Porsche puts hybrids in the fast lane - 70 mph w/o gasoline!

New Cayenne SUV can cruise at 70 mph on the electric motor, far faster than existing models.

Porsche said Tuesday a new prototype SUV hybrid will be capable of cruising at speeds up to 70 miles an hour on the electric engine alone, far faster than existing hybrids.

The hybrid version of the popular Cayenne SUV, expected to hit showrooms in the next two or three years, can't reach 70 miles per hour without the traditional engine, but once it gets there it can cruise at 70 without the need for gasoline.

The result is a vehicle that's 25 percent more efficient than current models and can cruise considerably faster than the current 40 mph top cruising speed of the hybrid Toyota Camry.

"If Porsche was going to do a hybrid, it makes sense to do it from a performance standpoint," said company spokesman Tony Fouladpour.

The hybrid Cayenne, Porsche's first foray into the hybrid market, uses a single transmission to power both the electric motor and gasoline motor, which is partly responsible for the increased performance, said Fouladpour.

It's expected to be in the same general price range as the basic Cayenne, which starts at $44,000.
(C)CNN

Hybrid lovers: The honeymoon may be over

As the reality of fuel efficiency sinks in, fewer new car buyers are considering a hybrid, according to J.D. Power.

The percentage of car shoppers considering hybrid vehicles has declined in the past year, according to a survey released Tuesday by J.D. Power and Associates.

Fifty percent of new vehicle shoppers surveyed said they are considering a gasoline/hybrid electric vehicle. That's down from 57 percent last year.

"In the 2006 study, we found consumers often overestimated the fuel efficiency of hybrid-electric vehicles, and the decrease in consideration of hybrids in 2007 may be a result of their more realistic understanding of the actual fuel economy capabilities," said Mike Marshall, director of automotive emerging technologies at J.D. Power.

Interest in hybrid vehicles declined the most among younger shoppers. Last year, 73 percent of car shoppers between ages 16 and 25 said they were interested in a hybrid vehicle. This year, 60 percent were.

Car shoppers also said they were willing to pay an extra $2,396 for a hybrid powertrain while expecting a fuel economy improvement of 18.5 miles per gallon.

Meanwhile, consideration for diesel-powered vehicles stands at 23 percent. Last year, only 12 percent of car shoppers considered purchasing one. New clean-diesel models, which have much cleaner exhaust than older versions, have just begun appearing on the market this year along with the low-sulfur diesel fuel needed to run them.

Shoppers expected to pay $1,491 extra for a diesel powertrain. They also expected to get about 15 mpg better fuel economy.

"As the automotive industry steadily offers more alternative powertrain/fuel options to consumers, buyer preferences will continue to shift the market in the coming years," said Marshall. "

The consumer research company also released an Automotive Environmental Index which ranks auto companies and specific models according to their fuel economy and emissions as determined by data from the Environmental Protection Agency and vehicle owners.

Toyota was the highest-ranking car brand in J.D. Power's Automotive Environmental Index, followed by Volkswagen and Honda. This is the second year J.D. Power has released that Index and Toyota has moved up six rank positions since last year.

The index is based on a car's emissions as reported by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and its fuel economy as reported by the EPA and by drivers responding to a separate survey by J.D. Power.

Of the top 30 vehicles in the J.D. Power index, 10 were hybrids from Ford, General Motors and Toyota.

Toyota, including its Lexus luxury brand, had more vehicles in the list than any other manufacturer.
(C)CNN

Plug-In Hybrids a Solution to Global Warming

The first major analysis of the potential impact of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles has found the widespread adoption of such cars and trucks would dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the United States and improve air quality.

By 2050, plug-in hybrids, or PHEVS, could eliminate 450 million metric tons of CO2 annually - the equivalent of taking 82.5 million conventional cars, or a third of the nation's current fleet - off the road. That would also cut oil consumption by nearly 4 million barrels a day. Assuming PHEVs hit the market by 2010, and depending on sales of the cars, the total reduction in greenhouse gases by 2050 would 3.4 to 10.3 billion metric tons, according to the study conducted by the non-profit Electric Power Research Institute and the Natural Resources Defense Council. The study was based on sophisticated computer modeling of the U.S. power grid and transportation system.

"What we’re talking about today is potentially a very, very large effect," said John Bryson, CEO of utility giant Edison International (EIX), during a press conference in Washington, D.C. this morning. Utilities like Edison, PG&E (PCG) and Austin Energy have taken the lead in pushing automakers to get in gear on plug-in hybrids.

Even if plug-in hybrids become the dominant form of transportation they would only spike electricity demand by five to eight percent, researchers said, because most car owners probably will charge their vehicles at night when power plants are idle or under-utilized. The study's computer models considered various scenarios, from a high CO2-intensive grid to a greener one as well as plug-in hybrids with varying ranges and sales. But even if plug-in hybrids made up only 20 percent of the nation's vehicle fleet in 2050 and the electric grid remained relatively dirty, greenhouse gas emissions would still decline by some 163 million metric tons annually.

The impact of plug-in hybrids on global warming will depend on the electric system, noted NRDC scientist Dan Lashof. "The key to utilizing plug-in hybrids is a cleaner power grid," he said. The greener the grid, the greater the greenhouse gas reductions as coal-fired power plants are displaced by renewable energy or begin to deploy technology to capture their CO2 emissions.

General Motors (GM) executive Tony Posawatz brought a plug-in Chevrolet Volt concept car to the press conference. The automaker is designing the Volt to run primarily on battery power and use other alternative fuels to extend its range. "We at General Motors are certainly very interested in this study," said Posawatz. "The potential for plug-ins, I think everyone recognizes, is tremendous."
(C)B2

Big 3 dragging heels on fuel economy

Car companies not reacting quickly enough to increasing fuel prices and consumer demand, Consumer Federation says.

Despite losing sales to Japanese car companies, auto manufacturers, particularly U.S.-based manufacturers, have been slow to respond consumer demands for better fuel economy, according to a report released Tuesday by the Consumer Federation of America.

The report, citing data on sales and on new model introductions over the past several years, concludes that more stringent average fuel economy regulations are needed to push General Motors, Ford and Chrysler competitiveness in the burgeoning small-car market.

"During the past ten years, as gas prices have gone up, the number of models (trims) with 30 mpg or higher has gone down," the report says.

The CFA report counts 61 models available with mpg's greater than 30 in 1998 compared to 46 in 2007. That represents a shift from 8 percent of available models in 1998 to 4 percent today.

Meanwhile, according to the report, the number of models getting less than 30 mpg has gone up from 746 in 1998 to 1083 in 2007. That represents a change from 92 percent of available vehicles in 1998 to 96 percent today.

As gas prices increased between 2000 and 2005, Asian manufacturers improved the fuel economy of 68 percent of their most popular models while Detroit-based manufactures improved the fuel economy of only 48 percent of theirs. Meanwhile, fuel economy actually got worse for 52 percent of the most popular domestic models, while it declined for only 32 percent of the most popular Asian imports, according to the release.

U.S.-based auto manufacturers have also suffered a decline in sales over the past three years that, according to the CFA's analysis, can be tied directly to the increasing popularity of more fuel-efficient compact and small SUVs while Detroit manufacturers have continued to emphasize large trucks and SUVs.

