Re: Why Americans hate Detroit

The icon of American stupidity

Was it intelligent or morally ethical for GM to develop the Hummer brand as it was dismantling the EV1 program?

Of course not. It was asinine to anyone that cared about foreign oil dependency or the environment. Unfortunately, at the time GM rolled out the Hummer instead of the EV1, MOST Americans didn't care about either global warming or the environment.

So, GM followed the American ideal - "Show me the money."

Today, Republicans in Congress are aghast at the idea of an automaker bailout. Yet, I bet most of them drive gas-guzzlers.

There is no doubt the Big 3 have demonstrated little leadership in fighting global warming and foreign oil dependency, and Americans hate that because it's a reminder of how stupid most American consumers have been acting. Blaming it all on the Big 3 while that big gas hog sits in the driveway is so much more convenient.

Global warming goes away if Big 3 go under?

Kill Detroit, kill CO2 emissions?

Despite my previous bailout post, I'm still an advocate of an automaker bailout with strings. A new string that environmental activists are now advocating is a bailout only if the Big 3 drop their suit against California and its desire to regulate CO2 emissions - an interesting idea.

Yet, I have some questions. Why are autos the environmental whipping boy? Don't houses and buildings cause far more environmental damage? Doesn't the food industry, especially the meat industry, cause more environmental damage?

Anyway. If automakers go bankrupt, do CO2 emissions go down? Does not bankruptcy only ensure that we drive gas-guzzling polluters longer?

Gas prices - Why strings MUST be attached to any bailout

Detroit still far behind the Prius

Pop open the bubbly, ladies and gentlemen, it's party time. In 4 states gas has fallen below $2.00 per gallon. On Wall Street, the overwhelming consensus is $50 oil before $65.

But, is that a good thing?

When gas was $2.00 US automakers laughed at the Toyota Prius. Today, the Prius has already sold more than 1,000,000 Prius hybrid cars, yet there won't be one US made Prius-contender on the road until late 2010 with the Chevy Volt. Moreover, GM probably won't be selling the 100,000 Volts per year until at least 2014.

Fortunately, if gas prices remain low, America's gas-guzzling will decline thanks to CAFE, but CAFE regulations won't be strong enough to end foreign oil dependency. Unfortunately, as history as proven, US automakers will simply do as much as needed to achieve CAFE, and when foreign oil dependency again rears its ugly head, America will again be unprepared.

Thus, a bailout must include strings.

UK Study - Current grid can handle plug-ins and reduce CO2. Many adoption questions

Many decades before everyone in the UK is plugging in

A joint study by Arup and Cenex for the UK’s Department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR) and the Department for Transport (DfT) finds that plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles can reduce automotive CO2 emissions by 40 percent per vehicle utilizing the current grid.

Nonetheless, the UK study doesn't believe that plug-ins are ready to take over market share. At today's pace the study expects 2.5% of all cars to connect to the grid by 2020, 11.7% by 2030. If the UK takes aggressive measures to develop plug-ins, then those numbers rise to 4.9% by 2020 and 32% by 2030. Under an extreme scenario - the production of plug-in only cars by 2025 - then the numbers plugging in would be 10% by 2020 and 60% by 2030.

More on the study from GreenCarCongress.

Democrats ready to play hardball with Detroit?

Time to Californiacate Detroit?

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

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

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

Canada afraid Obama serious about ending foreign oil dependency?

Oh so green, Canada?

For years the US has been the big anti-environmentalist bully on the block, choosing to ignore Kyoto, for instance, to protect our economy. With President Elect Barack Obama preparing to take over the White House, some of our critics are now worried we might fight foreign oil dependency and global warming a little to quickly.

Canada, one of our drug dealers - I mean oil suppliers - is afraid that an Obama Presidency could hurt Canada's oil sands projects - and the Canadian economy. Isn't that ironic?

Source: GlobeandMail

Don't buy a hybrid! Share a hybrid

Hybrid car sharing

WeCar, is the new car sharing division of Enterprise. It doesn't reinvent car sharing, although it does use only hybrid cars in its fleet, which is pretty cool. Still, this whole car sharing thing really has me intrigued.

