Is global warming the MAIN reason to oppose ethanol

O.K., global warming isn't the main reason to oppose ethanol, however, global warming is the main reason to oppose ethanol as the solution to both foreign oil dependency and global warming gases. How can we put all our eggs in the alternative fuels basket when the same scientists warning the world about global warming also claim that today's global warming is going to lead to extreme weather, such as mini-ice ages, extreme droughts, massive hurricanes, flooding, etc, etc.? All of these conditions could wipe out the entire grain belt of the U.S. - our energy supply (not to mention our food supply) - for a year, for a decade, for a millennium.

While there is nothing wrong with pursuing alternative fuels, they cannot be pursued at the expense of efficiency.

Today, hybrid cars offer the greatest tool for efficiency. In addition, hybrids can utilize any alternative fuel developed. Most important, however, creating lighter vehicles with plug-in hybrid technology could easily increase fuel efficiency by more than 50%, even as much as 75% if carbon fibers, instead of steel, were used to build automobiles.

In the short term, alternative fuels are a distraction - an excuse - enabling automakers to continue to build more and more inefficient vehicles. 'Yes, it's a 12 mpg Hummer, but it uses flex-fuel' is neither the answer to energy dependence nor to global warming.

Global Warming - It's the cows, not the cars

So, you want a gas-guzzling SUV, but you're afraid that people will accuse you of destroying the environment? Too bad, they will probably keep harassing you if drive a gas-guzzling SUV. Nonetheless, you could stop eating beef and let them know that you are fighting the REAL source of global warming.

"Livestock are responsible for 18 per cent of the greenhouse gases that cause global warming, more than cars, planes and all other forms of transport put together," states a new 400-page report by Britain's Food and Agricultural Organisation according to The Independent.

From fertilizer production to transportation to deforestation and pollution, eating beef is causing FAR, FAR more problems than even driving a gas-guzzler - at least in terms of pollution. Still, don't eat your veggie burger in your Hummer and think everything is O.K. - you're still funding terrorism and risking National Security.

CAFE or Tax incentives: Best path to increased fuel economy?

Whether you want to fight foreign oil dependency or to help reduce global warming, increasing the fuel economy of automobiles is one of the best paths to achieving both goals.

So, what is the best path towards increasing fuel economy?

Many environmentalists, for example, believe that increasing CAFE to 40 mpg in the next decade is the best path. Yet, critics point out that CAFE has achieved very little since its inception. As a result America continues to increase fuel consumption year after year, critics often point out.

Additionally, the majority of Congress - both Democrats and Republicans - believe that increasing CAFE to 40 mpg would destroy the entire American automobile industry.

While I am an advocate for increasing fuel economy and even increasing CAFE, I do not believe that simply raising CAFE to 40 mpg is a very good solution. Technology must be a key component.

Inevitably, America needs a vibrant auto industry to help keep the economy strong. Surely, inept leadership at the Big 3 deserves much blame for their current weakness and our oil problems, as does every President and Congress in the last 20 years. Nonetheless, however, the past is the past, and it is time to move forward.

I say we can do better than 40 mpg in the next 10 years, far better. Hybrid vehicle technology is proving that we can surpass 40 mpg in the next decade if we use new technologies and start thinking outside of the box, and we should.

By giving citizens the financial power to offset the cost of hybrid technology with tax incentives, there will be plenty of reasons for automakers to start building more and more such hybrid vehicles. Additionally, tax incentives and some auto industry subsidies are a move that will pay for themselves in the long run via less military protection of oil supplies. Furthermore, would you not rather help subsidize American auto-workers to build super fuel efficient vehicles based upon important developing technologies, rather than to pay for their unemployment benefits?

Ultimately, foreign oil dependency and global warming do not have to be a crisis. Instead, let foreign oil dependency and global warming be an opportunity for American automakers to fully embrace advanced technology as the path to high-tech American jobs, a strong American economy, and a clean and secure country.

Ending foreign oil dependency as quickly as possible is one of the most important things the U.S. can accomplish in the next couple of decades. Achieving this goal will take far more than CAFE, it will take open minded consumers and a lot of tax incentives.

Global Warming and Foreign Oil Dependency: Do you really need any more reasons to go hybrid?

Around ninety percent of Europeans believe that humans are causing global warming.

Do you agree?

If you do, then you realize how important it is that humans start taking much more responsibility for their contribution to global warming. One of the biggest impacts humans can have on global warming, especially in the U.S., is to reduce their automobile fuel consumption.

On the other hand, perhaps you are not yet ready to buy into global warming?

O.K., well what about foreign oil dependency? How do you feel about funding terrorism against the U.S.? How do you feel about putting an important aspect of the American economy into the hands of leaders of countries where the majority of their populations see America as an evil empire?

Regardless of whether you are concerned more about foreign oil dependency, or about global warming, isn't it time for a revolution against oil consumption?

While many are now clamoring for E85 and other forms of ethanol to address this problem, I think E85 is nothing short of a boondoggle, unless flex-fuel vehicles become significantly more fuel efficient.

Flex-fuel hybrids, for example, are an excellent idea.

On the other hand, flex-fuel Hummers aren't such a great idea. If we all drive flex-fuel Hummers or similarly sized gas-guzzlers, then we'll need all the ethanol we can make just to catch up with our increased fuel consumption.

Ethanol can be helpful, but it won't offer help much without significant gains in fuel efficiency.

Current hybrid cars offer nice gains in fuel efficiency today, but the real advantage of hybrids is their potential. In just another generation of technology - available in just a few years - average hybrid vehicles might achieve 100 mpg.

In the Southern half of the U.S. solar powered garages could power - theoretically - all of the fuel needs of these hybrids.

In the Midwest, home grown ethanol could be a good fuel for hybrids, but also for power plants that plug-in hybrids could plug into for clean electric fuel.

Perhaps in other areas, natural gas, hydrogen or even wind power makes me sense. Regardless, hybrids are able to utilize any of these fuels.

Flexible, adaptable and powerful hybrid technology offers a revolutionary tool to fight global warming and foreign oil dependency.

Invest in the future, make your next vehicle a hybrid vehicle.

Fuel efficiency (carbon) tax for gas-guzzlers?

In 2009 it will cost those living in London $48 dollars per day to drive in the city center, if they drive a gas guzzler. While this is a high fee, it is intended to reduce carbon emissions and make consumers responsible for their choices.

While President Bush hasn't been much of an advocate of the carbon trading system, many experts believe such a system is inevitable. Of course this carbon trading system would eventually have an effect on prices that consumers pay, but that price effect would probably be spread out amongst all products. Hence, the price of an economy car might see the same increase as the price of a gas-guzzler.

Would that be fair?

Consequently, would it be a good idea to create a carbon tax for consumers? Owners of SUVs and many other vehicles, such as gas guzzlers, regularly mention freedom of choice. Fine. Still, gas-guzzling does have an impact on the environment that affects even those whom choose not to drive gas-guzzlers to protect the environment.

Is that fair?

Thus, should these gas-guzzlers be forced to pay for their pollution and global warming emissions via a carbon tax or fee, especially when driving in urban areas where congested driving conditions cause the most pollution?

What do you think about a consumer based carbon tax?

Are Democrats AGAINST the hybrid vehicle revolution?

In a bid to support geothermal power, Harry Reid today accused the Bush Administration of being "so oil-friendly that we have been able to get their attention on virtually nothing that is not oil related," Reid said. "They’re not that interested in renewables."

Hmmm??? While Democrats are looking to bail out the fuel inefficient Big 3, Bush did have the courage to tell Detroit to produce 'relevant' vehicles. Bush has also, on numerous occasions promoted hybrid vehicles and lithium ion battery development. In fact, Bush even went so far as to say that hybrid vehicles were the best way to change consumer behavior.

Is that the definition of "lack of interest"? Maybe, for a politician.

Moreover, Bush asked Congress to extend tax credits for hybrid cars, something which Congress chose not to do. Yet, now that Democrats have taken over Congress I've heard very little about hybrid vehicles and even less about tax credits for hybrid cars.

Instead, the whole Democratic platform now seems fixated on E85.

Even worse Democratic ranking members of Congress have already voiced their disinterest in raising fuel economy standards in the U.S. because they don't want to sacrifice jobs - Democrat supporting UAW jobs - for increased fuel efficiency. Quite a different tune the Democrats are singing now compared to just a couple of years ago when Democrats blamed Republicans for not raising fuel economy standards, even though key Democrats joined Republicans on that vote.

Can we stop playing politics, for at least one year?

I really wish Reid and some other Democrats would quit the partisanship. Didn't America vote for change? Well, let's start changing, please? Let's take the high road, Democrats. Lead by example.

Obviously, the Democratic Party wants to do as much as possible to tarnish the President in an effort to claim the White House. However, if they don't focus on doing something these next two years just to try to win the White House, they might just catapult Republicans back into power.

For years Democrats have done a lot of talking about what should be done, what Republicans didn't do, and they were right, the Republican Party failed the people and America.

Still, now its time for Democrats to stop talking and to start acting. When it comes to foreign oil dependency and national security, even global warming, nothing matters more than fuel efficiency.

Ultimately, the benefits provided by E85 are not going to amount to much if our energy consumption keeps going up. Democrats and the rest of Congress must focus on fuel efficiency. If they are not going to mandate tough standards, then help Detroit develop fuel efficient technologies, particularly hybrids and plug-in hybrids, and give consumers tax incentives to buy these global warming and foreign oil dependency fighters.

Even oil man Bush understood that issue.

Let's hope Democrats and the rest of Congress can finally start helping America instead of just blaming each other for what is wrong with America.

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?

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!

The real problem with Al Gore: Global warming, Japan and hybrid cars

Just as Al Gore is beating the drum on global warming and inciting his treehugging supporters into a frenzy, almost every government in the world is spending less money to fight global warming according to the NYTimes.

For example, U.S. spending into global warming research and development is half what it was just 25 years ago, but it isn't just the U.S.

"Internationally, government energy research trends are little different from those in the United States. Japan is the only economic power that increased research spending in recent decades, with growth focused on efficiency and solar technology, according to the International Energy Agency."

Ironically, many energy experts expect total energy use to increase by some 50 percent in less than 20 years, with most of this increase coming from China and India. If we can't get control of energy consumption now, how are we going to do better in the next 2 decades when issues such as Kyoto don't even include these countries?

This should be cause for serious concern if you believe Gore. If the world is almost past the point of no return, yet energy consumption is still rapidly increasing, isn't Gore's battle already over?

I say Mr. Gore is simply telling the wrong story. Mr. Gore is a politician at heart, rather than an activist, and in the back of his mind, I think, Gore is simply posturing for another run at the Presidency. Global warming, Gore believes, might just be his ticket back to the big white house, and I say he's right, but he's also missing the point and his opportunity.

(Full Story)

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.

Another reason alternative fuels are not enough? Go hybrid!

"Our whole farming system really contributes a lot to global warming, and it could be made to be much more sustainable," claims Francis Thicke, an organic dairy farmer from Fairfield, Iowa, who has a Ph.D. in soil fertility.

Thick also believes subsidies for farmers to grow corn and soybeans should end because of their global warming contribution. (more)

On the other hand, synergistic technologies, such as lithium batteries, fuel cells, and hybrid vehicles will soon create autos that might need very little fuel, regardless of whether it is oil, ethanol or hydrogen. By the end of the decade, new hybrid technology combined with next generation lithium batteries might easily achieve more than 70 mpg. Plug-in technology could be added to these hybrid vehicles and most urban drivers might rarely, if ever, need any fuel other than a little electricity. Additionally, adding small fuel cells might make such hybrids even more efficient, requiring even less fuel or electricity.

Sure it would be nice to fill these next generation hybrids with ethanol instead of gasoline, but the focus should be on as little fuel as possible. In fact, whether ethanol is every viable in America shouldn't even be a primary concern for Detroit's automakers. Making the most efficient vehicles possible, should be their only concern.

Go hybrid, Detroit, go hybrid.

Are you red, white and green?

Do you want to change America's energy paradigm? Do you believe in energy conservation? Do you want to end foreign oil dependency? Do you want to raise fuel economy standards? Do you want fight global warming? Do you want to buy a hybrid car or other fuel efficient vehicle?

You are not alone. It is estimated that 45.3 million Americans would answer yes to most of the questions above and they are not all tree-hugging hippies. In fact the majority of the Red, White and Greens are non-partisan moderates, but there are also significant numbers of liberals and conservatives - these issues are more important than party politics.

Civil Society Institute President and Founder Pam Solo said: "Red, white and green is the new patriotism for this complex era in which energy, the environment and national security are all bound up together. What we see here are a new set of values that equate love of country with energy independence and protecting the environment from global warming. These survey findings show that there is a huge group of Americans who are very clear about their strong embrace of environmental values and the elected officials who reflect those values. The existence of red, white and green voters could have huge implications for the 2006 and 2008 elections." (more)

Let's get some more red, white and green representatives in political office!

Hybrid Vehicles: A California Fad?

The article Red Hot in AutoWeek states, "Hybrids are still hot stuff - registrations rose 34.8 percent in the first seven months of the year to 144,377 units, according to R.L. Polk & Co. But most of the heat is generated in the Golden State."

A number of reasons are cited to explain California's interest in hybrids, such as traffic, pollution and car pool lane access. In summary, it is noted that California often leads trends that eventually reach the rest of the country; however, some of those trends burn out as fads.

So, what about hybrid vehicles - fad or trend?

I guess if high gas prices are just a fad and concern about foreign oil dependency is just a fad, as well as if concern about global warming is just a fad, then it is possible that California's love affair with hybrid cars is also just a fad.

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.

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 vehicle buyers are important leaders

Imagine a 94 mpg Prius

CNBC's Hot Topic on Morning Call was about Hybrid Cost Hype. The main question was, do hybrid cars save money over the long haul? Answer, it depends on the type of hybrid and the driver, but in many cases, no, hybrids do not save money.

So what's the point?

How about significantly reduced pollution, how about reduced foreign oil dependency?

More important, even the 'hybrid critic' on Hot Topic acknowledged that if people keep buying hybrids, they will become cheaper and they WILL save money compared to conventional vehicles for ALL drivers.

That means reduced foreign oil dependency, significantly reduced pollution, and cheaper than conventional vehicles.

Those buying hybrid cars today are leading the world towards a cleaner, safer world that everyone will be able to afford tomorrow. Check out the articles provided by Zendude's comments. A 94 mpg Prius is the future and every hybrid buyer is investing in that future, helping to make that future a reality.

Hybrid buyers are helping fund the revolution for a better planet. What are hybrid haters accomplishing?

