(Source: USDOT – Office of Planning, Environment and Realty, Federal Highway Administration)

 (Source: Virgin America & Tree Hugger)

(Source: Autobloggreen & Financial Times)

Executives at India’s Tata Motors admit that their company is a bit behind the times when it comes to environmental awareness when compared to established players in Europe. “We are behind as far as the world is concerned. There are many Scandinavian companies because they are more conscious of this than the rest of us,” says JJ Irani, a director for Tata’s automotive business. He adds, “We are not shy of learning.”

Img. Source: Flickr

“Tata is new at this game,” Mr Irani told the Financial Times, explaining that the Indian group had not concentrated much on environmentally friendly products until now.

 “What we wanted was the experience of other global conglomerates who have been on this journey before,” he said.

For this reason, Irani and a few of his colleagues are currently visiting a number of large European companies in an attempt to pick up a few pointers on how to improve their eco-credentials. In addition, the group has plans to meet with executives at some of the world’s largest oil companies. Irani hopes these meetings will allow Tata to “catch up faster” than if they were on their own.  Mr Irani said he was taking managers from Tata companies to see how other groups behaved. “We want to see what sort of problems they face and how they deal with it so we can catch up faster.”

Tata has come in for heavy criticism from some environmentalists about the Nano, the world’s cheapest car, but the Indian company retorts that it is more fuel-efficient than a motorbike.

Tata sees a big opportunity because it operates in some of the biggest polluting sectors such as power generation, steel manufacturing and chemicals and carmaking. It has set up a group dedicated to exploring ways of becoming more environmentally friendly and has about 100 people working on it across all its companies.

The Tata managers will also meet some grandees of the oil industry including Lord Browne, the former BP chief executive, and Lord Oxburgh, ex-chairman of Shell.

They will also visit executives at banks Standard Chartered and Deutsche Bank as well as Siemens, Europe’s largest engineering group.

On a related note, TATA is releasing its all-electric Indica for the Norwegian market and eventually for the rest of the world. 

Although the all-electric Tata Indica on display at the SAE World Congress in Detroit this week is not the soon-to-be-released model, there’s a lot we can learn from the vehicle – and from TM4’s Eriz Azeroual – about how the technology will be implemented when the new model goes on sale in Norway either later this year or in early 2010 (yes, this is later than previously expected).  A limited number of the Indica’s are already testing in Norway and the TM4 reps are heard saying that Tata Motors is “a cool company. Very aggressive.” Even though they’re most famous for the Nano and apparently wanting to dominate the low-end automobile market, in Europe market they want to be known for electric vehicles.   Norway is a perfect entry point to bring an EV to Europe because there is a high tax on gasoline-powered vehicles. The high cost of electric vehilces isn’t totally equalized by the taxes, but EVs and gas-powered vehicle prices end up being “comparable” in Norway.

(Source: The Brookings Institute)

To help improve the energy efficiency and overall environmental sustainability of the U.S. transportation system, we will need to adopt policies that foster changes in the way Americans travel. A new Brookings report “Making Transportation Sustainable: Insights from Germany” finds that Germany may offer valuable lessons. Like the United States, Germany is a federal republic but it has taken impressive steps to improve transportation options, link transportation planning to land use, and advance other reforms – all while empowering metropolitan action.

Lessons for the United States:

Public policy can play a major role in reshaping America’s transportation system. The German experience offers five lessons to the United States for improving transportation sustainability through changes in travel behavior:

Get the Price Right in order to encourage the use of less polluting cars, driving at non-peak hours and more use of public transportation
Integrate Transit, Cycling, and Walking as Viable Alternatives to the Car, as a necessary measure to make any sort of car-restrictive measures publicly and politically feasible
Fully Coordinate and Integrate Planning for Land Use and Transportation to discourage car-dependent sprawl and promote transit-oriented development
Public Information and Education to Make Changes Feasible are essential in conveying the benefits of more sustainable policies and enforcing their results over the long term
Implement Policies in Stages with a Long Term Perspective because it takes considerable time to gather the necessary public and political support and to develop appropriate measures.

Click here to download the report.  Here is the read-only version of the report.

One of the factors that has helped to make cars so ubiquitous over the past century is standards. By standardizing things like fuel fillers, inflation nozzles on tires, 12V power sockets and countless other elements, automakers have been able make owning and operating a car much more practical. After all, if you had to drive around to 20 different gas stations to find one with a nozzle that fits your tank, it would be a real nuisance to drive. Most of those industry standards are defined by committees of the Society of Automotive Engineers. One of the standards currently being worked on is SAE J1772 which will define standard connectors for plug-in vehicles.  GM’s Fast Lane blog notes “with SAE J1772™, we’re defining what a common electric vehicle conductive charging system architecture will look like for all major automakers in North America, but more importantly, we’re working to resolve general physical, electrical and performance requirements so these systems can be manufactured for safe public use.

