A whole lotta clunkers in America

Legacy costs

Cash for Clunkers is over. After $2.88 billion we've removed 690,117 fuel inefficient clunkers from society while providing a quick bump to a down and out auto industry.

Good news, right?

Finish: A whole lotta clunkers in America

Is Cash for Clunkers really driving efficiency?

It's not all small cars

According to the government, the Cash for Clunker program is moving people out of fuel inefficient clunkers into vehicles averaging 25 mpg. I guess the keyword is average.

While the government hasn't released its data on the Clunker program, it has offered a Top 10 list that highlights small cars and a few hybrid vehicles.

Finish: Is Cash for Clunkers really driving efficiency?

The Icon and fuel efficient RVs

The most fuel efficient RV?

Check out this Fleetwood Icon RV. Who needs to fly, or stay in a hotel anymore? At 15 - 18 mpg, the ICON outperforms some large SUVs in terms of fuel economy. 

Interestingly, this ICON uses a Mercedes 6-cylinder diesel engine and a Dodge Sprinter powertrain. So, why not a diesel hybrid? Also, there are versions of Dodge Sprinter vans that include plug-in hybrid technology. Take the Icon, add some solar panels to the roof and a plug-in hybrid powertrain, and all your camping energy is free, with any extra electricity used as fuel. Now that's an idea I'd like to buy.

Anybody aware of a more fuel efficient RV?

Frankfurt - Fuel efficiency Pretending?

Green hotdoggin' at the Frankfurt AutoShow?

The hype around the Frankfurt Auto Show has almost exclusively been focused on green vehicles, such as hybrid cars, clean diesel vehicles, and bio-fueled vehicles. Obviously, it's great that automakers are focusing on green issues, but are they just posing?

With the EU possibly on the verge of very strict emissions requirements, automakers have to be prepared. Nonetheless, if the EU doesn't act, will automakers continue with their green efforts?

Transport and Environment, a Brussels-based environmental lobby group, is not impressed with Frankfurt-attending-automakers according to Reuters. Essentially, automakers are just throwing out a few token green cars, rather than making real changes, the group claims.

"It's not good enough to have one or two cars," said Transport and Environment spokesman Dudley Curtis. "What we need is emission reduction across the board."

Do automakers really care about the environment or energy security, or is profit all that matters?

UAW and Fuel Economy

Living la vida loca?

According to the UAW's Ron Gettelfinger, American automakers are unfairly portrayed as not competing on fuel economy, stating "Unfortunately, there is a misperception that the Big Three only make gas guzzlers, while Toyota is a division of Greenpeace."

I don't know, Ron. The Big 3 trail both Honda and Toyota year-after-year-after-year on fleet fuel economy. Are those facts based on misperception?

Without the profit margins of Detroit's most fuel inefficient vehicles, bankruptcy would be unavoidable. Yet, Toyota and Honda could survive.

Perhaps the real problem is Ron's misperception of reality? Time for a new UAW President?

Could the Automotive X-Prize embarrass Detroit

The car that started it all?

When Toyota launched the Prius hybrid car, executives from the Big 3 almost couldn't stop laughing at such a ridiculous effort. Americans, they seemed to believe, could care less about hybrid cars and fuel efficiency.

Well, who is laughing now?

Sure, hybrids are a long way from ending the internal combustion engine, but the vehicles did wake up some Americans, especially those realizing the ever-growing dangers of foreign oil dependency and/or global warming.

Can the Automotive X-Prize challenge the auto establishment even more? Dan Carney comments for Edmunds "The winning cars will not use "fuel molecule aligners," "air vortex generators," "fish carburetors" or any of the other mythical and fraudulent add-on devices claimed to produce fantastic fuel economy. Of course, this [an X-Prize Winner] will prove to conspiracy theorists that there's still a nefarious conspiracy between Detroit and Big Oil."

Already a loophole in new CAFE bill?

Gotta love those folks in Congress!

While there has been a lot of talk in Congress regarding CAFE, fuel economy, global warming, foreign oil dependency, etc., little action has followed. Now, according to Roland Jones, the current legislation aimed at these issues might already be flawed with loopholes before it is even enacted.

While this CAFE plan is not yet law, nor even fully ratified by Congress, it demonstrates that any CAFE-increasing bill will, almost assuredly, prove mostly ineffective.

And, really, who can blame Congress? Most Americans simply care only about the cost of their gasoline, not the costs of gas-guzzling pollution, global warming and foreign oil dependency. Most American, ultimately, are quite content to cheaply guzzle gas forever it seems.

Fuel economy dominates Intellichoice vehicle picks

Fuel efficiency scores

Intellichoice.com announced its Best Deals of the Month yesterday, and hybrid cars were very strong performers.

"A look at the list and it's not hard to see that fuel economy is a major factor for May's winners," said James Bell, publisher of IntelliChoice.com. "The Toyota Prius, Ford Escape Hybrid and Toyota Highlander Hybrid are perennial winners, and the Lexus RX 400h displaces the RX 350 on this month's list on the basis of fuel cost.

In addition, the Honda Civic hybrid also made the list.

Forget hybrids: Senate Approves Detroit-Friendly CAFE plan?

What percentage of Americans really need a bigger SUV than this Escape hybrid?

A Senate panel approved a plan to increase average fleet fuel economy in the U.S. to 35 mpg by 2020. Of course, the plan has yet to be approved by the full Senate and the House has its own plan, so it won't be surprising if the final plan is watered down, especially related to trucks and SUVs - Detroit's moneymakers.

Still, the Ford Escape hybrid can essentially meet 2020's standards, today. The Toyota Prius blows this requirement away, today. Hybrid cars provide the technology to meet this requirement, today.

Between now and 2020...(Finish Forget hybrids: Senate Panel approves Detroit-friendly CAFE plan)

GM joins climate change battle?

"General Motors on Tuesday became the first automobile manufacturer to join the U.S. Climate Action Partnership, a coalition of corporate executives that wants Congress to enact an economy-wide mandatory cap on carbon dioxide emissions."

Interesting. GM can both fight against climate change legislation and join a Climate Action Partnership? Perhaps the word partnership should be replaced with lobby?

How about if you increase your fleet fuel efficiency, stop using flex-fuel to violate CAFE, and stop fighting California's global warming legislation? How about a couple of hybrid cars, not just hybrid SUVs?

Walk the Walk, please.

(Source: AP)

Chrysler's gas-guzzling hybrids?

Chrysler adds Aspen to hybrid lineup

Move over Durango, here comes the Aspen. In addition to the Dodge Durango hybrid, Chrylser has announced that the 2008 Aspen will also be available as a hybrid.

Overall, Chrysler claims that both hybrid vehicles will offer a 25 percent overall increase in fuel economy. In city driving, however, both hybrids could achieve as much as a 40 percent increase in fuel efficiency.

While that's great news for SUV fans whom want to increase their fuel economy, how long do car fans have to wait for a U.S.-manufactured Toyota Prius contender?

Ford: Gasoline engines here to stay

I'll take the Reflex over the Explorer any day

According to Susan Cischke, senior vice president for sustainability, environment and safety engineering at Ford, "Research shows that Americans want more fuel-efficient cars, yet they don't want to drive smaller vehicles. And they still have a need to move people, haul things and tow boats and other loads," according to an article on CNN.

Thus, according to Cischke, the gasoline engine isn't going to be phased out at least for the next few decades.