Car pool lane breeding hybrid hate

Road rage, or the 'Prius backlash' is building against the drivers of hybrid cars, especially in the HOV lanes of California and Virginia.

"There's a mentality out there that we're a bunch of liberal hippies or we're trying to make some statement on the environment," said Travis Ruff, a real estate agent from Newbury Park who drives a Toyota Prius. "People are a lot less friendly than when I drove a Mercedes." (LATimes)

So, instead of hybrids, would it be better if HOV lanes were slowed with more car poolers? Inevitably, HOV lanes can't make gas cheaper, end foreign oil dependency, or even end global warming. In fact, HOV lanes can't even end congestion.

I have an idea, how about if carpool lane accessibility is determined not just by passengers, but by fuel efficiency as well? Say, if you drive a large SUV, achieving less than 20 mpg, then you have to have at least 4 occupants to qualify for HOV lane access - isn't that the point of these vehicles? Thus, only those vehicles achieving at least 30 mpg can enter the HOV lane with only 2 occupants?

Let's be real, what has a bigger effect on the world today, hybrid vehicles in the car pool lane, or tens of millions of gas-guzzlers achieving far under 20 mpg - even in the carpool lane?

Pollution, high gas prices, congestion, just blame hybrid vehicles.

CNW Hybrid Vehicle Efficiency Study?

Don't buy that hybrid!

Hybrid cars actually use more energy than gas guzzlers. At least, that is what CNW Marketing Research Inc. would have you believe. If every American drove a Hummer, instead of a Prius, America would use less energy overall! (P.S. - I also have some great land I'd like to sell to you.)

What nonsense.

It has been demonstrated that if every American drove a Toyota Prius hybrid car, for example, America could stop importing foreign oil.

If every American; on the other hand, drove a Hummer we would significantly increase foreign oil dependency. Yet, CNW would have Americans believe that a Hummer is actually more efficient than a hybrid.

CNW derives its Energy Cost by totaling the "energy necessary to plan, build, sell, drive and dispose of a vehicle from initial concept to scrappage. This includes such minutia as plant to dealer fuel costs, employee driving distances, electricity usage per pound of material used in each vehicle and literally hundreds of other variables."

Well, since hybrids aren't mass produced at the same level as conventional vehicles, this automatically creates extra SHORT TERM costs. If hybrids were produced in the same quantities as conventional vehicles, many of these extra costs would not exist. Moreover, over time the production of any vehicle becomes more efficient.

Additionally, the electric components of hybrids - many of which are the foundation of fuel cell vehicles - are expensive to dispose notes CNW. While this might also be true, this again is largely due to the newness of the technology. Many of these components will eventually be recycled. Anytime there is an emerging technology, different processes are required and take time to develop. Furthermore, the advancement of hybrid batteries alone will change dramatically in the next decade.

Not long ago, computer parts were not recycled, now huge businesses are being built around recycling computer components. Perhaps, computers were also a bad invention compared to the efficiency of pen and paper - a computer is less energy efficient!

Using CNW's logic, America's answer to foreign oil dependency and to pollution is simply to do nothing, as every experimental vehicle, such as hybrids or fuel cell vehicles, will always take more energy to produce in the short term. Obviously, since there are fewer hybrid suppliers, for example, chances are those hybrid supplies will have to be shipped further - taking more energy.

Using CNW's logic, invention and technological advancement are evil things. Since supply chains for new technologies seldom exist, their creation will ALWAYS, INITIALLY, be less efficient. Therefore, the status quo is always best, well, at least in the short term, but who really cares about the future?

Nonetheless, I cannot help but wonder how much CNW determined that it costs the U.S. to maintain a military presence in the Middle East every year to protect our oil habit? How much energy do all those destroyers and air craft carriers cost the 'overall efficiency' of conventional vehicles?

Did CNW also add the billions and billion of dollars of medical costs that can be directly attributed to vehicle emissions - the same emissions that hybrids SIGNIFICANTLY reduce?

I won't even get into the ultimate costs of global warming.

So get out there and buy a Hummer, it's an investment that can save America from foreign oil dependency while protecting the environment! (Now about that land.)

Hybrid cars: Why Toyota is the Most Important Automaker in the World

I was reading an article this morning, Honda sees hybrid owners buying fuel cell cars, and it struck me how Toyota has become the most important automaker in the world.

It turns out Honda is looking to the drivers of its hybrid cars to drive Honda Fuel Cell Vehicles.

"Honda has a rough idea of who its first fuel-cell customers will be, people trading in their gasoline-electric hybrid cars," states this AP article.

"We already hear of people saying, 'gee I like my hybrid but what's next. I want to go beyond gasoline'," says Steve Ellis, manager of fuel-cell marketing for American Honda Motor Co.

Yet, Ellis also notes that, "fuel-cell cars will make up only a fraction of the auto market for two or more decades."

While it's great that Honda is looking beyond hybrid vehicles, is the status quo of the world's fleet of automobiles good enough for the next two or three decades?

What happens when millions and millions of new drivers from China and India demand more oil in the next decade? What happens if Iran cuts oil production to the West? What happens if 10 years of increased, severe hurricane activity batters oil refineries in the Gulf of Mexico? What happens if global warming is actually much more serious than believed?

Even worse, what happens if the 'hydrogen economy' is found to result in some unintended consequence that actually makes gasoline still a better a solution?

How Green is Green Enough?

Sure Honda is the greenest automaker in the world, but none of the world's automakers are green enough, and that's why Toyota is so important.

Toyota's aggressive push into hybrid cars has made the public realize that much better automobiles - in terms of fuel economy and pollution - are available now, not in decades.

Yet, the best thing about hybrids is that hybrid technology offers much more potential than is currently offered. For example, hybrid technology could be added to flex-fuel vehicles, to diesel vehicles, to bio-diesel vehicles, to hydrogen vehicles, etc. Moreover, more and more research will lead to significantly better hybrid batteries. Consequently, 100 mpg hybrid vehicles could easily be less than a decade away.

100 mpg vehicles aren't worth striving for along the way to fuel cell vehicles in today's world? The status quo is simply good enough for another few decades?

Inevitably, when America experiences sustained gas prices of more than $3.00 per gallon combined with the constant threat of gas spikes of more than $5.00 per gallon, automakers won't - at least those that want to survive - have any choice but to build as many hybrids as possible.

Thanks to Toyota, Americans and the world will know, automakers can do better, much better.

Can automakers do the right thing? Join the hybrid revolution

Talking 'bout a revolution

Recently, IBM held a think tank calling on business leaders to lead the green revolution, before the government forces them to do it with messy and expensive regulations.

Automakers need to heed this call.

Let's face it, can we really afford to wait much longer before taking oil dependency seriously? Political tensions in Iran, Venezuela, Nigeria, the War in Iraq, bomb attacks on Saudi oil refineries and increased hurricane activity over the next decade are already great reasons to act, but they are only the beginning.

New evidence suggests that global warming is picking up fast. In less than 100 years, Miami could be a memory as oceans rise as much as 20 feet (NewScientist).

Additionally, yesterday I blogged about the potential of a billion new drivers from Asia and asked, "Where will the oil come from?"

Today, even China is beginning to tax SUVs and other gas guzzlers in an attempt to spur the sales and development of efficient automobiles.

Yet in America, we can only propose new fuel efficiency standards on large SUVs, but not on trucks - a huge source of gas-guzzling - because we wouldn't want to upset the American consumer or the American auto industry. (MORE)

We must do more, much more.

Even Flex fuel cars, hybrid cars, and plug-in hybrid cars are not enough. We need even better cars. We need to make automobiles smaller, and we need to make them flex fuel, plug-in hybrid vehicles. We need the best technology that the entire auto industry has to offer and we need it to be affordable. Most important, we need it NOW!

Yet, AutoWeek questions, "Do consumers even want plug-in hybrids?"

Since when did consumerism become more important than health or national security? So, what about smoking? What about seat belts? What about the Dubai port deal?

Ultimately, consumers will mostly do what is in their best interest, however, national security takes priority over consumer choice - ALWAYS. Still, if consumers know they can reduce fuel costs by 50%, they will gladly plug-in their vehicles.

Imagine the competition that could be created by flex-fuel plug-in hybrids for fuel choices. Ethanol, diesel, bio-diesel, gasoline, hydrogen, clean coal-powered electric, solar-powered electric, wind-powered electric, etc. all could play an important part in the new energy revolution that can fundamentally change the world. Ultimately, the green revolution and energy independence are not about protecting America, it's about liberating the people of the world.

The green revolution can be driven with the automobile. If the auto industry cannot focus on creating green choices for the world, then eventually the government will have to, and that won't be good for either consumers or businesses. Starting now might already be too late, but waiting any longer is simply suicidal.

Let's Revolt!

Congress doesn't need to build the green revolution, they need to inspire the green revolution with intelligent tax incentives. Let's keep the pressure on Congress and Business to do the right thing. Join the Hybrid Car Revolution Campaign.

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!

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.

Washington Post rips hybrid's HOV access

I try to not get too involved in politics. When push comes to shove, it takes a lot of money to be successfully elected to higher office, and almost as soon as a politician is elected, they are already thinking about their reelection. Thus, I think politics - on both sides of the aisle - are about money. As a result I have little faith in either party and am a registered Independent.

Nonetheless, I thought the Washington Post was a liberal paper, but I guess not when it comes to hybrid cars, the environment, or foreign oil dependency.

Since Sunday the paper has taken an agenda against hybrid cars and HOV lane access. On Sunday, the Post printed an editorial calling for the end of HOV lane access for hybrids because "As plenty of the region's commuters know, hybrid vehicles are the main culprit in the ever-worsening traffic in the region's carpool lanes."

The Post points out that 22% of vehicles in the HOV lane are hybrids, which tops the 15% of illegal users also using the HOV lanes. Yet, does the Post care about the illegal users? No, only the hybrid vehicles, which the post states " Hybrids' environmental advantages have diminished as stricter federal rules have required gas-powered cars to have cleaner engines, starting with 2004 models."

So now the Post believes that current gasoline automobiles solve all of America's problems? According to the Post there is now no reason to worry about pollution, global warming, or foreign oil dependency?

I can't help but wonder what the editors at the Post drive, but I bet its BMW, Mercedes, and Lexus. Gas-guzzling means nothing to this fine group of Americans because the cost of gasoline means nothing to people who make the kind of money editors for the Post make.

On a side note, I also wonder how many editors at the Post have children enlisted in the Military - I'd bet not many.

While I understand that hybrids might cause problems for HOV effectiveness and that is an issue worth addressing, to claim that hybrid's environmental impact is now insignificant because of new gasoline vehicles is a complete travesty - an absolute joke.

Yeah, all the gas-guzzlers idling in traffic everyday aren't really a problem anymore, at least not if they are 2004 or later models - as long as you aren't worried about the billions of barrels of oil they waste every year in traffic. And, oh yeah, in congestion even 2004 gasoline vehicles create significantly more pollution than hybrids, but who really ever drives in congestion? Don't we all drive 55 mph on the highway all the time?

So, hybrids are the problem, I mean they do make up almost 1% of all vehicle sales in America, isn't that already enough? Isn't that enough change for one lifetime? Haven't we almost solved global warming and foreign oil dependency already anyway?

I say if you care about the environment, if you care about foreign oil dependency, or if you care about obscene oil company profits, then you should toast the post. Cancel your subscription.

If everyone in America drove a hybrid, such as the Toyota Prius or the Honda Civic hybrid, foreign oil would not be needed. That's a goal worth striving for and it's far more important than HOV congestion - by far.

Yet, this isn't even an issue for the Post. How pathetic.

Maybe, just maybe, in the short term, the Post could focus on the 15% of illegal drivers in the HOV lane. How much money could be made by fining all of those drivers? Additionally, HOV traffic would be less than it was before hybrids if illegal users were punished and forced to stop using HOV lanes.

But that's not the point of the Post. Instead, let's not focus on people breaking the law, let's focus on hybrid cars - didn't you know, they are America's real problem.

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.

Why hybrid vehicles are ESSENTIAL to America

No, it isn't foreign oil dependency and supporting terrorism, although issues such as Iran will inevitably push gas prices much higher. No it isn't pollution, or even global warming, it isn't even Kartrina or limited oil refineries.

The reason hybrid cars have become so important to America is manufacturing.

There is a great article, China, India seen setting stage for environment-friendly world, which notes that "Energy guzzlers China and India are often blamed for some of the world's environmental problems, but a new study says the two most populous nations may well set the stage for a clean and green Earth."

Further the article states, "The two countries are mastering energy-efficient technologies, implementing cheap and environmentally-responsible transportation systems".

Yet, America is still hyping muscle cars and SUVs to generate buzz for the future at the North American International Auto Show. Fancier, bling-bling gas-guzzling vehicles have no future in India and China, perhaps not even in America.

The only chance America has to sell products to these countries is to sell them the best, most energy efficient technology, at reasonable costs. America, and American automakers, will never have cheaper labor to compete with China and India. Therefore, America MUST have the most efficient and intelligent labor and corporations.

Within 10 years, not only will gas be significantly more expensive around the world, American automobiles will be expensive and obsolete compared to foreign made vehicles, unless they offer extreme fuel efficiency, top engineering and reasonable prices.

Waiting for fuel cell vehicles, which will almost certainly be hybrids anyway, is the surest path to failure for American automakers. Making America the most fuel efficient fleet in the world is an absolute necessity for American auto manufacturers. Plus, wouldn't ending pollution and foreign oil dependency be pretty cool too?

What IS the point of hybrid vehicle critics?

Hybrid cars make up around one percent of total automobile sales, yet hybrid hype could almost make you believe that hybrids are dominating automobile sales.

So, is it the hype that makes critics sound off?

Do hybrid critics just hate change, or do they hate hybrids because most of them aren't built in America?

I just don't get most hybrid critics.

Some hybrid critics claim hybrids won't save money. In some cases this is true; however, even in these cases, hybrid vehicles still pollute far less than their conventional counterparts, but you can't put a cost on that. It means everything to some people, nothing to others.

Anyway, why are some so concerned with criticizing those that stand up and use their money to cause less pollution? Why is acting on one's beliefs a bad thing? What are critics acting on anyway?

Besides, many hybrids can save money. There is no doubt that hybrids like the Toyota Prius and the Ford Escape hybrid can save money and can achieve significantly better fuel economy than their conventional comparisons. Yes, you will have to drive differently, but if reducing your fuel consumption is important, hybrids offer the greatest and most convenient tools available for achieving this goal.

