Incentives for a Toyota Prius plant in the US?

Can protectionism save US auto jobs?

For a few years Toyota has been toying around with the idea of a US plant to manufacture its red hot Toyota Prius. Unfortunately, the current recession crushed any such plan for the short term.

Would it be wise for the US government to help bring such a plant to the US, or should the government only protect US companies, or only just UAW workers?

Likewise, Nissan is now planning a US plant for electric vehicle and electric vehicle battery development, with a significant eye on US government help. Should they get it?

Are incentives for transplants to bring more manufacturing jobs to the US a good or bad idea?

Japan is incentivizing hybrids, the US guzzlers

Congress set to pass cash for clunkers next week?

Hybrid cars have never been hotter in Japan. It started with the Honda Insight and the new Toyota Prius is primed for explosive sales as well. While these two not new hybrids are reason enough for a hybrid sales spike, Japan has helped the hybrid cause by providing tax incentives for consumers to buy hybrids.

In America, we're promoting cash for clunkers. Bring in your big 15 mpg gas guzzler and replace it with an 18 mpg gas guzzler and the government will hand you a check for up to $4500.

Obviously, the US economy is struggling and a surge in gas-guzzlers - the bread and butter of the US auto industry - could help the economy while protecting the large tax payer investment into the US auto industry. Still, this is a terribly bitter pill to swallow, and despite the worthy intentions, America should be embarrassed by this cash for clunkers program.

Energy Independence: An American joke

Can the US auto industry end America's foreign energy dependence?

Chrysler isn't paying back $7 billion that the government lent to the automaker to stay out of bankruptcy. GM is losing billions by the week. Yet, the government is about to loan the auto industry up to $50 billion to help the US auto industry retool for greater fuel efficiency.

Then there are bailouts for auto suppliers, financing units like GMAC, cash for clunker programs, etc., but why dwell? The real point is, when will all of this bailout money lead to energy independence?

In terms of future fuel efficient, oil dependence-fighting vehicles, it's all about the plug, right? Yet, GM's Chevy Volt probably won't be profitable until the 2020s according to Obama's auto task force unless there is a tripling in gas prices. What happens in the interim? Why can't the Big 3 compete with Toyota's already profitable, 50 mpg Prius?

Thus, many claim that only a gas tax can push America off foreign energy. However, as popular as President Obama is today, even he couldn't push such an idea through Congress.

Today, America's Achilles heal, foreign oil dependency, is more exposed than ever, and by the time we truly realize the dangers of this sick joke, it might be too late. Ironically, however, now that gas prices have fallen, this issue isn't even on America's radar.

Can green vehicles really save the Big 3?

The Chinese auto has only just emerged

As Congress and the Obama auto task force contemplate many tens of billions - perhaps even much more - in aid to the US auto industry, is the US auto industry already a dead industry walking?

Kudos to President Obama for playing hardball - even if it is just for show - with the UAW, bondholders and corporate boards. Still, today these concessions are being forced in an effort to compete with Japan and Korea.

Tomorrow, even mighty Toyota might not be able to compete with Chinese automakers, and smart people like Warren Buffett are already making that bet.

Today, many claim that hybrid and electric vehicles are the key to the Big 3's future - vehicles with little profit potential for Big 3 automakers in the next few decades. Yet, Chinese automakers are quickly rushing to fill this segment with their own products. Moreover, China has far better access to lithium than does the US, hordes of engineers and an endless supply of cheap labor.

Can hybrid cars really save the Big 3? Can anything?

Can Democrats survive cap and trade?

A Congressional conundrum

I believe that humans have contributed to global warming. I also believe that human caused global warming might have actually prevented an ice age that would have had a devastating impact on the human population. Regardless, it's time to regulate CO2 emissions, even if you don't believe in human-made global warming.

Like it or not regulating CO2 is ultimately about efficiency, and with today's massively growing population, limited resources, and the ever increasing computerization of the world's economy, efficient, clean energy is the only sustainable way forward.

Still, a significant percent of Americans don't agree, and even more don't believe that now, in this recession, is the time to deal with such a monumental issue. Nonetheless, now that the EPA is set to label CO2 emissions a danger to health, doesn't the government have to act? Yet, can Democrats retain control of Congress if they push ahead with a cap and trade plan?

EPA ready to institute cap and trade, will voters comply?

Greenhouse gases to be a "health danger"

The EPA is ready to declare carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases a public health danger according to reports. If the White House accepts the EPA's proposal, sweeping change is forthcoming. Already, the White House has indicated that it wants Congress to act on this issue, such as in greater fuel economy standards - probably similar to those California is seeking - along the way to President Obama's cap-and-trade plan.

But will consumers balk?

Ultimately, such legislation will lead to higher auto prices - higher everything prices. Assuming cap-and-trade revenues will help subsidize these higher costs for low income consumers might be too big of an assumption for many voters. And with a majority of Americans now picking the economy over the environment, serious plans to regulate CO2 emissions could become a political braking point for the Obama Administration if the economy does not soon recover.

Kudos to Obama for now

This is not the future

UAW boss Ron Gettelfinger is telling members to ratify a new round of concessions with Ford. Otherwise, according to Gettelfinger, Ford will not survive.

Holy cow. During the first round of Congressional testimony on this issue, the UAW seemed pretty resistant to any further concessions. I guess the UAW has finally seen the light. Certainly the problems associated with the Big 3 are not purely the fault of the UAW, but the union did play a significant role.

Kudos to the Obama administration and Congress for playing some hard ball with Detroit. With the significant tie between labor and Democrats, an earlier cave in was expected, at least by this blogger. Of course, such a cave in probably would have guaranteed the eventual collapse of Detroit's automakers.

Still, now comes the hard part. How do the Big 3 deal with the fact that 10 million sales per year might be America's new run rate? Can the Big 3 compete at producing small, fuel efficient vehicles at a profit? Will any US automaker produce 100,000 hybrid cars per year within the next 5 years?

Bailout Nation: Calling Big 3 haters and supporters

Are the Big 3 ready?

"Get me a plan that works."

That's what President Obama is hoping for on Tuesday, when automakers present their restructuring plans to the Treasury Department. Is such a plan, however, even possible?

Auto sales sunk 37 percent in January as automakers struggled for survival. GM, for instance, is slashing 10,000 white collar jobs and offering early retirement to every hourly worker as it tries to raise cash from partnerships in China and Korea. Additionally, GM is trying to unload brands such as Hummer.

Serious changes are occurring within the auto industry, which is good, but is it enough? And, what about the product?

In recent weeks and months, all of the Big Three have been showing off their EV plans as proof of how they will help America reduce foreign oil dependency and global warming? But is this all just poppycock?

If these cars are going to save the Big 3, the Big 3 will need to sell millions of such vehicles EVERY year, right? When is that going to happen? 2020? Later?

Yet, in just a few months, California might put into law emissions requirements that will soon make most of the Big 3's money makers unfit for sale in the Nation's most important auto market. How will GM or Chrysler compete with the Toyota Prius or the Honda Insight in such an environment?

So, what should Obama and Congress do? Undoubtedly, a new bailout is inevitable, but should America's new energy vision focus only on protecting the Big 3, or should it be more focused on achieving results, on achieving real change?

For instance, why not do just enough to keep the Big 3 afloat, while providing massive consumer-driven tax incentives for highly efficient, manufactured in America, vehicles made by any automaker? Besides, isn't competition the mother of innovation?

Tax credits for guzzlers - Does it ever end?

One last dance on the Congressional gravy train?

I've had a hard time not commenting on the plan, now part of the stimulus package before the Senate, to give consumers a tax credit for buying new cars. So, I'm just going to get it out of my chest.

