(Source: Timesonline, UK & Autocar, UK)

A £2,000-a-car scrappage scheme aimed at kick-starting Britain’s depressed motor industry has hit trouble after a dispute between car companies and the Government over costs.

Manufacturers, including Ford and Honda, have told dealers not to register any new vehicles under the scheme, which is starting today.

Consumers are being offered £2,000 towards a new car if they trade in a motor that is at least ten years old.

The car companies said that they were seeking “clarification” from the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR) over “administrative” details.

The Government insisted that it had been clear on details of the scheme, under which manufacturers would pay £1,000 and the Government £1,000 towards the cost of the incentive.

However, the car manufacturers want dealers to share the cost.

The eleventh-hour hitch will come as a huge embarrassment to the Prime Minister, who had heavily promoted the “bangers for cash” scheme as the route to revitalising Britain’s depressed motor industry.

Gordon Brown and Lord Mandelson, the Business Secretary, visited a Nissan dealership today to talk to consumers signing up to the scheme.

Mr Brown said the £300 million project would prove “very popular” and “a great help to the British car industry.” It would help the economy to “move forward,” he said.

A BERR spokesman said: “Thirty-eight manufacturers have signed contracts with the Department which set out clearly that manufacturers provide £1,000 and the Government matches it.

“We understand several dealers are unhappy about the idea they should share the costs. The Government also needs to ensure VAT is paid in accordance with the scheme.”

Though the scheme was revealed in the Budget the final details emerged only at a meeting on Thursday, manufacturers said.

However, President of the AA Edmund King has pointed out that the £2000 incentive can be used as a deposit to help car buyers get finance. He added that the scheme would “transform the chances of survival in a crash for thousands of car owners” whose current old cars offer substantially less protection than newer models.

But Friends of the Earth executive director Andy Atkins said the scrappage scheme was “a lost opportunity”.

“A well-designed scheme could have played a limited role in cutting emissions from our roads,” he said. “But, unlike some other countries, the UK scheme doesn’t prevent motorists part-exchanging an old, small model for a brand-new gas guzzler.”

Business secretary Peter Mandelson visited a car dealership today to launch the scheme and said there has been a positive response from the industry.

“I am delighted by the response of the motor industry. Thirty-eight companies have signed up – all the major UK car manufacturers and a number of other companies. This means more choice for consumers and a boost for British brands. 



“The scheme has been met with a flood of enquiries from customers. It will provide a boost to the industry and kick-start sales.” 



The confirmed list of manufacturers who have signed up to take part are: Allied Vehicles, Bentley, BMW, Chevrolet, Citroen, Daihatsu, FIAT, Ford, Honda, Hyundai, Isuzu, Jaguar, Kia, Land Rover, London Taxis International, Mazda, Mercedes Benz, MG Motor, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Perodua, Peugeot, Porsche, Proton, Renault, Rolls Royce, SAAB, SECMA UK, Subaru, Suzuki, Toyota, Vauxhall, Volkswagen, Volvo, Koelliker UK Ltd, Iveco Ltd, Chrysler and Renault Trucks UK Ltd.

(Source: USA Today & Image: Jalopnik)

As the American lawmakers are getting ready to pass the landmark “cash for clunkers” legislation, many of you are still left wondering what this legislation entails and how it will affect you.  The media chatter in the past has offered very little except that the legislation would provide federal vouchers of up to $4,500 for people to trade in their older vehicles for new ones that get better mileage.

Talk of the vouchers has kept some would-be new car and truck buyers on the sidelines, waiting to see whether they’d qualify for government help. So, for the moment, the idea is hurting sales. Based on interviews with lobbyists and congressional offices, the USA Today captured the details of this legislation in a nice Q & A format:

Image: Newsday

Q: What’s the idea behind “cash-for-clunkers”?

A: Supporters say it would replace older vehicles with new ones that use less fuel, are safer and pollute less. And it would give the struggling auto industry a sales boost.

Q: What’s the bill’s status?

A: It’s in a House committee and backed by the president. Senators from both parties are prepared to co-sponsor similar legislation as soon as this week.

Q: Sounds like a sure thing.

A: Not so. Environmental lobbyists, who don’t think it boosts fuel economy enough, might derail it or get it changed enough in the Senate that a compromise would take awhile.

Q: Any groups trying to keep it from being derailed?

A: You bet. Car companies, autoworkers, component suppliers and car dealers, among them. The House bill “will help jump-start auto sales and the U.S. economy, while also providing environmental benefits and increasing energy security,” says Ziad Ojakli, Ford Motor spokesman.

Q: What’s the price tag?

A: About $4 billion. The money is currently proposed to come from Energy Department funding included in the already enacted $787 billion economic stimulus package.

Q: If the House bill becomes law, how would it work?