Of course, driving habits aren't the only concern. While the Honda Accord hybrid is regularly ridiculed by hybrid critics, the Accord hybrid is built for the open highway. If you are driving in urban traffic, this car will not achieve great fuel efficiency. If you regularly drive between Temecula and Fontana, California every day, then an Accord hybrid can be a great buy.

So, again, what is the point of hybrid critics?

Many educated hybrid critics claim that hybrids are just a distraction along the path to fuel cell vehicles. Interesting point except for the fact that even GM has recently admitted that fuel cell vehicles will be fuel cell hybrid vehicles, as has Toyota (more on this). Thus, purchasing a hybrid vehicle helps invest in the fuel cell future. These critics see no value in that?

Even without fuel cell hybrid vehicles, current hybrid technology offers the ability to easily achieve 100 mpg with today's technology, and experimental hybrid technology goes even further, at far less costs than fuel cells.

So what? Well, achieving 100 mpg across America's fleet would easily end foreign oil dependency.

So, these critics don't think that foreign oil dependency, in addition to pollution and global warming, are important issues? These critics don't find it interesting that the Chinese are now building hybrid vehicles as they scour the Earth for oil deals?

Besides, so what if some want to invest in the future, without necessarily profiting from it personally. Is that really a waste of time? Instead, selfish gas-guzzling greed is a better use of resources?

Does this all come down to guilt? Is that what is it about?

Perhaps hybrid vehicles don't ultimately save every consumer money, but only help reduce oil dependency, help reduce pollution and help invest in the future. How pathetic.

Is this the point these hybrid critics are making?

Syriana, Kyoto and Hybrid Cars

So, the Montreal climate conference resulted in a 150 Nation agreement for further meetings that won't include the U.S. (more). The Bush administration won't sign onto the Kyoto Protocol because of fears that mandatory emissions cutbacks could have a negative effect on the U.S. economy.

While I support the Kyoto Protocol, I think Bush does have a point about the economy, but I think he has an even greater point when he demands that Kyoto must include India and China. Nonetheless, in the midst of ever more global warming evidence, I think serious action is required, and Kyoto might be a good step because it gets the U.S. to stop talking about global warming and to start doing something about it.

So, what is Bush's answer to global warming, technology.

While I agree with Bush, I don't agree with his process for bringing forth such technology. The Bush future is the hydrogen economy, which I believe in, but I also believe we can't wait for it. We must start taking action NOW.

Ironically, one of the main contributors to global warming is also one of the main contributors to terrorism - oil dependency. Yet, even after 9/11, after Iraq, after Katrina, the U.S. is still taking little action to really change America's dependency on oil.

If Bush believes in technology, then why doesn't he seek oil independence the same way Kennedy sought the moon in the '60s?

The technology just isn't there yet?

Baloney!!!!!

While many criticize hybrid cars for their costs and for their failure to meet EPA fuel efficiency ratings, the truth is, if every American drove a Toyota Prius hybrid today, we would end foreign oil dependency today.

But the best part of hybrid cars isn't what they can do today, but what they can do tomorrow if we invest. Experimental hybrid cars demonstrate that the technology to drastically reduce America's oil consumption exists right now, and it really isn't that expensive. In fact it is incredibly less expensive and incredibly more feasible than hydrogen vehicles.

Is it more expensive than conventional vehicles, yes, and that is why the government needs to get involved. Still how expensive is the war on terror, or the costs of pollution and global warming?

Recently, Bill Ford lobbied the government to provide more tax incentives to help Detroit reduce foreign oil dependency and to regain its sense of automotive innovation.

The government has said it isn't interested.

Isn't this exactly what Bush was talking about when it comes to better alternatives to Kyoto? But it isn't just Kyoto, its the war on terrorism as well.

"I'm involved in this because most of the world's oil reserves are owned by countries that finance people that want to kill us, that finance radical Islam," Anne Korin, co-director of the Washington, D.C.-based Institute for the Analysis of Global Security.

While Mrs. Korin doesn't believe in global warming, she is joining with global warming activists and using the movie Syriana to bring attention to the dangers of America's oil dependence (more).

Yet, GM is set to roll out model after model of gas-guzzling SUVs and neither Ford nor GM seem to know how to be profitable in a fuel efficient world.

What better opportunity for the government to get involved? This isn't about interfering with free markets, it's about protecting the people from the proven dangers of terrorism, while also protecting the environment and the 'possible' dangers of global warming. If global warming isn't a national security issue, terrorism certainly is.

And, speaking of the economy, if America is the fuel efficient, greenhouse reducing technology leader of the world, what could be better for the economy?

Sick of narrow-minded hybrid car critics

I was reading some AutoWeek forum entries this morning about hybrid cars when I realized that most hybrid critics are not only narrow-minded, but they have a complete lack of vision.

How does the quote go, "There is only one constant in the universe, change." I guess the Buddhists call it impermanence, or the idea that in 100 years, everyone that exists today will be gone, yet the world will go on, it will just be different because change is constant.

If hybrid critics were leading the world for the last 100 years, the world would still be riding horse and buggy. Fortunately, change is inevitable.

But back to the point. The two main criticisms of hybrids are 1.) They aren't as fuel efficient as the EPA rates them, and 2.) They don't save money.

It is true that hybrid vehicles aren't as efficient as the EPA rates them. All vehicles aren't as efficient as the EPA rates them. So what's the point?

Additionally, individual driving habits have a HUGE affect on fuel efficiency - in both hybrids and conventional vehicles. Even a standard Toyota Highlander can achieve better than average fuel efficiency by adjusting driving habits. Nonetheless, the Highlander hybrid or Escape hybrid can achieve much larger increases in fuel efficiency by adjusting driving habits compared to their conventional versions.

Shouldn't hybrids just be more fuel efficient?

Well, they are. For the average driver, hybrid technology will achieve better fuel efficiency than a standard vehicle, especially in city driving. And if you adjust your driving habits, you can significantly increase a hybrid's fuel efficiency performance.

Since most drivers of hybrids are concerned with saving fuel, hybrid technology offers an excellent tool for them to meet their goals.

Testers from AutoWeek, etc., aren't concerned with the fuel efficiency capabilities of hybrids, they are concerned with proving that hybrids don't achieve EPA predictions.

If you don't care about fuel efficiency, well, then a hybrid isn't for you. If you aren't going to use a tool correctly, then it probably is best not to use it. If you want to put a screw in the wall, a hammer can do the job, but it won't do it as well as a screwdriver because the screwdriver is a better tool for the job.

For those drivers seeking to achieve the greatest fuel efficiency, many hybrid vehicles are by far the best tools available, but you still have to use the tool correctly to achieve maximum performance.

Why is that so hard for critics to get? Not everyone has to stroke their ego by driving the biggest or the fastest vehicle.

Additionally, why are critics so concerned with hybrid performance anyway? If they are so concerned with fuel efficiency, why are they worried that a Prius might achieve 45 mpg, rather than 60 mpg? Shouldn't they be more concerned with why a Dodge Durango is only getting 10 mpg instead of 14 mpg? I mean, lets get real.

Regarding the costs of hybrid technology, critics have a point, but so what?

People pay more for the right gas-guzzle obscene amounts of foreign oil but somehow that's cost effective in the eyes of these critics - that's worth the extra money?

Yet, choosing to spend extra money to help reduce foreign oil dependency and to help save the environment isn't justified. Please!

Well, America better wake up. Global warming is real - whether it is caused by man or by nature - and the majority of the world is beginning to take this threat quite seriously. Well, except for America, and the world is becoming much angrier with America for this position. We can continue to pretend like the opinions of the rest of the world don't matter in our ever-more-interconnected world, but we'll do so at our peril, but I digress.

Ultimately, many hybrid owners can recover the costs of their vehicle with intelligent driving. And if not, how do you put a cost on clean air and a cleaner environment?

If you don't care about clean air and a healthy environment, then quite frankly, you are the problem, not the driver of a hybrid car. Any help is still help and changing direction always requires leaders.

Still, many hybrid vehicle drivers aren't just buying a hybrid to save money, or just to reduce foreign oil dependency, or just to clean the environment. Many are making an investment in the future.

While many hybrid vehicle drivers could drive any vehicle they want, they choose to buy a hybrid to help fund the development of new, cheaper generations of hybrids.

Already, experimental hybrid vehicles demonstrate that the potential of hybrid technology is barely being tapped. Plug-in Prius hybrids can easily achieve more than 80 mpg, the Enigma diesel hybrid achieves 80 mpg, yet can go from 0 to 60 in 4.3 seconds, and other experimental hybrids have achieved more than 100 - even 200 - miles per gallon.

Today's hybrid buyers are helping to make tomorrow's hybrid technology more fuel efficient, more powerful, and cheaper.

Perhaps another technology will come along and hybrid technology won't be needed. Or, perhaps it will be hybrid technology that finally makes fuel cell vehicles realistic. Rather than waiting and continuing to gas-guzzle, however, hybrid buyers are taking action because they believe a better tomorrow starts today.

Apparently, hybrid critics would rather just keep talking and hammering screws into the wall as they wait for tomorrow.

A major American failure: The hybrid vehicle

I was reading the article The Hot Hybrids published by E: The Environmental Magazine that was reposted by MotorTrend.

The article opens, "With $1 billion in taxpayer money poured into the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles in the 1990s, Detroit's Big Three developed a trio of hybrid vehicles (with both gasoline and electric drivetrains for maximum fuel economy). The resulting prototypes were shown off at auto shows, but the domestic automakers were steadfast in their refusal to actually produce these consumersubsidized eco-cars."

Always good to see tax-payer dollars hard at work! So, it took a billion tax payer dollars for Detroit to decide there was, "No market for them," and they were, "too expensive to build"? That's just great!

Well, a decade later, U.S. monthly Toyota Prius sales can surpass Audi, Volvo or Saab monthly sales, and the sales potential of the Prius still hasn't fully been tapped. Currently, supply simply cannot keep up with demand.

So what, the critics of hybrid cars say, it's just all the treehuggers and that market will soon run dry. It's just marketing hype they claim.

Fine, maybe it is hype, but couldn't GM use a little marketing hype?

The DetroitNews published an article this weekend called Black October: How one month changed the course of the auto industry. "It was the pivotal event in the month that may be remembered as the industry's Black October, when the vulnerabilities of Detroit's automakers were laid bare in dramatic fashion."

The American auto industry is in serious trouble and that trouble will resonate - has resonated - throughout the American economy, and the worst is yet to come.

Hybrid cars might not be the dominant vehicle of the future; however, in light of the connection between terrorism and foreign oil, global warming, hurricanes, and high gas prices, average Americans have become interested in hybrids. This interest takes them to Toyota and Honda dealerships because consumers are starting to feel like maybe they do have a choice. Maybe there is a difference.

Ultimately, hybrid technology might be expensive, but it is expensive because it requires some of the most advanced automotive technology - it demands invention and innovation. Since the potential of technology, quite simply, has few limits - technology can and will advance.

Hybrid cars utilize this kind of technology that can and will advance. Sure diesel, or biodiesel might compare fairly well with hybrids today, but hybrids are only an emerging technology. Experimental hybrids prove that the potential of hybrid vehicles has barely been tapped. Additionally, hybrid technology can also utilize the advancements made in diesel, biodiesel, hydrogen, or even fuel cells - in addition to hybrid advancements.

In today's world the potential of technology must be chased, and it must be chased ALL the time. For too long the American auto industry has succeeded at maintaining the status quo, rather than driving the technology of the future.

Some might say GM is a fuel cell leader - they are pushing the future, the real future. Maybe, but GM has been promoting this fuel cell future since the Nixon administration. When are real results required? The future cannot always be an excuse for doing nothing today.

When it comes to technology there is always a better, more efficient way to do things. If always finding a better way to do things isn't driving the core of a business, then that business might use technology, but it isn't a technological leader.

For too long, Detroit has used technology to maintain the status quo, not to innovate automaking. The success of the Toyota Prius has changed everything, and the bar has been raised. There is no status quo, there is only innovation.

GM's Bob Lutz once said that GM could have developed a competitor to the Prius by simply diverting a fraction of ONE year's marketing budget to such development. Actually, GM should have just used it's share of the billion dollars of tax payer money with which it was paid to do this.

If hybrids are just hype, why will EVERY major automaker be offering a selection of hybrids within just the next few years? That's a pretty expensive exercise in futility if they are just chasing hype.

Inevitably, hybrids demonstrate the complete failure of the American auto industry. Let's hope they can change, they OWE it to us.

Ford hybrid taxis; GM's Chinese hybrids: Hype or the winds of change?

Yesterday, Ford CEO Bill Ford introduced a mini-fleet of hybrid taxis that will serve New York City. Considering that the fleet will only consist of 6 Escape hybrids, it is a bit interesting that Mr. Ford chose to make the presentation.

Or is it?

With Ford's hybrid head resigning just weeks ago, there was much speculation about the future of Ford hybrids, but now Mr. Ford appears to be taking the lead on hybrids. While fuel cells might be the distant future, hybrid cars represent the near future and they are proof that the auto industry CAN and MUST change.

Isn't it ironic that on the same day that New York announced that it will begin forcing automakers to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, joining California, Mr. Ford was in New York promoting his company's hybrids?

Still, the drive to hybrid technology isn't just being driven by treehuggers from both coasts.

GM is now banging the hybrid drum in China, joining at least 3 other automakers that will soon begin developing and producing hybrid vehicles in that country.

Many auto analysts have long speculated that China will be the key market for major automakers as we head into the future. And according to a recent AutoWeek article, "The Chinese government is keen to develop more fuel-efficient engines to curb its growing appetite for imported oil and reduce pollution. An automotive policy released last year suggests preferential treatment for developers of fuel-efficient technologies."

Hmmm, does "preferential treatment" have anything to do with GM's new hybrid focus?

Global forces, including global warming, terrorism, hurricanes, global petroleum demand, and consumer interests are requiring - even DEMANDING - that automakers change. The hybrid battleground is no longer just about hype, it's about business survival. With China entering the fray, the prospect of much cheaper hybrid parts becomes not just a possibility, but an obvious reality.

Ultimately, a technological revolution is hitting the world's auto industry and it isn't being driven only by speed and horsepower, but also by fuel efficiency and environmental impact. Experimental hybrids demonstrate that hybrid technology has significantly more potential than is currently being exhibited in the Prius, the Highlander hybrid, or the Civic hybrid. Huge, monumental gains are yet to be made in this emerging automotive technology.

While fuel cell vehicles might be the inevitable future, that future might not be a reality for decades. Hybrids demonstrate significant, dramatic change can be accomplished now, without fuel cells, without hydrogen. Nonetheless, today's hybrids could quite easily become tomorrow's fuel cell hybrids, as both Ford and Toyota are currently displaying (more).