Are you kidding me? Foreign-oil sucking, 911-causing, gas GUZZLERS?

This is change?

I say, F cars right now, unless we're talking a serious change, such as a plan to end foreign oil dependency by 2020. If not, just give Detroit enough money to stay above water for now. That's it. We'll sort it out later when there is time for a better plan.

Besides, if it doesn't kill you, it only makes you stronger, right?

I mean, really, if you wanna spend a trillion dollars today, there should only be one focal point: the real estate and the mortgage mess.

Isn't that the root of our problems in the first place? So, why focus on anything else right now?

Don't have any ideas?

Here's one. Since the banks screwed us on this thing in the first place, let's just force them to lower rates on ALL mortgages significantly, or something like that.

They owe us, right? Direct and simple. Transparent.

But tax credits for gas guzzlers? Excuse me, I have to go to the bathroom right now.

Congress and fuel economy - Can you say hypocrisy?

Even Barack doesn't have much high ground

I remember, just as gas prices were rising, a press conference that members of Congress had at a Washington DC gas station to address the rising cost of gasoline prices. Even though the gas station was just ONE block from Congressional offices, most members drove. Even worse, their drivers waited in idling cars as members spoke, then were quickly driven back the one block to their offices.

Reporters on scene also noted how most drove SUVs, or gas-guzzling performance cars. Only a couple members - in total - drove hybrids then, at least in Washington.

Around the same time President-Elect Obama told supporters at a town hall meeting in Illinois that America had to give up their love affair with gas-guzzling SUVs, then he left the meeting in a gas-guzzling SUV. Later, reps for Obama explained that it was a flex fuel vehicle. Unfortunately, in Chicago, where Obama spent most his Illinois time, there weren't but a couple of ethanol stations throughout the entire metro area. Of course, ethanol guzzlers are little better than gas guzzlers.

Yet, these same politicians - now holier than thou - cannot understand why US automakers haven't focused on more fuel efficient vehicles, more hybrid vehicles. With their leadership - on both sides of the aisle - is there really any wonder?

Govt would have to fund Big 3 bankruptcy

No one has the money to fund a bankruptcy?

So, you want the Big 3 to go into bankruptcy to clean house? Alright. I was just watching some pre-coverage of the bailout testimony before Congress and analysts were discussing how there is no financial institution strong enough to finance the bankruptcy of the Big 3. Oddly enough, financing a bankruptcy would actually cost more than the bailout loans - and the bankruptcy wouldn't be a loan.

I don't know, folks. There is a lot of reason to hate the Big 3, I realize that. Still, we're giving hundreds of billions to just Citibank, and no one hardly says anything. Yet, when we try to help the auto industry - an employer of millions directly and indirectly - America wants to crush them? Does America really hate the UAW that much more than billionaire Wall Streeters?

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?

No help for efficient-minded consumers?

"A one-sentence provision buried in the Senate’s recently passed energy bill, inserted without debate at the urging of the nuclear power industry, could make builders of new nuclear plants eligible for tens of billions of dollars in government loan guarantees."(NYTimes)

This is not the forum for a nuclear energy debate, but it seems ridiculous that the government's biggest handouts always go to big business - big businesses that use billions in tax incentives to achieve billions in profits. Yet, the benefits provided by these businesses seem to cost American consumers more and more.

What about giving smart consumers the power to reward companies that make smart decisions?

Over and over I have been told how important the clean vehicle tax credit has been to the buyers of hybrid cars? Yet, Toyota's hybrid tax credits are essentially expired. Is that how you reward companies for doing the right thing? More important, isn't it essential to help citizens and consumers to make better choices, such as buying more fuel efficient vehicles?

If it was GM or Ford, rather than Toyota, that was the hybrid sales leader, would hybrid tax credits still have been capped by manufacturer? Would they have been capped at all?

Whether it is Democrats or Republicans, it seems there is one phrase that best describes America's politicians - pork-barrel pigs.

Study claims 35 mpg CAFE is 'economically feasible'

If the Volt is 'technologically feasible' by 2010, then how can 35 mpg not be?

Congress and Detroit. Two peas in a pod? If there was ever a common element between politicians and automakers, it has to be vision. Or, more precisely, a lack thereof.

O.K., the House of Reps. is going to delay any action regarding fuel economy until Fall - something that will make automakers breathe a little easier the next few months. While automakers show off fancy cars, possibly able to achieve 100 mpg by 2012, they also continue to argue that 35 mpg is not 'technologically feasible' by 2020 - a claim I disputed on Tuesday.

Yet, not only is 35 mpg easily 'technologically feasible' by 2020, it is even more economically feasible than not achieving this higher level of CAFE, according to a new study cited by Edmunds.

"Detroit's automakers would collectively earn $14.4 billion by 2017, the study says, under the toughest standards being considered by Congress: a combined car and truck average of 35 mpg by 2018. The U of M auto brain trust calculates that indexing mileage targets to vehicle size wouldn't penalize Detroit with its truck-heavy lineups the way the existing car and truck standards do. Instead, the domestic automakers would be allowed to aim for a lower target — around 33 mpg — while Japanese rivals that are top-heavy with passenger cars might need to average 38 mpg. "

Why doesn't Congress get off its ass and do something meaningful? Forcing, while helping, Detroit to build as many hybrid cars today, while developing tomorrow's plug-in hybrids, seems to be the best thing Congress could do for Detroit - and America.

So, show some vision already!

Automakers clueless on "reasonable" fuel economy standards

Automakers want to work with Congress to set "reasonable" standards

According to the DetroitNews, automakers will be starting a new ad campaign regarding proposed legislation to increase fuel economy standards in the U.S..

"We don't have all the answers to questions about reasonable fuel economy standards. No one does. Together, we can find the answers America deserves," the campaign says according to the paper.

I have an answer to questions regarding reasonable fuel economy standards. End foreign oil dependency. That's the answer! If you want to work with Congress, work with Congress to end foreign oil dependency! How many fricken trillions of dollars do we have spend in places like Iraq and to fight the War on Terror because of our dirty, protect our foreign oil consumption at all costs politics? Is that reasonable?

Work together to create enough hybrid cars, plug-in hybrids, electric vehicles, clean diesels and biofuels to end foreign oil dependency! Had automakers and Congress followed through on proposals to do this a decade ago, America already would have saved at least half a trillion and the costs would have already paid for themselves.

Decline of Big 3 Clout or simply time for change?

Time to focus on cars, not politics?

For decades the U.S. auto industry has had a strong influence on American politics, and many see Detroit's inability to more successfully squash CAFE talk as a sign of their declining influence.

I say its become too obvious, especially since 9/11, that we cannot keep doing things the way we have been. The Big 3 didn't have a chance.

Still, America wants to see the Big 3 do well. Hopefully, Congress can work with Detroit to make this happen - I'm still waiting for the U.S. government to purchase a fleet of American-made hybrid vehicles.

CAFE, Congress & Automakers: How about honesty?

The technology is there

While fighting against proposed CAFE increases, a number of automakers and their alliances have claimed such increases were technologically impossible.

Once the same argument was used with hybrid cars, until the Toyota Prius proved that hypothesis wrong. Now almost every automaker is taking lithium powered hybrids incredibly seriously.

Ultimately, the current CAFE plans in Congress are technologically achievable today, let alone more than a decade from now. So, let's be honest.

The real issue isn't technology, it's cost. Is the cost of developing a new generation of automobiles worth the end of foreign oil dependency, for example? Is it worth it for Congress, consumers and automakers to come together to achieve a common goal?

CAFE: Can Democrats put Michigan in check?

