(Source: Autoblog & Motor Age via Search Auo Parts)

According to a recent Kelley Blue Book study, 87-percent of new-car shoppers said they thought gas prices would go much higher. Seems like the obvious choice to us, too.

Curious what those expectations for rising fuel costs are having on new-car purchasing decisions? KBB’s got a statistic on that, too. More than 60 percent of in-market new-car shoppers said that rising gas prices have either caused them to change their minds completely or at least made them think about vehicles they normally wouldn’t have considered. For instance, consumers may opt for a four-cylinder or V6 engine instead of a more powerful and furl-thirsty V8.

When asked in May 2009 what they think will happen with gas prices in the next 30 days, 87 percent of new-car shoppers said they thought gas prices would go much higher, a significant jump from the 66 percent who thought gas prices would increase just a month earlier.

In both April and May, more than 60 percent of in-market new-car shoppers said that rising gas prices have either caused them to change their minds or made them think about vehicles they normally wouldn’t have considered. When asked what they would be most likely to compromise in their next new-vehicle purchase in order to save money they might need to spend on fuel, shoppers cited engine size (for example, a four-cylinder versus a V6 or V8) as the top item likely to be sacrificed, followed closely by vehicle size (for example, a mid-size sedan versus a large sedan).

In addition, Kelley Blue Book reports that 73 percent of those who saw gas prices increasing in May said they plan to change their spending habits if gas prices were to go much higher.

KBB’s data further indicates that $3 gallons of gas may be the new tipping point that will get consumers to alter their spending habits. See more in the official press release after the break.

Click here to read the press realse from KBB.

(Source: Urban Omnibus, Wired)

Urban Omnibus and The Infrastructurist talk to the founder of Zipcar and GoLoco about everything from mesh networks to taxi stands to why “infrastructure is destiny.”  In this exhaustive interview published on the Urban Omnibus, you can get to read about Robin’s new social networking project that aims to turn your social network into a travel network. The last couple years she’s been working on GoLoco, which aims to do for ride sharing what Zipcar did for car sharing: to make it easy, efficient and commonplace to share car travel, split costs, and reduce emissions. GoLoco members receive alerts when one of their friends or interest groups is going whether they want to.  Here is an interesting excerpt from the interview, that offers a better understanding of how GoLoco works.

So, as you have moved from Zipcar to GoLoco, from car sharing to ride sharing, do you see ride sharing as more of a national set of strategies?
Yes, car sharing only works in dense metropolitan areas or in cases where people don’t need a car to get to work. If you need a car to get to work, you’re going to have to own your own car. The cost of car sharing is too high for a daily commute. But, then again, according to the National Households Consumer Survey, across the nation it costs $24 per day on average that people are spending in America on their car, day in and day out. If I were to tell you that it was going to cost $125 a week to go to work, you would say, no way, I’m not going to do it. But we are doing it – we just don’t realize we’re doing it.

That’s why I did GoLoco – I said, what about all those other people who are feeling similar transportation and mobility pains but they need a car to get to work? Ride sharing is for those people.

Screenshot of GoLoCo portal (Courtesy: Urban Omnibus)

Can you give us ride sharing 101? How can GoLoco change how we get around?

The big idea for ride sharing and for GoLoco is to think of your car, your expenses, your friends, and your trips as part of your own personal public transportation system. Your friends and their cars and their trips are ways that you can get around. It builds on the idea of long tail media and long tail economics. Ride sharing is the long tail of public transportation. There are rides that serve little niches of demand way out there, in places where you’ll never see a bus service, or a public transportation service of any kind, but you would see ride sharing, because of the individuals who do go way out there. Basically, if you look at the long tail, ride sharing can meet the needs of small groups of individuals who need to get from a specific origin to a specific destination at a particular time.

I think when we look back at ourselves sitting alone in our 120 square feet of car, driving down these highways with incredible storage costs and incredible operating costs, I think we will look back at how we travel today and be just astounded: astounded at the cost, astounded at the waste. It’s such a wacky idea that we’d want to be alone in our cars spending huge sums of money and all that parking space, when it was less fun and more expensive and kind of crazy.