The hybrids ARE coming, and they are going to come in a big way during the next decade. In 5 years, J.D. Power's prediction of hybrids achieving just 5% of the market will seem like the silliest analysis ever made by an automotive expert.

Hybrid hype is over and the winds of change are blowing. The real battle is just beginning.

Why did you, or why would you, buy a hybrid vehicle?

Did you buy a hybrid? Are you thinking about buying a hybrid? Why?

Did you buy a hybrid solely to save money on gasoline? In reality, the only hybrid that might save you money is the Toyota Prius, but only if you live in a city.

Did you buy a hybrid for carpool lane privileges, or perhaps your city offers free parking?

Maybe you bought a Ford Escape hybrid or a Toyota Highlander hybrid because you want an SUV, but you want the industry to focus on fuel efficient technologies.

There are many reasons to buy hybrid cars, and for many buying hybrids is about far more than gasoline costs or a fight against global warming, it is a revolution against the status quo.

What does buying a hybrid vehicle mean to you?

Do creationists hate hybrid cars?

I make this post with a little tongue-in-cheek. Nonetheless, I read an interesting article the other day called, Is US becoming hostile to science? Ultimately, the article focuses on creationism versus evolution and it asserts that a significant percentage of Americans don't believe in evolution, nor the big bang, and many have become quite hostile towards science.

Similarly, an interesting video on CNN Video titled, America's Negative Numbers, notes that the U.S. has dropped to 28th in math compared to other countries and 22nd in science.

Is it any wonder China and Russia are sending men into space as America watches?

While I don't want to get into the debate between creationism and evolution, I have to admit that I believe in the power of science, but I also believe in god. To me science is simply the reproducible understanding of nature, and reviewing just the last 100 years it is hard to argue against what science has accomplished.

Some creationists that I know not only dismiss evolution, but also global warming and the dangers of oil dependency. Since hybrid cars are utilized by many as a solution to both global warming and oil dependency, then hybrids are equally dismissed as unnecessary.

Many bright bloggers and writers might argue that the dismissal of hybrids isn't due to a dislike of science, but is about simple facts. They argue that clean diesel or bio-diesel is a more affordable solution.

While I agree that both clean diesel and bio-diesel are significantly better options than our current path, I do not agree that either, by themselves, go far enough nor match the potential of hybrid technology. Additionally, the hybrid powertrain can accommodate both clean diesel and bio-diesel engines. Moreover, experimental hybrid technology demonstrates that even conventional vehicles can be converted into hybrids that can achieve well over 100 mpg. Consequently, it becomes obvious that the potential of hybrids has barely been tapped.

Neither bio-diesel nor clean diesel have demonstrated anywhere near such potential. Thus, while bio-diesel and clean diesel are important technologies, hybrid bio-diesels and clean diesel hybrids are even far more important technologies.

Is it a realization gap, rather than religion?

Is the problem that science and technology, much like evolution, isn't always visible via huge steps, but rather small incremental steps? For example, I have been using laptops for more than 10 years. Year after year, the performance of memory, speed, and battery power increases. From year to year the gains don't seem terribly significant, but comparing today's laptops to the laptops of 10 years ago, demonstrates that we've made amazing strides.

In my opinion, especially based on available, experimental technology, hybrids offer that same kind of potential, at a cost that is significantly less than fuel cells. That doesn't mean fuel cells won't replace hybrids, it just means that hybrid technology is important enough for investment until the many obstacles surrounding fuel cell vehicles can be resolved. In actuality, it might just be hybrid technology that resolves many fuel cell problems.

Yet, if America neither embraces nor believes in science and technology, what is the future for hybrids, for fuel cells, and for America?

The American auto industry might be an example of the path that America is taking. Decades of materialistically driven engineering and marketing have left GM on the verge of bankruptcy, as Ford continually becomes less and less significant. Appearance and useless power, not technological innovation, have been the drivers of the American automarket.

Likewise, if you work in technology, then you know of the void that exists in America when it comes to filling technical jobs - we have to import our programmers, engineers, and scientists. In America too much attention has been put on law and entertainment. We'd rather sue, act or be a professional athlete, rather than a scientist, engineer, or astronaut.

This has to change. As the population of the world booms in the next hundred years only pandemics or science can keep us moving forward. The world's demand for resources is growing so rapidly that only the death of billions and billions of us will allow us to move forward, or we can use science.

Somehow, America and the world must resolve our religious and scientific differences. Both god and science can co-exist. Our religious beliefs and values shouldn't hold science back, rather they should be used to ensure that we use science to benefit humankind, rather than to just control and profit from humankind.

Still, America's scientific problems aren't just about religion, as there are plenty of godless Americans that do not value science.

Ultimately, however, I believe that it is the religious Americans that will be the difference. If god is the ultimate creator, than science is nothing but an expression of god, an expression that should be embraced for good, not denied out of fear.

In recent years I've noticed a number of bumper stickers on the backs of luxury vehicles and SUVs that say, "Jesus was a liberal." While that might be true, Jesus would today drive neither a luxury vehicle, nor a gas-guzzler, Jesus would drive a hybrid.

Hybrid driving DiCaprio takes on global warming

Yesterday, LEONARDO DiCAPRIO told an Oprah Winfrey audience that "Global warming is not only the number one environmental issue that we're facing today, but one of the most important issues facing all of humanity." (more)

DiCaprio, who has bought several hybrid vehicles, such as the Toyota Prius, is working with Dr. Michael Oppenheimer, Princeton University professor, to promote a new documentary called Global Warming.

Unfortunately, while I applaud Mr. DiCaprio, it seems that much of Middle America just doesn't want to hear this message coming from Hollywood. Most Americans are willing to acknowledge the harm that pollution is causing, and I think even a majority of Americans are even willing to entertain the idea of global warming. Yet, many Americans just don't trust the voices coming from Hollywood.

And who can blame them? When the likes of Ben Affleck make strong political statements, but don't vote, how can they be taken seriously? Nonetheless, I wish Leo well. Regardless of whether global warming is real or not, shouldn't reducing pollution ALWAYS be a goal?

Still, I wish Leo would do more than buy a few hybrid cars and put together a documentary. When push comes to shove, Hollywood has money, actors have money. What does the average American have but a lot of bills?

Start a solar company or an experimental hybrid car company. Lead a revolution. Don't play Howard Hughes, be like Howard Hughes.

That's a lot to ask of anyone, but if Hollywood really wants people to listen, it's going to take a lot more than a documentary. It's going to take a lot more than songs like American idiot.

Still, why shouldn't big energy help with global warming? When Exxon Mobil can profit $10 billion in one quarter, while Royal Dutch Shell profits $9 billion in the same quarter - isn't it time for some corporate responsibility? (NyTimes)

Watch the documentary Global Warming

Related Posts

Hollywood's so-called obsession with the Prius

The future of hybrid vehicles

I was recently interviewed for an article regarding hybrid cars and the question posed to me was, "Will the hybrid powertrain be the dominant powertrain by 2012?"

While I said that it would not, I noted that analysts currently predicting total hybrid sales achieving just 5% of the market by 2012, were just as wrong in that prediction as they were when they predicted the complete failure of the Toyota Prius.

Just today the article, Forget hybrids, America; diesels will provide economy, performance argues that America should focus on diesel, not hybrids, especially because Ford is a leading player.

So now diesel is the answer to America's oil problems? Please!

According to Ken Miller, an oil industry analyst with Purvin & Gertz in Houston, "New environmental rules for diesel will go into effect on Jan. 1 that are expected to add a few more cents per gallon to the cost of diesel. The day when diesel was cheaper than gasoline is probably over." (AutoWeek) Yet, diesel is the answer?

Others might say that bio-diesel can make diesel vehicles cheaper to run, but I doubt this to be true if a significant percentage of Americans begin to drive bio-diesel. Where will the fuel come from? What if severe weather causes drought or storm that destroys fuel crops? Bio-diesel can absolutely help end foreign oil dependency, but it cannot do it alone.

I say build flex-fuel hybrids because doing so could save America as much as a trillion dollars (more).

There was a time when technology was the strength of America, yet today, the strength of America seems controlled by whether oil is cheap or not. Additionally, many automotive writers, probably the ones who refused to use a computer for as long as possible, continue to wear blinders.

How many more conflicts in the Middle East, how much more evidence of pollution and global warming, how much more evidence that America is continually losing its technological stronghold, will it take before America embraces the future - a future that will be dominated by technology, not cheap oil?

America has for too long chosen the easy path, a path that has been enforced by military power and executed with a complete disregard for the environment. Suddenly, however, the easy path is neither so easy, nor cost-effective.

While hybrid cars might not dominate the future, hybrid technology is just an emerging technology that can lead to 100 mpg fuel efficiency within 10 years if automakers create bio-diesel hybrids, plug-in hybrids, or even solar-powered plug-in hybrids - while also helping hydrogen, electric, and fuel cell vehicle development.

Can diesel achieve that in a decade?

The future of the world, especially the automotive world, will not be driven by cheap oil, but by technology and that technological advancement needs to begin now. Sure America can wait, but the longer it waits, the more technologically obsolete America will become.

Besides, isn't it time America invests in America, rather than in filthy rich oil companies?

The pathetic irony of hybrids, fuel economy, and the automotive press

Hybrid critics make me laugh. Hybrid cars don't achieve EPA fuel efficiency numbers and they don't save money these critics keep harping.

Sure, according to Consumer Reports, hybrid cars often do not achieve the EPA's fuel economy estimates. Of course, the Consumer Report's study also shows that of the 6 hybrids available, 3 of them are the MOST FUEL EFFICIENT VEHICLES you can buy. More ironically, however, these critics glance over the fact that most vehicles miss their EPA estimates, and that in city driving, conventional vehicles miss their EPA estimates miserably.

So let's be clear about this. The Toyota Prius only achieves a pathetic 45 mpg in the city, the Jeep Liberty Diesel achieves a whopping 11 mpg, the Chrysler 300C achieves 17, and a number of Dodges achieve a stellar 8 mpg. Ohhh, those crappy hybrids.

Good thing hybrids only account for around 1 percent of U.S. auto sales otherwise America would be in real trouble! PHEW!

"Hybrids suck, man," these critics seem to say, "they don't achieve EPA estimates, so it's OK if I only achieve 8 mpg. The Prius only achieves 45 mpg, not 60! Thats the real problem!"

What's going on here? If foreign oil dependency is a problem, if oil consumption is a problem, shouldn't our attention be on the source of the problem? Why is the President asking Americans to conserve, as GM increases output of its most gas-guzzling vehicles?

Now I get it, cause we don't want more hyped hybrids on the road - they're dangerous! I mean, according to a recent study, if all vehicles achieved 45 mpg, not only could America end foreign oil dependency, but it could save as much as a trillion dollars. That would be blasphemous. Americans aren't supposed to save money, our duty in life is to spend money, dammit!

Fortunately, 9 out of 10 of the 'best' offenders, according to the CR study, were conventional vehicles. Almost every conventional vehicle is achieving less than 20 mpg when driven in the city, stuck at street lights and stop signs, caught in rushhour, etc. In fact, many conventional vehicles are only achieving around 10 mpg in these conditions. Now that's American, baby!

So, is it the fact that hybrids only achieve 45 mpg, instead of 60 mpg, that is increasing foreign oil dependency every year, or is it the fact the millions of conventional vehicles are only achieving 10 mpg? Damn those hybrids.

I wonder how much advertising money is spent on hybrid vehicles versus conventional vehicles? Hmm. Well, GM spends billions on advertising every year and they don't offer any hybrids - NO the current Silverado DOESN't COUNT - so I'd say hybrids are already at a huge disadvantage.

OOPs, I didn't just criticize GM. I better watch it, they might pull all their ads from my site like they did to the LATimes.

In reality, promoting hybrids is worth millions in advertising dollars, while promoting 8 mpg gas-guzzlers is worth billions, but I'm sure there isn't any connection. Just as there isn't any connection between 8 mpg and foreign oil dependency. Just as there isn't any connection between automobile pollution and lung cancer, and asthma, and allergies, and smog-influenced skin cancer, and global warming.

Hybrids are hype and everyone should drive a Hummer because oil dependency is a god-given, perfectly harmless action. Those that disagree are part of the oppressive, supremely powerful tree-hugging conspiracy.

If ending foreign oil dependency could save America a trillion dollars, how much does 8 mpg, or even 20 mpg, really cost America? Since there are billions of reasons not to ask that question, you can be sure that criticisms of hybrids will continue, but that question won't get asked.

Of course, what's a trillion dollars? Just add it to the deficit and let someone else deal with it in a decade or two. Now that's American! God bless us!

Hybrid cars are for wimps!

Do you care about clean air? Are you worried about your child's asthma? Wimp!

Do you care about global warming? Wimp!

Do you worry about foreign oil dependency? Wimp!

Do you like hybrid cars? Wimp!

If you said yes to any of the above, then you aren't SUV material.

"We haven't turned into wimps overnight," AutoPacific's George Peterson tells Newsweek in the October 10 issue (on newsstands Monday, October 3). "People still like a tough looking SUV." (more)

A sign of change?

While calling for an increased gasoline tax on CNBC this morning Mike Jackson, AutoNation Chairmen and CEO, noted that fuel efficiency is now more important than cupholders when making vehicle purchasing decisions.

When Americans make fuel efficiency more important than where they put their morning cup of Joe, you know the world is changing!

Is an increased gasoline tax a good way to get Americans to realize the importance of fuel efficiency?

Hybrid hate versus gas-guzzling hate

Earlier this week I commented on a CNN article that called hybrid cars hype, more on this.

Why so many hybrid critics? Let's be real, hybrids account for around 1% of U.S. sales. Don't like 'em, don't buy 'em.

Perhaps you don't buy the foreign oil dependency and terrorism connection. Fine. Perhaps you don't buy the fossil fuel, pollution, and global warming connection. Fine.

Do you buy it when the President of the United States calls on all Americans to conserve gasoline in the wake of two hurricanes that have significantly affected gasoline supply?

If not, go ahead and bury your head back in the sand now.

If you do buy the argument that Katrina and Rita require all Americans to help the Nation by conserving, then what do you think about the fact that GM has decided to wager its future on its most gas-guzzling vehicles, despite the President, despite the gas shortage?

Are American corporations above Americans?

Why are critics focusing on hybrids, instead of gas-guzzling vehicles? Which vehicles have a real impact on America right now? Which vehicles provide the greatest amount of advertising dollars?

Is there a connection?