Somebody better tell Honda to stop making small cars.

Forget the politicians when it comes to hybrids and biofuels?

Does it really matter which Party is in control?

If you ask me, competition works better than politicians. I'm not saying competition works perfectly, but it works better than a bunch of rich, special interest-funded partisan politicians.

Consequently, I've been very bothered that Congress has not extended Toyota's hybrid tax credits - something both Republicans and Democrats have ignored. Yet, in the last couple of years, both parties have talked considerably about energy dependence, especially foreign oil dependence and/or global warming. Yet, very little has been accomplished to alleviate these problems.

Obviously, the task is not simple. Still, it seems to me that the quickest way to make automakers deal with fuel efficiency is simple competition. Force them to act or risk losing customers.

Thus, the more success Toyota has selling hybrid vehicles, the more pressure there is.....Finish Hybrids and Biofuels: Forget the Politicians.

Ford ready to fight global warming?

Let's get this sucka on the road then!

I think Ford CEO Alan Mulally has the potential to turn Ford around. First, Mulally is an efficiency aficionado. Second, he has proven himself at Boeing. Third, he wants to fight global warming, even telling reporters that he believes humans are responsible for the "vast majority" of global warming.

Whether he's correct or not regarding global warming, Mulally at least appears cognizant of the fact the fuel efficiency is going to determine the success of automakers selling vehicles in the U.S. - foreign oil dependency isn't going anywhere even if science proves the sun is causing global warming. Perhaps, some U.S. auto manufacturers might choose to focus on selling sub-$5000.00 cars in China and India, but it appears that Ford is prepared to try to sell fuel efficient vehicles in the U.S..

So, c'mon Mr. Mulally, let's see a few new hybrid vehicles, such as the Ford Reflex hybrid pictured above. Enough talking, time for a little walking. Show the world and the rest of Detroit that Ford ain't dead yet. Besides America could truly use some real leadership coming out of Michigan - apart from the Pistons and Red Wings.

Tough environmental regulations a boon for hybrids and bio-fuels in Europe?

How will Europe deal with CO2 emissions?

According to press releases from Frost & Sullivan, the future seems very bright for hybrid cars and alternative fuels, at least in Europe.

"As a medium-term strategy over the next three to five years, OEMs are expected to introduce micro hybrids, mild hybrids, ethanol, biofuels and LPG into their fleets to reduce CO2 emissions," notes Frost & Sullivan (http://www.automotive.frost.com) Research Analyst Krishnasami Rajagopalan. "These technologies offer increased fuel efficiency and reduced emissions, which help OEMs reduce their fleet average CO2 emissions."

"Going forward, reducing emissions below 140 g/km of CO2 will be possible mainly with the help of alternative fuels and hybrids (micro, mild and full). While OEMs are aware of this fact, further development or market acceptance of these alternative fuels and hybrids is restrained by the distribution network, availability and high implementation costs."

Poor fuel economy - Blame the consumers?

Yesterday, the director of the EPA's Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Margo Oge, told a crowd at SAE that automakers and energy companies needed to work together to achieve increased fuel economy and reduced emissions. Immediately, disagreement came from every direction, according to the DetroitNews. Is it hydrogen, is it ethanol, is it fuel cells, is it cleaner gasoline, is it hybrid cars?

While there was little consensus on any sort of answer to creating better fuel economy and reducing emissions, there was some consensus regarding consumers and their role in this conundrum. Typically, consumers want the cheapest fuel - regardless of emissions, regardless of foreign oil dependency - and consumers quickly tend to choose performance over fuel economy.

"The challenge we face is that a vast majority of our customers choose fuel based on cost and convenience even over concerns such as greenhouse gases," Shell Oil Vice President for Fuel Development Darran Messem said.

Steve Plotkin, transportation energy analyst at Argonne National Laboratory, added "Americans have chosen performance over efficiency for years," as he suggested that the government will have to mandate some standards.

I say forget mandates, let's do a gas tax. It makes consumers take action that will require a fuel economy-driven reaction from automakers. Ultimately, if consumers aren't part of the solution, then the problem will only get bigger.

Roland's polls about hybrid vehicle sales

The Commodore 64 didn't tempt many consumers - personal computers were still too much of an emerging technology

Yesterday I came across a poll a by Cargurus.com of 500 visitors to their automotive site which suggested that most consumers were still not interested in hybrid cars. As I read through the press release I noticed quotes from Tesla board members - also Cargurus.com board members - explaining that hybrids make little sense. Rather, a Tesla board member claimed, electric cars were a far better option. No conflict of interest there!

Please. I would love an electric vehicle. If I could afford Tesla's $100,000 Roadster, I would buy it today. Yet, the Roadster still has yet to hit the road for any consumers. And it costs $100,000!

Nonetheless, Roland Jones of MSNBC took this highly objective poll to claim that maybe hybrid vehicle sales have no future, a common thread in much of Roland's hybrid writing.

Yet, if Toyota offers the third generation Prius at the same costs as today's Prius, but with a significant increase in fuel efficiency, then nothing will stop the hybrid revolution - and that is less than 2 years away. Until then, hybrids still are an emerging technology, and anybody whom studies the sales patterns of emerging technologies wouldn't find any surprise in a poll that shows a majority of consumers are still "iffy" about buying a hybrid vehicle.

Nissan Maxima Clean Diesel Vehicle

Nissan will begin selling a clean diesel Maxima in the U.S. by 2010 according to a press release from the company.

"Nissan is fully engaged in reducing emissions and improving fuel economy and efficiency. Launching a clean diesel engine in the U.S. will offer customers the benefits of fuel economy, CO2 reduction and a satisfying, fun- to-drive performance that is a hallmark of the Nissan brand," said Carlos Ghosn, President and CEO of Nissan Motor Co., Ltd., in a speech at the Council on Foreign Relations. "You can expect to see more diesel engines in our product lineup in Europe, Japan, North America and China by fiscal year 2010."

GM's Lutz says fuel efficiency too expensive

Are flex-fuel lies killing GM?

GM's Bob Lutz is claiming that President Bush's plans to increase automobile fuel efficiency could raise the cost of automobiles by $5000.00, according to the DetroitNews. Rather than increase fuel efficiency, Lutz claims increased availability of ethanol is a better solution.

I'm so tired of hearing about GM's ethanol plans. First, GM is using cheap flex-fuel technology as a loophole to violate CAFE. As a result GM can't even meet the CAFE laws created 20 years ago, let alone more stringent rules. Consequently, GM is using legal loopholes to avoid paying massive fines, while increasing America's foreign oil dependency more than should be allowed by law. Second, corn-based ethanol is not a good solution to resolving America's energy problems. Third, GM is an automaker, not an energy company, so focus on automotive technology.

While Toyota achieves record months of sales significantly helped by hybrid cars, such as the Prius, GM has yet to sell one full hybrid vehicle. Why? Why can't GM realize that fuel efficiency is becoming ever more a critical aspect of automobile manufacturing survival - possibly and probably the key to the automotive future?

The good 'ole days of gas-guzzling land yachts are over. Deal with it.

Automakers shun fuel efficient technology for fuel

Shouldn't automakers be more focused on fuel efficiency, rather than on alternative fuels?

I hate being critical of the biofuel movement, but it is simply a fact that corn-based ethanol is just not a very good bio-fuel. Moreover, there are plenty of questions still left unresolved regarding bio-fuels, especially until cellulosic ethanol is economically achieved.

