(Source: The Infrastructurist)

The author make a convincing case for upping transit investments and transit-oriented development to make our systems efficient and suggests some drastic measures, which are considered often “basic” in the pro-transit world.  The summary goes like tihs: “The move toward a world where we need more alternatives to single-person auto travel is going to happen regardless of  US politicians. It would be better if we tried to get ahead of that curve. Lazrus is probably right to be gloomy about that–but wrong to be gloomy about the long-term prospects of transit and rail.”  If you are a transit nut, this is definitely worth a read.  Enjoy!

—————————————————————————————————————————-

Yesterday’s dispatch from LA Times business writer David Lazarus has a great lede: “It’s hard to appreciate how truly pitiful our public transportation system is until you spend some time with a system that works.” Many of us know that feeling.

Then he gushes about the consistently reliable, affordable and convenient transit systems in Japan. “I rode just about every form of public transit imaginable — bullet trains, express trains, commuter trains, subways, street cars, monorails and buses.” All fabulous, of course.

Then there’s that age old question of replicating it here in this place we call America. Lazarus argues that even if you build great transit and high speed rail networks people won’t use them in sufficient numbers unless you also strongly penalize car travel. Carrot and stick. But how to discourage auto use? Like this:

• Make driving more expensive with higher gas taxes and road fees
• Make parking much pricier and less convenient all over the country
• Redevelop our cities and suburbs to make them denser and more conducive to transit and rail travel

Pretty basic stuff, though Lazarus chooses to characterize this broader process as “making our cities less comfortable” and says he “simply can’t imagine political leaders at the local, state or federal level telling voters that they support a big increase in gas taxes, sky-high parking fees and high-density neighborhoods.”

That fact essentially seals the fate of transit and passenger rail, he argues.

Let’s assume for the sake of argument he’s right that politicians will never act to make driving meaningfully more expensive. Should we abandon hope for transit and passenger rail that doesn’t suck?

No. Potentially for two reasons, in fact.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Economic Policy Institute)

Not even the most optimisitic American could have envisioned this soaring  popularity of “Car Allowance Rebate System” (CARS) — better known as “cash for clunkers.” CARS has proven to be very popular, and the $1 billion originally slated for credits appears to have been all but exhausted less than a week after the program went into effect. and is now awaiting another $2B lifeline, which is expected to come through after the Senate vote.

The program has already prompted thousands of Americans to upgrade older, less fuel efficient cars and is generating much-needed sales for troubled automobile manufacturers and related industries while decreasing gasoline consumption and improving environmental outcomes. But has there been an attempt to quantify these  impacts on fuel efficiency and environment? Yes.  The Economic Policy Insititute analyzes the fuel efficiency improvements & emissions reductions and made it easy for us to understand.  Here is a quick peek at the study & the awesome graphic that explains the cost savings in fueling a clunker vs. a new car.  The study methodology involves the following elements:

• Study authors assumed that the average credit is $4,000 and that all of the $1 billion is spent on credits, thus producing 250,000 trade-ins.
• The average miles driven per year — 14,450 — is the per vehicle estimate from the US Department of Transportation for 2006, the latest available data.
• Used forecasted annual gas price of $2.36/gallon from the Department of Energy.
• Derive CO2 emissions from the EPA and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, who assume that 1 gallon of automobile gasoline is equivalent to 19.4 pounds of CO2.
• 58% of all crude oil is from foreign sources and that 44% of all crude oil goes to gasoline production (both estimates from the Department of Energy for 2008).

Based on these assumptions, the study team has determined that the fuel economy improvements will save an estimated $821 per traded vehicle annually (see chart above).  How? Reduced gas consumption means less dependence on foreign oil, and more money in the pockets of consumers that could be used for domestic consumption. According to the Department of Transportation, the average fuel efficiency of old cars traded in via the program is 15.8 miles per gallon, while new cars had an average MPG of 25.4.

On average, total gas consumption will drop by 87 million gallons per year, and American consumers will use 22.2 million fewer barrels of foreign crude oil. The environmental impact of reduced gas consumption is considerable as well. We estimate that the program will result in about 850,000 fewer tons of CO2 emissions per year (3.4 tons per vehicle annually). This reduction equals more than two-thirds of the annual CO2 emissions linked to household electricity, heating, and waste.