Through SAE, our industry is working together to answer fundamental questions about plug-in electric vehicles such as battery electrochemistry, optimal battery-size and state of charge, and lifecycle among other issues, but zeroing in on the ergonomics, safety and performance of the charging interface is one of the most basic ways we can help build consumer confidence in plug-ins.

Think about it, if you have no reservations or confusion about charging your vehicle, you’re probably going to be more likely to drive one. Drivers shouldn’t have to worry about electromagnetic compatibility, emission and immunity when they need to plug-in – that’s what engineers like me get paid to do.”

(Source: AutoBlogGreen, CNNMoney)

Dodge Circuit, a two-seat roadster, could be Chrysler’s first step into electric cars, provided the company survives.

A battery-powered 268-horsepower two-seat sports car is in line to become Chrysler LLC’s first electric car, provided the carmaker lives to see another day.   

To survive, help is needed from Italy’s Fiat but, as negotiations with the Italian automaker bog down and the two week deadline to hammer out a partnership approaches, the company’s future – as well as its aspirations for an electric hot rod – are increasingly in doubt.

Chrysler’s first electric car, set to be introduced late next year around the same time as General Motors’ Chevrolet Volt, will be a sports car with a zero-to-60 time of under five seconds and a top speed of 120 miles hour.

“To be able to meet a 2010 timeline, you have to be pretty far along in development, and right now we are,” said Lou Rhodes, head of Chrysler’s electric car program, in a recent CNNMoney.com interview.

The Circuit is similar to the Tesla Roadster, a $109,000 sports car produced by a small California company. Pricing for the Circuit has not been announced but will likely undercut the Tesla.

 (Source: Time)

A Lot Full of Old Clunkers For Sale

It’s no secret that one of the biggest reasons the U.S. auto industry is teetering on collapse is that, quite simply, Americans have stopped buying cars. U.S. auto sales were down 37% in March from 2008, the latest in a nearly unbroken year-and-a-half streak of falling sales. And if the cratered economy is the main culprit behind backed-up inventory at U.S. car dealers, another is that American automakers have failed to produce the more fuel-efficient vehicles that gas-price-conscious car buyers are beginning to demand. As a result, the U.S. still sends hundreds of billions of dollars overseas for oil — and adds ever more greenhouse-gas pollution into the atmosphere. 

Now what if there were a way to tackle both these problems with one policy: to stimulate demand for American cars while making the U.S. auto fleet cleaner, greener and more efficient? It sounds like the kind of slick two-for-one pitch you might hear from a used-car salesman, but that’s exactly what proponents of a “cash for clunkers” program are promising.

But is cash-for-clunkers really two-for-one? That depends. There are currently two main bills in the House and Senate, which, according to greens, are not created equal. One, sponsored by Democratic Ohio Representative Betty Sutton, allows any car from model year 2000 or earlier to be traded in, without any restriction on fuel economy. In return, car buyers will get $4,000 if they buy a new U.S. car that gets a minimum mileage of 27 m.p.g. and $5,000 if they buy a U.S. car with at least 30 m.p.g. Crucially, the new cars have to be made in the U.S. — foreign brands can qualify, but only if they’re manufactured on U.S. soil, which would disqualify super-efficient vehicles like Toyota’s Prius hybrid, made only in Japan.

Whichever bill is chosen — and others are being circulated as well — a successful cash-for-clunkers program wouldn’t be cheap. Germany’s program may end up costing the government some $6 billion, three times the initial price tag. Since Obama has said that money for the cash-for-clunkers program needs to come out of existing stimulus spending, that might take some creative accounting. But a cash-for-clunkers program, whatever its environmental benefits, would provide the government with a way to aid the domestic auto industry without giving Detroit any more direct handouts. “There’s a lot of justifiable taxpayer reluctance to keep helping the auto industry,” says Goldstein of the Center for American Progress. “Politically this is a viable alternative to sending them additional loan money.”

(Source: Washington Post) 

Without higher gas taxes, ‘cash for clunkers’ won’t do the job 

CAR SALES in Germany jumped an astonishing 40 percent in March, thanks in large part to a “cash for clunkers” program in which the government gave those handing over old-model cars roughly $5,000 toward the purchase of newer, more fuel-efficient vehicles. Lawmakers in the United States have crafted similar proposals, hoping both to provide a boost to the U.S. auto industry and to spur sales of environmentally friendlier cars. But even the best of these proposals is not likely to provide the punch of the German initiative.

