daniel Howes to be the most entertaining and open-minded Detroit News auto beat writer, I've regularly had issues with some of his views and with many of the views of the rest of the auto beat staff. Too often, the Detroit News has seemed just as lost in the past as the leadership at the Big 3.

The last couple of weeks, however, Howes has been on the attack, poignantly arguing that if Detroit (Big 3) doesn't start making significant changes - immediately - then Detroit automakers will have no one to blame but themselves.

Obviously, I couldn't agree more and I have constantly used hybrid cars as an example.

Well, today, Howes set his sights on Ron Gettelfinger of the United Auto Workers - an important aspect of Detroit's dysfunction. I highly recommend reading the article. Click here to read.

Overall hybrid sales - about the same as always

AutoWeek has posted a story about which hybrid vehicles are hot and which are not. Ultimately, the figures say about the same thing they save every month. The Toyota Prius accounts for about half of all hybrid sales. The Prius and the Honda Civic hybrid sell well regardless of gas prices, and the Honda Accord hybrid and the Mercury Mariner hybrid are the slowest sellers.

The most interesting thing about the story was a top ten list of why people buy hybrid cars. The list DOES not even include foreign oil dependency. How can that be?

Why do we keep talking about highway fuel economy?

Talk to transportation academics or government officials and the future of automobile transportation can be summed up in one word, congestion. Already the daily commute of a significant percentage of Americans is filled with stop-and-go and slow-and-go traffic - the worst driving conditions for both fuel economy and pollution. Even worse, not only are these conditions supposed to get worse for these Americans, the majority of Americans will soon also be facing these conditions.

Yet, whenever most automakers speak of fuel economy, it's always highway fuel economy.

If about half of America is already spending a significant percent of their driving time in congestion, with this percent expected to grow significantly in just the next decade, why do we continue to use highway fuel economy as the standard?

The truth is that most automakers are far less fuel efficient than they claim to be in real world driving, and the real world driving that causes the worst fuel economy and pollution is quickly becoming the norm and getting worse by the day.

Isn't it time to deal with reality, instead of living in the past?

Chinese slow to adapt to hybrids

For a country where most people ride bikes and don't own an automobile, its no surprise that the $40,000 Toyota Prius (cost in China) is a slow mover in China. While the government of China has been trying to get some control over pollution and global warming, it is not yet providing many incentives for consumers to help. Let's not forget we're talking about a country that is building a coal powered energy plant every 3 days. Eventually, however, China will have to take the threat posed by vehicle emissions to their country seriously.

For more on China and hybrid cars, check out Toyota Prius sales lag in China.

NYTimes review of Mercury and Vue hybrids

If you are interested in a hybrid SUV, particularly an American-made hybrid SUV, you might find the article Saturn Vue and Mercury Mariner: Hybrids, Mild or Seasoned, From the Motor City interesting. In a nutshell, the Saturn Vue hybrid is likable, but it comes a up a little short compared to other hybrid vehicles. The Mercury Mariner hybrid is a very fine hybrid vehicle, but costly. As I've stated in the past, the Vue hybrid might be a good buy for highway drivers looking for an economical American-made hybrid, though I still consider this hybrid SUV to be a mild hybrid. The Mariner hybrid is mostly a luxury hybrid that provides great performance and fuel efficiency, but it cannot really be defined as economical. Anyway, check out the rest of the article by following the link above.

Detroit must "think anew"

Last week I questioned an editorial by the Detroit News regarding fuel economy because of its complacency, and it's inability to foresee and realize that change must be realized by American automakers. Today, however, Daniel Howes of the Detroit News is singing my tune, telling politicians to give up the blame game while also telling Michigan and the Big 3 that it's time to change.

"The only questions are how and how quickly. Not, why us? Nor who's to blame for tampering with what U.S. Sen. Debbie Stabenow likes to call "our way of life" -- as if Detroit's automakers, their unions and others are immune to the laws of supply and demand. They aren't, no matter how freely some politicians may be willing to manipulate reality to suggest otherwise."

"Apologies to Sen. Stabenow, but "our way of life" is strangling Michigan because it was never designed to adapt to a changing world, much less accept that the economy and competition would change."

Evolution is often driven by small constant changes. Toyota, for example, is driven by small constant changes focused on increasing efficiency. This process, or Kaizen, led Toyota to hybrid cars - a new platform to increase efficiency. Inevitably the efficiency potential of hybrids has barely been tapped. Moreover, hybrids are adaptable to flex-fuel, hydrogen, gasoline, diesel, biodiesel, or even electricity, and they can lead to advanced batteries and fuel cell development.

Ultimately, hybrids exude change and flexibility. Today's hybrids are gasoline-electric, but tomorrow's might be flex-fuel plug-in hybrids and not long after that they might by hydrogen hybrids, or plug-in fuel cell hybrid vehicles. Hybrid technology is changing rapidly, adapting to the future.

Today, Democrats and the Big 3 appear very close to becoming fixated upon ethanol, a fuel which requires little change for the Big 3. Ultimately, ethanol won't really make the Big 3 any more adaptable, and it just might lead to another decade of complacency. Alternative fuels can help America, but not enough. Only significantly more fuel efficient automobiles can lead to real change.

Detroit must "think anew", and ethanol just isn't new enough.

Let consumers determine fuel efficiency?

This morning the Detroit News published an editorial against raising fuel economy rules because consumers aren't interested in fuel efficiency, they are interested in reliability, the paper argued. "Increasing fuel economy standards is again being pushed by advocacy groups, despite a clear mandate from consumers that other factors mean more when they go the showroom to buy cars and trucks."