Is Nancy Pelosi's biggest problem her own party?

Do Democrats really care about global warming and foreign oil dependency? While the answer to that question seems like a resounding yes, why is it that some Democrats are the BIGGEST laggards regarding real CAFE increases and real action on global warming? Isn't that supposed to be the domain of Big Oil-influenced Republicans?

At some point Democrats might have to ask, "Are Michigan Democrats really Democrats."

John Dingell (D) of Michigan is one of the biggest forces preventing a serious increase in CAFE, even though hybrid cars demonstrate that the CAFE requirements proposed for 2020 are essentially achievable today. Yet, Dingell has ripped....(Finish: CAFE: Can Democrats put Michigan in check?)

Congress lobbied to lift hybrid tax credit cap

A123 Systems and Tesla both lobby Congress for help

A horde of auto-orientated lobbyists asked Congress for help yesterday with a number of clean vehicle and clean fuel technologies. Included in that lobbying was a request to remove the cap on hybrid tax credits, which was set at 60,000 hybrid vehicles per manufacturer. Consequently, the leading selling of hybrid cars, Toyota, is already down to a reduced credit that will soon expire completely. Most automakers, on the other hand, have yet to sell one full hybrid.

A123 Systems also lobbied Congress for help in its quest to develop plug-in hybrid vehicles, as did Tesla Motors regarding fully electric vehicles. (more)

Hybrids and Biofuels: Forget the Politicians?

Does it really matter which Party is in control?

If you ask me, competition works better than politicians. I'm not saying competition works perfectly, but it works better than a bunch of rich, special interest-funded partisan politicians.

Consequently, I've been very bothered that Congress has not extended Toyota's hybrid tax credits - something both Republicans and Democrats have ignored. Yet, in the last couple of years, both parties have talked considerably about energy dependence, especially foreign oil dependence and/or global warming. Yet, very little has been accomplished to alleviate these problems.

Obviously, the task is not simple. Still, it seems to me that the quickest way to make automakers deal with fuel efficiency is simple competition. Force them to act or risk losing customers.

Thus, the more success Toyota has selling hybrid vehicles, the more pressure there is.....Finish Hybrids and Biofuels: Forget the Politicians.

MPG: What do automakers want?

Does the world need some new automakers?

Automakers, including the leading developer of hybrid cars, Toyota, are essentially begging Congress not to get too tough on fuel economy according to the latest Reuter's reports. Yet, what are their solutions? Wait until the holy grail, the hydrogen economy, develops? Do automakers not fully comprehend the threat and problems caused by foreign oil dependency, by global warming and automaker's significant responsibility towards these issues?

While automakers speak of the billions it might cost them to achieve significant gains in fuel efficiency, how many billions - if not trillions - has foreign oil dependency cost America, the world? Certainly Congress and automakers must work together, rather than as adversaries. And, while it is true that consumers also must bear some of the burden for creating our gas-guzzling culture, at some point automakers need to realize that America needs solutions to foreign oil dependency and global warming far more than it needs any of the major automakers.

Ultimately, if automakers cannot become part of the solution, then they are part of the problem.

Toyota hybrid tax credits and Democrats

Why haven't Dems taken any action?

Many Democrats in Congress have made global warming one of their most important political issues - at least in terms of political speech. Yet, political action is still lacking.

Most of these hard-talking Democrats and some Republicans have demanded tough increases in fuel economy that could severely threaten the viability of U.S. automakers. Fine. This is an important issue and tough action will be required. Nonetheless, tough talk and little action accomplishes nothing.

Finish Toyota hybrid tax credits and Democrats

What's the problem? Congress, Hybrids and Clean Vehicle Tax Credits

Is Bush more green than Congress?

President Bush is certainly not going to win any awards for being the greenest President. Still, for at least 6 months the President has asked Congress to extend tax credits for hybrid vehicles. Yet, Congress has done nothing.

Sure, GM and DaimlerChrysler have not sold any full hybrid vehicles and are sitting on more than 100,000 full tax credits, while Toyota has already used every full tax credit. So, why should Congress do something that only benefits Toyota?

Because foreign oil dependency and global warming demand action now, not tomorrow, and not after a global warming committee is formed. NOW. Members of Congress have talked a lot of tough talk regarding global warming and foreign oil dependency, but they've taken very little real action.

Power to the People

Raise fuel economy by raising CAFE, Congress tells us. Fine. Do it. Automakers, however, will still need financial incentives. So, why not get started right now? Extend and uncap the tax credits for hybrid cars, and put those financial incentives into the hands of consumers, rather than executives more beholden to shareholders than to citizens and to consumers.

--> Read the rest of Congress, hybrids and clean vehicle tax credits

Hybrid Vehicles Dead? Toyota Prius sales soar in January

Are hybrid vehicles losing their appeal?

Despite lower gas prices and a federal tax credit that was reduced by 50 percent, the Toyota Prius had its best January on record, selling 8,299 units. The Camry hybrid posted sales of 2,801 units, the Highlander hybrid reported 1,810 sales, while the Lexus RX400h reported 1,245 units sold.

So, if Toyota sold more than 14,000 hybrid cars in January with only a reduced tax credit, how many more would Toyota have sold if it still qualified for the full tax credit? Considering the seriousness of foreign oil dependency, pollution and global warming, it is simply silly that Toyota is being punished for being too successful doing the right thing.

--> More on Hybrid vehicles dead? Prius sales soar in January

Honda pooh poohs both plug-in hybrids and E85

The Honda FCX is nice, but is it realistic?

Honda regulatory manager, John German, told the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee that Honda is in favor of raising fuel economy standards in the U.S. yesterday. However, he also told the Senate that Honda doesn't see nearly as much potential in either plug-in hybrids or E85 as many other automakers apparently see, such as GM. According to German, even with significant improvements, plug-in hybrid vehicles would not be cost-effective for at least 6 years.

(Source: AutoWeek)

More momentum gaining in Congress for increasing CAFE

"There is a dangerous amount of momentum" in Congress behind tougher corporate average fuel economy regulations, General Motors Corp. Vice Chairman Bob Lutz said Tuesday at the North American International Auto Show. (more)

Of course, what costs will Congress be willing to accept to achieve an increase in CAFE? Will Congress risk tens of thousands of more auto jobs in Detroit to increase CAFE? That seems like political suicide.

Regardless, I say before Congress increases CAFE, extend tax credits for hybrid vehicles. Also, make buying a hybrid part of the small business tax credit. Give American companies some R&D money to develop lithium-ion technologies - the kind of technologies that have the ability to make any proposed increase in CAFE child's play.

--> More on increasing CAFE

Toyota sees huge hybrid growth in 2007

Toyota is hoping to leave all other automakers in the rear view mirror when it comes to hybrid vehicles. According to Just-Auto, Toyota "plans to sell 250,000 to 300,000 hybrid cars in the US in 2007, up from 192,000 in 2006."

With gas prices dropping, are such sales figures a reality, especially when Toyota's reduced hybrid tax credits are considered?

I hope Toyota is correct, and I hope that Congress extends the tax credit for Toyota hybrids. Toyota's success has made all automakers take another look at hybrid technology and serious competition is brewing. Congress should help keep it brewing by ensuring that hybrid technology remains accessible to consumers - regardless of automaker and regardless of dipping gas prices.

This Toyota FT-HS hybrid concept, pictured above, demonstrates what hybrid investment can accomplish, and this is just the beginning.