Click here to read the entire article (free regn. required).  

Note:  Below is a list of articles on this issue, previously published on TransportGooru.  This compilation of articles offer an insight into state of various “Cash for Clunkers” style programs implemented (or currently being debated) across the globe (Germany, UK, etc,). Stay plugged in to TransportGooru for more on this topic in the days to come.

 Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save (CARS) Act revives “Cash for Clunkers” scrapping plan in U.S

Germany plans to extend Abwrackprämie aka “Environmental Bonus”

The bickering starts over the implementation of the Cash for Clunkers legislation

Obama Favors “Cash for Clunkers”

Germany increases subsidy to 5 Billion Euros, tripling incentives for its “Cash for Clunker” (Abwrackprämie) program

Britain mulls implementation of “Cash for Clunkers” scheme to boost ailing auto sales 

Where the US stands in pushing “Cash for Clunkers”- Four bills in Congress; Details Needed

One giant container ship can emit almost the same amount of cancer and asthma-causing chemicals as 50m cars, study finds

(Source: Guardian via Tree Hugger)

The Guardian has a pretty shocking piece about giant cargo ships and the pollution they emit. The title of this post is a line from “confidential data from maritime industry insiders”, and according to them, the low-grade ship bunker fuel that powers cargo ships has up to 2,000 times the sulphur content of diesel fuel used in US, and European automobiles and emission control is practically non-existent.  Here we can see that the primary concern with shipping is air-pollution (“US academic research which showed that pollution from the world’s 90,000 cargo ships leads to 60,000 deaths a year in the US alone and costs up to $330bn per year in health costs from lung and heart diseases”). It does contribute significantly to global warming, but about 5-6 times less than land-based transportation.

Shipping by numbers (From Guardian)The world’s biggest container ships have 109,000 horsepower engines which weigh 2,300 tons.

Each ship expects to operate 24hrs a day for about 280 days a year

There are 90,000 ocean-going cargo ships

Shipping is responsible for 18-30% of all the world’s nitrogen oxide (NOx) pollution and 9% of the global sulphur oxide (SOx) pollution.

One large ship can generate about 5,000 tonnes of sulphur oxide (SOx) pollution in a year

70% of all ship emissions are within 400km of land.

85% of all ship pollution is in the northern hemisphere.

Shipping is responsible for 3.5% to 4% of all climate change emissions

The calculations of ship and car pollution are based on the world’s largest 85,790KW ships’ diesel engines which operate about 280 days a year generating roughly 5,200 tonnes of SOx a year, compared with diesel and petrol cars which drive 15,000km a year and emit approximately 101gm of SO2/SoX a year.

(Source: Tree Hugger)

Leader in the Pack 
Rep. Sutton’s Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save (CARS) Act would give consumers incentives of $3,000 to $5,000 for turning in vehicles that are 8 years or older to buy more fuel-efficient vehicles or to obtain a transit voucher. She says that support is growing every day. The bill has gathered 21 co-sponsors so far, up from 19 a couple of weeks ago. The bill is still working out the metric of how cars would need to be traded in and what fuel efficiency would need to be for the new car. Sen. Dianne Feinstein has a similar proposal (with a short title of Accelerated Retirement of Inefficient Vehicles Act of 2009) that would mandate that the new car be 25% aboveCAFE standards . There has not been anything mentioned about how many cars one person or family can switch for the credit. Also, some states already have incentives for buying cleaner cars, so will individuals be able to get both state and federal credits? If so, in places like Texas , a person could get a combined total of as much as $8,500.00 for a new car.

Click here to read the entire article.  Here is the CNBC video of  the Cash for Clunkers featuring industry experts Dave McCurdy, Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and John Wolkonowicz, IHS Global Insight.

 Note:  Below is a list of articles published on TransportGooru, offering insight into state of various “Cash for Clunkers” style programs implemented (or currently being debated) across the globe (Germany, UK, etc,).

Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save (CARS) Act revives “Cash for Clunkers” scrapping plan in U.S

Germany plans to extend Abwrackprämie aka “Environmental Bonus”

The bickering starts over the implementation of the Cash for Clunkers legislation

Obama Favors “Cash for Clunkers”

Germany increases subsidy to 5 Billion Euros, tripling incentives for its “Cash for Clunker” (Abwrackprämie) program

Britain mulls implementation of “Cash for Clunkers” scheme to boost ailing auto sales