RK ARCHIVE - And Now for Something Completely Different...

In this case, I want to share with you my experience yesterday at the New York Auto Show press preview. Given my background (17 years at the U.S. Energy Information Administration) and interest in energy and environmental issues, I was invited to the show (along with several other blogs such as Treehugger.com) by Charles Territo, spokesman for the Alliance of Auto Manufacturers. The Alliance membership includes 10 major car companies: BMW, Chrysler, Ford, General Motors, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, Mitsubishi, Porsche, Toyota, and Volkswagen. All of those companies had exhibits at the show.

My particular focus was on hybrids and other technologies that increase vehicle fuel economy. A major question I had was whether -- as AutoblogGreen puts it -- the New York show would "break the green auto show streak." I must say, I was skeptical about an auto show being environmentally friendly at all. If anything, I was expecting a bit of "greenwashing" and not much more. On that score, the results were somewhat better than I expected, but still with a long ways to go. For more, follow me over to the flip for some photos and commentary from the show.

P.S. Oh, by the way, the photo at the top of this diary is of a flying car. No joke -- for just $450,000 you'll eventually be able to own a Milner AirCar, "a completely self-contained four-door, four to five-seat advanced-composite road-able aircraft (flying car) with foldable main wing in the rear of the vehicle and a canard in the front." Now that's one way to beat a patented NOVA traffic jam! :)

The breakfast keynote address was delivered to around 2,000 journalists (and bloggers) by Chrysler Chairman and CEO Robert Nardelli. As Motor Trend reports, Nardelli compared Chrysler to "a $60-billion startup company" and discussed his plans to rebuild the struggling automaker and (hopefully) return it to profitability by "enhancing our core, extending our business, and expanding our markets" (that's apparently PowerPoint speak for...well, stuff that CEO's like to talk about in order to sound like they have a Plan). Yet more PowerPoint speak ensued as Nardelli talked about introducing "more globality in our designs." "Globality?" As in making cars that might actually sell on Planet Earth? Now THAT is a plan! :) Asked about whether Chrysler assumed a recession in its plans for 2008, Nardelli said that the company did not "build in a second-half recovery" to its forecasts. Translation: the answer is YES, Chrysler is assuming a U.S. recession in 2008, the only question is how bad it turns out to be.

The Mercedes Benz extravaganza was a bit over-the-top, as frequently is the case at shows like this. The theme was that "Blue is the new Green," and that everyone should "Vote for BlueTEC" -- Mercedes' new "clean diesel" SUV line. According to a press release, BlueTEC will "comply with the extremely strict requirements of the American Bin 5 and ULEV emission standards, making Mercedes-Benz the first manufacturer to be able to license diesel SUVs in all 50 US states." The problem is that the fuel economy on these vehicles is mediocre at best (18 city/24 highway). I mean, sure, I'm a fan of diesel as an alternative to gasoline -- Mercedes-Benz says that the BlueTEC diesel engines "consume 20 to 40 percent less fuel compared to a gasoline engine with similar performance -- but we're going to have to do a lot better than 18/24 if we want to keep the polar ice caps around for a few more decades.

More from the BlueTEC mock political rally (goofy fun), complete with red, white and blue balloons. Vote for BlueTEC (or better yet, Barack Obama - ha)!

For everyone who thinks that "hybrid" means "small," check out this hybrid GMC Yukon. The fact is that hybrid is a technology that can be placed in any vehicle, from the smallest to the largest. In fact, it might very well be that we will get the the most "bang for the buck" by making the biggest trucks hybrids, more so than adding hybrid technology to an already fuel-efficient Honda Civic, for instance.

A closeup of the Yukon hybrid, which GMC claims gets "up to 50% better city fuel economy when compared to the conventional engine." On the other hand, that's still only 22 miles per gallon. Not gonna stop global warming that way.

