Chinese Rail Investment Gathers Pace! 80 very high-speed trains (236 mph) purchased for $4 billion

September 29, 2009 at 1:15 pm

(Source: Tree Hugger)

Reassuring Reliability

Image Courtesy: Bombardier

Low Energy Consumption

Image Courtesy: Bombardier

Tree Hugger reports that the estimated $4 billion US (or 2.7 billion euros) is only part of China’s grand $300B dream. Another recent article on  TreeHugger outlined the grand plan to invest over $300 billion in high-speed rail through 2020, in a bid to speed ahead of the rest of the world’s train systems. Here are some excerpts from today’s interesting TreeHugger article.

The Chinese Ministry of Railways has announced that it will buy 80 “very high speed trains” from Bombardier’s Chinese joint ventre Bombardier Sifang to add to China’s fast-growing network of high-speed rail. The ZEFIRO 380 trains are both very efficient (more on that below) and very fast, and should help make transportation in China greener, especially if train trips displace plane trips.

The order is for 20 eight-car trainsets and 60 sixteen-car trainsets, for a total of 1,120 cars.

The ZEFIRO 380 has a maximum operating speed of 380 kilometers per hour (236 miles per hour) and is designed for efficiency:

The Bombardier press release notes ” The new trainsets will be an integral part of an evolving high speed rail capability in China, which is developing more than 6,000 km of new high speed lines to create one of the most advanced high speed rail networks in the world. The trains, with maximum operating speeds of 380 kph, are based on Bombardier’s next-generation ZEFIRO high speed rail technology, and powered by a highly energy efficientBOMBARDIER MITRAC propulsion and control system.

Exceptional Operational Flexibility

Image Courtesy: Bombardier

The ZEFIRO 380 trainsets will also incorporate Bombardier’s advanced ECO4 energy saving technologies to create best-in-class energy and operating efficiencies. Bombardier launched its ECO4 technology package in 2008 as part of an ongoing focus to extend rail’s position as the most sustainable form of transportation in the world. Bombardier is first in the industry to create a new formula for total train performance with a portfolio that can create substantial overall energy savings of up to 50%.”

The ZEFIRO 380 trains will be manufactured at Bombardier Sifang (Qingdao) Transportation production facilities in Qingdao, China. Engineering will take place in Qingdao and at Bombardier centers in Europe with project management and components provided from sites in Europe and China.

What the heck is USA doing?

If you are wondering what is the status of the US high-speed rail development program, here is your answer.  We are waaaaaaaay behind many of our counterparts that are already engaged in the HSR programs .  The Europeans (French with their TGVs  & Germans with their ICE trains) and the Japanese have been at the forefront of HSR for decades and have built excellent systems that are capable of traveling at ~250MPH speeds.  New comers such as Spain and China have blazed new paths and surged ahead of the US and have embarked on ambitious plans, backed by huge  government funding commitments.  Heck, even the oil-rich Saudi Arabia is forging ahead with its development of brand new HSR lines cutting across the sandy deserts connecting major cities.  Recently, the Russians also got on this track and have quickly sought Spain’s help in building their HSR lines.  While the rest of the world is surging ahead, the US Government is still wrangling over its plans of where to invest the $8Billion funding. The US HSR Association states “Our vision is for a 21st century, 17,000 mile national high speed rail system built in 4 phases, for completion by 2030″.  Realistically speaking, this goal seems far fetched at this point, especially with the glacial pace of activity at the Federal level.

Click here to read the entire article. Also, click here to see more pictures of these new toys China is buying from Bombardier.

Cash for Clunkers Update – August 28, 2009: Clunkers by Numbers; Detroit’s Big 3 Sales Shares Sink; Sec. LaHood Blogs The Success; Skeptics Warn of “Hangover”;

August 28, 2009 at 3:55 pm

(Sources contributing to this hybrid report: Green Car Congress; Fast Lane – Sec. LaHood’s Blog; Autoblog; Detroit News; LA Times; Business Week)

Finally, the curtains came down on the Cash For Clunkers program on Monday @8PM.  After much hype and chaos the program closed its doors with a mixed record.  Secretary LaHood calls is a great success while some others say no pointing to the choas around the program’s final days when the computer systems crashed as the dealers tried to submit their transcation data for reimbursements. In anycase, the program has left a wonderful memory in the minds of many economists and possibly underlined the fact that indeed the Government has some clever tricks up the sleeves to stimulate a lagging economy, especially for the automakers whose future looked very gloomy before this program came in to place.