For example, if we triple or quadruple ethanol consumption, how much will food prices increase? Also, considering that water is more and more labeled as the next oil, is it wise to use so much of this precious resource to fuel our vehicles via water-greedy corn? Furthermore, will global warming affect our ability to produce many bio-fuels? And that's just for starters.

Finish Fuels rather than fuel efficiency

Automakers can't adapt to changing world?

Does the world need some new automakers?

Automakers, including the leading developer of hybrid cars, Toyota, are essentially begging Congress not to get too tough on fuel economy according to the latest Reuter's reports. Yet, what are their solutions? Wait until the holy grail, the hydrogen economy, develops? Do automakers not fully comprehend the threat and problems caused by foreign oil dependency, by global warming and automaker's significant responsibility towards these issues?

While automakers speak of the billions it might cost them to achieve significant gains in fuel efficiency, how many billions - if not trillions - has foreign oil dependency cost America, the world? Certainly Congress and automakers must work together, rather than as adversaries. And, while it is true that consumers also must bear some of the burden for creating our gas-guzzling culture, at some point automakers need to realize that America needs solutions to foreign oil dependency and global warming far more than it needs any of the major automakers.

Ultimately, if automakers cannot become part of the solution, then they are part of the problem.

Is this the Third Generation Prius?

Wow!

According to Erin Riches of Straightline, the Toyota press conference at the Geneva Auto Show was packed, as the hype around the Hybrid X had boiled into a froth.

So, is the Hybrid X the third generation Prius? If so, and if this vehicle can hit the streets sometime in 2008, Toyota is going to become an almost unstoppable force in the automotive world. Imagine this hybrid with lithium-ion batteries, significantly increasing both the performance and the fuel efficiency of the third-generation Prius compared to the current Prius.

This hybrid says one thing: future.

Toyota might be the king of hybrid cars right now, but this vehicle could be the beginning of a new hybrid vehicle empire for Toyota.

Read more of Erin's report.

Is this Toyota's Hybrid X?

Is the FT-HS hybrid concept Hybrid X?

Earlier this week I mentioned that Toyota will debut the Hybrid X at the Geneva Auto show next week and I wondered whether the Hybrid X is the FT-HS concept, or a derivative of this concept. I just don't know.

Also, recently, Toyota claimed that the third generation Toyota Prius, and all of Toyota's hybrid cars, will utilize lithium-ion batteries, rather than the NiMH batteries used today. This development - this revolution - promises much lighter vehicles and greater energy capacity - two things that should increase both the performance and the fuel efficiency of Toyota's hybrid vehicles. At the same time, Toyota claimed this will also reduce the price of hybrid technology.

So is this Hybrid X? More on Hybrid X.

Third Generation Toyota Prius

Lithium ion batteries will power the third generation Toyota Prius hybrid according to Toyota CEO Katsuaki Watanabe. "We will change the battery from nickel hydride to the lithium battery," stated the CEO in a recent BusinessWeek interview.

Additionally, Toyota confirmed earlier reports that indicated that there will be serious improvements in weight, fuel-efficiency and costs of the third gen Prius, which should be available in either 2008 or 2009.

More on the Third Generation Toyota Prius.

SUV interest increasing?

The Saturn Vue hybrid is just too mild for my tastes

According to Cars.com, there is an uptick in consumer interest for SUVs. Ironically, however, fuel efficiency is more important than safety for consumers interested in purchasing a new vehicle, but the most important point is price, notes the same study. Consequently, I wonder is fuel efficiency less important for those interested in an SUV compared to other vehicles?

It seems that must be the case.

Obviously, it appears SUV fans are a die hard bunch, still they must also have fuel efficiency concerns. So, why isn't GM or Chrysler trying to attract any of these die hards with their dual mode hybrid powertrain?

Finish, Where are GM's hybrid SUVs?

Clean diesel vehicles don't go far enough

Sure, a clean diesel is nice, but a clean diesel hybrid is revolutionary

I was watching CNBC's coverage of the recent North American International Auto Show yesterday, a show where European automakers really tried to raise the image value of clean diesel vehicles, such as the VW Tiguan concept pictured here.

And what is not to like? Clean and powerful, plus a 25 percent increase in fuel efficiency over gasoline sounds pretty good.

Yet, if America converted its an entire fleet to clean diesel, instead of gasoline, it would take more than a decade. In that same time, it is predicted that America's energy consumption will probably increase by some 20 percent or more. So, what will have been gained? At best, America would be just as dependent as today on foreign oil by making this conversion.

Clean diesel hybrids, or clean diesel plug-in hybrids, however, could have revolutionary effects on foreign oil dependency. Why not invest in this future? Won't the costs pay for themselves in the long run?

More on clean diesel vehicles versus hybrid vehicles.

Toyota seeks to extend tax credits for hybrids

Toyota wants tax credits for hybrid vehicles extended, citing a drop in the sales of its hybrid cars corresponding to the reduction in the credit. Other automakers, aren't as certain. Honda, for example, called hybrids only a bridge to another technology and would prefer tax credits for hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. (more)

Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles? The same hydrogen vehicles that BMW just claimed are 30 years away from mass-production reality? What happened to Honda, the environmental leader? Yes, Honda developed its hybrids as a bridge to another technology, but their bridge is lost in the fog right now. Toyota, on the other hand, is developing its hybrid cars as an integral part of the path to fuel cell vehicles.

One battery break-through and hybrids could become twice as efficient as today. Moreover, they could be converted into plug-in hybrids for even greater fuel efficiency. In fact, with just one good battery innovation, electric vehicles - never powered by a fuel cell or hydrogen - might be the future.

Yes, extending the tax credit will further empower Toyota, but letting the credit slide will lull many automakers back into the 'maintaining the status quo' mentality that created the problems of foreign oil dependency and global warming in the first place.

Let's drive competition. Let's extend tax credits for hybrid vehicles.

BMW: Hydrogen highway still decades away

"BMW says hydrogen-powered cars are 30 years off, at least in terms of being available to the masses—and yes, I know, they just introduced a hydrogen-power 7-Series model. This 30-year prediction is much more pessimistic than the already pessimistic GM's 10-year prediction." (more)

When such a time frame is realized, it seems obvious that everything that can be done today, better be done today. Hybrid cars offer huge gains in efficiency, they can utilize any of the alternative fuels being developed including hydrogen, and hybrids can help develop fuel cells. Or, we can just wait 30 years.

Is the third generation Hybrid Synergy Drive almost production-ready?

0 - 60 in 4 seconds with 4 cylinder fuel efficiency! What are we waiting for?

I've already stated that I want the FT-HS hybrid concept to become a reality, and I've also stated that the technology behind the FT-HS hybrid is more important than the vehicle itself. Obviously, this begs the question, "When is some of this new hybrid technology going to find its way into Toyota's current hybrid cars?"

Already, Toyota has contemplated a city Prius, for example. Why not put FT-HS technology into a smaller Prius - say one with only a 3 cylinder engine - that would achieve greater fuel efficiency, yet still be capable of amazing bursts of speed or power.

Also, why not a sporty version of the Camry hybrid? Couldn't this new hybrid technology provide more torque and/or towing capacity for the Highlander hybrid?

Since Toyota has claimed the FT-HS is basically a production-ready vehicle, one has to assume the third generation Hybrid Synergy Drive has to be almost production-ready as well. So, why not give consumers a little taste?