Foreign oil dependency. Global warming. High fuel prices. Financial crisis. Are more expensive hybrid cars and electric vehicles really the answer? Instead of just replacing our 13 million per year fleet of vehicles, why not less vehicles? Isn't it gluttonous consumerism, not just gas-guzzlers, that is really strangling America?

Bikes, scooters, tiny one-person microcars, and public transportation might not offer much bling for consumers, but for daily commuting, such forms of transportation are far more efficient, cost effective and environmentally friendly than a plug-in Prius or a Chevy Volt. And all of these approaches can be supplemented with car sharing.

Instead of buying a Volt, might not the future be a better time to share a Volt?

UK - Cost, not environment, drives consumers

Global warming not enough for most consumers

US studies have indicated that a significant percent of Americans are worried about global warming, foreign oil dependency, or both. Unfortunately, despite this worry, the majority of those concerned about these issues are only willing to buy a car that helps fight these problems if it makes obvious financial sense.

Well, auto consumers in the UK aren't much different.

Covering the study, GCC notes, "While 20% of Britons are now saying they look at CO₂ levels when buying a new car, the survey found that 75% of motorists would purchase a lower-emissions car only if it saved them money. Almost two-thirds of people surveyed (61%) believe that cost is the most important consideration when others buy a more environmentally friendly car."

Why buy a hybrid vehicle?

Umm. Do you really need to ask?

That's a question I hear regularly. This morning a man asked this question and then provided a list of small vehicles sold outside the US that achieve better fuel economy than the Toyota Prius. Yes, most were smaller-than-the-Prius diesels, and they outperformed the Prius primarily in highway fuel economy.

So, why buy hybrid vehicles?

I say forget that a diesel vehicle could be a hybrid vehicle. Forget that even clean diesel is still dirty. Forget that it takes more oil to make diesel than gasoline, thereby offsetting much of diesel vehicle efficiency, at least for those concerned about oil dependency, especially foreign oil dependency.

I advocate for hybrid vehicles because neither diesel, nor gasoline, will ever end US foreign oil dependency. On the other hand, hybrid cars are all about batteries, and battery R&D will lead to 100 mpg hybrids, well over 100 mpg plug-in hybrids and full electric vehicles.

I mean, really, don't pollution, global warming and foreign oil dependency provide enough reasons to support hybrid cars?

Will global warming stickers on cars help?

Will consumers care?

If you live in California, the next time you go car shopping you might see a different sticker on your car of choice called an Environmental Performance sticker. Showing both a smog score and a global warming score based on EPA data, California lawmakers hope it will influence consumers to buy greener vehicles.

Can a sticker make consumers buy greener cars?

35 mpg by 2020, 75 mpg by 2030

Fuel cell cars only way forward?

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

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

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

Ford also planning plug-ins

A tool to fight greenhouse gas emissions?

Ford, spurred by a coalition of shareholders, has been devising plans to decrease global warming emissions. According to MotorTrend that means emerging technologies, such as plug-in hybrid vehicles, to contend with the Chevy Volt and the Toyota Prius plug-in.

While I'm not sure how much plug-ins fight global warming, I sure hope that Ford is serious about advanced technologies like hybrids.

Likewise, similar shareholder action is expected at GM.

So what? Plug-in hybrids might not reduce global warming

A Prius prepped for plug-in conversion

I've been a plug-in hybrid vehicle advocate, well, since I started advocating for regular hybrid vehicles. Still, I have issues with PHEVs and some PHEV fans. For example, I think buying one of today's hybrids is the quickest way to make tomorrow's plug-in hybrids a reality. So, if you need a new car today, don't buy a non-hybrid because you're "waiting for a PHEV".

Still, my main issue boils down to the infrastructure to which plug-ins must connect. Quite simply, the transference of power from big oil to big electricity doesn't excite me greatly. More important, too many utilities are using antiquated technology that could actually increase global warming emissions. All this leaves me with trust issues.

Finish: So What? Plug-in hybrids might not reduce global warming

Carbon capture: Another problem for PHEVs?