State's emissions rule will cause a hybrid car explosion

Oregon and Washington are set to adopt California's new vehicle emissions standards - a move that is sure to push hybrid vehicles to the forefront of the automotive world. Since Congress is controlled by rich lobbyists that protect special interests, rather than the people's interests, states are taking action.

"People realize that having more advanced-technology cars on the road will enhance our oil security and begin to address global warming issues," says Rob Sargent of the Boston-based National Association of State Public Interest Research Groups. (more)

Hybrid trucks and other hybrid tidbits

As the fifth tropical storm Emily builds in the Gulf, and BP's new deep oil rig Crazyhorse (Thunderhorse Field) sits listing in the Gulf of Mexico, one cannot begin to underestimate the potential of much higher gasoline prices. And if gasoline prices rise, the technology behind hybrid cars becomes significantly more appealing.

According to a new R. L. Polk & Co. study, 97 percent of consumers have heard of hybrid vehicles and 78 percent would consider buying one; however, cost would still limit the majority from taking such action. (More from Car and Driver)

Obviously higher gas prices can help offset the cost barrier.

Yesterday, Ford released its second hybrid, the Mercury Mariner hybrid, and Toyota continues to suggest that a hybrid truck is soon coming. While Toyota has mentioned this possibility in the past, it indicated yesterday that Toyota seeks to offer the first hybrid truck. Still, Toyota has released few details about a Tundra hybrid.

Nonetheless, even if gas prices make hybrids more desirable, will it matter? Demand is still greater than supply, and the new Mariner hybrid really won't help, since only a few 1000 units are even planned.

Toyota, and the very successful Prius hybrid, combined with the Lexus RX400h, the Highlander hybrid, and the Camry hybrid will still only hit about 500,000 total hybrids next year.

Honda's upgraded hybrids, the Civic and the Accord, will help, but American-made hybrids are the missing ingredient. Foreign oil dependency, terrorism, global oil demand, and global warming - America needs leadership and responsibility from American corporations.

It's furiously ironic that GM often speaks of hybrid costs, while touting fuel cells, which are exorbitantly more costly than hybrid vehicles. Yet, GM is considering a fuel cell agreement with Toyota - a company which is building its fuel cell future on the backbone of the hybrid powertrain?

'American-made' automobiles simply mean nothing if they also mean increased 'terrorist-supporting foreign oil dependency.' It's time for Ford and GM to stop talking about a stronger America and to start building a stronger America today, not tomorrow.

The importance of hybrid technology

Yesterday, President Bush told reporters covering the G8 that the U.S. seeks to utilize technology to help fight not only global warming, but foreign oil dependency as well.

Environmentalists were not impressed. Nonetheless, many environmentalists act like both radical Republicans and Democrats - it's either their extreme view or the highway.

While I would like America, and the world, to suddenly embrace conservation - it just isn't going to happen. The history of the world has been advanced by technological innovation. End of story.

Bush and Detroit have habitually pointed to the 'hydrogen economy' as the ultimate answer. Today's terrorist activities and the current escalating oil crisis demonstrate that the world cannot wait 2 or 3 more decades before achieving a solution.

Hybrid cars, especially the Toyota Prius, prove that the U.S. doesn't have to wait for the hydrogen economy. If everyone drove a Prius, it would drastically change America's foreign oil dependency, as well as pollution emissions.

Nonetheless, just as with conservation, the Prius is not the answer, but hybrid technology does provide a solid solution. It has become quite clear that Americans not only want choice, but they want power and size. The Prius, unfortunately, does not address those preferences.

Still, as Prius hybrid technology has been added to vehicles such as the Lexus RX400h, the Toyota Highlander hybrid, and the Ford Escape hybrid, the potential of hybrid technology begins to emerge.

It's still not enough many critics will argue, and they are right. Fortunately, that is the beauty of hybrid technology. The advances made in hybrid technology from the first generation Prius to the second generation Prius, for example, were simply fantastic. Like the technology behind notebook computers, hybrid vehicles could easily double, triple, even quadruple - not only their fuel efficiency, but their performance - in just the next several years.

This doesn't require a completely new energy infrastructure, nor does it require somehow making $1,000,000 fuel cell vehicles more cost effective.

And it isn't just Toyota. Honda will be releasing an updated hybrid powertrain in both its Civic hybrid and Accord hybrid that could truly challenge the Prius. As other manufacturers begin offering their proprietary hybrid technology, gains could be exponentially made.

The time for talking about the technology of the future is no longer acceptable. American consumers must demand that automakers either act today, or perish tomorrow, and hybrid technology is the first step.

Gas prices, hybrids, and politics

This morning oil prices went higher and should push beyond $60.00 per barrel sometime this week. So what should America do? Well, if you are a California Democrat, such as Fabian Nunez, we should lower gas taxes and raise the sale's tax on everything else (more).

Suddenly, Democrats are starting to sound an awful lot like oil-controlled Republicans. The conservationist, environmentalist, anti-war party wants to increase foreign oil dependency so as not to offend consumers at the pump? Pure hypocrisy.

Unfortunately, it isn't just California Democrats, but many Union-controlled Democrats as well. Case in point, raising fuel economy standards in the U.S. While the majority of Republicans are against raising such standards - surprise, surprise - enough voted for change that Democrats could have made it happen, but they didn't.

Instead, Democrats, such as Nancy Pelosi, ridicule and blame the Republican party for every oil ill, when in reality, the Democratic party has conspired with the Republican party to maintain the status quo. The phrase think globally act locally could well be utilized by Democrats. Rather than blaming Republicans, change the turncoats in the Democratic party and make something happen.

Until then, BOTH sides of the aisle stink.

Obviously, Democrats, just as Republicans, care more about re-election than actually standing for something. The Union edict of Buy American or Eat your Import doesn't apply to America's foreign oil dependency - the main driver of pollution, global warming, terrorism, and two wars in Iraq. Isn't that convenient?

Hybrid cars might not be the perfect solution to foreign-oil dependency, but they are a huge step in the right direction. Unfortunately, selfish and ego-centric Americans appear unwilling to change their driving habits towards smaller vehicles, regardless of the costs. Thus, emerging hybrid technology can help create a bridge between larger vehicles and fuel economy.

The United States is a country that has succeeded via technology, and hybrid technology can help begin solving foreign oil dependency today. Instead, American politicians are going to promote cheaper foreign oil dependency. Brilliant!

The hybrid car stage, America

While hybrid cars are only a small percentage of total U.S. automobile sales, America is still THE market for hybrids. The hybrid leader, Toyota, sold almost 10,000 Prius hybrid cars in May alone, and recently added the Lexus RX400h and the Highlander hybrid to its lineup. Still, getting your hands on a Toyota hybrid isn't easy, and prices often include significant dealer markups.

Supply simply isn't catching up to demand.

To address the problem, Toyota recently announced that it would begin moving some hybrid production to the States. In late 2006, for example, Toyota will begin building 50,000 Camry hybrids per year in Kentucky and plans to add the Prius to U.S. production as well.

The hybrid component supply chain; however, will remain in Japan and this remains the largest obstacle to mass hybrid vehicle production. Currently, Panasonic EV Energy Co, produces all of Toyota's hybrid batteries, but according to AutoWeek, Toyota wants to move some of this supply chain to the U.S.

"Obtaining the necessary components will be the real restriction in how many hybrid vehicles Toyota manufacturers here," says Jim Press, COO of Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. Inc.

Other hybrids, such as the Nissan Altima hybrid, which will be built in Tennessee and the Ford Escape hybrid, as well as the Mercury Mariner hybrid, Toyota hopes, will help create new hybrid component manufacturer's in the U.S. Additionally, in late 2007 through 2008, GM and Chrysler will also begin building hybrids in the U.S., and both Ford and Toyota will be adding new models to their hybrid lineups.

All of this hybrid activity should eventually force Japanese battery companies to move some production facilities to the U.S., as well as create a new market for emerging companies and divisions. Until this happens; however, the supply of hybrids is almost certain to continue to trail demand.

While it is a bit disappointing that it will take some time for the hybrid market to truly flourish, this is great news for America. Hybrid technology isn't just going to be an interim technology or bridge to fuel cell vehicles, hybrid technology is going to become fuel cell technology.

In July, Toyota will begin leasing its first fuel cell hybrid vehicle which has "become the first vehicle in Japan to acquire vehicle type certification under the Road Vehicles Act, as amended and enacted on March 31, by Japan's Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (MLIT)," according to just-auto.com.

Just as with hybrids, America will be THE market for the majority of the first generations of mass produced, commercial fuel cell vehicles. Thus, America must become home to the production of not only fuel cell vehicles, but the technology behind fuel cell vehicles, and that begins with hybrids.

So buy a hybrid vehicle. Not only are you helping fight foreign oil dependency, pollution, and global warming today, but you are helping lay the foundation for a revolution in automotive technology to be built in America.

The reality of fuel cells drives hybrid vehicles

There is an interesting AutomotiveNews article, Honda continues work on cold start, range issues with its fuel-cell vehicles, that demonstrates the great importance of hybrid cars.

"If all goes well, Honda hopes to sell 50,000 fuel cell vehicles a year in the United States by 2020. Toyota wants to sell 12,000 fuel cell vehicles annually in the United States in the early 2010s," the article states.

Why so few vehicles?

One of the biggest problems, aside from extreme cost, is that fuel cell vehicles cannot operate in cold weather. While significant gains are being made, the necessary gains are at least a decade or two away.

Quite simply, fuel cell vehicles will not take over the automotive market for at least two decades. Can America continue its SUV love affair amidst foreign oil dependency and global warming for another two decades?

Not with current technology.

Imagine a Toyota Prius that is significantly more powerful and twice as efficient as today's model. Such a vehicle is possible within a decade or less, and that technology will also be available for SUVs, such as the Ford Escape hybrid, or the Toyota Highlander hybrid.

Hybrid technology is simply the best automotive investment any American can make if you don't believe in supporting foreign oil dependency, high gas prices, or destroying the environment.

Demand nothing less than hybrid vehicle efficiency.

Hybrid cars and marijuana!

O.K. there really isn't a direct connection between marijuana and hybrid cars.

Still, yesterday, I wrote an entry Marijuana, Hemp, and Hypocrisy discussing a perspective of the Supreme Court ruling affirming federal jurisdiction over state's rights and marijuana.

Essentially, I argued that the issue should have never come before the Supreme Court - this is an issue for Congress and I discuss the hypocrisy behind government campaigns, such as Hemp for Victory and the continued law against growing hemp in America. Basically, since hemp is almost like marijuana - even thought it can't get you 'high' - it still has to be illegal because it is related to marijuana.

Yet, I find myself amused about stories of Henry Ford growing fields of Hemp to fuel his automobiles. And how Dupont and Mellon, Treasury Secretary of the U.S., and petroleum supporter and investor, conspired against hemp - in the guise of marijuana - to eliminate not only a competitor of the petroleum industry, but cotton, tobacco, and almost every other important industry of the day.

Then there are stories of how tire, petroleum, and auto industries bought out the original Los Angeles light-rail system, dismantled it and created freeway sprawl as well as today's most important automotive market - certainly no motive-driven collusion.

Ultimately, the story claims that Ford was against petroleum because it was so dirty - even then, in the early 1900's, oil was dirty and polluting. Ford was interested in biodiesel, hemp-biodiesel, but the robber barons were interested in petroleum.

And where has petroleum taken us?

The damage that foreign oil dependency has caused to America is beyond measure - SMOG, 911, and multiple wars in Iraq are nothing compared to the coming environmental costs.

Yet, Ford sells Ford Explorers and receives a tax advantage from the government because those Explorers 'could' fill up with ethanol gasoline, but don't. Thus, Ford receives a tax credit for fuel efficiency, even though it isn't. Good to see the government hard at work!

American automakers have become incapable of competing in the fuel efficient vehicle segment, so the government creates loopholes and tax incentives for America automakers to increase America's foreign oil dependency. Someday, they've said for decades, fuel cells will take care of the all the world's problems.

Thus, Congress - Democrats and Republicans alike - continue to ignore the importance of fuel efficiency to reduce foreign oil dependence, to help reduce funding for terrorism against the U.S., to help American auto companies become more competitive, and to help the damned environment.

If you don't believe in pollution, stop using your plumbing and just crap in the backyard for a few months and then tell me there is no such thing as pollution or global warming. What is wrong with people?

Those whom argue against global warming constantly try to say the science is not 100%. While that is true, the science? What kind of idiot can say pollution isn't a problem based on science, when the essence of science is based on the principle that for every action is an equal and opposite reaction?

Efficiency is the essence of natural science and fuel efficiency should be a national priority for America, but it isn't. Instead, the U.S. Congress rewards Ford for building gas-guzzling SUVs. Unfortunately, it is obvious that U.S. politicians and corporations represent money, not people.

Demand nothing less than hybrid vehicle efficiency and register to vote! The only thing that can change America, is the people.

Schwarzenegger paves way to hybrid cars?

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger told a United Nations conference that the threat from global warming was real, and that California was going to lead the fight.

"I say the debate is over. We know the science, we see the threat and we know the time for action is now," he said. (AP via Yahoo)

While Schwarzenegger did not announce many specific new policies, he did state that he would move ahead with greenhouse gas emissions standards for automobiles starting in 2009, despite the Bush administration's siding with automakers against California's standards.

If automakers lose the fight in California, the road to hybrid cars will be clearly paved. The battle against foreign oil dependency has moved from the federal government to the state government of California and the Gov. is in a position to accomplish what the federal government has been unable to accomplish for decades - responsible fuel efficiency.

While that is not the goal of the California legislation, it will inevitably have that effect.

Governor Schwarzenegger has a tremendous opportunity to lead America regarding important issues such as global warming and energy independence, perhaps, even more than the President. Let's hope he takes advantage.

If he terminates his Hummer soon, I might become a true believer.

Global warming evidence continues to build

Scientists are using new data to create another "smoking gun" of evidence that global warming is being caused by an "out-of-balance energy exchange". If the evidence is correct, it indicates that things could "spin out of control" if serious action isn't taken soon. (AP via Yahoo)

Demand nothing less than hybrid car efficiency.

America's Fight: Why Detroit must embrace hybrids

Detroit's problems are simple, American multi-national corporations.

In America, as soon as a President or Senator is elected, the next election becomes their top priority. America is only focused on right now, or the next 2 to 4 years. Yet, the decisions made today have impact far beyond just the next couple of years, when our decisions become someone else's responsibility.

Moreover, American multi-national corporations are also typically focused on 'right now' politics, as well as 'right now' profit for shareholders. Thus, responsibility is determined only by 'right now' profitability.

