(Source: Wired & You Tube)

Folks at Mission Motors are hard at work preparing for the upcoming TTxGP green motorcycle grand prix.  As they prepared their electric beauty, Mission One, for the D-Day they decided to take it out for a spin on the circuit and test its endurance and speed.   We are now thankful that the team decided to capture the events in a video and decided to share with us enthusiasts who are eagerly awaiting the products arrival in the market. The video provides some tantalizing glimpses of the bike’s mechanicals, and since Mission Motorsunveiled the bike in February, we know a little about what’s coming in the $69,000 street bike slated for production next year.

“We were able to test extensively at speed as well as for endurance,” company founder and CEO Forrest North told Wired.com. “The bike responded amazingly in both areas. We were extremely impressed that right off the factory floor the Mission One could be ridden to the limits with very few tweaks. We’re excited to begin testing at the Isle of Man next week and put the bike through its paces on the mountain course.”

It has a 3-phase AC induction motor and a liquid-cooled lithium-ion battery. Mission Motors claims the battery is good for 150 miles and recharges in just two hours at 240 volts. Lustworthy hardware includes Ohlins suspension at both ends, four-piston Brembo brakes and Marchesini forged wheels. The components put the Mission One on par with hardcore sportbikes like the Ducati 1198.

The TTxGP will be a great place to prove the bike’s sporting cred. The inaugural event follows the Isle of Man TT, one of the most storied races in all of motorcycling. The 37.5-mile course may well be the ultimate test of a motorcycle’s handling, and running that hard for that long will show what’s possible – or what isn’t – with battery range.

(Source: Streetsblog & Rotor.com)

The House is poised this week to take up the so-called “cash for clunkers” bill, which aims to boost the slumping U.S. auto market by giving out tax credits of $3,500 and up to anyone who trades in a gas-guzzling car for a more efficient model.

With the Senate Majority Leader threatening to make Senators work five days a week to speed up work on legislative priorities, lawmakers expect to finish a war supplemental bill this week that would include a provision for cash for clunkers and then Congress will turn its attention to healthcare and climate change legislation.

House Democrats must settle the issue of whether to include in the war supplemental a provision that would give car buyers a voucher worth up to $4,500 for trading gas-guzzlers for more fuel-efficient vehicles.  There is tremendous bipartisan support for this proposal, especially with the recent bankruptcy of General Motors.

The likely passage of Sutton’s bill this week could be bad news for a stronger “cash for clunkers” plan that’s being promoted by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), who displayed welcome candor last month in calling the Sutton plan “the auto industry’s version” of “cash for clunkers” and “unacceptable” to American drivers.

Feinstein’s proposal would require drivers to achieve a 25 percent fuel-efficiency increase before receiving a tax credit for ditching their clunkers. But Michigan Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D) is pushing for a trade-in tax credit that’s very similar to Sutton’s — truck owners would only have to increase their fuel efficiency by 2 miles per gallon to be eligible.

Feinstein’s proposal would require drivers to achieve a 25 percent fuel-efficiency increase before receiving a tax credit for ditching their clunkers. But Michigan Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D) is pushing for a trade-in tax credit that’s very similar to Sutton’s — truck owners would only have to increase their fuel efficiency by 2 miles per gallon to be eligible.

(Source:  Foreign Policy Magazine)

Cartoon Courtesy: Slate Magazine

Outside a small group of nihilists and committed free marketeers who’d have let General Motors go under, no matter the price, few question the necessity of the Obama administration’s plan for the once great American company’s reorganization in bankruptcy. But as a U.S. taxpayer, and therefore one of GM’s brand-new owners, I have my doubts about our ability to manage this new property. Yes, GM’s previous owners proved unable to run a competitive car company in a global marketplace, but is the U.S. government really the best one to transform it? Already, the particulars of the Chapter 11 arrangement lead me to fear that the same sort of internal politics, unthinking nationalism, and generalized aversion to engineering risk that have hobbled GM for decades will continue to haunt its new incarnation.

One place where you won’t hear for-attribution criticism of the “new” General Motors these days is GM headquarters. Perforce they are obligated to display their gratitude with the unfailing enthusiasm that a $50 billion-plus investment in a failing business minimally entitles its benefactors to expect in return. Although the collegial tone of the new rapprochement comes 50 years late, it is heartening nonetheless to see American industry finally welcome Washington’s involvement in matters like safety, fuel economy, and emissions regulation.

Even Robert “Maximum Bob” Lutz, GM’s outgoing product czar and vice chairman, and a fierce critic of government meddling from the “give me back my bullets” wing of Detroit’s old school, has experienced an astonishing change of heart, at the ripe age of 77. Speaking to a gathering of journalists in Motor City the other week, Lutz unhinged every jaw in the house when he shared his thoughts on how the White House automotive task force ought to become a permanent fixture. Of the unprecedented government-industry collaboration the Chrysler and GM bankruptcies begat, Lutz, an ex-Marine attack pilot and near-libertarian known for making his daily commute in a decommissioned Czech jet fighter, quipped: “Jeez, it only took 30 years for somebody to finally figure [government-industry partnership] out.”