The government's clean coal con-job?

Autobloggreen has an interesting post regarding America's energy problems today. Clean coal, largely achieved via carbon capture, it seems, might be more myth than reality according to a growing horde of carbon sequestration critics. And, even in the cases where carbon sequestration might work, its costs, well, simply might not be worth the cost compared to alternative technologies.

This comes off the heals of other studies suggesting that in areas still using old coal technology, plug-in hybrids could produce more CO2 than if just gasoline were used to power conventional vehicles.

None of this suggests, even for one second, that further development of plug-in hybrids or electric vehicles should be delayed. However, these studies do seem to suggest that America's energy problems will not be solved alone by plug-in hybrids, the Chevy Volt, or any other type of automobile.

Lutz: Volt is the future. His global warming beliefs "immaterial"

Lutz's beliefs on global warming are "immaterial"

CNBC interviewed Bob Lutz this morning at the New York Auto Show, and his statements on global warming were a focal point.

Lutz claimed his statements were taken out of context, and that his beliefs regarding global warming are similar to many astrophysicists that hypothesize that solar radiation could be a big part of today's global warming. Nonetheless, Lutz claimed his beliefs about global warming are "immaterial".

According to Lutz, the only future for GM is take the automobile out of the global warming and foreign oil dependency equation, and the only way to do that is with vehicles like the Chevy Volt.

Global warming: Too much focus on cars?

Is the focus on cars a global warming sham?

Angus MacKenzie of MotorTrend was recently doing some research on global warming emissions and he found out that transportation accounted for 30 percent of US CO2 emissions, with cars accounting for 60 percent of those emissions. Thus, personal transportation - the cars and trucks we drive - account for just 18 percent of the total US CO2 emissions?

Sure Congress has achieved a plan to reduce these emissions by 30 percent, but how significant is 30 percent of 18 percent, Angus wonders. And, more important, what is Congress doing about the other 70 percent?

Shouldn't technologies, such as hybrid cars, be valued more for their potential to end foreign oil dependency, rather than to fight global warming? Has the auto sector become a CO2 scapegoat?

GM CEO challenges Bob Lutz on global warming

Shocking: A crass statement from Bob Lutz?

Not long ago, when GM's Bob Lutz challenged man-caused global warming, I didn't think much about his remarks. Anyone that has ever spent any time around Lutz wouldn't be surprised. Besides, while Lutz might not buy global warming, I've heard him speak passionately about the dangers of foreign oil dependency a number of times. And, ending foreign oil dependency would also achieve significant reductions in CO2 emissions. So, whatever.

Nonetheless, GM CEO Rick Wagoner recently contradicted the statements made by Lutz, acknowledging both global warming and the need for GM to accept this reality as a necessary business requirement.

Is global warming killing hybrid cars?

Global warming can't make hybrids mainstream?

Turns out hybrid vehicles aren't very profitable, especially in the short term. Thus, although Mercedes is moving ahead with its hybrid program, the automaker is doing so cautiously (more).

That's probably because consumer research continually demonstrates that while consumers are interested in better fuel economy, they are not interested in paying more for it. For example, a new study shows that only 11 % of new car buyers are willing to pay extra money for green vehicles.

What about foreign oil dependency? Why are hybrid vehicles sold and marketed largely as environmental vehicles, rather than foreign oil dependency fighting vehicles? Imagine the PR campaigns that could be created around freedom-fighters. Besides if America ended foreign oil dependency, such an act would put a huge dent in our global warming emissions.

Isn't it time to unite the people? Isn't it time to sell hybrids in a way that justifies their cost and investment in the future in a way that a majority of consumers can relate?

How much car do you really need? Part 1

Do you really need it, or do you just want it?

"Thus my point isn't that people shouldn't be allowed to buy whatever vehicle they want," states Karl on Cars this morning. "My point is that you should be honest about your lifestyle and fully recognize when you really need a large, utilitarian vehicle and when you simply want one. For example, do I need a Ford GT? Nobody needs a Ford GT! However, I'm fully ready to admit I simply wanted one, functionality and earth-saving desires be damned. I'm not sure how many SUV drivers really need one, but I fear many of these folks aren't ready to admit they simply want one.