This is why I did GoLoco. We know that we can’t build our way out of congestion, so if things are increasingly, year after year, getting more congested, there’s only one solution for that: addressing the cost of driving over peak periods.

At $2 per gallon, people spend 18% of their income on their car, and that’s without paying for congestion pricing or tax increases or any other changes to transportation financing coming down the road. But it’s not in the control of any government to effect what the ultimate price of gas is going to be when we have increasing demand from India and China, and arguably peak oil. We have an increasing world population that will continue to drive cars with gasoline on our roads. Ride sharing is going to be significant while we transform our infrastructure to be less car-dependent. While we have such a high cost of car travel in such a car-dependent country, I don’t see another solution. 86% of trips made are alone in a car. Think about standing in a mall, looking at a parking lot. You know that a large number of people there are going exactly where you’re going in the next five minutes.

Image Courtesy: Wired - iPhone Zipcar App

Click here to read the entire interview.

In other related ZipCar news,  there is a new iPhone App from Zipcar which makes car sharing a breeze.  The pioneering car-share company has developed an iPhone app you can use to choose, reserve and locate a car on the go – a brilliant move, considering one-quarter of the company’s subscribers have an iPhone in their pocket.

The app tells you what cars are available and uses GPS and Google Maps to direct you to it once you’ve made a reservation. Should the car you’re looking for be lost in a sea of cars in a parking lot, the app will help you find it by sounding the car’s horn. That’s also handy for finding your ride if you’ve forgotten where you’ve parked it.  Zipcar is the largest car-sharing service in the world, with locations in 49 U.S. cities in addition to Vancouver, Toronto and London. The company believes the app, which will be available later this summer, will allow it to expand its service and make car-sharing a breeze.

“There are currently 15 million people within a block of a Zipcar service station and about 47 million iPhone customers,” says Luke Schneider, Zipcar’s chief technology officer. “We therefore estimate that our car sharing network could potentially increase to 32 million customers in years to come as a result of our new partnership and expansion into new markets.”

(Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics, USDOT)

The Bureau of Transportation Statistics of the Research and Innovative Technology Administration has released “A Time Series Analysis of Transportation Energy Use Per Dollar of Gross Domestic Product” (GDP), a report about the decline in transportation energy use relative to GDP.  The statistical analysis shows that transportation energy consumption has been declining relative to GDP since 2000 with a steeper decline beginning in the third quarter of 2007, when the cost of fuel rose dramatically.

Transportation energy use relative to gross domestic product (GDP) has been declining within the past decade. However, the total transportation energy consumed (see figure 1) shows only a more recent decline. To see clearly the long-term decline, the seasonal component first must be separated from the underlying trendline to observe the long-term trend of that energy consumption. Then the ratio of the deseaonalized data and GDP can be taken.

The report is the first in the BTS series titled Transportation Trends in Focus.  The report can be found at http://www.bts.gov/publications/bts_transportation_trends_in_focus/2009_06_01/.

(Source:  Government Accountability Office)

Aircraft emit greenhouse gases and other emissions, contributing to increasing concentrations of such gases in the atmosphere. Many scientists and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)–a United Nations organization that assesses scientific, technical, and economic information on climate change–believe these gases may negatively affect the earth’s climate. Given forecasts of growth in aviation emissions, some governments are taking steps to reduce emissions.

In response to a congressional request, GAO reviewed:

(1) estimates of aviation’s current and future contribution to greenhouse gas and other emissions that may affect climate change;

(2) existing and potential technological and operational improvements that can reduce aircraft emissions; and

(3) policy options for governments to help address commercial aircraft emissions.

GAO conducted a literature review; interviewed representatives of government agencies, industry and environmental organizations, airlines, and manufacturers, and interviewed and surveyed 18 experts in economics and aviation on improvements for reducing emissions from aircraft. GAO is not making recommendations. Relevant agencies provided technical comments which we incorporated as appropriate and EPA said emissions standards can have a positive benefit to cost ratio and be an important part of policy options to control emissions.