Er, right. Thirty years and a couple of epochal bankruptcies.

Questions about the government’s intentions for the new GM Lite already abound. Notably, what will and what should the company’s policies be, now that it is controlled (in theory) by and for the benefit of U.S. taxpayers, who own 60 percent of its shares?

Will GM be underwritten so as to lead the market in the direction of fuel saving and new technologies? Or will it trim its sails and attempt to get by on its sometimes-profitable religion of pickup trucks and SUVs, perhaps ones that get slightly better mileage? GM is still tooled up to build them.

Ever since the 1920s, when GM’s Alfred P. Sloan introduced the precepts of what came to be known as Sloanism — a car for every purse and purpose — a good day at a car dealership was one when you sold someone “more car than they need.” Automobile marketing often appeals to man’s baser emotions. Greed, lust, and envy come to mind, as do excessive horsepower and other costly and unnecessary options that have been larded on to new cars to boost profits for longer than any of us have been alive. So, you can’t help wondering, has the U.S. government entered the business of encouraging people to live out their most insane automotive dreams? Will it labor to create demand for automobiles when and where there is no need, as generations of car companies have done before it?

And where do GM’s new taxpayer/shareholders stand on the matter of outsourcing work to Mexico or South Korea or China or anywhere else, as the old GM did whenever it got the chance? Will Chevy production lines in places like Toluca and Silao, Mexico, come home to the USA? The old GM went in for cheap overseas labor. Has the government now entered the business of using taxpayer money to export jobs? Is this the change we need?

Myriad practical and philosophical quandaries aside, one vital series of questions about the “new” GM — which brands will be kept, sold, or terminated — has already been answered. Chevrolet, Buick, Cadillac, GMC, Australia’s Holden, and South Korea’s Daewoo are to be spared. To be sold: Saturn, Hummer, and Sweden’s Saab are available outright, and operating control of GM’s German division, Opel, is to be sacrificed in a deal brokered by the German government outside U.S. bankruptcy proceedings. For the scrap heap: Pontiac, the venerable division that once claimed to “build excitement.” In limbo: Opel’s English sister brand, Vauxhall.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Autoblog & Autoweek)

Americans may have the opportunity to welcome the Tata Nano to their shores in just over two years, according to a confirmation from David Good, a U.S. rep for the Indian automaker. Before it arrives, Tata assures that the ultra-cheap compact with a base price of just $2500 will be configured to meet all emission and crash standards. If successful, we could see see versions of the Indian microcars running on biofuel and diesel.  This begs the question whether the price point will continue to stay around $2500 even after meeting such stringent safety and emissions requirements? Probably not! It is safe to say that the price would be a little less than $5000  – the expected price of the Euro version.

But who will distribute the teensy Tatas? Well, that’s up in the air right now. A brand-new dealer network for the brand has been discussed. Another option would be selling the Nano through Jaguar and Land Rover dealerships — the Indian automaker owns both, after all.  But this option seems highly unlikely,  according to Stuart Schorr, a spokesman for Jaguar Land Rover, who dismissed the rumours.

A larger European version is slated to debut in 2011, and has an upgraded engine that could get 67 mpg. That car is still expected to come in at less than $5,000.  Tata would be the second Indian company with cars on U.S. streets. Global Vehicles U.S.A. Inc. of suburban Atlanta plans to introduce pickups made by Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. later this year.

(Source: Greenbang, Alpha Galileo & Green Car Congress)

Data: Gerbens-Leenes et al via Green Car Congress

The ‘water footprint’ of bioenergy, i.e. the amount of water required to cultivate crops for biomass, is much greater than for other forms of energy. The generation of bioelectricity is significantly more water-efficient in the end, however – by a factor of two – than the production of biofuel. By establishing the water footprint for thirteen crops, researchers at the University of Twente were able to make an informed choice of a specific crop and production region. They published their results in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) of 2 June.

The researchers found, for example, that it takes an average of 14,000 litres of water to produce one litre of biodiesel from rapeseed or soya. However, the water footprint for rapeseed in Western Europe is significantly smaller than in Asia. For soya, India has a large water footprint, while the figures for countries such as Italy and Paraguay are more favourable. In the generation of bioelectricity, too, there are big differences between the crops: sugar beet has by far the smallest water footprint – jatropha is 10 times less water-efficient. For the production of bioethanol, sugar beet is again by far the favourite: one litre of bioethanol made from sugar beet takes 1,400 litres of water, as against 2,500 litres for sugarcane, which is widely cultivated  in Brazil.  A new report from Novozymes describes how Brazil could produce up to 8 billion liters (2.1 billion gallons US) of biofuel from sugarcane residues (bagasse) by 2020, representing additional export revenue for Brazil of up to US$4 billion. In Brazil, the proportion of bioethanol used in transport fuel is already at 50%; by comparison, the proportion is 7% in the US, 2% in China, and 1% in Europe, according to Novozymes.