This is bigger than Detroit. This is about the essence of America, which is why the Senate - at the President's request - must add tax credits for hybrid cars and other clean energy technologies.

Right now is the time for change, and hybrids vehicles, including diesel-electric, plug-in, and hydrogen-electric vehicles, prove hybrids have barely tapped their potential.

This isn't Detroit's fight and they are not in it alone. Detroit, Congress, and every President since Jimmy Carter, has failed America by not taking up this fight decades ago.

This is America's fight, and many of us are demanding action RIGHT NOW. Join the hybrid revolution.

Top 5 Reasons to Demand Action Today!

1.) The Pentagon has labeled global warming one of the greatest threats to the U.S.
2.) Multiple CIA directors have labled foreign-oil dependency a serious national security threat and have actively lobbied President Bush to take action
3.) Two Wars In Iraq
4.) Profits from foreign-oil have helped finance terrorism against the U.S.
5.) Placing the strength of the American economy in the hands of the Middle East is simply silly in today's world

Gas prices, the Energy Bill, and Congress

Since the Energy Bill passed the House of Representatives, I have scanned the media for a positive assessment of the Energy Bill.

I have been unable to find one.

A majority of Americans, ones that live near the poverty line - the ones you never hear about on the O.C. or on reruns of Beverly Hills 90210 - are coming up shorter and shorter each month because of gas prices. But, who cares about a bunch of hillbilly, disenfranchised Americans that don't vote anyway?

Definitely not Congress. Gas prices are skyrocketing and the blame falls on both Democrats and Republicans alike. The last President to really push fuel efficiency was Jimmy Carter, according to USAToday.

While it seems obvious that Republicans have oil-lined pockets, Democrats are not nearly as innocent as outspoken Nancy Pelosi-(D)California, would have us believe. Instead of blaming Republicans, perhaps she should start by questioning the UAW-controlled-Democrats that are just as complicit in protecting the status quo of the automotive industry.

Even China is raising fuel efficiency standards. Not because scientific evidence suggests a global warming connection, but because pollution is ALREADY affecting their lives and China isn't very interested in America's decades old, inefficient automotive technology.

Save that for the Americans too stupid to value substance over image.

But I don't blame those Americans because we haven't had much choice, thanks to Congress. Experts, including those from the government, tell us this is an issue of National Security, yet neither corporate America, nor Congress, is taking responsible action.

Instead, billions of tax-payer dollars are being given to rich-in-profit energy corporations to 'save' America from the problems the same corporations created.

So, when you are at the pump this summer, pumping $3.00 gallons of gasoline into your vehicle, remember to thank your well-paid Congress-person.

And, if you are interested in buying a new car, don't forget hybrid cars! Send a message to the automotive industry that you want change.

Hybrid vehicles versus hydrogen vehicles

What is the future of the automobile?

Gas and energy prices are rising higher. Evidence of global warming continues to escalate, painting a very ugly picture of the future, and auto executives throughout the world realize serious change will ultimately be required.

Advanced gasoline engines, clean diesel engines, hybrid powertrains, hydrogen engines and fuel cells have all been promoted as the future of the automobile. Ultimately, however, the discussion always seems to end up as hybrid vehicles versus hydrogen vehicles. Somehow this discussion pits current hybrid technology versus some future technology. Yet a hybrid powertrain has the ability to incorporate advanced gasoline engines, diesel engines, hydrogen engines, and fuel cells into its powertrain.

More important, Toyota sees its current hybrid powertrain as about 75% of the required technology for its fuel cell-powered cars. Thus, the adaptability of hybrid cars creates enormous potential. For example, hybrid battery packs, like laptop computer batteries, will increase their efficiency, and as this happens, hybrids will become even more fuel efficient.

While other technologies might emerge that are as good, or better than hybrids, those that continue to summarily dismiss hybrids have dismissed objective thinking. Dismissing hybrids is dismissing Toyota.

With billions in profit to spend, dismissing Toyota is just plain silly.

More on hybrid vehicles.

GM stops advertising in LA Times

GM has stopped advertising in the Los Angeles Times because "of dealer concerns over 'factual errors and misrepresentations' in the newspaper's articles and editorials" according to the AP.

Recently, LATimes auto critic Dan Neil called GM "a morass of a business case" and called for the "impeachment" of two executives. Neil also said GM "utterly missed the boat on hybrid gas-electric technology" while speeding up production of SUVs.

I couldn't agree more with Mr. Neil.

Oil prices are only going to go up, as are the dangers and expenses of foreign-oil dependency. Yet, GM has nothing to offer America except a tab for billions of dollars of health care and pension expenses. Oh yeah, and a large fleet of gas-guzzling SUVs.

For decades GM has told America not to worry about foreign-oil dependency, $3.00 gallons of gas, pollution, or global warming because fuel cells were just around the corner to save the world. Well?

Waste of Money?

GM has stated that hybrids have no long term potential, and that is why they didn't develop them. Instead, GM spent much more money marketing gas-guzzlers than Toyota did developing its hybrid powertrain. In essence, GM spent billions telling America that SUVs were about American freedom. Americans need horsepower, not fuel efficiency, screamed GM's slick marketing.

Today, hybrid cars provide both horsepower and fuel efficiency. GM still only provides the same thing they've been providing for decades, gas-guzzling inefficiency.

Nice investment - thanks GM.

Canada's emissions legislation and California

Any step forward is a good step. That's about the only thing that can be said of Canada's new emissions regulations.

A 6% gain is really nothing more than PR for both the Canadian government and the auto industry.

California has created legislation that requires auto makers to cut emissions by 30%. While California gives the industry until 2016 to reach the new levels, Canada's change is required by 2010. Still, even doubling Canada's required reductions in double the time, is still just 12%, not even half of California's legislated requirements.

Will Canada's legislation undermine California?

I don't get Canada's legislation. Granted, I have not followed the story that closely, and while it has been reported that Wall Street was a bit rattled by the news, I see only bark, not any bite, in this deal.

If California's legislation is ultimately upheld against the automaker's lawsuit, Canada's requirements will be pretty much obsolete. If California wins, New York is almost certain to follow. Even just California; however, will require a fundamental shift in auto production that would ultimately affect all of North America.

Hybrid cars already achieve California's requirements for 2016. Vehicles, such as the Toyota Prius and the Honda Accord hybrid prove that we can clean the air cost-effectively.

Even SUVs and luxury vehicles can be part of the mix. The Escape hybrid, Highlander hybrid, and Lexus RX400h prove that the technology exists to fit American driving habits, while significantly polluting less.

Too many scientific studies are raising too many questions about the climate, pollution, and global warming. Technologies such as hybrid cars might cost more today, but their investment in protecting the future will easily pay off down the road.

What level of catastrophe will it take to force auto-makers, and many consumers, into real action? I'm not sure, but I don't really think a 6% improvement is anything.

Demand nothing less than hybrid car fuel efficiency!

Ford to Clear Air on Global Warming

BusinessWeek Online is reporting that Ford "will write a report about global warming, including details on emissions from Ford vehicles and factories" because of shareholders, whom are questioning the company's ability to compete in California and its new emission's regulations. Ford will consult climate experts to assist with the report.

20,000 Escape hybrids and suddenly you are an environmentalist? What a joke. Drastic change is required from Ford, and it could start by ending the lawsuit against California's Clean Air legislation. Then again, why would anyone expect anything but hot air from Ford?

U.S. needs to address global warming - Bush ally

Former Secretary of State James Baker, a close ally of the Bush family, broke ranks with the Bush administration on Thursday and called for the United States to get serious about global warming.

"When you have energy companies like Shell and British Petroleum, both of which are perhaps represented in this room, saying there is a problem with excess carbon dioxide emission, I think we ought to listen," Baker said (Reuters).

Toyota Prius leads way to Oscars

"About 15 celebrities including Gwenyth Paltrow, Natalie Portman, Scarlett Johanson, Leonardo DiCaprio, Robin Williams, Orlando Bloom, Salma Hayek, Charlize Theron, Penelope Cruz, Morgan Freeman, Julie Delpy and Tim Robbins are all pulling up to the red carpet in hybrid cars," at the Oscars according to MotorTrend.

This is the third year Global Green, the American branch of Green Cross International run by Mikhail Gorbachev, asked celebrities to use their status to help the environmental cause. Toyota lent its Prius hybrid for 'green celebrities' to arrive at the Oscars, rather than arriving in a limo.

"With global warming threatening us all, driving a fuel efficient car like a hybrid is something that everybody can do to protect our planet. I am proud to do my part. I personally own and drive a hybrid car. And I love it!" Hayek said.

Thank you Toyota hybrids

Recently, I have grown a bit frustrated with Toyota. Why can't they make more Prius hybrid cars? Why did the Lexus RX400h and the Highlander hybrid have to have their market releases pushed back?

My desire for hybrids to take over the automotive world just isn't rationale at this point in time.

Automotive experts, particularly competitors, are confident that the Prius does not make money, nor do they expect any of Toyota's next hybrids to make money either - at least in 2005. The fact is, it has been terribly expensive for Toyota to accomplish what it has accomplished with hybrids.

Basically, every expert in the world laughed at Toyota's hybrid car endeavors for years, until demand for the 2004 Prius slapped every one of those analysts in the face. And Toyota has had to go it alone, without the help of a vast supply network. So the progress Toyota has made is all the more remarkable, while the lack of progress made by almost every other auto-maker, is all the more disappointing.

Now, places like California, Canada, even the U.S. legislature are demanding that automakers take action. Hybrids have proven that there is another way, not in some fantasy future, but today.

When the CIA and Pentagon describe foreign-oil dependency and global warming as great threats to American security, how long do you wait before contributors to U.S. foreign-oil dependency and global warming are also named co-conspirators against the security of the United States?

Often GM, for example, tries to equate itself with Americana. Not my America, brother. Dumping your waste in my land, polluting my lungs, threatening the environmental stability of the world, while maintaining and supporting an oppressive, robber-barron-like foreign-oil dependency for America is not patriotic, rather the antithesis of patriotism.

America is about freedom and independence, or at least that was the idea, right? Gas-guzzling reduces freedom and independence according to the CIA and the Pentagon.

How dare American corporations risk my freedom and independence for their short term profit. If American auto-corporations represent patriotism, then I say it's time to revolt.

Thanks Toyota.

Honda hybrid buzz?

I love the Honda Accord hybrid. It's just a great automobile, and I've received numerous e-mails from very proud and happy Civic hybrid owners.

Yet, there is little Honda hybrid buzz, and I wonder what Honda's vision of the future is.

The Toyota Prius, Toyota claims, has had a significant effect on Toyota's fuel-cell car development. In fact, the success of Toyota's Hybrid Synergy Drive, driven by Prius development and production, has pushed Toyota to believe that its fuel-cell vehicles will be fuel-cell-electric hybrid vehicles.

Therefore, every hybrid purchase is a significant investment in Toyota's fuel-cell technology, as well as its future as an automotive company.

Honda's hybrid vision has taken a different path. Honda's hybrids are less a step towards fuel cells, except, arguably, the Insight. The Accord and Civic hybrids, it appears, are not as integral a step towards fuel cell development as is the Prius, Lexus RX400h or Highlander hybrids.

Toyota's Ace card is the fact that it has intertwined it hybrid development with its fuel cell development. This makes Toyota's hybrids more of a long term investment, while still solving short-term needs such as reduced pollution and global warming, or reduced foreign-oil dependency.

While I think Honda is still well-positioned for a surge in hybrid interest, the lack of buzz around Honda hybrids compared to Toyota hybrids seems to demonstrate that Toyota is far ahead of the rest of the automotive world and is setting itself up for massive, future marketshare.

No doubt global warming real according to new studies

"The debate over whether or not there is a global warming signal is now over, at least for rational people," said Tim Barnett of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography.

New studies which looked at the oceans, rather than the atmosphere, seem to provide conclusive evidence that humans are affecting the earth's temperature. (Read more)

Are oil profits dirty?

I am watching CNBC right now and a segment on oil just finished.

The price of oil isn't getting any cheaper, because of demand. Demand is only going to get higher. One analyst said oil companies are making more cash than they can possibly spend, so oil companies will keep trying to find more oil.

So why isn't gas cheaper, I wonder? And it's almost certainly not going to get cheaper. In fact, it won't take much to happen in world events to cause prices to go higher.

I'm certain terrorists will never make that connection.

Ultimately, if you are invested in oil you are making good money, but I say that money is dirty. We know it's dirty. Whether you live in Houston and are not allowed to say the words "global warming", or you just think it's been hyped up, there is no argument that oil has caused massive environmental destruction around the world - oil spills, smog, illegal dumping.

While refineries have made oil much cleaner over the years, our dependence upon oil is ridiculous by environmental standards alone.

Yet, according to analysts, one of the biggest factors of the economy moving forward is? You got it, oil. A dip in supply and all bets are off.

The truth is, terrorists could easily damage the economy by reducing the supply of oil.

Even without terrorism, if demand surprises analysts this year again, as it did last year, oil prices are almost certain to spike anyway.

Why should the U.S. continue to remain so susceptible to something we can easily change? Not only can we change it, but in the long run, we can profit from it.

Oh, that's right. Because America's investor class has money in oil.

The Kyoto protocol.

Phooey. Not that I'm against it, but reducing America's automotive demand for oil by 30 or 40 percent, nationwide, is a bigger step, one that could be accomplished in just a decade with current technology, particularly hybrid cars.

The point is, we should be efficient as possible not just because it's good for the environment, that's almost irrelevant. We should invest in hybrids and efficient technologies because it's good for the economy, it's good for your job, and it's good for your family.

Is dirty profit really more important than all of that?

Demand nothing less than hybrid car efficiency.

Join the revolution, join the Soultek Hybrid Car Club.

Global warming, big business, oil and hybrid cars

Hybrid cars are too expensive because gas is cheap, many American auto analysts and auto executives continue to state.

But is gas really that cheap?

Any American who questions the cost of gas is considered some kind of environmental nut by mainstream media and industry.

Why?

There is no doubt that smog in America's largest cities was, and is, significantly caused by automobile emissions caused by oil, and numerous studies have shown that smog has a negative impact on people's health. Many Americans will die prematurely because of smog - that is a fact.

Now most scientist throughout the world believe these emissions are also significantly contributing to global warming, but don't say those two words in Houston.

According to a Reuters story, U.S. companies do not take global warming seriously, and in Houston, "one of the world's oil capitals, opposition to the notion of global warming is so strong that local officials have to be careful not to use the term, said Elena Marks, the city's directory of health policy."

