For those whom don't buy American autos

Many whom drive hybrid cars or are interested in hybrid cars are often not very interested in American automobiles because of the Big 3's over reliance upon fuel inefficient vehicles. Still, if GM offered a plug-in hybrid vehicle before any other automaker, would you be interested? Would it change your opinion about GM? Would you wait until either Toyota or Honda offered their own plug-in hybrid?

Chevy to reveal electric vehicle at NAIAS

On Sunday, January 7th, Chevy will reveal an electric concept vehicle at the North American International Auto Show. While GM has been accused of killing the electric vehicle, the automaker has recently claimed that the future is electric. In addition to an electric concept vehicle, there is great speculation that GM might also debut a plug-in hybrid at the Detroit show. Or, perhaps the Chevy offers both possibilities?

GM's green side at the LA Auto Show

I spent the weekend at this year's LA Auto Show, and I have a lot to write on regarding that topic. I'll start with GM. There was a lot of pre-show hype regarding GM's new green revolution - as I've called it. Since I started my auto show tour on the GM side, I was very excited. Yet, I left the GM side of show unimpressed. Yes, I saw the Yukon hybrid and all of GM's Flex-fuel vehicles - every huge gas-guzzling one of them. Inevitably, a flex-fuel tank is still a tank.

The Yukon hybrid is, well, huge. Fine. Yet, the hybrid engine on display near the vehicle seemed to attract more attention than the hybrid itself. So, I went looking for GM's other hybrid debut, the Saturn Aura hybrid.

Saturn had a nice little hybrid section at the show that showcased a split Saturn Vue hybrid with lights demonstrating the different modes of its mild hybrid powertrain. It definitely caught people's attention - as they walked into the bathroom. Unfortunately, the display, just as with the Yukon hybrid, caught more attention than either the Vue hybrid or the Aura hybrid. And why did GM practically hide the Saturn hybrid display area?

Ultimately, I thought GM's green efforts were completely unimpressive, unless one believes flex-fuel is the solution to the world's energy problems. Unfortunately, I do not hold that view.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

GM 'officially' announces hybrid, electric developments

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

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

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

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

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

GM working on plug-in Saturn Vue hybrid

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

GM to discuss its hybrid future today?

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

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

Still, this is pure marketing, pure buzz.

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

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

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

GM will probably save green revolution for Detroit

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

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

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

Big 3 CEOs and President conclude meeting

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

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

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

GM less fuel efficient today than 10 years ago

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

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

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

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

GM to launch hybrid vehicle marketing campaign

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

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

All you do is talk, talk, talk?

(Source: Car&Driver)

Ford to focus on fuel efficiency

Ford is set to focus on fuel efficiency.

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

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

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

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

Speaking of the right path.

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

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

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

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

Toyota versus GM: Health Care, Hybrids and Kaizen

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

GM already toning down its i-Car campaign?

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

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

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

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

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

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

So, is ethanol worth the price?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

GM set to go hybrid, then all electric?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Toyota's huge hybrid vehicle mistake?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

GM to build hybrids in China by 2008

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

(Source: AFP)

Foreign oil dependency makes America stronger!

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

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

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

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

Why?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Silverado hybrid wins SEMA Award

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

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

"First hybrid....", please.

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

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

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

Over $5 billion in 2006 to subsidize ethanol as hybrid tax credits run out

"A recent study conducted by the Swiss-based group called Global Subsidies Initiative revealed the total cost of the tax breaks and subsidies that go into U.S. production of ethanol to be in the whopping range of $5.1 to $6.8 billion for 2006." (more)

While I'd rather use my tax dollars to subsidize American industries, such as ethanol producers, rather than foreign oil companies, I'd rather subsidize hybrid cars and other clean vehicle technologies more than ethanol. Give GM and Ford $5 billion per year to perfect hybrid cars, plug-in hybrid vehicles, fuel cell hybrid vehicles and electric vehicles.

If lighter materials and smarter automobile designs were coupled with next generation batteries, fuel cells and hybrid technology, the U.S. could easily end foreign oil dependency. Sure it would be expensive, but not too expensive if we simply made better use of current tax subsidies - Not by adding new ones.

GM's I-car Campaign set to challenge Toyota on hybrid vehicles?

According to unofficial sources cited by the Detroit News, GM is ramping up to challenge Toyota's lead in hybrid vehicles. So, are they serious?

Last year, Toyota sold more than 235,000 hybrid vehicles. GM, on the other hand, has yet to sell one single full hybrid. Sure GM offers a few mild hybrids, but mild hybrids are not going to challenge Toyota's hybrid vehicle sales lead.

Still, GM might have a secret weapon, the I-car.

The I-car isn't just a hybrid vehicle, but a plug-in hybrid vehicle. If Toyota were to develop a cost-competitive plug-in hybrid vehicle before Toyota, I think it could be a game changer. While some hybrid critics have argued that plug-in hybrids are even more of a niche product than current hybrids, poll after poll has demonstrated that Americans are very intrigued by plug-in hybrid technology.

Still, it won't be easy. Toyota hasn't been particularly bullish regarding plug-in hybrids thus far because of costs and battery issues. So, does GM have a secret weapon? Is their past experience with electric vehicles going to finally pay off? Is GM demonstrating even more vision than Toyota regarding the potential of hybrids?

Simply building plug-ins won't be enough, however. If current hybrids are too expensive for most consumers, imagine adding $6000.00 to the price tag. Americans aren't going to buy. Sure, the technology will probably pay for itself over the life of the vehicle, but that isn't the way American consumers think.

Consequently, the success of the I-car program will come down to cost. Can GM convince the Feds to not only offer tax incentives for hybrid technology, but also extra incentives for plug-in technology? Obviously, the government is probably much more interested in adding new incentives that could help an American automaker, unlike the government's lack of interest in helping Toyota hybrid buyers.

Such incentives might make a plug-in hybrid cost-effective, especially an American-made plug-in hybrid. Many Americans want to do something about foreign oil dependency, but many Americans refuse to buy a hybrid from Toyota or Honda. Unlike Toyota and Honda, GM has real power to really rally this customer segment around not only supporting GM and American workers, but fighting foreign oil dependency, pollution and global warming.

Can GM play this hand correctly, or will they just fold amidst a temporary drop in gasoline prices?

Even better than GM going green, are the choices that would open up to American consumers interested in green options. A hybrid battle between GM and Toyota would force every automaker to get very serious about clean technologies, and this competition for green supremacy would make hybrid technology not only better, but cheaper.

Before the end of this year, GM is supposed to announce this new strategy. Let's hope GM isn't just serious, but ready to launch this program as soon as possible. This could change everything for GM, and for America.

Make me a believer, GM, make me a believer!

Saturn Vue hybrid, mild hybrid, debut begins

Buy a Saturn Vue hybrid and you can 'Go green without going broke' according to GM.

I've long been a critic of GM's hybrid efforts and I am not terribly fond of the Vue hybrid, simply because it is a mild hybrid. Ultimately, I just cannot take GM's green efforts seriously until they offer a full hybrid vehicle.

Full hybrid vehicles, unlike mild hybrids, offer the ability to function on electric power alone at low speeds, such as stop-and-go and slow-and-go conditions. Such driving conditions produce the worst fuel economy and result in the most global warming causing emissions. Fortunately, such conditions are also the optimal conditions for full hybrid performance.

Consequently, mild hybrids just don't quite cut the mustard.

Earlier this week LA Times auto critic, Dan Neil, called the Vue hybrid "a maximally minimal venture in hybrid powertrain technology that would seem less about fuel economy and more about securing coveted hybrid badges on the doors."

But his praise of GM's hybrid efforts didn't end there. "As much as I hate to diss any hybrid, this seems a pretty desultory effort." I could go on, but I won't, but you can read it all on Dan's LA Times article.

Are Detroit automakers, "rigid" and "old-school"?

Thinking outside-of-the-box is, in my opinion, one of Detroit's biggest problems. Or, let me rephrase that sentence. Detroit's inability to think outside-of-the-box is Detroit's biggest problem, which is why America is last in the hybrid car game.

An article in the Automotive News sheds light on the problem. "...talented women have been leaving Ford, General Motors and the Chrysler group in numbers too large to ignore. Most have left for better opportunities outside the industry after years of frustration in rigid, old-school work cultures and lack of advancement," states Anne Doyle, president of Anne Doyle Strategies, whom was also once communications director for Ford North American Division.

Hmmm???? "Rigid, old-school work cultures." I'd say that about sums up Detroit's problems.

Big trucks and SUVs cannot forever drive Detroit's profits. Sadly, this should have been realized decades ago, not just to protect the environment, but America itself. Reliance upon foreign oil endangers not just tens of thousands of American jobs, but America's national security. This should have been clear after the problems with Iran in the 70's and 80's. It should have been crystal clear after 9/11.

While Detroit might see hybrid vehicles as an interim technology to fuel cell vehicles, hybrids are interim technology that is desperately needed right now. America can't wait another decade or two to start getting serious about oil dependence. Unfortunately, the attitude in Detroit continues to seem, "rigid" and "old-school", and that is very sad.

Saturn Aura Mild Hybrid Coming Soon - Anyone Care?

GM is starting production on the Saturn Aura Green Line this week, which is supposed to be around 10% more efficient than a standard Aura. Until GM offers a full hybrid to consumers, however, I just can't get very excited about a GM mild hybrid.

(Source: AutoblogGreen)

It's our country, the Silverado hybrid vehicle!

Have you seen the new "Our country, our truck" GM Chevy ads? Images of Katrina, Vietnam and 9/11 selling the new 30 mpg Chevy Silverado hybrid, reinforcing the message that GM has finally gotten serious about foreign oil dependency. While GM has been a laggard on hybrid vehicles, the new Silverado hybrids demonstrates GM's new commitment to America's National Security.