(Source: Green Car Congress & Wired)

Toyota’s third-gen Prius is already a huge hit in Japan (topping the sales numbers for May), and the automaker plans to lease a plug-in version to corporate and municipal customers by the end of the year.

Just 200 are slated for release in Japan under a joint program with the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry aimed at promoting the adoption of plug-in hybrids and EVs. Although the new Prius – like all those that came before – uses a nickel metal hydride battery, the plug-in features a lithium-ion pack.

“Toyota Motor Corp. believes that, in response to the diversification of energy sources, plug-in hybrid vehicles are currently the most suitable environmentally considerate vehicles for widespread use,” the company said in a statement. “TMC therefore intends to encourage the marketing of plug-in hybrid vehicles while introducing a total of 500 vehicles globally—primarily to fleet customers—to further use and understanding of the vehicles.”

TMC will introduce approximately 150 plug-in hybrid electric vehicles in the United States, as well as more than 150 vehicles in Europe, including 100 in France. TMC is also considering introducing plug-in hybrid vehicles in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Germany.

(Source: Greenbang, Alpha Galileo & Green Car Congress)

The ‘water footprint’ of bioenergy, i.e. the amount of water required to cultivate crops for biomass, is much greater than for other forms of energy. The generation of bioelectricity is significantly more water-efficient in the end, however – by a factor of two – than the production of biofuel. By establishing the water footprint for thirteen crops, researchers at the University of Twente were able to make an informed choice of a specific crop and production region. They published their results in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) of 2 June.

The researchers found, for example, that it takes an average of 14,000 litres of water to produce one litre of biodiesel from rapeseed or soya. However, the water footprint for rapeseed in Western Europe is significantly smaller than in Asia. For soya, India has a large water footprint, while the figures for countries such as Italy and Paraguay are more favourable.

In the generation of bioelectricity, too, there are big differences between the crops: sugar beet has by far the smallest water footprint – jatropha is 10 times less water-efficient. For the production of bioethanol, sugar beet is again by far the favourite: one litre of bioethanol made from sugar beet takes 1,400 litres of water, as against 2,500 litres for sugarcane, which is widely cultivated  in Brazil. 

A new report from Novozymes describes how Brazil could produce up to 8 billion liters (2.1 billion gallons US) of biofuel from sugarcane residues (bagasse) by 2020, representing additional export revenue for Brazil of up to US$4 billion. In Brazil, the proportion of bioethanol used in transport fuel is already at 50%; by comparison, the proportion is 7% in the US, 2% in China, and 1% in Europe, according to Novozymes.

(Source: Streetsblog & Wall Street Journal)

The Obama administration is working on a plan to fill the shortfall in the nation’s highway trust fund by August without adding to the federal deficit, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood told Congress yesterday.

The highway trust fund, which relies mostly on gas-tax revenue, will need up to $7 billion in additional money by the end of summer to ensure states continue receiving payments, LaHood told the transportation subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee. The fund also will need up to $10 billion in the 12 months after September to ensure its solvency, LaHood said.

“We believe very strongly that any trust fund fix must be paid for,” LaHood told members of the House Appropriations Committee’s transportation panel. “We also believe that any trust fund fix must be tied to reform of the current highway program to make it more performance-based and accountable, such as improving safety or improving the livability of our communities — two priorities for me.”

The administration’s quest to offset its trust fund fix, which will cost as much as $7 billion, could prove fruitless.  Rep. John Olver (D-MA), chairman of the panel that greeted LaHood today, put it simply when asked if the necessary spending cuts could be found. “That’d be very tough,” he said, noting that his own annual transportation spending is unlikely to become law before the highway trust fund runs out of cash.  Replenishing the trust fund with a cost offset, as LaHood suggests, requires a serious conversation about finding new long-term revenue sources for not just highways but all modes of transportation.

But he said the President Barack Obama administration has ruled out raising the gas tax to provide additional funding, saying an economic recession isn’t the time to make such a move.  “We are not going to raise the gasoline tax. I’ll just say that emphatically,” LaHood said.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: AP via Yahoo)

General Motors Corp., just days after the bankrupt carmaker sold its Hummer brand, said Friday that it has reached a deal to unload Saturn to racing legend and auto dealer Roger Penske.

 General Motors Corp. has a tentative deal to sell its Saturn brand to former race car driver and dealership group owner Roger Penske, both companies said Friday.

