Lightening the load to better fuel economy

The evolution of carbon fiber

One of the greatest ways to increase fuel economy is to reduce weight. Thus, exotic materials, such as carbon fiber, have excited automakers with the possibility of much lighter, yet stronger, cars. Unfortunately, costs have kept these materials from mainstreaming.

Recently, however, BMW announced that its Megacity electric car would use carbon fiber. As the Megacity is planned as a volume vehicle, it's use of carbon fiber implies the possibility of some cost-effective angle.

Likewise, Daimler also announced it will increase the use of carbon fiber in its Mercedes SL class. Of course, the SL class is an expensive class of vehicle, so perhaps carbon fiber isn't quite there yet.

Regardless, a new study by Lotus demonstrates that most vehicles could be made 38 percent lighter by 2020 at a cost of just 3 percent, while improving fuel economy by 23 percent. Furthermore, the Lotus study also achieved an additional 13 percent reduction in powertrain weight using hybrid technology.

Cost-effective, safe fuel economy. For what are we waiting?

Whoohooo! Fuel efficiency rules

Dumping big

A new survey demonstrates that 53 percent of new car buyers will buy a more fuel efficient vehicle than their current model, while 54 percent are willing to downsize their vehicle choice. Likewise, 78 percent of respondents believe alternative vehicles are not a temporary fad, and 34 percent are considering an alternative vehicle as their next purchase.

Not surprisingly, the key reason for not buying an alternative vehicle in the interim was price.

"Too many solutions" to improve fuel economy?

Batteries or fuels, both?

I've been following the Society of Automotive Engineers World Congress conference, and I've been amazed at the lack of consensus among experts on how to move the auto industry forward. While there is some consensus that the battery is the long term plan, costs will prevent the battery from dominating the auto industry for some time according to the majority of experts.

So, what should be done in the interim?

"There are too many solutions to choose from and they all cost money," claims John Juriga, director of powertrain for the Hyundai-Kia America Technical Center, and that sentiment seems to echo through the SAE's conference halls.

Cellulosic ethanol, natural gas, methanol, synthetic fuels, smaller cars, new engine technologies, hybrids, electric cars and fuel cell vehicles are all being explored, yet each automaker can only truly focus on a few of these solutions. Yet, every automaker must follow all of these technologies as one technological breakthrough, or change in government policy, could game change any of these possibilities the experts claim.

I don't know. Are there too many solutions, or just too few reasons to actually change?

Honda Insight simply not a city car?

Just not built for stop and go traffic

We've had a number of conversations on this blog as to whether Honda can ever mainstream their hybrid cars without adding full hybrid technology to their hybrid portfolio.

Obviously, all hybrids can offer fuel efficiency gains outside of tough urban traffic, however, in such conditions full hybrids, such as the Toyota Prius and the Ford Fusion hybrid, can achieve fuel economy numbers that simply blow away the competition.

In such conditions, however, the Insight lags.

"The lack of even a rudimentary purely electric mode seriously handicaps the Insight, especially in heavy urban traffic as I found out the fun way on my way home up main thoroughfare," notes MotorTrends Kirill Ougarov recently.

Isn't full hybrid technology essential for every hybrid maker?

Is the EPA just shy of useless?

But what about in the real world?

When the EPA revised its methodology for determining fuel economy a few years ago, it was realized that the EPA was off by as much as 50 percent. While revisions made the EPA's methodology a little more accurate, many driving conditions still make the EPA's numbers mostly useless.

Even worse, automakers can essentially manipulate the EPA's methodology to make some of their vehicles appear more fuel efficient - at least in the lab - than in reality.

The EPA's 'City' estimates are so ridiculous that Mazda decided against using start-stop technology in many of its vehicles because there was no value - at least no perceived value. Even though science can prove that such technology can pay for itself and increase vehicle fuel economy, EPA testing doesn't calculate any benefit for start-stop technology.