After one month, an extra $2 billion in funding and an absolute mess of paperwork, Cash for Clunkers has finally petered out. The final numbers are in and the program resulted in 700,000 sales totaling $2.877 billion in $3,500 and $4,500 vouchers handed out at dealerships across the nation. An additional $100 million was set aside for administration costs, or about $144 for every claim processed, leaving $23 million in the kitty.

The program offered consumers rebates of $3,500 or $4,500 off the price of a new vehicle in return for trading in their older, less fuel-efficient vehicles to be scrapped. The trade-in vehicles needed to get 18 miles per gallon or less.

Here are some interesting snippets collected from various sources around the web (thank me for making it easy for you).

  • The US Cash for Clunkers program (CARS) ended Tuesday night with 690,114 dealer transaction submitted worth $2,877.9 million.
  • Eighty-four percent of consumers traded in trucks and 59% purchased passenger cars.
  • The average fuel economy of the vehicles traded in was 15.8 mpg and the average fuel economy of vehicles purchased is 24.9 mpg: a 58% improvement.
  • Cars purchased under the program are, on average, 19% above the average fuel economy of all new cars currently available.
C4c1

Image Courtesy: Green Car Congress

Green Car Congress notes that Toyota reaped the largest percentage of sales under the CARS program (19.4%), followed by GM (17.6%) and Ford (14.4%). Honda came in fourth at 13.0%.

The top 10 vehicles purchased under the program were:

  1. Toyota Corolla
  2. Honda Civic
  3. Toyota Camry
  4. Ford Focus FWD
  5. Hyundai Elantra
  6. Nissan Versa
  7. Toyota Prius
  8. Honda Accord
  9. Honda Fit
  10. Ford Escape FWD

Top 10 Trade-in Vehicles:

  1. Ford Explorer 4WD
  2. Ford F150 Pickup 2WD
  3. Jeep Grand Cherokee 4WD
  4. Ford Explorer 2WD
  5. Dodge Caravan/Grand Caravan 2WD
  6. Jeep Cherokee 4WD
  7. Chevrolet Blazer 4WD
  8. Chevrolet C1500 Pickup 2WD
  9. Ford F150 Pickup 4WD
  10. Ford Windstar FWD Van

David Kiley at Business Week says that the annualized selling rate for the auto industry in August is expected to be about 15.5 million, thanks to C4C, according to Wall Street firm Goldman Sachs. That would be a 16% improvement year over year, and nearly a 40% increase from July.  Goldman fully expects a “pay back effect” in September following the program. The firm also expects the monthly selling rate to remain above 10 million for the rest of the year, with a final sales tally of about 10.5 million, with a tally of 12 million next year. Some other analysts have pegged next year’s selling rate at 12.5 million to 13 million.

David also observed that while the program did its job, its real contribution has been less than the hype. Cash for clunkers did spur sales. It sold 690,000 cars and many were compacts like the Ford Focus and Honda Civic. So it did accomplish the mission of scrapping some old iron and selling some more efficient cars. That said, the boost will amount to less than a 3% increase for the year. That’s hardly the windfall that Germany achieved from a similar program, which pushed sales up an average of 30% a month since March. There may also be a hangover in car sales in the U.S. Edmunds says that purchase intent is now down 11% from June, meaning that fewer people are looking at new cars. So sales could slump in the coming months. In fact, J.D. Power says that more than 70% of sales may have happened later this year even if the government hadn’t spent $3 billion on the clunker program. One other point: Toyota was the biggest beneficiary, getting 19.4% of sales, with General Motors getting 17.6% and Ford getting 14.4% of sales from the program.