Hybrid Synergy Drive Versus E Flex Drive: It's all about evolution

Several years ago I thought that automakers should do everything possible to develop hydrogen powered vehicles, especially fuel cell vehicles. Eventually, however, it became obvious that there were many, many technological hurdles - in addition to massive costs - to overcome and make this hydrogen future a reality. Yet, it seemed obvious, especially after 9/11, that America couldn't just wait for the hydrogen highway to deliver a road to energy security.

Fortunately, Honda launched the Insight hybrid and Toyota quickly followed with the Prius. For Honda, hybrid technology was a niche a technology, an experiment in fuel efficiency. By the second generation of the Prius, however, not only was the Prius a hit with consumers, it was the beginning of a foundation, an element of Toyota's kaizen.

The Prius had become a path to fuel cell vehicles.

--> Read the Full Story

Can the Toyota FT-HS hybrid be taken seriously?

While Toyota seemed more interested in promoting trucks, rather than its fantastic line of hybrid cars, the FT-HS hybrid concept was still an incredible hit at NAIAS. Still, with a name like FT-HS, can this concept be taken seriously? This amazing sports concept was built with an amazingly advanced hybrid powertrain to achieve phenomenal performance in terms of speed, power and fuel efficiency. Moreover, it is essentially production-ready. So, what's the problem? How about a better name and a launch date?

Congress must help America develop lithium-ion batteries

When the movie Who killed the electric car showed experts whom claimed the technology for electric cars was available in the days of NiMH batteries, I had to laugh - hysterically. Many fans of plug-in hybrids seem to believe the same idea. Yet, speak with experts at GM, hybrid leader Toyota, or fuel efficiency leader Honda and they all eventually hit the same point: maintaining the sweetspot.

Sure automakers can make plug-in hybrids today, but maintaining the sweetspot with today's lithium-ion batteries isn't easy. In fact, to do so in a cost effective way simply isn't possible. Would you a buy a car that is going to cost an extra $4000 every 4 years to replace your batteries? In reality, that's a strong possibility. In addition, even if next generation batteries exist, feasibility studies still have to be carried out, and that takes years - the insurance industry demands it.

(Full Story)

Will there be a 2008 Accord hybrid?

When the Honda Accord Coupe Concept was revealed at NAIAS I was in attendance hoping to hear something about an updated Accord hybrid. Unfortunately, a hybrid version of the Accord was not mentioned as part of the debut. I later asked a Honda spokesperson if the new Accord Coupe, which is set for launch as a 2008 vehicle, would include a hybrid version. To that question, I was simply told there is not yet an answer.

Considering that Honda's debut focused on Honda's efforts in fuel efficiency, it was surprising not to hear something about an Accord hybrid, which only makes me think that the Accord hybrid could be phased out.

Fuel efficiency and hybrid launches at NAIAS?

So, most automotive executives believe that fuel efficiency is becoming the most important consumer concern. If so, how well will this issue be addressed at the upcoming North American International Auto Show?

All of the pre-show hype regarding hybrid cars, for example, has thus far focused on the FT-HS hybrid sports concept and a couple of clean diesels. While there are rumors that GM will debut some concept vehicles in this space, they are now just rumors. On the other hand, I've heard few hybrid or next generation fuel efficient technology rumors coming out of Ford or Honda, for example.

In my opinion, the FT-HS represents a revolution in both automotive technology and hybrid technology. Will all other automakers simply concede this space to Toyota for now? In reality, the hybrid revolution is probably 3 years away from fruition - the time when next generation batteries become mass-production reality. So, it wouldn't be surprising to see automakers idle their hybrid concepts in the short term.

On the other hand, it is as important as ever for automakers to be ready for the hybrid revolution - there really isn't that much time left to prepare. Consequently, I believe there are going to be a number of major hybrid concept launches at NAIAS by multiple automakers.

At least I hope so.

Fuel efficiency to become most important issue for car buyers?

A study by KPMG cited by BBC claims that most car industry executives believe that fuel efficiency is quickly becoming the most important concern for car buyers. "The North American consumer seems to be waking up to some consciousness with regard to fuel pricing, and those designs are typically the heaviest and least fuel efficient," Motor industry analyst Mark Fulthorpe, of CSM Worldwide stated.

"Increasingly they are looking at newer, lighter designs particularly from the Japanese and Korean manufacturers. We also see that in Europe as well."

If gas prices continue their decline, it seems hard to believe that fuel economy will become the dominant issue for car buyers. Still, such beliefs should keep investments in hybrid cars and other fuel efficient technologies a top priority for automakers.

Did GM kill the electric car?

Who killed the electric car? That is the question, at least according to the movie of the same name. Yet, in reality, did anyone really kill the electric car? Is it fair to blame a company like GM, the company most associated with killing the electric car, for the death of electric cars? Are electric cars even dead?

In just a few days, GM will debut a Chevy electric concept vehicle at the North American International Auto Show. In the last several months both Bob Lutz and Rick Wagoner have claimed the automotive future to be electric.

So, how could GM have killed the electric car if the automotive future is electric?

Perhaps, GM simply killed one version of an electric vehicle, one bad adaptation of an electric vehicle in the evolution of electric vehicles.

Lest we forget, even Toyota had a hard time finding enough batteries to produce 100,000 Toyota Prius hybrid cars just a year or two ago. Since electric vehicles require even greater battery capacity than hybrid cars, should we really be surprised electric vehicles didn't take America by storm?

Even Toyota, a company consumed by efficiency, has claimed that plug-in hybrid vehicles are not yet ready for mass-production. Plug-in hybrids offer very near electric car performance, but with the option of using conventional fuel when needed - significantly increasing the appeal of 'electric' vehicles.

Thus, is Toyota killing the plug-in hybrid electric vehicle?

Even today, hybrid vehicles could fade away for a number of years, particularly if gas costs decline for a couple of years. Yet, the dangers of foreign oil dependency won't go away because gas becomes cheaper. On the contrary, the dangers of foreign oil dependency will probably increase.

Inevitably, the only way hybrid cars, plug-in hybrids or electric vehicles are going to go mainstream in the next decade is with significant political help, as well as consumer help. Consumers have to be willing to share some risk - to pay now and save fuel later. Politicians have to help consumers afford to buy these foreign oil dependency fighting vehicles.

Will consumers and politicians rise to the challenge, or will we again be blinded by temporarily cheaper gas?

I hope the FT-HS hybrid concept isn't a "pipe dream"

When I saw the headline Pipe Dream? on AutoWeek regarding Toyota's newest hybrid concept, I couldn't wait to read the article. What possible negative arguments could AutoWeek have about one of the most interesting concept vehicles in years, I wondered. Whether Toyota builds the FT-HS hybrid or not isn't really very relevant. It's the technology. It's the fact that the FT-HS uses carbon fiber and an advanced hybrid powertrain. It's the fact that the FT-HS can go 0-60 in 4 seconds with 4 cylinder economy car fuel efficiency. Most important, it's the fact that the FT-HS was built upon a real production platform.

Then, of course, I read the article and realized there wasn't any negativity. Then again I guess I hope the FT-HS isn't a pipe dream. Then again, however, it isn't really about the FT-HS, it's about the technology producing the FT-HS.

