(Source: Bloomberg)

Edward E. Whitacre Jr. built AT&T Inc. into the biggest U.S. provider of telephone service over a 43-year-career. By his own admission, he becomes chairman of General Motors Corp. knowing nothing about the auto industry.

The 6-foot-4-inch Texan nicknamed “Big Ed” said steering the nation’s largest automaker after bankruptcy is “a public service.” People who know him say he can meet GM’s need for the type of transformation he orchestrated at Dallas-based AT&T.

“I don’t know anything about cars,” Whitacre, 67, said yesterday in an interview after his appointment. “A business is a business, and I think I can learn about cars. I’m not that old, and I think the business principles are the same.”

Whitacre’s selection bucks more than a half-century of tradition at GM, where the only non-executives to lead the board since 1937 were interim ChairmanKent Kresa and John Smale, who held the job from 1992 through 1995. Whitacre will take the post when Detroit-based GM exits Chapter 11, perhaps by Aug. 31.

A bachelor’s degree in industrial engineering and record in shaping a “monolithic” AT&T into a diversified enterprise make Whitacre “a good choice,” said Jim Hall, principal of 2953 Analytics auto-consulting firm in Birmingham, Michigan.

“He was one of the guys who helped create a new AT&T that wasn’t so dependent on land-line phone service,” said Hall, a former GM engineer. “There’s a parallel with General Motors. GM is not now about just making cars. It’s about re-creating itself as a 21st-century car company. They have to have somebody at the top that understands they have to make a new GM.”

“Lots of conversations” followed with Steven Rattner, the Wall Street dealmaker running President Barack Obama’s car task force, said Whitacre, adding that Treasury’s message was: “We need your help. It’s a great company. You could be a lot of assistance to GM.”

(Source: Green Car Congress)

Image: via Apture

Off late, there is a big push within the Aviation industry towards a “greener future.”   More airlines are starting to test technologies and tweak approaches (such as use of biofuels) to attract the environmentally-conscious consumer. According to 700-page Stern Report on the economics of climate change, CO2 emissions from aviation are about 600-700 megatonnes per year, or about 2-3% of total global CO2 emissions.   Giovanni Bisignani, IATA’s Director General and CEO, in his State of the Industry address at the 65th IATA Annual General Meeting and World Air Transport Summit in Kuala Lumpur said the international airline industry is committed to achieving carbon-neutral growth by 2020.

Amdist all the buzz and fervor building up around the greening of aviation, the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA),  the world’s largest technical society dedicated to the global aerospace profession, with more than 35,000 individual members worldwide, and 90 corporate members, has released its first annual list of top emerging aerospace technologies.  Developed by AIAA’s Emerging Technologies Committee (ETC), the 2009 list comprises the following:

1. “Greener Aviation” Technologies, including emission reduction and noise reduction technologies as usedin the Federal Aviation Administration’s Continuous Low Emissions, Energy and Noise (CLEEN) program, and the European Environmentally Friendly Engine (EFE) program and “Clean Sky” Joint Technology Initiative.
2. Alternative Fuels, including biofuels, as promoted by the FAA’s Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative (CAAFI), and the recent FAA grant to the X Prize Foundation to spur development of renewable aviation fuels and technologies.
3. High Speed Flight Technologies, such as supersonic and hypersonic aerodynamics, sonic boom reduction technology, and thermal management aids.
4. Efficient Propulsion Technologies, including open rotors and geared turbofans, such as those used in the European DREAM (valiDation Radical Engine Architecture systeMs) program.
5. Active Flow Technologies, such as plasma actuators.
6. Advanced Materials, such as nanotechnology and composites.
7. Active Structures, such as shape memory alloys, morphing, and flapping.
8. Health Management, such as monitoring, prognostics, and self-healing.
9. Remote Sensing Technologies, including unmanned aerial vehicles and satellites such as those used inNASA’s Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS) program.
10. Advanced Space Propulsion Technologies, including plasma-based propulsion such as the Variable Specific Impulse Magnetoplasma Rocket, and solar sail technologies.