When the government makes real world fuel economy a joke with inaccurate stickers and methodologies, how can automakers be expected to take fuel economy seriously?

Ferrari hybrids to the rescue

Does it make any sense?

A Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano hybrid concept is said to be ready for a Geneva Auto Show appearance.

Offering an impressive 35 percent improvement in fuel economy, the Fiorano hybrid almost seems to make sense. Still, overall fuel economy would be less than 14 miles per gallon, and far worse in pure city driving.

Lipstick just can't change a pig. A Ferrari is what it is and no amount of hybrid technology can change that.

Can Congress fight foreign oil dependence and save Detroit?

Is foreign oil dependence a meaningless buzz phrase?

So, Nancy Pelosi is going to lead a Congressional caucus to the North American International Auto Show to see how Detroit's new automotive products are shaping up and to listen to ideas from Michigan's elected leaders.

Considering that Congress has invested at least $81 billion in the US auto industry, such a trip seems necessary.

And, without doubt, there will certinaly be photo ops with various plug-in vehicles, such as the Chevy Volt, and sound bites of how such vehicles are going to save Michigan and America, despite the fact that numerous studies claim such vehicles will have little impact on foreign oil dependency or CO2 emissions for decades. Nonetheless, I'm sure the trip will make for great PR.

Moreover, I'm sure there will be some references to new CAFE rules and how they've led to a plethora of new American small cars. Shoot, by 2020 the US auto industry's fleet fuel economy might even match our competitor's fleet fuel economy - well, at least what their fleet fuel economy is today.

Inevitably, however, America will still be heavily dependent upon foreign oil. In fact, based on most data available, the US will be heavily dependent upon dirty foreign oil for several more decades, minimally, barring any new, aggressive change in Congressional policy.

Thus, I must ask, can Congress aggressively and swiftly fight foreign oil dependence and save the US auto industry, while not bankrupting the US economy nor increasing CO2 emissions? Is such a task simply impossible, or is it Congress that is the problem?

What if small car buzz fizzles?

America's next best seller?

This year's LA Auto Show featured several small cars that US automakers hope will drive big buzz - and sales - as automakers move towards new CAFE rules.

But what happens if they don't sell?

According to research from AutoPacific, these new small cars are facing an uphill battle. “People want technology to solve the problem of fuel economy," notes one AutoPacific analyst. They don't, however, want to be forced to downsize.

That means lighter materials, clean diesel, and hybrid technology. Yet, so far US automakers haven't been able to use these technologies to match the efficiency of the competition. Consequently, the average fleet fuel economy of each of the Big 3 isn't just far behind their Asian competitors, but even BMW has better fleet fuel economy than the any of the Big 3.

Can the Big 3 truly compete if fuel economy becomes the key driver of the US auto industry?

The need for global performance based standards

And the LA Auto Show opens

Pretty interesting opening remarks by the Auto Alliance and GM's Bob Lutz.

While claiming that no US industry is doing more than the auto industry on global warming, a performance-based global standard is now required that is not technologically-based as technology is too unpredictable.

Like the new CAFE standards, this sounds smart, but will the standard be robust enough? Or is this need for a global standard more of a delay tactic?

Time to start over on EPA mileage stickers?

Even more confusing with plug-in vehicles

The Mini E electric vehicle will be rated at 99 mpg according to the EPA's preliminary methodology, while the Chevy Volt will be rated at 230 mpg.

Yet, the Mini E will cost less per month to operate according to Edmunds.

Thus, Edmunds believes that operating costs, for instance, might be a better way to provide useful information to consumers. Likewise, environmental concerns, such as yearly CO2 emissions, could be added as well.

Regardless, is it time to overhaul the EPA's mileage stickers?

Asian automakers dominate fleet fuel economy

Where's an American competitor?

Perhaps you've seen the recent Chevy commercial where Howie Long wonders why Asian automakers have a fuel efficient reputation when GM sells some similar vehicles with better highway fuel economy?