"By passing a strong [Corporate Average Fuel Economy] requirement, without loopholes, Congress will be providing a blueprint to help the 'Big 3' become competitive again by building the vehicles that the American consumer really wants."

There is currently a proposal in Congress to increase the required average fuel economy for all passenger vehicles to 35 miles per gallon by 2020.

Rather than waiting for car manufacturers to respond to market pressures, congress should force them to act, said Jack Gillis, a spokesman for the CFA.

"If we don't make them change soon, they're probably going to kill themselves," said Gillis, "and we don't want that to happen."

General Motors counters that the CFA's analysis favors the Japanese manufacturers, such as Toyota and Honda, by focusing on percentage of available models.

"It just so happens the Detroit manufacturers are happy to be full-line manufacturers," said Greg Martin, a GM spokesman. "unlike Honda which is content with a very specific segment of the market."

A "full-line manufacturer" is one that competes in all market segments from small cars to large trucks and SUVs.

General Motors sells 24 models that get 30 miles per gallon or better, said Martin, compared to 12 for Toyota and six for Honda.

"They should be embarrassed," Martin said of the CFA. "The report is bereft of any intellectual or academic rigor."
(C)CNN

Once Frumpy, Green Cars Start Showing Some Flash

When Christopher Paine, the director of “Who Killed the Electric Car?” filmed the General Motors EV1, he had to search for a flattering perspective.

“When we filmed the car on the road, its best angle was the low front shot from the side,” he said. “It was gorgeous. The back of the car was more challenging. The car’s style did not appeal to certain design sensibilities.

“That Citroën-like back was not successful,” he added.

Mr. Paine is putting it mildly. The EV1 was derided for its appearance. So was the spacey Honda Insight, the first hybrid to go on sale in the United States. Neither was a commercial success.

Both shared a stylistic similarity to the long skirts of the early 20th century: They suggested Popeye’s pal, Olive Oyl, in her ankle-length dress. The rear fender skirts seemed frumpy.

Honda’s hybrid evoked similar reactions. While the Insight could theoretically get 56 miles a gallon in the city and 70 on the highway, its shape put people off.

The EV1, G.M.’s pioneering electric car, and the recently discontinued Insight raised a challenge that designers are still dealing with. How do you signal green to other drivers, and is it for pride or marketing? How do you provide drivers assurance about the novel technology? What does green look like? How do you design a green car? How green do drivers want to appear?

One way to suggest green through design is simply to paint or mark models that have better fuel economy or reduced emissions. Toyota offers the hybrid versions of the Camry in a color called Jasper Pearl, a light, almost luminous, green. When I drove a test model, several people asked if the car was a hybrid, simply because of its strange green paint, I believe.

Saturn offers the hybrid version of its Vue utility wagon in green. It also applies what it calls a Green Line badge to them — the word line implying more green models to come. Ford adds a green-leaf badge to hybrid versions of its Escape and Mercury Mariner.

BMW’s 7 Series with hydrogen power is indistinguishable from other 7 sedans except for its badge. Honda’s discontinued Accord Hybrid resembled the standard model, and its Civic Hybrid is distinguished from its siblings largely by pie-pan wheel covers.

The Toyota Prius offers a now-recognizable and characteristic silhouette: a long arc of roof, a short hood and a high, stubby back. It is not lovely and it is not as radically different from other cars as the EV1 or the Insight. But it is different enough to signal that it represents a different kind of car.

While in the traditional visual language of auto design the small hood sends a signal that the Prius is low-powered and ineffectual, its now familiar silhouette speaks of greenness. Of course, Toyota also offers other hybrids whose status is signaled by a badge that reads Hybrid Synergy Drive.

For the next-generation Prius and other possible hybrid vehicles, Toyota designers have been trying to answer the question of what green should look like.

One effort, by Toyota’s Calty design studio in Newport Beach, Calif., is a show car that aims to make the hybrid attractive by making it sporty. The car, called the FT-HS, projected a hybrid power plant with the equivalent of 400 horsepower. It seemed inspired by the idea of the electric Tesla sports car, to replace the sense of green as sacrifice with one of sport and indulgence.

Toyota called the idea hybrid-sports. William Chergosky of Calty, said: “The FT-HS wasn’t just meant to showcase the idea of hybrid-sports. It was also meant to be a vehicle that would help us clarify a hybrid design idiom. The design language of a hybrid should speak to its function.”

Mr. Chergosky said the FT-HS’s design started with the idea of placing the engine in an unconventional place. “Our model was the styling cues that midengined cars have.

“What we hoped to create was a look that conveyed lightweight, efficient, advanced and clean,” he said — not simply hybrid.

This can seem high-concept. Mr. Chergosky added in an e-mail message: “The hybrid story should be a holistic one that starts from the inside (the heart) and transforms the outer shell (the healthy body).”

Another new green Toyota is the Hybrid X show car, created at Toyota’s ED2 design center in southern France and introduced at the Geneva auto show last spring. The glass of the highly aerodynamic body forms two U shapes. Seen from above they make the X of the car’s name. The emphasis is on an open, spacious interior.

Honda’s Small Hybrid Concept, also in Geneva, seemed aimed at curing the ills of the Insight, although its rear end bore an echo of that car. It rides on macho 20-inch wheels and has no hint of fender skirts.

For the Volt, Chevrolet’s electric show car with a supplementary gas engine, a team of designers led by Bob Boniface tried to avoid the dull appearance of other green cars. They took echoes of the face of the sporty Camaro and made the beltline, which separates the windowed greenhouse from the lower body, high.

Ultimately, a dramatic change in the engineering of cars will change their appearance and style. “A car on the outside fundamentally has to look like what it is inside,” said Chris Chapman of BMW’s Designworks studio in Newbury Park, Calif. “This was true in the first electric cars and will be in the future.”

The basic design of any car, he said, is dictated by the placement and size of engines, batteries, fuel and so on. These affect where passengers and luggage go. Together, they make up what designers call the package. As changes occur in motors, he said, “people come to accept the new look, as they accept the flat wedge airfoil shape of the Prius,” he said. “In the long run, new designs and layout and architecture will have to come out from underneath, from the basic technology.”

Designers have done little to signal green in a car’s cabin, but that may be changing. Ford recently announced that its 2008 Escape would use only recycled fabric in its seating surfaces. This is green, but not obviously so. But why shouldn’t it be? asked David Lyon, head of North American interior design for G.M. He is looking for alternatives to leather, a sort of design equivalent to a vegan menu, and for materials that look recycled. Recycled items can become something for drivers to boast of, he said.

Green cars can too often look “like sensible shoes” in the phrase of Bob Boniface, the G.M. designer.

Tom Peters, who headed the design of the latest Corvette, said, “There are two schools of thought on this.” One makes the car conventional, the other makes it strikingly different. The former strategy is aimed at reassuring buyers. Drivers are used to cars with hoods and engines in front, for instance.

“If there is no engine in front — without that mass in front of us —many of us feel vulnerable,” he said.

But he added: “From a designer’s standpoint, you want to celebrate the new techno. With fuel-cell technology it is very exciting to create a new shape, a new surface vocabulary, new ways to get into and out of the car. People are ready for that now.”
(C)NYT

Lexus LS 600h: Conspicuous Consumption With Green Illusions

Lexus's 2.5-ton flagship moves on hybrid power.