And at this point I have to add what really kills me is when these same folks, sitting in the cabin of their 6,000-pound SUVs/Crossovers/full-size trucks that they don't really need, claim to be earth conscious and/or scream "No blood for oil!" or "We need to stop being held hostage by our energy policies that subjugate us to Middle East countries."

Whatever folks."

Click here to read the Karl's full story

Is the green movement a zealot-driven jihad?

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

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

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

Audi A3 1.9TDIe: Who needs a Prius asks Angus?

A Prius killer?

Angus of MotorTrend has been driving an Audi A3 1.9TDIe for the last few days, a nice new diesel vehicle that is making Angus ask why anyone needs a Toyota Prius. Ultimately, according to Angus, the Audi is more fuel efficient than the Prius, except in extreme traffic, and the Audi performs better, so maybe there is no need for hybrid cars? Finish reading.....

GM prepares effort to fight state greenhouse laws

California's greenhouse gas law could slow vehicles like the Volt?

GM's CEO, Rick Wagoner, is urging auto dealers to help fight against states that are trying to set individual limits on greenhouse gas emissions, which really isn't a surprise. "We need to work together to educate policymakers at the state and local levels on the importance of tough but national standards," Wagoner told the dealers group. Otherwise, GM will not, "be able to accomplish everything that we otherwise could."

While I'm sure it wouldn't be easy, why not try to educate these policymakers about how much help GM and other automakers might need to achieve these higher levels as well? Discuss dollars and cents. Discuss lost jobs. Even establish a Davos-style conference in California for such a forum, but at least have a real conversation on these issues.

Republican Candidates Stand with California on Emissions?

McCain with CA and buddy Schwarzenegger on emissions

"I applaud the governor's efforts and that of other states in this region and other states across America to try to eliminate the greenhouse gas emissions that are causing climate change," said John McCain last night during a debate in California.

Other Republican candidates were supportive as well, though some not as vigorously. "I side with states being able to make their own decisions, even if I don't always agree with the decisions they make," stated Mitt Romney.

I'm sure Democrats will say the same, which irks me a bit. Most of these people are already in Congress. If they couldn't lead Congress as members on such issues, will they really be able to lead as President?

Automakers want to re-educate California on emissions

Auto companies ready to increase lobbying efforts in California

"Dave McCurdy, chief executive of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, said in an interview that the industry's lead trade group would redouble efforts to "educate" states...... that a proposal by California to cut tailpipe emissions sharply to fight global warming could further depress the struggling U.S. industry."

What is more dangerous to America, the loss of a Ford, for example, or increased foreign oil dependency and global warming emissions?

EPA rejects California tailpipe waiver

Governor vows to appeal EPA's tailpipe waiver decision

For the FIRST time in 30 years, the EPA has declined to provide a waiver to allow the state of California to regulate tailpipe emissions from passenger vehicles, despite numerous court rulings, including one from the Supreme Court, that supported California's position.

Yet, not only was it California, but sixteen other states - when combined - that represent a significant percent of Americans that were denied. One can only be left to wonder, whom exactly does the EPA protect, when the people cannot, even after Supreme Court affirmation, demand clean air via legal and precedented processes?

Thanks King Bush.

“It is disappointing that the federal government is standing in our way and ignoring the will of tens of millions of people across the nation. We will continue to fight this battle. California sued to compel the agency to act on our waiver, and now we will sue to overturn today’s decision and allow Californians to protect our environment.”

(Full Press Release)

Pelosi is a comedian and CAFE is the joke

Will Americans go from SUVs to small cars?

Nancy Pelosi has called the new CAFE standards "a shot heard around the world". Please.

There is no doubt that the new CAFE standards will lead to more fuel efficient vehicles, such as hybrid vehicles and more alternative fueled-vehicles. However, when you consider America's energy consumption, which almost always increases year-after-year, CAFE is not a solution - it's a dud heard 'round the world. Read more.....