Why? Well, because they have better fleet fuel economy.

This year Honda came in first at 23.6 mpg. Hyundai was second at 23.4, while Toyota was third at 23. 2 mpg according to the EPA.

Ford, as the top American automaker, came in 7th at 20.5 mpg. GM was eighth at 19.9 mpg.

Driven by efficiency: What's up with America?

A BMW hybrid

A new automotive report on sustainable value - or the way a company uses its economic, environmental and social resources - finds that most automakers could be far more efficient.

Toyota and BMW, however, consistently use all of their resources much more efficiently than most automakers. Honda and Hyundai "generally" use their resources more efficiently than the rest of the pack.

Unfortunately, the Big 3 "consistently" use their resources less efficiently than most other automakers. American automakers aren't just overly dependent upon gas-guzzlers, for instance, they are also inefficient at building those guzzlers.

Of course, when US auto consumers have traditionally valued cup-holders more than fuel economy, should anyone be surprised? We, the people, don't value efficiency any more than the Big 3.

Fortunately, however, that means there is huge upside to be gained from making efficiency job number 1 in Detroit and in America. Are they (and we) ready?

Prius versus Insight: A commuter's mileage challenge

The hybrid commute according to Kicking Tires

For many urban commuters, hybrid cars provide an excellent tool for saving money at the gas pump. So, Kicking Tires decided to test the Toyota Prius versus the Honda Insight on the same urban commute.

On a 23 mile commute in traffic, the 2010 Toyota Prius averaged more than 58 mpg.

On the same commute, the 2010 Honda Insight averaged 44 mpg.

Bailout shock: "stunningly poor management"

The arrogant duo?

Over the years, I've been a pretty big GM critic. Sure, the Chevy Volt gave me some hope - and it still does - but GM's overall efforts towards fuel efficient products has been disappointing. Even after 9/11, GM didn't embrace hybrid cars or small, more fuel efficient vehicles. Instead, they launched a new line of their biggest, foreign-oil dependent guzzlers.

While I've always blamed poor management for GM's lack of visionary leadership, others have blamed the lack of national health care, yen-dollar exchange costs, sky high oil prices, etc.

Today, Steven Rattner, one time Obama Auto Task force leader, told Fortune he was alarmed by the "stunningly poor management" at the Detroit companies and said GM had "perhaps the weakest finance operation any of us had ever seen in a major company."

"We were shocked, even beyond our low expectations, by the poor state of both GM and Chrysler. Looking just at the condition of GM's finances and Chrysler's new-car pipeline, the case for a bailout was weak," claims Rattner.

Sure, America might have had no choice but to bail out most of the US auto industry, but it's time to close the book on the idea that management at GM couldn't have prevented this crisis.

Surprise? Hybrids top gov's fuel economy guide

Easily the most fuel efficient vehicle sold in the US

Yesterday the government released its 2010 Fuel Economy Guide and, once again, hybrid cars dominated the list, led by the Toyota Prius.

To see the entire list, click Fuel Economy Guide.

Trucks regaining hybrid and small car market share

Simply un-American?

According to Kelly Blue Book data, used small cars and hybrid vehicles have dropped in value as gas prices have declined.

On the other hand, truck values are up 23 percent, more than recovering their 18 percent value decline caused by last year's gas spike.

While the government continues to invest many billions of dollars into making the US auto industry more fuel efficient, isn't such an investment risky without also managing the future cost of fuel?

Hybrid fuel economy killers and keepers

Using the wrong oil?

Over the years I've heard many a story about how the wrong oil, the wrong tire pressure, the wrong tires themselves, or the wrong ethanol blended gasoline caused serious drops in fuel economy for some hybrid owners.

What issues or products have killed your hybrid's fuel economy? Conversely, what has increased your hybrid's fuel economy?