AIAA’s list reflects the expertise of the members of the Emerging Technologies Committee, as well as the results of a specially commissioned study. The ETC is composed of three technical subcommittees: Aviation, Space, and Multidisciplinary and System Technologies.  ETC chair Dan Jensen stated, “The list provides guidance to AIAA for its institute development strategy, while helping shape the annual input AIAA provides to the United States Air Force Scientific Advisory Board. The technologies listed represent the aerospace technologies in which research and technology development is most active from a global perspective.”

(Source: New York Times & Planetizen)

It was hailed as the solution to America’s infrastructure spending deficit, but the influx of private funds has come to halt along with the failure of banks and the huge investment from the Recovery Act. Plus, many schemes aroused taxpayers wrath.

Late last month plans to privatize “Alligator Alley,” a 78-mile stretch of Florida highway that connects Fort Lauderdale with Naples, collapsed when no bidders showed up. The failure has had a ripple effect — in Mississippi, state officials have pushed back the bidding schedule for a new 12-mile toll road.

Then there is the $1.2 billion privatization of 36,000 parking meters in Chicago. In the five months since the deal took effect, widespread complaints about poor service and rising parking rates have created a political firestorm for the Chicago City Council. Public opposition was so strong that on Wednesday the council approved a delay in voting on any future asset sales.

Chicago public officials have called the work of the private operator, Chicago Parking Meters L.L.C., “simply unacceptable.” For its part, the operator has apologized and announced it would delay price increases at the meters.

Proponents of public-to-private asset sales point to the $1.8 billion lease of the 7.8-mile Chicago Skyway in 2004 and the $3.8 billion raised by Indiana through a 75-year lease of its toll road in 2006 as successful pioneering efforts.

In Indiana, the money went to pay for a 10-year highway infrastructure program, and Gov. Mitch Daniels was re-elected last year promoting the lease, despite bumper stickers that read “Keep the Toll Road, Lease Mitch.”

The stimulus money, as well as other infrastructure money promised by Congress, has provided temporary relief for cash-poor municipalities. But this situation will not last forever.

(Source:  Autoblog & Detroit Free Press)

The U.S. House approved the “cash for clunkers” legislation earlier today, paving the way for consumers to snag up to $4,500 for trading in their older vehicles for new, more fuel efficient transport.

The bill, which passed 298-119, drew overwhelming support from automakers, local business groups and dealers who claimed the passage could boost sales – further aiding GM and Chrysler’s “reinvention” – during the economic downturn.

The House bill sets aside $4 billion to pay for electronic vouchers given to owners of older vehicles toward new models. With auto sales running at their lowest rate in four decades, the Congressional Budget Office estimated the bill could spur sales of about 625,000 vehicles; backers are hoping for 1 million.

The act “will shore up millions of jobs and stimulate local economies,” said Rep. Betty Sutton, D-Ohio. “It will improve our environment and reduce our dependence on foreign oil.”

The government’s interest in goosing the vehicle market extends to its ownership inGeneral Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC, both of which are counting on a healthier U.S. market in the coming years for survival.

“The auto industry is going through a tremendous restructuring,” said Rep. Sander Levin, D-Royal Oak. “If there is not increased demand, that restructuring cannot succeed.”

Under the plan, owners of cars and trucks that get less than 18 m.p.g. could get a voucher of $3,500 to $4,500 for a new vehicle, depending on the mileage of the new model.

(Source:  AP via Yahoo)

The Supreme Court on Tuesday cleared the way for Chrysler LLC’s sale to Fiat, turning down a last-ditch appeal by opponents that included consumer groups and three Indiana pension plans.

The court rejected a plea to block the sale of most of Chrysler’s assets to the Italian automaker. Chrysler, Fiat and the Obama administration had warned that the high court’s intervention could have scuttled the sale.