Another example of a large SUV incorporating hybrid technology is the Chevy Tahoe, Green Car Journal's 2008 Green Car of the Year. At 21 mpg in the city, I've got to say I'm a bit skeptical about how "green" this vehicle is, but on the other hand, "the 6.0-liter two-mode hybrid Tahoe achieves 50 percent better fuel economy than a Tahoe powered by a standard 5.3-liter V-8." In other words, if someone really wants a Tahoe, at least they hybrid technology makes it less of a gas guzzler than it is with a conventional engine.

According to Wikipedia, the Subaru R1e "is a battery-electric microcar under going development," with Subaru "planning on offering these vehicles for sale to consumers starting in 2010." It's intriguing, but still has a long way to go (if ever) before it becomes a mass-production vehicle. I talked to the Subaru people and tried to figure out why they are investing so much money into this technology. I got a lot of talk about how exciting it is, but I remain confused regarding the business model here, as well as what's really pushing the company in this direction (government pressure? perceived profitability somewhere down the line? corporate image building/greenwashing? a technological challenge? true commitment to the environment? who knows?).

The Honda Fit (28 city/34 highway) is a popular, 5-door hatchback. According to Honda's press release, "[t]he current Fit has been a tremendous success for Honda", while the "all-new Honda Fit will reconfirm that small can in fact be big" (not sure what that means exactly - translation from corporat-ese, anyone?). In addition to the Fit, Honda unveiled the FCX Clarity, a "next-generation, zero-emissions, hydrogen-powered fuel cell vehicle." So, pull up to your hydrogen filling station and...whoops, you say there's no hydrogen filling station near you? Unfortunately, that's the problem with some of these new technologies -- the infrastructure to support them doesn't exist and will have to be developed. That will take time and (lots of) money. We'll see.

According to Wikipedia, "The Nissan Cube is a mini MPV produced by Nissan and sold in the Japanese market." Now, the Cube is coming to the U.S. market for the first time. According to Nissan, the company "has collaborated with design students from New York's Pratt Institute to explore the concept of 'cubeness'." AutoblogGreen looks at the Nissan Cube -- "will come to the US market next year to fill the void left behind by the dearly departed first gen Scion xB" -- and Denki Cube -- "the lithium ion battery-powered version that Nissan is testing and hopes to bring to market early in the next decade." It's definitely an eye-catching and intriguing car, part of the "Nissan Green Program 2010." We'll see...

Finally, just for fun, here are the spec's on the prototype Milner AirCar. I'm sure you've had the thought occasionally as you sit, stuck in Beltway gridlock, that if your car only had wings you could just take off and fly over the jam...well, maybe you didn't have that thought, but apparently it's not as totally wacky as it seems.

1) Not that this is a great revelation, but there's a heck of a lot of money being poured into marketing of cars, SUVS, etc.

2) No question, car companies are looking at new technologies -- hybrids, flex-fuels, diesel, etc. The questions are, how quickly are they moving, how deep is their commitment, what are their motivations, and in general how serious are they about going "green."

4) The more I think about it and talk to people in the business, the more I conclude that the economically rational way to go is a steep carbon tax (revenue neutral is fine) or some other method of internalizing negative externalities and pricing energy in a way that incorporates all the environmental, defense, national security and health costs that go along with producing, transporting, and consuming the stuff. From what I'm reading and hearing, it sounds like corporate America is becoming more open to this option, as long as it's not targeted at one particular industry.

5) Just yesterday, I received an email from a friend of mine who's in Portugal, reporting that he paid $7.90 per gallon -- $120 to fill his gas tank -- plus about $5.50 in tolls for every 20 miles driven on the Portugese equivalent of I-95. Can you imagine that in the United States? How would you deal with $7.90/gallon gasoline and $5.50 tolls every 20 miles? My guess is that if this were ever enacted, the entire sprawl model would be decimated and U.S. oil consumption would plummet over a few years. One way to make this revenue neutral, by the way, would be to eliminate regressive taxes such as the payroll deduction. I wonder if people would go for that deal -- significantly more money in their paychecks, but much higher gas prices at the pump. Of course, consumers could compensate for the higher gas prices by purchasing vehicles that get 40, 50, 100 miles to the gallon. They could also drive less in a wide variety of ways.