At least, that is what the ad should have been about. Instead, GM is using images of 9/11 - an act largely produced by America's foreign oil dependency - to promote a gas guzzler and the apparent pride of foreign oil dependency.

--) Complete 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.

Clean diesel versus hybrid technology: A stupid debate

The Axis of Diesel states, "Mercedes, GM and even Honda, are betting on a new breed of green diesels. The goal? To leave hybrids in the dust."

First, let's be clear. There is no comparison between clean diesel vehicles and hybrid cars. PERIOD. It's no different than comparing apples to oranges.

Second, hybrid vehicles can also use clean diesel technology. So, however efficient a clean diesel is, a clean diesel hybrid will be 20 to 30 percent more efficient. Hybrid technology is not dependent upon fuel, which is why Ford is working on the Reflex diesel hybrid and Peugeot on the C-Matisse diesel hybrid.

Yes, even European automakers are buying into hybrid technology.

----> Finish Reading Clean Diesel Vehicles Versus Hybrid Vehicles: A stupid debate

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 credit for Toyota hybrids is over

Happy October. Unfortunately, October means that the full hybrid tax credit for Toyota hybrid vehicles is now expired. Now, any Toyota hybrid purchase will only qualify for half the credit. So, how will this affect Toyota hybrid sales?

If the goal of tax credits for hybrid cars was meant to change consumer behavior, why was the credit capped by manufacturer? Shouldn't getting as many hybrids on the road as quickly as possible be the main goal? Shouldn't the credit be consumer-driven, not manufacturer-driver?

I've said it before and I'll say it again, if GM was leading U.S. hybrid sales with the Prius, rather than Toyota, I doubt the legislation would have been written the same. Unfortunately, GM is still more focused on new Hummers rather than new hybrids.

Why are hybrid credits sitting idle when consumers can use them NOW? Is this free market capitalism?

Nissan's hybrid vehicle plans

What's up with Nissan and hybrid cars? Why has Carlos Ghosn been so bearish regarding hybrids? While Nissan plans to offer the Nissan Altima hybrid next year, it will almost certainly be the only Nissan hybrid available until 2010 - when Nissan will begin offering its own hybrid technology. Until 2010, the Nissan Altima hybrid will be based largely on Toyota hybrid technology.

Still, has Nissan and Ghosn really been so bearish?

Sure Nissan missed the early hybrid hype, so what could Ghosn do? I guess about the same thing as GM, 'hybrids don't make business sense'. Yet both GM and Nissan are going to develop hybrids anyway. If hybrid vehicles don't make business sense, does it makes sense to follow the leader, Toyota, down an expensive, bad business path?

How does that make sense?

Obviously, the 'hybrids don't make business sense' automakers realize the potential of hybrid technology could make great business sense - maybe not today, but maybe in the next couple of years. Besides, if gas prices do push higher, consumers won't care if hybrids make business sense to automakers, they'll only care if they save money at the pump.

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?

GM's naive, monopolistic and capitalistic fuel cell vehicle plans?

"Hydrogen fuel cell-powered vehicles could hit showrooms as early as 2011 and the technology will revitalize General Motors, GM Vice Chairman Bob Lutz said as he delivered a hydrogen concept car to be test driven by Camp Pendleton Marines over the next few months." (more)

Hmmm. So, why will fuel cells revitalize GM more than any other automaker?

For decades GM has successfully lobbied the government not to increase fuel economy standards because such a move would interfere with GM's fuel cell development. For decades, GM has told the government, zero emission fuel cell vehicles were just around the corner. Now, once again, GM's fuel cell vehicles are just around the corner - at least according to GM execs.

Should we believe them this time, or has GM cried fuel cell one too many times?

Every major automaker on the face of the planet is working on fuel cell vehicles, and most of these automakers, as well as most automotive experts, claim that cost-effective fuel cell vehicles are still more than a decade away, at least. Other experts claim it will take at least two decades or more. Some experts claim it might never happen.

I think it'll happen and here's why.

Recently, fuel cell developers have started to dig the idea of plug-in fuel cell hybrid vehicles. For years now, Toyota has claimed that its hybrid vehicles were the beginning of their fuel cell vehicle platform. Even GM engineers have admitted that their fuel cell vehicles will also be fuel cell hybrid vehicles. This is because fuel cell vehicles will almost certainly require an electric drive, and hybrids offer that electric drive.

Yet, hybrid cars are too expensive for GM, but we are to believe that in a couple of years GM's fuel cell hybrid vehicles will not be? I'd like to see the numbers behind that kind of bean-counting!!

In fact, the idea of plug-in fuel cell hybrid vehicles might call into question the entire idea of the 'hydrogen highway' - and the foundation of GM's fuel cell vehicle program.

O.K. current hybrid vehicles are not the answer to the world's problems. I'll willfully admit that as FACT. Still, next generation hybrids, such as those powered by lithium batteries will almost certainly, easily, achieve over 100 mpg, and plug-in capabilities could extend this efficiency even further.

More important, plug-in hybrid vehicles could receive additional power from small fuel cells. Utilizing a small fuel cell would be far more cost-effective than using a large fuel cell - at least in the short term. Consequently, this could be the quickest way of both ending foreign oil dependency and investing in fuel cells, but the upside doesn't end there.

If you can have a fuel cell in your car, why not in your home? Such a fuel cell could be powered by natural gas, or, in many areas of the U.S., by solar power.

Imagine all of California's homes and vehicles powered by solar-powered fuel cells with excess energy stored in advanced lithium-ion batteries? Would places like California really even need a hydrogen highway?

Why not dare to dream? Why does GM only envision the future as just a subtle offshoot of today's world, of today's energy paradigm? In reality, does America really need a new multi-billion dollar hydrogen highway? Maybe GM does, but America might not.

I'm sure the monopolistic, capitalistic, corporate-lobby-controlled politicians can easily be sold on this idea, but we THE PEOPLE, should demand more. The hydrogen highway might be great for corporate America, but is it really so great for the people of America?

Michigan Study: Fuel Efficiency Best Way Forward for Detroit

According to a study by the University of Michigan, fuel efficiency is the best way forward for the Big 3 to increase profits and to maintain jobs. (more) While large SUVs have been the most profitable vehicles for the Big 3, this trend, the report claims, cannot and will not continue. New automotive technologies must be utilized, even though they will be expensive in the short term.

"Deploying new technologies takes time and money to accomplish, and time and money are in short supply in Detroit. While management is currently focused on cutting capacity through massive layoffs, they need to undertake a deep transformation to much more fuel-efficient fleets to avoid going under. The dilemma the Detroit automakers face is that while they may believe that they cannot afford to make fuel economy a high priority, in actuality, it turns out that they cannot afford not to."

I say it's just a matter of priorities and vision. As GM's Bob Lutz has claimed, GM could have beat Toyota to hybrid cars by using a fraction of their yearly marketing budget for hybrid vehicle development, instead of for marketing gas-guzzlers.

Hybrids are "basis" for fuel cells

"The hybrid is the basis," said Robert Stempel, chairman and CEO of Energy Conversion Devices Inc., which develops batteries used in hybrid cars. "It gets the electric drive on the vehicle. Once you have the electric drive there, then you really don't care if you have the gasoline engine or diesel or fuel cells. The key is that electric drive." (more)

So, why haven't American automakers been more bullish on hybrid vehicles? If hybrids help create the necessary powertrain for fuel cell vehicles, doesn't hybrid production ultimately help reduce the costs for fuel cell production? Moreover, other fuel cell makers have argued that plug-in fuel cell hybrid vehicles could also speed fuel cell development by enabling smaller - thus cheaper - fuel cells to help power the vehicle.

Are American automakers really going to compete in the world auto market by focusing on alternative fuels?

I say technology is the only answer, and it seems American automakers are already missing the boat. C'mon GM and Ford, it's OUR future! Give us foreign-oil dependency, fuel cell investing American-made hybrid vehicles and ask those jackasses in Washington to help foot the bill.

Cheaper gas and the death of hybrid cars?

Will cheaper gas lead to the death of hybrid cars?

Currently, gas prices are down some 30 cents and could even reach $2.00 by Thanksgiving. Additionally, the Toyota Prius hybrid, the best-selling hybrid vehicle by far, will soon only qualify for half its current tax deduction.

Of course the reduced tax deduction won't just affect the Prius, but all Toyota hybrids. So, how will this affect Toyota hybrid vehicle sales?

Obviously, cheaper gas and less incentives probably aren't going to lead to greater Toyota hybrid sales.

Still, I think hybrid sales will march on, but without tax incentives Toyota sales will almost certainly take a hit. Then again, I don't think Toyota expected such interest in hybrids in the first place - at least not this soon.

Nonetheless, considering the billions given to oil companies, farmers and ethanol producers, its a shame more tax credits aren't available for Toyota hybrids. If GM or Ford were the leading hybrid producer, would tax credits still be running out?

Why I hate GM

O.K. I don't really hate GM. Still, I'm not very fond of the corporation. Then again, I'm not very fond of most corporations. Even American corporations don't exist for Americans. Sure, American corporations provide jobs for Americans, but does that then excuse all corporate wrongdoings? Let us not forget even the Exxons of America provided jobs to Americans.

That's why GM really irks me. GM, as a corporation, doesn't care one crap about America. GM, as a corporation, cares only about shareholder value. Fine, that is the essence of corporations. (Finished in Comments)

Isn't it ironic? GOP tells Detroit 'Drop Dead'

I like Daniel Howes of the Detroit News, but I think he wrote an absolutely ridiculous article, Top GOP leaders sending message to Big 3: Drop dead.

"But meet with Detroit's automakers? Nah, why should the president care whether U.S.-owned automakers, burdened by fierce foreign competition and cumulative decisions that threaten to swamp them, are fighting for their collective lives? Instead, key Republicans and the White House are reprising President Ford's message to New York back in the mid-'70s: "Drop dead."