In “North Dallas Forty,” the shaggy 1979 gridiron film starring Nick Nolte, a lineman played by John Matuszak ranted memorably to a coach about the hypocrisy of pro football: “Every time I call it a game, you call it a business. And every time I call it a business, you call it a game.”

Toyota and Lexus would disagree, but their recent hybrid models, including the Toyota Highlander and Lexus RX 400h utility wagons, the Lexus GS 450h sedan and now the Lexus LS 600h L, similarly seem to be trying to have it both ways.

In recent advertisements, including one in the “green issue” of Vanity Fair, Lexus uses one hand to present the 400-plus horsepower of the LS 600h L and the other to pat its own back for saving fuel and planet alike.

The ads and the cars have convinced many, including some credulous journalists, of Lexus’s pitch: that a hybrid car or S.U.V. can drive like a Porsche and sip fuel like a Prius. But a closer examination proves once again that there’s no free lunch, even at the drive-through.

For more than a year, Lexus has suggested that the LS 600h L — as tested, a $121,000 hybrid version of its LS 460 L flagship sedan — would set a new standard for four-door luxury automobiles. Its pitch was that the car would perform like a V-12 supersedan while whipping V-8 rivals on fuel economy. Instead, the hybrid may have set a new standard for automotive hyperbole.

Behind its green Teflon shield, the Lexus proved to be just another overstuffed sedan that can barely top 20 miles a gallon — less, if you actually tap into all that power. If that’s saving the planet, Jor-El had better prepare the escape pod before it’s too late.

Before the enviro-brigade readies the guillotine, I hasten to add that this isn’t about hating hybrids. Electric propulsion is looking more and more like a winning technology. Companies from Toyota to General Motors are working to develop affordable lithium-ion batteries, which could deliver clean, efficient, renewable power in plug-in hybrids or purely electric vehicles.

I can’t believe that adding a cupful of electric juice to a fat barrel of V-8 muscle is what environmentalists have in mind.

On the performance front, forget about the Lexus hanging with V-12 sedans like the Mercedes S600. Turns out that the Lexus can’t even outrun its own nonhybrid version, the LS 460 L. Nor is it appreciably quicker than V-8 competitors that cost $20,000 to $30,000 less, like the Mercedes S550, the Audi A8 and the BMW 7 Series, or the similarly priced Maserati Quattroporte.

It must be noted that such decadent sedans are about more than straight-line speed. Park those high-wattage rivals beside the Lexus, and the modestly styled LS virtually disappears; challenge them on a twisty road and they all disappear from the Lexus by virtue of their sportier handling.

Spurred from a stop to 60 miles an hour, the LS 600h L clocks a swift 5.5 seconds, according to Lexus’s own testing. Yet the gas-only LS 460 L, with a mere 380 horsepower from a smaller V-8, reaches 60 in 5.4 seconds, nosing out the more powerful hybrid.

How is that possible? Check the scales, where the Lexus hybrid weighs in like Jared before his Subway diet.

The hybrid does add all-wheel drive, not available on the LS 460 L. But together, the heavy batteries and all-wheel-drive system burden the hybrid with more than 700 additional pounds, for a total of 5,049. Forced to motivate the added weight, the hybrid’s larger 5-liter V-8 — another environmental oxymoron — and dual electric motors makes acceleration a wash. (One motor drives the four wheels. The other starts the gas engine and recharges the batteries.)

Excess weight takes its toll on mileage as well. The hybrid got 21 m.p.g. — amazingly, 1 m.p.g. less than the nonhybrid version that I tested on the same urban roads and highways in and around New York City. That perfectly wonderful LS 460 L is blessed with one of the most fuel-efficient V-8s I’ve driven, a 4.6-liter smoothie.

But the Lexus hybrid’s biggest jolt comes from sticker shock: the LS 600h L starts at $104,715, about $32,000 above the LS 460 L. Laden with options for $121,000, the hybrid costs about $30,000 more than the comparable gas-only version.

Driven gently, the Lexus will indeed beat the mileage of its apples-to-apples V-8 rivals, but only by 1 m.p.g. to 3 m.p.g. A Mercedes S550 isn’t an egregious guzzler at an E.P.A.-rated 16/24 m.p.g., and I managed 19 m.p.g. during a recent test. And when I drove the Lexus in mildly spirited fashion, its mileage dropped to 19 m.p.g. It’s hard to see why such minuscule mileage gains would dazzle the type of person who’s ready to drop $100,000 on a car.

The E.P.A. rates the hybrid’s mileage at 20 m.p.g. in town and 22 on the highway. The nonhybrid is rated 16/24 under the same revised formula, which takes effect for 2008 and is intended to present lower, more realistic mileage estimates for most cars.

In its defense, the hybrid should save you a few bucks if you do a lot of city driving. But on the highway, the gas-only model was decidedly more efficient, and thus ended up doing 1 m.p.g. better over all. And in bumper-to-bumper traffic, where you expect a hybrid to excel, the LS 600h L mustered only 14 m.p.g., certainly nothing to marvel at.

The uneasy comparisons don’t end there. The gas-only version handled better and drove more smoothly.

The nonhybrid benefits from the world’s first eight-speed automatic transmission, which lifts mileage and operates with hushed aplomb. The hybrid’s continuously variable transmission, in contrast, has to busily calculate and divvy power from the gas and electric sources. It’s among the most seamless of its kind, but not as smooth or transparent as the Lexus eight-speed. And its manual-shift function is nearly useless. In trying to mimic the feel of sporty downshifts, it ladles on ever-higher levels of regenerative hybrid braking. To the driver, the sludgy effect feels like throwing anchors of various sizes out the window.

Lexus’s hybrid double-talk extends to emissions arguments. When the company says the Lexus hybrid is cleaner than average cars, people will assume that has something to do with global warming. But in this instance, that is not the case.

To its credit, the car’s super-ultra-low emissions vehicle rating (SULEV, if you will) is indeed cleaner than other V-8 models, but only if you are measuring the pollutants that form smog. (Even on the smog index, many gasoline models also achieve SULEV ratings or better).

But the critical earth issue today is conserving fuel and cutting carbon dioxide emissions. Those greenhouse gas levels are almost entirely a function of fuel economy: if you use more gas, you spew more carbon dioxide. So on that score, the 21 m.p.g. hybrid actually emits far more carbon dioxide than, say, a Mercedes-Benz diesel E-Class that can attain 30 m.p.g.

The LS 600h L also emits more greenhouse gases than the average new car that currently achieves 27.5 m.p.g. So a common Toyota Camry, among dozens of models, leaves a smaller carbon footprint than this hybrid land yacht.

One final ignominy: given the hybrid batteries and a separate air-conditioner for the back seat, the hybrid’s trunk measures a meager 11.7 cubic feet, smaller than that of a Kia Rio or other compact sedan. (Skip the rear air-conditioning in a Lexus LS 460 L, and you’ll enjoy a 50 percent larger trunk, at 18 cubic feet).

Jim Farley, general manager of Lexus, defended the car’s performance and green credentials. “If Lexus had to have a flagship, this is how it should be,” he said. “It’s the progressive person’s alternative. Hybrids are a huge platform for us at Lexus, and they’re only going to get bigger.”