According to IPCC, aviation currently accounts for about 2 percent of human-generated global carbon dioxide emissions, the most significant greenhouse gas–and about 3 percent of the potential warming effect of global emissions that can affect the earth’s climate, including carbon dioxide. IPCC’s medium-range estimate forecasts that by 2050 the global aviation industry, including aircraft emissions, will emit about 3 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions and about 5 percent of the potential warming effect of all global human-generated emissions. Gross domestic product growth is the primary driver in IPCC’s forecasts. IPCC also made other assumptions about future aircraft fuel efficiency, improvements in air traffic management, and airport and runway capacity. IPCC’s 2050 forecasts for aviation’s contribution to global emissions assumed that emissions from other sectors will continue to grow.

If other sectors make progress in reducing emissions and aviation emissions continue to grow, aviation’s relative contribution may be greater than IPCC estimated; on the other hand, if other sectors do not make progress, aviation’s relative contribution may be smaller than estimated. While airlines currently rely on a range of improvements, such as fuel-efficient engines, to reduce emissions, some of which may have limited potential to generate future reductions, experts we surveyed expect a number of additional technological, operational, and alternative fuel improvements to help reduce aircraft emissions in the future. However, according to experts we interviewed, some technologies, such as advanced airframes, have potential, but may be years away from being available, and developing and adopting them is likely to be costly.

In addition, according to some experts we interviewed, incentives for industry to research and adopt low-emissions technologies will be dependent to some extent on the level and stability of fuel prices. Finally, given expected growth of commercial aviation as forecasted by IPCC, even if many of these improvements are adopted, it appears unlikely they would greatly reduce emissions by 2050. A number of policy options to address aircraft emissions are available to governments and can be part of broader policies to address emissions from many sources including aircraft. Market-based measures can establish a price for emissions and provide incentives to airlines and consumers to reduce emissions. These measures can be preferable to other options because they would generally be more economically efficient. Such measures include a cap-and-trade program, in which government places a limit on emissions from regulated sources, provides them with allowances for emissions, and establishes a market for them to trade emissions allowances with one another, and a tax on emissions. Governments can establish emissions standards for aircraft or engines. In addition, government could increase government research and development to encourage development of low-emissions improvements.

Click here to download the entire report.

(Source: R744.com &1234facts.com)

In the middle of this fiasco, Environment Minister Sigmar Gabriel has raised his voice to warn the German automotive industry against a “highly risky economic and technical adventure” with an untested, flammable, and toxic refrigerant 1234yf. Moreover, manufacturers should not expect the EU R134a phase-out schedule to change, but rather choose CO₂ now as the most energy-efficient and safe alternative available.

In an interview with ACE, a leading automotive club representing the interests of 550.000 Germans, the Environment Minister Sigmar Gabriel has taken a clear stance in favour of CO₂ in the currently hotly debated question of which refrigerant to choose for future car air conditioning systems:

“Fact is: With CO₂ there is an environmentally friendly alternative to R134a available, and it has been proven in real life,” Gabriel stated. “The VDA has to know what it does to strengthen its credibility or not,” he referred to the clear commitment to CO₂ already issued in 2007 by all carmakers united in Germany’s automotive association VDA. The Environment Ministry would continue to support CO₂ (R744) as not only the most ecological option, but also that with a significantly higher energy efficiency, as measurements by the Federal Environment Agency have proved.

Untested chemical “high adventure”
Gabriel also issued a clear warning to the automotive industry to not use untested alternative refrigerants. The currently discussed flammable and toxic chemical 1234yf would be a completely new substance not yet fully investigated by public authorities for its ecological and health risks. As a consequence, manufacturers deciding for 1234yf would embark on a “high economic and technical adventure”, Gabriel concluded.

The Minister warned the German automotive industry against a further use of R134a in cars after 2011. According to Gabriel, the EU MAC Directive, prescribing the use of refrigerants with a Global Warming Potential of below 150 in future passenger cars, will not be changed. Carmakers should acknowledge that he would hold on to the agreed phase-out schedule starting in 2011, with a gradual ban of R134a until 2017. As a result, from 2011, the deprivation of type approval for cars using the climate-damaging refrigerant would be enforced as originally scheduled.