As if automakers have done the greatest job in giving real choices to Americans. When you provide countless incentives to get someone into a gas-guzzler for less than a more fuel efficient model, many consumers will take that deal.

Additionally, the LATimes cited a report today showing that fuel efficiency is driving sales, at least in California. I guess the California auto market doesn't mean much to Detroit?

Also, while I understand consumer choice and believe in consumer choice, foreign oil dependency, according to multiple ex-CIA directors and many other security officials, is a significant threat to national security. Thus, is the paper arguing that consumer demand is more important than national security?

Let's also remember many Americans ARE choosing more fuel efficient vehicles.

Nonetheless, lets give consumer demand the benefit of the doubt. Let automakers build whatever they want. However, don't lecture me about the importance of America's auto industry when they are producing products that threaten MY national security. Don't ask me to buy American when it means giving money to terrorists and countries that HATE America.

In that case I will absolutely by a Toyota or Honda hybrid. I will ONLY buy fuel efficient vehicles, and I want the best fuel efficient vehicle money can buy - not some half-ass attempt.

Moreover, I don't want ANY of my tax dollars going to American companies producing products that threaten my National Security.

Consumer demand? Please! So, we should America remove all laws that ban any type of smoking because consumers demand cigarettes? Should we make all drugs legal because consumers want them?

While I'll acknowledge the fact that CAFE has largely been ineffective, I will not accept saying it is O.K. to build 14 mpg trucks that fund terrorism against fellow citizens because consumers want them. Something has to change. We can choose to make that change as a path to a more secure and prosperous future for America, or can we wait until our backs are against the wall and we are forced to change.

I guess it just goes to show how Old School so many Detroit-followers are still these day.

When I worked in the software field consumers NEVER wanted to upgrade, however, some software upgrades were required to make their software - their business - safer. Consequently, consumers really had no choice but to upgrade if they wanted to STAY in business.

The world changes, and when you work in technology you realize how quickly the world changes. Business at the speed of light, Bill Gates said of the digital world, which now includes automotive manufacturing.

Ultimately, companies that don't envision what customers will want in the future are doomed to the past. Whether Detroit thrives or dies WILL be determined by fuel efficiency - despite what consumer interest is today.

Are Democrats AGAINST the hybrid vehicle revolution?

In a bid to support geothermal power, Harry Reid today accused the Bush Administration of being "so oil-friendly that we have been able to get their attention on virtually nothing that is not oil related," Reid said. "They’re not that interested in renewables."

Hmmm??? While Democrats are looking to bail out the fuel inefficient Big 3, Bush did have the courage to tell Detroit to produce 'relevant' vehicles. Bush has also, on numerous occasions promoted hybrid vehicles and lithium ion battery development. In fact, Bush even went so far as to say that hybrid vehicles were the best way to change consumer behavior.

Is that the definition of "lack of interest"? Maybe, for a politician.

Moreover, Bush asked Congress to extend tax credits for hybrid cars, something which Congress chose not to do. Yet, now that Democrats have taken over Congress I've heard very little about hybrid vehicles and even less about tax credits for hybrid cars.

Instead, the whole Democratic platform now seems fixated on E85.

Even worse Democratic ranking members of Congress have already voiced their disinterest in raising fuel economy standards in the U.S. because they don't want to sacrifice jobs - Democrat supporting UAW jobs - for increased fuel efficiency. Quite a different tune the Democrats are singing now compared to just a couple of years ago when Democrats blamed Republicans for not raising fuel economy standards, even though key Democrats joined Republicans on that vote.

Can we stop playing politics, for at least one year?

I really wish Reid and some other Democrats would quit the partisanship. Didn't America vote for change? Well, let's start changing, please? Let's take the high road, Democrats. Lead by example.

Obviously, the Democratic Party wants to do as much as possible to tarnish the President in an effort to claim the White House. However, if they don't focus on doing something these next two years just to try to win the White House, they might just catapult Republicans back into power.

For years Democrats have done a lot of talking about what should be done, what Republicans didn't do, and they were right, the Republican Party failed the people and America.

Still, now its time for Democrats to stop talking and to start acting. When it comes to foreign oil dependency and national security, even global warming, nothing matters more than fuel efficiency.

Ultimately, the benefits provided by E85 are not going to amount to much if our energy consumption keeps going up. Democrats and the rest of Congress must focus on fuel efficiency. If they are not going to mandate tough standards, then help Detroit develop fuel efficient technologies, particularly hybrids and plug-in hybrids, and give consumers tax incentives to buy these global warming and foreign oil dependency fighters.

Even oil man Bush understood that issue.

Let's hope Democrats and the rest of Congress can finally start helping America instead of just blaming each other for what is wrong with America.

Hybrid sales up 30% in 2007 according to Toyota

Now that the Toyota Camry hybrid is being produced in the U.S., Toyota's ability to produce hybrids has increased. As a result Toyota is predicting a 30 percent increase in the sales of hybrid vehicles in 2007 versus 2006, which would equal more than 300,000 hybrids.

Flex-fuel hybrids or plug-in hybrids?

Last week, when I read that Toyota wasn't going to offer the Toyota Tundra hybrid until at least 2010, I posted the article Toyota's huge hybrid vehicle mistake. Essentially, I wondered why Toyota wouldn't offer a hybrid truck much sooner just to steal some truck buzz from GM.

Anyway, Autopia took the same news and spun it into the article flex-fuel hybrids gain speed and suggested that any smart automaker would display flex-fuel hybrids at the Detroit Auto Show in January.