Certainly, this hybrid Lexus is one of the quietest, most comfortable, best-built sedans around. It has every imaginable safety system and creature comfort. The navigation system is first-rate. The Mark Levinson audio system is amazing. And the optional ($12,675) Executive Package is the hands-down — or feet-up? — coolest feature. It includes rear seats that recline, heat and cool, along with a right-hand chair with a steeper recline, massage functions and a powered ottoman for the full mini-Maybach effect.

Yet every compliment you can lavish on this impressive ride, minus the all-wheel drive, applies equally to the nonhybrid version.

So why would anyone spend an extra $30,000 for this car? Certainly, the performance gains of 12-cylinder sedans aren’t always justified by their enormous premiums. Many people buy them for that V-12 badge on the fender, the exclusive message it sends. Ditto for the Lexus, but the roughly 2,000 people who’ll line up for the hybrid won’t be broadcasting their superior power, but their superior morals, however illusory.

If that’s not you, stick with the Lexus LS 460 L. Enjoy a back-seat massage and relax. You’ll know that you’ve got the better car — one that’s equally fast and frugal, but also weighs less and handles better.

You can actually park that terrific gas-only Lexus in the garage and have $30,000 to buy a Prius hybrid, with cash left over. Save the LS for special occasions and run errands in the Toyota at more than double the mileage. While Lexus plays the hybrid game, it’s the Prius that takes care of business.
(C)NYT

Electric Cars Nearly Ready, but Batteries Are Less So

Clever and attractive, the Chevrolet Volt, a design study for a new wrinkle in electric cars, dominated the headlines coming from the Detroit auto show in January. But the introduction was punctuated with an asterisk.

The car that promised a fuel economy equivalent of 150 miles a gallon and a total range of 640 miles using its onboard recharging system carried a major caveat: the lithium-ion batteries required to make it a reality are not yet available, and won’t be until 2010 at the earliest, industry experts say.

The Volt is not the only car waiting for lithium-ion batteries to be roadworthy. Reports last month in Nikkan Kogyo Shimbun, a Japanese business newspaper, said that the next generation of the Toyota Prius would be delayed by six months because the carmaker had decided that lithium-ion batteries were not quite ready.

Officially, the car was not postponed because Toyota had never announced an introduction date, but such a decision would have major implications: reverting to nickel-metal hydride batteries in today’s Prius means finding room for a larger and heavier power pack. A Toyota spokesman, John Hanson, said that while the company saw “huge potential” in lithium-ion batteries, it wanted to assure future Prius buyers the same levels of affordability and reliability they experience in today’s models.

The quest for batteries that provide sufficient range at a reasonable cost has gone on for a century. Electric power was a viable alternative when automobiles were first gaining popularity, eventually losing out to combustion engines in the 1920s. In recent decades, research efforts have gained greater urgency.

Like King Canute, who as ruler of England commanded the incoming tide to go out, the state of California decreed in 1990 that pollution-free electric cars must come into being. Battery-electric cars looked like a sensible solution for urban air-quality problems because pollutants would be produced where the electricity was generated, rather than where the car was driven.

Since the early 1990s the price of gasoline has doubled, and with it the motivation to seek alternatives. Battery technology has evolved considerably; hybrids have arrived, priced to reflect their need for two power plants instead of one and a battery that by itself is one-third of the car’s driveline cost. The plug-in hybrid — whose battery can be recharged from a wall socket as well as by an onboard combustion engine — has attracted a vocal following.

Before 1990, the principal battery choices were lead-acid, the familiar auto engine starting battery, and nickel-cadmium. The lead-acid battery is well-proved, but heavy considering the small amount of energy it can store. Nickel-cadmium batteries offer more miles of driving for a given weight and size, but are less attractive because a recycling system is not well-established. They are also at least four times as expensive.

The real force driving battery development has been portable electronics and cordless power tools, not vehicles. Both are high-volume applications. The workhorse here is the nickel-metal-hydride battery, which can store three times the energy of lead-acid cells in a package the same size. Nickel-metal-hydride is the most commonly used type of batteries in hybrids and electric-only vehicles because they are long-lived — Honda’s warranty for the Civic Hybrid battery runs 10 years/150,000 miles in some states — but are a great deal more expensive than a basic lead-acid battery. With a rapid recharge taking three hours, they were not the answer to California’s push for mainstream zero-emissions cars.

Another new battery type came along in 1991 — the lithium-ion battery. Its light weight — lithium is the third-lightest of elements — improved energy capacity for a given weight, and subsequent developments in electrode chemistry suggest that by 2010 it will be the winning technology for all applications. (It is already common in devices like cellphones and laptop computers.)

One problem has been durability, with early lithium-ion units tolerating only 750 cycles of discharge and recharge, or about two years of service, before deterioration of the terminals carrying power reduces charge capacity by 20 percent. A change from a terminal made of carbon to one made of lithium titanate spinel oxide holds the promise of increasing this to 9,000 cycles and 20 years’ use.

Many other battery chemistries exist — sodium-sulfur, nickel-zinc and nickel-iron — but the major contenders for use in electric vehicles remain the nickel-metal hydride and lithium-ion types.

Temperature control is an important consideration in the development of auto batteries; some cell or electrode types need to be warmer than others to function. And there are upper temperature limits — overheating and fires from lithium-ion batteries in laptop computers made headlines about a year ago.

All batteries slowly lose their charge to small internal currents, which generate heat just as a toaster does. If electrode deterioration increases this self-discharge current enough, catastrophic overheating can occur. Novel electrode chemistries or external control electronics promise to eliminate this hazard.

So far, lithium-ion batteries have gained capacity at the rate of 8 percent to 10 percent a year, doubling their ability to store energy over a decade. This and improved electrode chemistry have refreshed the appeal of the battery-electric car. Tesla, an electric-car startup that plans to start delivering its $98,000 Roadster this fall, has developed a power storage system of 6,831 lithium cells, each about the size of a AA battery, that it says will power the car 200 miles.

With the prospect of greater range, increased durability and their low cost to refuel, battery-electric vehicles start to look like just a bigger and practical power tool — one that may well make more sense than electric cars that use hydrogen fuel cells to produce power.

Would urban and suburban citizens buy lots of small electric vehicles at a price competitive with economy gasoline-powered cars? Have batteries matured enough to hit such a price point? Or will new emissions solutions make the small turbodiesel our first choice, as in Europe? It all comes down to price.
(C)NYT

Ford teams up to test plug-in hybrids

Auto manufacturer and utility Southern California Edison will work together to test up to 20 rechargeable vehicles.

Ford Motor Co said Monday it would test a fleet of rechargeable hybrids with utility Southern California Edison in a partnership that environmental advocates said underscores the growing interest in vehicles capable of running with little gasoline.

Ford Chief Executive Alan Mulally and John Bryson, chief executive of Edison International, unveiled plans for the alliance at Edison International's headquarters in suburban Los Angeles Monday.

Mulally said Monday he expects the company to sell plug-in hybrids in five to 10 years.

"Within five to 10 years we will start to see this technology in our hands," Mulally on the sidelines of a press event to announce an alliance between Ford and utility Southern California Edison to test 20 rechargeable electric vehicles.

When asked if that meant plug-in hybrids would be available on showroom floors, Mulally said, "Yes. Sure."

Mulally said the rollout of Ford plug-in hybrids is dependent on advancements to lithium ion batteries that will be charged by the car's owners using regular household electrical outlets.

He declined to give a more precise production target, saying: "I can't go further than that. We will know a lot more in the next few years."