Most Americans just don't want small cars

If only the F150 were a hybrid

Provide a lot of incentives for consumers to buy small and efficient cars and some will take advantage. Interest also rises with gas prices. No duh, right?

Nonetheless, Americans don't really want these vehicles according to BusinessWeek.

Instead, they want vehicles like the Ford F150, a vehicle that saw its first year on year increase in sales since 2006 according to recent data. In fact, Ford is lifting production on these vehicles, despite the horrific 15 - 17 mpg fuel economy of these pickup trucks.

Sure the Toyota Prius has been a hit and the plethora of plug-in vehicles on the horizon sound compelling, but what about solutions for the majority of Americans that want vehicles like the F150?

Fuel economy: Is it meaningless?

Is it all about good karma?

Why do people care about fuel economy?

I can largely only think of three things: bragging, altruism, and cost of ownership. And most seem to be driven only by the later and only during gas price spikes.

In recent years, it's become more of a factor, but not that much of a factor.

Ratings systems are a hot topic these days, with plug-in vehicles coming on line. Can fuel economy be fairly rated as more fuels are added to the mix?

Yet, I wonder, do these rating systems even matter?

Why not just average total cost of ownership if that's what drives consumers?

Gangster government gone green

Larry Kudlow wonders, can hybrids drive profits to Detroit?

"Gangster government gone green" stated CNBC host Larry Kudlow, a proud conservative capitalist and a Cadillac Escalade hybrid driver, about yesterday's CAFE rule rewrite.

Kudlow claimed that all of the bailout money spent on GM and Chrysler thus far will be eaten by taxpayers. Moreover despite UAW concessions, Kudlow wonders can small cars, clean diesels and hybrid vehicles return US automakers to North American profitability?

I guess I doubt it. Americans have become so accustomed to buying not just more cars, but more car, than is actually needed thanks to cheap gas prices. More expensive, smaller and clean vehicles will just result in Americans buying less vehicles, won't they? That will probably mean even more downsizing in the long run and more glut in the short term.

Nonetheless, now that tax payers are part owners of Chrysler, GM, etc. shouldn't we know where our money is going? Is hiding green taxes the same way we hide military taxes really the best answer?

Inevitably, it doesn't matter, but I still think that a gas tax was the most transparent, honest way to have approached this problem. Unfortunately, a "gangster government" does run America. But, that's because we, the people, can't handle the truth. Fortunately, however, at least this new government gang is a green gang.

Automakers all on board with new CAFE requirements

California's EPA waiver no longer needed

In the last 24 hours I've noticed quite a bit of news regarding how US automakers are now on board with President Obama's plans to increase fuel economy and reduce CO2 tailpipe emissions. While they claim its about unified standards, I think its all about the money.

Not so long ago, many from the US auto industry claimed that such requirements were impossible to meet. Funny how bankruptcy and dependency on tax-payer money changed that opinion. Today, automakers need every dollar they can get out of the government. Maybe we should push them even harder?

Anyway, better late than never I guess.

Americans overwhelmingly against gas tax

22 percent of Americans would buy a hybrid to help the environment

Talk to most auto executives about fuel economy and most of them say the same thing. Without higher gas prices most Americans just don't care. Cupholders are more important. Thus, many of these executives have claimed that without a gas tax, the idea of significantly increasing American fuel economy is a far-fetched idea.

Unfortunately, a new Rasmussen poll has found that 81 percent of Americans are completely opposed to the idea of a gas tax. In fact, only 8 percent of Americans would support a gas tax and the rest are undecided.

The poll also seems to suggest that most Americans will not buy hybrid cars until prices come down much further or gas prices rise significantly.

Saturn might be dead, but the Vue plug-in is not

On track for 2011

In 2008 GM brought a Saturn Vue plug-in hybrid to the North American International Auto Show. Turns out that plug-in hybrid wasn't just some marketing-driven mock-up, but an actual test vehicle that GM had been road testing just days earlier. Everything seemed online for a 2010 launch.

