Give the Big 3 a break, Take 1

Even Honda is getting hammered?

Both Toyota and Honda posted sales declines of over 30 percent in November compared to last year. While that wasn't as bad as GM or Chrysler, those numbers were roughly in line with Ford's numbers.

And, for those buying cars, would you buy a car from a company that was weeks away from bankruptcy without government help? I wouldn't.

Does that justify Detroit's years of SUV madness at the expense of a balanced product portfolio? Of course not, but all of these automakers had started making serious changes before the credit crisis - a crisis that is hurting all automakers, even those making hybrid cars and small cars.

This alone doesn't justify a bailout, but it adds a little perspective. More coming on Take 2.

Autos: Let the new world order begin

Everything soon as efficient as the Prius?

By 2020, if all goes well, the average fleet-wide fuel economy of the US fleet will be 35 mpg, a far cry from the fuel efficiency required to end foreign oil dependency. On the upside, there could be more than a million plug-in vehicles on the road by 2020.

Unfortunately, even if automakers are selling 1 million plug-ins per year in the US by 2020, probably an aggressive number, that would still represent significantly less than 10 percent of total yearly US auto sales, and we'll still be very dependent upon Persian Gulf oil.

Yet, achieving that million EV mark is going to cost many, many billions in government tax incentives. Even then, most automakers will make little profit off these vehicles. In fact, the move towards fuel economy is probably going to mean that total US auto sales per year will decline, even significantly.

Sadly, getting serious about fuel economy probably means significant job loss, not gain - at least in the US.

Is Congress even considering these issues as they ponder the legitimacy of the Big 3's plans for the future? We'll soon find out, but one thing is certain: bailing America out of its foreign oil dependency will cost far, far, far more than US automakers are seeking in loans.

Waxman to make life tougher for automakers?

Higher CAFE requirements coming?

If I had to make a wager, I'd bet that a bailout for US automakers is inevitable, despite the recent hardball from Democrats. While that might irritate most, relax a little if your focus is fuel economy and global warming.

Now that Henry Waxman has replaced John Dingell as the leader of the Energy and Commerce panel, tougher CAFE and global warming requirements for automakers now seem inevitable. If Democrats hold to their guns, a bailout can be a good thing.

F Congress: Give automakers the money

Or do I mean F America?

Congress is in a tough spot. The majority of Americans don't want Congress to help the US auto industry, despite the fact that all of the Big 3's competitors receive heavy subsidies from their governments.

I understand. For decades the Big 3 built a lot of crap and, even after 9/11, they still didn't react to fuel economy. Profit was more important than national security.

Nonetheless, Congress has to give automakers the money and, we the people, should accept that because we the people are also responsible for the state of the US auto industry. We bought the gas-guzzlers. We demanded that gas stay cheap. We voted for politicians that made gas taxes and increased fuel economy standards dirty word for decades.

I know. None of that justifies the failures of the Big 3, whom helped brainwash the people into gas-guzzling stupidity. And, I know most Americans want the corporate big wigs of America, including those from Detroit, to suffer. Yet, it will be average Americans - all over America - that will suffer most if Detroit goes under. Now is not the time to seek revenge, it's time to turn a wrong into a right.

LeBeau - Automakers open to fuel efficiency strings for cash

Time to make the best out of this bailout?

During CNBC Reports just a few minutes ago, Phil Lebeau - whom interviewed GM CEO Rick Wagoner this morning - stated that US automakers would be open to fuel economy strings for government cash.

Seems like a positive sign, and an angle that Congress should exploit.

Democrats ready to play hardball with Detroit?

Time to Californiacate Detroit?

The state of California wants to regulate CO2 emissions, which would require massive increases in fuel economy - meaning automakers would be forced to roll out tons of new alternative technologies, such as hybrid cars.

In Washington, California Congressman Henry Waxman has argued California's case, and he appears ready to take California's case to a higher pulpit. According to the Financial Times, Waxman "is challenging the dean of the House, John Dingell of Michigan, in his role as chairman of the House energy and commerce committee."