A: The government would send up to $4,500 to the selling dealer on your behalf, if you:

1. Trade in a car that — this is a key point — has been registered and in use for at least a year, and has a federal combined city/highway fuel-economy rating of 18 or fewer miles per gallon.

2. Buy a new car, priced at $45,000 or less and rated at least 4 mpg better than the old one (gets a $3,500 voucher). If the new one gets at least 10 mpg better, you get the full $4,500.

Example: Trade that well-worn 1985 Chevrolet Impala V-8, rated 14 mpg, for a 2009 Impala V-8 rated 19 mpg and the government will kick in $3,500. Downsize to Chevy Cobalt (27 mpg) or even a larger Honda Accord (24 mpg) and get $4,500.

Mileage ratings back to 1985 are at www.fueleconomy.gov.

Q: What about trucks?

A: It’s more complicated.

For standard-duty models — most SUVs, vans and pickups:

1. The old one must be rated 18 mpg or less.

2. The new one must be at least 2 mpg better for $3,500 or at least 5 mpg better for $4,500.

For heavy-duties (6,000 to 8,500 pounds gross vehicle weight rating):

1. The old one must be rated 15 mpg or less.

2. The new one must be rated at least 1 mpg better for $3,500, or 2 mpg or more for $4,500.

Work trucks (8,500 to 10,000 lbs.) don’t have mpg ratings, so age is the criteria. The old one has to be a 2001 model or older. And only $3,500 is available.

Q: Is it worth it for $4,500?

A: The assumption is that the people most likely to use the program would trade in cars worth less than $4,500. Thus, while not necessarily clunkers, most would be at least 8 years old.

Q: Can I combine these incentives with other offers?

A: Yes. For instance, you could trade for a hybrid and get the voucher, claim the hybrid tax credit and get dealer or manufacturer discounts. You also could deduct the sales tax, if any, on your next federal tax return.

Q: Would I ever see the $3,500 or $4,500?

A: No. It’s an electronic transfer from the government to the dealer. Dealers want to be sure the amount can be counted as cash from the buyer, which would help buyers get credit because they’re financing less.

Q: What does the dealer do with my trade-in?

A: Gives it to a salvage operator. The engine, transmission and some other parts must be destroyed so they can’t be reused. The idea is to cull fuel-thirsty, polluting drivetrains. Operators can resell other parts, however.

Q: What’s to keep me from buying a junkyard car for a few hundred bucks, getting it barely running and trading it?

A: The one-year-in-service requirement noted earlier. Lawmakers wanted to exclude the revival of so-called junkyard dogs, because they’ve already been taken off the road.

Q: What do I get if I recently bought a car that would have qualified?

A: The bill contemplates making the incentives retroactive to March 30, but it’s unclear how to find and junk cars that were traded in that long ago. Some might already be back on the road, driven by new owners.

Q: What’s wrong with environmentalists’ idea that the new car or truck should get much better fuel economy than the House bill currently requires?

A: Opponents say the environmentalists’ fuel-economy improvement thresholds are so high that foreign brands benefit disproportionately, because their lineups tend now to have more small, fuel-efficient vehicles.

But the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy complained in a statement criticizing the House bill that the proposal as it stands now is way too lenient.

The council charged that the bill “aims primarily to clear Detroit’s unsold inventory from the storage lots,” rather than to seriously cut fuel use.

Q: How soon could this become law?

A: Depends on how much critics can sway the Senate, and to what piece of legislation this “fleet modernization” bill is attached.

If it becomes part of a larger bill that’s likely to get lots of debate, it could take awhile. If it’s attached to urgent, must-pass legislation, such as an appropriation bill, it could move quickly to the president’s desk.

A current plan is to add the program as an amendment to climate change legislation now being considered.

As proposed, it would be in effect for just one year.

(Source: Detroit Free Press & Image: Jalopnik)

WASHINGTON — Congress appeared ready Wednesday to move forward on a bill to pay people to surrender their old gas-guzzlers for new, fuel-efficient models — but the auto industry hasn’t decided what it wants out of the program.

While backers of a cash-for-clunkers plan announced a deal earlier this month, the final bill has yet to be crafted because of a last-minute dispute between foreign and domestic automakers over incentives for leasing. Environmental groups aren’t thrilled with the compromise, saying it is weighted too heavily toward truck buyers.

But with House and Senate leaders, along with President Barack Obama, voicing support, industry officials say they are hopeful a bill that will boost a lethargic market for new vehicles will get through Congress in weeks. Backers say the compromise would cost about $4 billion — paid for by money from the economic stimulus plan passed earlier this year — and could boost sales by 1.3 million vehicles over a year, according to industry officials.

Owners of cars and trucks that get less than 18 m.p.g. could get a voucher of $3,500 to $4,500 for a new vehicle, depending on the mileage of the new model, but no trade-in value because the vehicles would be scrapped.