Now Saturn is on the chopping block, however, the Vue plug-in hybrid will not be a casualty of this lost brand. Instead, GM plans to reproduce this hybrid under one of the remaining GM brands.

According to GM this plug-in hybrid will achieve at least twice the city fuel economy of any other conventional SUV.

Will cap and trade increase auto fuel economy?

How much must gas cost to make the Fusion hybrid a big seller?

So, Bill Ford Jr. is now advocating a gas tax. It seems everyone in the auto industry is hyping a gas tax these days. It provides such a perfect excuse for Big 3 inaction on fuel economy. Of course, its hard to argue that Bill and others don't have a bit of a point.

Still, why now? Is it just because the White House has indicated a gas tax isn't even on the table, as it all comes down to cap & trade now?

I'm not really sure, but I have wondered lately how cap & trade would affect gas prices. One article in USAToday recently claimed that by 2015 a cap & trade program would add between .16 cents on the low end to about $2.58 on the high end to the price of a gallon of gas.

Certainly, an additional .16 cents won't accomplish anything. $2.58, on the other hand, would have a pretty big effect. Nonetheless, that's quite a range and a lot of uncertainty.

Obviously, cap & trade is about carbon, but is such a program too open ended if the goal is ending foreign oil dependency?

Auto bailout: No strings attached?

Is Obama's task force being realistic?

Earlier this week, the EPA called CO2 a "health danger", setting the impetus to higher national fuel economy standards, probably similar to what California is seeking, in addition to a carbon trading cap-and-trade program. Both programs, many auto analysts have noted, could be detrimental to Big 3 viability.

At the same time, it appears a 9 1/2 million vehicle run rate per year could be around a couple of years - something which US automakers have called unsustainable. 11 1/2 million vehicles per year is closer to the Big 3's threshold.

Yet, here we are at the deadline for more automaker aid, which is coming with few strings. However, if the run rate sticks at 9 to 10 million autos per year, automakers will need more and more help, and that is without higher fuel economy standards or cap-and-trade. Add these programs, and the need for significantly more auto aid will be necessary.

Isn't it time for a more comprehensive conversation regarding these intricately intertwined issues from Washington? Is that too much to chew in a sound bite?

Bailout busters: How could you support the Big 3?

More hybrids?

According to numerous polls, most Americans are not very supportive of further bailout money for the Big 3. Is there, however, certain bailout strings that could make more Americans supportive of the US auto industry?

For instance, a requirement that each of the Big 3 would produce at least 1/2 million hybrid cars and plug-in vehicles per year?

Or, perhaps even better, how about agreeing to new CAFE legislation that is as strong as what California's EPA waiver request would require? Such a requirement would inevitably lead to a serious ramp up of of hybrid and plug-in production.

What would it take to make you more supportive of the US auto industry?

Fusion hybrid priced right?

$27,270

The new Ford Fusion hybrid is 8 miles per gallon more fuel efficient than the Toyota Camry hybrid in city traffic, but it will also cost over $1,000 more than the Camry hybrid.

According to the EPA, the $27,270 Fusion hybrid achieves 41 miles per gallon in the city and the 36 on the highway. The $26,150 Camry hybrid achieves 33 mpg in the city and 34 on the highway.

Is the Fusion hybrid worth the extra cost compared to the Camry hybrid, purely in terms of fuel economy? Not necessarily, especially for highway drivers. For city drivers, however, the Fusion hybrid makes a compelling case. Of course, hybrid tax credits are still available for the Fusion hybrid, so this price difference is currently less relevant.

Regardless, the Fusion hybrid is a pretty impressive offering from Ford. Now, if only they could start seriously ramping up yearly production of their hybrid cars.

New Prius: Is 50 mpg enough?

10 percent more efficient

Toyota is beginning to stage media briefings in preparation for its April launch, but really most of the key details are based around one simple stat: MPGs.