These profit-rich oil companies are one of the most powerful industry segments in the United States today and they use that power to protect their profit and interests.

"Financial and insurance firms elsewhere have awakened to the dangers posed by global warming, but U.S. companies have shown little interest so far, a British insurance expert said on Wednesday. U.S. insurers have elected not to join in, often because they have close links to the fossil fuel industry. In the U.S.A., the fossil fuel companies are extremely powerful."

O.K., so let's forget about global warming and smog, let's just pretend it doesn't exist. Fine, I'm just a nut on that one (as is the Pentagon).

Are there any other costs?

Why are we in Iraq, for the second time?

Let us say it is because of weapons of mass destruction. How could Saddam afford to create such programs?

Oil.

While the U.S. might not be directly fighting in Iraq because of oil, oil is the root of the problem. Thousands of Americans and tens of thousands of Arabs have been killed because of oil. Trillions of dollars have been spent to secure, oil.

Flip on the tube and watch CNBC, a financial news network, and oil is one of the most frequented topics.

Both Bush presidents became president because of one thing, oil.

Every major American car manufacturer is strongly influenced by Unions. One of the main mantras of the Union is buy American. If it is so important to buy American, why do we import so much of America's economic fuel, oil, from foreign countries - especially from countries with such strong anti-American feelings?

How many Union pension funds have shares of oil company stock?

Oil has done many things to benefit the U.S. and the world, but has the quality of life for most Americans improved as much as the wealth of the richest of the rich whom own oil?

If you are happy with the state of affairs in the U.S. politically, economically, and environmentally, then go buy your gas-guzzler.

As for me, I'm tired of making filthy rich people - that could care less about me and my family - even richer, at my expense, and I won't buy anything less efficient than a hybrid.

I've had enough of their perfect world.

What is the hybrid car attraction?

Those whom don't believe in hybrid cars seem to believe there is some conspiracy against Americans that is going to force them to buy hybrids.

Don't believe me? Go to Autoweek and check out some forums and you'll hear about how the automotive media is in love with hybrids and how green-activists are trying to force Americans to buy certain cars.

I read a ton of automotive news every day, and very rarely is any of it about hybrids. Pick up almost any issue of any major automotive magazine, and you might find an article or two on hybrids. Often you won't find anything about hybrids.

The only reason there is buzz regarding hybrids is because of hybrid supporters, not the media.

Many of us look around at the world and see gross pollution and we want to do something about it. Many of us look at the problems in the Middle East and we want to do something about it. Many of us look at the corporate greed that decided that it was O.K. to build SUVs on a truck platform, even when rollover was determined to be a serious threat, and we want to do something about it.

Some of us are tired of a world driven by inefficient greed that has only one purpose, not creating the best product possible, but achieving the quickest profit for shareholders.

Freedom of choice, contrary to these conspirators, is about choice. Without hybrids what choice is there?

You can buy a small compact if you are so worried, some might say.

Why?

Why can't I have an efficient sedan, or truck, or SUV? The technology certainly exists.

The original Toyota Prius was a bit of a slug, but the new Prius proves good performance is possible. The release of the Honda Accord hybrid; however, demonstrates that hybrids are not only efficient, but better performers.

The Accord hybrid isn't the only hybrid achieving better performance than it's conventional cousin. The Toyota Highlander hybrid and the Lexus RX400h hybrid, like the Accord hybrid, will also out perform their conventional cousins, while getting almost 30 percent better fuel efficiency.

So where is the conspiracy?

Yes, there is a cost for hybrid technology, but there is no doubt that hybrids are simply better vehicles than non-hybrids. As time goes on, the gap between hybrids and conventional vehicles will widen, to the benefit of hybrids.

Technology, such as computers, has demonstrated one clear fact - it advances. In the short term it is more expensive and complicated, but the gains made in the long run easily recover those initial costs.

Ten years ago, a laptop with the ability to function on a battery for four hours with top notch performance was nothing but a dream. Even if you doubled the price of your computer investment, it was still a dream.

Now that technology is cheaper than a high end desktop of 10 years ago, but with performance that would have been a dream just 10 years ago.

That's why it's called an investment. Oil shortages, oil wars, pollution, global warming, etc. are all reasons to invest in new technology. Many have said wait until fuel cells arrive. Right now it costs almost 1,000,000 to create one fuel-cell powered car. How long can we wait, forever?

It costs a few extra grand to make a hybrid, and hybrid technology is still emerging. GM's two-mode hybrid technology promises the possibility of 60 percent more efficient hybrid Tahoes, Yukons, and Sierras.

That's not worth a few extra grand?

As the old adage goes the only certain thing in life is change.

Assuming a decades old truck platform could drive the automotive future was not only stupid, but dangerous for American auto manufacturers, and more importantly, dangerous for Americans.

Hybrid cars are not some green wet dream, they are simply better cars than conventional cars.

Get over it. Change is inevitable.

Join the Soultek Hybrid Car Club.

Former CIA director, James Woolsey, Promotes hybrid vehicles

"We're not talking about electric vehicles, but about plug-in hybrid vehicles that can be topped off with electricity for short trips," James Woolsey, former director of the Central Intelligence Agency, said last month during the unveiling of a report by the 16-member National Commission on Energy Policy. "The potential in terms of national policy, and in terms of global warming, ought to be focused on by anyone" concerned about terrorism or "paying over $2 a gallon."

Maybe it's just me, but when the former CIA director starts promoting hybrids because of global warming, terrorism, and high gasoline prices, those issues become even significantly more important.

How many Americans are concerned about terrorism?

A far majority I'm sure, and the former CIA director endorses hybrid vehicles as a way for consumers to help fight terrorism, which makes it a lot harder for putzes from GM's executive staff to claim that hybrids don't make business sense.

America's dependence on foreign oil has pushed the world to the brink of global, man-made disaster. Any American company that does not head this threat - choosing profit over the people's safety - can only be called one thing, UNAMERICAN.

If you are worried about the threat of terrorism, do something about it.

Demand nothing less than hybrid vehicle efficiency, not to save money on gas, but to save lives and to make the world a better place.

Join the Soultek Hybrid Car Club.

Some still plug in their hybrids

At the North American International Auto Show, signs were posted near the Toyota Prius telling visitors that hybrid cars, such as the Prius, don't have to be plugged in.

Yet, some hybrid buyers still want to plug in their vehicles, and are adding the functionality to their hybrids themselves.

A story by the Christian Science Monitor states, "In effect, these backyard mechanics have turned the hybrid car's appeal on its head. Instead of emphasizing gasoline over electric power and the convenience of today's cars, they're aiming to create less polluting higher-mileage vehicles that emphasize electricity over gasoline - even if it's a bit less convenient."

What's the point you might ask?

"We're not talking about electric vehicles, but about plug-in hybrid vehicles that can be topped off with electricity for short trips," James Woolsey, former director of the Central Intelligence Agency, said last month during the unveiling of a report by the 16-member National Commission on Energy Policy. "The potential in terms of national policy, and in terms of global warming, ought to be focused on by anyone" concerned about terrorism or "paying over $2 a gallon."

Click here for the complete Christian Science Monitor article.

Join the Soultek Hybrid Car Club.

"Hybrids are an interesting curiosity" says GM's Lutz

I've gone off on GM executive Robert Lutz before, but I'm going to do it again.

"Hybrids are an interesting curiosity and we will do some," says Lutz, "But do they make sense at $1.50 a gallon? No, they do not."

This statement exemplifies everything wrong with American corporatism - everything is about short term profit, even at the expense of American lives.

Is 30 percent better fuel-efficiency on a small car really important?

Ask the fathers and mothers of soldiers killed in Iraq that question, Mr. Lutz.

Hybrid cars like the Toyota Prius and the Honda Accord hybrid are important because they demonstrate that America doesn't need to be dependent upon foreign oil.

Apparently, however, that's not important to you Mr. Lutz?

Fortunately, vehicles like the Toyota Prius and the Accord hybrid, pushed American auto companies into action. Thus, Ford released the Escape hybrid, and significantly more fuel-efficient hybrids are on the way.

The Toyota Highlander hybrid and the Lexus RX 400h hybrid will soon offer American consumers three different hybrid SUVs, with more soon to follow. While I am not a huge SUV fan, I am huge hybrid SUV fan when compared to a standard SUV.

The point is, without hybrid cars, there never would have been hybrid SUVs.

Yet, there will not be a hybrid SUV from GM until 2007 or 2008.

While Mr. Lutz can continue to putz around his company's complete lack of environmental concern, or lack of worry for American soldiers, more and more Americans have had enough.

Yes, Mr. Lutz, to many of us hybrid cars are worth the extra cost, even if gas is only $1.50 per gallon. Terrorism, pollution, global warming and Iraq, Mr. Lutz, make cheap gas insignificant if that cheap gas leads to billions of tax-payer dollars being spent on wars and military machinery to "protect" our oil interests.

If cheap gas and conventional automobiles mean that 1000s of young Americans need to die to ensure GM's poor business practices will continue to be profitable, then yes, I absolutely demand a hybrid car, Mr. Lutz.

And it's not just me. Millions of Americans are more than willing to spend an extra few thousand dollars to help save one American life, let alone thousands, sir.

At some point, Mr. Lutz, doing the right thing is more important than money, even for a huge multinational corporation like GM. Ignore that fact at your own peril.

More hybrid car hype talk

Interesting article this morning, Crossovers and hybrids may never live up to their hype. The author of the article, John McCormick, doesn't like hybrid vehicles. "Turning to hybrids, I continue to wonder at the gullibility of the general public and automotive journalists who should know better. Any honest automotive engineer will tell you that the concept of a vehicle with two engines doing the job of one is nonsensical."

Except in city driving, McCormick does note. That fact; however, is apparently insignificant to McCormick, even though the majority of Americans drive in such conditions, and such conditions are gross contributors to smog and global warming.

Those are just nonsensical "green" issues to McCormick.

Nonetheless, despite McCormick's dislike of hybrids, "So, is the future bright for.....hybrids? The answer is a qualified yes."

Anyway, I'll be covering this article in more depth later, but click here to read Mr. McCormick's for yourself.

Auto Show Media Hype: Hybrids raised the ante

I read and scan piles of automotive news everyday.

In auto magazines, for example, I often see a couple of ads for the Ford Escape hybrid, but not an article covering anything about hybrid cars.

Of course, I often do find articles about hybrid cars as well, and that didn't happen much less than a year ago.

Momentum is building.

Likewise, when I get my auto news from the Internet, some days, there is nothing about hybrids, but on many days there is at least some news.

When talk of the North American International Auto Show hit the Net a week ago, little of it was focused on hybrids. Now, hybrids and alternative-fuel vehicles are the buzz of the show.

In particular, the future of hybrid cars and their relationship to hydrogen fuel-cells seems to be a hot topic. Most important, are hybrid cars just automaker buzz, or an automobile revolution?

Many auto analysts are still describing hybrids as hype that won't last more than a couple more years.

I completely disagree. That might not mean much, but so does Toyota, and that means a lot.

First, while Honda was first-to-market with hybrids, Toyota is the undisputed leader of hybrid vehicles, and the Toyota Prius is Best in Class. The Honda Accord Hybrid and the Honda Civic Hybrid are impressive, but Honda has not shown the same commitment to hybrids as has Toyota.

Second, Ford and the Escape hybrid, on the other hand, are produced utilizing leased Toyota hybrid technology.

Third, GM and DaimlerChrysler hybrids? It's all conceptual.

In reality, I don't think Toyota expected hybrid success this quickly, but how can they let up now?

Now the rest of the automotive world is kickin' it into gear, using the North American Auto Show to demonstrate their new green revelations. I bet; however, that auto makers wish this wasn't happening, at least not this year.

Toyota is years ahead of everyone in hybrids. While most automakers are talking about hybrids, Toyota is selling more than they can make of them.

If hybrid vehicles can transition, almost seamlessly, from gas to diesel to hydrogen and fuel cells, as Toyota seems to believe, then Toyota has everything to gain from permeating the market as quickly as possible with it's revolutionary technology.

That's upping the ante. Raising the stakes on your opponent.

The current situation in Iraq, global warming, and smog - something has to be done about gasoline pollution and foreign oil dependency.

Now is the time for action. The early bird will definitely get a big chunk of the worm. Even Ford knows that.

"There'll come a time when everything's a hybrid; it's inevitable, because of the fuel economy and performance and (air pollution) benefits," stated Mary Ann Wright, Director of Ford's hybrid and hydrogen vehicle programs recently.

That's right, performance. Aside from efficiency, hybrid powertrains can be used to increase performance. Even Ford knows performance can sell, and hybrids can out-perform their conventional cousins.

While many consumers might not pay $3000.00 more for fuel efficiency, or pollution reduction, many will pay $3000.00 more for a better performing vehicle, in addition to significantly increased efficiency.

This is the future of hybrids and the newest Prius and Accord Hybrid prove it.

The negative media about hybrids is smoke and mirrors. The hybrid buzz isn't hype, it is the panic of auto executives afraid of losing the future's marketshare.

Head to Head to Head: Prius, Accord and Escape Hybrids, Part 1

Back in November, I went Head to Head: The Ford Escape Hybrid and the Toyota Prius.

After driving both the Toyota Prius and the Ford Escape hybrid I noted that there were many differences between these vehicles, but that the main difference between these vehicles was "simply that the Prius feels different. Not in a bad way, mind you, but in a futuristic way. Sitting in the Prius is like sitting in the future."

Nonetheless, I noted that both were excellent vehicles.

Both significantly reduce fuel consumption and pollution.

Well, the new Honda Accord hybrid also significantly reduces fuel consumption and pollution as well.

Much like the Escape hybrid, the Accord hybrid also feels pretty much like a conventional Accord. Unlike the Escape hybrid; however, the Accord performed at a different level than the Escape. The Accord hybrid performed better than most V6 Accords that I've driven, noticeably different. That was the critical feature that kept grabbing my attention.

Perhaps it's my bias against SUVs, but I couldn't get over the design inefficiency of the hybrid Escape when compared to the Prius. While smaller, the Prius just felt roomier and more relaxing than the Escape, which from the outside at least, seemed so much bigger than the Prius.

People don't like change, typically, they don't want to think differently. That is unfortunate when it comes to automobiles. In the Yin and Yang of life, the automobile is one of the greatest inventions of the modern world, yet it has also become one of its greatest threats.

Hybrid cars like the Toyota Prius truly are a revolutionary step for the automobile. They do cause you to think differently, to change. The Prius proves that compact, efficient Sedans don't have to feel compact. Their intelligent design forces any with an open mind to realize just how inefficient the American automobile culture has become.