Dingell's protectionism of Detroit, at the expense of CAFE and global warming, according to FT, has irked both Waxman and House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi. Thus, if Waxman does replace Dingell, it would seem that fuel economy and global warming would play a far more significant role in the next session of Congress.

Another $25 billion for automakers in the works

Smelling the White House

Democrats are kicking around the idea of another $25 billion for automakers as a "bridge financing" loan according to the DetroitNews. Such funding now appears inevitable as Congress will eventually offer the Big 3 some kind of bailout. Fortunately, it seems that money will come with strings, such as the money can't be used for bonuses. Unfortunately, it doesn't appear the new legislation will come with enough strings, such as a fuel economy requirement, for instance.

If Democrats attain a super-majority in Congress, I worry a little that Congress might save too much of the Big 3. Yesterday's auto sales numbers indicate quite clearly that the US auto industry MUST be downsized in some way, and it seems that must begin with Chrysler.

Can Democrats clean and green the US auto industry?

America's freedom fighter?

On the NYSE floor, an Obama win has already been priced into stocks, and there is a belief that an Obama win, coupled with a filibuster-proof Democratic majority in Congress, will lead to 'new deal' style projects and bailouts, such as the one needed for the US auto industry.

Can politicians cost-effectively manage both a successful bailout of the US auto industry, while increasing fuel economy and reducing emissions?

More important, if Congress is going to invest many billions more of tax payer money into the US auto industry, shouldn't fuel economy requirements be even more stringent than new CAFE regulations? For instance, shouldn't a massive bailout plan be structured around a real world plan to end foreign oil dependency by, say, 2025?

Does a bailout take a bite out of CAFE?

Chevy Cruze delayed

A bailout to help GM and Chrysler merge now seems inevitable. So, why did Cerebrus buy Chrysler? That's right, to make money, and probably at taxpayer expense. Anyway, back to the bailout. It seems there are just too many jobs, healthcare and pension funds at stake for Congress to let the auto industry go under. So, when these companies emerge, one can only assume that means GM will then forever be too big to go under.

Whatever, right? It's the jobs. It's the economy.

Fine, but what happens if GM says it can't meet new CAFE requirements without tens of billions more of taxpayer money, or bankruptcy? How can the government enforce legislation like CAFE when the auto industry knows Congress won't let it fail?

Automaker bailout - Why I'm losing faith

Does Congress really care about the people?

I was just watching some coverage on CNBC about how a number of Wall Street firms are using taxpayer bailout money to fund executive bonuses. Thus, our taxpayer money is funding the bonuses of executives whom lost 100's of billions of our wealth because, according to one expert on the panel, Congress left loopholes in the bailout bill, as usual. 

Thus, as we sit on the verge of an automaker bailout, I only feel anger. Yes, I want the US auto industry to succeed. Yes, I want to protect US auto jobs. Yet, I cannot trust this Congress, nor the corporations it protects. This Congress has proven that Democrats and Republicans suck.

Besides, if the auto industry is bailed out, how many more hybrid cars will the US auto industry make next year, or the year after? Probably none. 

At this point, I'll take a depression and give my house up to bankruptcy rather than watch any more of my tax dollars go to some incompetent, greedy, rich executive's bonus. Perhaps, the auto industry isn't Wall Street, still I can't take any more, I've lost all faith.

Should automaker loans become a bailout?

How much change does Barack really want

So, Barack Obama wants the Energy Department to quickly provide the $25 billion in loans that automakers are to receive to help meet increased CAFE regulations because of tough financial times. Yet, such regulatory efforts, according to reports, often take 18 months or more to structure.

Lest we forget, these loans - which cost tax payers several billion to fund - were specifically created for fuel efficiency projects, such as new hybrid cars. They are not, as the auto industry reiterated numerous times, a bailout. Thus, how much can retooling a factory help today's bottom line for the Big 3?

More important, if rushed and loopholed, is not a bailout exactly what these loans are in danger of becoming? Should the US auto industry be bailed out at any cost? Is the Nationalization of the US auto industry inevitable?

