Plug-in Ratings: Both Congress and the EPA confused

What's the value of plugging in?

When tax credits for plug-ins become available, neither electric range nor fuel economy will matter, only battery capacity - a move that appears to strongly favor GM's Chevy Volt versus the Toyota Prius.

However, when it comes to the EPA and CAFE, it's fuel economy that will matter. And that is the standard that Congress will judge automaker fleet fuel economy.

So why the double standard? Shouldn't there be just one way to judge plug-ins?

Dan Foley, of the Automotive X-Prize has been suggesting MPGe as a better rating "MPGe is a measure that expresses fuel economy in terms of the energy content of a gallon of gasoline, asking how much energy was delivered to the vehicle, and how far did it go."

Automaker loans easily pass through House

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

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

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

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

Chevy Volt hated by bipolar America

Too Prius like?

As if that's a bad thing. Yet, the Internet and the Chevy Volt Nation are up in arms. This is not the Chevy Volt that debuted at NAIAS in 2007.

"Huge disappointment," and an "unlikely love child of a one-nighter involving GM's concept and the Prius" are some of the criticisms that AutoObserver reported.

For many of these critics the Volt was the anti-Prius, an American-made bad ass electric muscle car that would put America back on top of the auto world. A vehicle that would allow Americans to continue to act like Americans, but without the guilt. We'd no longer waste gas, instead we'd waste electricity, which is so much more 21st century.

But, now the Volt looks too much like the Prius. Well, some times intelligence needs to trump vanity. Finish: Chevy Volt hated by bipolar America

Automaker bailout isn't a bailout?

Chrysler's idea of hybrid technology

Earlier today I changed my stance and suggested that Congress give Detroit automakers the money they are seeking, with conditions that mandate more change than just new CAFE.

Let's ensure the bailout leads to guaranteed change, I thought, but then I learned it's not a bailout. The Big 3 don't really need the money. It's for us - you and me - Joe Customers.

"It's not a bailout. It's an acceleration of technology into the hands of consumers who couldn't afford it," Chrysler's Jim Press said.

Huh? You can't find a hybrid today on a lot. Toyota is months behind demand for its hybrid cars, and is increasing production as fast as possible. Next year Honda will sell more hybrids than the Big 3 combined by a couple times at least. This money isn't about helping consumers, it's about one thing, bailing out Detroit's over-dependence on large SUVs and trucks.

Give Detroit the money, but....

Toyota's very fuel efficient Tundra?

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

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

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

Bigger hybrids are better, right?

A better application for hybrid technology?

Small cars, so goes the thinking of some, are already fuel efficient, so why waste costly hybrid technology on small hybrid vehicles? Instead, putting that hybrid technology in large vehicles, they note, actually saves more fuel.

I thought about that this weekend as I watched a few Cadillac Escalade hybrid commercials. 'Why are hybrids always small cars,' the driver of an Escalade hybrid asks. Why not a vehicle with an 8 inch nav screen, dvd entertainment system and room for 8, yadda, yadda, yadda.

FINISH: Bigger hybrid vehicles are better, right?

EPA should change testing for the Volt?

Being treated unfairly?

According to MotorTrend, the EPA and GM are having a problem agreeing how to define the Chevy Volt. For those driving less than 40 miles per day and that recharge every day, the Volt acts basically like an electric car. For those that drive longer distances, or don't recharge every day, then the Volt acts more like a hybrid. Unfortunately, EPA testing is not designed for such duality in capabilities and performance. Thus, the difference, as far as the EPA is concerned, is a 45 mpg EPA sticker, or a 100 mpg EPA sticker.

Should the EPA create a new classification for plug-in hybrids? If the Volt lives up to the hype, will the EPA sticker even matter?

US automakers are "deserving" of $50 billion in loans?

Lutz claims Big 3 "deserving" of $50 billion in loan guarantees

I want the Chevy Volt to succeed. I want the Big 3 to survive, but I want them to survive because they are solid, quality businesses. But are they?

'We make what consumers want,' the Big 3 have maintained, as their market share has perpetually declined as millions of consumers switched to more fuel efficient vehicles from the likes of Honda and Toyota.

And while hybrids didn't make sense to US automakers, despite tax payer funding, Toyota turned their hybrid cars into a long term business model, even though "nobody could have foreseen $4.00 gas prices."

Perhaps the Big 3 are deserving of these loans, but aren't the American people also deserving of some honest accountability? Some real responsibility?

Fuel economy: Double jeopardy for tax payers?

Just let Congress manage our economy?

