Wednesday, December 13, 2006

NO. Hybrid vehicles are not losing their appeal

Today, Roland Jones of MSNBC asked the question, Are hybrid vehicles losing their appeal?

No, Roland, they are not. Also, Roland, how can you utilize the Honda Accord hybrid to discuss hybrid vehicle economics? First, the Accord hybrid isn't a hot-selling hybrid, it's possibly the worst selling hybrid. Second, it's a performance hybrid, and was not produced purely to achieve fuel efficiency.

Sure, the sales of hybrid cars are down. Automobile sales overall are down and expected to be down into 2007. Yes, hybrids are down more, but that fact has nothing to deal with appeal, Roland. Obviously, the fact that Toyota's hybrid tax credits have been cut in half is a key issue since the Prius is by far the best selling hybrid, as is the drop in gasoline prices.

But there is also a bigger, non-hybrid issue. Why are automobile sales down and expected to be down next year? Are automobiles losing their appeal? Or, do consumers have a little less financial power? If economic times are tight, it isn't surprising fewer consumers can justify paying more for a hybrid when the tax credit has been cut in half and when gas prices are down.

Nonetheless, consumers are very interested in hybrid cars, especially the hybrids of the future. Consumers are not stupid, and they know the best of hybrid vehicles is yet to come. Currently, the public appears to be particularly fascinated with the idea of plug-in hybrid vehicles. So, since consumers have less cash and gas prices are low, many are waiting for next generation hybrid technology.

And no, Roland, diesel is not an alternative. Diesel might compete with hybrids today in some driving conditions, but reliance upon diesel instead of gasoline will NEVER end foreign oil dependency. Next generation hybrid technology, however, certainly has the capability to end foreign oil dependency.

Labels: , ,

Friday, December 08, 2006

Tax incentives for oil drillers more important than clean vehicle tax incentives

Even in the final days of the current Republican led Congress, tax incentives for oil drillers are still of extreme importance. Even in these days of astronomical oil company profits, more tax incentives for oil companies are still far more important than tax incentives for hybrid cars and other clean vehicle technologies.

If filthy-profit rich oil companies can't afford to do more Gulf drilling without tax incentives, then too bad. If that means higher gas prices in the short term, then I guess it will just make alternative fuels and hybrid cars that much more cost-effective. Besides, the more we invest in alternative fuels and clean vehicle technologies, the less we'll have to be worried about the price of oil in the long term.

Labels:

Thursday, December 07, 2006

Capitalism, Competition, Free Markets & Hybrid Tax Credits

Today, the Pentagon is one of the biggest proponents of energy independence. Why? Quite frankly, the cost of protecting America's oil habit is very expensive, and it is possibly the greatest threat to American National Security. Most citizens are even starting to understand the problems foreign oil dependency has and is creating. As a result, Congress created a new tax credit to help Americans purchase clean, foreign-oil-dependency fighting automobiles, such as hybrid cars.

The plan worked so well, that Toyota met its quota in less than a year, long before GM has even sold ONE full hybrid vehicle. Consequently, sales of Toyota hybrids have slowed in recent months. Sure, high gas prices have dulled people's interest in fuel economy, but it seems obvious that reduced tax credits are also an important part of the skid.

In America, where the virtues of capitalism, competition and free markets are loudly promoted in corporations and Congress, shouldn't such ideals also be used to fight for energy independence? If Toyota could sell another 60,000 hybrid vehicles right now, utilizing GM's unused credits before GM even offers a full hybrid, shouldn't they have that right?

Isn't protecting National Security more important than protecting Detroit's failures? Is America afraid to end oil dependency too quickly? Is the status quo really more important than National Security? Why are we punishing Toyota for doing too much to help America fight foreign oil dependency?

Why are there even quotas on the tax credits? There are no quotas on the tax incentives given to small business owners that buy the worst gas-guzzlers, yet there is NO incentive for small business owners to buy fuel efficient vehicles.

I guess that only makes sense to members of Congress.