Honda claims fuel cell vehicles "a real possibility" by 2018

Honda is claiming that fuel cell cars could be mass-produced by 2018. "In 2018, I believe the development (of a fuel-cell car) will have been very advanced," Honda president Takeo Fukui said in an interview with Kyodo News today. "It will become a real possibility to a large degree." (more)

A "real possibility"? Wow! We've been hearing about this "real possibility" for decades. Sure fuel cell vehicles might be mass-produced by 2018, but they might still cost more than 100,000 apiece, maybe even much more.

I became interested in hybrid cars because of my interest in the hydrogen economy and fuel cell vehicles. Ultimately, however, I realized that fuel cell cars were at least a decade away from reality and hybrids became, minimally, the short term solution to foreign oil dependency and global warming. Still, it appeared that hybrid vehicles, such as the Prius, were also providing a foundation for fuel cell vehicles. Consequently, I came to believe that investing in such hybrid vehicles made the path to fuel cell vehicles shorter. Even before full fuel cell vehicles, plug-in hybrid vehicles could utilize small fuel cells to increase their fuel efficiency - another step in making full fuel cell vehicles cheaper.

Lately; however, I have become somewhat annoyed by fuel cell vehicle talk. First, the vehicles cost almost $1 million apiece. Second, where are these vehicles going to fuel up? Third, the best of hybrid technology could be used, in just a couple of years, to mass-produce carbon-fiber plug-in hybrid vehicles with a capability of more than 100 mpg for a cost less than $50,000 apiece. Small hybrids could be far cheaper.

What the hell are we talking about 2018 for then? Let's do everything we can to today, not wait until 2018. Besides, mass-producing hybrids, especially next generation hybrids, creates a very nice platform to slowly develop fuel cells until costs can be driven down.

Watch out! Toyota's N Platform

Toyota is developing a new production platform called the N Platform. The N Platform is a production-ready platform for both the next-gen Lexus IS and GS sedans, as well as the platform for a few Japan-only Toyotas, in addition to the hybrid FT-HS sports concept vehicle. This new front-engine, rear drive flexible component production platform can be used for conventional-engined vehicles and hybrid vehicles. Additionally, as with the FT-HS, this platform can also accommodate carbon-fiber paneled automobiles.

So what! So what?

Imagine a $60,000 sports car that goes from 0 to 60 in 4 seconds, yet achieves the fuel efficiency of a four-cylinder compact car available in a T-roof with a hubless steering wheel using drive-by-wire technology. Imagine how much of this N Platform technology could revolutionize the Toyota Prius, for example.

Toyota's N platform is a shot across the bow of every other automaker in the world, a warning that Toyota isn't going to become complacent with success. Instead, Toyota is going to push their efficient production process to the next generation. Watch out world, Toyota is stating, the best is yet to come.

Mulally provides hope for Ford fans

Ford stock is dirt cheap, but not many analysts would recommend a buy on the stock and probably with good reason.

Still, one has to take note of Ford's new leader, Alan Mulally. Mulally is a long time fan of Toyota, particularly due to Toyota's manufacturing process - a process he hoped to replicate as an executive at Boeing. In fact, Mulally has called himself "a disciple of the Toyota production system," according to the DetroitNews. Moreover, when Mulally, along with the leaders of GM and Chrysler, met with the President a couple of months ago, it was Mulally whom was by far the most optimistic. It just seems as if Mulally realizes that the future of American automakers will require a revolution in process and in thinking. In a word, however, that revolution can be defined by efficiency.

Whether it is efficiency in production, in supply chains or in fuel economy, the mantra of efficiency can be a game changer for American automakers.

Consequently, I was very excited to hear that Ford is in discussions with Toyota regarding efficiency. Whether production efficiency or hybrid vehicle efficiency, it's obvious Ford can learn a thing or two from Toyota. While some analysts have questioned what Toyota might have to gain from a partnership with Ford, I say they have a lot to gain.

For example, yesterday, I noted that a hybrid partnership would benefit Toyota by making their hybrid powertrain more standard, which would give suppliers more incentive to develop Toyota-friendly hybrid parts. Obviously, more hybrid suppliers would lead to cheaper hybrid parts. Furthermore, Toyota would also receive a license fee from Ford which would help fund Toyota's hybrid development costs.

While none of this might work out, I think there is great potential for both companies. Obviously, Ford needs help, and Toyota knows a strong Ford is good for Toyota, especially if Toyota can create a nice revenue stream from a successful Ford.

Regardless, Mulally should give Ford fans great hope.

Congress: Flex-fuel plug-in hybrids not flex-fuel guzzlers

There has been much buzz in the media regarding how the Democratic control of Congress is going to help the green revolution. While there is no doubt that Democrats will pass more 'green' legislation than the previous Republican Congress, there is still much cause for concern. For example, "The politics surrounding environmental issues have proved hard to predict, largely because the potential economic impact of stronger regulation tends to scramble partisan loyalties. Democrats from auto-making states, for example, have fought efforts to mandate stricter miles-per-gallon rules for vehicles." (more)

Currently, the top buzz words coming from the Democratic agenda have largely been focused on global warming and alternative fuels, especially ethanol.

Obviously, global warming is an important issue, but when there are studies that indicate that far more global warming pollution is caused by the livestock industry than all the emissions from all forms of transportation combined, one has to take pause. Of course we should make cleaner automobiles; however, why is the smaller problem the center of all the global warming attention?

Even worse, it seems the Democratic preferred answer to global warming is ethanol. First, corn-based ethanol is not very environmentally friendly. Yes, it might be more environmentally friendly than petroleum, but is it enough more? Without doubt, I say no. Second, ethanol is also seen as a way to protect American automobile jobs, but at what cost? I simply don't see how E85 Hummers, Expeditions and Nitros are really an answer to global warming, foreign oil dependency or American jobs - at least in the long term.

Over the last several decades, almost every single advance in fuel efficiency has only produced heavier and more powerful vehicles - resulting in greater foreign oil dependency and pollution. In order for America to truly fight global warming and foreign oil dependency, while protecting American jobs, very advanced technology will be required - as fast as possible.

The entire American automobile psyche must evolve.

Of course, ethanol can help, particularly if it is used to top off a flex-fuel plug-in hybrid vehicle that only needs a few gallons of liquid fuel every month - if ever. Yet, I have heard very little coming out of the Democratic camp regarding hybrid cars and real world legislation.

If America takes the slow road to advanced hybrid technology, Toyota won't. Hyundai probably won't either. And if you make it profitable for American automakers to make E85 guzzlers, then you can expect to wait far longer for American automakers to focus on flex-fuel plug-in hybrids.

Ultimately, American automakers and American consumers have to change dramatically, and that change will require significant help from the government. Hopefully, Congress will focus on the the future, not just today's political pork and paybacks.

Will the new auto alliance be all about ethanol?

Dave McCurdy, a conservative Democrat, will take over the leadership position of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers. Now that Democrats are taking over Congress, one might expect huge changes in fuel efficiency and global warming pollution. But should we?

"The Auto Alliance made a fine choice in hiring Dave McCurdy as its president," U.S. Rep. John Dingell, D-Dearborn, said in a statement. "His integrity is unquestioned, his political instincts are sound, and his exceptional judgment will serve the Alliance remarkably well." (more)

McCurdy, a conservative Democrat, and Dingell, a protectionist Democrat unwilling to risk any union jobs in the auto industry in the name of fuel efficiency, will probably be a perfect match. They will make a lot of noise, but not accomplish much, at least regarding fuel efficiency. They will, however, make those invested in ethanol very rich.