David Kiley says that “Clunkers” was good policy for a number of reasons (all of which I agree wholeheartedly):

  1. There is no question that the program brought many car buyers off the sidelines, and gave automakers, and dealers, a shot in the arm not only in terms of sales of the vehicles that qualified, but in vehicle sales in general as the program brought lots of new eyeballs to the entire showroom, not just the models that qualified.
  2. The $3 billion had direct impact on the economy, keeping people working, increasing production and shift work at auto companies and parts makers. Unlike other pieces of economic stimulus, the money was allocated and went directly into the economy. The money isn’t sitting on a shelf waiting for building permits to make it through local bureaucracies.
  3. Clunkers put a spotlight on the whole idea of trading up in fuel economy. Lots of old Explorers got swapped for Ford Focuses and Toyota Corollas. I believe U.S. public policy must move toward engineering a substantial change in transportation. There needs to be more policy that persuades people to choose their vehicles in a smarter way, to leave a smaller carbon imprint. This Clunkers bill was, perhaps, a start of a recurring series of moves that will create a more fertile atmosphere and public discussion about this.
  4. Perhaps the undeniable efficiency of Clunkers will influence policy-makers and lawmakers the next time they draft a stimulus package. Economist Martin Feldstein warned us when the stimulus was being debated that it was not targeted nearly enough to consumer spending. His notion, which I agreed with, was that money should have been highly targeted to spending on specific high-impact sectors—cars, major appliances, home improvement.

The USDOT’s press realease observed that according to a preliminary analysis by the White House Council of Economic Advisers, the CARS program will (1) Boost economic growth in the third quarter of 2009 by 0.3-0.4 percentage points at an annual rate thanks to increased auto sales in July and August. (2) Will sustain the increase in GDP in the fourth quarter because of increased auto production to replace depleted inventories. (3) Will create or save 42,000 jobs in the second half of 2009. Those jobs are expected to remain well after the program’s close.

Sec. LaHood says “This is a win for the economy, a win for the environment and a win for American consumers”.  He noted in his blog “CARS’ economic success has been some of the most heartening news. Both Ford and General Motors haveannounced production increases for their third and fourth quarters due to heightened demand for fuel-efficient vehicles. Honda is also increasing production at its U.S. plants in East Liberty and Marysville, Ohio and in Lincoln, Alabama.  The program has been a lifeline to auto manufacturers and dealers to be sure. But it’s also had a visible ripple effect through communities and related industries. Because of CARS, scrapyards are selling clunker waterpumps, batteries and other parts. Credit unions and banks are processing thousands of car loans. Repairmen, mechanics and sales staff are picking up additional work. CARS has truly been a winning deal for everyone. ”   The USDOT’s press release also offered the following statistics:

Vehicles Purchased by Category

  • Passenger Cars: 404,046
  • Category 1 Truck: 231,651
  • Category 2 Truck: 46,836
  • Category 3 Truck: 2,408

Vehicle Trade-in by Category

  • Passenger Cars: 109,380
  • Category 1 Truck: 450,778
  • Category 2 Truck: 116,909
  • Category 3 Truck: 8,134

84% of trade-ins under the program are trucks, and 59% of new vehicles purchased are cars. The program worked far better than anyone anticipated at moving consumers out of old, dirty trucks and SUVs and into new more fuel-efficient cars.

Average Fuel Economy

  • New vehicles Mileage: 24.9 MPG
  • Trade-in Mileage: 15.8 MPG
  • Overall increase: 9.2 MPG, or a 58% improvement

Cars purchased under the program are, on average, 19% above the average fuel economy of all new cars currently available, and 59% above the average fuel economy of cars that were traded in. This means the program raised the average fuel economy of the fleet, while getting the dirtiest and most polluting vehicles off the road.

C4c2

Image Courtesy: Green Car Congress

Industry experts are now saying that after the ‘party’ of the Cash for Clunkers scheme, the auto industry will now experience a ‘hangover’, with a large drop in sales due to the lack of incentives. Auto research firm Edmunds.com predicted Wednesday that the industry “is likely to experience a painful hangover” after the monthlong cash-for-clunkers party. “People rushed into purchases that many would otherwise have made later this year. The result will be lower sales in the weeks to come,” said Edmunds Chief Executive Jeremy Anwyl.  The number of people who intend to buy a new car in the next two months was down 50% from the peak of the clunkers program and 11% from the average in June, the firm said.

Figures released Wednesday showed that California auto dealers requested the most in reimbursements, $326.8 million, followed by those in Texas, New York and Illinois.  Timely payment to dealers, some of whom are owed more than $3 million, will be a key measure of the program’s effectiveness, industry spokesman Wood said.  Michigan ended up with $132.4 million in vouchers sought under the cash for clunkers program, the eighth highest among states. California was first at $327 million followed by Texas, New York, Florida Illinois, Pennsylvania and Ohio.