Penske has signed a memorandum of understanding that would give his dealership chain, Penske Automotive Group, Saturn’s 350 dealerships, the companies said. Penske said that he expects to offer all the dealers new franchise agreements and will retain all 13,000 Saturn employees for the immediate term.

“I would expect that the model that we’re putting together, the distribution model, will be profitable day one,” Penske said in an interview with The Associated Press. “We’ll have less costs. We’ll not be in the manufacturing side.”

Neither Penske nor GM would say how much Penske is paying for the brand. Penske said he expects the deal to close in the third quarter.

Penske Automotive Group also distributes Daimler AG’s Smart subcompacts in the U.S., but Smart has its own dealership network and Saturn dealers will continue to exclusively distribute Saturn vehicles, Penske said.

Initially, GM will continue to produce on a contract basis the Saturn Aura sedan as well as the Vue and Outlook SUVs, the companies said. But Penske said he is in talks with manufacturers around the world about building Saturn cars in the future.

GM Chairman Roger Smith first unveiled the Saturn brand in November 1983, describing it as a revolutionary new way to build and sell small cars in America. But the project was slow to develop and the brand did not officially launch until 1990. It featured the iconic tag-line “a different kind of car company.”

GM’s hope was that Saturn would attract younger buyers with smaller, hipper cars to better compete with Japanese imports. It built a new plant in Spring Hill, Tenn., devoted to Saturn production. The factory had more flexible work rules than traditional GM plants for the employees who built the cars.

Image Courtesy: Penske Automotive Group

Despite a cult-like following that drew thousands to annual reunions in Spring Hill, the brand never made money for GM. The factory stopped making Saturns in 2007 and currently builds only the Chevrolet Traverse.

As GM focused more on high-profit pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles, Saturn began to languish in the late 1990s. Then in 2006, car buyers began to find Saturn’s new models more appealing. But after a good year in 2007, sales dropped 22 percent last year as the U.S. car market withered.

Penske Automotive also distributes Daimler AG’s Smart subcompacts in the U.S., but Smart has its own dealership network and Saturn dealers will continue to exclusively distribute Saturn vehicles, Penske said.

Carl F. Galeana, who owns two Saturn dealerships north of Detroit, said Friday he was thrilled that Penske would be the Saturn buyer.

“Roger Penske is an icon in the business world,” Galeana said. “I’ve worked with him personally. Nobody works harder than Roger Penske.”

Galeana said the fact that Penske is interested in Saturn means the brand has value.

“It allows Saturn to get back to its original roots, which is to be an independent car company,” he said.

Shares of Penske Automotive rose 52 cents, or 3.6 percent, to $15.13 in midday trading on news of the sale. The stock has enjoyed a brisk rally this year, more than tripling from an annual low of $4.82 in March.

During a press briefing earlier this week, GM Chief Executive Frederick Henderson said Saab has attracted three bidders, but he declined to reveal names.  The renowned Hummer brand was sold to a Chinese heavy machinery company a couple of days ago and this transaction will conclude upon clearance from three different Chinese government agencies .

Click here to read the entire article.

This post is sponsored by LemonFree.com 

(Source:  Wall Street Journal, Green Car Congress & Tree Hugger)

Image Courtesy: Green Car Congress - Prius sales in Japan by month since January 2007. Data: JADA.

Last month (May 2009), the Toyota Prius was the top selling model in the world’s second-largest economy; the rival Honda Insight hybrid came in third, according to new car sales rankings—excluding minicars with displacements of less than 660 cc—released by the Japan Automobile Dealers Association (JADA).   

In April Honda was quite happy to report that its new Insight hybrid was both the best selling car in Japan for that month (outselling the Toyota Prius) and the first hybrid car to have that honor with 10,481 units. (Earlier post.) In May, the Insight dropped to third place with 8,183 units, behind the Prius and the Honda Fit, with 8,859 units.Toyota’s May performance was all the more surprising, since the third-generation Prius didn’t go on sale until May 18.  

The Prius posted 10,915 units in May, in Japan more than twice the 5,079 units sold in May 2008 and compared to 1,952 units in April 2009, according to the JADA data. (In the US, Toyota reported 10,091 units of the Prius sold in May.)

There are several possible explanations—beyond the fact that both Toyota and Honda have cut prices to make hybrids a little less niche and a little more mass market. First, generous government incentives: Japan’s stimulus package included a range of tax breaks for buyers of hybrid (and electric) vehicles which can knock thousands of dollars off the price tag. Japan has tougher mileage standards—but that affects what kind of cars manufacturers turn out, not what kind of cars consumers flock to. One huge difference is the price of gasoline—which automatically makes the hybrids more attractive, especially in a recession. Japan, like many European countries, slaps a hefty national tax on gas. Right now, Japanese pump prices work out to $4.61 a gallon. That compares to a U.S. national average of about $2.50 a gallon.

Over 1.8 Million new and used cars