What small car crash tests mean for fuel efficiency

I think that America would be well served by moving towards smaller vehicles; however, many Americans are very resistant to such a move, especially after recent crash tests. While some might argue small cars would be safer if big vehicles were taken off the road, such a move simply doesn't seem like it has the political legs to see reality. As a result fuel efficiency is going to have to be achieved with technology and hybrid technology seems like a no-brainer.

2007 A good year to invest in fuel efficiency for Honda

Earlier this week Honda announced that its great year in sales would result in more investment in fuel efficient vehicles. While there was no indication that Honda's increased investment in fuel efficient vehicles would include hybrids, Honda's success does show that fuel efficiency is becoming much more of a consumer concern.

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.

A fleeting impression of Vinod Khosla

I saw Vinod Khosla last night on the program NOW on a Southern California PBS channel. Khosla, a venture capitalist focused on ethanol, completely changed my mind about ethanol. I now have more doubt than ever.

Khosla objected to any question regarding ethanol's ability to 'save the planet' as a conspiracy committed by the oil companies. Big oil profited $10 billion in one quarter, Khosla consistently reminded the interviewer. Consequently, any scientist or any attempt to question ethanol as the cure to America's energy problems was paid for by big oil.

Please. There are many, many scientists whom have very legitimate concerns regarding the potential of ethanol.

Moreover, citing $10 billion dollars in quarterly profit cannot be the answer to every objection raised by critics. Believe me, Khosla seemed to say, because they have $10 billion in profits to fight me and the truth.

Hmmm. Currently, profit margins on ethanol are extremely high. So, if ethanol would happen to explode how many billions would Khosla rake in? Isn't that a tiny bit of a self-serving conflict of interest? Sure high oil profits are a concern, but other American industries have even higher profit margins. Moreover, those profit margins would never have occurred without hurricane Katrina, for example.

High oil profits are a good reason to stop any tax benefits for oil companies, but not the best reason to end oil dependence. Security is the best reason to end oil dependence, regardless of the profit margins.

Energy security is a very important American issue, for it's not just energy security, but national security. Such an issue demands complete and utter honesty, and honesty was something that Mr. Khosla seemed to be lacking.

I believe ethanol has great potential, but without a considerable improvement in fuel economy and energy efficiency, I also believe ethanol offers very little. Honestly, and I don't have billions or even millions at stake, nor am I paid by any oil company.

Who pays to increase CAFE?

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.

American-made hybrid SUVs reviewed by NYTimes

If you are interested in a hybrid SUV, particularly an American-made hybrid SUV, you might find the article Saturn Vue and Mercury Mariner: Hybrids, Mild or Seasoned, From the Motor City interesting. In a nutshell, the Saturn Vue hybrid is likable, but it comes a up a little short compared to other hybrid vehicles. The Mercury Mariner hybrid is a very fine hybrid vehicle, but costly. As I've stated in the past, the Vue hybrid might be a good buy for highway drivers looking for an economical American-made hybrid, though I still consider this hybrid SUV to be a mild hybrid. The Mariner hybrid is mostly a luxury hybrid that provides great performance and fuel efficiency, but it cannot really be defined as economical. Anyway, check out the rest of the article by following the link above.

American automakers need to embrace change and adaptability - something E85 doesn't provide

Last week I questioned an editorial by the Detroit News regarding fuel economy because of its complacency, and it's inability to foresee and realize that change must be realized by American automakers. Today, however, Daniel Howes of the Detroit News is singing my tune, telling politicians to give up the blame game while also telling Michigan and the Big 3 that it's time to change.

"The only questions are how and how quickly. Not, why us? Nor who's to blame for tampering with what U.S. Sen. Debbie Stabenow likes to call "our way of life" -- as if Detroit's automakers, their unions and others are immune to the laws of supply and demand. They aren't, no matter how freely some politicians may be willing to manipulate reality to suggest otherwise."

"Apologies to Sen. Stabenow, but "our way of life" is strangling Michigan because it was never designed to adapt to a changing world, much less accept that the economy and competition would change."

Evolution is often driven by small constant changes. Toyota, for example, is driven by small constant changes focused on increasing efficiency. This process, or Kaizen, led Toyota to hybrid cars - a new platform to increase efficiency. Inevitably the efficiency potential of hybrids has barely been tapped. Moreover, hybrids are adaptable to flex-fuel, hydrogen, gasoline, diesel, biodiesel, or even electricity, and they can lead to advanced batteries and fuel cell development.

Ultimately, hybrids exude change and flexibility. Today's hybrids are gasoline-electric, but tomorrow's might be flex-fuel plug-in hybrids and not long after that they might by hydrogen hybrids, or plug-in fuel cell hybrid vehicles. Hybrid technology is changing rapidly, adapting to the future.

Today, Democrats and the Big 3 appear very close to becoming fixated upon ethanol, a fuel which requires little change for the Big 3. Ultimately, ethanol won't really make the Big 3 any more adaptable, and it just might lead to another decade of complacency. Alternative fuels can help America, but not enough. Only significantly more fuel efficient automobiles can lead to real change.

Detroit must "think anew", and ethanol just isn't new enough.

Forget fuel efficiency because consumers don't want it?

This morning the Detroit News published an editorial against raising fuel economy rules because consumers aren't interested in fuel efficiency, they are interested in reliability, the paper argued. "Increasing fuel economy standards is again being pushed by advocacy groups, despite a clear mandate from consumers that other factors mean more when they go the showroom to buy cars and trucks."

As if automakers have done the greatest job in giving real choices to Americans. When you provide countless incentives to get someone into a gas-guzzler for less than a more fuel efficient model, many consumers will take that deal.

Additionally, the LATimes cited a report today showing that fuel efficiency is driving sales, at least in California. I guess the California auto market doesn't mean much to Detroit?

Also, while I understand consumer choice and believe in consumer choice, foreign oil dependency, according to multiple ex-CIA directors and many other security officials, is a significant threat to national security. Thus, is the paper arguing that consumer demand is more important than national security?

Let's also remember many Americans ARE choosing more fuel efficient vehicles.

Nonetheless, lets give consumer demand the benefit of the doubt. Let automakers build whatever they want. However, don't lecture me about the importance of America's auto industry when they are producing products that threaten MY national security. Don't ask me to buy American when it means giving money to terrorists and countries that HATE America.

In that case I will absolutely by a Toyota or Honda hybrid. I will ONLY buy fuel efficient vehicles, and I want the best fuel efficient vehicle money can buy - not some half-ass attempt.

Moreover, I don't want ANY of my tax dollars going to American companies producing products that threaten my National Security.

Consumer demand? Please! So, we should America remove all laws that ban any type of smoking because consumers demand cigarettes? Should we make all drugs legal because consumers want them?

While I'll acknowledge the fact that CAFE has largely been ineffective, I will not accept saying it is O.K. to build 14 mpg trucks that fund terrorism against fellow citizens because consumers want them. Something has to change. We can choose to make that change as a path to a more secure and prosperous future for America, or can we wait until our backs are against the wall and we are forced to change.

I guess it just goes to show how Old School so many Detroit-followers are still these day.

When I worked in the software field consumers NEVER wanted to upgrade, however, some software upgrades were required to make their software - their business - safer. Consequently, consumers really had no choice but to upgrade if they wanted to STAY in business.

The world changes, and when you work in technology you realize how quickly the world changes. Business at the speed of light, Bill Gates said of the digital world, which now includes automotive manufacturing.