Democrats ready to give more subsidies to biofuels

Already, ethanol is an incredibly subsidized product, as is the corn from which most ethanol is derived. Yet, the profit margins for ethanol producers are actually greater than oil profit margins. For many, this isn't a problem because of the belief than ethanol is more green than petroleum, or that ethanol helps reduce foreign oil dependency. Many Democrats in Congress also have the same belief and those Democrats are preparing to roll back tax subsidies for oil companies and use them for biofuels according to the Detroit News.

Still no word, however, on whether Congress is going to do anything to promote hybrid vehicles, including plug-in hybrid vehicles.

Hoping for a smart green revolution from Congress

There has been much buzz in the media regarding how the Democratic control of Congress is going to help the green revolution. While there is no doubt that Democrats will pass more 'green' legislation than the previous Republican Congress, there is still much cause for concern. For example, "The politics surrounding environmental issues have proved hard to predict, largely because the potential economic impact of stronger regulation tends to scramble partisan loyalties. Democrats from auto-making states, for example, have fought efforts to mandate stricter miles-per-gallon rules for vehicles." (more)

Currently, the top buzz words coming from the Democratic agenda have largely been focused on global warming and alternative fuels, especially ethanol.

Obviously, global warming is an important issue, but when there are studies that indicate that far more global warming pollution is caused by the livestock industry than all the emissions from all forms of transportation combined, one has to take pause. Of course we should make cleaner automobiles; however, why is the smaller problem the center of all the global warming attention?

Even worse, it seems the Democratic preferred answer to global warming is ethanol. First, corn-based ethanol is not very environmentally friendly. Yes, it might be more environmentally friendly than petroleum, but is it enough more? Without doubt, I say no. Second, ethanol is also seen as a way to protect American automobile jobs, but at what cost? I simply don't see how E85 Hummers, Expeditions and Nitros are really an answer to global warming, foreign oil dependency or American jobs - at least in the long term.

Over the last several decades, almost every single advance in fuel efficiency has only produced heavier and more powerful vehicles - resulting in greater foreign oil dependency and pollution. In order for America to truly fight global warming and foreign oil dependency, while protecting American jobs, very advanced technology will be required - as fast as possible.

The entire American automobile psyche must evolve.

Of course, ethanol can help, particularly if it is used to top off a flex-fuel plug-in hybrid vehicle that only needs a few gallons of liquid fuel every month - if ever. Yet, I have heard very little coming out of the Democratic camp regarding hybrid cars and real world legislation.

If America takes the slow road to advanced hybrid technology, Toyota won't. Hyundai probably won't either. And if you make it profitable for American automakers to make E85 guzzlers, then you can expect to wait far longer for American automakers to focus on flex-fuel plug-in hybrids.

Ultimately, American automakers and American consumers have to change dramatically, and that change will require significant help from the government. Hopefully, Congress will focus on the the future, not just today's political pork and paybacks.

Is there an issue more important than energy independence, right now?

Oil dependence aids terrorists, funds dictators and gives millions around the world a reason to point their finger at the imperialist, capitalist and evil American empire. Gas guzzling greed has produced complacency and ignorance that has stunted automotive development by focusing on speed and power rather than than on efficiency and clean technology. This greedy, ego-driven focus - produced by cheap oil dependence - has severely weakened the U.S. auto industry and now threatens the U.S. economy.

And for what? So, that yours is bigger than mine?

American automakers, their unions and representatives in Washington complain about imports and outsourcing, yet turn a blind eye to our extremely dangerous oil imports. How can one import be so good, yet another so bad?

One political party protects the oil industry, the other political party protects the gas-guzzler builders. Yet, our environment and National Security continue to deteriorate as politicians blame each other for a problem each party has contributed in creating.

Now politicians on both sides of the aisle are preparing to make energy independence the core issue for 2008 - at least in terms of political soundbites.

Why are waiting until 2008? I don't care about the next election, right now. I don't care about lame ducks, right now. I care about today, right now.

Right now, Congress could renew tax credits for Toyota hybrid cars. Right now, we could give small business owners the same tax incentives to buy clean vehicle technologies that we currently give small business owners to buy the worst gas-guzzlers.

When America went to the moon, it inspired the development of so many technologies and industries. Right now, striving for energy independence could do the same, while increasing National Security and fighting global warming.

Why isn't America doing more? Shouldn't we be doing everything we can, right now?

--> More on hybrid tax credits, etc.

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."

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)

Re: Direct Injection Ethanol Boosting

Yesterday, I briefly touched on a story about MIT's direct injection ethanol boosting system. I didn't cover the topic in any depth because I was annoyed by the anti-hybrid spin the article took. Anyway, if you want to check out an interesting discussion about direct injection ethanol boosting, check out Green Car Congress.

The Scuderi Air Hybrid Vehicle

The Scuderi Group is set to show off its air hybrid vehicle at the SAE Commercial Vehicle Engineering Congress and Exhibition Oct. 31- Nov. 2.

"The innovations in the design of the Scuderi engine reduces the cost of diesel systems by eliminating or dramatically reducing three of the most expensive and complex parts of a diesel system - turbo charging, injectors and exhaust treatment," said Sal Scuderi, president of The Scuderi Group. "Because of the inherent design advantages of the Scuderi Air-Hybrid diesel engine, we estimate that this engine can lower the cost of diesel engines by as much as 40-50 percent. We strongly believe that the Scuderi Air-Hybrid engine is the diesel engine design of the future."

The Scuderi group also believes that Air diesel hybrids are more effective than electric hybrids because of the complex technology required by electric hybrid cars. I say, perhaps in the short term, but not in the long term. Whether gasoline or diesel, the world needs to get off oil. The air hybrid is nowhere near accomplishing that goal.

(Source: Business Wire)

Forget plug-in hybrid vehicles - For Now

Never put off until tomorrow what you can do today. That's the sentiment that plug-in hybrid vehicles are beginning to cause me.

Over the weekend, as I was catching up on some news I read two hybrid stories. The first by Green Car Congress discussed Hymotion, a hybrid to plug-in hybrid conversion company, and their plans to add solar panels to their conversion process. Now this is an idea I completely support and I totally support Hymotion.

So, why am I beginning to have plug-in angst? (Full Story)

Flex-fuel lies, foreign oil dependency and hybrid vehicle tax credits: Rate Congress

"A public advocacy group on Thursday said Ford Motor Co. has avoided as much as $135 million in fines by marketing vehicles that are supposed to run on the gas-ethanol mix E85 that don't work and accused the company of running misleading ads." (more)

Moreover, aside from the obvious, the fact is that for years the majority of flex-fuel vehicles sold by both Ford and GM have not ever filled up with E-85. Yet, each company has avoided millions and and millions in fines by selling these vehicles.

"Public Citizen and other environmental advocacy groups have long complained that automakers get credits to meet federal fuel economy regulations by building flexible-fuel vehicles that are hardly ever filled with E85, since it's available at just 900 of the country's 170,000 pumps."

So, Congress gives small business owners huge tax incentives to buy the worst gas-guzzlers, provides huge tax incentives to oil companies, enables the big three to avoid 100's of millions of dollars in fines for violating fuel economy regulations - increasing our foreign oil dependency, and limits tax credits for Toyota hybrid vehicles because they are too successful.

That sure sounds like the right path towards achieving energy independence.

Even the President says hybrids are possibly the most important way to change consumer behavior. Yet, Congress hasn't passed proposed legislation to provide small business tax incentives for buying hybrid cars or other fuel efficient vehicles, nor has Congress passed proposed legislation to extend hybrid vehicle tax credits.

Good work, ladies and gentlemen!

We live in a country that blames the President for quite a lot these days. Fair enough. Let's extend at least as much blame to the current - do nothing, partisanship is more important - Congress.

Flex fuel lies, foreign oil dependency and hybrid vehicle tax credits - Congress is failing America.