Click here to read the entire article. (Hat tip @NPR)

(Source: DOE & Tree Hugger)

President Obama was in Indiana yesterday to announce how $2.4 billion dollars from the Recovery Act will be divided up between 48 different battery and electric vehicle projects.”If we want to reduce our dependence on oil, put Americans back to work and reassert our manufacturing sector as one of the greatest in the world, we must produce the advanced, efficient vehicles of the future,” said President Obama. “With these investments, we’re planting the seeds of progress for our country and good-paying, private-sector jobs for the American people,” he said.

“For our nation and our economy to recover, we must have a vision for what can be built here in the future – and then we need to invest in that vision,” said Vice President Biden. “That’s what we’re doing today and that’s what this Recovery Act is about.”

“These are incredibly effective investments that will come back to us many times over – by creating jobs, reducing our dependence on foreign oil, cleaning up the air we breathe, and combating climate change,” said Energy Secretary Steven Chu. “They will help achieve the President’s goal of putting one million plug-in hybrid vehicles on the road by 2015. And, most importantly, they will launch an advanced battery industry in America and make our auto industry cleaner and more competitive.”

The announcement marks the single largest investment in advanced battery technology for hybrid and electric-drive vehicles ever made. Industry officials expect that this $2.4 billion investment, coupled with another $2.4 billion in cost share from the award winners, will result directly in the creation tens of thousands of manufacturing jobs in the U.S. battery and auto industries.

So Where’s All That Money Going?

The money is going to three main categories of projects:

• $1.5 billion in grants to U.S. based manufacturers to produce batteries and their components and to expand battery recycling capacity;
• $500 million in grants to U.S. based manufacturers to produce electric drive components for vehicles, including electric motors, power electronics, and other drive train components; and
• $400 million in grants to purchase thousands of plug-in hybrid and all-electric vehicles for test demonstrations in several dozen locations; to deploy them and evaluate their performance; to install electric charging infrastructure; and to provide education and workforce training to support the transition to advanced electric transportation systems.

Most of the grant winners are familiar names, with Detroit firms getting a substantial share. But who’s the biggest winner? Here are some of the winners:

• Johnson Controls: $299.2 million for the production of nickel-cobalt-metal battery cells and packs, as well as production of battery separators (by partner Entek) for hybrid and electric vehicles.
• A123 Systems: $249.1 million for the manufacturing of nano-iron phosphate cathode powder and electrode coatings; fabrication of battery cells and modules; and assembly of complete battery pack systems for hybrid and electric vehicles.
• General Motors: $105.9 million for the production of high-volume battery packs for the GM Volt (the cells will be from LG Chem, Ltd. and other cell providers to be named), plus another $105 million for the construction of U.S. manufacturing capabilities to produce the second-generation GM global rear-wheel electric drive system. That’s not all. There’s also another $30.5 million to develop, analyze, and demonstrate hundreds of Chevrolet Volt Extended Range Electric Vehicles (EREVs) –125 Volt PHEVs for electric utilities and 500 Volt PHEVs to consumers. (for a total of $241.4 million)

The complete list of the 48 grants can be found here (pdf).

(Source: Green Car Congress)

This post is sponsored by LemonFree.com

Buoyed by the US government’s CARS (“Cash for Clunkers”) program, US auto sales slowed their decline in the US in July, dropping on 12.1% to 997,824 units, accordingto summary figures from AutoData. Passenger car sales dropped 10.6% to 554, 527 units, while light truck sales dropped 14.1% to 443, 297 units. All comparisons are by volume. As a result, the SAAR for July surged to 11.24 million units; US SAAR had been below 10 million since January.

Hybrids had an especially good month, with reported sales jumping 31.8% year-on-year to 35,429 units, representing a 3.55% new vehicle sales market share for the month—the highest monthly share yet. Hybrid gains were largely due to an increase in Prius sales (up 29.7% to 19,173 units) and Ford hybrids (up 323% to 5,353 units).