The comments were the first time Ford has offered a timeline for producing plug-in hybrids.

Under the research partnership, researchers from Southern California Edison and Ford will work together in "real world" testing of up to 20 plug-in hybrid vehicles, Ford spokesman John Clinard said.

Ford said it would provide the utility company with a fleet of 2008 Ford Escape Hybrid sport utility vehicles that would be benchmarked for performance.

The Escape Hybrids would then be engineered by Ford in cooperation with a battery company partner yet to be named to make the vehicle capable of being plugged in.

Like other gasoline-electric hybrid vehicles currently on the market, the Ford Escape Hybrid's batteries are charged by the SUV's gasoline engine as well as by from energy captured during braking.

Plug-in hybrids can also charge their batteries by plugging into an electrical outlet. That could allow them to make little or no use of gasoline power several miles after batteries were fully charged.

The No. 2 U.S. automaker, which lost $12.6 billion last year, became the first U.S. car maker to introduce a gasoline-electric hybrid vehicle - the Escape - in 2004.

Faced with declining U.S. market share, Ford later backed off ambitious sales targets for hybrids and was criticized by environmental advocates for having lost momentum in the race to develop alternatives to combustion engines.

Ford's move to test plug-in hybrids was welcomed by environmental groups, which have often targeted the automaker for its poor fuel economy record.

"Ford, a company that was previously dead last in fleet-wide fuel efficiency for all major automakers, appears to be turning a corner with this announcement," environmental group Friends of the Earth regional policy director Danielle Fugere said in a statement.

Environmental advocates, particularly in California, have been pressing automakers to roll out plug-in vehicles capable of running solely on electricity for short distances and recharging at a standard electric outlet.

"Consumers have been waiting a long time for an automaker to offer the next generation of ultra-fuel-efficient, gasoline-optional cars," said environmental groups Rainforest Action Network and Global Exchange Campaign in response to Ford's announcement.

Ford will initially work exclusively with Southern California Electric to develop the testing procedures but did not rule out working with other partners in the future.

"As Ford's plug-in hybrid program grows, the automaker will look for broader participation as it develops a business model not just for Southern California, but potentially nationwide," Ford said in a statement.

Larger competitor General Motors Corp. has already begun development work this year on its own plug-in hybrid car. GM showed off a concept version of the Chevrolet Volt in January and has signed contracts with two battery companies to research batteries for a possible production version.

Electric utility Southern California Edison serves about 5 million electricity customers in the Los Angeles region and parts of California's coast and Central Valley. It is a subsidiary of Edison International.
(C)CNN

Hybrid synonym - Prius

A riddle: Why has the Toyota Prius enjoyed such success, with sales of more than 400,000 in the United States, when most other hybrid models struggle to find buyers?

One answer may be that buyers of the Prius want everyone to know they are driving a hybrid.

The Prius, after all, was built from the ground up as a hybrid, and is sold only as a hybrid. By contrast, the main way to tell that a Honda Civic, Ford Escape or Saturn Vue is a hybrid version is a small badge on the trunk or side panel.

The Prius has become, in a sense, the four-wheel equivalent of those popular rubber “issue bracelets” in yellow and other colors — it shows the world that its owner cares.

In fact, more than half of the Prius buyers surveyed this spring by CNW Marketing Research of Bandon, Ore., said the main reason they purchased their car was that “it makes a statement about me.”

Only a third of Prius owners cited that reason just three years ago, according to CNW, which tracks consumer buying trends.

“I really want people to know that I care about the environment,” said Joy Feasley of Philadelphia, owner of a green 2006 Prius. “I like that people stop and ask me how I like my car.”

Mary Gatch of Charleston, S.C., chose the car over a hybrid version of the Toyota Camry after trading in a Lexus sedan.

“I felt like the Camry Hybrid was too subtle for the message I wanted to put out there,” Ms. Gatch said. “I wanted to have the biggest impact that I could, and the Prius puts out a clearer message.”

Unlike the original Prius buyers, who wanted to be first with its innovative technology, the latest owners are far more conscious of foreign oil dependence and global warming, said Doug Coleman, Toyota’s product manager for Prius.

“Consumer knowledge and consumer awareness is changing,” Mr. Coleman said.

Prius sales for the first six months of the year are up 93.7 percent from last year, to 94,503, and Toyota has already sold close to as many Prius cars as it did in all of 2006.

To be sure, many owners are still choosing the Prius for the fuel economy that a hybrid offers — rated at 60 miles a gallon in city driving and 51 on the highway (although those numbers are estimated at 48 miles a gallon for city driving and 45 on the highway for 2008 models under more realistic government-imposed standards). But many are looking for something extra.

“The Prius allowed you to make a green statement with a car for the first time ever,” said Dan Becker, head of the global warming program at the Sierra Club (and yes, a Prius owner).

Not everyone is a fan of the statement. Some postings on Internet car discussion groups occasionally make dismissive references to “Pious Prius owners.”

Prius was first embraced by Hollywood stars and other celebrities and remains in vogue long after most cars have lost their buzz. Owners have included Cameron Diaz, Leonardo DiCaprio, Billy Joel, Bill Maher and Larry David. Mr. David has bought three, including one for his character to drive on his HBO series, “Curb Your Enthusiasm.”

Now Prius drivers are typically found in cities on the East and West Coasts, and in college towns like Ann Arbor, Mich., and State College, Pa.

“You can’t drive across town without seeing half a dozen of them,” said Peter A. Darnell, a software engineer and Prius owner in Westford, Mass., north of Boston.

Mr. Darnell admits to feeling smug this year when gasoline prices spiked above $3 a gallon. But that was not the main reason he bought his car. “I have to admit that I’m a granola-crunching liberal, and I really liked the idea of minimizing the impact on the environment,” Mr. Darnell said.

Corey Confer, general sales manager at Joel Confer Toyota in State College, said he had received calls from as far away as Key West, Fla., from buyers looking for a Prius.

His dealership advertises an $800 discount on each vehicle, while some dealers in the West, where gas prices are highest, are adding $2,000 premiums.

Nationwide, Prius sales jumped sharply in May, when gasoline prices rose above $3 a gallon. Worldwide, Toyota has sold more than one million Prius cars.

Toyota was alarmed to see Prius sales flatten last year, just when it planned to double shipments to the United States. It sold 105,000 in 2006, but is on track to sell 175,000 this year.

Before gas prices hit record levels, Prius sales were climbing, in part because of the first national advertising campaign, as well as rebates, which began in February.

The deals caught Dave Hancock’s eye. “I usually fast-forward past commercials, but I put on the brakes and said, What’s this?” said Mr. Hancock of Rochester.

When he brought home his car, his daughter called from Atlanta to congratulate her parents “for being so environmentally conscious,” said Mr. Hancock, who is retired from the Eastman Kodak Company.

Toyota’s competitors have had little success in approaching the sales level of the Prius, but not for lack of trying.

Honda actually beat Toyota to the hybrid market with its Insight, but it has since discontinued that car. And it is dropping a hybrid version of the Accord, whose gas mileage was not much better than the gas-powered Accord, and carried a higher price.

Honda, which sells a hybrid Civic, said it planned to come back with a new hybrid designed from the ground up as a hybrid, not a converted car. It is already giving sneak peeks to environmentalists like Mr. Becker of the Sierra Club, who drove a prototype brought to Washington by Honda engineers.