Flex-fuel credit all but guaranteed

Corn is a political force

The House and Senate are close to approving a CAFE bill calling for 35 mpg by 2020 and, even though ethanol causes more harm than good, ethanol credits will be extended.

"We're very close to a deal," U.S. Sen. Carl Levin, D-Lansing, said in an interview Wednesday. "The bumper sticker aspects of the bill may not be significantly altered, but we are providing enough flexibility and practicality to make this achievable."

In other words, enough loopholes will exist that this legislation will, ultimately, accomplish little in terms of either foreign oil dependency or global warming. By 2020, there will be many more cars on the road and many more drivers which will significantly increase energy consumption.

CAFE is not the answer.

Heather Mills and Environmental Hypocrisy

What's worse: gas-guzzling or eating meat?

Recently Heather Mills showed up for a photo shoot to make the connection between global warming and eating meat in a gas-guzzling SUV. While Ms. Mills is right about the meat eating and global warming connection, there is also a big connection between gas-guzzling and global warming.

So does Mrs. Mills have a leg to stand on? Sadly, she does not - no pun intended.

Nonetheless, the point Mills is trying to make is a strong one. Al Gore, for example, talks about how dangerous global warming is, how the world is on the verge of collapse, but he could probably have a bigger effect on global warming by going vegetarian, yet this isn't part of Gore's inconvenient truth. Why?

Maybe the goal to being a good environmentalist is to do less lecturing and more living by example?

Hybrid Tax Credits & The Hydrogen Highway NOW

How Congress can empower America with an Energy Revolution

Global warming, foreign oil dependency, oil company profits, and especially CAFE are very common and important topics discussed regularly by many in Congress. Even Presidential candidates are one-upping each other with their CAFE plans.

Similarly, many environmental groups have also been particularly focused on CAFE. Yet, sadly, even the most stringent plan in Congress is going to do little to significantly affect either global warming or foreign oil dependence based upon America's history of year-after-year of increased fuel consumption.

And the other favorite of Congress, corn-based ethanol, might even be less effective than CAFE, or even harmful.

America needs an energy paradigm change, an Energy Revolution! (Finish)

Are utility companies afraid of the hydrogen highway?

Fuel cell cars: The greatest fear of power companies?

I've long been a huge fan of hybrid cars and, especially, of plug-in hybrid vehicles. For the last several years, I've believed that plug-in hybrids made fuel cell vehicles and, more important, the hydrogen highway irrelevant to a new energy paradigm. In fact, I started to believe that the hydrogen highway was the quickest path away from a new, clean and green energy paradigm.

Lately, however, I've been buying into the hydrogen economy, and I'm starting to wonder if utility companies and some of their plug-in hybrid-supporting friends are fighting against the hydrogen economy for all the wrong reasons. (Finish)

Foreign oil dependency & Global Warming: Michigan doesn't get it

Politicians in Michigan need to wake up

"Michigan's congressional delegation is urging the U.S. Health and Human Services Department to stop touting foreign cars to its employees.

In a letter to Secretary Mike Leavitt, Michigan lawmakers blasted an e-mail his department sent to its 67,000 employees advising them to avoid sport utility vehicles and recommending a number of foreign cars," writes the DetroitNews.

"It is our hope that your agency will refrain from sending out similar communications that make product endorsements, particularly by non-U.S. companies," the delegation wrote. "It seems to us the time and effort that went into producing this document could have been better spent preventing disease, assuring food and drug safety (and) improving children's health."

Wake up Michigan!

Honestly, global warming is the biggest issue facing the Health of America if it's real. Sure, global warming is a contentious issue, but global warming dissenters do not have absolute proof that human-influenced global warming is not real. Thus, there is nothing wrong with the Health and Human Services Department taking a stand - something the Big 3 should have done a couple of decades ago and at least after 9/11.

However, more to the point, the Health Department is not promoting foreign cars, they are promoting green cars. Sadly, American automakers just haven't been very green. Even more disappointing, being green coincides very closely with fuel economy, which also means that since 9/11, American automakers have done little to address foreign oil dependency.