According to the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, CARS sales reflected demand for more fuel-efficient vehicles:

• Ford reported a 9 mpg increase from trade-in vehicle to new vehicle purchase;
• GM reported a 54% increase in small car sales since the CARS program was launched;
• 57% of Mazdas sold so far under the program were fuel-efficient Mazda 3’s;
• 78% of Toyota’s CARS sales volume consists of Corolla, Prius, Camry, RAV 4 and Tacoma, which average a combined 30 mpg;
• Volkswagen reports more than 60% of its CARS sales are clean diesel Jetta TDIs which get an EPA combined 34 mpg.

Here is a quick snapshot of sales volume by manufacturer (in the hybrid category):

• GM delivered a total of 1,487 hybrid vehicles were delivered in the month, up 36.3% year-on-year.
• Ford’s fuel-efficient vehicles pace July sales results. Ford had an exceptionally strong month with hybrid sales, up 323% year-on-year to 5,353 units.
• Toyota Motor Sales (TMS) posted July sales of 24,295 hybrid vehicles, up 19.3% from the same period last year.
• Total sales of the fuel-efficient Honda Civic increased 3.1% to 30,037. Sales of the Civic Hybrid, however, plunged 71.8% to 969 units year-on-year. The new Honda Insight hybrid posted 2,295 units.
• Nissan sold 1,030 units of the Altima hybrid, up 44.1% year-on year.

Our friends at Jalopnik yesterday published a revised list of ten most purchased vehicles under the Cash for Clunkers program:

1. Ford Focus

2. Toyota Corolla

3. Honda Civic

4. Toyota Prius

5. Toyota Camry

6. Ford Escape FWD

7. Hyundai Elantra

8. Dodge Caliber

9. Honda Fit

10. Chevrolet Cobalt

Click here to read the entire report.

(Source: AP Via Yahoo & Time)

“Cash for clunkers” could have the same effect on global warming pollution as shutting down the entire country — every automobile, every factory, every power plant — for an hour per year. That could rise to three hours if the program is extended by Congress and remains as popular as it is now.

Climate experts aren’t impressed.

Compared to overall carbon dioxide emissions in the United States, the pollution savings from cash for clunkers do not noticeably move the fuel gauge. Environmental experts say the program — conceived primarily to stimulate the economy and jump-start the auto industry — is not an effective way to attack climate change.

“As a carbon dioxide policy, this is a terribly wasteful thing to do,” said Henry Jacoby, a professor of management and co-director of the Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change at MIT. “The amount of carbon you are saving per federal expenditure is very, very small.”

Officials expect a quarter-million gas guzzlers will be junked under the original $1 billion set aside by Congress — money that is now all but exhausted.

Calculations by The Associated Press, using Department of Transportation figures, show that replacing those fuel hogs will reduce carbon dioxide emissions by just under 700,000 tons a year. While that may sound impressive, it’s nothing compared to what the U.S. spewed last year: nearly 6.4 billion tons (and that was down from previous years).

That means on average, every hour, America emits 728,000 tons of carbon dioxide. The total savings per year from cash for clunkers translates to about 57 minutes of America’s output of the chief greenhouse gas.

Likewise, America will be using nearly 72 million fewer gallons of gasoline a year because of the program, based on the first quarter-million vehicles replaced. U.S. drivers go through that amount of gas every 4 1/2 hours, according to the Department of Energy.

Time Magazine reports that initial data released by Department of Transportation, however, shows that so far cash for clunkers has been a green success. The clunkers averaged 15.8 m.p.g., compared with 25.4 m.p.g. for the new vehicles purchased, for an average fuel-economy increase of 61%. On the whole, American drivers are trading in inefficient trucks and SUVs for much more efficient passenger cars. Car manufacturers like Nissan are already retooling some models to improve their fuel economy so they can qualify for the credits. The early numbers were enough to convince California Senator Dianne Feinstein to go from criticizing cash for clunkers as too lax to supporting additional funding for the bill in the Senate. “This program has done much better than we ever thought it would for the environment,” she told reporters on Aug. 4.

It’s called the efficiency paradox: as we get more efficient at using energy — through less wasteful cars and appliances — the overall cost of energy goes down, but we respond by using more of it. In the case of cars, that means driving more. Ultimately our gas bill stays the same, but we spend more time on the road and pump the same amount of greenhouse-gas emissions into the atmosphere. The earth isn’t any better off.