Still, if Toyota isn't going to offer a gasoline-electric version of the Tundra until 2010, then a flex-fuel Tundra hybrid wouldn't be available until 2010 either. By 2010, however, I expect more than a flex-fuel hybrid Tundra, I expect a plug-in Toyota Tundra. Sure it would be nice if that plug-in Tundra hybrid were a flex-fuel hybrid, but I'll take a gasoline plug-in Tundra hybrid over a flex-fuel Tundra hybrid any day.

Consequently, if automakers are smart they will show off plug-in hybrids at the Detroit Auto Show. It already appears GM will be smart - at least from a PR standpoint.

The hybrid show stopper at the Detroit Auto Show, in my opinion, would be a Toyota plug-in hybrid vehicle. Having already produced several hundred thousand hybrid vehicles, Toyota could really kick it up a notch if they went hell-bent-for-leather on plug-in hybrid technology.

While GM has already picked up some positive PR for its potential plug-in hybrid showcase, Toyota could steal their thunder. Inevitably, whom does the world believe more when it comes to hybrid vehicles - Toyota or GM?

A Prius as a backup generator for your home?

I just got around to reading the article, A Plug-In Prius that Powers Your House, which talks about a PGandE program that would enable plug-in hybrids to essentially serve as backup generators during blackouts, etc. Even more interesting, PGandE - the Nation's largest electric utility - is having discussions with Toyota about producing plug-in hybrid vehicles. While I believe that plug-in hybrids are still a couple of years away from mass production, I think it is now inevitable that they will be mass produced, which is simply spectacular news.

Big 3 CEOs and President conclude meeting

The meeting between the President and the CEO's of the Big Three has ended. I watched a short post-meeting interview the Big 3 CEO's gave, which focused on three issues: ethanol, trade policy and healthcare. Overall currency issues dominated the question and answer session, followed by healthcare; however, GM's Rick Wagoner opened the interview with the statement that the Big 3 were ready to offer 50% of their vehicles as flex-fuel vehicles by 2012. It seemed obvious that Wagoner was trying to hammer home the point that the Big was doing their part (Of course you have to believe that E85 alone is a game changer for the industry) to counter the President's previous 'build relevant vehicles' statement.

All three CEO's said the meeting went extremely well. While Wagoner admitted that the President didn't agree with every point made by the Big 3, Ford's CEO Alan Mulally added that he was very impressed with President's knowledge of the issues and the quality of the dialogue while also noting that he felt the Bush administration was a "very supportive administration" - almost countering the pre-meeting politicking by Michigan Democrats.

Although Wagoner hogged the mic., I was very impressed with Mulally's optimism when he did speak. Mulally concluded the interview by answering a question that the auto industry did not expect a government bailout, and that the industry needed to do a lot more to build more fuel efficient vehicles that consumers want.

First Chinese produced hybrid vehicle hits autoshow

China's Chery Automobile has announced its plan to present the first Chinese produced hybrid vehicle at the Auto China 2006 Show in Beijing next week. Another Chinese automaker, Geely Automobile, has also announced plans for its first hybrid model.

(Source: Jalopnik)

GM less fuel efficient today than 10 years ago

While GM claims to have more fuel efficient vehicles on the road today than any other auto manufacturer, GM's fleet is .05 miles per gallon less efficient than it was 10 years ago. Both Ford and Chrysler made slight gains. Toyota, on the other hand, improved fuel efficiency by 1.5 mpg over the same decade.

"Improving motor vehicle fuel efficiency is a win-win-win solution that would not only lower consumer costs and help decrease our dependence on oil, but also improve the future prospects of U.S. car companies," said Mark Cooper, the consumer federation's research director. "It is essential that the new Congress move quickly to approve higher fuel efficiency standards in order for these benefits to be realized."

Additionally the report noted, "It is significant that Ford and GM showed only marginal increases in the percentage of vehicles meeting CAFÉ standards and have suffered severe financial setbacks."

Kind of ironic that the same day the Big 3 and Democrats are blaming Bush for Detroit's problems, the facts seem to paint a bit different story. I thought the Democrats were going to rise above partisanship, end their ties with lobbyists and provide a new direction for America?

Democrats, Big 3 Blame Bush for Detroit's Problems

The Big 3's top lobbyists met with Michigan's top Democrats to prepare for President Bush's meeting with the CEO's of the Big 3. The message: Detroit's problems are not Detroit's fault.

While Bush has told the Big 3 to build more relevant automobiles, the Big 3 have not listened. Instead Detroit blames health care and unfair trade practices.

Regarding relevant automobiles, GM responded, "Five million who bought our cars last year think they're relevant," GM's sales chief Mark LaNeve told The Detroit News in May. "Twenty million owners that we have just in our database probably think they're pretty relevant. The 1.1 million (GM) jobs are also voters and probably think it's pretty relevant."

"There have been no steps taken by this administration to support manufacturing. They need to understand, and I hope the Big Three will be blunt and direct with the administration, that their competitors are not companies overseas. Their competitors are countries overseas," Senator Carl Levin said.

(Source: DetroitNews)

Plug-in hybrid technology being tested

Valence Technology has partnered with EnergyCS to produce a plug-in Prius hybrid for the city of Sacramento to test for fleet viability. Likewise, Canada's Manitoba Hydro is also testing plug-in hybrid vehicles and their impact on the electric grid.

While it is great these developments are occurring, it seems plug-in hybrid technology is still a couple of years away from reality, and I hope that fact doesn't stymie hybrid investment.