While GM's Rick Wagoner can complain about unfair trade advantages and currency manipulation in places like Japan, Toyota has every right to complain about protectionist legislation coming out of the U.S. Congress.

If GM were forced to compete for those credits in a free market, you can bet they would have gotten more hybrids on the road much faster. Instead, Congress has essentially given them a safety net NOT to act faster.

Great job Congress! I mean its only our National Security at stake!

Labels: , ,

Tuesday, December 05, 2006

Hybrid tax credits not on Congress' radar?

Toyota spokeswoman Martha Voss told the San Francisco Chronicle that hybrid tax credits do not seem to be on the radar screen of Congress, at least not in the near term. "There was talk of some people on the House and Senate side wanting to introduce bills" that would extend the hybrid tax credit for at least another year, Voss stated. "Since Congress changed hands, they're taking care of other business right now. They have a lot to do before they come back next year. We don't have any signals that there is something urgently pending," Voss says.

I wonder whether if it was GM or Ford that was running out of tax credits for their hybrid cars if Congress would take the matter more seriously? For some reason I'm sure Congress doesn't mind slowing down Toyota's foreign-oil dependency fighting success.

Labels:

Monday, December 04, 2006

Is there an issue more important than energy independence, right now?

Oil dependence aids terrorists, funds dictators and gives millions around the world a reason to point their finger at the imperialist, capitalist and evil American empire. Gas guzzling greed has produced complacency and ignorance that has stunted automotive development by focusing on speed and power rather than than on efficiency and clean technology. This greedy, ego-driven focus - produced by cheap oil dependence - has severely weakened the U.S. auto industry and now threatens the U.S. economy.

And for what? So, that yours is bigger than mine?

American automakers, their unions and representatives in Washington complain about imports and outsourcing, yet turn a blind eye to our extremely dangerous oil imports. How can one import be so good, yet another so bad?

One political party protects the oil industry, the other political party protects the gas-guzzler builders. Yet, our environment and National Security continue to deteriorate as politicians blame each other for a problem each party has contributed in creating.

Now politicians on both sides of the aisle are preparing to make energy independence the core issue for 2008 - at least in terms of political soundbites.

Why are waiting until 2008? I don't care about the next election, right now. I don't care about lame ducks, right now. I care about today, right now.

Right now, Congress could renew tax credits for Toyota hybrid cars. Right now, we could give small business owners the same tax incentives to buy clean vehicle technologies that we currently give small business owners to buy the worst gas-guzzlers.

When America went to the moon, it inspired the development of so many technologies and industries. Right now, striving for energy independence could do the same, while increasing National Security and fighting global warming.

Why isn't America doing more? Shouldn't we be doing everything we can, right now?

--> More on hybrid tax credits, etc.

Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, November 28, 2006

Americans want 40 mpg cars, but how much will they pay?

A new survey by the Opinion Research Corporation demonstrates that, "more than three out of four Americans want the government to impose a 40-mile-per-gallon fuel-efficiency standard on American vehicles." (more)

Would those same Americans still want such a fuel efficiency standard if it was going to cost them an extra $5000 to purchase their vehicle? What if it was just $3000? What if it meant the collapse of the U.S. auto industry?

While surveys show that Americans are interested in fuel economy, far fewer Americans actually demonstrate this attitude in the show room. Sure, Americans might be moving out of some of the largest gas-guzzlers into slightly smaller gas-guzzlers, but the vehicles most Americans continue to purchase are nowhere near achieving 40mpg. Getting them to achieve 40 mpg isn't going to be cheap, at least not in the short term.

Consequently, I argued yesterday that tax incentives are key to achieving higher fuel economy. Ultimately, 40 mpg CAFE probably isn't going to happen, and if it does, there will be loopholes. Moreover, if Americans fully embraced advanced technologies, funded by consumer-based tax incentives, 40 mpg becomes a cake walk.

Labels: , ,

Monday, November 27, 2006

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.

Labels: , , , , ,

Thursday, November 16, 2006

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.

Labels: , , , , , ,