Wow! So, was it Democrats that have protected Detroit's fuel inefficiency for decades? Was it Democrats that forever blocked increased fuel economy standards? Was it Democrats that protected SUVs for decades?

Give me a break, Daniel. If not for Republicans preventing the Carter administration from ending the SUV craze, before it even started, Detroit would already be a very different place.

Detroit should have realized that cheap gas couldn't last forever - that warning bell has been ringing, quite loudly, for decades. Sure the auto industry is important for America, but not at the expense of our National Security. America is literally spending trillions of dollars to maintain cheap oil.

Screw the unions, screw trade barriers. It all comes down to product. Ultimately, GM and Ford blew it. The first hybrid cars should have been American, without question. No country has more to gain by increasing fuel efficiency. More important, if fuel cells are the holy grail for Detroit, then hybrids make fuel cells happen sooner.

I say Detroit should drop dead until it starts acting like an American company - you know - a company that fights for freedom, not increased foreign oil dependency.

E85 versus hybrid cars, AGAIN!

I have not been a big fan of E85 or Flex-fuel vehicles. If you are a consumer that has such a vehicle, and regularly fills up with E85, I applaud you. However, I DO NOT applaud either GM or Ford for flex fuel technology. For many years this technology was simply used to violate CAFE, and I seriously doubt that a line of Flex Fuel Hummers or Tahoes is really going to help the world.

If GM was installing this inexpensive technology in all vehicles, especially their small cars, I'd be a little more supportive. Nonetheless, the potential of ethanol driven from cellulose is definitely worth further investigation.

Still, I do not believe ethanol offers anywhere near a complete solution to America's oil and/or fuel problems.

For decades, the idea of a war for clean water has been gaining steam and even the Pentagon has alluded to such a possibility. Further, a new report by the WWF environmental organization, for example, warns that many First World cities are already facing serious water shortages and the problem is only expected to get worse -much worse - and significant blame belongs to agriculture. (more)

In the very near future, clean water could be worth more than oil, yet vast amounts of water will be required to irrigate and process our ethanol crops. And, what about the pollution from chemical fertilizers and other pesticides that will run off into our ever more important aquifers, lakes and rivers? Is it really worth it?

Certainly, ethanol is an interesting resource to explore, but if automotive companies only focus on fuel, rather than significantly better designed and significantly more fuel efficient vehicles, such as hybrid cars, ethanol addiction could easily lead to as many problems as foreign oil dependency.

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)

GM, Daimler and BMW hybrids: Talk, Talk, Talk

While I am very excited about the dual mode hybrid transmission that GM, DaimlerChrysler and BMW are working together to produce, I am equally as bothered by the lack of real results from this group.

"We believe that our two-mode hybrid is the best of the hybrid systems," said Andreas Truckenbrodt, executive director of DaimlerChrysler's hybrid programs, recently (more).

Don't tell me about it, show me.

Toyota has now sold more than 500,000 Toyota Prius hybrids. Neither GM, Dailmer nor BMW have sold 1 of their two-mode hybrids - NOT ONE!

It is actually quite possible that by the time that the GM et al alliance begins to roll out a competent supply of hybrid cars, Toyota will already be launching its THIRD generation of hybrid technology. Such technology, it has been rumored, could result in huge gains in both performance and fuel efficiency.

I really hope that two-mode hybrids live up to the hype. Even if they do live up to the hype, they still might not be able to live up to Toyota's real world experience.

GM's BioDiesel hybrid vehicle: When is the concept stage over?

"This unique concept, showcased in a Saab 9-3 Convertible, is the first vehicle to combine a fossil-free bioethanol fuel (E100) capability with electric-only propulsion by utilizing the advanced two-mode hybrid system which General Motors Corp. is co-developing with DaimlerChrysler and BMW Group. The Saab BioPower Hybrid Concept is capable of zero fossil fuel CO2 emissions while also enhancing performance and reducing energy consumption." (more)

To me, such hybrid cars demonstrate the potential that automobiles have to offer - not tomorrow, but today. Sure these vehicles cost more, but how much does it cost the American government to ensure cheap gasoline? I say, enough already GM, get these cars on the road! While I am a huge GM critic, such a vehicle would instantly convert me to a huge GM advocate.

AP test drives the Saturn Vue hybrid

I'm not a big fan of the Saturn Vue Greenline hybrid. I think it has taken GM a long time to come up with a legitimate 'mild' hybrid vehicle. Still, there are many hardcore GM fans out there, and if you are one of them, then you might want to check out this test drive. If you live in an urban area, then this isn't your hybrid, but if your commute is mostly highway driving, the Vue might be a good hybrid buy. Eventually, the Vue hybrid should become a full hybrid, so if you need a full hybrid to deal with congestion - and it has to be a GM hybrid - you might want to wait.

Nissan and GM to partner on hybrid vehicles?

According to recent reports, GM and Nissan will discuss hybrid vehicle collaboration. Currently, GM is finalizing its own hybrid technology, as is Nissan. Nonetheless, Nissan will lease hybrid technology from Toyota for its upcoming Altima hybrid. Some speculate this potential alliance might focus on collaborative buying of the parts for hybrid cars. (More)

Ford Expedition hybrid, with leased GM hybrid technology?

Ford has announced that is working on a hybrid version of the Ford Expedition, apparently, in an attempt to compete against GM's Tahoe hybrid, Yukon hybrid, and Chrysler's Durango hybrid. In fact, there is some speculation that Ford might even lease GM's Dual Mode hybrid powertrain (more).

While I understand that there are a number of Americans that essentially demand large trucks and SUVs, where are the Big 3's hybrid cars? The Big 3 simply aren't going to survive in the future if Detroit can't build top selling fuel efficient cars in addition to huge SUVs. It is hard to take Detroit's hybrid efforts seriously until they come up with a hybrid to challenge the Toyota Prius.

Hybrid Vehicle Technology Spawning Innovation, Competition

Back in the 90's the Big 3 were given a billion tax dollars to develop the next generation of fuel efficient technologies. They developed hybrid cars and electric cars, but Detroit quickly decided that such vehicles just weren't profitable enough.

Japan, on the other hand, showed a bit more vision and determination, eventually producing the Honda Insight hybrid, followed by the Toyota Prius hybrid. Still, things didn't really get going until the 2nd Generation Prius, which quickly became a hot seller and put hybrids on America's radar.

Now Detroit is finally taking the hybrid game seriously - at least a little bit.

While Ford has stated that it firmly believes in the future of hybrid cars, GM has continued to state that hybrid vehicles are little more than a public relations effort. Nonetheless, GM and Chrysler are developing hybrids - of course their hybrid technology is, ultimately, better for trucks and highway driving, rather than the congestion that is predicted to be a major problem in the next couple of decades.

Moreover, the Army recently announced a program converting Ford Escape hybrids into hydrogen hybrids, and there are also Prii running on hydrogen. Suddenly, the 'hydrogen highway' might not require fuel cells at all, rather just current hybrid vehicle technology. Besides, if fuel cells do become cost-effective, most engineers believe that fuel cell automobiles will be fuel cell hybrid vehicles.

But back to today's technology.

Even far different hybrid technology, such as a hydraulic hybrid, is being developed and tested right now. For example, UPS is testing a diesel hydraulic hybrid this year. Hydraulic hybrids offer significant fuel economy improvements without the high costs of electric motors, hybrid batteries and software.

Single mode hybrids, dual mode hybrids, hydrogen hybrids, hydraulic hybrids - suddenly, oil dependence seems more manageable.

Recently, I read the article, Energy policy without the fear factor that states, "We cannot continue to go the way we've been going. It is not a matter of "car guys'' versus "tree huggers,'' liberals versus conservatives, truck lovers versus truck haters. It is an acknowledgment that, if we as a global community fail to examine and answer "What if?'' and refuse to accept or implement the changes required by the answers, the question may answer itself.....And the answer could be one none of us could live with."

Today's hybrids are not just the beginning of an automotive revolution, but a technological evolution. When we believe we can do more, a funny thing happens, we find out we can. Suddenly, utopian dreams aren't so utopian when the power of technology is used to benefit people, rather than just profit from people.

"What if" we dare to dream is a great question. 'Why not dare to dream', I think, is an even better one with today's technology.

GM considering plug-in hybrid vehicle

GM has stated that it is considering a plug-in hybrid vehicle.

"We are always looking at ways to provide fuel efficiency to our customers, and energy independence to the United States," said GM spokesman Brian Corbett. "Obviously, a plug-in hybrid is something that would definitely be on our radar screen, something we could consider for the future. But I'm not saying we're going to do one or the other." (more)

Concern for energy independence? Oh, really? Wow! I'm sorry, but GM is still admitting that hybrid cars are only useful for image and marketing. I guess their plug-in hybrid vehicle would be for the same?

Still, I hope GM builds the plug-in hybrid.

Hybrid technology proves a bill to increase fuel economy is possible

There is a move in the Senate to raise the average fuel economy to 35 mpg from 25 mpg by 2017. (more)

Surprise, surprise Detroit doesn't want to be forced to make more fuel efficient vehicles, but they want the oil industry to be forced to use ethanol. Shouldn't Detroit focus more on its core business - making cars, especially more fuel efficient cars?

Of course ethanol should be explored, but the science behind ethanol is still very conflicted, yet one thing seems clear: If GM just makes more and more Hummers, Tahoes, and Escalades ethanol really isn't going to help reduce foreign oil dependency that much.

Anyway, the technology to achieve this new fuel economy threshold already exists today and with advancements in hybrid technology, it is conceivable that even today's worst gas-guzzlers could achieve this new limit with such hybrid technology.

Ultimately, the entire issue is cost, or profit. While I understand that businesses have to make a profit, when that profit can only be made at the expense of the safety of the people, is their product worthwhile?