To address the emissions problem directly, we need to look at fuel, not Fords: institute carbon taxes that raise the price of gas. We already know that higher gas prices discourage driving and reduce greenhouse-gas emissions — total vehicle miles traveled in the U.S. declined 3.6% in 2008 compared with the previous year, thanks largely to the sky-high price of gas for much of 2008. (The recession didn’t help, but sharp declines in driving began well before the bottom dropped out of the economy.) As gas prices have fallen in 2009, however, driving has begun to tick back up.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: AP via Yahoo & New York Times)

The Senate will vote to extend the popular “cash-for-clunkers” program before going home on Friday, Majority Leader Harry Reid declared Tuesday in a strong signal the government won’t let the trade-in rebates die under the surging demand that has almost exhausted federal backing.

Reid’s GOP counterpart, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, predicted his party would not block a vote and “the matter will be completed.” Republicans were still demanding a chance to amend a House-passed version that would extend the program into September, but Democrats were confident the bill wouldn’t be changed.

“There obviously is a real pent-up demand in America,” the Transportation secretary, Ray LaHood, said. “People love to buy cars, and we’ve given them the incentive to do that. I think the last thing that any politician wants to do is cut off the opportunity for somebody who’s going to be able to get a rebate from the government to buy a new automobile.”

Visiting the White House for a lunch with the President, Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader, was also asked about the program.

“We’ll pass ‘cash for clunkers,’ ” he said. And Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky, who is the minority leader, said there would be a vote, but he did not suggest an outcome.  Opposition to extending the program has been dissipating. One vocal GOP critic, South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint, said Tuesday he would not try to block the legislation. And three lawmakers who wanted the program limited to the purchase of even more fuel-efficient vehicles said Monday they would back the plan.

Republicans have said it puts the government in the bad position of picking winners and losers.

“People want to know what’s going to be next. Cash for shoes? Cash for groceries?” said Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala.

The first $1 billion in funding is expected to lead to sales of 250,000 vehicles and the additional $2 billion would generate sales of perhaps a half-million more vehicles.  The program has encouraged about a quarter-million Americans to buy new cars at time when the economy is still in recession and badly needs a boost.

Buyers of new cars and trucks have swamped formerly deserted auto dealers to claim their rebates — up to $4,500 when they trade in older models that get significantly worse gas mileage. The older vehicles are then scrapped.

Because the House has already recessed for August, any change by the Senate would effectively interrupt the rebate program until Congress returns in September. Consumers who don’t get in on a deal this week would have to wait until then to take advantage of the rebates, assuming eventual passage.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Detroit News via Autoblog & Bloomberg)

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has processed 80,500 transactions so far, and the early winner of Cash For Clunkers appears to be the Ford Focus. The Detroit News is reporting that the Focus is the number one vehicle purchased under the government program, showing us why Ford’s C-Segment vehicle gained 43.6% in July. Ford also saw an amazing 97% increase in Escape sales in July, a tally that was likely improved with the help of Cash For Clunkers.

The controversial and somewhat clumsy program is drawing plenty of attention for its popularity amongst car buyers, and Detroit automakers appear to be taking more than their fair share of sales.

The White House says 47% of all vehicles sold through the bill so far come from US automakers; 2% higher than the domestics’ 45% overall share. Four of the top 10 vehicles purchased under the program come from domestic automakers, and over half of all vehicles were built in the States.

This wildly popular program is currently all but spent and is awaiting the Senate nod for a further $2Billion cash infusion to keep it going.   On Friday, the House approved the $2 billion increase. The Senate is expected to vote Wednesday or Thursday; the White House is pressing it to act. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood told MSNBC that the program has been a “lifeline to the economy.”

To drum up support for more dollars, the White House is touting the program’s value. White House spokesman Robert Gibbs says the average fuel economy increase so far is 9.4 mpg; a 61% increase verses the vehicles destined for a sodium silicate bath. So far, 83% of the vehicles traded in have been trucks, while 60% of the vehicles purchased under the program have been cars. The White House estimates that Cash For Clunkers will save the average car buyer $700 – $1,000 in gas prices during the life of the vehicle.