Bush believes hybrid cars one of the best paths to foreign oil independence

"I believe so strongly that this country has got to use its talent and its wealth to get us off oil," Bush said. "Probably the fastest way we can begin to change the consumer habits -- is to promote hybrid vehicles."

President Bush made that statement earlier today in response to falling gas prices.

"My worry is, however, that a low price of gasoline will ... make us complacent about our future when it comes to energy," Bush said at a government-sponsored renewable energy conference in St. Louis.

I couldn't agree more. Already one new study has demonstrated that consumer interest is dropping significantly as gas prices are dropping, while interest in gas-guzzlers is rebounding.

Bush, who has asked Congress to extend the tax credit for hybrids earlier this year, again brought up tax credits today. Unfortunately, Congress has not addressed this issue. Perhaps, hopefully, once the elections are over an extension will be enacted. Otherwise, with dropping gas prices and smaller tax credits for Toyota hybrids, interest in hybrid vehicles could drop significantly.

(Source: Reuters via Yahoo)

Russia puts Western oil 'supplies at risk'? Join the hybrid revolution.

"A former government adviser has warned it is "only a matter of time" before BP or Shell faces a bid from a Russian state-owned group such as Gazprom which could threaten western oil supplies. Professor Peter Odell, an energy economist, says ExxonMobil is also vulnerable to a Chinese takeover as the large UK and American stock-listed oil groups lose their influence in global markets." (more)

If it isn't OPEC seeking a bottom cap of $55.00 per barrel, it's China and Russia and state-owned oil companies threatening the price of gasoline.

Fortunately, Congress has passed tax incentives for hybrids that protect GM and Ford, rather than incentives that seek to achieve change as quickly as possible. Unfortunately, protectionism isn't what GM needs, it needs a good kick in the ass. GM's biggest problem these days, apparently, is a lack of Hummers according to Bob Lutz, not tax incentives for hybrids.

Hummers are far more important than foreign oil dependency.

Besides, what would ending foreign oil dependency accomplish anyway? A less complicated Middle East? Putting an important part of the American economy back in the hands of Americans?

Obviously, achieving oil dependency wouldn't be easy, it would require the kind of technological revolution which would create new jobs, new industries and new markets. What a waste!

The technology behind hybrid cars offers such a revolution. Hybrid technology can make any vehicle 20 - 30 percent more fuel efficient, today, whether that vehicle is fueled by gasoline, diesel, ethanol or even hydrogen. New software and new batteries will double the fuel efficiency of today's hybrids in just a few years. Then plug-in hybrids could also increase hybrid performance while creating an ideal platform for the introduction of small fuel cells into the automobile.

Unfortunately, hybrid production doesn't result in the huge profit margins many automakers covet - hybrid vehicles only make the world a better place. And Hummers, it seems, are much cooler than making a better world.

Gasoline and oil costs might drop in the short term, but the long term is filled with too many risks not to act as quickly as possible.

Full Tax Credits For Toyota Hybrids Almost Over

The full tax credit for hybrid vehicles is almost over for Toyota hybrids. Starting Oct. 1, hybrid cars produced by Toyota will only qualify for half their current tax credit. While President Bush has asked Congress to extend these credits for 1 more year, Congress has not complied. It's hard not to wonder if the Toyota Prius, by far the best selling hybrid automobile, had been produced by GM instead of a Japanese automaker, would the credit still be expiring?

Government loans to help Big 3 develop hybrid vehicles, etc.

"The Big Three automakers could get up to $20 billion in federally backed loan guarantees to speed the development of "green technologies," including hybrid electric engines, flexible fuels and clean diesel under a bill to be introduced this week in Congress." (More)

Will the Big 3 even care? It's not free money - they will have to pay it back. Besides, with gas prices falling, will the Big 3 just return to business as usual - hoping that SUV sales will again pick up?

Who cares? Clinton and his hybrid vehicle

I'm sorry. I don't really care about Bill Clinton and his new Mercury Mariner hybrid (more). I say, it's long over due. I say the Clintons, and EVERY single member of Congress, should have been driving a hybrid vehicle for several years now. Instead, a few members drive flex-fuel vehicles - that rarely see a drop of E85. That is not a worthy statement.

Too many members of Congress and many other politicians make bold statements about the price of gasoline, foreign oil dependency and the environment - yet, they drive gas-guzzlers. These people cannot only afford hybrid vehicles, they have the greatest responsibility to drive them.

Congress: Plug-in hybrids or extended tax credits for hybrids?

O.K., even oil man, President Bush, says we gotta end our foreign oil dependency, and I think the majority of Americans agree. Consequently, the big talk lately has focused on plug-in hybrid vehicles, and even the largest utility in California is now promoting plug-in technology (more).

I say, 'hold on'.

Plug-in hybrids are an excellent direction to push automotive technology towards, and getting the government involved is both wise and necessary. However, the current tax credit for hybrid vehicles is a far more important issue - for now.

Right now, the market for hybrid cars is dominated by the Toyota Prius. Yet, the Prius and every other Toyota are going to soon see smaller tax credits, quickly followed by no tax credits.

This is how Toyota is rewarded for doing the right thing? This is how consumers are rewarded for doing the right thing? But, back to plug-ins.

Plug-in hybrid technology just isn't cost-effective - at least not mentally - for most Americans. While the technology might pay for itself in the long run, Americans think about today, maybe tomorrow, not 7 years from now.

Plug-in hybrid technology just isn't there yet. Current hybrid vehicles are a hard enough sell for most with tax credits, but without.....?

That doesn't mean we shouldn't strive for plug-ins. We absolutely should strive for plug-in hybrid vehicles, and nothing pushes automobiles towards plug-in technology faster than current hybrid vehicles. The more current hybrids that sell, the faster plug-in hybrids will hit the market.

Plug-in hybrids are a great idea, a great idea that might never see the light of day if tax credits for hybrid vehicles are not extended.

Almost certainly, millions of small business owners have received far more tax incentives for buying gas-guzzling SUVs, so I think the government can afford tax incentives for foreign oil dependency fighting hybrid cars - even if they are Japanese.

Join our campaign for extending the tax credits on hybrid cars.

The Automobile: A case study in American stupidity?

The other day I was at a restaurant. As I looked through the menu, I knew I already knew what I really wanted, fish tacos and garlic fries. Ultimately, however, I ended up with a cup of soup and a salad. Since I knew that I was going to have a couple of beers – I was at a microbrewery for crying-out-loud – I thought I should at least eat healthy.

Yet, in America, we don’t seem to ask the question of cost-to-benefit very often, especially when it comes to automobiles. The only question that seems to matter is 'Do I look cool?'

As Americans, far too often, we do what we want in the whim of the moment and deal with the consequences later – if at all.

Consequently, I couldn’t help but laugh when I read some of Rick Wagoner’s comments at the auto industry's Management Briefing Seminars in Traverse City. For example Wagoner stated, “Some of the things that we all believe are necessary to ensure the continued strength of the (manufacturing) sector, which I think is just vital ... we just don't see the leadership,” stated Wagoner regarding the White House and Congress.

Leadership!? Give me a break, Mr. Wagoner. When the country was attacked by terrorists supported by America’s foreign oil dependency, when hurricanes destroyed oil refineries and demonstrated America’s overly stretched oil addiction, what was GM’s leadership? (Completed in Comments)

Bush plugs plug-in hybrids again

"We're working on battery technologies," President Bush said in Washington at a speech to the National Association of Manufacturers. "They say we're pretty close to a breakthrough in a battery where you can drive the first 40 miles on a battery, and your car doesn't look like a golf cart." (more)

Sure, he might be an oil man, but when it comes to hybrid cars, President Bush deserves a few kudos. Bush has now been on the plug-in hybrid vehicle bandwagon for at least year and he has been lobbying Congress to extend the tax credits for buying hybrid cars. Hopefully, Congress will take a little action.