According to the EPA, the new Toyota Prius will achieve 49 mpg on the highway and 50 mpg in the city - a number that hypermilers will have little problem increasing.
.
Of course, in addition to the increased fuel economy the new Prius will be a bit bigger and faster, while offering a number of other cool new features, such as solar-powered ventilation.

Still, the Prius is the king of hybrid cars because of its fuel economy. With an expected price increase on the new Prius coming, is a 10 percent increase in fuel economy enough?

Kudos to Obama for now

This is not the future

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

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

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

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

Obama team ready for energy "moon shoot"

Will we all be driving something like a Volt in 10 years?

Senator Ken Salazar, Obama's pick for interior secretary, is ready for big things regarding US energy policy, according to Edmunds.

"I will play a keystone role in helping to craft the energy agenda," Salazar told the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. "I would not have taken this job if I was not given the assignment to help craft the energy moon shot that we will take."

While exciting and expected, I can't help but wonder what kind of "moon shot" it's going to take to simply save the US auto industry, regardless of building any new vehicles. Can both "moon shots" be achieved simultaneously?

We'll see, but the potential for fiscal fiasco seems high considering the especially sad state of today's US auto industry. Of course, it can't get much worse, right?

A few 2010 Toyota Prius details

Blue man group hypes the Prius

There is a YouTube video featuring the Blue Man Group and the new Toyota Prius. The video isn't terribly exciting, but if you are wondering what new features the third generation Prius will offer, the video does provide some insight. I think it looks great, but I don't think Toyota is striving to sell the cheapest hybrid. And, ultimately, the Prius is still about fuel economy, so the EPA's new rating might be what most are waiting to learn.

Bailouts just the beginning if CAFE increased

Everything as efficient as the Prius under new Congress?

If you don't believe in an automaker bailout, you ain't seen nothing yet. Unless the economy quickly starts soaring, within the next few years, automakers could need as much as $120 billion according to recent Congressional testimony.

And, even if the economy warms, but car buying stays slow, the US auto industry isn't even "viable".

"At 10.8 or 10.5 million total market," for yearly auto sales, Bob Lutz told CNN, "we do not have a viable automobile industry in this country for anybody."

Yet, the push in Congress is to now raise fuel economy standards for the Big 3, under the direction of Congress. An aggressive increase in fuel economy means that US automakers won't be profitable for more than a decade, maybe decades. In fact, such a move will require significantly more money from the government beyond the $120 billion if the economy doesn't quickly and vastly improve.

Is socialization of the US auto industry now inevitable?

Green technology patents: The Big 3's trump card?

How do we get the technology out of the lab and into the real world

"General Motors, Ford and Chrysler are collectively one of the world's primary sources for the research and development of green and fuel-efficient technologies," notes a commentary in the DetroitNews. "As Washington decides on aid to the ailing auto industry, top consideration should be given to the significant potential of these Big 3 technologies for stimulating economic and job growth and creating a greener and more fuel-efficient world."

Interesting piece on the green technology patents owned by the US auto industry and how bankruptcy "would create a historically unique opportunity for their foreign competitors to acquire a vast amount of crown jewel technology for a fraction of their true value."

GM's plans for the bailout money, for the future

Hard to get excited about hybrids like the Tahoe

Just checked out a video that GM is using to trump up support for the bailout of the US auto industry, something I already support, although tentatively. Yet, this video demonstrates the problem with the Big 3 and with GM. Too much tomorrow. The next big thing, such as the Chevy Volt, is never here today, it's always tomorrow.

No doubt, quality at GM has improved greatly over the years, and massive restructuring has been achieved and more is forthcoming. Cars like the Malibu are solid winners. And, next year, GM will have 9 hybrid cars available for sale, far more than anyone else. Yet, will any of them ever sell at least 50,000 units per year?