The sales last month from the federal incentives may result in fewer buyers later this year after the program ends, George Pipas, Ford’s sales analyst, told CNBC today.

A similar program in Germany won’t sustain sales growth into 2010 as those incentives expire, said Matthias Wissmann, president of the German carmakers, today at a Frankfurt news conference. Germany’s car market expanded by 26 percent from a year earlier in the first half, propelled by increases of at least 40 percent in May and June.

Our favorite auto website,  Jalopnik, offers a comprehensive list of the top 10 vehicles  sold and trade-ins) dealt under this CARS program.

The Ten Most Traded-In Vehicles (vehicle’s EPA mileage)
1. 1998 Ford Explorer (14-17 mpg)
2. 1997 Ford Explorer (14-18 mpg)
3. 1996 Ford Explorer (14-18 mpg)
4. 1999 Ford Explorer (14-18 mpg)
5. Jeep Grand Cherokee
6. Jeep Cherokee
7. 1995 Ford Explorer (15-18 mpg)
8. 1994 Ford Explorer (15-18 mpg)
9. 1997 Ford Windstar (18 mpg)
10. 1999 Dodge Caravan (16-18 mpg)

The Ten Most Purchased Vehicles (vehicle’s EPA mileage)
1. Ford Focus (27-28 mpg)
2. Honda Civic (24-42 mpg)
3. Toyota Corolla (25-30 mpg)
4. Toyota Prius (46 mpg)
5. Ford Escape (20-32 mpg)
6. Toyota Camry (23-34 mpg)
7. Dodge Caliber (22-27 mpg)
8. Hyundai Elantra (26-28 mpg)
9. Honda Fit (29-31 mpg)
10. Chevy Cobalt (25-30 mpg

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Green Car Congress)

GM’s domestic sales of the automaker and its joint ventures in China jumped to 144,593 units—an increase of 77.7 percent compared to last year. This was GM China’s best July ever, extending an uninterrupted series of single month sales records that started in January 2009.

For the first seven months as a whole, GM China and its joint ventures sold 959,035 vehicles, up 42.8% in comparison with the first seven months of last year.

Shanghai GM registered year-on-year sales growth of 60.6% in July to 56,489 units.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Green Car Congress & NGVA Europe)

The monthly sales rate of natural gas vehicles in Sweden has increased from about 150 to more than 700 units,according to NGVA Europe. The results are largely driven by the new Volkswagen TSI Passat EcoFuel (earlier post) (60% of sales) and the Mercedes B 170 NGT (earlier post) (24% of sales).

Most of the company cars are medium sized sedans or wagons. Cars like the new Volkswagen Passat TSI EcoFuel, and the Mercedes B 170 NGT (see picture on the right while refuelling at a NG/biomethane filling station of Fordonsgas), belong in this category, and explain the strong growth this year of the Swedish NGV sales. More than 50 % of all new cars sold in the Swedish market are company cars supplied to employees and used both for company and private purposes.

The employee pays income tax based on the assessed value of the car and the value of any fuel paid for by the company. For hybrids and for NGVs the value of the car is reduced by 40 % and for flex fuel cars by 20 %, to stimulate the use of environmentally superior technologies. The 40 % reduction is limited to maximum 16.000 SEK annually which, with a marginal tax rate of 50 %, means a net tax saving of 8.000 SEK (some 800 EUR) annually. The lower fuelling costs also mean a corresponding reduction of tax on the value of fuel paid for by the company. A reduction of the annual fuel costs by say 600 EUR thus normally means a 300 EUR tax saving.

Sweden at the end of 2008 had just under 17.000 NGVs and the Swedish NGV sales in June ran at an annual rate of 8.700 vehicles. Sales of new NGVs are now accelerating and may soon reach about 800 units monthly, corresponding with an annual sales rate of close to 10.000 vehicles. The graph shown below clearly illustrates the importance of the now available new models in the company cars segment (also well suited for the Swedish taxi cab segment).

In June 2.9 % of all new passenger cars sold in Sweden were NGVs!

Click here to read the entire article.