Cash for Clunkers Update: Program Ends On A Positive Note & With A Negative Foot Note; Dealers Get Another 24 hrs to File Reimbursement Paperwork; List of Top 10 Contenders & Losers

August 24, 2009 at 8:32 pm

Contributing Sources: CNN MoneyJalopnik ; LA Times & Autoblog Green)

This post is sponsored by LemonFree.com

Finito!  Finished! Over! Gone! Done! End of the Road! Swan Song!  Whatever the buzz word you would like to use for marking the end of the “successful” Cash for Clunkers Program, please feel free to do so.  Many buyers made it out of the dealers with a sigh of relief while many dealers are still left wringing their hands over the delays in the Government’s administrative machine that processes the vouchers.

Amdist all this madness and hype surrounding the C4C,  for many of us in the transportation business might take a couple of days (or even weeks) to understand the full impact of the program’s final days.  Hopefully it is all good.  In the meanwhile,  TransportGooru went looking for the statistics on how the programs as well as the vehicles tallied up so far and found it for you from the reliable sources in our Automotive web reporting sphere (including Autoblog, Jalopnik, etc).

The ever popular Website, Jalopnik reports that as of Friday morning the number of transactions submitted numbered 489,269 with a dollar value of $2.04 billion. This morning the number reached 635,186 transactions with a dollar value of $2.65 million.  So far (as of 7:47 AM August 24, 2009) the number of vehicles purchased have overwhelmingly been passenger cars (283,104) and category 1 trucks (166,686), with just a few category 2 (31,862) and category 3 (1,300) trucks. On the other end, the majority of vehicles turned in are category 1 trucks (318,249) and category 2 trucks (81,599) with just 78,265 passenger cars. Was there a surge of sales over the weekend? How successful has the program been?  Once the deadline has passed, it’ll be interesting to see where the final MPG improvements and rankings of purchased and clunked cars end up. Shouldn’t have to wait long.

It would be hard to have a popular program without any drama, right?  The New York Times reports that auto dealers swimming in applications for the “Cash for Clunkers” program now have a little extra time to fill out those forms.   The Web site that dealers use to submit rebate applications crashed this afternoon, the Department of Transportation said. As a result, dealers can file for rebates until noon on Tuesday, though the deadline for sales is still 8 p.m. Monday. Car shoppers flooded sales lots this weekend after the announcement Thursday that the program was ending.

The Transportation Department said that despite a large increase in the system’s capacity, the website was down temporarily Monday. By then, dealers had submitted 625,000 applications worth more than $2.5 billion.


The department’s website, which has had problems throughout the program’s short life, was down for at least six hours Monday amid a last-minute rush to submit rebate applications, said Bailey Wood, a spokesman for the National Automobile Dealers Assn.

Glitches aside, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood spent Monday taking a victory lap.   “This program has been a lifeline to dealers,” Mr. LaHood said in Norristown, Pa. “It’s been a lifeline to the scrapyards who are getting these cars and can sell water pumps, and batteries and other parts. It’s also been a lifeline to the credit unions and banks processing all these loans. It’s been a win-win-win all around.”

AutoNation (AN, Fortune 500), the country’s largest dealership chain, stopped doing Cash for Clunker transactions after Friday. AutoNation had completed over 12,000 deals, according to spokesman Mark Cannon.

“It’s been a great run,” Cannon said.

Under Clunkers, which launched July 27, vehicles purchased after July 1 are eligible for refund vouchers worth $3,500 to $4,500 on traded-in cars with a fuel economy rating of 18 miles per gallon or less.

here is an updated list of traded-in and purchased cars  (curtesy of our friends at Jalopnik).

Top 10 New Vehicles Purchased

1. Toyota Corolla
2. Honda Civic
3. Ford Focus FWD
4. Toyota Camry
5. Hyundai Elantra
6. Toyota Prius
7. Nissan Versa
8. Ford Escape FWD
9. Honda Fit
10. Honda CR-V 4WD

Top 10 Trade-In Vehicles
1. Ford Explorer 4WD
2. Ford F150 Pickup 2WD
3. Jeep Grand Cherokee 4WD
4. Jeep Cherokee 4WD
5. Ford Explorer 2WD
6. Dodge Caravan/Grand Caravan 2WD
7. Chevrolet Blazer 4WD
8. Ford F150 Pickup 4WD
9. Chevrolet C1500 Pickup 2WD
10. Ford Windstar FWD Van

This list is subject to change as the final numbers come in.  So stay tuned for further updates.