A federal appeals court in New York had earlier approved the sale, but gave opponents until Monday afternoon to try to get the Supreme Court to intervene.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg ordered a temporary delay just before a 4 p.m. deadline on Monday. A little more than 24 hours later, the court freed the automakers to complete their deal.

The opponents include a trio of Indiana pension plans, consumer groups and individuals with product-related lawsuits.

The court issued a brief, unsigned opinion explaining its action. To obtain a delay, or stay, someone must show that at least four of the nine justices find that the issue raised is serious enough to warrant hearing a full appeal and that a majority of the court will conclude the lower court decision was wrong.

“The applicants have not carried that burden,” the court said.

Indiana Treasurer Richard Mourdock expressed disappointment with the decision and said options seem limited for opponents of the sale. “Obviously the supreme court of the land is the supreme court of the land,” Mourdock said. “The United States government has, I continue to believe, acted egregiously by taking away the traditional rights held by secured creditors.”

(Source:  Flight Global)

American Airlines plans to fly a more precise altitude on an 11 June flight as part of the launch of testing to prove efficiencies of aircraft equipped with avionics to support next generation (NextGen) air traffic control modernization.

The flight operated by American from Charles De Gaulle to Miami is designed to showcase route optimization as the carrier plans to operate within a special envelope clear of other aircraft.

On the flight American plans to use single engine taxi on departure and arrival, continuous climb out and descent, optimised routing and a tailored arrival.

For the optimised routing over water American will fly a more precise altitude of 32,400ft, for example, rather than being confined to a normal altitude of 32,000ft or 33,000ft, says American Boeing 777/737 programme manager Brian Will.

Once the weight burns down the Boeing 767 can climb another 1,000-2,000ft. But instead of using an increase in engine power for that climb, the 767 climbs in 100-200ft increments without a push in power, which reduces fuel burn and carbon emissions, Will explains.

American is spending about $2.2 million per aircraft for its future air navigation system (fans) upgrade that includes a global positioning update to the flight management system and changes to the flight management computer that allow for the automatic downlink of an aircraft’s position through controller pilot datalink communication. Fourteen of the carrier’s 767s have been upgraded with the system.

Road Pricing Beyond the Technology

Sunday 20 September, 2009 @ 9.00 – 17.00

Radisson SAS Royal Viking Hotel, Vasagatan 1 SE-101 24 Stockholm, Sweden

PRELIMINARY PROGRAMME

(As of 4 June, 2009; Subject to Change)

Road Pricing is an economic instrument that can be part of a package of measures to address overall mobility. This is not a seminar about the technology of road pricing but about strategic objectives, policy, monitoring, measuring and managing of road pricing schemes which are the core values of IBEC. Be prepared for frank discussions!

The benefits of pricing include the immediate traffic impacts but also the economic and social benefits that effective pricing can generate. Of course these benefits vary widely depending on the type and scale of pricing. Systems that provide a « guaranteed » level of service, such as those that involve some form of variable pricing should help business and individual travellers to solve a key transportation problem of the 21st Century – reliability. Then, there are the environmental concerns; to what extent does road pricing provide a useful contribution to greenhouse gas reduction? But, it’s all got to be implemented, and road pricing has a public image problem to address also.

Key Issues

● What are the economic benefits of road pricing and how can they be measured?

● Can road pricing provide large scale and long-term economic stimulus for a 21st Century economy?

● How should we inform and consult with stakeholders?

● What about social equity – do we understand the social distribution of costs and benefits?

● How should we manage politics and public expectations?

● Are HOT lanes a step in the right direction or a dangerous distraction?

● What have we learned from current efforts at implementation?

● Where have real benefits been delivered and what have we learned from the failures?

Time Schedule

9:00 Welcome

9:15 Session 1: What each region is doing in Road Pricing

This session will provide an international survey of Road Pricing policies and activities from around the world. More than being descriptive, each speaker will put developments into context by explaining transport objectives and how pricing is seen as a tool to address the transport challenges faced.