And, as exciting as the Chevy Volt is, it will still lag far behind Toyota Prius sales for at least another decade. In fact, while the Volt will be a game changer, it probably won't hit its game-changing stride until close to 2020. By then, it might not be quite as unique as it is today.

The Chevy Volt might be the best green vehicle selling at least 100,000 units per year in 2016, but America, at least those doubting GM, want to see GM challenge the Prius with a vehicle that can sell 100,000 units today.

Carpe diem, GM. Carpe diem.

Some hope for fuel economy

The gas guzzler is done?

Well, that's probably not going to be true anytime soon, but the wild popularity of gas-guzzlers is dead. That's a step, and as I watch the automakers testify before Congress, I need some hope.

If the recession hitting the US lasts as long, including the recovery, as some economists are predicting, any chance of profitability for automakers is many, many years out. How are they going to be able to afford a serious push towards fuel economy if the technology costs more, especially if gas prices don't go significantly higher for the next few years? Aren't many consumers going to balk?

Or, have Americans smartened up?

That was the feeling I got after reading the comments to a MotorTrend article about the falling price of gas. Considering that MotorTrend is not a staunch advocate of fuel efficiency, it's a hopeful sign when many of MotorTrend's readers believe that cheap gas shouldn't be an excuse to a return to guzzling.

Congress and fuel economy - Can you say hypocrisy?

Even Barack doesn't have much high ground

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

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

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

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

Autos: Let the new world order begin

Everything soon as efficient as the Prius?

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

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

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

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

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

Big 3 "visionary leaders" of "rebranded green" autos?

So, when will the Big 3 make America foreign oil independent?

"They [Big 3] need to tell Congress next week and the world that they are visionary leaders of a rebranded green auto industry," Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm said in an interview with The Detroit News. "We're not whining. And I don't think the auto industry should whine. They just need to lead. ... They need to convey that they intend to lead our nation to energy independence."

Talk about denial. The problem is that the Big 3 are not leading us to energy independence, at least not in the next few decades. Already, Big 3 CEOs testified before Congress that 35 mpg by 2020 was already pushing their capabilities. That won't come close to ending even Persian Gulf oil dependence.

Is that the leadership to which Granholm is referring?

Forget plug-in tax credits

Killing American fuel economy

Ethanol fans can't talk enough about how ethanol has helped America. Yet, when Congress struck a deal in 1988 to promote ethanol, they devised a tax credit scheme enabling 16 mpg gas guzzlers to have a fuel economy rating of 24 mpg. Thus, through the '90s, US automakers couldn't roll out enough gas-guzzling SUVs.

Yeah, that sure has helped America, not!

So, how are plug-in tax credits similar to flex fuel credits? They are not. Yet, I'd bet the first generation of plug-in vehicles are more about meeting new CAFE requirements than they are about killing the conventional vehicle. And, with billions in free money available both in cash handouts and tax credits, why not use that money to roll out enough plug-ins to attain green marketing cred and to help achieve new CAFE requirements?

Money for nothing and CAFE for free?

I say, enough government regulation. Let's make it easy. Increase oil taxes on gasoline, diesel, or any other petroleum products, and let consumers and innovators decide the winners. The flex fuel credit has proven that the government might have good intentions, but seldom do their intentions achieve intended results.

Waxman to make life tougher for automakers?

Higher CAFE requirements coming?

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

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

LA Auto Show: Where's the green?

The coolest green debut in LA

Yesterday, as I walked the floor of the LA Auto Show for what seemed like the 1000th time in two days, I felt very disappointed. While there were more hybrid cars and electric vehicles than ever displayed here, few will have any impact in the next couple of years. Many will never even be built.

When it comes to fuel economy, particularly city fuel economy, the auto industry has little to offer. 25,000 Ford Fusion hybrids just isn't enough. Nor are small cars, such as the Mini Cooper and its EPA estimated 26 mpg city fuel economy.