New tax credits for Non-plug-in hybrids needed?

Tax credits helped drive the Prius

There is no doubt that tax credits for hybrid cars, especially the Toyota Prius, helped sell these vehicles. But, are new tax credits needed to keep moving these vehicles?

Probably not, considering that most hybrid dealers have been adding massive dealer markups to these vehicles. Of course, if the economy keeps tanking all car sales will suffer.

Still, what about a tax credit for non-plug-in hybrids that rewards significantly higher fuel economy - say for hybrids that achieve at least 60 or 70 mpg combined fuel economy? Or, at least a tax credit for plug-in conversions?

If Congress truly wants to end foreign oil dependency, isn't a more aggressive, comprehensive incentive program required?

Tax credits for plug-in's a done deal

Will a Prius plug-in qualify?

Tax credits for plug-ins are now a done deal, as the President has promised to pass the bailout bill that Congress has now approved. Plug-ins with at least a four-kilowatt battery pack will qualify for a credit ranging from $4,168 to $7,500 depending on the number of kWh's in the battery pack.

It is know that the Chevy Volt will qualify for the entire $7,500.

Originally, Toyota was against this bill, but the company seemed to change its tune when the kWh battery requirement was reduced. So, it appears plug-in hybrids, such as the Toyota Prius, will also qualify for this credit.

Revised plug-in tax credit in new bailout bill

$4,168 - $7,500 tax credit for plug-ins

If the new bailout package in Congress is approved on Friday, it will also include a new plug-in tax credit.

Plug-in vehicles weighing under 10,000 pounds with at least a 4 kWh battery pack will qualify for a $4,168 tax credit. The value of the credit will scale up to a maximum of $7,500 for each extra kWh of battery capacity.

Once automakers, collectively, sell 250,000 plug-ins in one year, the credit will expire.

Automaker bailout goes to President

Chevy Volt and EV1 at Alt Car Expo

Both the House and the Senate have signed off on a bill to give $25 billion to automakers to help make more fuel efficient vehicles. And, I'm OK with that. This is about jobs at a time when jobs are desperately needed.

Still, this isn't just a loan, it is a bailout. Tax payers ARE putting up $7.5 billion to secure these loans. Besides, despite new CAFE regulations, the markets are DEMANDING the Big 3 move towards efficiency. The Big 3 have no choice but to change, something that should have been obvious after 9/11 and Katrina.

Let's hope they get it right this time.

Automaker loans easily pass through House

Hopefully its used to develop plug-in hybrids like this Escape plug-in hybrid at NAIAS

Don't call it a bailout, but the House of Representatives has passed a bill that includes $25 billion in loans for US automakers, and the bill is expected to easily pass through the Senate. Still, even though its not a bailout, it will cost US tax payers $7.5 billion to fund these loans.

Hopefully, the language in this bill remains tough, particularly that language requiring the loans be used only on projects that achieve at least a 25 percent increase in fuel economy - a standard automakers were fighting to lower.

If it stays at 25 percent, I won't call it a bailout. If automakers successfully lobbied Congress to reduce this requirement, however, then how can you call it anything but a bailout?

Automaker loans sneaking through Congress

Big 3 to get a little help?

With the Wall Street bailout providing cover, the $25 billion dollar loan package for automakers is gaining momentum. Nonetheless, legislation coming out of Congress, including these loans and many other programs, is said to be filled with many billions in earmarks that could force the President to exercise his veto powers.

Nevertheless, at least compared to the hundreds of billions, minimally, needed to bail out Wall Street, $25 billion for automakers is chump change. Sadly, however, the real question might be, is $25 billion nearly enough to save the Big 3?

Give Detroit the money, but....

Toyota's very fuel efficient Tundra?

The Big 3 continue to increase their efforts to acquire as much as $50 billion in loans from the US government - $25 billion of which was written into CAFE increasing legislation, and momentum is gaining in Congress.

Thus far, I've been against this bailout, but I think I've changed my mind. Perhaps the bailout can be the impetus for desperately needed change.

Finish: Give Detroit the money, but....