Ultimately, companies that don't envision what customers will want in the future are doomed to the past. Whether Detroit thrives or dies WILL be determined by fuel efficiency - despite what consumer interest is today.

Are Democrats going to help the hybrid 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's fleet less fuel efficient today than 10 years ago

While GM claims to have more fuel efficient vehicles on the road today than any other auto manufacturer, GM's fleet is .05 miles per gallon less efficient than it was 10 years ago. Both Ford and Chrysler made slight gains. Toyota, on the other hand, improved fuel efficiency by 1.5 mpg over the same decade.

"Improving motor vehicle fuel efficiency is a win-win-win solution that would not only lower consumer costs and help decrease our dependence on oil, but also improve the future prospects of U.S. car companies," said Mark Cooper, the consumer federation's research director. "It is essential that the new Congress move quickly to approve higher fuel efficiency standards in order for these benefits to be realized."

Additionally the report noted, "It is significant that Ford and GM showed only marginal increases in the percentage of vehicles meeting CAFÉ standards and have suffered severe financial setbacks."

Kind of ironic that the same day the Big 3 and Democrats are blaming Bush for Detroit's problems, the facts seem to paint a bit different story. I thought the Democrats were going to rise above partisanship, end their ties with lobbyists and provide a new direction for America?

The right path to fuel efficiency

Ford is set to focus on fuel efficiency.

Yeah, we've heard this before. Ford is going to lead the environmental revolution in the automotive world! One month Ford is going to produce 250,000 hybrids by 2010, the next month they've already given up.

Still, Ford's new CEO, Alan Mulally is worth believing - for now.

In his job at Boeing, Mulally was a follower of the Toyota Production System. Moreover, Mulally believes that higher fuel prices and global oil demand are the most important dynamics facing the automotive field heading into the future. Consequently, Mulally told the Automotive News that "So clearly, designing and building cars that people really like and that are going to be useful for their lives but also continue to improve (fuel) efficiency is what I think is going to be the most important thing."

While it seems obvious that fuel efficiency is becoming significantly more important, the ability to compete and profit as we enter into this new automotive world is easier said, than done. Hopefully, Mulally can find the right path.

Speaking of the right path.

It would be nice if the Big 3 were a little more focused on how to be more fuel efficient when they meet with the President on Tuesday, rather than focusing on health care and trade issues. It's sort of ironic that Ford's CEO is showing up in a Ford Escape hybrid and GM's CEO in a Saturn Vue hybrid, yet both automakers are getting their asses kicked in the hybrid vehicle segment.

It wasn't but just a couple of years ago when GM execs regularly ridiculed hybrids. Perhaps, if the Big 3 had been more focused on automaking the last few decades, rather than on financing and lobbying, they wouldn't be facing such hard times. Neither health care nor trade issues caused the hybrid lag in Detroit - that was pure corporate incompetence.

Could ethanol become a boondoggle?

Last year ethanol producers received subsidies and tax incentives worth more than $5 billion dollars, and those subsidies will probably be much higher next year. Yet, even with those subsidies ethanol isn't cost effective unless gas prices are close to $3.00 per gallon.

So, is ethanol worth the price?

Supporters of ethanol claim that all this investment in ethanol for automobiles will eventually lead to better ways of producing ethanol, such as cellulosic ethanol.

I say it will simply lead to more flex-fuel Hummers and little decrease in foreign oil dependency. I say E85 is a feel-good way of accomplishing nothing, something both Democrats and Republicans love - talk, talk, talk, but do nothing.

Without raising the fuel efficiency of America's automobiles - significantly - America's demand for energy will continue to grow exponentially and it will outpace any reduction in foreign oil dependency produced by ethanol.

More important, even GM is now realizing the that the future of automobiles is probably electric. If this is true, then E85 simply becomes a distraction, even a boondoggle to those ends, at least for American automakers and the American economy.

Today, hybrid cars can increase fuel efficiency by 20 to 30 percent, which is a good start. Add advanced gasoline engines or clean diesel engines and fuel efficiency could be doubled - that's with just TODAY's technology.

But the real advantage of hybrids will be lithium batteries, and the ability to utilize electric power. Within 5 years it is quite possible that you could buy a $30,000 hybrid vehicle that might never have to be filled with fuel if you drive less than 40 miles per day, all it would need is a small electric charge at night.

Within 10 years a small fuel cell stack could be added to these plug-in hybrids and the majority of drivers might never need any other fuel than just a little occasional electricity. More important, all of this could happen much quicker if more incentives were provided for hybrid technology and lithium-ion technology.

Why not give those ethanol subsidies to consumers to purchase these vehicles? Ultimately, a change in consumer behavior is the quickest path to foreign oil dependence and a cleaner environment.

Yet, ethanol is the favored buzzword, the favored recipient of tax incentives and government subsidies.

In the past Honda has already claimed it believes electric cars are integral to the future, and Toyota's hybrid efforts make them a player in electric cars as well. Even GM says the future is electric. Consequently, it is imperative that American automakers lead the way into this automotive revolution, rather than sticking to flex-fuel Hummers and Mustangs.

America's focus should be that in 10 years every American vehicle produced is either fuel-free or that fuel is simply a backup. The technology will be there within 10 years. The Japanese will be there. Will America?

Still, I'm all for ethanol, cellulosic ethanol, as a fuel to produce electricity, just not as an automobile fuel. Ultimately, transporting ethanol simply makes no sense in a liquid form, but in an electric form it makes great sense.

Consequently, E85 could become a distraction, even a boondoggle if it takes the clean energy and foreign oil dependency spotlight, and early talk from many Democrats seems headed in that direction.

The future is now. If we don't dare to dream, we just might wake up to a nightmare. New automotive technology, not alternative fuels, should be the priority for America, and the majority of our tax incentives and subsidies should be given to consumers to buy this new technology.

Is it time to kill the Kyoto Protocol? Prop. 87?

Has the Kyoto Protocol become a joke?

In the next 20 years, energy demand is supposed to rise significantly and most of that growth is expected to come from China and India - two countries largely unaffected by Kyoto. How can this make sense?

Global warming advocates, such as Al Gore, claim we have to act right now or it might be too late. Still, even if all of the world, except China and India, began to meet their Kyoto requirements, the world would still fail because China and India would more than cover the difference and global warming emissions would still be far too high.

China, already the 2nd largest contributor of global warming gases, is seeing massive increases in global warming pollution every year. Yet, China is building a new coal power plant on average EVERY 3 days. At this rate, China cannot be given a free pass for another decade if a Kyoto type plan is going to be effective.

Quite simply, Kyoto was a good P.R. campaign that helped raise awareness of the global warming problem, but it is already meaningless, and it is time to move on.

Even in Europe, where global warming is widely accepted, the majority of countries are failing to meet their emissions requirements. Unfortunately, at this point in time, carbon caps are seen as too expensive in the short term and too costly to economic growth.

Inevitably, the world will have to think beyond Kyoto. Carbon caps, while a great idea, simply won't be enough. Technology and innovation are not only integral, but the keys to success.

More important, greater appeal has to be made to the consumers of the world.

In places like California, Proposition 87 claims to fight some of these problems by blaming the oil companies and taxing them for the problem.

Please. I guarantee loophole after loophole in 87 will ultimately lead to nothing - not even cheaper fuel - just the waste of billions of dollars. Propositions are about politics. If Democrats so strongly believe in this campaign why not ask the Democrat-controlled California Congress to do something?