The technology powering plug-ins, particularly lithium-ion batteries, will rapidly evolve in the next decade. A fleet of plug-in hybrids might not be cost-effective for cities such as Sacramento in the short term. Nonetheless, current hybrid vehicles certainly are cost effective today for Sacramento, and their purchase helps invest in the future of plug-in hybrids, which will definitely be cost effective in the future.

GM to launch hybrid vehicle marketing campaign

GM is preparing a new marketing campaign to promote its hybrid cars and other clean vehicles. Yet, GM's first full hybrid vehicles - first real hybrids - probably won't be available for sale until late 2007 at the earliest.

It sure is irritating - for me at least - when Bob Lutz states that GM could have already developed hybrids simply by using a fraction of one year's billion dollar marketing budget, then markets their hybrids before they even have any real hybrids on the road.

All you do is talk, talk, talk?

(Source: Car&Driver)

Ford to focus on fuel efficiency

Ford is set to focus on fuel efficiency.

Yeah, we've heard this before. Ford is going to lead the environmental revolution in the automotive world! One month Ford is going to produce 250,000 hybrids by 2010, the next month they've already given up.

Still, Ford's new CEO, Alan Mulally is worth believing - for now.

In his job at Boeing, Mulally was a follower of the Toyota Production System. Moreover, Mulally believes that higher fuel prices and global oil demand are the most important dynamics facing the automotive field heading into the future. Consequently, Mulally told the Automotive News that "So clearly, designing and building cars that people really like and that are going to be useful for their lives but also continue to improve (fuel) efficiency is what I think is going to be the most important thing."

While it seems obvious that fuel efficiency is becoming significantly more important, the ability to compete and profit as we enter into this new automotive world is easier said, than done. Hopefully, Mulally can find the right path.

Speaking of the right path.

It would be nice if the Big 3 were a little more focused on how to be more fuel efficient when they meet with the President on Tuesday, rather than focusing on health care and trade issues. It's sort of ironic that Ford's CEO is showing up in a Ford Escape hybrid and GM's CEO in a Saturn Vue hybrid, yet both automakers are getting their asses kicked in the hybrid vehicle segment.

It wasn't but just a couple of years ago when GM execs regularly ridiculed hybrids. Perhaps, if the Big 3 had been more focused on automaking the last few decades, rather than on financing and lobbying, they wouldn't be facing such hard times. Neither health care nor trade issues caused the hybrid lag in Detroit - that was pure corporate incompetence.

Lithium hybrid revolution 3 to 4 years away?

While you can't buy a plug-in hybrid vehicle today from any of the major auto manufacturers, you could buy a Toyota Prius and have that hybrid vehicle converted into a plug-in hybrid vehicle, but why would you do that?

Full hybrid vehicles, such as the Prius or the Ford Escape hybrid, have the ability to run completely on electric power, as well as the ability to generate electric power. In current hybrid technology this typically happens at lower speeds such as in stop-and-go or slow-and-go traffic, and this feature is one of the primary reasons hybrids are so fuel efficient.

Nonetheless, current hybrids have a limited ability to store energy because NiMH batteries in hybrids only have so much capacitiy.

Lithium ion batteries, on the other hand, enable a hybrid to extend this storage capacity, however, simply driving the hybrid probably won't generate enough electricity via regenerative breaking, etc to fill the batteries to full capactity.

Thus, why not plug the hybrid into an outlet and top the batteries off? Doing so with today's plug-in prototypes enables these hybrids to travel up to 40 miles on electric power alone, a distance greater than the average American commute.

This is the potential of lithium ion battery powered hybrid vehicles, and this is what has GM preparing to show off a prototype plug-in hybrid vehicle in early 2007 - probably at the North American International Auto Show. Still, according to GM's Bob Lutz, the real potential of a plug-in hybrid vehicle is still about 3 to 4 years away.

Lutz told The Detroit News that GM estimates it will take three to four years "to convert from 'power' lithium batteries to 'energy storage' lithium cells," which would allow vehicles to travel farther distances.

Imagine the ability to travel 100 miles on electric power alone with technology which will probably be available in just 3 to 4 years. Imagine the effect such vehicles would have on foreign oil dependency. Imagine adding a a few solar panels or a small wind turbine to your garage and powering your plug-in hybrid with completely green electricity.

So why just imagine it? Why not make this a reality?

Buying today's hybrid cars helps invest in this future. Additionally, we must put pressure on Congress to offer more incentives to both automakers and consumers for developing and buying these types of vehicles. In the long run, these investments in the future will more than pay for themselves.

Hybrid vehicles still offer excellent reliability - Consumer Reports

Hybrid vehicles are very reliable according to Consumer Reports survey research. The Honda Accord hybrid and the Toyota Prius hybrid are the number one and two most reliable family cars, and the Honda Civic hybrid took third place for most reliable small car. The Toyota Highlander hybrid and the Lexus RX400h took the first and fifth spots for most reliable midsized SUVs.

The only hybrid to suffer a bit this year compared to last year was the Ford Escape hybrid, which dropped from above average to just average.

(Source: CNNMoney)

GM's i-Car plug-in hybrid probably to debut at NAIAS

While unconfirmed, GM's prototype plug-in hybrid vehicle will probably be unveiled a the North American International Auto Show, although CEO Rick Wagoner might also cover the vehicle at a speech he'll be giving later this month at the Los Angeles Auto Show.

Toyota versus GM: Health Care, Hybrids and Kaizen

Now that Democrats have assumed control of Congress, many in GM are hoping for help dealing with health care as part of the solution to their problems. While I agree that GM might need some help dealing with health care, I think GM should also take the President's advice - build more relevant vehicles.