Taking a leaf from the Healthcare protests, Big Oil Plans to Fight Obama’s Climate Change Strategy

August 14, 2009 at 6:59 pm

(Sources contributing to this hybrid report:  Streetsblog, Tree HuggerThe Huggington Post & Guardian, UK)

The US oil and gas lobby are planning to stage public events to give the appearance of a groundswell of public opinion against legislation that is key to Barack Obama’s climate change strategy, according to campaigners.

A key lobbying group will bankroll and organise 20 ”energy citizen” rallies in 20 states. An internal memo obtained recently by Greenpeace USA details polluting interests’ plans to launch a nationwide astroturf campaign attacking climate legislation at public events scheduled throughout the final weeks of recess before the Senate returns to debate the issue in September.

The email memo (shown below), which appears to come from the desk of American Petroleum Institute president Jack Gerard, asks API’s member companies to recruit employees, retirees, vendors and contractors to attend “Energy Citizen” rallies in key Congressional districts nationwide in the closing weeks of the August recess. Taking a page from the playbook of astroturf campaigners currently crashing health care town hall events across the country, API hopes to similarly sully productive communications between Congress members and their actual constituents at public events scheduled for the coming weeks.  Gerard states that API is ready to bus in company members and provide logistical support, and reveals that API has retained “a highly experienced events management company that has produced successful rallies for presidential campaigns, corporations and interest groups.”

“Our goal is to energise people and show them that they are not alone,” said Cathy Landry, for API, who confirmed that the memo was authentic.

The email from Gerard lays out ambitious plans to stage a series of lunchtime rallies to try to shape the climate bill that was passed by the house in June and will come before the Senate in September. “We must move aggressively,” it reads. Gerard called this a “sensitive” plan that puts a “human face” on opposition to climate and energy reform. The campaign plan places a special focus on 21 states picked by API for having “a significant industry presence” or “assets on the ground.”

The rally sites were chosen to exert maximum pressure on Democrats in conservative areas. The API also included talking points for the rallies – including figures on the costs of energy reform that were refuted weeks ago by the congressional budget office.

The API drive also points to a possible fracturing of the US Climate Action Partnership (Uscap), a broad coalition of corporations and energy organisations which was instrumental in drafting the Waxman-Markey climate change bill that passed in the House of Representatives in June.

Whether the oil-industry rallies will command even a fraction of the attention that the health care events are getting remains an open question. Most of the health “town halls” were organized by Democratic lawmakers as a forum to hear constituent concerns, while the “Energy Citizen” events — one of which appears to be slated for next week in Houston — would be purely private-sector productions.

Environmental groups’ advance knowledge of the anti-climate rallies, however, could lead to on-the-ground battles over the future of the climate bill. The ultimate intended audience for that showdown: Democratic senators who remain on the fence about regulating emissions.

The memo closes with a ‘for your eyes only’ plea: “Please treat this information as sensitive and ask those in your company to do so as well… we don’t want critics to know our game plan.”

TransportGooru Musings: What a pity! For the sake of money, people like Jack Gerard tend to ignore the growing threats of global warming and seem to care less about what can happen to the very planet they live .  They seem to be ready to even pledge their children’s future, let alone their own future by playing such “Games.”  Why does the oil lobby engage in such a thing?  Treehugger said it aptly:  “…is all to say, to ensure that anything that cramps the business-as-usual, carry us down the path to catastrophic climate through continued rampant use of fossil fuels, plans of the petroleum industry is pushed aside in continued favor of big profits.”

Or may be it is the fear of losing out to the growing environmental movement that is making people like Gerard to resort to such  measures to keep their business afloat.  With more people buying energy efficient cars and the Government making a big push for electric vehicle technology, there may soon be a day the oil companies will be left behind trying to peddle their gooey black mess to unsuspecting folks in rural pockets of America.