6) The auto industry has taken a large share of the heat on global warming. However, what struck me in talking to auto industry representatives at the show was the level of antagonism by the auto industry towards the oil industry. It sounds to me that about the only people who are fans of the oil industry are George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and other (mainly Republican) Congressmen who receive large contributions from Big Oil. Obviously, it's time for that to change.

P.S. Thanks again to Charles Territo for his hospitality, it was much appreciated. Also, thanks to New Media Strategies for helping to pull this together.

Comments

I've seen this thing a million times before. (Jack Landers - 3/20/2008 11:04:20 AM)

When I was in elementary school in the late 80's, I remember reading in World magazine about essentially the same thing. It was a modified Honda Civic that had fold out wings, was going to change transportation forever, etc. They had a neat picture and that was the last I ever heard.

If you flip through back through old issues of Popular Mechanics, you find stuff like this going back to the 1920's. Every decade, a couple of different companies start up and get this crazy idea to build a car that is also an airplane. And they always go out of business and never get any farther than a couple of prototypes.

They end up with slightly unsafe airplanes that it would be illegal to take off from the highway in anyway. As a car, the vehicle is generally not particularly enjoyable to drive. And good luck trying to insure it. There's no safety or crash data out there on such things, so you'd pay so much money every year for the legally required liability policy alone that you'd have been better off leasing or financing a regular small airplane.

Anyone with the $450k imagined price tag would certainly much rather spend half that amount on both a Lamborghini and a used Cessna. Nobody with half a million dollars to spend on this sort of thing is concerned about saving money by not having to buy a car as well as a plane.

This Milner thing will, at best, result in one more page in a coffee table book of aviation oddities in the bargain aisle of Barnes and Noble 30 years from now.

I think the first "airborn" vehicle for the mass market (relawson - 3/20/2008 7:58:14 PM)

will actually hover a few inches above the ground using magnetic levitation.

I think that this would be much more energy efficient given the lower friction. But even this is probably 50 years out.

I am interested in driving a "motorcycle-car" powered by a motorcycle engine/electric motor, seating two (tandem), and enclosed like a car with all of the latest safety features and air conditioning (needed in Florida).

These types of vehicles will get over 100mpg - and already are in fact. One model exceeds 200mpg. Plus, they look like an aircraft cockpit and are aerodynamic.

Two quick things (citizenindy - 3/20/2008 9:41:56 AM)

Point 5 is very similar to the sales tax idea thay many people on the right like. I think most of you guys would not like that because its extremely regressive. I would argue that its actually the most fair because you pay for what you use.

Reading about these hybrid SUVs is similar to the recent post article about being green as the popular thing to do and then you feel good. In reality you aren't really accomplishing anything at all.

off topic looks like Coal demand has outpaced supply in China. Need some new ideas

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

A sales tax isn't (Eric - 3/20/2008 11:06:37 AM)

the same thing because the purpose of the carbon tax is to encourage different behavior. The sales tax idea is simply moving the tax from one source to another. And the revenue neutral part is so people don't get all worked up about raising taxes to save the environment.

I mostly agree with the carbon tax concept, but there is a potential problem with the revenue neutral aspect - if it works, and people turn away from carbon polluting products, the overall tax revenues decrease. So either the carbon tax must increase, the threshold for taxing must increase, or the income tax must increase as consumers turn away from carbon polluters if tax revenues are truly to remain neutral.

In fact, I'm surprised the Republicans aren't all over this like flies on s**t. If they could get the law passed without built in increases to counter balance changing behaviors, they'd effectively be lowering the tax rate.

Situation in Germany (Alokin - 3/20/2008 10:58:10 AM)

Let me tell you about Germany. I just calculated that we are currently paying about 8,60 per gallon for gas. Prices have been going up recently, but we always paid a lot more than the US gas prices. When I came to the US first in '97, I could hardly believe how cheap gas was. No wonder everyone drove big SUVs.... The thing is, big cars will be a hard habit to break. Here in Germany (and Europe in general), smaller and very small cars have always been popular. They are cheaper and use not too much gas.