General Motors has been promoting the Chevrolet Volt, a concept hybrid that it says it will build once it has developed batteries for it.

In the meantime, G.M. is selling the Saturn Vue, a small sport utility vehicle that is available in “mild hybrid” form, meaning that it has an electric motor that can assist its primary gas engine but the car cannot run on electricity alone. G.M. also plans to introduce a hybrid version of the Saturn Aura car and says it will eventually have 12 hybrid vehicles, although Volt appears to be the only one that would be built specifically as a hybrid.

“We think we’re covering the market well,” said Brian Corbett, a G.M. spokesman.

So does the Ford Motor Company, even though it has pulled back from a commitment to sell 250,000 hybrids a year in the United States by 2010.

In June, Ford officials, including the chief executive, Alan R. Mulally, said the company had more hybrids under development beyond the Ford Escape and Mercury Mariner, both small S.U.V.’s. It has not set a new target for hybrid sales. Escape sales are up 10 percent this year, with Ford expecting to sell 22,000.

Toyota executives have said they plan to offer a hybrid version of everything the company sells worldwide, perhaps as soon as 2010. Japanese press reports say Toyota may even build Prius into a separate brand, with basic and sporty Prius models.

Automotive News reported that Toyota may add a stand-alone hybrid for Lexus, which sells several hybrid cars and S.U.V.’s. Mr. Coleman of Toyota would not discuss specifics, but he said senior management “is very bullish” on hybrids.

(C) Nick Bunkley and Mary M. Chapman contributed reporting.

The sad truth about hybrid cars

Hybrid Cars' Low Impact on Oil Imports
The hundreds of thousands of hybrid cars sold in the United States since their arrival on these shores in 1999 must be putting a dent in oil imports, right? Not quite. Or at least not yet.

According to a report released by the U.S. Department of Energy's National Renewable Energy Laboratory, fuel efficient electric-gasoline cars like the Toyota (TM) Prius and Honda (HMC) Civic have saved a grand total of 5.5 million barrels of oil over the past eight years. On the other hand, the U.S. was importing 8.5 million barrels of oil a day in 2003 to power cars and light trucks. "Hybrid electric vehicles would have to replace a significant portion of the total light duty vehicle fleet to have an impact on petroleum imports," NREL researchers concluded. The lab calculated gasoline savings based on fuel efficiency data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and reports from hybrid car owners and then used modeling software to calculate how many hybrids were on the road in any given year. Despite the negligible consequence of hybrids on oil imports so far, researchers were optimistic about their potential, noting that hybrid sales have grown 72 percent a year over the past five years and that such vehicles were 45 percent more fuel efficient than similar-sized conventional cars in 2006. "Although the fuel savings from hybrid electric vehicles to date is relatively small compared to the total fuel use, as the technology matures and these numbers increase they can have a significant impact in reducing our overall transportation fuel use,” said NREL senior research engineer Matthew Thornton in a statement. Of course, that impact would be magnified if General Motors (GM), Ford (F) and other U.S. automakers focused less on creating hybrid versions of monster SUVs like the Chevrolet Tahoe and more on developing small and mid-sized hybrids. Or all-electric cars, for that matter.

Diesel VS Hybrid VS Flex-Fuel

Hybrid
Gas/electric hybrids use electric motors to assist a gasoline engine in driving the vehicle. In hybrid cars now on the market, the batteries for the electric motor are charged by the gasoline engine and by power recaptured during slowing and stopping of the vehicle.
Vehicle costs: Adds about $2,000 to $3,000, but hybrid models usually have unrelated additional features making it difficult to assess the cost of the hybrid feature alone.

Efficiency: Increases fuel efficiency by anywhere from 25 to 40 percent compared to vehicles with similar-sized gasoline engines.

Fuel costs: Uses gasoline, so reduces fuel costs to the same degree that it increases fuel efficiency

Performance: Depends on the setup. Can actually boost performance while still increasing fuel efficiency compared to a non-hybrid car. But more performance will mean less efficiency.

Greenhouse gases: In any vehicle, CO2 emissions vary directly with the amount of fuel burned, so hybrid vehicles reduce CO2 emissions to the same degree that fuel efficiency is improved.

Other pollution: Reduces emissions of other pollutants to the same degree that fuel efficiency is improved, assuming hybrid and non-hybrid vehicles are otherwise the same.

The future: General Motors is working on two new plug-in hybrid vehicles, but it has not set a specific timeline. A plug-in hybrid could have its batteries charged by plugging into an electrical outlet as well as by using power generated from an on-board engine. The first GM vehicle would be a plug-in version of the new Saturn Vue Hybrid. The other would be something like the Chevrolet Volt concept car, where the wheels are driven by electricity alone, and an on-board engine is used only for back-up generator power.

Clean diesel
Thanks to new emissions cleaning technologies, you'll be seeing many more diesel-powered vehicles in the U.S. over the next few years. By their very nature, diesel engines offer much better fuel economy than gasoline engines. In Europe, diesels make up about half the market.
Diesels have been scarce in the U.S. because of strict emissions standards that older diesel engines couldn't meet and because of poor consumer perceptions of diesel engines.

Today's diesels don't puff out black foul-smelling smoke like older ones did. Because of other advancements, they don't make those clanging, rattling noises, either.

Ultra-clean diesel fuel, which has greatly reduced sulfur content, is now available at many gas stations. Like unleaded gasoline, this low-sulfur fuel allows for more advanced emissions cleaning technologies.

Diesel engines cost more to produce than gasoline engines, though, and the need for extra emissions cleaning devices adds even more to the cost.

Purchase costs: Adds about $1,000 to $2,000 to vehicle cost. It can be difficult to judge final consumer cost since the diesel engine is often not directly comparable to a gasoline engine available in the same model. Unrelated features may also be included in the diesel version, and car companies don't break out the cost of the engine separately.

Efficiency: Increases fuel efficiency from 12 to 35 percent compared to the same model with a similar-sized gasoline engine.

Fuel costs: Uses ultra-clean diesel fuel, which changes in price independently of gasoline. Right now, diesel costs slightly less per gallon less than gasoline. The engine's greater efficiency also reduces fuel costs substantially.

Performance: If your only experience with diesel engines comes from watching buses and trucks or driving an old diesel car from the 1980s, performance is much better than you think. It is a little different from driving a gasoline-powered vehicle, though. Engine RPMs are lower than with a gasoline engine and the engine sound, while not harsh or noisy, is slightly different, too. But when you step hard on the gas pedal, the turbocharger kicks in quickly. (All modern diesel engines are turbocharged.) With its superior torque - torque gives the pull you feel when accelerating - you'll be surprised how quick a diesel car can be.

Greenhouse gases: In any vehicle, CO2 emissions vary directly with the amount of fuel burned, so diesel reduces CO2 emissions to the degree that fuel efficiency is improved.

Other pollution: Even with cleaner fuels and improvements in emissions controls, modern diesel engines still emit more smog-forming emissions than gasoline engines, particularly nitrous oxide.

The future: By 2010, diesel cars will be held to exactly the same EPA emissions standards as gasoline-powered vehicles. Several car companies say they will make cars to meet those standards.