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

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

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

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

Most cost-effective gas savers according to Intellichoice

The most cost effective mid-sized gas saver

According to Edmunds, most hybrid vehicles are not good buys because they cost more. Accordingly, a Honda Fit without air conditioning or cruise control and little more than a cheap AM/FM radio is a better deal than the Toyota Prius, simply because the Prius costs more. I won't even get into keyless entry, etc, for example, because such features have even far less value to Edmunds.

However, others, such as Consumer Reports, have perpetually picked the Prius as one of the most cost-effective vehicles to own. And it isn't just CR.

Finish: Most cost effective gas savers

I hate gas guzzlers

Gas guzzler.

Gas guzzler, gas guzzler, gas guzzler.

You see them everywhere. Huge SUV gas guzzlers. Luxury sedan gas guzzlers. Sports car guzzlers. Gas guzzlers everywhere.

But driving a gas guzzler is fun. It's about more than transportation. It sends a message. It tells people you can afford the gas. It makes you feel powerful. It can make a dork feel cool. A short person tall. A poor person rich. An impotent man virile. It's not about driving. It's about perception. And, since life is so short, why shouldn't you just do what you want, drive what you want?

Finish: I hate gas guzzlers

Fuel economy, cars and politics

Large gas-guzzlers still qualify for tax incentives

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

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

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

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

Highway fuel economy is for suckers

Is highway fuel economy even relevant anymore?

So, the Ford Focus is a better deal than the Toyota Prius, and GM offers more vehicles that achieve 30 mpg or more than any other automaker. Of course, ONLY (and maybe not even then) based upon perfect world highway fuel economy.

So, what percentage of your commute is a cruise-controlled 55 - 65 mpg on a flat surface without any wind resistance?

Most people, even in small towns, stop at a few stop signs or red lights, conditions that reduce fuel economy significantly. Suddenly, 30 mpg is more like 20-25 mpg, or even worse, depending on how many stop lights you actually hit. Then there is the kind of congestion that you find in large cities like LA and Chicago. In such conditions, the Toyota Prius has been demonstrated to average almost 60 mpg. In tough urban congestion the Focus might not even achieve 20 mpg.

Yet, according to transportation studies, congestion is increasing and it's going to increase significantly in the future. So, is highway fuel economy even relevant anymore? Even worse, isn't marketing highway fuel economy deceptive?

Auto industry too old school?

Stuck in the last century?

So, I was watching CNBC this morning and I caught a feature regarding GM's future, and the products that are going to drive their future. Cadillacs, Camaros, and Corvettes dominate, in addition to the new and improved Malibu, which is a very solid auto. Still, the feature felt more like a blast to the past, although these vehicles will all probably be hot sellers.

Then, later today, I saw a headline from CarandDriver that caught my attention: Five Fuel-Saving Technologies - Feature that focused on clean diesel, direct injection, variable displacement/cylinder deactivation, turbochargers, and variable valve timing and lift. All great fuel saving technologies, however, the article didn't even mention hybrid cars.

To be fair, the CarandDriver article closes the opening paragraphs with the statement that the article is about"current engine technologies that help make more power and improve efficiency". Obviously, hybrid technology is about more than just engines, so maybe it was fair to keep hybrids off the list.

Still, isn't the entire auto industry - from press to manufacturers - still too old school?

Evolution: Time for a few auto dinosaurs to die?

Can US automakers reinvent the Model T for this century?

It is said that one of the critical moments in human evolution was the extinction of large dinosaurs, for it opened new environments for smaller animals to explore, to adapt and to evolve.

Today, with the US auto industry flailing, it's hard not to wonder if the US auto industry couldn't be revived with a little extinction, and many have made such a case. As fuel economy has become the critical factor for automaker survival, the inefficiencies of the dinosaurs of the US auto industry have become pathetically obvious and simply unacceptable to some.

On the other hand, building autos is no easy business, especially when Americans demand many millions of new vehicles every year, and building new generations of hybrid cars and electric vehicles will be even harder. So, righting these wayward ships of inefficiency seems the most efficient plan, but can US automakers be righted and can they be righted quickly enough?

Also, if a US automaker or two went under, would it only lead to more foreign made cars, or could emerging US companies quickly fill the void?

GM uses Volt to lobby for lower fuel economy standards

No game changer until well after 2015

The Chevy Volt will be an amazing piece of technology when it hits the road in late 2010, but it won't be a game changer until well after 2015. According to the DetroitNews, GM is currently lobbying the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to lower the increase in fleet fuel economy required between 2011 and 2015 because such a requirement could slow the rollout of the Volt.