When that day arrives, you can imagine the price of oil crashing down!  It might someday sell for $10/barrel, if you are ready listen to this investment guru.  There is an interesting post on the Infrastructurist blog that features Robert Prechter, an investment guru with a fairly impressive record of prognostication, who says oil is headed below $10 a barrel (maybe as low as $4) and destined to stay there for a long time. This is just a week or so after the world’s leading energy economist declared that we should expect oil to cost perhaps a few hundred bucks a barrel in the not-too-distant future. So, only a one hundred-fold difference, or so. In gasoline prices, it’s the difference between $10 a gallon and 75 cents a gallon. Prechter relies on a form of analysis called the Elliot Wave. It’s based on the principle that the price history of an asset (oil in this case) can tell you something about where where its price is going in the future. It will be really fun to watch what happens to Jack & his band of brothers at API when that day of $10/Barrel arrives for big oil.

Click here to read the entire article.  Here is a copy of the above-mentioned e0mail (courtesy of Greenpeace, via desmogblog)

Cash for Clunkers: Some Tidbits & Updates – August 12, 2009

August 12, 2009 at 6:07 pm

  • Autoblog says that as of today’s there’s $1.66 billion left in the replenished Cash 4 Clunkers program. If consumers continue buying cars at the current rate, that’s just about 28 days until the program is tapped out.  As of August 7, U.S. auto dealers had received 245,000 Clunkers worth $1.03 billion as of. Today is Wednesday, August 12 and those numbers have swelled by 71,000 cars and $300 million.
  • Streetsblog CapitolHill has a nice peice that compared the ecological benefits from both the clunkers (Cars and Refigerators).  I swear to god that I had no knowledge of the Cash for Refrigerators till today.  In the Cash for Clunkers(C4C) Vs. Cash for Refrigerators(C4R)  battle, C4C’s cousin,   ” Cash for refrigerators” program typically offers between $25 and $50 for the removal of old fridges that emit chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), the chemicals behind the growing ozone hole that were eliminated from home appliances in the 1990s. Ridding a home of a CFC-spewing fridge removes about five tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, recycler Sam Sirkin told the New York Times last week. That works out to a cost of $10 per ton for the richest refrigerator rebate program — more than 10 times cheaper than “cash for clunkers.
  • Autoblog says not all clunkers in Germany being junked; some are “stolen” from the junkyard.
  • Wired reports that SUVs Officially Dead as Explorer Tops Cash-for-Clunkers Trades; Ford Explorers, the once-beloved, occasionally unstable and often-maligned vehicle that spawned countless imitators.
  • Tree Hugger discusses Bill Clinton’s suggested “EVs for Clunkers” at National Clean Energy Summit – Yesterday at the National Clean Energy Summit in Las Vegas, Bill Clinton suggested that the Cash for Clunkers program could serve as model to speed up the adoption of electric cars.
  • Streetsblog Captiol Hill finds out Citigroup’s “Cash for Clunkers” Contract is Worth $7.7 Million.
  • Have you been “Ave-d”? Guardian gushes about the sleek Spanish rail service! Americans left wondering if their Government will ever “get it”?

    August 8, 2009 at 5:16 pm

    (Source: The Guardian, UK)

    Ana Portet has had an unusual commute to work. At 7.30am she popped down to Sants railway station in Barcelona. Three hours later she was in a meeting with colleagues from her brewery firm, 315 miles away in Madrid.

    “I’ll be back in Barcelona by half past five,” she said as her early afternoon bullet train flew back along the new high-speed tracks at up to 210mph. “It’s so quick, sometimes you are there before you have even noticed.”

    Portet is one of hundreds of thousands of travellers who have migrated from the world’s busiest air shuttle, linking Madrid and Barcelona, to what is now Spain’s most popular train, the high-speed AVE.

    The AVE, an intercom announcement has just told us, will leave us in the centre of Barcelona in two hours and 32 minutes. With Madrid’s AVE station a short walk from the Prado museum, the journey is from one city centre to another. What is more, the high-speed train does this in punctual, hassle-free and elegant style.

    High-speed trains pulled by aerodynamic engines with noses shaped like a duck-billed platypus are grounding aircraft across Spain. The year-old Barcelona-Madrid line has already taken 46% of the traffic – stealing most of it from fuel-guzzling, carbon-emitting aircraft. As the high-speed rail network spreads a web of tracks across Spain over the next decade, it threatens to relegate domestic air travel to a distant second place.