Still, even Japanese automakers are dealing with health care issues when they open up factories in the U.S.. For example, Toyota's health care costs for U.S. employees has doubled in the last five years to more than $11,000 per employee. Unlike GM; however, Toyota is taking action rather than just complaining to the government.

To help deal with health care, Toyota is building a $9 million dollar clinic to serve the employees of one of their factories. Why? Kaizen, or continuous improvement.

"Typically we reduce costs by improving quality," said Ford Brewer, assistant general manager for health and wellness at Toyota's North American manufacturing headquarters. "That's the same thing we're doing here." (more)

Just as with hybrid vehicles, Toyota is always seeking continuous improvement. Hybrids are not only fuel efficient and incredibly clean, but they help develop new technologies. Hybrids don't require one huge jump when the time is right - such as from gasoline vehicles to full fuel cell vehicles - they enable continuous improvement. First a hybrid, then a plug-in hybrid, then a small stack fuel cell plug-in hybrid, then a full fuel cell vehicle - continuous, constant improvement.

It will be very interesting to see if Toyota is able to reduce its health care costs with this approach. Still, Toyota is taking action, rather than just begging for help. Toyota is again thinking outside-of-the-box.

Perhaps if GM sought to solve more of its problems with innovative thinking, rather than always looking to the government, GM's bottomline would be a little more robust.

GM already toning down its i-Car campaign?

About two weeks ago I made a post about GM's i-Car, a car many believe will be some type of plug-in hybrid vehicle. According to unconfirmed sources at that time, the i-Car campaign would be launched some time before the end of the year as a challenge to Toyota and its hybrid cars. Then, earlier this week, Bob Lutz told the AutomotiveNews that the future was all electric vehicles powered by fuel cells. In the interim, Mr. Lutz claimed a plug-in hybrid would probably be the best solution, and the reality of the i-Car campaign seemed, well, real.

Suddenly, it seemed GM was preparing to completely reinvent itself. Finally, I thought, finally.

Perhaps, I got a little too excited a little too quickly.

While the LA Times is reporting that GM is going to launch an electric vehicle prototype next year, there are already questions about how serious GM actually is about the i-Car program, at least in the short term. Maybe, now that Democrats have control of Congress, GM believes it can rest on E85 and flex-fuel vehicles for several years rather than actually doing something great.

Democrats appear ready to focus on alternative fuels as answer to foreign oil dependency

As I stated earlier today, when it comes to foreign oil dependency, don't expect any real change from Democrats. Rep. John Dingell, whom will become chairmen of House Energy and Commerce Committee in January, has been a strong proponent against increased CAFE standards and he appears to see E85 and alternative fuels as the main solution to foreign oil dependency. (more)

Hopefully, Democrats will extend a few crumbs towards hybrid cars and plug-in hybrid cars, but that might offend the UAW too much, so don't expect any new tax credits for hybrids.

This is the big change America voted for? Excuse me for not being overly excited. When push comes to shove, politicians are just politicians and Democrats aren't really much better than Republicans.

It all comes down to the people. Politicians don't lead revolutions, people do, and voting for Democrats is no revolution.

Some interesting quotes

"In recent years, attempts to increase fuel economy standards have been met with broad bipartisan opposition and we're hopeful that that opposition continues," said Charles Territo, a spokesman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers.

"Energy policy and fuel economy standards for the past 20 years have been a bipartisan failure," said David Friedman, research director for the Union of Concerned Scientists' Clean Vehicles Program. "The next year will tell us a lot about how serious people are."

Stop the Madness: Hybrid Vehicles Not E85!!!!!!!

Last year ethanol producers received subsidies and tax incentives worth more than $5 billion dollars, and those subsidies will probably be much higher next year. Yet, even with those subsidies ethanol isn't cost effective unless gas prices are close to $3.00 per gallon.

So, is ethanol worth the price?

Supporters of ethanol claim that all this investment in ethanol for automobiles will eventually lead to better ways of producing ethanol, such as cellulosic ethanol.

I say it will simply lead to more flex-fuel Hummers and little decrease in foreign oil dependency. I say E85 is a feel-good way of accomplishing nothing, something both Democrats and Republicans love - talk, talk, talk, but do nothing.

Without raising the fuel efficiency of America's automobiles - significantly - America's demand for energy will continue to grow exponentially and it will outpace any reduction in foreign oil dependency produced by ethanol.

More important, even GM is now realizing the that the future of automobiles is probably electric. If this is true, then E85 simply becomes a distraction, even a boondoggle to those ends, at least for American automakers and the American economy.

Today, hybrid cars can increase fuel efficiency by 20 to 30 percent, which is a good start. Add advanced gasoline engines or clean diesel engines and fuel efficiency could be doubled - that's with just TODAY's technology.

But the real advantage of hybrids will be lithium batteries, and the ability to utilize electric power. Within 5 years it is quite possible that you could buy a $30,000 hybrid vehicle that might never have to be filled with fuel if you drive less than 40 miles per day, all it would need is a small electric charge at night.

Within 10 years a small fuel cell stack could be added to these plug-in hybrids and the majority of drivers might never need any other fuel than just a little occasional electricity. More important, all of this could happen much quicker if more incentives were provided for hybrid technology and lithium-ion technology.

Why not give those ethanol subsidies to consumers to purchase these vehicles? Ultimately, a change in consumer behavior is the quickest path to foreign oil dependence and a cleaner environment.

Yet, ethanol is the favored buzzword, the favored recipient of tax incentives and government subsidies.

In the past Honda has already claimed it believes electric cars are integral to the future, and Toyota's hybrid efforts make them a player in electric cars as well. Even GM says the future is electric. Consequently, it is imperative that American automakers lead the way into this automotive revolution, rather than sticking to flex-fuel Hummers and Mustangs.