More on the obstacles regarding plug-in hybrids.

Congress "examines" more hybrid vehicle incentives

"Congress today will examine ways to entice more people to buy and use hybrid vehicles as the list of government-issued perks to gas-electric hybrid owners grows longer." (DetroitNews)

While there will probably be little immediate action today, let's hope Congress, minimally, ends the cap on tax credits for hybrid vehicles. Besides, isn't it about time America get's serious about fuel efficient technology?

Toyota hybrid vehicle tax credits running out

Thanks to a protective and short-sighted U.S. Congress, tax credits for Toyota hybrids are running out. While the President and some members of Congress have suggested extending this credit, Congress doesn't seem very interested at this point. Check out the NYTimes article, U.S. Hybrids Get More Miles Per Congress on this issue. Why isn't Congress acting? Congress constantly harps about high gas prices and the threat of foreign oil dependency, yet they do so little - other than TALK, TALK, TALK. I say fighting oil addiction is more important than protecting the U.S. auto industry if they can't or won't compete. Let's extend the tax credits for hybrid cars! (MORE)

Do oil companies control hybrid vehicle battery production

I was just reading an article about a new hybrid vehicle battery supplier, GS Yuasa at Green Car Congress. In the posts to that entry, there is an interesting thread about oil company conspiracies, such as how oil companies bought old trolley lines and dismantled them in favor of freeways. Additionally, there are some that claim that NiMH battery technology, which powers today's hybrid cars, is being controlled/limited by oil companies. While there have been patent infringement cases, I've heard that NiMH battery production has been largely minimized by limited availability of Nickel, not by oil companies. Still, great thread.

Fuel cells, ethanol and hydrogen: GM's bag of excuses?

For decades, GM has lobbied Congress and the White House not to increase fuel economy standards. In fact, it is rumored that even Rick Wagoner has lobbied the White House, stating that increased fuel economy would hinder fuel cell development.

Now that it's obvious that fuel cells are still decades away, GM has switched to ethanol - not just as an alternative fuel, but as a bridge to hydrogen. "Even some of the initial steps in the processing of the biomass -- whether to make it hydrogen or ethanol -- will be one and the same, so it is an important step toward an alternative pathway for energy," he said. "And it allows us to use our existing internal combustion engines as we transition to hydrogen in the future." (AutomotiveNews)

And they don't have to stop making gas-guzzlers. The more ethanol GM uses, the more they are helping farmers, right?

Back to Reality

Scientist after scientist - many of whom are working on ethanol - claim that even cellulosic ethanol will not help America much if we don't create more fuel efficient vehicles. Yet, it seems that GM comes up with excuse after excuse not to become significantly more fuel efficient.

Perhaps ethanol can help create a path to hydrogen, but hybrid cars can also use ethanol and hydrogen. Moreover, since GM's current fuel cell vehicles are fuel cell hybrid vehicles, the more hybrids we build today, the faster we can build tomorrow's fuel cell hybrid vehicles.

Oh yeah, and in the interim we can at least end foreign oil dependency.

So why doesn't GM care about foreign oil dependency? What can't GM help make America stronger?

GM needs to stop making excuses and start taking the realities of the new world more seriously. Millions of Americans will support GM to the very end, yet millions more would support GM if they acted like they truly cared about the environment and about America's foreign oil dependency.

Take on the Toyota Prius, GM, and you could attract millions of new customers. Follow the current path and you'll lose many of us forever.

High gas prices: Don't just blame Republicans

O.K., so Republicans have ties to big oil, that's obvious. But can you really blame high oil prices completely on Republicans, especially when the price of oil is decided in the open markets by traders trading future shares of oil every single second of the business day? How do you manipulate that? Still, Republicans deserve criticism for their close oil ties.

In addition to oil, Democrats ridicule the President's minor CAFE updates, and they are minor. In fact, they are essentially worthless. Yet, less than a year ago, when Congress had a chance to significantly update CAFE, did Democrats make a stand? Heck no. How would Democrats funded by the labor unions that 'protect' autoworkers explain this to the Union leadership, to the workers that would lose their jobs - and to a huge endorsement and source of campaign money?

In reality, when it comes to high gasoline prices, Democrats are very dirty. (Finished in Comments)

GM and E85: Fool's Gold?

Flip, flop. Mandates on the oil industry are bad, mandates on the oil industry are good - that's the position of Hillary Clinton on mandating that the oil industry put E85 pumps in half of America's gas stations. Hillary Clinton, like all good politicians, has learned to stand for votes, rather than convictions. While she has publicly stated that ethanol mandates would hike fuel prices and VOTED against them, now she knows ethanol mandates will hike auto worker votes in her direction. Convictions or votes? Votes or convictions?

Despite Hillary's strong convictions, I say, E85 is Fool's Gold for GM. (Full Story)

Japan versus Detroit: Who acts more American?

Automobiles versus fuel?

When automakers have faced Congress over the last week, there has been a striking contrast in style. Toyota, for example, has focused on incentives for building more fuel efficient automobiles, such as hybrid cars. Detroit, on the other hand, has focused on new fuels, such as ethanol, for their gas-guzzlers.

While ethanol holds great promise as an alternative fuel, the automotive technology to utilize ethanol is already complete. What isn't complete are new vehicles, such as flex-fuel hybrids, for example, which could make inefficient burning ethanol much more efficient. Fortunately, Ford has at least proposed such a vehicle.

Still, shouldn't GM focus on being a better automaker? If they want to be an energy company, maybe its time to sell the auto business? For decades GM has used fuel cell vehicles as an excuse not to compete with Japanese efficiency, now they are using ethanol. At a time when foreign oil dependency is causing so many problems for America, why is it that Japanese companies are doing so much more to alleviate the problem? You make cars, Detroit, not energy. (Sources: AutomotiveNews)

Congress and Detroit: The Dangers of E85

It will take years before ethanol, especially E85, makes a noticeable dent in America's gasoline consumption. Still, in a decade, if 10% of gasoline consumption were reduced in favor of ethanol, would it matter?

Perhaps not as much as first thought. First, in 10 years demand for fuel is going to go up. Second, without subsidies ethanol offers little in terms of free market competition, it simply isn't cheaper than gasoline. Sure, it does reduce foreign oil dependency, but how much and is that enough?

(Finished in Comments)

GM's Rick Wagoner is a hypocrite

Rick Wagoner lobbied members of Congress today for help with ethanol, noting that because Detroit automakers believe in free markets, "Incentives rather than mandates are the way to go." Yet, aides to Wagoner admitted that mandates would be required for energy companies. I guess there is nothing like free markets, huh, Mr. Wagoner? Why should we expect anything less than hypocrisy and deception from a man whom admits that his company's efforts to develop hybrid cars are purely about image?
(Source: AutomotiveNews)

New hybrid technology plugged to Congress

Yesterday, a number of scientists promoted plug-in hybrid vehicles to Congress whom might offer $250 million in incentives for such a program. (MORE)

Foreign Oil Dependency: It all comes down to clean vehicle tax incentives

High gasoline prices are only the most obvious, negative result of America's foreign oil dependency. The worldwide geopolitical crisis that America is facing in an effort to maintain its dependency on oil is the real, but less visible, problem.

Now that CAFE is essentially dead, or at least rendered useless, the only thing that can make a difference are tax incentives. Congress must give consumers strong tax incentives to buy hybrid cars or to use bio-diesel, for example.