(Source: Green Car Congress)

The New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) has selected Volvo Technology North America to lead the development and demonstration of an advanced Commercial Vehicle Infrastructure Integration (CVII) program. A contract awarding this program to Volvo Technology is being finalized by the state.

The program will demonstrate VII applications for commercial vehicles along key transportation corridors in the greater New York City region. Test corridors, utilizing 5.9 GHz dedicated short range communications (DSRC), include 13 miles of the New York State Thruway Authority’s I-87 Spring Valley Corridor and 42 miles of NYSDOT’s I-495 Long Island Expressway.

VII is an advanced ITS (Intelligent Transportation System) technology using infrastructure similar to that of 915 MHz based systems such as E-Z PASS but with the capability of very high-speed, high-capacity data communication using an on-board communication device that is integrated with the electronic information and control systems of the vehicle.

Visual and audible information is available to the driver from the VII network, and the vehicle can communicate information to the VII roadside infrastructure as well as other vehicles, creating smart vehicles operating along a smart highway and transportation system, NYSDOT notes.

VII development has focused almost exclusively on passenger vehicles. While a number of major light vehicle manufacturers have been directly involved with the VII technology development under the leadership of the USDOT, the commercial vehicle industry has not been sufficiently represented, NYSDOT said. The Volvo-led effort for the state of New York, funded by the I-95 Corridor Coalition in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration, is the first VII program exclusively devoted to developing and demonstrating the technology for commercial vehicles.

(Source: Autoblog, Bloomberg & ThisDay)

America might get most of its oil from Canada, but the moves that Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) makes still reverberate here. Thus, a statement by the Kuwaiti Oil Minister Sheikh Ahmed al-Abdullah al-Sabah to reporters yesterday probably won’t help decrease domestic gasoline prices any time soon. OPEC’s al-Sabah said that the organization will not consider increasing production until the price of a barrel of oil reaches $100.

Crude oil traded in New York has climbed almost 60 percent this year, after plunging more than $100 in five months at the end of 2008 as the global recession curbed demand for fuel.

(Source: AFP via Yahoo & Science Daily)

Image Courtesy: IOP - Energy consumption and GHG emissions per PKT (The vehicle operation components are shown with gray patterns. Other vehicle components are shown in shades of blue. Infrastructure components are shown in shades of red and orange. The fuel production component is shown in green. All components appear in the order they are shown in the legend.)

Do you worry a lot about the environment and do everything you can to reduce your carbon footprint? Are you the one who frets about  tailpipe emissions, greenhouse gases and climate change?

If yes,  you must be the one who prefers to take the train or the bus rather than a plane, and avoid using a car whenever you can, faithful to the belief that this inflicts less harm to the planet.

Well, there could be a nasty surprise in store for you, for taking public transport may not be as green as you automatically think, says a new US study published in Environmental Research Letters, a publication of Britain’s Institute of Physics.  Often unknown to the public, there are an array of hidden or displaced emissions that ramp up the simple “tailpipe” tally, which is based on how much carbon is spewed out by the fossil fuels used to make a trip. Environmental engineers Mikhail Chester and Arpad Horvath at theUniversity of California at Davis say that when these costs are included, a more complex and challenging picture emerges.

The pair give an example of how the use of oil, gas or coal to generate electricity to power trains can skew the picture.

Boston has a metro system with high energy efficiency. The trouble is, 82 percent of the energy to drive it comes from dirty fossil fuels.  By comparison, San Francisco‘s local railway is less energy-efficient than Boston’s. But it turns out to be rather greener, as only 49 percent of the electricity is derived from fossils.

The paper points out that the “tailpipe” quotient does not include emissions that come from building transport infrastructure — railways, airport terminals, roads and so on — nor the emissions that come from maintaining this infrastructure over its operational lifetime.