America's focus should be that in 10 years every American vehicle produced is either fuel-free or that fuel is simply a backup. The technology will be there within 10 years. The Japanese will be there. Will America?

Still, I'm all for ethanol, cellulosic ethanol, as a fuel to produce electricity, just not as an automobile fuel. Ultimately, transporting ethanol simply makes no sense in a liquid form, but in an electric form it makes great sense.

Consequently, E85 could become a distraction, even a boondoggle if it takes the clean energy and foreign oil dependency spotlight, and early talk from many Democrats seems headed in that direction.

The future is now. If we don't dare to dream, we just might wake up to a nightmare. New automotive technology, not alternative fuels, should be the priority for America, and the majority of our tax incentives and subsidies should be given to consumers to buy this new technology.

GM set to go hybrid, then all electric?

So, GM is canceling their hydrogen fuel cell program? Well, not exactly, but it appears GM is finally beginning to understand that the world doesn't have to wait for hydrogen fuel cells before getting serious about fuel economy and pollution.

"What started as a fuel cell project is now an electric vehicle project," GM's Bob Lutz told the Automotive News recently.

"A series hybrid could run primarily on electricity from lithium-ion batteries, with an engine as backup to replenish batteries, Lutz says. The backup engine could be a diesel or gasoline internal combustion engine. Backup energy also could come from a fuel cell."

Of course, Toyota has claimed this same idea for a number of years, although their approach is a bit different. Even fuel cell makers have been calling for plug-in hybrid vehicles because they make a smaller, cheaper fuel cell stack much more cost effective to add to a vehicle.

Still, the costs of the batteries, fuel cell stacks, etc for either an all-electric fuel cell vehicle, or a plug-in hybrid fuel cell vehicle, will probably be very high for several years and maybe even a decade or longer. Which is why current hybrid technology is so important.

If not for current hybrids, GM wouldn't even be having this conversation. If not for current hybrids, plug-in hybrids wouldn't even be a buzzword in the auto industry. If not for current hybrids, there wouldn't be enough upside to develop lithium-ion batteries for automobiles.

Today's hybrid vehicles, with today's hybrid technology, are an investment in lithium ion batteries and in fuel cells, in addition to being a way to begin to reduce foreign oil dependency and global warming emissions. With today's hybrid vehicles we can begin changing the world TODAY.

It's about time GM has gotten with the program. Let's just hope this revelation isn't just hot air! America, the world, needs GM to do the right thing now more than ever.

Hyundai calls hybrid vehicles "market standard" after 2010

"Kim Min-jin, Senior Vice President of Hyundai, said that hybrid cars will become a market standard after 2010 and that financial support from the government is desperately needed for Korean automakers to commercialize their vehicles in time."

Currently, Kim claims that Korean automakers are 10 years behind Japanese automakers in hybrid development, and that without government subsidies, Korean automakers can't compete because of high import costs for hybrid batteries, etc.

By 2010, however, Hyundai believes those high costs will finally start to materialize into profits as increased production reduces costs and increases performance of hybrid batteries, etc. Consequently, just after 2008, Hyundai believes it can "launch a new vehicle that is superior to Japanese cars in both price and performance."

Toyota's huge hybrid vehicle mistake?

When it comes to hybrid vehicles, Toyota is the undisputed king. The Toyota Prius is by far the world's best selling hybrid, and Toyota offers the largest lineup of hybrids of any automaker.

Still, I think Toyota might have played its hybrid hand a bit better, or maybe there is a kink in Toyota's hybrid vehicle chain?

With low gas prices, sales of pick-up trucks are picking up, and GM and Ford are leading the way. This is one vehicle segment that American automakers understand well, and it is the most important vehicle segment for American automakers.

Consequently, Toyota's recent advertising campaign for its trucks has really surprised me, but not in a good way. Apparently, Toyota trucks are so tough that neither the Loch Ness Monster nor even a meteorite could damage one.

Please! Is Toyota serious? Is this how Toyota is going to challenge Ford and GM trucks?

Toyota, I believe, has to take a completely different approach, and I think a hybrid truck would have been the perfect buzz creator. For instance, imagine how easy it would be to attack the Chevy Silverado hybrid with a Toyota full hybrid truck - the emissions and fuel economy comparisons would be a joke.

Sure, hybrid trucks aren't going to outsell conventional trucks. Still, focusing on Toyota's hybrid trucks could bring a lot of buzz to all Toyota trucks, just as the Prius has driven much positive PR to all Toyota vehicles.

So, why isn't Toyota acting? Instead of a hybrid truck, Toyota has resorted to cheezy commercials?

Is Toyota's hybrid powertrain insufficient for some truck duties, such as towing a boat or camper? Is this a kink in Toyota's hybrid powertrain? Will GM's dual mode hybrid powertrain handle these tasks better?

Many might believe that truck drivers are nothing but a bunch of good ole boys - don't believe in global warming, don't tell them what to drive. While some might fit this profile, I bet a bunch of 'em fully believe in the dangers of foreign oil dependency and would be very open to hybrid trucks.

Toyota could have framed a new debate around hybrid trucks, Americanism and foreign oil dependency. Moreover, I'd bet they could have sold as many hybrid trucks as hybrid Highlanders, and considering the importance of the truck segment, wouldn't a hybrid truck have been worth a try?