If automakers don't want to develop such technologies - they don't have to - but let consumers reward those that can and will.

It is simply ridiculous that vehicles, such as the Hummer, can receive a $25,000 small business tax deduction - a tax incentive far greater than any hybrid receives. When the Hummer achieves 35 mpg, then it might deserve such a deduction.

It's time for Americans to make a stand and demand that we stop giving so many incentives to oil companies and the likes, and that we give those incentives to consumers that reduce their oil use, or that move beyond oil.

American automakers have thus far failed America, oil companies have failed America, and if Congress doesn't pass a strong set of tax incentives for consumers, not corporations, to buy clean technologies, they will continue their failure of America.

Let's not let it happen. (More)

Congress and CAFE: Two Peas in a Pod

Not long ago I referenced a story that ridiculed Congress and its conservationist policies. On a day members of Congress went to a gas station about a block from their offices to speak about high gas prices, almost every member was driven, spoke as their vehicles idled, and then was driven back one block to their offices. Even worse, most members were in gas-guzzlers. As if that were not enough, most members regularly drive gas-guzzlers.

This is Congressional leadership? Reminds me of what my old football coach used to say, "Anybody can talk the talk, but only champions walk the walk.

Apparently, there aren't many champions in either Congress or the White House these days, maybe there hasn't been in a long time. In today's world LEADERS would be driving hybrid cars, bio-diesel cars, or maybe flex-fuel vehicles fueled with E85, not Tahoes, Escalades, and BMW 760's. Maybe a REAL leader would even - dare I say - walk!?

Today, Congress is focused on CAFE, something they didn't act on just a year ago, but it's good politics now that Americans are angry about high gas prices. It seems success in Congress is driven by doing little and blaming someone else for the problem.

While I am an advocate for increasing CAFE, the plan is really going nowhere. The boldest move that has reasonable support - although probably not enough support - is to raise CAFE by 10 mpg in 10 years. In 10 years, with millions more Americans driving longer commutes while in more congestion, 10 mpg will basically accomplish, well, nothing.

The best case scenario for this plan is that we'll only be importing as much oil in the future as today. Whooohooo!

Nothing short of an automotive revolution is going to change America's oil addiction, and 10 mpg is far from a revolution. Unfortunately, only dire catastrophe will wake Americans up to such a realization, and without REAL leadership coming from Congress and the White House, such a catastrophe appears inevitable.

Gas guzzling: Tax incentives versus CAFE

Gas guzzling kills

I love discussing the connection between gas-guzzling, wars in Iraq, 9/11 and other forms of terrorism.

"There is no connection between Iraq, 9/11 and gas guzzling," so many often say.

Really? So, why do we care so much about the Middle East, but not other areas of the world? Why did we stop Saddam in the first Persian Gulf War? Was it about human rights? If so, why didn't - and why don't we - care about the slaughter of millions in Sudan, or Rwanda?

Do we really care that much about people from Qatar?

One only need listen to Bin Laden's own words to understand that there is a clear connection between America's need, or greed, for foreign oil and 9/11.

But back to the point. Whether it is the cost of gasoline, fear of foreign oil dependency, or a desire to protect the environment, many realize that America's oil addiction cannot continue.

So, which is a better tool to fight this dependency, CAFE or tax incentives?

I say put the power in the hands of the people. Congress and corporations have had decades to make a difference and the only thing they've accomplished is perpetually increased foreign oil dependency.

I say let Ford and GM do whatever they want. Put the power in the hands of the people!!

Instead of increasing CAFE, take that high CAFE number and give a huge tax incentive to EVERY customer that buys a vehicle that meets that CAFE number. That's the best way to promote technologies, such as hybrid cars.

Increase CAFE and automakers will just find some kind of loophole to do nothing.

If you want to buy a gas guzzler, no problem, but you'll pay high gas prices and receive no tax credit. Buy a Prius, buy an Escape hybrid, even a Tahoe hybrid and you get a HUGE tax credit - as long as it meets that high CAFE number - plus you'll you use less gas.

Tax incentives for Hummers? Please!!!!!! This must end, as must any other corporate welfare and loopholes for automakers, as must tax incentives for oil companies.

Give this money to the people and let the corporations fight for customers. By, of and for the PEOPLE, not the corporations!!!!

Fickle consumers underscore need for hybrid technology

Most Consumers Still Demand Performance and/or Size

Hybrid technology is just emerging and still evolving, but already there are mild hybrids, full hybrids, one-mode hybrids, two-mode hybrids, gasoline hybrids, diesel hybrids, hydrogen hybrids, plug-in hybrids, flex-fuel hybrids, etc.

Another class of hybrids, performance hybrids, have often been the source of much media ridicule because they are as much about performance as fuel efficiency. Such hybrids include the Lexus RX400h and the Honda Accord hybrid. Additionally, other hybrids, such as the Toyota Highlander hybrid, could have been made to be more fuel efficient, but Toyota figured Highlander drivers, and many SUV drivers, still favored a certain level of performance more than fuel efficiency. Much evidence seems to show that Toyota is right.

According to a CNN/Kelly Blue Book study, almost 25% of consumers are willing to give up performance and size for better fuel economy; however, 25% refuse to give up anything for better fuel economy. The other 50% will give up a little size, or a little performance, etc.

Along those same lines, an AutoWeek article notes, Loyalists won't quit big SUVs; hauling power, improved fuel economy help move vehicles . "Arguably, Americans insist on SUVs. It's unique to their lifestyle and utility."

Additionally, while Congress is going to finally address CAFE, it now appears that the new regulations will still protect Detroit's SUV domain. It is just too obvious in Congress that Detroit probably cannot survive if CAFE is pushed too high.

Unfortunately, performance and size are simply more important to most Americans than is fuel efficiency. Nonetheless, ever rising oil prices, ever more realizations of the connection between foreign oil, terrorism and American hate, will slowly force more and more Americans to take fuel efficiency seriously.

The technology behind hybrid cars enables automakers to continue to provide performance and size to Americans, while also significantly reducing foreign oil dependency. This isn't something that should be done, it is something that must be done. While Congress will probably be weak on CAFE, they should be overly aggressive in offering tax incentives to promote hybrid technology.

Join our Campaign to Make Congress Act On Hybrid Tax Incentives.

Time to Declare War on Foreign Oil Dependency?

I think America is at War, a war that most Americans refuse to acknowledge, and the fight for independence from foreign oil dependency is shaping up to be the most important war America has ever fought.

Former CIA Director R. James Woolsey has become a huge advocate for ending America's foreign oil dependency, and he is very outspoken about the dangers of America's oil addiction.

"If you want to see who's paying for all that [extremism and terrorism], next time you pull in to fill up, turn the rearview mirror a little bit so you can look at yourself for a minute as you get out with your credit card," Woolsey said during a meeting with reporters and editors of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.

Yet, Americans don't really think about that - to our direct connection to extremism and terrorism - instead we think about how expensive is $3.00 oil. Sadly, $3.00 oil is nothing compared to what could happen.

Aside from the problems in Iran, Nigeria, Venezuela, aside from hurricanes, aside from rapidly growing oil demand in China and India, an attack on Saudi oil refineries could have an even greater impact on gasoline prices.

How bad?

Today oil is at $70.00 per barrel, but if Saudi oil refineries were damaged - not destroyed - oil could easily climb to over $150.00 per barrel. Add intensified problems with Iran, or another major hurricane and who knows how high oil prices could climb.

What would a year of $7.00 gasoline do for the American economy? How high would $7.00 gas push the cost of groceries and other commodities? How would $7.00 gas help your commute?