First and foremost consumers have to change. Driving flex-fuel guzzling SUVs instead of gas-guzzling SUVs isn't going to change anything, except for maybe the final destination of energy profits.

In California the focus should be on fuel efficiency and getting every day people to participate in that battle. Big oil might be a problem in California, but a bigger problem is all the big Hummers, Expeditions, Tahoes, etc. filled with only one occupant 90% of the time clogging the freeways.

How does 87 or Kyoto address that?

Giving people excuses and someone to blame is simply counter-productive. The problem with 87 and Kyoto is that they require no action from the people. The people simply aren't part of the solution. Yet, it is only by rallying the people that real change will be achieved.

Of course blame is always easier than responsibility, and it makes for better partisan politics.

A city Prius? A crossover Prius? Maybe soon.

In a few years there will probably be more than one type of Prius. While there are no known plans for these derivative Prii, the idea is brewing within Toyota according to Bloomberg News.

``To the extent they can leverage derivatives to help amortize investment costs for the hybrid system, they'd be crazy not to,'' said Eric Noble, president of consulting firm Car Lab in Orange, California. ``There is so much equity in the Prius name at this point, that would make sense, especially in the near term.''

A smaller ``city car'' based on the Prius would have even higher fuel efficiency and would fit with ``a trend toward people moving into inner-city lofts,'' Lentz said. ``People also want to see more utility on the vehicle, so you could imagine something that's a little more utility or crossover-based.''

In related news, Toyota is reporting that sales of the Prius are still strong and should be higher in 2006 compared to 2005.

Scientists say ethanol could boost gasoline engines

"Injecting small quantities of ethanol into car engines at moments of peak demand -- such as accelerating sharply or climbing a steep hill -- could improve the fuel economy of gasoline engines by 20 percent to 30 percent, a scientist said on Wednesday." (more)

Such technology would probably cost about $1000.00 per vehicle and could be mass produced by 2011. The technology would also enable vehicles to use smaller engines.

Consequently, some are calling the technology a hybrid challenger. Why?

By 2011, Toyota for example, believes its hybrid technology will not only be more sophisticated and half as heavy - making it significantly more fuel efficient - but half as expensive. Thus, by 2011 you can have a hybrid vehicle that increases fuel efficiency by 30 percent to 40 percent - at least - for $1500 more per vehicle, or you can have an ethanol vehicle that achieves 20 percent to 30 percent better fuel efficiency for $1000 more per vehicle (Of course, will ethanol be cost-effective versus gasoline and available?)

Or, why not have vision? Why not offer a flex-fuel hybrid vehicle that increases fuel efficiency by 50 percent to 60 percent for just $2500 more per vehicle? Geez, why not make it a flex-fuel plug-in hybrid vehicle and be 70 percent to 80 percent more fuel efficient.

But why shoot for the moon. Why dream the big dream when we can settle for complacency?

Instead we can stick with a 20 percent gain with ethanol and all of America can drive super-Hummers because they will be so damn fuel efficient. Suddenly, we'll realize we need just as much foreign oil as ever, plus as much as ethanol as we can find!! Then, not only will America be beholden to big oil and foreign governments, but big agri-business as well - a capitalist's dream!

Ford hires futurists, gets lost in past?

Ford hired a number of futurists to help them predict future consumer trends.

"Ever since 9/11, you see people wanting more of a sense of security," said Lisa Bacus, Ford's director of global strategic marketing. "They want to feel like they are in control." Consequently, "That means a growing interest in crash safety, as well as better visibility and handling." (more)

Apparently, however, it doesn't mean fighting foreign oil dependency or achieving better fuel efficiency? It doesn't mean stopping our financial support of the terrorists that caused 9/11 - via oil? It doesn't mean fighting pollution or global warming? These issues have nothing to do with the security of America's future?

Boy, I feel a lot better about Ford's future.

Foreign oil dependency: Most Americans concerned, but irresponsible

According to a new survey most Americans are concerned about foreign oil dependency, and 87% believe the government can do something about the problem. Even more interesting, 41% believe it is "realistic to expect the government to maintain a steady supply of oil at a reasonable price."

Geez. Is there really any wonder that America is so dependent upon foreign oil? Talk about taking NO responsibility!!

What exactly do Americans want the government to do? The only thing that is going to reduce foreign oil dependency is using less oil. Sure, the government could ban SUVs, raise fuel economy requirements and offer tax incentives for hybrid cars and other clean technologies and fuels.

Inevitably; however, American citizens have to take some responsibility.

We're the ones driving gas-guzzlers. We're the ones who drive a block to the store to pick up a gallon of milk. We're the ones demanding bigger, heavier and faster vehicles - all of which decrease fuel efficiency. We're the ones driving Hummers with bumper stickers that say 'No blood, for oil'.

Sure the government can do more, it can force Americans to stop acting so irresponsibly.

Is 2008 the next big gas price scare?

Gas prices are dropping. I don't really need to tell you that. Already, after just a couple of months, interest in fuel efficiency is also dropping.

So, are cheap gas prices here to stay?

Probably not according to most energy analysts, and unlike past valleys and peaks in gasoline prices, the distance between each valley and peak is likely to shrink as we trend upwards.

According to some, the next big threat to American gasoline prices is Russia. If you haven't noticed the influence of Russian oil, you soon will as Russian gas stations open in your neighborhood. That's why 2008 could create the highest gas prices we've ever seen.

"And it's my memory of how traumatic those transfers of power used to be that leads me to pick 2008 for a Russian oil supply shock. That year will be filled with uncertainty and rumor, as the question of who will run the country rises to the top of the agenda for overseas investors and purchasers of Russia's oil. Even if, as I think is almost certain, power remains with Putin or someone in his circle, the uncertainty will be enough, with oil supply and demand in such precarious balance, to give the oil speculators plenty to work with." (more)

The recent rise in gas prices was driven by speculation, not George Bush. Americans must get this through their heads. Electing a Democrat as President isn't going to change foreign oil market speculation.

Imagine continued and escalated problems with Iran, Chinese oil grabs, hurricanes and turmoil in Russia all happening at the same time - the perfect storm. Oil could easily surge beyond $100 per barrel. Even worse, imagine war in the Middle East. In such an event, $100 oil would seem cheap.

The dynamics driving oil speculation aren't really improving. Sure they are now calm, but new storms are building. When those storms hit land, hybrid vehicles will really pay off.

Interest in fuel efficiency dropping with gas prices

According to Cars.com there has been less consumer interest in the Toyota Prius hybrid since gas prices started dropping. According to Cars.com consumer searches for the Prius have dropped by 37.8%. Cars.com claims this is part of a general drop in consumer interest for fuel efficient vehicles, whereas interest in gas guzzlers has increased.

I've long claimed that consumer interest in hybrid cars would be affected by gas prices. Still, gas prices, almost assuredly, will go back up and so too will interest in hybrids. Still, part of this drop in fuel efficient interest, especially for the Prius, might also have had something to do with reduced tax credits for Toyota hybrid vehicles.

Nonetheless, let's face it, the problems associated with foreign oil dependency, and oil dependence in general, aren't ever going away. Those whom choose to ignore this fact will pay the consequences. Hybrids might not make perfect sense today for everyone, but they will in a few years.

Plus, maybe a downturn in interest will create a buyers market for those interested in the Prius, especially a used Prius.

(Source: Car & Driver)