How patriotic is that when foreign oil dependency has become one of the most critical issues to national security, even to the health and welfare of the American people?

Traffic congestion, MPGs and Hybrids

"Things are bad and they're getting worse," said Alan Pisarski, a transportation expert and the author of "Commuting in America."

According to a new study, traffic in America is increasing, and that traffic is costing Americans - on average - about a work week per year.

Traffic also results in the worst fuel economy and the highest emissions, unless you drive a hybrid, such as a Toyota Prius. For this reason, I feel that the EPA and automakers should highlight city fuel economy, rather than highway fuel economy.

According to experts, the majority of Americans will soon live in urban areas, urban areas like Los Angeles where almost 2 weeks per year are wasted. Unfortunately, there are few solutions for this congestion, which means the problem is only going to get worse and probably significantly worse.

While it's great that a lot of cars achieve 30 mpg on the highway, it's their fuel economy in the city that is becoming ever more important. Hybrid cars, such as the Prius or the Ford Escape hybrid - even the Chevy Tahoe hybrid - provide huge improvements in fuel economy in these conditions.

Sadly, traffic is a problem that took only a few decades to grow out of control, and it will have devastating consequences on fuel economy, foreign oil dependency and global warming if it isn't taken seriously into the next few decades.

Vermont ruling almost guarantees hybrid future

Will the EPA be forced to work with states on emissions?

"There is no question that the GHG (greenhouse gas) regulations present great challenges to automakers," Judge William Sessions III, sitting in the U.S. District Court in Burlington, wrote at the conclusion of his 240-page decision.

He added, "History suggests that the ingenuity of the industry, once put in gear, responds admirably to most technological challenges. In light of the public statements of industry representatives, (the) history of compliance with previous technological challenges, and the state of the record, the court remains unconvinced automakers cannot meet the challenges of Vermont and California's GHG regulations."

Many believe this ruling will now set a precedent that other states, such as California, are also seeking, enabling such states to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, something that almost guarantees the need for significant fleets of hybrid cars and other advanced technologies.

Sure, some critics, such as Karl on Cars, are going to complain that global warming is not being caused by humans and such changes are an expensive waste of time.

I say hold on.

Even if it is proven that global warming is not being caused by humans, the process of trying to end global warming emissions will have a huge impact on fuel economy and foreign oil dependency. Thus, even if you don't believe in global warming, isn't it time to address energy security?

AutoNation's CEO, Mike Jackson, on fuel economy

Bush, and the last 4 Presidents, have accomplished nothing regarding foreign oil dependency

"We've had five presidents in a row who have said our dependence on imported oil is a matter of national security. Actually, on this issue you can pick whether you're motivated by global warming or national security—it doesn't matter. If you look at the issue and want a serious energy policy that's going to make a difference—because in this period with these five presidents we've gone from importing 30 percent of our oil to 60 percent of our oil—so, obviously we don't have a policy that's dealing with this."

"When it comes to fuel consumption and fuel economy do not listen to what people tell you they are going to do, look at what they actually do. Take model year '06 with all the discussions about fuel economy and everything else, fuel economy for the cars sold will be basically unchanged. It's the same as the last 25 years."

So, what's Mike Jackon's favorite solution? A gas tax.

(Source: BusinessWeek)

Speculating on Toyota's new hybrid & hybrid plans

Toyota's next hybrid-only vehicle?

So, by 2009 Toyota plans to begin selling another hybrid-only brand. Will it be completely unique? Will it be a Prius derivative, such as a larger Prius or a smaller city Prius, as Toyota has previously discussed? Maybe it will be something even far more interesting, such as the FT-HS hybrid concept?

O.K., Toyota's new hybrid will not be the FT-HS, as Toyota has already stated that it would develop this concept vehicle as both a hybrid and a conventional vehicle.

Still, whatever vehicle it is, it proves that Toyota is not just serious about hybrid cars, but dead serious about selling 1,000,000 hybrids per year starting around 2010. So, what is this new hybrid and how does it fit in with Toyota's hybrid plans?

--> Finish: Speculating on Toyota's new hybrid and hybrid plans