This isn't good for American auto corporations, their employees, or their consumers.

According to the Pentagon, global warming is a serious threat to the national security of the United States. The far majority of scientists in the United States and the world have no doubt that decades of automobile emissions have had a serious impact on global warming.

The Toyota Prius demonstrates the we can easily, and in the long term, price-competitively, do something to protect our national security, and we don't have to lose comfort, safety, or performance.

The Accord hybrid has proven, without doubt, that hybrid vehicles are simply better than conventional vehicles. They are significantly more efficient and they can perform better than their conventional cousins.

While the Escape hybrid is my favorite SUV, it doesn't make as strong a statement as do the Accord hybrid and Toyota Prius.

Nonetheless, there still are some notable differences between the Accord hybrid and both the Escape and Prius hybrids. The Prius and the Escape hybrid are full hybrids, meaning that at low speeds, both vehicles can run only on electric power. This significantly reduces fuel consumption and pollution emissions in stop-and-go traffic - the kind of driving conditions which cause the most pollution in conventional vehicles.

The Accord hybrid doesn't make quite as much of an impact in stop-and-go traffic. Though better than the conventional version. The Accord really distinguishes itself from its conventional and hybrid competitors in highway driving.

Stay tuned for Part 2.

More on hybrid cars.

Join the Soultek Hybrid Car Club.

Toyota Prius Test Drive

I took a test drive of the Toyota Prius this weekend. While it wasn’t my first test drive of the Prius hybrid, it was my first test drive in a loaded Prius. So, let me just get this out of the way – this is a bloody awesome vehicle! Forget the fact that this auto is a hybrid car - it’s a revolutionary piece of technology

But, first, let’s get into some pricing issues.

$22,000 is the basic package price in my area, which includes a $3000.00 dealer fee, otherwise this car would sell for $19,000, and that is a steal. The hybrid I drove, was a Package 6, or the fully loaded Prius, plus leather, U.V paint protection and every accessory imaginable. It was listed at $32,000. Again, this price included a $3000.00 dealer fee.

There are about 6 different Prius Packages offered for the 2005 Prius Model. Of course you can always custom order one – but that will definitely cost extra, especially with supply still trying to catch up to demand.

Now remember, packages are not the same at each dealership, and different accessories are automatically loaded as a package in some areas. Obviously, pricing is probably the reason for this variance - providing dealers the ability to control a certain aspect of pricing – aside from the $3000.00 dealer fee that I find offensive. (Click here to read more about Prius features, specifications and packages).

Let me reiterate one more time; however, the base car is an awesome car. You don’t need to go above the base to get a loaded car. Of course Toyota does offer very tempting add-ons.

The outside of this auto looks different, sleek and high-tech.

Using the Smart Key System to open the doors I sat down in the driver’s seat, which is like being 16 again – it’s a brand new, revolutionary driving experience.

The Smart Key is like a mini-dvd that slides into a slot and with the push of a button, the car starts.

At first you hear the engine idle, but then silence, as the hybrid synergy drive remains ‘powered’ using just stored electric power, or almost free energy.

The dashboard is a unique digital dash that features a multifunction screen. In the loaded version, the multifunction screen includes a voice-activated DVD navigation system with hands-free phone capability via Bluetooth technology. The steering wheel also incorporates phone options; rear and front defrost, aside from all the standards.

This car is elegantly and efficiently designed right down to the glove-box. Or, excuse me, dual glove-boxes.

Driving is nice and smooth, and this car provides a great drive, but the most notable aspect of driving this machine is driving in slow traffic.

The car almost seems to float above the road as you watch regenerative energy fill your hybrid battery pack on your multi-screen monitor.

If you live in an urban area and commute in stop-and-go traffic, this IS the car for you. In fact the Prius actually achieves its best fuel-efficiency and greatest pollution reduction during high traffic, when standard autos achieve just the opposite.

The Prius also performs well on the highway, achieving an EPA estimated 51 mpg – though EPA estimates are out-dated for all cars, standard or hybrid. The EPA, for example, estimates that the top speed limit cars will drive is 55 mph on the highway. Still, your Prius will still utilize much less gas than standard cars, while significantly reducing pollution as well during highway, or freeway driving.

Pulling back into the lot, I checked out the hatchback, which is an extremely nice add-on to this vehicle. With the backdoor open, and the seats folded down, and the Prius hybrid offers an extensive amount of room for transporting large and bulky items.

Additionally, when the seats are back in position, the car easily accommodates four adults, or two adults and three children.

Because the Prius is one of the most aerodynamically advanced production vehicles, sun roofs are not an option for this vehicle.

In Conclusion

I am hybrid vehicle advocate because of pollution, global warming, environment, terrorism, and oil wars – not to mention simple automotive evolution.

But even if these issues are not on your radar, this car is still worth your consideration.

Or join Soultek’s hybrid car club.

Bob and my Accord Hybrid Test Drive

On my recent Accord hybrid test drive, my friend Bob accompanied me.

Bob isn't much of a car guy, but he really liked the Honda Accord hybrid. When we looked at the numbers; however, Bob didn't like the car quite so much, telling me that he would buy the standard Accord, rather than the hybrid just because of the difference in price.

I gave him my whole environmental speech, the Middle East, terrorism, but Bob would not waiver.

Unfortunately, I think most consumers agree with Bob.

I felt the same way regarding the Ford Escape hybrid.

The Toyota Prius is a completely new car, so there isn't that kind of price comparison available. Nonetheless, if in stock, a Prius would list for less than $20,000, far less than the other two hybrids.

It seems obvious to me that hybrid powertrains are the future of the automobile because they will provide a natural transition to hydrogen, bridging the gap between oil and hydrogen as the plethora of technological roadblocks are slowly overcome.

The threats of global warming, terrorism, and foreign-oil dependency are not only dangerous to national security, but dangerous to the American economy.

Intelligent, efficient auto design, such as hybrid technology and better building materials, will clean the environment, strengthen the economy, and push America towards the technological leadership of the future's energy source.

What are we waiting for?

More hybrid cars.

Ford's Other Hybrid Vehicle Idea

Hybrid vehicle powertrains are not just about gasoline engines and electric motor combinations. While hybrid cars like the Toyota Prius, Accord hybrid, or even hybrid SUVs, such as Ford's Escape hybrid, are powered by gasoline engines, other engine possibilities exist.

For example hydrogen or diesel engines have already been developed to work with electric motors and demo vehicles have already been created.

Ford's Mercury Meta One vehicle is one such concept vehicle. Combining a diesel engine and an electric motor, this hybrid vehicle meets emission levels required by California's Partial Zero Emissions Vehicle Rating.

Diesel engines also emit less carbon dioxide, a global warming contributor, than gasoline engines.

Still, diesel - at this point in time - faces tough regulations in the United States. Diesels; however, are very big in Europe and could hold serious promise for Ford in that market.

More hybrid vehicle information.

Toyota hybrid cars, just a niche?

In a recent article by John Dinkel, Power to the People 2015, covering the engines of U.S. cars 10 years from now, there is an interesting quote. "Regarding consumer demand, Dave Hermance, executive engineer for environmental engineering at Toyota, says, "I think perhaps 5 percent of total U.S. vehicle sales by 2010 will be hybrids; by 2015, maybe 10 percent.""

While Toyota has been a big leader in the hybrid vehicle movement because of the Toyota Prius, perhaps their lead in hybrid cars, or more important, clean technologies isn't as clear.

Statements such as those by Hermance seem to imply that Toyota has no intention of making hybrid cars their conventional cars within the next decade or two.

Unlike choosing a DVD player, rather than a VCR, health implications are involved in this choice between vehicles. In my opinion, automakers shouldn't have a choice any longer.

This isn't about simple consumer demand anymore.

This is as much about National Security as it is about environmentalism.

Just today, following the horrible Tsunami in Asia, scientists are predicting even worse scenarios based upon global warming data and modeling.

Helping make America safer, right now, isn't that expensive. The Toyota Prius sticker price, of a $19,000.00, is a very fair price for the innovation provided. The Ford Escape hybrid proves that SUVs can be, at least, significantly more fuel-efficient.

And the Honda Accord hybrid proves not only that hybrids are significantly more efficient than their conventional cousins in terms of fuel-efficiency and pollution, but that they also outperform their cousins in speed and quickness.

While advanced gasoline engines, such as the Ford Focus PZEV can meet strict emission's standards, and cylinder deactivation can reduce fuel-efficiency by 20 percent, the combination of an Advanced Gasoline Engine and an electric motor, otherwise known as a hybrid powertrain, produce the greatest efficiency.

This combination creates cars today that can have a significant, positive impact on the environment tomorrow.

Anything less should be unacceptable, and anything less - considering the legacy of automobile pollution - should be considered negligence.

More hybrid vehicles.

Diesels versus hybrids. Let's get it on.

For a couple of months, DaimlerChrysler has been trying to build buzz around its newest Jeep Liberty, a diesel version.

Earlier this month, Chrysler began shipping the new model to dealers in an attempt to gauge consumer interest.

There hasn't been much. Of course, Daimler isn't trying that hard to market the car yet, only the idea of diesel. Daimler believes that the better fuel efficiency offered by diesels will lure American buyers to diesel.

Many states, including California and New York; however, will not allow diesels to be sold in their states because diesels still emit pollutants that are known to be smog-producing and carcinogenic.

Perhaps those laws could change, but why?

Advanced gasoline engines are 10 percent less efficient than diesels, but they pollute less. That balance equals out in my book.

Hybrids versus diesels

Some analysts have gone so far as to say that hybrid vehicles, such as the Toyota Prius, Honda Accord Hybrid, and Ford Escape hybrid, are too expensive, and that diesels should be the powertrain of choice until hydrogen takes over.

Yet, these same diesels, as well as advanced gasoline engines can each be integrated with a hybrid powertrain. Each of these hybrid combinations would create significantly more efficient vehicles than either diesel or advanced gasoline engines.

The hybrid powertrain is simply more effective and efficient than simple internal combustion powered vehicles. With endless combinations, including hydrogen and fuel cells, hybrid vehicles can drive us into the future, creating and perfecting the necessary automotive technologies to make the hydrogen economy a reality.

More importantly, hybrids allow consumers the ability to make a choice, an important financial choice, that can empower individuals to help end foreign-oil dependency, to help fight SMOG, global warming, and other environmental damage.

And in pure price? The average hybrid is about $3000.00 more than standard cousins, minus the Prius, which has no conventional comparison.

The 2005 Jeep Liberty Diesel starts at $25,125, while a similar, conventional Liberty starts under $23,000. That's more than a $2000.00 difference.

Diesels hold some promise, but the technology is not even comparable to hybrids. An investment in hybrid technology is an investment in the future, diesel just as gas, will soon become the past.

Despite Hybrid Escape, Ford Hammered by Environmentalists

"Ford's marketing talks about the greening of the Blue Oval," he said. "It's highly disingenuous if not outright false. Ford's advertising is outrageously misleading because it paints the company as an environmental leader when, in fact, it's exactly the opposite." (From DetroitNews)

Ford continues to receive the lion's share of criticism from environmentalists, or at least American environmentalists, because it's the most identifiable American automotive brand.

While none of the world's largest automakers deserve significant kudos for their environmental efforts, Ford has not only slyly reneged on publicly made pollution mandates, but continues to be a pollution leader.

Just a few months ago, Ford brought "the world's first hybrid SUV to market".

Big deal. How many did they bring to market, .000001%? I don't think 20,000 Ford Escape hybrids is even 1% of Ford SUV sales.

Moreover, only extreme environmentalists with money can afford one.

The Toyota Prius base sticker price is $19,000. Granted you won't be able to buy one for that price anytime soon due to demand, but at least the technology is within reach of a large majority of Americans.

Still, Toyota only thinks 10% of the U.S. market will purchase hybrid vehicles in 2015, according to recent statements by Toyota executives. So, Toyota isn't exactly planning to flood the market with hybrids either.

Honda is about the only company that has really been an environmental leader, or least Honda is as close to an environmental leader as possible for an automaker.

Still, even with the release of the Accord hybrid, Honda's third hybrid car, the company is only planning to produce twice as many hybrids as Ford in 2005.

So, yes it might be unfair to attack Ford for the massive pollution problems created by the entire auto industry, but it is entirely unfair for Ford not to do something to protect not just America's environment, but America's people.

Over the last several decades, Ford reaped massive profits and benefits while emitting massive pollutants into our skies. While profits might be down today, mostly caused by gross corporate mismanagement, Ford has a responsibility - with the preponderance of evidence of pollution and global warming - to take environmental action.

Making public statements, then reneging on them, while marketing yourself as an environmental leader when facts prove the opposite, isn't just misleading, it's as conning as the worst car salesperson.

The Ford Escape hybrid is a nice gesture by Ford, but only a gesture.

Accord Hybrid one of LA's Ten Great Cars of Year

Los Angeles is possibly the world's most materialistic city, especially when it comes to automobiles. That's why when I saw the article, The Class of 2004 Ten of the great cars of the year and the types of L.A. owners they might attract, by Dan Neil, I certainly didn't expect to see a hybrid vehicle.

Yet, of the 10, one was the Honda Accord Hybrid and another was a Mini-Cooper, most of the rest were extreme gas-guzzlers.

Still, I was happy that a story about cars and Los Angeles, written by a Los Angeles Auto writer, would include a hybrid, but the article went further than that. Mr. Neil opens his article mentioning America's relationship to the internal combustion engine, and that this year provided evidence that something better than the internal combustion engine was clearly possible.

More important, he noted $3.00 gas in California and said, "American foreign policy is bloodily fixated on a region of the world whose single strategic value is oil."

It's not just because of the cost of gasoline that people purchase vehicles such as the Toyota Prius, or Ford Escape Hybrid, it's because of the costs of our dependency upon foreign oil, in addition to the environmental costs.

For decades Americans have died in the Middle East protecting foreign-oil dependency, like some maddened, craving drug addict.

But if California can say, No More, what an impact on the rest of the Nation.

Further, Neil brings up global warming, Bush's acknowledgement of global warming, as well as California's fight for clean air. "But automakers, suing to stop California's new carbon-emission standards, are in greenhouse denial." Then he asks, "Whose air is it, anyway?"

"The future belongs to automakers who embrace change. Toyota surpassed Ford as the world's No. 2 automaker in 2004 and will likely overtake GM in 2005, when it will sell more than 100,000 hybrid cars in the U.S.".

As in denial as America has been about oil, especially foreign oil and its costs, dramatic world events are forcing Americans to wake up to this issue.

American auto corporations better do the same.