When numerous ex CIA officials and National Security experts agree that foreign oil dependency is possibly the greatest issue facing U.S. national security can we continue to tolerate excuse after excuse from automakers?

How many more 9/11s do we need? How many more 100s of billions of dollars do we need to spend protecting our right to cheap oil?

Be part of the solution Detroit, not part of the problem.

Is GM heading down the wrong hybrid path?

When the 2008 GM Chevy Tahoe hybrid hits the streets it will add a new page to the technology behind hybrid cars, the Two Mode Hybrid Powertrain. GM's two mode powertrain gives GM hybrid vehicles the ability to optimize performance based on driving conditions - highway versus city.

Toyota's Single Mode hybrid powertrain, on the other hand, is more optimized for city driving. Essentially, Toyota and Ford hybrids utilize larger electric motors and hybrid batteries than will GM hybrids.

So, which is better?

There is no doubt that GM hybrids will have an advantage when it comes to power tasks, such as towing compared to Ford or Toyota hybrids. Additionally, GM hybrids will compete with Toyota and Ford hybrids on the highway.

In the city, in the congestion that is predicted to become significantly worse and more common in the future; however, Toyota and Ford hybrids will dominate. Thus, it is not surprising to hear rumors that GM is intensely studying the Toyota hybrid powertrain.

Inevitably, the real potential of hybrid vehicles lies completely around electric motors and, more importantly, hybrid batteries. It now seems inevitable that lithium-ion batteries will soon replace the current NiMH batteries that power hybrids. This will produce lighter hybrids with significantly greater storage capacity resulting in better performance, cheaper costs and significantly improved fuel economy.

If NiMH batteries are replaced by lithium-ion batteries, hybrids such as the Toyota Prius and the Ford Escape hybrid could achieve massive gains in fuel economy, while costing less. Additionally, these hybrids could accommodate plug-in capabilities as well, resulting in even far greater fuel economy - we're talking 100 mpg +.

GM's dual mode hybrid technology can also utilize lithium-ion battery technology, but not nearly to the extent that Toyota and Ford hybrids can. This could really give Ford and Toyota a huge advantage over GM - at least with consumers that drive in any type of congestion. Since congestion will be the future for most Americans, GM's current hybrid path could be headed into the wrong direction.

Hybrid Cars: It's the technology stupid

"Don't tell me about the technologies tell me how you will use them to reduce global warming pollution," said Roland Hwang, Berkeley-based vehicle program director for the Natural Resources Defense Council. "That's what's missing here." (LATimes) This was Mr. Hwang's response to Toyota's hybrid technology update yesterday.

Actually, Mr. Hwang, it is all about the technology.

While activists, such as Mr. Hwang, can believe that global warming pollution is the world's greatest problem, global warming is not going to sell cars today. First, the inconvenient truth about global warming is that the science is not nearly as clear as Al Gore would have the world believe (more).

Second, even if global warming is real, hybrid cars are going to accomplish little in the next few years. Tens of millions of hybrids will be required to even make a dent in CO2 emissions, so let's get real Mr. Hwang.

Ultimately, only innovation, particularly technological innovation, can help fight a problem like global warming, and Toyota is pushing the limits far more than any other auto company in this battle. One hybrid battery breakthrough could change the automobile landscape forever - that's why hybrid technology is so important.

For example, lithium-ion batteries could result in 100 mpg hybrid cars, such as the next generation Prius that Toyota is testing. Conservation won't lead to this development, but further hybrid technology development will.

Furthermore, hybrid development will continue to push automotive innovation via competition. In fact, many Americans are doomed to lose their jobs if Detroit doesn't make innovation job one. Inevitably, that competition to innovate will lead to the technologies that can end CO2 emissions.

In reality, the Toyota Prius has done little to ease CO2 emissions today; however, without the Prius we'd still be talking about fuel cell vehicles still decades away from reality. We certainly wouldn't be talking about GM hybrid vehicles soon entering the market without the Prius.

The importance of hybrids is not about global warming nor foreign oil dependency. Today, the importance of hybrids is purely about technology. Today's hybrid technology won't end foreign oil dependency or CO2 emissions, but investing in today's hybrids will lead to the technology that can resolve these issues.

When it comes to today's hybrid vehicles, it's ALL about the technology.

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.

A Quick Fix for Gas Guzzlers: Has Detroit Lost its Mind?

Yesterday, Thomas Friedman of the NY Times asked, "Is there a company more dangerous to America's future than General Motors? Surely, the sooner this company gets taken over by Toyota, the better this country will be," in the article A Quick Fix For Gas Addicts. Of course, GM's Bob Lutz questioned Friedman's mental state, "the majority of Americans, not being extreme liberals, and harboring a deep-seated distrust toward the media, will see his piece for what it is: the product of an unusual, but not altogether well, mind." David Cole, head of the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, added, "The liberal philosophy is we ought to not be buying GM SUVs and instead buying Toyota Priuses. That's their perfect world but it's not the world in which we live" (more). So, Mr. Cole, instead of hybrid cars, the conservative philosophy is that we all drive Hummers, kill all Muslims in the Gulf states so we can take over their oil fields to have enough oil to fuel all of Detroit's gas-guzzlers?

AutoWeek gushes over the Vue hybrid

AutoWeek recently test drove the Saturn Vue Greenline hybrid and they apparently loved GM's new hybrid. Now, I have not driven the Vue hybrid and it might be an excellent vehicle, but I'm also very skeptical of AutoWeek. Sometimes it seems that AutoWeek is more of a puppet of GM, concerned more with maintaining a slice of GM's monstrous advertising budget than with objective GM reporting. Additionally, the article tries to compare Ford Escape hybrid fuel economy to Vue fuel economy based on "track" testing. This is silly. Tracks determine mostly highway fuel economy. If you drive in congestion, then the Vue is going to offer far worse fuel economy compared to the hybrid Escape. If you drive mostly on the open highway, then the Vue hybrid is definitely worth your consideration compared to the Escape hybrid. (AutoWeek Review)

Ethanol isn't enough, but ethanol hybrids could be just right

Over the last several months there has been a tremendous amount of hype around ethanol. In fact, GM's GoYellow campaign seems to imply that every American could drive a flex-fuel Hummer and America could still end foreign oil dependency. Yet, scientists don't agree, and they say corn-based ethanol will have little effect on foreign oil consumption.

Of course, ethanol supporters suggest other forms of biomass, such as cellulosic ethanol - which still requires undeveloped technologies - could possibly achieve a 30% drop in gasoline consumption by 2030. "There are many people who believe that biomass has the power to replace our appetite for gasoline," said Kimberly Gray, professor of civil and environmental engineering at Northwestern University. "But that will only occur with significant improvements in energy efficiency and smart growth." (more)

In reality, despite GM's marketing deception, corn offers very little hope for America's fuel needs, especially if GM only produces Tahoes and Hummers. America needs smaller vehicles, and it needs millions and millions of hybrid cars. While smaller flex-fuel hybrid cars won't end gasoline consumption anytime soon, they could end foreign oil dependency - something flex-fuel gas guzzlers will NEVER accomplish.

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)

Honda Will Share Hybrid Technology

Honda announced that it would share its hybrid technology if other auto companies were interested, joining at least Toyota and GM/Chrysler/BMW. Already Nissan is going to lease Toyota hybrid technology for the upcoming Altima hybrid, and Ford leases some Toyota software. Perhaps, Honda is making a play for Hyundai, whom recently announced the delay of any hybrid cars until 2009? (More)

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)

GM, The Great American Company?

GM is going to cap the price of gasoline at $1.99 for those in California or Florida whom buy certain vehicles, such as the Chevy Tahoe, for 12 months. The cap is expected to save buyers around $100.00 per month, or $1,200 per year. Hmmm. So, if GM offered a hybrid Tahoe instead, you could easily cover the extra hybrid costs in just a couple of years via gasoline savings - five at the most? In addition, we could significantly disrupt America's dependence on foreign oil and dramatically improve air pollution? But who gives a crap about those issues!!!! (Source: AutomotiveNews)

Hybrid Vehicles: Neither an interim technology, nor a bridge to the future

The time for the hybrid car revolution is now

I regularly note that one of the best things about hybrid cars is the potential of hybrid technology. For example, the second generation Toyota Prius hybrid made great gains in efficiency and performance compared to the first generation Prius.

Ultimately, hybrids are an emerging technology and the best is yet to come.

Ironically, earlier today I noted that GM regularly tries to downplay hybrids, yet also admits that its fuel cell vehicles will be fuel cell hybrid vehicles. So, is this just deceptive marketing by GM, or don't they really believe in the future of fuel cells?

Inevitably, I don't care. The future will emerge - with or without GM. (More)

More than a Honda Fit hybrid?

Sure the Honda Insight is dead, but it will result in a brighter future for hybrid vehicles. In the past, Honda has been unsure about the future of hybrids, but the announcement that Toyota is going to produce a new 4 door hybrid that is more fuel efficient than the Insight and cheaper than the Civic hybrid is great news for hybrid consumers. While the new car might be similar to the current Fit, I think that Honda has realized that they need more than a Fit hybrid to challenge the Toyota Prius. Thus, I expect Honda's new hybrid to be a unique vehicle - a move Ford and GM need to heed.

Isn't GM full of it on hybrid vehicles?

Not long ago, GM's Rick Wagoner stated that hybrid cars were only about image for GM. Yet, if GM believes that the future is hydrogen, isn't calling hybrids just a P.R. move simply a lie? Even GM fuel cell engineers have stated that fuel cell vehicles WILL be fuel cell HYBRID VEHICLES. Thus, wouldn't pursuing hybrids today, help make tomorrow's fuel cell hybrid vehicles more cost effective sooner?

Forbes Getting on the Hybrid Train? Unbelievable!

A week or so ago, a number of articles hit the web announcing sluggish sales of hybrid cars. Then a few weeks later, another round of articles announced that hybrid sales were again hot. One of those articles, Hybrids Stuck In Neutral clearly covered the main issues behind the so-called sales slump, but it was the conclusion of the story that really hit me.