"GM's game-changing (extended range electric vehicle) technology should be treated as a low-volume application" through the 2015 model year, GM said in its filing, adding that it "strongly discouraged" NHTSA from assuming large numbers of vehicles would be built before then. It urged NHTSA to drop its yearly increase to 3 percent per year.

Back in April, Hybridcarblog reported that GM might use the Volt as an SUV fuel economy bargaining chip, and it now appears that prediction has come true. Sources within GM have claimed that less than 200,000 Chevy Volts would be built before 2015, therefore, the Volt will have little impact on GM's fleet fuel economy.

Should the Volt be an excuse for lower fuel economy standards? What if some unforeseen problem slows the Volt and E-Flex? Too many eggs in one basket?

Honda: Proof that plug-in vehicles are a gimmick?

Honda just not worried about CAFE?

When it comes to CAFE and NHTSA fuel economy regulations, one automaker is always absent from the discussion, Honda. Interestingly, in this time of high gas prices and super sluggish auto sales, Honda sales keep on rolling. Sure, Honda doesn't have the hybrid cars, yet, to match Toyota, but Honda's overall fleet is far more fuel efficient than Toyota, and CAFE seems of little concern.

Thus, it's very interesting that Honda is not aggressively pursuing either plug-in hybrid vehicles or electric vehicles. Instead, Honda believes cheap hybrid cars are the best short-to-midterm solution, followed by fuel cell vehicles, such as the Honda Clarity.

Even more ironic, however, one might think Toyota and GM would be less concerned over CAFE if they are so bullish on plug-ins - vehicles which should significantly help balance their fleet fuel economy. Hence, one can only assume that neither Toyota nor GM believe that plug-ins will be a major component of their fleet fuel economy for many, many years.

Certainly, there is no doubt that America will see a number of plug-in vehicles by 2010, but when will we see them in numbers that matter? Are plug-in vehicles before 2015, even 2020, more of a niche, PR-gimmick to distract Americans from the reality that automakers are failing us as consumers on fuel efficiency, foreign oil dependency and global warming?

SoCal hybrid drivers save over $2,500 per year?

Dial a clue hybrid haters?

OK, I don't have any statistics to support this claim, but I was just watching Jane Wells, of CNBC, discussing mass transit versus driving in the Los Angeles area. One interesting 'fact' she pointed out: the average SoCal commuter wastes $2500 per year just idling in traffic. Since hybrid vehicles can use only electric power during much of this idling, SoCal hybrid drivers are saving a nice chunk of change compared to non-hybrid drivers in this all-too-common SoCal driving condition.

Prius, Escape hybrid rule city fuel economy

Escape hybrid outperforms the Civic hybrid

When I tell people that a Toyota Prius can achieve as much as 60 mpg in LA driving, many don't believe me. Yet, a recent city driving test by Cars.com has proven my - in some minds - wild claims.

In several tests of real world Chicago traffic, the Toyota Prius achieved fuel economy ranging from 50.5 mpg to 60.8 mpg, averaging 55.7 mpg according to observed tests and 59.1 mpg according to the Prius computer.

Surprisingly, the Ford Escape hybrid outperformed the Honda Civic hybrid in the same traffic, achieving 38.3 mpg versus the 37.6 mpg of the Civic hybrid.

Cars.com only tested four hybrid cars. The other hybrid tested, the Chevy Tahoe hybrid, achieved 20.5 mpg.

35 mpg by 2020, 75 mpg by 2030

Fuel cell cars only way forward?

While automakers are already complaining about the technological feasibility of 35 mpg by 2020, things could get far worse. In order to meet greenhouse gas emission reduction requirements currently being proposed, automakers would have to achieve 75 mpg by 2030 according to a top EPA official.

"There are a lot of strategies you need to consider -- both engines and fuels," Margo Oge, director of the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Transportation and Air Quality recently said in an interview. Automakers "need to be thinking of those investments for the long term basis," beyond the energy bill, Oge said.

Sure automakers will need to use long term vision, which is scary, but how realistic is it to expect automakers to achieve such a massive increase in fuel economy when many members of Congress are still trying to figure out how to make gas cheaper for Americans?

50 mpg - Much ado about tax incentives?

America loves two-seaters, not!

50 mpg by 2020. According to automakers, such a task is almost technologically impossible. Nonsense! On the contrary, such a task is quite feasible. Such a task does, however, require a shift in consumer psychology, or financial help.