Momentum gains for automaker bailout

Talks have started at the White House

Automakers have gained momentum in their quest for some $50 billion in US backed loans, although that amount could get slashed to $25 billion.

The Detroit News has reported, "It's something we're aware of and we're talking to the members of Congress and also the people in the (auto) industry, and thinking about what they might think would be required from their perspective," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said at a press briefing Tuesday. She said she wasn't prepared to say what funding amount "the White House would or would not support," noting "there's a lot of details that go into something like that."

And, with both John McCain and Barack Obama supportive of at last $25 billion - Obama supports the $50 billion - some type of bailout seems inevitable.

Fuel economy: Double jeopardy for tax payers?

Just let Congress manage our economy?

Yesterday, I blogged on how the city of Flint is providing millions in tax breaks to GM to help fund the Chevy Volt, and GM is also seeking millions from the state as well. Likewise, GM is also requesting part of $50 billion in low interest, government backed loans to help in the conversion to vehicles with better fuel economy, such as smaller vehicles and hybrid cars. And, when GM finally starts selling the Volt, it will probably need large tax incentives for consumers in order to make these vehicles affordable.

And, if Ford and Chrysler ever develop real plans to address fuel economy, they'll need just as much help.

Yet, the pain doesn't stop there. Automakers claim that CAFE will increase the price of all vehicles significantly. Thus, not only are tax payers committing billions in loans and tax breaks to Detroit, they're also going to have to pay more for the products their tax dollars are helping to fund.

Without doubt, US automakers provide great jobs for many Americans, but how did things get so screwed up? More important, can the US auto industry really be saved, or are we just delaying the inevitable?

US automakers need $40 billion

A Ford plug-in hybrid at NAIAS

There is an interesting article, The Next Bailout: Detroit,
that covers the latest talks the Big 3 US automakers are having with some members of Congress. Apparently, the Big 3 need about $40 billion to both survive and to develop next generation hybrid cars and electric vehicles.

This blog has covered automaker bailouts in the past, and most that have commented seemed to be against any bailout. Nonetheless, feel free to again express your opinion for or against, but how likely do you think an automaker bailout is, regardless of your bailout opinions? Is it a sure thing? Is it dependent upon the race for President?

Fuel economy, cars and politics

Large gas-guzzlers still qualify for tax incentives

Democrats are the party for greens, right? So, why are solar tax credits set to expire? Why are tax credits for hybrid cars expiring while tax incentives for huge gas guzzlers are not?

We shouldn't be surprised according to an interesting chart The Fast Report sent to Hybridcarblog. The chart shows a strong correlation between gas prices and the ratio of small to large vehicle sales. Overall, higher gas prices lead to less guzzler sales, more small car sales and greater US fuel economy. Great for greens, right?

And yet Democrats want to tap into oil reserves, grill oil executives and whatever else to try to lower gas prices, an event that will only lead to more gas-guzzler sales and decreased fuel economy. Contradictions?

Republicans couldn't run Congress and now Democrats can't either. Talk, talk, talk. Spend, spend, spend. Man, I gotta run for office. What a job!

A $20 billion bailout for automakers?

America's automotive "Apollo Project"?

A bipartisan group of US senators is proposing a $20 billion package to help automakers achieve "the goal of transitioning 85 percent of America's new motor vehicles to non-petroleum-based fuels within 20 years."

The bulk of the money goes to automakers to both retool and to develop new battery-orientated technologies, including hybrid cars and electric vehicles. Additionally, in the short term, the plan would also significantly increase tax credits for hybrids and hybrid conversions. Of course, the plan also offers a few billion more for biofuels.

While there is a dire need for such an "Apollo Project", from where will the money come? Who is going to ensure that the tax money isn't wasted on pork and boondoggles with few conclusive results - Congress? Perhaps I'm just grumpy from driving more than 2000 miles in the last 36 hours, but I can't help but ask, do automakers deserve such a bailout?