"A half-century ago, General Motors CEO Charles Wilson boasted, "What's good for General Motors is good for America." The bloom is off that rose, and lately GM has been grasping for straws, promoting its conventional Chevrolet lineup as "An American Revolution." With all due respect, a real "American Revolution" in the car business would be to move the country to hybrids."

Forbes publishing a hybrid revolution article? Unbelievable!

While Forbes has been a bit bearish regarding hybrids in the past, their change in tone wasn't just a temporary flinch. Today, Forbes published, GM's Fuelish Talk which takes a hard look at GM's automotive business. Again, while a clear and concise article, it was the conclusion that struck me.

"Finally, I think that GM should rise to the challenge of the Toyota Prius and make its own unique hybrid--something special, akin to the BMW Mini. If done right, the company could keep a factory busy making this vehicle, and get top dollar for it, too."

While I've made this claim numerous times, it's great to hear such a sentiment repeated by such a conservative business magazine.

Toyota Hybrids: The Calm Before the Storm?

When I first heard that Toyota was going to cut Prius production in order to produce the Camry hybrid, I was very disappointed. Let's face it, hybrid cars wouldn't even be on America's radar if not for Toyota, but cutting Prius production? How could they?

Now I know that many hybrid parts, particularly batteries, are in short supply and every automaker can only produce so many hybrids. Nonetheless, the hybrid supply chain is growing and no automaker is more knowledgeable about that subject than Toyota. They have essentially built the hybrid supply chain. Therefore, when I read that Toyota believes hybrids will become an important part of their profits by 2008, my disappointment turned to elation.

While there are numerous hybrid skeptics out there, I cannot help but feel that they remind of people that predicted computers were silly back in the early 80's, or that e-mail and the Internet were silly in the early 90's - and these were smart, successful people. I fully believe that the potential of hybrid technology has barely been tapped, the best is still yet to come. Ultimately, you can never judge an emerging technology only by the capabilities of the present - something done habitually by many hybrid critics.

GM might be building hybrids for P.R. and Nissan might think that hybrid technology isn't yet ready, but Toyota is now just sitting back quietly as the entire automotive world argues about the future of hybrids. But Toyota isn't just sitting, they are using their huge profits to take their hybrid technology to the next level.

Every other automaker better beware - this could just be the calm before the storm.

GM boss says only building hybrids for image

GM's boss Rick Wagoner doesn't believe in hybrid cars and is quoted as saying that GM is only building hybrids for 'image reasons'. Mr. Wagoner also noted that addressing CAFE will not help reduce America's foreign oil dependency. "We continue to think it's a misguided policy with literally nothing to show for 30 years, and built around the false premise that one can regulate energy policy changes without having anyone make any changes or sacrifices," he said. (AutomotiveNews) Why should we expect anything less from a marketing company that builds cars? Maybe we should sacrifice GM's gas guzzlers, since they seem unwilling to accept any responsibility for growing foreign oil dependency?

Level Field Institute isn't Level Headed

Starting today the Level Field Institute, founded by American automakers, retired automakers, and dealers are going to attack claims that foreign automakers provide American jobs.

I say stop complaining about foreign cars and start lobbying Detroit to build cars that foreign car buyers want. Not everyone in America wants a gas-guzzler or a truck and many are offended by how little effort and concern, over the decades, that Detroit has put into fuel efficiency.

Fuel cell, blah, blah, blah.

Moreover, it's terribly ironic and hypocritical for the American auto industry to expect Americans to protect American jobs when it also means increasing foreign oil dependency.

I have long believed that American companies, not Japanese, should have marketed the first hybrid cars. I can hear Bob Lutz now, "Hybrids don't make business sense!"

Well, then, why are you now building them, Mr. Lutz? Not to mention that Americans provided $1 billion tax dollars for the Big 3 to build them in the 90s. For Mr. Lutz, it makes much more sense to spend billions every year marketing the American virtues of guzzling foreign oil rather than investing in fuel efficiency. Now that's American leadership!

The Big 3 should have one cause today, ending foreign oil dependency. Yet, today, GM and Ford success, even survivability, is still hinged upon the success of today's worst gas guzzlers.

Stop blaming Americans for buying foreign cars and start making America a safer and cleaner country. If GM and Ford had cars that equaled the capabilities of the Prius, they would sell better than the Prius.

I know, I know, they just aren't profitable, foreign oil dependency is so much more cost effective.

GM and Ford Claim Hybrid Car Pool Lane Discrimination

Sometimes I think it is best just to keep quiet. This is one of those situations for Ford and GM. "Ford Motor Co. and General Motors Corp., seeking to boost sales, want the federal government to force New York and California to let solo drivers of their hybrid vehicles join those of Honda and Toyota cars in highway carpool lanes." (JSONLINE)

While I like the Ford Escape hybrid, it doesn't achieve the kind of mileage that the Honda Civic hybrid or the Toyota Prius hybrid achieves. More important, the Toyota Highlander hybrid also doesn't not qualify for HOV lane access in these states - so there is no discrimination. The point of New York and California HOV legislation was to promote the very best fuel efficiency.

Both of these American companies should be leading the fight against foreign oil dependency, instead they survive only by increasing America's dependency.

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!!!!

The hybrid revolution: Is Toyota just coasting?

According to Toyota, its hybrid cars are selling as fast as they can be made. Contrary to recent articles, even the Highlander hybrid and the Lexus RX400h, are also selling well, notes a recent AutoWeek story.

Nonetheless, Toyota isn't necessarily selling many more hybrids this year compared to last year. In fact, with the release of the Camry hybrid, for example, Toyota has had to reduce its production of the popular Prius, in order to have the capacity to build the hybrid Camry. Thus, overall sales of Toyota hybrids are not accelerating as fast as in the past, even though interest is growing.

So, why isn't Toyota producing more hybrids?

"Expanding hybrid volume requires increasing the number of vehicles that have the hybrid option available," stated Jim Press, President of Toyota U.S.A. "That's driven by engineering resources, and it's difficult to accelerate that."

One can only speculate that "engineering resources" also includes technical parts from suppliers, such as batteries. Why don't suppliers rush to this demand? Maybe the better question is, why should they? NiMH batteries appear to already be a dead technology soon to be replaced by lithium-ion technology. Yet, unfortunately, this whole transition will take years, maybe even a decade.

Whatever the causes for this lack of "engineering resources", it appears that Toyota is either willing, or has no choice, to just coast for a few years, producing only a few hundred thousand hybrids annually.

Hopefully, soon-to-be-released hybrid technology from GM and Chrysler, or a new hybrid Fit from Honda, will accelerate Toyota's hybrid production.

Is Silicon Valley the Next Detroit, but Cleaner and Greener?

Sometimes I just don't think that Ford and GM are going to find the light at the end of the tunnel. They simply seem to be lost in the past and unable to find a new vision for the future.

While I hope that changes, as the technology behind automobiles evolves from motors and gasoline into computers and batteries, perhaps Silicon Valley is better positioned for the future than is Detroit. That's the point of the article, A car that could save the planet—fast.

This movement, "a growing cluster of engineers, startups, and investors, most of them based in Silicon Valley, that believe they can do what major automakers have failed at for decades: Think beyond the golf cart and deliver an electric vehicle (EV) to the mass market."

"Beyond that, startups are forming to equip new "plug-in" hybrids that run almost entirely on their electric motors. And around the country, a handful of other exotic EVs are showing up on the road -- including George Clooney's new ride, a $108,000 commuter coupe that's just 3 feet wide."

Hybrid cars, such as the Prius, have demonstrated that automakers can do better, much better. If Detroit can't be the place for this automotive revolution, let's hope that Silicon Valley can.

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?

How hybrid vehicles can save America

"At some point the love affair with horsepower will run out of gas. If it doesn't, we will." (The Atlanta Journal-Constitution)

Gas guzzling is the root of all evil. O.K., I'm just kidding. Still, gas-guzzling is causing massive problems throughout the world. Let's face it, the geopolitical scene in the Middle East revolves entirely around oil, and very important glaciers are probably melting due to gas-guzzling global warming emissions. Of course, most Americans simply tune these issues out of every day consciousness.

The only thing that really gets Americans emotionally engaged is $3.00 gas, but still not enough to stop our love affair with gas-guzzling. In reality, $3.00 gas isn't that expensive, it just isn't dirt cheap.

Year after year America consumes more and more gas and more and more of it comes from countries that perceive America as enemy, not friend.

While huge SUVs, for example, aren't as popular as they have been, they are still selling extremely well. More alarming, if these gas hogs do not sell well, the American auto industry will almost certainly collapse.

Therefore, hybrid vehicles have become absolutely essential for America's survival. Inevitably, Americans want power and they want speed, but this combination is synonymous with gas-guzzling. Only hybrid technology can provide this combination, while also reducing gas consumption.

While others might speak of ethanol or bio-fuel, which are excellent options, they will not go far enough. If ethanol is someday cheaper than gasoline for all Americans, demand will just keep increasing, creating the need for more and more ethanol. Then one day, a drought or some other disaster, will wipe out a significant percent of our ethanol supplies.

Conservation might the best solution, at least in the short term, but such a topic seems offensive to many Americans, and might also bring down Detroit.

Inevitably, America and the world needs significantly more fuel efficient automobiles and hybrid technology can cross that bridge. Along the way, any number of hybrid breakthroughs just might result in even more efficient, fuel cell hybrid vehicles - available at cost-effective prices.

While I wouldn't mind a ban on any vehicle that doesn't achieve, say 30 mpg, most Americans simply aren't going to support such a move in the near term. Thus, it is vitally important that Americans who demand large vehicles and other performance autos, to embrace hybrid vehicles.