What We Can Do

Fighting this war isn't a battle between ethanol versus biodiesel, or clean diesel cars versus hybrid cars. All of these technologies and alternative fuels MUST be utilized. Conservation MUST be utilized.

While politicians can blame one another, and citizens can blame politicians, automakers and the drivers of gas-guzzlers, blame will not win the war. While many in Congress blame other members, or the President, how many members regularly drive a hybrid car, fill up with ethanol or biodiesel, or maybe even walk a little more? Not very many according to recent reports. What about citizens?

Ultimately, little can be done in the short term to fix gas prices or to reduce foreign oil dependency. Today, average citizens must try to conserve, buy hybrid cars, use ethanol where available, or give bio-diesel a try. Moreover, we have to think about the future. We must make Congress and the President create more tax incentives for clean automobiles and clean fuels, not for Hummers and for oil companies.

Finally, we need to let automakers and politicians know that if they can't, or won't, help us fight this war, we'll find alternatives to them.

Join our campaign to make Congress Act.

Is raising CAFE worth bankrupting GM?

When Congress failed to pass legislation that would have increased CAFE less than a year ago, hardly anyone cared. Today, 10 states - essentially Democratic strongholds - are suing Bush for the problem.

Yes, the last time CAFE came before Congress, the majority of Republicans were against the legislation; however, enough Republicans did vote to change CAFE, if not for Democrats loyal to the auto unions also voting against CAFE increases. Ultimately, America's oil addiction has been perpetuated by both parties - even if one party is more at fault.

Still, can you blame some of these politicians? Their constituents probably would have lost even more jobs, and the entire American auto industry could have been pushed into bankruptcy if CAFE had been significantly increased.

On the other hand, Detroit should have beat Japan to hybrid cars, for example, but American leadership in automobiles has been missing for decades. Still, we can't wait forever for American automakers to get with the program.

So, all politics aside, if raising CAFE meant bankrupting GM, would the ends justify the means? Might bankruptcy finally be what is needed to get the American auto industry focused correctly, or is this going to far?

A Prius in Every Pot? Mrs. Dowd smoking too much pot?

"It's taken over five years, but George W. Bush finally made a concession speech to Al Gore.

He conceded that America needs to conserve, by buying hybrid vehicles and developing new energy sources."

This is the lead to Maureen Dowd's A Prius in Every Pot editorial originally posted in the NY Times, in which Mrs. Dowd blames the entire gas crisis on Republicans, particularly Dick Cheney.

Just to be clear, Bush has been on the hybrid band wagon for at least year, even promoting plug-in hybrids last year, but why haggle over facts?

So, Mrs. Dowd would have us believe that Republicans like Cheney, Bush etc. would screw over Americans to make their oil co-conspirators rich at the expense of the entire Republican Party? So, these very rich Republicans are not only selling out their Presidential legacies, but the entire Republican Party, for a little more money?

That's just silly, especially since the current price of oil is decided in the open markets.

Certainly, Republicans deserve a great amount of blame for not helping to promote alternative fuels or alternative technologies, such as hybrid cars earlier. Democrats, on the other hand, deserve considerable blame for protecting the Unions of inefficient, gas-guzzling producing American auto companies.

For decades many Democrats have regularly joined Republicans, including recently, to prevent an increase in CAFE because they knew union members would lose their jobs.

More important, American citizens deserve much blame for not being more fuel efficient. When Europe pays $5.00 for a gallon of gas, did we really believe we could pay just $2.00 forever while always increasing our demand?

And to be fair, just what did President Clinton accomplish to reduce America's average fuel economy in his 8 years? According to statistics, nothing.

O.K., since gas prices weren't that high then, Americans didn't really care about this issue, so we just guzzled more gas. Was this also Bush and Cheney's fault?

Let's not forget, gas-guzzler sales really took off during the Clinton Administration, when Dowd's hero, Al Gore, was in office.

Inevitably, too many Americans, including most members of Congress, waste energy and guzzle gas. Earlier today I posted an article about how the members of Congress contribute to gas-guzzling. Most members of Congress are horrible conservationists and most drive gas-guzzlers, regardless of party.

With this kind of leadership to follow, is there really any wonder why America is in this energy crisis?

Inevitably, Democrats, Republicans, automakers, and many American citizens share the blame for America's oil problems. Too bad professional mudslingers, such as Mrs. Dowd, can't be more open-minded, dare I say fair-minded, for it is precisely this type of myopic, provincial vision that has caused this crisis in the first place.

Gas-guzzling Congress Drives ONE Block to Protest Gas Prices!

Congressional Hypocrisy?

When members of Congress went ONE block to a gas-station news conference to sound off on high gas prices, almost all of them drove, and the majority of them drove gas-guzzlers.

One Senator did drive a Prius hybrid car and John McCain actually made the extremely difficult, one block journey, on foot - an amazing feat!!!

"Since George Bush and Dick Cheney took over as president and vice president, gas prices have doubled!" charged Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), standing at an Exxon station on Capitol Hill where regular unleaded hit $3.10. "They are too cozy with the oil industry."

"She then hopped in a waiting Chrysler LHS (18 mpg) -- even though her Senate office was only a block away." (Washington Post)

So, Mrs. Boxer's plan is to drive one block, stop and wastefully idle, and then drive one more block? Now that's the way to fight high gas prices!

The actions of both Democrats and Republicans demonstrate why gas prizes are too high: Americans drive gas guzzlers and they are lazy.

At least these politicians could have driven some more hybrid cars, biodiesel or ethanol cars on this huge 2 block journey to help promote the kinds of technologies that can fight these high gas prices.

Apparently, most in Washington just talk about making a difference, instead of actually making a difference. It's people like Mrs. Boxer that are causing high oil prices. She who live in a glass house should not throw stones.

With such leadership, is the current state of America really that surprising?

Bush asks Congress to limit cap on tax credits for hybrid vehicles

Tax incentives for clean vehicles, such as hybrid cars, are great legislation. Unfortunately, tax credits for hybrids are capped. Consequently, before the end of this year, Toyota hybrids will not qualify for the full tax credit.

At least for this year, that could change.

"The easiest way to promote fuel efficiency is to encourage drivers to purchase highly efficient hybrid or clean diesel vehicles," President Bush said in an address to the Renewable Fuels Association summit in Washington.

"If the automakers sell more than their limit, new purchasers are not eligible for the full tax credit.

"And so here's an idea that can get more of these vehicles on the road, and that is to have Congress make all hybrid and clean diesel vehicles sold this year eligible for federal tax credits," he said. (DetroitNews)

Congress shouldn't stop with the clean vehicle credit. Congress should also add hybrids to the $25,000 small business tax deduction, which currently only applies to the worst gas guzzlers.

Would Hummers Sell Without $25,000 Tax Deduction?

You would think that sales of GM's Hummer would be almost non-existent with $3.00 gasoline, but Hummers are actually selling quite well.

So What Gives?

It's ironic how many Hummers I see that advertise some kind of service, or maybe it isn't. It seems quite obvious that many Hummer buyers are taking full advantage of the $25,000 small business tax deduction.

If not for this deduction, I assume many of these advertisers/buyers would buy something else

How can the government justify this deduction in light of terrorism, Iraq and America's growing dependence on foreign oil? How can the government cap smaller tax credits for hybrid cars and other clean technologies, yet not cap much larger deductions for the worst gas-guzzlers?

In fact, while I feel bad for GM's business story, if the only way GM can survive in today's world is via tax-subsidized gas-guzzlers, then it's time to let GM go under.

Congress can do much better. We must make Congress act. Join the Hybrid Car Revolution Campaign.