Prius shortage close to over

An increase in Toyota Prius production is finally catching up with Prius demand, which has lessened in the face of falling gas prices and reduced federal tax credits. Still, demand for the best selling hybrid vehicle is still very strong. Eventually such a trend should decrease the value of used Prius hybrids, which often sell for more than new ones. Nonetheless, it will take several months of dropping sales to actually create a surplus of Prius hybrids.

(Source: CNNMoney)

GM to build hybrids in China by 2008

GM will join Toyota and build hybrid cars in China. While details of the report are sketchy, it appears GM will build the new hybrids with their new two-mode hybrid powertrain starting in 2008. Currently, the two-mode hybrid system is not offered in any GM vehicles and GM has not made clear which hybrid vehicles it will produce in China.

(Source: AFP)

European carmakers "firmly" opposed to CO2 emissions law

According to the Association of European Automobile Manufacturers (ACEA), consumers are at fault for automakers failing to meet CO2 emission reductions.

"This is due to a strong customer demand for larger and safer vehicles and disappointing consumer acceptance of extremely fuel-efficient cars."

Great. Now Europeans want to act as foolishly as Americans?

Still, perhaps consumers do want these larger vehicles. Fine, then make them hybrid vehicles, or clean diesel hybrid vehicles, and let consumers cover the costs of meeting CO2 emissions by paying for these technologies. Or, they can simply buy a smaller vehicle.

When you make it easy for consumers to make poor choices, they will. Make them responsible for their poor decisions and they'll make better choices in the future.

SEMA goes green? Yeah, whatever

"Even as a celebration of American muscle cars took center stage at this year'’s mod-manic Specialty Equipment Market Association (SEMA) show in Las Vegas, an emerging sense of environmental responsibility was also evident."

Case in point #1 - The Eco Jet - "The car, built around a Corvette Z06 aluminum frame, is powered by a 650-hp turbine engine (similar to a helicopter engine) that will rocket the 2,100-pound car off line with 585 pound-feet of torque. The “eco” part of the name comes from the fact that the car will run on biodiesel, a clean-burning fuel derived from renewable resources."

O.K., you're telling me a car that utilizes a helicopter engine is an environmentally responsible car? Am I missing something here? I don't care if the Eco Jet uses biodiesel if it is a monstrous biodiesel-guzzler. Wow!

Case in point #2 - The Chevy Silverado Hybrid - SEMA actually started a new hybrid category which the Silverado hybrid won. "The Silverado did come out of the blue, in that a lot of other hybrids were getting a lot more press,” said SEMA vice president Peter MacGillivray. “Yet the Silverado has more accessories available for it than any other vehicle."

I ripped on the SEMA hybrid prize earlier this week, so I won't rip on the Silverado mild, very mild, hybrid again.

(Source: MSNBC)

Insurance discount for Ohio hybrid drivers

As of November 1st Farmer's Insurance is offering a 10% discount to drivers of hybrid cars in Ohio.

(Source: AutoblogGreen)

Civic and Escape hybrid sales up big in October

Sales of the Honda Civic hybrid were up 890% in October compared to October 2005, reaching 2,288 units sold. The Ford Escape hybrid and the Mariner hybrid hit 1,602 units combined, up 30.6% compared to October 2005. The sales of all other hybrid vehicles were down in October 2006 compared to October 2005.

So what is the story? Why are sales of the Toyota Prius, for example, down while the Civic hybrid is up? Or why are sales of the Highlander hybrid down, while sales of the Escape hybrid are up?

Well, I'd bet it all comes down to tax incentives. October was the first month that tax incentives for Toyota hybrids were cut in half.

While Prius sales were down about 12%, Toyota still sold 8,733 of the hybrid vehicles - far more than Honda's Civic hybrid. Nonetheless, it will be interesting to see what happens over the next couple of months. If gas prices begin to again go up, I think Prius sales will be fine despite the lower tax incentive. If gas prices remain stable, this downward trend might continue.

(Source: Green Car Congress)

A city Prius and other derivatives coming soon?

In a few years there will probably be more than one type of Prius. While there are no known plans for these derivative Prii, the idea is brewing within Toyota according to Bloomberg News.

``To the extent they can leverage derivatives to help amortize investment costs for the hybrid system, they'd be crazy not to,'' said Eric Noble, president of consulting firm Car Lab in Orange, California. ``There is so much equity in the Prius name at this point, that would make sense, especially in the near term.''

A smaller ``city car'' based on the Prius would have even higher fuel efficiency and would fit with ``a trend toward people moving into inner-city lofts,'' Lentz said. ``People also want to see more utility on the vehicle, so you could imagine something that's a little more utility or crossover-based.''

In related news, Toyota is reporting that sales of the Prius are still strong and should be higher in 2006 compared to 2005.

Foreign oil dependency makes America stronger!

Do you think foreign oil dependency makes America stronger? In today's world, isn't that a stupid question?

Yet, it seems many Americans either believe that cheap foreign oil is good for America or that it poses little threat to America's National Security. Otherwise, how can the continued purchasing of gas-guzzlers be justified? How can the lack of hybrid vehicles from 2 out of 3 of Detroit's automakers be explained?

I often criticize GM for its lack of leadership in fighting foreign oil dependency. Does my criticism stem from my perpetual hate of anything GM? Absolutely not. It stems from the immense power GM has to take a leadership role in fighting oil dependency coupled with GM's refusal to do so.

Ultimately, I would gladly buy a GM hybrid vehicle - as long as it was a full hybrid vehicle. Unfortunately, GM just doesn't have any full hybrid vehicles available yet.

Why?

Well, just a few years ago important GM executives, such as Bob Lutz, publicly ridiculed hybrid vehicles and those automakers investing in them, which is particularly offensive since billions of taxpayer dollars were given to Detroit to develop similar vehicles back in the 90s.