Likewise, the Big 3 automakers, especially GM, must also embrace hybrid technology and one can only hope that GM's Two Mode Hybrids live up to expectations. If GM can be successful selling these vehicles in America, the future could be much brighter not just for consumers, but for GM and America as well.

Ultimately, America must embrace technology, especially clean and green technology, if the economy is to remain strong. Otherwise, America will quickly become but a footnote in the history of 21st Century Superpowers.

Hybrid Technology: One Mode Versus Two Mode

Soon, the first hybrid cars from GM and Chrysler will be available for sale, and so too will a new type of hybrid technology.

The New York Times notes, "the new technology is different in some crucial respects. It has the potential to operate much more efficiently at highway speeds, with a greater boost from the electric motors. The components are lighter and more compact and can be readily adapted to different types of vehicles. It is particularly well suited to large trucks and S.U.V.'s — the biggest gas hogs in Americans' garages — where it will have the greatest impact on overall fuel consumption."

Wouldn't going from an SUV to a hybrid car, rather than a large hybrid SUV, "have the greatest impact on overall fuel consumption"?

Still, if consumers have to have a "gas hog", a hybrid "gas hog" will be 25% less piggish - and that's at least a good start.

Are Detroit vehicles irrelevant?

Next month President Bush is going to meet with the Big 3 about energy and the environment, pensions and health care, and currency problems with Japan. Unfortunately, building more "relevant" vehicles probably isn't going to come up.

When Bush told Detroit to build more "relevant" vehicles, auto executives were not too happy. In their minds, huge gas-guzzling vehicles are relevant, which must explain why almost every flex-fuel vehicle - those that can run on ethanol-mixed fuels - are extreme gas guzzlers.

Without tax incentives and even with incentives, ethanol isn't always cheaper than gasoline, so flex-fuel vehicles aren't helping the consumer by offering cheaper fuel costs.

O.K., so is Detroit building flex-fuel vehicles to fight foreign oil dependency?

That doesn't make sense either. If you want to fight foreign oil dependency, then why not offer flex-fuel capabilities in all vehicles? Why just offer flex-fuel capabilities only in vehicles that might fail CAFE?

Today, their are just 600 ethanol pumps covering ALL of America, compared to about 180,000 gasoline pumps. Just a little over a year ago - when GM churned out most of it's flex-fuel vehicles - there were only about 300 pumps. This is why GM never told anyone about the flex-fuel capabilities they added to many gas-guzzlers for a number of years - there was NOWHERE to fill them up and in most states there still isn't.

Now GM is trying to take credit for such actions.

In today's world, flex-fuel gas guzzlers that receive CAFE credits can only be called one thing, irrelevant. Flex-fuel gas-guzzlers neither offer the far majority of Americans cheaper fuel nor do they help fight foreign oil dependency.

While ethanol offers tremendous potential, today's gas-guzzling flex-fuel vehicles do not.

Later this year or early next year, GM will start offering hybrid cars. Once again, most of them will also be gas-guzzlers.

With the unstable nature of gasoline and oil and the limited supply of ethanol and pumps, are any of these vehicles - whether hybrid or flex-fuel - really relevant?

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.

Energy Secretary Disses Hybrids?

U.S. Energy Secretary Samuel W. Bodman called on Americans to embrace ethanol, but did little to promote hybrid cars or clean diesel at the SAE conference in Detroit.

"It should be our common goal that E85 become a nationwide fueling option," Bodman said. "In the coming days, I will be asking that we do more to make consumers aware of the flex-fuel option both when they are considering a new car purchase and for existing owners of flex-fuel vehicles."(DetroitNews)

Additionally, the Secretary plugged electric cars and hydrogen fuel cells as the 'answer' to America's energy problems.

It's ironic that since GM, Ford and Toyota fuel cell vehicles will be hybrid vehicles, that the Secretary didn't promote hybrids, minimally, as a bridge to not just fuel cell vehicles, but electric vehicles as well. Plug-in hybrid vehicles, for example, can function as electric cars, while also providing gasoline, diesel, ethanol, biodiesel or even hydrogen as a supplementary or primary fuel source.

On the other hand, there is a good chance that if someone buys a flex-fuel vehicle, especially if they live on either coast - they will never fill it up with E85, since they won't be able to find any gas stations that carry ethanol.

In fact, if you are worried about the environment, or foreign oil dependency, many flex fuel vehicles cause much more harm than good. Since many flex fuel vehicles are large trucks and SUVs, flex fuel capabilities were only added to avoid penalties for missing CAFE requirements. Consequently, flex-fuel technology is often only serving as a loop hole that increases foreign oil dependency and pollution.

And the government is good at loopholes. According to some, Bush's new CAFE requirements - intended to make more fuel efficient trucks and SUVs - might lead to bigger, more fuel inefficient trucks and SUVs thanks to another loophole. (AutoWeek)

Why should we be surprised since the government already gives unlimited, $25,000 tax deductions for small business owners to buy the most pollution and foreign oil dependency causing vehicles, yet gives much smaller, capped tax incentives for hybrids?

It seems the government and the Energy Secretary are either ignorant, incompetent, or too focused on protectionist legislation designed to protect American corporations, rather than to actually make America a safer place. Apparently, only gigantic, inefficient corporations can save America.

Yes, ethanol is important, but so to is clean diesel, biodiesel, and even clean gasoline. More important, hybrid technology can make any of these fuels much more efficient, while clearing the path to fully electric cars and/or fuel cell hybrid vehicles.

Let's put the power in the hands of the people, not the corporations. Join the campaign for hybrid vehicle tax incentives.

Does SUV hate empower SUV drivers?

Recently GM launched a 'Write-Your-Own-Ad' for the new Chevy Tahoe as part of a viral marketing campaign. Essentially, you can go to the website chevyapprentice.com and use some tools offered on the website to build your own Chevy Tahoe ad.

Of course, SUV haters have used this opportunity to blast the Tahoe for its poor fuel economy and lack of environmental friendliness. Many Tahoe critics even used the Chevy site to try to create campaigns against this Chevy vehicle, posting some of their videos on Youtube, for example.

So, did Chevy lose or win this campaign? Is any publicity good publicity? Is any buzz good buzz?

Often I am incensed by the haters of hybrid cars, whom only empower both my passion for hybrid technology and my hate for gas-guzzling.

Is the same true of SUV lovers? Do the SUV haters only empower the majority of them to continue their support of SUVs?

Even hybrid SUVs?

Yesterday, I made a post about the Durango hybrid and I realized how hard it is for me to support large SUVs, even when powered by hybrid technology. Soon, there will also be a Tahoe hybrid. While I'm not fond of large hybrid SUVs, I feel that I must completely support them.

Minimally, they offer significantly improved environmental performance, a 25% gain in fuel economy, additional hybrid competition and hybrid investment.

Is this perfect? Not by a long shot, but it's positive momentum. Thus, while I want to be a hater, is hate really very effective?

Is attacking the Chevy Tahoe ad useful, or, ultimately, counterproductive?

Study suggests gas-guzzlers pollute far more than believed

A new study suggests that as gas-guzzlers get older they pollute far more than government tests acknowledge, and that the government should measure pollution not by miles driven, but gallons of gas used. (Intech via MotorTrend).

BMW and Toyota vehicles pollute less over time, Hyundai, Mitsubishi, Chrysler, and GM were most likely to pollute.

Imagine a billion new car drivers!!!!!!!!!!!

"Imagine a rapidly growing economy in which billions of increasingly affluent citizens cannot wait to buy their first car and take to the freedom of the open road. No, this isn't a multinational auto executive's fantasy: it is the reality of China and India." (BusinessWeek)

Man, won't that be great for GM? They can get rid of all their expensive American labor and just build cars in Asia for this boom and export the rest back to America - at least they will still be an American company. That's all that really matters, right?

O.K., all kidding aside, where will all the extra oil come from?

I know, I know. Suddenly, we'll all be driving fuel cell vehicles, so this won't matter, right?

I knew there was a reason why new technology, such as hybrid cars, is silly. Now I can go back to gas-guzzling in peace. PHEWWWW!

Where is the Tahoe hybrid? Bothersome to GM faithful?

I am contacted often about the Tahoe hybrid. It seems many of GM's faithful customers would love to buy one of GM's hybrid vehicles. The only problem is that GM isn't selling any hybrid vehicles, well, other than buses.

I don't get it. I think that if GM produced a unique hybrid, similar to the Toyota Prius or a new hybrid SUV, and ran an ad campaign about the dangers of oil dependency and how American corporations and citizens need to work together to make a better world, they would have a blockbuster on their hands.

Does if bother the GM faithful that GM is taking so long on hybrids?

Oil: Why are Americans so irresponsible?

CNN did a very interesting survey on oil.

"Although Americans don't believe the country faces an imminent energy crisis, most believe there are "major problems" --- from potential oil shortages to possible terrorist attacks -- and they are harshly critical of the leadership on the issue from the White House, according to a new CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll."

Yet, only 1 in 4 Americans believe consumers brunt any responsibility and only about the same amount blame automakers. While Bush receives much of the blame, oil companies are the most hated.

So, what are Americans doing about? Buying more oil.

In reality, what can Bush really do? Most energy experts note the majority of the problem is refinery capacity. Yet, there has been little support the last few decades to build new refineries and even if Bush said, build ten more, they wouldn't be online until long after he's out of office.

Yet, Dems like Hillary Clinton complain that Bush isn't being tough enough with Iran, at the same time Iran is devising plans to use oil as a weapon against the U.S. If problems with Iran escalate, gasoline prices would easily surge beyond $4.00 or $5.00 per gallon.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't

Lame duck Bush simply can't win, even though there is little he, or anyone, can really do about short term oil prices. All we can do in the short term is conserve.

Then there are the oil companies. I'm tired of this one. Too much of the oil industry is controlled outside of the United States. We, the consumers, need to buy less oil - that's it.