Auto industry spends $70 million on Congress

Save our guzzlers

The auto industry spent $70 million in 2007 trying to influence Congress, up from $59 million the year before. All in all, lobbyists spent $2.70 billion to lobby Congress last year. (DetNews)

Foreign oil: Democrats just as pathetic

No leadership in Congress

It's easy for many to find too comfy of a relationship between Republicans and Big Oil. Nancy Pelosi and Democrats, however, continue to be just as disappointing. Leading Democrats want to start a witchhunt into high pump prices - as if $120 barrels of oil don't say enough. Pandering, pandering pathetic Democrats. Maybe Nancy should call up John McCain to see if they can work out a bi-partisan 'gas is free for the summer' campaign.

Thanks to high gas prices, consumer behavior is changing - something Congress has failed to do for decades. Congress should be focusing on what else can be done to reduce foreign oil dependency, not what else they can do to lower fuel prices and INCREASE dependency.

Will we ever have elected officials that can handle the truth, or are pandering, pork-loving liars forever inevitable?

Republican Candidates Stand with California on Emissions?

McCain with CA and buddy Schwarzenegger on emissions

"I applaud the governor's efforts and that of other states in this region and other states across America to try to eliminate the greenhouse gas emissions that are causing climate change," said John McCain last night during a debate in California.

Other Republican candidates were supportive as well, though some not as vigorously. "I side with states being able to make their own decisions, even if I don't always agree with the decisions they make," stated Mitt Romney.

I'm sure Democrats will say the same, which irks me a bit. Most of these people are already in Congress. If they couldn't lead Congress as members on such issues, will they really be able to lead as President?

California Emissions Suit: An American Tragedy

Congressional Hearing Today on California Emission Waiver

Congress, led by Barbara Boxer of California, intends to overturn the EPA's decision to deny California a waiver to determine its own tailpipe emissions. Yet, it's no wonder that the EPA ruled as it did, despite the fact that most EPA staffers felt the EPA had to rule in favor of California.

Ultimately, the entire US auto industry and a very important slice of the American manufacturing sector is at stake. And, while some might argue that automakers will get what they deserve, I still have the same lingering angst: Why does Congress continue to artificially deflate the cost of gasoline?

Cheap gas is and has been the root of America's foreign oil dependency, yet neither Barbara Boxer nor Nancy Pelosi have the guts to address this issue. Nor does the President or any other member of Congress. Of course, since we the people keep voting for these idiots, I guess we're the real fools.

Foreign oil: Congress versus automakers

US Coast Guard protecting imported energy

It costs, minimally, tens of billions of dollars every year just to secure the oil that the US imports from the Middle East, not including war costs. Yet, this cost is NOT included in the cost of our gasoline?

Why? And, who pays for these costs (duh, right)?

More important, if Americans had been paying the real cost of gasoline over the last few decades, would America be so dependent upon foreign oil today?

While Congress scapegoats automakers with historically-ineffective CAFE legislation, isn't the real problem the cheap cost of gasoline kept artificially low by Congress?

Still no new hybrid vehicle tax credits: Let's take action

Give them credit

Congress has passed CAFE. By 2020 foreign oil dependency will end, significant reductions in global warming will be achieved, and all Americans will drive in any vehicle and achieve at least 35 mpg, while saving 100s of dollars in gasoline costs per year.

Now will reality please stand up?

It's time to put the power in the hands of the people. Tax credits for hybrid cars, clean diesel and bio-diesel conversion kits give the people the power to make smarter, clean and greener consumer purchases, while rewarding the companies making cleaner and greener energy and products. Power to the people, not the corporations! Join the Revolution! Read more.

Should politicians drive American?

The best hybrid for members of Congress?

Just a couple of years ago there were just a couple of members of Congress whom drove hybrid cars. Thus, at a Congressional news conference on high gas prices at a gas station a few blocks from Congressional offices, several reporters mocked Congress for both not walking to the conference and for driving fuel-inefficient cars.

Today, many more members of Congress now drive hybrid vehicles and many of those hybrids are foreign hybrids, such as the Toyota Prius. This has continually bothered some members of Congress, especially those from Michigan.