The researchers also touch on the effect of low passenger occupancy and show that we are naïve to automatically assume one form of transport is more environmentally friendly than another. They conclude from their calculations that a half-full Boston light railway is only as environmentally friendly, per kilometre traveled, as a midsize aircraft at 38 per cent occupancy.  From cataloguing the varied environmental costs the researchers come to some surprising conclusions. A comparison between light railways in both Boston and San Franciso show that despite Boston boasting a light railway with low operational energy use, their LRT is a far larger greenhouse gas (GHG) emitter because 82 per cent of the energy generated in Boston is fossil-fuel based, compared to only 49 per cent in San Francisco.

Total life-cycle energy inputs and GHG emissions contribute an additional 155 per cent for rail, 63 per cent for cars and buses, and 32 per cent for air systems over vehicle exhaust pipe operation.

Journal reference:

• Mikhail V Chester and Arpad Horvath. Environmental assessment of passenger transportation should include infrastructure and supply chains. Environmental Research Letters, 2009; 4 (024008) DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/4/2/024008

Image Courtesy: The Infrastructurist

(Source: The Infrastructurist)

Our friends at The Infrastructurist have come up with a clever way to fix the decaying infrastructure of the United States.  They have developed a portal F** This! where you, the Citizen & resident of the community, can become a guardian of public infrastructure.

The Infrastructurist says, “You can keep your city working smoothly. You can post pictures of busted crap–partially disassembled escalators in subway stations, cavernous potholes, permanently dark street lights–and trade snide and insightful comments with your wonderful new F** This! cyberfriends (why can’t your real life friends be this cool?). At the same time, while you’re busy enjoying yourself, we’ll see to it that the appropriate public officials get notified and the problem you identified gets dealt with. Or, if said officials prove useless in fixing the busted stuff, we’ll see to it that they endure at least some small measure of public humiliation. It’ll be fun!”

The website notes that F** This! is still in the early stages of development and sometime soon, the Infrastructruist will organize an official campaign and some neat features that will help bring your complaints to everyone’s attention (assuming, you know, they are deserving of it). At first, the focus will be on New York, but the plan is to expand to other US cities in coming weeks and months.

As suggested in the website, let us poke around and look at a few of the action items that are up there. Explore F** This!’s inner workings. Let them creators know what you think. And a protip: Even if you don’t live in New York, you can scoot the map around and find your town. So give that a try if you’re inclined. The tool that is at use here is from a company called See Click Fix, which I think is very smartly put together. How about you?

What a novel way to get stuff fixed around the country!

(Source: ABC News & Autobloggreen)

I had an opportunity to take a ride today in a new electric car that has perhaps one of the best shots at being the U.S. answer to Japan’s popular Toyota Prius.

Image Courtesy: Autobloggreen

Designed by Santa Monica, California-based Coda Automotive, the four-door sedan isn’t powered by gas. The electric battery can plug into any standard AC outlet.

Coda says a 40-mile commute takes about 2 hours to charge.

Right now, the car and it’s battery are manufactured in China. But the company has applied for tens of millions of dollars worth of stimulus funding through the Department of Energy to build an electric battery plant in a factory in Enfield, Connecticut to fuel it’s vehicles.

“The U.S. has zero,  absolutely no mass battery manufacturing in the United States.  So we’re going to China where they can mass produce the batteries to get these cars to market in the U.S. fast until we can get these produced here” said Kevin Czinger, president and CEO of Coda Automotive.

Coda plans to partner with aerospace battery designer Connecticut-based Yardney Technical Products to create and mass produce the first U.S. electric car battery.

The company says the plant could employ 600 people at first, and then possibly grow. Beginning next June, Coda plans to have the capacity to build 2,700 cars and 20,000 a year in 2011. By comparison, Toyota sold about 159,000second-generation Toyota Prius hybrid cars last year in the U.S.  The price tag? $45,000 — but buyers could receive a federal tax credit worth $7,500 and other state incentives that Coda says could drive the price down to $32,500.

Image Courtesy: Autobloggreen

Click here to see more hi-res pictures of the Coda sedan.