Of course that's hard since automakers haven't provided a lot of choice when it comes to fuel efficiency. GM still doesn't have any hybrid vehicles on the road - no their 'mild' hybrid doesn't count. Additionally, GM's 'GoYellow' compaign is complete B.S., since there aren't any gasoline stations with E85. So, who is GM kidding?

Apparently, most Americans!!! It's too expensive for GM to build hybrids, but not too expensive to spend $3 billion per year on advertising lying about ethanol and other 'professional grade' technologies.

In reality Congress deserves far more blame than the President and if any President deserves blame for oil, you'd have to blame Clinton, the first Bush, or Reagan.

Ultimately, however, Americans should blame automakers and themselves for buying the billions of dollars of propaganda that the big 3 have been selling to America. The right to gas guzzle isn't about American freedom, it's about American stupidity.

And these people laugh at us for buying hybrids.

The hybrid car revolution: Time to get Congress to Act

$25,000.00 Small Business Tax Deduction for Gas Guzzlers, but not hybrid cars? And how about a plug-in hybrid tax deduction?

Why are we giving huge tax deductions to small business owners that buy vehicles which cause the most pollution and offer the worst gas mileage? Why do we reward American automakers for continued complacency and incompetence?

Sure, Congress offers tax credits for hybrid cars, but they are capped. Yet there is no cap on how many extreme gas-guzzlers can receive a $25,000.00 tax deduction.

Why?

Even worse, the caps on hybrid cars are limited by manufacturer, which means that some manufactures, such as GM, can essentially sit on their credits for a couple of years. Why aren't these credits controlled by consumers, rather than greedy corporations?

Why?

Is this how Congress rewards technological innovation, or protects inept auto corporations?

We worry about the Dubai Port’s Deal and national security, even though numerous security experts say this is political issue, not a security issue. Yet, we don’t care that the security of the American economy is in the hands of terrorist-harboring countries that aren’t helping with the War on Terror, but countries which have explicitly exclaimed their hate for America and against the War on Terror.

Why?

But I don’t want to get too political. The point is, Congress can create real momentum towards a cleaner environment and towards energy security. The small business tax credit should immediately include hybrid vehicles and other forms of clean, alternative transportation.

Plug-in Hybrid Tax Incentives

Additionally, there should be some tax incentives for consumers that are willing to convert their hybrids into plug-in hybrid vehicles. Plug-in hybrid technology extends the benefits of hybrid vehicles, in addition to promoting more hybrid battery research.

The People, not the Corporations

Let's also move towards tax incentives on the buyer side, not the producer side. We’ve already given GM hundreds of millions of tax dollars to develop hybrids, instead, we got professional grade gas-guzzlers.

Put the power in the hands of consumers, not corporations.

Join the campaign to make Congress act on tax credits and deductions for hybrid cars.

GM showcases fuel efficiency efforts

GM's fuel efficiency claims; Much ado about nothing

Eric Kaufman, GM engineering group manager for energy and drive quality said that while the buzz around fuel efficiency has been focused on hybrid cars, GM has made other important gains. (MotorTrend)

For example, they have made gasoline engines more efficient through a number of achievements and they now have almost 2 million flex-fuel vehicles on the road.

Why is GM such a joke? Why don't they just shut up regarding fuel efficiency?

Let's just be clear, GM is not focused on fuel efficiency, PERIOD.

As for flex-fuel vehicles, how much is a flex-fuel vehicle worth if you can't find ethanol? GM flex-fuel vehicles cause more harm than good. Since no one can fill them up with ethanol because there aren't any pumps, or it's too expensive, the only thing GM's flex-fuel program achieves is CAFE credits.

GM's flex-fuel vehicles simply enable GM to avoid fines on their gas-guzzlers, that's it. If GM cares so much about flex-fuel, why not offer it on all vehicles and not just those vehicles that might miss their CAFE requirements?

Even doing that wouldn't have much effect any time soon, but at least it would demonstrate some sincerity.

GM isn't going to go green by going yellow, they need to get real if they want to go green.

Why gas-guzzling is great!

What's better than a gas-guzzling SUV that can go offroad?

A more powerful, even greater guzzling SUV that can't go offroad. It's pure guzzling pleasure, a message to the world that the price of gasoline means nothing, nor does common sense.

Now that's saying something!

As for global warming and foreign oil dependency, those are just treehugging conspiracies - every real American knows that.

That's why I can't wait for the new muscle cars from Ford and GM, so I can fly by those granola-eating Prius and Civic hybrid drivers. They act like they are saving the world. Give me a break, they aren't making a dent in foreign oil dependency. That's why I buy GM products, they understand America. Just look at Bob Lutz.

"There's enormous good will for the glory days of American cars, when they really were American and didn't try to be Japanese or German," says GM car czar Bob Lutz.

Gas guzzling is the essence of America. Since we're the best in the world, we can do whatever we want. Besides, if I wasn't using so much gas, those people in the Middle East wouldn't have any money and that would breed real terrorism. The truth is gas-guzzling helps fight terrorism. The richer we make those people the less they'll want to kill us.

I'm the real American. America is about choice, even if it is a stupid choice, such as buying a hybrid car.

Be a real American, buy the biggest gas-guzzler you can find! Together we can change the world!

I'd like to thank all the 8 mpg SUV drivers!

A bunch of states are appealing to the government to get the EPA to start regulating greenhouse gas emissions. Unfortunately, I don't believe they will be successful simply because GM couldn't survive if the EPA actually started to regulate these emissions, and you know the EPA is biased.

While the critics of hybrid cars shout out that hybrids don't achieve their EPA fuel economy, they fail to mention that conventional vehicles also fail to meet their EPA fuel economy ratings. Thus, the EPA is going to start using more accurate methods to determine ratings; however, they aren't going to use these more accurate ratings to determine CAFE. For if they did, millions of Ford and GM vehicles wouldn't pass CAFE and these automakers would have to pay large fines.

Ironically, these vehicles that are essentially violating the law are some of Detroit's most profitable automobiles.

Of course, automakers are against the move, because it "would make cars smaller, lighter and less powerful, which they say, would strip cars of attributes consumers demand."(MSNBC)

So consumer demand is more important than public safety? I don't believe that is the main issue, I'd say it's money that is more important than public safety. Still, I'd like to thank all the 8 mpg SUV drivers out there. You're my hero!

Why I like the flex-fuel Ford Escape hybrid

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Fit Honda adding another hybrid vehicle to lineup

Honda set to offer the first subcompact hybrid.

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

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

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

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

Help us, Detroit....

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

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

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

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

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

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

Smoke and Mirrors

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

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

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

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

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

Why?

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

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

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

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

Disgraceful.

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

How much more does Detroit need?

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

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

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

Let's Dare to Dream!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Lithium: Why hybrid vehicles will dominate auto sales by 2020

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

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

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

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

Why?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Re: Buy a Hybrid, and Save a Guzzler

Dear Mr. Leonhardt,

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

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

Why didn't I realize that?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hybrids aren't fuel efficient?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Super Bowl and Hybrid Cars

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

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

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

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

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

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

GM putting its hybrid vehicle program into gear

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

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

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

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

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

Time to give Ford a little green credit?

I am typically pretty critical of Ford, but I think Ford might be heading in the right direction. Others; however, are not so impressed with Ford's new green movement. The Chicago Tribune stated, "Ford Long On Hype, Short on Detail" finding very little excitement in Ford's hybrid vehicles, even the flex-fuel Escape hybrid and the Reflex diesel hybrid.

While it is true that Ford's hybrid vehicles are more hype than reality in terms of pure business, don't they deserve a little hype? The Ford Escape hybrid is an excellent hybrid SUV, which is why it's going to be hyped during the SuperBowl.

Where are GM's hybrids?

If automakers are now in the golden age of automaking, as Toyota believes, then Ford has taken some solid steps toward the future. Yes, those steps might be small, but if they are just the beginning, then Ford could turn its fortunes around.

I think Ford deserves a little green credit - they've taken real action.

I wish I could say the same for GM.

GM's Three-Pronged Hybrid Strategy

Yesterday, GM kicked off its three-pronged hybrid vehicle strategy at that Washington Auto Show. The "low-cost" Chevrolet Silverado pickup, which barely qualifies as hybrid in my opinion, will be followed by the 'mild' Saturn Vue Greenline sport utility vehicle and, finally, GM's two-mode hybrid system will be installed on the Chevy Tahoe hybrid in 2008.

I have had enough "hybrid hype"

I am so tired of the phrase "hybrid hype".

Today, I read the article, Amid Hybrid Hype, a Lonely Advocate of Fuel Cells, that finally pushed me over the limit.

"It matters not that, in the automobile industry, hybrids generally are regarded as an interim step toward cleaner, more fuel-efficient technologies, such as hydrogen fuel cells."

"Gas-electric and diesel-electric hybrids are of the moment. The news media love them. Toyota Motor Corp., the biggest purveyor of hybrids, gets lots of greener-than-thou credit for promoting them. There's a buzz; and where there's buzz, there are politicians; and when you mix buzz and politics together, you get policies, which beget certain permutations in business."

Wow, not long ago, GM's Bob Lutz also called hybrids a poor business case, which he now admits was a mistake. Ironically, GM has also admitted that its fuel cell vehicles will inevitably be fuel cell HYBRID VEHICLES.

If hybrid technology is an integral piece of fuel cell vehicle technology how can you call hybrids an "interim step"? If GM and Toyota, the two biggest automobile companies, are going to develop fuel cell hybrids, then hybrid technology cannot be labeled "interim".

Of course, there is a buzz around hybrids. Why shouldn't there be?

9/11, Katrina, global warming, and high gasoline prices have made many people decide the time for action is now and hybrids provide that action today. It isn't just about what the Toyota Prius hybrid or the Ford Escape hybrid can achieve today, but what they could achieve tomorrow.