Obviously, there aren't many choices when it comes to hybrid cars, and the Prius is the most fuel efficient hybrid. So, is it really that big of a deal that American members of Congress buy non-American hybrids? Or, as members of Congress, would it be more ethical to drive a hybrid like the Ford Escape hybrid?

CAFE passes Congress: Sorry I don't care

Once again, take it easy Nancy

Well, CAFE has passed Congress, and all I can say is big deal.

A 6-fold increase in ethanol production - much of that coming from corn. Please. I mean, c'mon. Already, corn-based ethanol has increased food prices by 5 percent overall, but for some products, prices have increased much more. The cost of a gallon of milk, for example, is up 90 cents. How much higher will a 6-fold increase raise prices, especially if a big drought hits once we get there? Forget just costs, suddenly we might be talking shortages. Now that's smart.

I already made my thoughts pretty clear in my post Pelosi is a comedian and CAFE is the joke. But, for another perspective check out Warren Brown's article, Energy bill hangs on to the myth that we can have our oil and guzzle it, too.

Hybrid vehicles dissed by Energy Bill?

$100 million per year for hybrids and electrics?

At first glance one might think the proposed energy bill coming out of Congress includes some great incentives for advanced technologies, such as hybrid cars, plug-in hybrid vehicles and electric cars, but if compared to corn-based ethanol, the numbers are pathetically low. Finish.....

No new hybrid credits in CAFE, energy bill?

Where are the tax credits, Nancy?

According to the DetroitNews, many Michigan Democrats are prepared to vote against the final energy bill if certain details are not resolved. One of those issues is tax credits for hybrid vehicles. Apparently, Congressional leaders want to split CAFE requirements and incentives for achieving CAFE into two separate issues.

Some Democrats, such as Debbie Stabenow, state "The regulations are real, and the funding needs to be real."

How can you regulate something that is going to cost automakers 10's of billions of dollars without both helping struggling automakers and giving consumers incentives to change their gas guzzling ways? I'd argue that the incentives for change are MORE important that the regulations for change.

The Bush, Republican, Big Oil and Iraq Conspiracy

One of the biggest increases in foreign oil dependency happened on Clinton's watch

I just finished posting a comment on the GreenCarCongress website about Google's commitment to making renewable energy cheaper than coal. Actually, it wasn't so much about Google, but some comments to the article that referenced the Big Oil, Bush and Iraq conspiracy.

STOP this nonsense. Finish...

Ethanol blocking CAFE

Time to end the ethanol loophole

The DetroitNews is reporting that Congress is close to finishing off a 35 mpg by 2020 energy bill, however, "several congressional sources and auto industry lobbyists said the major issue is the fuel economy credit automakers get for making flexible-fuel or dual-fuel vehicles."

Thus far ethanol is a joke that has caused more harm than good. Sure, cellulosic ethanol holds promise, but corn-based ethanol should not be used as an excuse not to produce more fuel efficient vehicles.

Shouldn't CAFE be limited just to fuel economy? If automakers and Congress want to work on biofuels, incorporate that legislation into gas taxes. For instance, offer a lesser fuel tax for greener alternative fuels, but let's at least keep CAFE about fuel economy and fuel efficiency-increasing technologies, such as hybrid cars and clean diesel vehicles, for example.

No gimmicks. No excuses. 35 mpg means 35 mpg. Keep it simple.

US House Committee hoping to advance electric drivetrains

US House Committee on Science and Technology advances two important energy bills

The two bills offer research funding for V2G technology, batteries, ultracapacitors and much more that could help advance hybrid cars, plug-in hybrids, electric vehicles and fuel cell hybrid vehicles. (more)

Forget CAFE this year?

No compromise on CAFE?

"The likelihood of Congress passing legislation by the end of the year to raise the fuel economy of the nation's cars and light trucks is diminishing.

Even as the White House on Friday called for Congress to take action, observers said the odds are low of House and Senate leaders overcoming procedural hurdles to begin work on compromise legislation." More..

Energy Bill: Billions and Billions for nuclear power, but not for hybrids?