Sure, GM has been claiming the future will be fuel cell vehicles, but they've been saying this for decades and they might be saying it a few more decades before it is a reality. Still, everything that can be done to fight oil dependency today, needs to be done today.

Quite simply, today, the hybrid vehicle is the best course of action in the war on oil dependency. The hybrid powertrain by itself is already efficient and will become even far more efficient. More important, however, the hybrid powertrain enables the integration of clean diesel, flex-fuel, electricity, hydrogen and fuel cells into the same powertrain.

Today's technology, such as a clean diesel hybrid, could produce vehicles that are 50 percent more efficient than today's vehicles. What are we waiting for? Too expensive? No way! There are enough subsidies already being wasted on big oil and other pork barrel legislation to provide the tax incentives needed for consumers to make clean diesel hybrids cost effective.

But, clean diesel hybrids are just one slice of the potential hybrid pie. In areas where ethanol makes sense, flex-fuel hybrids could be built. Add plug-in technology to both diesel hybrids and flex-fuel hybrids and you might only have to fill up on trips greater than 40 miles.

Imagine only filling your vehicle up a couple of times per year.

In the Southwest, such plug-in hybrids could make solar power far more cost-effective, enabling homeowners the ability to power their homes and their automobiles. Imagine never paying an electricity bill nor to fuel your automobiles. How's that for fighting global warming?

Of course these vehicles could also eventually develop into hydrogen powered hybrid vehicles, or fuel cell hybrid vehicles, but foreign oil dependency could be ended without either of these innovations. We don't have to wait for the holy grail, fuel cells. We just have to start demanding action right now.

To be fair, it's not as if GM is evil and Toyota is a saint. Neither automaker is doing enough. Nonetheless, considering the trends of the last few decades, such as previous oil embargoes, Katrina, global warming, and 9/11 isn't it finally time to say enough is enough?

And I say, it's especially time for GM, the most important automaker in America and one of the most important American companies, not to just act, but to take the lead. GM has the kind of loyal following to buy these war-effort vehicles and the political power to force the government to assist with subsidies and tax incentives for these war-effort vehicles.

Instead of using that billion dollar GM marketing budget to market gas-guzzlers, market the fight against the war on foreign oil dependency and global warming. It's our GM hybrid vehicle, it's our national security.

I don't think there is a company that could do more for America than GM if GM began to look at foreign oil dependency and global warming as a war, a war that GM was leading the battle against at ALL costs - even bankruptcy. That is simply a battle that GM would not and could not lose today.

Bob Lutz has admitted that GM could have taken a FRACTION of their YEARLY marketing budget to develop a hybrid to rival the Toyota Prius. Yet, they willfully continue to chose to spend that money marketing gas-guzzling - even AFTER 9/11. Stop!

Before 9/11 most Americans had their heads buried in the sand regarding the consequences of America's addiction to oil. Sometimes when something is so good, it's just better not to ask questions. After 9/11, however, there is no excuse not to act. Now America needs GM to do the right thing more than ever.

If 9/11, Katrina, Iraq and all the threats about global warming are not enough to get America to realize it is time to change, what will it take? Would the deaths of 10,000 or 100,000 citizens be enough? Do we need a third world war, or the loss of a major city, such as New York? Would that finally be enough?

Then again foreign oil dependency has nothing to do with 9/11, Iraq or global warming, right? Foreign oil dependency makes America stronger!

Prius sales down 8.6% in October

Sales of the Toyota Prius, by far the world's best selling hybrid vehicle, fell 8.6% in October to 8,733 vehicles. Still, considering gas prices have been dropping and tax credits for the Prius have been cut in half, I would call October a strong month for Prius sales.

(Source: CNNMoney)

Silverado hybrid wins SEMA Award

I had to laugh when I read the press release from SEMA, the Specialty Equipment Market Association, regarding the award the Chevy Silverado Hybrid won at the 2006 show.

"The Chevrolet Silverado Classic Hybrid -- the first full-size production pickup to utilize hybrid technology -- is also the first hybrid to be recognized as the most accessory friendly vehicle at the 2006 SEMA Show in Las Vegas, capturing one of four SEMA Vehicle Design Awards and becoming the benchmark in SEMA's newest design award category." (more)

"First hybrid....", please.

Quite frankly, calling the Silverado a hybrid is offensive to those whom truly support hybrid technology. If the Saturn Vue hybrid is a "a maximally minimal venture in hybrid powertrain technology that would seem less about fuel economy and more about securing coveted hybrid badges on the doors," then the Silverado hybrid is a maximally inept hybrid vehicle.

Sorry GM fans. Until GM offers a full hybrid vehicle, GM is on my #8@* list regarding hybrids. Hopefully, GM will exceed my expectations when they announce plans for the i-Car plug-in hybrid.

For now, however, GM simply doesn't offer any hybrid vehicles in my eyes.

Gas prices: It doesn't get any better than this?

Just finished watching a panel of energy experts discuss the future of the oil market for the next few years. They concluded that right now is probably as good as it is going to get when it comes to gas prices for the next few years.

A bottom of $50 per barrel of oil was predicted in the short term; however, by next year a barrel of oil will again rise above $60 and will probably settle in the $65 to $70 range. Interestingly, these predictions are based off of status-quo conditions. Consequently, a terrorist attack, hurricane, etc could push prices much higher.

So, don't worry that your investment in a hybrid car isn't going to pay off because gas prices are falling. In a few months gas prices will slowly start to rise back towards $3.00 with the potential of going much higher.