Plug-in hybrids can achieve 80 mpg and other experimental hybrids, with advanced lithium-ion batteries, have achieved more than 250 mpg. If we invest in today's hybrid vehicles, this can be the future for tomorrow's hybrid vehicles.

And, speaking of hype, where are the real world fuel cells vehicles? They aren't even a reality yet. Today, the average fuel cell vehicle costs $1,000,000.00 and there are still technology barriers, not to mention fueling obstacles. Yet, GM has lobbied the government since the Nixon administration not to raise national fuel economy regulations because fuel cells were just around the corner.

Let's face it, it isn't implausible to suggest that it might be 2 more decades before cost-effective fuel cell vehicles are available - if ever. If hybrids are hype, then fuel cell vehicles are pure fantasy.

So,we should wait two decades before taking foreign oil dependency or global warming seriously because fuel cells will save the world in two decades? Nothing like putting all your eggs in one basket.

Still, even if you want fuel cell vehicles to develop as quickly as possible, short term investing in hybrid vehicles might just be the best way to make that happen, unless of course GM and Toyota aren't going to be part of the fuel cell revolution.

Perhaps gasoline and diesel hybrids are a bridge to fuel cells, but to call them an "interim technology" simply doesn't make sense.

Inevitably, hybrid technology will also help power fuel cell vehicles, and it might just turn out that advancements made in gasoline and diesel hybrids help make fuel cell hybrids a reality much sooner than expected.

The price of gasoline could get ugly in 2006

In 2005, before Katrina, the price of gasoline had already been on the rise. According to experts unexpectedly higher demand for oil from China disrupted the delicate balance of world wide oil supply and demand. Consequently, when Katrina hit the Gulf, disrupting the even more delicate balance of U.S. refining capacity, gas prices skyrocketed.

If a cold winter followed, energy analysts warned, things would not only get scary regarding natural gas and other heating oils, but the gasoline problem could also worsen.

So, was America lucky we've had a mild winter? That depends.

According to weather forecasters, the same weather patterns that have kept our winter warm, are the same weather patterns that breed hurricanes.

With gas prices already up more than 50 cents compared to last year, what happens if Chinese demand again exceeds expectations, or another hurricane wipes out a number of Gulf refineries?

As if that were not enough, Nigerian 'rebels' are attacking oil platforms in that country, the fifth largest exporter of U.S. oil (more).

But that's an insignificant problem compared to Iran.

Last week, Manouchehr Takin, of the Centre for Global Energy Studies, argued that crude prices could hit $100 a barrel if Iran stopped exporting. "Supply and demand are very tightly balanced," he said.

When it comes to energy, America is now playing Russian Roulette, and chances are America is going to get burned.

Unfortunately, it won't be just high energy costs affecting drivers and slowing the economy if all these events unfold. Sustained $100.00 oil could have devastating consequences for both Ford and GM. Even today, several years since 9/11, the success of these two auto companies is still intrinsically tied to the sale of gas guzzlers.

Sure Ford has the Mercury Mariner hybrid and the Ford Escape hybrid, but GM has yet to put a full hybrid on the road, thus, they can put out about 25,000 hybrids combined.

How many warning signs does it take to realize the world has changed and gas guzzling is no longer acceptable?

In the 90's Congress perceived this problem, that's why they gave the Big 3 a billion dollars of TAXPAYER money to develop fuel efficient vehicles. The Big 3 even developed hybrid cars, but decided they had no future. I guess when you're making $10,000 in profit per gas-guzzler sold you don't think much about the future.

Ironically, even today, both companies are still pushing muscle cars in an attempt to generate new buzz around their companies.

Are the Big 3 still that blind?

How many more times can they pull the trigger before their luck runs out, and will Americans be willing to stop the bleeding if gas hits $4.00 or $5.00 per gallon. Will it be too late then?

When it comes to gasoline, 2006 could get real ugly.

Showing off hybrid vehicles in Detroit.

In Invasion of the Hybrids, BusinessWeek states that "The auto giants are putting the spotlight on their eco-offerings at this year's North American International Auto Show in Detroit."

"Hybrid vehicles are proliferating, and not just because gas prices spiked to above $3 per gallon last year. Auto makers showing off new hybrid vehicles and plans at this week's North American International Auto Show in Detroit realize that having a hybrid vehicle lineup is valuable public relations for their images."

While this might be true, it is very interesting to note that there are some very unique and radical ideas in many of these new hybrids. For example, GM will be releasing a dual mode hybrid powertrain, while Mitsubishi is showing off its In-wheel Electric Vehicle (MIEV) hybrid powertrain, and Ford is displaying the Reflex diesel hybrid vehicle.

The autoshow isn't just about hybrid vehicles, its about new hybrid technology, and it is also about new hybrid parts suppliers. To simply call this PR is an understatement.

So what hybrids are just around the corner?

Ford will add the Mercury Milan hybrid and the Ford Fusion to their hybrid lineup by 2008, along with their current hybrids, the Escape hybrid and the Mariner hybrid.

GM will offer its mild hybrid, the Saturn Vue Greenline Hybrid, next year which will be followed by the Chevrolet Tahoe hybrid, Chevy Equinox hybrid, the Chevy Malibu hybrid, and the Cadillac Escalade hybrid.

Honda will add the Ridgeline hybrid and Pilot hybrid.

Nissan has already announced the Altima hybrid, but the Sentra and Murano hybrids won't be far behind.

Hyundai, Volkswagen, BMW, Chrsyler, Puegeot, Subaru and even Porsche have all announced they will also offer hybrids.

Obviously, Toyota, which launched the Camry hybrid in Detroit, will continue to push full steam ahead into hybrids. "I think everything will be a hybrid, eventually. It will either be a gas hybrid, a diesel hybrid or a fuel-cell hybrid," Jim Press, Toyota's North American president and chief operating officer said.

Hybrid cars aren't just critical for the public realtions of auto corporations, hybrid technology is critical for their very survival.

New EPA Fuel Mileage, Hybrid Cars and the Future

Boy, oh, boy some critics of hybrid cars couldn't wait to talk about how the new EPA estimates for fuel economy might affect hybrids.

The Detroit News just couldn't contain themselves in the article, Fuel test overhaul may dent hybrids, as you can tell from the title.

No, No, Detroit News, tell me how you really feel.

Anyway, the article states, "The Environmental Protection Agency announced an overhaul in the way it estimates fuel economy Tuesday, a move that could shake up showroom transactions, especially in the booming hybrid segment."

Under the new methods, the city fuel mileage estimates for most vehicles would drop 10 to 20 percent from today's estimates, depending on the vehicle. The highway mileage estimates would generally drop 5 percent to 15 percent, the EPA has stated.

The DetroitNews and others have noted that for hybrid vehicles; however, city driving numbers will drop 20 to 30 percent.

What I find most amusing about this whole discussion is how much hybrid critics like to discuss the shortcomings of hybrids. Critics constantly note that hybrids are only 1% of total sales and will never achieve more than 5% of U.S sales, therefore, they are insignificant.

Fine, if that's your belief, why do hybrid critics care so much about hybrids?

But let's get back to the EPA numbers.

When Consumer Reports did their fuel economy tests last year, it found that the biggest offenders in terms of real world city mileage were conventional vehicles, in contrast to the EPA. In fact, 9 out the 10 of the biggest offenders WERE NOT hybrids and those vehicles missed their EPA estimates by 35% on average. The worst offender, the Jeep Liberty diesel, missed its EPA estimates by 50%!

Another offender, according to CR, the Chrysler 300C, is supposed to achieve 17 mpg in the city, but actually only achieved 10 mpg. Yet, the DetroitNews and other hybrid critics are complaining about hybrids? In my mind, 10 mpg is simply unacceptable in today's world and that should be the real issue regarding American fuel economy.

Yet, the EPA numbers don't demonstrate CR's findings. Why?

While I don't know the answer, my guess is that because other cars don't fare as poorly, this raises the overall average for all vehicles in a particular class. In any regard, it demonstrates that the new EPA numbers are still very unreliable.

Also since these new numbers could affect the way CAFE is determined, one has to wonder if some politics aren't involved in the mix. If it were demonstrated that conventional vehicles were vastly less fuel efficient than the EPA has stated, then CAFE might have to be refigured. Such a move would probably immediately bankrupt both Ford and GM.

Since there aren't many hybrids available, on the other hand, one hybrid with poor city mileage can skew the whole hybrid fleet. Honda hybrids, for example, haven't performed as well in the city as Toyota hybrids, are the results of these hybrids averaged? If so, is that fair?

Ultimately, the testing methods of the EPA are still in question. Ironically, "Officials at the Alliance for Automobile Manufacturers, the auto industry's Washington lobbying group, cautioned that real-world mileage still varies from driver to driver."

Do hybrids save money.

OK, let's say the Toyota Prius hybrid car only achieves 45 mpg in the city. CR found that the Ford Fusion only achieves 17 mpg in the city. While the new EPA estimates favor the fusion, the Prius is still THREE times more fuel efficient than the Fusion in the city.

Now, if you drive on the highway all the time and never drive in congestion, the Prius won't offer near the savings, but it will still offer significantly better fuel economy than the Fusion. On the other hand, if you live in any major urban area in the U.S., the Prius could save you around $1000.00 per year compared to similarly sized conventional vehicles. That makes the Prius a pretty awesome deal.

Perhaps you're somewhere in the middle, so in 5 years you've only saved $2500. That at least covers the base MSRP price difference between the Prius and the Fusion. Keep the Prius a couple more years and you've done well, and if gas prices spike in the next 7 years, then you've done really well.

With the situation in Iran brewing, spikes in gasoline prices are becoming almost inevitable. The real question regarding gas costs isn't will gasoline prices go higher, but how much higher will gasoline prices go?

In the end, hybrid vehicle buyers, not hybrid critics, will have the last laugh, despite the EPA's new numbers.