Flex-fuel vehicles
Flex-fuel vehicles can run on either gasoline or E85, a fuel that's 85 percent ethanol, an alcohol made from fermented plant material (in the U.S., it's usually corn) with 15 percent gasoline. To accept E85, some parts of the engine have to made from materials resistant to the corrosion ethanol can cause.
E85 contains less energy per gallon than gasoline so when sensors in the engine detect that ethanol is being burned they adjust by, among other things, pumping more fuel into the engine. Because of this, vehicles will get about 15 percent lower fuel mileage when burning E85 rather than gasoline.

For now, at least, E85 is almost impossible to find at gas stations outside the central Midwest. Until E85 becomes more widely available, most flex-fuel vehicles will just burn gasoline.

Purchase costs: Adds no cost to the vehicle

Efficiency: When running on gasoline, no difference. When running on ethanol, fuel efficiency is reduced by about 15 percent

Fuel costs: The cost if E85 fluctuates independently of gasoline but, at the moment, it costs less. Because of E85's poorer fuel economy, though, using E85 exclusively would cost you several hundred dollars more per year, based on EPA estimates.

Performance: No difference when running on gasoline. When running on E85, the vehicle will have a small increase in peak horsepower, but the difference will be undetectable to most drivers.

Greenhouse gases: No difference when running on gasoline; Since a vehicle needs to burn more fuel when running on E85, more CO2 is released. However, there should be little net production of CO2, theoretically, at least, since burning plant-based ethanol releases only carbon that had recently been absorbed by the plants used to make the fuel.

Other pollution: E85 burns more cleanly than gasoline so, in spite of burning more fuel per mile, produces about the same amount smog-forming pollutants as gasoline.

The future: Cellulosic ethanol, which could be made from plant parts not normally used for food, could greatly increase the supply of ethanol, which may allow it to supplant a significant portion of the petroleum-based fuel now used in cars.
(C)CNN

GM to make fuel-efficient diesel engines

Engines to increase efficiency by 25 percent, reduce emissions by 13 percent; will be used in light-duty trucks, Hummers built after 2009.

General Motors Corp. said Friday it will invest $100 million in its engine plant in Tonawanda, New York, to make a new diesel engine for light-duty trucks that improves fuel efficiency by 25 percent and reduces carbon-dioxide emissions by 13 percent.

The automaker said it will make the 4.5-liter V-8 engines for North American pickup trucks and the Hummer H2 sport utility vehicles built after 2009.

The announcement comes as GM, long known for its dependence on gas-guzzling SUVs, is trying to improve its image and reverse sliding sales and slumping market share against rival and hybrid-leader Toyota by shifting its product line-up to more fuel-efficient vehicles.

"GM is transforming its product portfolio to reduce fuel consumption and emissions, and the 4.5-liter V-8 diesel is an integral part of that transformation," said John Buttermore, GM's vice president of global powertrain manufacturing.

Production of the engine is scheduled to begin in the fourth quarter of 2009, GM said.

"It will meet the stringent 2010 emissions standards, and it will be compliant in all 50 states, making it one of the cleanest diesel vehicles ever produced," said Tom Stephens, GM's vice president of global powertrain and quality.

Union and local government officials had been trying to win production of the new diesel engine for the plant near Buffalo in western New York state.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton wrote a letter to GM Chief Executive Rick Wagoner and Erie County officials in late May approved a $350,000 sales tax break to clinch the new investment in the plant.

The $100 million investment includes renovation, new machinery, equipment and special tooling. GM, which also competes with Honda, Ford and DaimlerChrysler-owned Chrysler, said it will invest an additional $41 million for vendor tooling, containers and investments at other locations to support this operation.

In January, GM said it would invest $300 million in the plant to make new V-8 engines for its luxury vehicles, slated for production in 2009.

Friday's announcement brings GM's total investment in the plant to $1.6 billion over the last ten years.

The plant employs 1,825 people and makes engines for several GM vehicles including the Chevrolet Cobalt, HHR, Malibu, Impala and Saturn Ion.
(C)Reuters

Big 3-backed fuel efficiency plan proposed in Senate

Congressional allies of major automakers put forward a proposal Thursday challenging the leading Senate plan to force the industry to make vehicles that go significantly further on a gallon of gasoline.

The bipartisan alternative offered by Sen. Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat, and Christopher Bond, a Missouri Republican, would require cars, sports utilities and pickups to get better mileage over time, but is weaker than the chief plan approved by the Commerce Committee in May.

Financially struggling carmakers, including General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co., and Chrysler Group, have lobbied fiercely against the commerce measure, arguing that it would break their backs.

Environmentalists, some major companies outside auto industry and the Bush administration believe tough efficiency measures are the most effective and fastest way for the nation to reduce gasoline consumption and cut dependence on oil imports.

The commerce bill would raise fuel standards for all vehicles by 10 miles per gallon over 10 years - from an average of 25 mpg now to 35 mpg by model year 2020.

Automakers would have to achieve additional gains of 4 percent annually until 2030. It would also mandate fuel standards for trucks for the first time and, according to proponents, cut tailpipe emissions by 18 percent.

The Levin-Bond plan would require passenger cars get at least 36 mpg by 2022 and SUVs, pickups and vans achieve 30 mpg by 2025.

Unlike the Commerce Department proposal, the Levin/Bond plan does not include provisions or "off ramps" to allow industry to escape efficiency targets if the technology was not feasible or too expensive. The Levin/Bond proposal also does not include standards for trucks.

The Senate is expected to vote on the alternate proposal next week.

The Levin-Bond plan would also set targets for production of gasoline/electric hybrids and a range of gasoline alternatives, like ethanol, biodiesel. It also would increase funding for research and development of advanced batteries for electric cars and hydrogen fuel cells.

The commerce proposal also provides funding for fuel saving technologies.

The leading trade group for Detroit automakers, Japan's Toyota Motor Corp. and other companies said the Levin/Bond proposal was "tough on industry." The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers called the commerce plan "wildly extreme."

The House Energy and Commerce Committee is working on a fuel efficiency mandate as part of climate change legislation.
(C)CNN

Why we need big hybrid SUVs

Think a GMC Yukon Hybrid sounds silly? It can save more gas than a Civic Hybrid.

Outrage. Disbelief. Downright disgust. Those were readers' reactions to our recent story about "Top 13 fuel-efficient cars", which featured several trucks and SUVs.

Many of the emails went something likes this: "Did you sell your soul to Detroit? Since when is 16/24 'great' fuel-efficiency?"

Actually, 16 miles per gallon in city driving and 24 on the highway is really good for a large SUV. That's what the GMC Acadia gets.

Compare that to another big General Motors SUV, the GMC Yukon, which has similar interior space. The Yukon gets 14 miles per gallon in the city and 19 on the highway.

Yes, I know. That's a difference of only 2 miles per gallon in city driving. In overall driving - city and highway combined - the difference between the Acadia and the Yukon is 3 miles per gallon, according to EPA estimates.

Whoop-dee-doo?

Look at it this way, though. Over 15,000 miles - about a year's worth of driving - someone who drives the Acadia will use 148 fewer gallons of gas than someone who drives a Yukon. (By the way, all the EPA estimates used in this article are based on new testing procedures that result in lower, but more realistic, mileage figures for all vehicles.)

Now let's look at another car on the list, the Nissan Altima Hybrid. It gets 34 miles per gallon overall compared to 26 miles per gallon for the similar non-hybrid Altima. That's a difference of 12 miles per gallon.