And, sure, maybe Nissan will have cost-competitive EVs in 2012, but until then we get nothing? Even then, are EVs the focus of the auto industry, or just a niche product to balance their guzzlers into CAFE compliance?

Green automakers? That's an oxymoron.

Bail out automakers to save the Chevy Volt? Part II

I still love the Volt, but it's time for some reality

On Monday, after reading some stories supporting a US automaker bailout to save the Chevy Volt, I slammed the suggestion (more). It's not that I don't believe in the viability of the Volt, it's that I don't believe the Volt is the critical piece of this discussion.

After watching the CEO's of the Big 3 testify before Congress Tuesday, I believe that even more. Both Ford and GM insisted that the new CAFE requirements - 35 mpg by 2020 - were the absolute most achievable limit. Any new strings for the bailout, they argued, should not include higher fuel economy standards.

Hence, by 2020, most US-made vehicles will still be conventional vehicles - though conventional vehicles with direct injection and other technologies that will increase fuel economy - not vehicles like the Volt.

More important, while 35 mpg fleet fuel economy means foreign oil dependency from the Persian Gulf will be reduced by half, America will still be terribly dependent upon foreign oil in 2020. This reality, not the Volt, should be the focus of the bailout talks.

Why can't automakers help end foreign oil dependency by 2020? If EVs and hybrid cars can't get us there be 2020, what other technologies, fuels, etc. can get us there? Can cellulosic ethanol be significantly increased in the next 10 years? Can natural gas help? Something else?

The US auto industry needs government help, and I'm inclined to help. However, if the government and US tax payers are going to partner with the US auto industry to achieve success, why not strive for revolutionary success?

LeBeau - Automakers open to fuel efficiency strings for cash

Time to make the best out of this bailout?

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

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

Democrats ready to play hardball with Detroit?

Time to Californiacate Detroit?

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

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

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

Fuel economy versus auto jobs - What's more important?

No US Prius competitors any time soon

Fuel economy. In and of itself, fuel efficiency doesn't sound important. However, when you add foreign oil dependency into the equation, fuel economy becomes vital - perhaps the most vital issue facing America.

Yet, is America really taking foreign oil dependency seriously?

Finish: Fuel economy versus auto jobs - What's more important?

Another $25 billion for automakers in the works

Smelling the White House

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

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

Can Democrats clean and green the US auto industry?

America's freedom fighter?

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

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

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

Does a bailout take a bite out of CAFE?

Chevy Cruze delayed

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

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

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

Hybrid vehicle fuel economy tips: Hypermiling Tools and Tricks

Turning it off helps

Hypermiling. It's a favorite word of many hybrid owners striving to best past fuel economy records. Plus, the various energy monitors on many hybrid cars essentially force hypermiling.

Pulse and glide. Drafting. B Gear. Different driving conditions require different hypermiling techniques.

My favorite congestion technique, especially on short trips, is hitting the gas pedal. Yeah, that's right. After a cold start, a little extra gas seems to optimize engine performance, probably because of the Atkinson cycle.

Likewise, in these conditions, shutting off your console screen and AC can also have big effects on fuel economy.

What are your favorite hybrid hypermiling tools and tricks?

Cheap hybrids - Only Honda gets it?

Still too expensive?

Hybrid vehicles, and other emergent fuel efficient technologies, are not the cheapest vehicles on the block, especially up front. And, when your 401K, pension plan, and home equity values are racing downward - with gas prices - sticker price becomes even more important.

While plug-in hybrid vehicles have received all of the hype and hope recently, aren't cheap hybrid cars the most efficient path to better fuel economy and technological economies of scale?

Thus far, however, only Honda seems focused on cheap hybrids, even more so than Toyota, although I'm certain Toyota can readjust to cheaper hybrids quite quickly.

Obviously, the development of plug-ins is extremely important, but isn't there great danger in putting off until tomorrow what can be done today?