We are currently driving a 12 year old diesel VW Golf, on 4.5l per 100km, which is about 52 miles per gallon. There are cars now on the streets which try to get to the 3-liter-benchmark. Unfortunately, we have caught on to the SUV trend as well, with the slightly schizophrenic effect that everyone talks about using less gas and less energy, but still buy the big car if you can afford it. And despite our high taxes (called "ecotax") on any kind of fossil fuel, despite the talks and books and teaching kids in school about energy saving, people still do not change their habits too much.

This is why I think that it won't help to put higher taxes on fuel. You get used to those so easily. Here in Germany I constantly have the feeling that people simply use public transport when it is affordable and convenient, covering large areas and with good connections; and if this is not the case, they will use their car, no matter how high gas prices climb.

There was a similar diary about suburbs, and whether people would return to the cities in response to the high fuel costs. I don't think so. If they want gardens, lots of space, and small neighborhoods, they will still move to the suburbs; and the singles and young professionals will stay in the cities for the nightlife. When job opportunities and shopping malls grow in an area, people are more likely to move there, and if there is nothing, they will at most live there for the lovely nature and take the two hour drive to the city for work. Ah, yes: we also have a pretty decent train network here in Germany, purportedly one of the best in the world. This does make it a lot easier to live on the country side and commute by train, some people have train commutes of several hours.

To sum up: I don't think politics can change people's habits and desires by using punishment (higher taxes...) - it will be necessary to provide other options first, and then everyone can make his choice. I have never owned a car, simply because I can get anywhere by train and subway, whether it is for vacation or to work or home to my parent's place; and a car is just not worth the money for me. A lot of young people in cities think this way, not because they cannot afford a car, but because there is no need for one.

Question.. (proudvadem - 3/20/2008 11:36:16 AM)

Thank you for sharing the show with us. Great info...
I know car shows have the "latest & greatest" and I love seeing the cars of the future- especially a greener future.
However...many of us REALLY want a greener car..but the price is out of reach for many. I have been shopping for a Prius and am unable to find one (even a used one) that is "affordable" (I have a TON of student loans). Many of the dealerships have them on backorder and if you see one in the paper- it's gone that same day!

Lowell, did you hear any talk about hybrids becoming more affordable? I know they are in great demand but do you (or anyone else on here) have any insight to when they could become widely accessable?

Thanks!
Maria

The current base price (Lowell - 3/20/2008 12:04:23 PM)

for the Prius is $21,100 for the Standard model. The Ford Escape hybrid costs $26,640. You might want to check out a Honda Fit, which gets 34 mpg on the highway and has a base price of $13,850. A Mini Cooper gets 34 mpg on the highway and costs around $18,000. A Honda Accord gets 31 mpg on the highway and costs around $18,000-$19,000.

Of course, you save on fuel costs with a hybrid, the amount you save depending on how high fuel prices are and how much you drive the vehicle. You might also be eligible for a tax credit or a personal property tax exemption (in Arlington, that's the case for hybrids "clean fuel" vehicles).

As far as prices coming down for hybrids (or any other type of vehicles), I didn't hear any talk about that, but with more and more models of hybrids (and other fuel-efficient vehicles) coming out for different price ranges, I'd expect that you'd be able to find something you can afford in the next few years (if not now).

The coolest green car you'll ever lay eyes on... (fred2blue - 3/20/2008 2:17:05 PM)

is designed by Fisker Automotive. It is called KARMA (debuted at the Detroit Auto Show in January).

Scheduled to go into production in late 2009/early 2010, the Fisker Karma is a green performance car. It has something called Q-Drive Technology, essentially an electric motor that is capable of 50 miles of travel without recharging. But with a 4-cylinder gasoline engine - which kicks in to run the Q-Drive, KARMA is slated to get...100 MILES PER GALLON.

Whoa!

I love the optional solar-paneled roof.

Only downside? The sticker: MSRP = $80,000!

Green cars are not supposed to be gorgeous. And I'd be tempted to include a stunning image of the Karma here in this comment, to make my point.

But take a look for yourself. The "reveal" is worth it!