But someone who decides to buy the Altima Hybrid instead of a regular Altima will save just 136 gallons of gas a year. That's still a lot, but not as big of a difference as a mere 3 mpg improvement in a large SUV.

Vehicles like DaimlerChrysler's Dodge Durango Hybrid and GMC's Yukon Hybrid, both due out later this year, are expected to make an even bigger difference. (We got to read lots of angry email when we wrote about the Durango Hybrid: "You folks are either morons or fools to run an article on a hybrid engine that only gets 25 mpg. What kind of reefer are you clowns smoking?")

I'm not trying to hide from the obvious here. Someone who switches from a non-hybrid GMC Yukon to a Toyota Prius will save about 611 gallons of gas a year. That switch would make a huge difference.

But how many people do you think could actually do that?

That assumes that all consumers are able to buy the smallest possible vehicle and that no one who drives a large SUV or other full-sized vehicle actually needs one.

Even as consumers have been ditching mid-sized SUVs for smaller SUVs and cars amid rising gas prices, sales of large SUVs have stayed relatively flat. That indicates that these buyers can't easily switch.

I didn't have to go very far to find a perfect test case: my sister. She lives in Cape Cod, Mass., where it snows heavily in the winter. She has three boys who all play hockey, a dog and a husband; and she usually has a couple of her kids' friends - and their hockey equipment - tagging along wherever they go.

Try fitting that life into a Prius. My sister drives a GMC Yukon XL not because she thinks it's cool but because it does what she needs her vehicle to do even when there's a foot-and-a-half of snow on the ground.

The gas mileage, on the other hand, she's not so crazy about.

But when she goes to trade in that vehicle she might be able to get a Yukon XL Hybrid. GM estimates it should get about 20 miles per gallon overall. That means it would use 237 fewer gallons of gas a year than the Yukon XL she drives now.

That's a lot of gas. And, if that hybrid Yukon XL isn't available, you think she'll buy a Honda Civic? No. More likely, she'll buy another Yukon, a non-hybrid one. That would be another 237 gallons of gas per year not saved.

Drawing a big circle around one number - say 35 miles per gallon - and saying "a vehicle isn't fuel efficient unless it gets 35 miles per gallon" is silly, simplistic and pointless. It's counterproductive because it keeps car companies focused on saving fuel where the savings are needed least. The best way to an get eye-popping miles-per-gallon number is by piling advanced hybrid technology into an already-efficient small car. It gets headlines, but it limits the real impact of the technology.

Car companies such as General Motors, which sells 70 percent of all large SUVs, and Chrysler are doing the right thing by putting their best fuel economy technology where it's actually going to do the most good: in vehicles that really need the help.
(C)CNN

How Gas Prices affect Driving Habits

With fuel prices continuing to increase, drivers are starting to change their habits to avoid the fuel pumps.

It seems that everyday the price of fuel is hitting an all-time high. As of this week, the national average price for a gallon of gasoline is around $3.21, and in many parts of the country it is well above this figure. So are Americans changing their driving habits to avoid paying so much at the pump?

According to a new MSN-Zogby poll, they are indeed. The results are based on an interactive survey of 7,241 adults nationwide conducted between May 11-14, 2007.

In fact, when asked how expensive gas would have to get before carpooling or consider using alternative transportation, one in three Americans (33%) say they have already changed their driving habits as average gas prices climbed past the $3 a gallon mark.

The poll also shows that drivers living in the Western states (42%) are more likely than those living in other regions to say they've already changed their driving habits. More women (36%) than men (30%) also say they've already made changes.

But overall, 21% say gas prices would have to increase to between $4 and $5 per gallon before they would adjust how they drive; while 14% of Americans say gas prices would have to reach between $6 and $8 per gallon before they would be willing to consider alternative transportation.

Of course, there are some die-hard drivers who won't give up their wheels no matter how high gas prices climb—15% say they will never quit driving. Men (17%) are slightly more likely than women (13%) to take this position, as are older adults.

There are a number of things a driver can do to save at the pump, and the answer doesn't have to be purchasing a more fuel-efficient vehicle. For a list suggestions designed to help cut your fuel consumption, check out MSN Autos Green Driving Tips.

If purchasing a more fuel-efficient vehicle sounds like a better plan, here is a list of the most fuel-efficient vehicles in America, based on 2007 model-year EPA fuel economy data.

The MSN-Zogby poll is based on an interactive survey of 7,241 adults nationwide that was conducted between May 11-14, 2007, and carries a margin of error of +/- 1.2 percentage points. By Perry Stern

The BMW Hydrogen 7

Clean Energy’ comes to the UK next week with the arrival of eight BMW Hydrogen 7 cars.

The virtually emissions-free luxury saloons form part of a total fleet of 100 Hydrogen 7 models that are a major landmark in BMW’s CleanEnergy programme: for the first time, Hydrogen 7 models have been produced on the ‘standard’ 7 Series production line and will be used in normal day-to-day driving in the UK.
Jim O’Donnell, BMW UK’s managing director, summed up this important step in BMW’s history: “The arrival of our Hydrogen 7 cars could not have come at a better time. Politicians, business leaders, the media and consumers are engaged in healthy debate on the future of energy supply and use. Meanwhile, the automotive industry is committed to cleaner motoring, with a host of possible solutions available today and being developed for the mid- and long-term. BMW is at the core of the future of motoring with tremendous developments in petrol and diesel engines, hybrid powertrains and hydrogen technologies.

“Our efficient dynamics programme has introduced energy-saving technologies that break through the 60 miles per gallon and one hundred and twenty grams per kilometre CO2 barriers, our new diesels are cleaner and greener than many of today’s hybrids, yet power and performance in all of our cars has improved. Clean, green motoring can also be engaging and dynamic, and the new BMW Hydrogen 7 models epitomise that philosophy,” O’Donnell concluded.

The fleet of liquid hydrogen powered cars is set to continue its rigorous programme of driving activities on UK roads. They will be in active service as support vehicles at a number of high profile events over the summer as well as transporting key participants at industrial, business and political conferences. A select group of high-profile VIP users will also take delivery of a car for short periods of time in order to experience the ‘normality’ of emissions-free motoring.

Uwe Ellinghaus, BMW UK’s marketing director clarified the importance of these hydrogen cars: “The age-old chicken-and-egg debate has now been resolved. BMW can produce hydrogen-powered cars on the production line and the time is right to engage with business leaders and politicians in order to progress the development of a hydrogen highway – the fueling and infrastructure requirements that make hydrogen a viable fuel for the consumer.

“We hope that experiencing these cars in normal driving situations will encourage people to join the debate. Without doubt, it will take many years for a suitable infrastructure to develop that makes hydrogen power an easy option for the consumer, but all indications are hydrogen is the only genuine long-term sustainable power source for cars. Public hydrogen filling stations have been developed in Germany and California, and the presence of BMW Hydrogen 7 cars in the UK will undoubtedly bring the future closer for British drivers,” Ellinghaus concluded.

The BMW Hydrogen 7 cars will be in action at a number of high-profile events starting on 22 May at the SMMT Test Day at Millbrook followed immediately afterwards when they will be used in the build up to the following week’s BMW PGA Championship at Wentworth. The Goodwood Festival of Speed and the Revolve alternative fuel Brighton to London drive event are also in the diary, as well as a number of conferences and environmental summits.

The BMW Hydrogen 7

The BMW