    A high-speed network is not designed overnight. Spain’s AVE story started in the 1980s, when the socialist prime minister Felipe González commissioned a line between Madrid and his home city of Seville. The project was overshadowed by corruption scandals and greeted with a certain amount of scorn. Why was sleepy Seville getting the line and not busy Barcelona? Some saw it as an expensive white elephant and a monument to González’s ego.

    The line, however, was a spectacular success. Remote Seville was suddenly two and a half hours from Madrid. Spaniards, used to shabby, lumbering trains that crawled across the countryside following unpredictable timetables, discovered their trains could be stylish and run on time.

    Previously the choice on the Madrid-Seville run was between a hot, tiring six-hour coach journey or an aircraft. Seventeen years later, only one traveller out of 10 takes the plane to Seville. The rest go by a train that is 99% punctual. The Seville line proved that high-speed trains could be part of the answer, albeit an expensive part, to some of Spain’s most enduring problems.

    By 2020 Spain will have Europe’s largest high-speed network, its 6,000 miles of track outgunning even France’s TGV system. By then 90% of the population will be within 30 miles of a station. New lines have already been opened to Segovia, Valladolid and Malaga in the last 18 months. New links will eventually connect France and Portugal.

    The high-speed train network also helps Spain control carbon emissions, with passengers on the Madrid-Barcelona line cutting their own emissions by 83% on the trip.

    Click here to read the entire article.

    Transportgooru Musings:

    Something unusual is happening with the mainstream media these days.  There seems to be a renewed interest in pushing the idea of having a high-speed rail network in to the minds of the American public .  We have seen two articles on CNN/Fortune have brought too fore how China is pushing ahead with its investment in building a sophisticated, world class HSR network.  This spurred a good bit of debate on many popular infrastructure & transportation forums such as the Infrastrucrist.  Another one appeared in LA Times, by business writer David Lazarus whose sentiments about the American transportation system was summarized as follows after experiencing the highly systematic & super-sleek Japanese network: “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.”  Again, our good friends at Infrastructurist followed-up with a nice debate.

    Now we have this Guardian article, that gushes about the glorious Spanish high-speed rail network.  I am sure this would stir another round of renewed interest in the minds of us transportation nerds, especially among those who keenly the TransportGooru and Infrastructurist columns on this topic. But do these discussions go beyond the comments section of these portals.  I wonder if the Government is even taking note of these anxiety-laden cries that advocate the need for a comparable HSR.  As the President and his administration staff reiterate his commitment to keep American workforce competitive in every field, pushing huge loads of money for all sorts of industries (Automobile manufacturing, battery research etc.) , everyone in the Government seems to forget that competitiveness should also extend beyond roads and vehicles.  The vast American bureaucracy is slowly pushing ahead with limited funding ($8Billion) and a massive goal (a HSR-network in pockets of nation with targeted connectivity), while other nations like China and Spain are blazing ahead with massive investments in a rail network.  Unless we as a nation get serious about investing in alternative transportation options such as rail, we will continue to remain dependent on our expensive oil addiction.

    With the Government pushing new thinking such as transit-oriented development, it is probably not too far in the future before urban living becomes “cool” again and the minor discomforts of not having the plush sub-urban life with white picket fences and acre-wide manicured lawns might fade away.   The Government facilitated the emergence of the sprawl and the suburban lifestyle with its policy and funding push for interstates.  Back in the past were days when railroading was the best alternative for longer distances.  Ford and other American automakers created a new way of life with the commercialization of automobile technology, which has now blossomed into a thriving industry.  Can the Government enable a similar push for building high speed rail networks around the country?

    Before we even get there, let’s first ask: Is there a need for it?   Yes, clearly there is a need for it, at least for distances shorter than 400 miles and there is also a desire for it among folks.  But the only thing that is lack is the Governmental backing. The paltry $8B will not be enough but it is definitely a good start.  It is not always a bad thing to emulate successful strategies, irrespective of where it emulates from.  American ingenuity stems from this ability to take ideas irrespective of their origin and tweak to make them suitable for the American landscape.  We did this for years by simply importing foreign talent (from nuclear scientists to PhD students) propelled new ideas and thinking to create a huge economy that was atop the world for decades. Why not do the same for building a rail network?