The Newsweek article, Miles to Go, points out that 50 mpg simply requires American consumers to give up either "cost, drive quality or safety", or, presumably, some combination thereof. The technology, however, is available in the form of lighter materials, smaller sizes and hybrid technology.

Still, it seems obvious that American consumers don't like to give up anything. Sure, they might down size a little, but it seems very unlikely that a Dodge Durango buyer is going to start driving something the size of a Mini Cooper. Hence, are not consumer tax credits for fuel efficient technologies the key, especially considering the government's unhealthy role in maintaining foreign oil dependence?

Finally: Fuel economy rules!?

High gas prices re-shaping consumer psychology

A new AAA survey suggests that fuel economy is now the number one consideration for new car buyers according to the DetroitNews, and other data also supports the growing importance of efficiency in the mind's of consumers.

"The survey results clearly demonstrate that gas prices have reached levels sufficient for consumers to dramatically alter their driving behaviors and car-buying habits," said Kathy Harrison, vice president and chief public affairs officer for AAA Michigan.

So, if gas prices recede a good bit, will consumers return to their gas-guzzling ways, or have we finally wised-up?

Can the X-Prize achieve what automakers cannot?

SpaceShipOne after the first X-Prize

After SpaceShipOne won the first X-Prize, several years ago now, I sat in the Mojave Desert feeling as if the world was on the verge of a great change. I'm still waiting. Nonetheless, the X-Prize did lead to Virgin Galactic and a number of other private space ventures, so the fruits of the first X-Prize are still ripening.

Today, at the New York Auto Show, the X-Prize is hoping to inspire a new wave of green cars. Yet, I cannot help but wonder, is an automotive X-Prize really needed? Every major automaker is now working on 'green cars', and the main obstacles now boil down to costs. On the other hand, however, the lack of out-of-the-box thinking seems to be a major auto-industry illness.

While the 'green' X-Prize might not lead to a new, green production vehicle, the X-Prize can still inspire the public, perhaps even reshape consumer psychology regarding fuel economy and pollution. That alone is worth the effort.

Waxman claims White House blocked California EPA waiver

The White House blocked the EPA

"Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., chair of the House Oversight Committee, contended in a letter to EPA administrator Stephen Johnson that the White House scuttled a 300-page draft regulation that would have essentially required automobiles to average 35 miles per gallon by 2018 -- two years ahead of an energy bill signed into law on Dec. 19." (more)

Of course, had Congress acted responsibly over the last few decades regarding fuel economy, would the EPA have even mattered?

Fuel economy and SUV safety

Is safety really an excuse?

Many women, I've been told by several auto industry-related women, buy large SUVs because they feel safe - it's some kind of motherly instinct they claim. But are SUVs really safe?

Why is it that improvements in SUV safety seem to find their way into the news a few times per year if SUVs are so safe in the first place? Is the foreign oil dependency that large SUVs create safe for US soldiers fighting an oil war in Iraq? Was it safe for the victims of 9/11 - an attack partially funded by foreign oil profits?

There are some out there that do need a large SUV, such as the GMC Yukon hybrid pictured above, but not nearly as many as drive such vehicles. Thus, does safety legitimately justify SUV need? I don't think so.

Has the EPA lost all credibility?

Just a puppet of the US auto industry?

"This is a choice only you can make, but I ask you to think about the history and the future of the agency in making it," stated a memo by a senior career staffer in the EPA to Administrator Stephen Johnson regarding California's tailpipe waiver. "If you are asked to deny this waiver, I fear the credibility of the agency that we both love will be irreparably damaged."

"The eyes of the world are on you. It is obvious to me that there is no legal or technical justification for denying this".

I guess there was only politics. Do US a favor, Mr. Johnson, resign. It is your destiny.

Is the green movement a zealot-driven jihad?

Green critic John McCormick claims the green movement has turned into a jihad

"If reducing CO2 output is the name of the game -- and let's remember that no-one has proved that man-made CO2 has anything to do with the earth's natural warming trend ....," John McCormick states as he attacks the green movement's jihad against fuel inefficiency in today's DetroitNews.

Perhaps nature is solely responsible for global warming, an unlikely possibility. So what? Does that make foreign oil dependency any less of a threat to national security? Read more....

Do mild hybrids make sense?

Is the Malibu hybrid worth the effort?

There was a time when I hated writing about mild hybrids, but today that isn't the case. It isn't that I'm willing to give much pen time to the mild side of hybrid vehicles now, but at least I no longer hate mild hybrids.

Still, do mild hybrids make sense? Read more.......

The Honda Civic Hybrid is "fun"

A "fun to drive" vehicle?