Chaired and coordinated by Alan Stevens, TRL, UK

10:45 Break

11:00 Session 2: Deployment challenges in relation to Stakeholders

Public acceptance is crucial for road pricing success. In this session, experts from the Road Pricing community will describe the challenges of informing and consulting stakeholders, particularly transport users, about the benefits of pricing.

Coordinated by Jane Lappin, Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, USA and Amy Ellen Polk, Citizant, Inc., USA

12:30 Buffet Lunch at the Fisk restaurant

13:15 Session 3: Evaluation challenges

This session will consist of presentations and discussion of Road Pricing deployment and evaluation challenges and how can these challenges be overcome. This will include a wide range of issues and all workshop attendees are invited to participate in the lively discussion that is anticipated.

Chaired and coordinated by Steve Morello, Egis Projects, France

14:45 Break

15:15 Session 4: Business case for society

This session will tackle the broad macro view of the economic and other benefits to society of road pricing and how we can tell if we are doing a “good job”.

Chaired by Kevin Borras, Thinking Highways, UK – Coordinated by Dick Mudge, Delcan, Inc., USA

16:45 Wrap-up

17:00 End of seminar

Registration Fee and Payment:

Fee: € 75 incl. taxes (approx. SEK 793 based on 5 May, 2009 exchange rates on www.xe.com).  It includes seminar materials, 3 coffee breaks and lunch at the venue restaurant.

For registration and other related event information, please contact:

Odile PIGNIER – Harmonised Events – Email: odile@harmonised-events.com

Tel: +33 (0)2 41 54 76 30 – Fax: +33 (0)2 85 52 00 08

Find more information @: www.ibec-its.org

(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: Business Standard & Green Car Congress)

Image: REUTERS/Zainal Abd Halim via Boston Globe

The international airline industry is committed to achieving carbon-neutral growth by 2020, said Giovanni Bisignani, IATA’s Director General and CEO in his State of the Industry address at the 65th IATA Annual General Meeting and World Air Transport Summit in Kuala Lumpur.

Two years ago we set a vision to achieve carbon-neutral growth on the way to a carbon-free future. Today we have taken a major step forward by committing to a global cap on our emissions in 2020. After this date, aviation’s emissions will not grow even as demand increases. Airlines are the first global industry to make such a bold commitment.

—Giovanni Bisignani

The commitment to carbon-neutral growth completes a set of three sequential goals for air transport: (1) a 1.5% average annual improvement in fuel efficiency from 2009 to 2020; (2) carbon-neutral growth from 2020 and (3) a 50% absolute reduction in carbon emissions by 2050.

To achieve these goals, the air transport industry is focusing on a cross-industry four-pillar strategy on climate change consisting of improved technology; effective operations; efficient infrastructure; and positive economic measures.

In 2009 the carbon footprint of air transport is expected to shrink by 7%. Of this, 5% is due to the recession and 2% is directly related to efficiency gains.

Bisignani said a cross industry four-pillar strategy on climate change focused on improved technology, effective operations, efficient infrastructure and positive economic measures was delivering results noting that in 2009 the carbon footprint of air transport was expected to shrink by 7 per cent.

Bisignani attributed 5 per cent to the recession and 2 per cent to efficiency gains from IATA’s four-pillar strategy.

“No other industry is as united and no other industry can point to such good results and progress,” Bisignani claimed.  He noted that the airlines’ commitment needed to be matched by governments. “We are ambitious, but our success will be contingent on governments acting effectively.”

“International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) must set binding carbon emissions standards on manufacturers for new aircraft. A legal and fiscal framework to support the availability of sustainable biofuels must be established.

“Governments must work with air navigation service providers to push forward major infrastructure projects such as a Single European Sky, NextGen in the US or fixing the Pearl River Delta in China,” Bisignani added.

(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.