    We have the need, we have the people who can get it done. All we need is the willingness to invest and the determination to get it done. As demonstrated in the past, Americans can accomplish great things (from building the interstate system to the invention of the atomic bomb), when the Government stood firm and pushed ahead to finish these mega-projects.  Some of these projects not only became a rallying point for nation building (during and after WWII) but they also spawned new economies and industries, spurring job growth and economic development in communities.

    For argument sakes, for the time being we can remain content that our nation has a sophisticated air transportation network, with even the tiniest of the towns boasting an airport.  In reality, many of our airports are overwhelmed and strained by heavy operational delays and operate with sub-par efficiency, at times also posing a risk to passenger safety.  But at the end of the day, we are still going to be an oil-dependent economy, ply our cars and planes with imported for the near future.  Of course, there is a lot more to it than just saying and writing it on these websites and newspapers.  But that’s where the Government comes in to figure it all out and to make it happen.  That’s what the American tax-payers pay for every year before April 15th – to fund and keep a massive bureaucracy working for the to safeguard the interests of its citizens and not budge for the disgruntled political masses.

    For what it matters, we are blessed with a dedicated team of professionals who are a part of this massive bureacracy and the USDOT employs thousands of people under its railroad-ing arm, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA).  The agency should be given special powers (agreed that we are not Communist China and it may all have to be worked out within a Democratic framework) to expedite the approval process for the pending HSR proposals.  It should also be taken into account that allied industres such as steel manufacturing be reviatlized with incentives for making steel locally.  This would be a really good way to resuscitate the long-shuttered steel mills of our nation.  Hire a new workforce to build these raillines (as a data nugget, consider what China had been able to do in keeping its workforce busy.  The CRCC now employ 110,000 workers on a single line connecting Beijing and Shanghai.  If you are running short of professional capacity to build and manage all this new work, employ the new grads coming out of our universities (FYI,  the CNN article on Chinese HSR plans offer this data:  Last year China Railway Construction Co., the nation’s largest railroad builder, hired 14,000 new university graduates — civil and electrical engineers mostly — from the class of 2008. This year, says Liang Yi, the vice CEO of the CRCC subsidiary working on the Beijing-to-Shanghai high-speed line, the company may hire up to 20,000 new university grads to cope with the company’s intensifying workload. But with the private sector cutting way back on hiring — and university students desperate for work — taking on that many new engineers and managers hasn’t been too difficult) and put them to work on this project of national importance.   If we managed to somehow put aside all our  political in-fighting and come together to accomplish this in the next 20 years, our future generations may have a better shot at being competitive.  We may even see a renewed interest in our nations private-sector players to invest and operate these new railroads (many foreign and local infrastructure firms are now buying rights to build and operate our nation’s ports and toll-roads).  Who knows! Someday in the future we may have a sophisticated system if we “get it right”).

    It takes a special leader , who can stand tall amidst all the challenges and marshall his troops to get the mission accomplished and our President sure has shown glimpses of such qualities.  But as we all know, mere glimpses are not enough.  Unless our leadership shows some serious commitment and interest, the possibilities of an average American riding an Ave-like or Shinkansen-like or a TGV-like system will remain elusive.  Will the real leader stand up and deliver?

    President Obama Announces $2.4 Billion in Grants to Accelerate the Manufacturing and Deployment of the Next Generation of U.S. Batteries and Electric Vehicles

    August 6, 2009 at 3:51 pm

    (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.

    Image Courtesy: Department of Energy - map of the award locations

    “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).

    Thanks to Cash for Clunkers, Hybrid Sales Rises 31.8% in July; New Vehicle Sales Up 3.55%

    August 5, 2009 at 11:52 am

    (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).

    Us hybrid sales 2009.08-1

    Image Courtesy: Green Car Congress - Hybrid sales rise, thanks to Cash for Clunkers

    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.
    Us hybrid sales 2009.08-2

    Image Courtesy: Green Car Congress - Total Reported Monhtly Sales of Hybrid Vehicles in US

    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.

    Climate experts says`Cash for clunkers’ effect on pollution is not so significant

    August 5, 2009 at 10:06 am

    (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.

    Majority Leader Harry Reid: Senate will vote to extend “cash-for-clunkers” program before going home on Friday

    August 4, 2009 at 4:10 pm

    (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.

    Images via Apture

    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.