The DetroitNews ran an article reviewing the Honda Civic hybrid this weekend that called the Civic hybrid, " a lot of fun to drive" without really talking about what was so fun.

Was it funner than a regular Civic? Was it funner than a Toyota Prius, or a Camry hybrid? Was it the way it handled?

No. It was "fun" to watch the fuel economy gauge.

Anyway, for some real world Civic hybrid experiences, especially regarding fuel economy, check out our Honda Civic Hybrid Testimonials.

More automakers blame gas prices for fuel economy

Big trucks are the best selling vehicles in America

"Gas prices would have to be $13 a gallon in today's world for consumers to demand a fleet where half the vehicles achieved better than 35 miles per gallon," Chrysler LLC economist Paul Traub said after addressing the Society of Automotive Analysts this month.

Is that statement an exaggeration? Can automakers profitably sell significantly more fuel efficient vehicles - that consumers are willing to buy - without a significant increase in gas prices?

Does the Tahoe hybrid make sense? Congress?

What's the purpose of SUVs?

The hybrid technology that powers both the soon-to-be-released Chevy Tahoe hybrid and the GMC Yukon hybrid is impressive. However, ever since GM announced plans for dual mode hybrid vehicles, I've asked one simple question: Will the technology be cost-effective and, therefore, relevant?

That question has been answered, kind of, and I have some questions for Congress. Read more....

Lutz blames cheap gas for poor US fuel economy

Bob Lutz and Rick Wagoner in front of the Volt

Only gas prices at the level that Europeans pay will cause Americans to rethink their vehicles, Lutz said. Current European gasoline prices are the equivalent of about $8 a gallon, he said.

“If for the last 15 years we’d had a slow but sure rise in federal fuel taxation of, say, 15 cents a gallon per year -- that would have gradually put the customer in the equation,” he said.

There are some more great Lutz quotes in this AutoWeek article as well.

Have FCVs gotten their mojo back?

Honda has definitely stepped up their fuel cell efforts

Recently, Honda stated that the near future for Honda was hybrid cars, then fuel cell vehicles. Electric cars would not be part of Honda's plans (more).

Is Honda crazy?

GM, Ford, Toyota, Hyundai and many other automakers have also been significantly ramping up their fuel cell vehicle efforts. It appears that a corner has been turned on fuel cell vehicles. Still, despite the amazing progress that fuel cell vehicles have made in the last couple of years, there is one HUGE problem.

Where is the hydrogen highway? Where are all these fuel cell vehicles going to refuel? In California, a hydrogen-leader, hydrogen filling stations are decreasing, not increasing, and building a new hydrogen highway infrastructure could cast as much as $500 billion according to some estimates.

So, is Honda crazy? Maybe, or maybe Honda's hydrogen Home Fueling Station is far closer to reality than the skeptics believe. Considering Honda's history, I wouldn't bet against them.

CAFE: 35 mpg really means 26.5 mpg?

26.5 mpg by 2020 - Nancy's shot heard round the world?

Karl on Cars has a great article dismissing the new CAFE standards coming out of Congress. It turns out that CAFE doesn't measure fuel economy the same way as does the EPA; therefore, a CAFE standard of 35 mpg actually equals 26.5 mpg. Likewise, I assume CAFE strongly favors, easier to achieve, highway fuel economy.

When you add in the lower standard for trucks plus the ethanol credit, U.S. automakers aren't going to have to do nearly as much as one might think to achieve CAFE compliance. Essentially, the Chevy Tahoe hybrid is probably already close to compliance, so anybody expecting massive changes in America's automotive landscape might be waiting a whole lot longer.

Gotta love those politicians.

Ethanol blocking CAFE

Time to end the ethanol loophole

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

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

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

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

Clinton calls for 'plug-in revolution'

55 mpg by 2030

On Monday Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton called for a fleetwide increase in fuel economy to 40 mpg by 2020 and 55 mpg by 2030. To help automakers achieve these goals, the Senator offered $2 billion for battery research and $20 billion in government bonds to help U.S. automakers retool auto plants.

Essentially, Clinton believes plug-in hybrid vehicles, such as the Chevy Volt, are the future.

Nonetheless, automakers called the plan nonsense, while other Democratic presidential candidates questioned Hillary's record on fuel economy.

"You can't bring about change on our energy policy if you change your position to suit the politics of a presidential campaign," Obama's Iowa communications director Josh Earnest said. "When she had the chance to lead, Senator Clinton voted multiple times against legislation to increase production of renewable fuels and to increase fuel efficiency standards."