“This is a jobs bill that helps the environment,” said Ziad Ojakli, Ford’s group vice president for governmental affairs.

The plan does have several hurdles that will keep some potential buyers on the sidelines. The clunker being traded in has to be kept off the road — meaning it will have no trade-in value beyond the voucher. Far more trucks on the road will qualify for the vouchers than cars: even 15 years ago, only five models of midsize sedans managed just 18 m.p.g.

And while the compromise among U.S. House members was unveiled earlier this month, the actual bill will be kept under wraps until it is introduced with the House Democrats’ plan to control carbon emissions through a cap-and-trade system, expected no later than Monday.

Although cash-for-clunkers programs in other nations have been motivated by environmental goals to improve the mileage of vehicles on the road, environmental groups are lukewarm about the U.S. compromise.

(Source: The Transport Politic)

The Federal Transit Administration releases its budget for FY ‘10, and recommends new transit capital projects

On Friday, the Obama Administration released details on its proposed budget for fiscal year 2010. The recommended appropriations affect each agency, and will have to be approved by Congress in a succession of relevant bills before they become law, but since Democrats control both the executive and legislative branches, there are likely to be few divergences from the President’s proposals.

The Federal Transit Administration’s budget will increase to $10.34 billion this year, up from $10.23 billion in FY 2009. These amounts were set in stone by the 2005 surface transportation bill, SAFETEA-LU, so there was little expectation that the President would propose massive increases in funding for public transportation. However, the budget significantly expands funding for New and Small Start transit capital projects, from $1.57 billion in ‘09 to $1.83 billion in ‘10. ARRA stimulus funds were included in FY ‘09.

Because the dedicated highway trust fund, which funds highways and transit and which relies on fuel tax revenues, is running out of cash as people drive less and automobiles become more frugal, the government needs a new source of funds for transportation. This year, as in 2008, the Hosue and Senate will likely have to divert general fund revenues to compensate, and the budget assumes that fact, proposing that a large percentage of both transit and highway money be appropriated directly by the Congress.

Along with the general budget, the Department of Transportation released itsannual New Starts Report. This document, which is well worth reading through if you have the time, documents the federal government’s commitment to funding new transit corridors in the United States. The FTA rated and recommended a number of new corridors for funding — five major New Starts projects and five Small Start projects in addition to several already announced over the past year.

Click here to read the rest of this interesting analysis (Note: It is a lengthy analysis too).

The Energy Department has requested $30 million to relaunch a program to make radioactive plutonium-238, the supply of which is running low.

The Energy Department plans to restart its program of making radioactive fuel for NASA’s deep space missions, the agency announced Thursday, a decision that came only hours after the National Research Council warned that the nation was fast running out of the fuel.

Jen Stutsman, a spokeswoman for the department, said the agency had requested $30 million in its fiscal 2010 budget proposal to restart the fuel-making process. In its budget statement, the agency said it had “a long and successful history” of supporting NASA’s needs. It said it welcomed the National Research Council findings.

For such research, which includes the New Horizons mission now heading for Pluto and the Cassini mission now orbiting Saturn, the electricity that powers onboard instruments comes from devices called radioisotope power generators. The RPGs make electricity with the heat from the radioactive decay of small amounts of plutonium-238 carried on board. 

According to Ralph McNutt, a space scientist at Johns Hopkins University and co-chairman of the committee that produced the report, the United States stopped making Pu-238 about 20 years ago, with the end of the Cold War. Although Pu-238 is not weapons-grade material, it is a byproduct of making the more dangerous Pu-239, he said.

(Source: LA Times)

(Source: Autobloggreen)

The message has been hinted at before, but the federal government is now serious about shifting the focus away from hydrogen and onto plug-in vehicles. In an important statement yesterday, Department of Energy Secretary Steven Chu said that hydrogen vehicles are still 10 to 20 years away from practicality and that millions in federal government funding for hydrogen programs will be cut from the 2010 federal budget. Chu said, “We asked ourselves, ‘Is it likely in the next 10 or 15, 20 years that we will covert to a hydrogen car economy?’ The answer, we felt, was ‘no'” (well, duh).

Did we mention this is a big reversal? Just a few weeks ago, Chu announced $41.9 million for hydrogen projects. A major switch, but not totally surprising. During the presidential campaign last fall, Obama did call for a million PHEVs by 2015.

The U.S. Fuel Cell Council and the National Hydrogen Association quickly released a joint statement against the budget cuts.  Here is the full presser:

PRESS RELEASE:

Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Associations Criticize DOE Program Cuts

Official Joint Statement
Washington, DC

May 7, 2009-The National Hydrogen Association (NHA) and U.S. Fuel Cell Council (USFCC) issued the following joint statement regarding the Obama Administration’s FY 2010 budget request for the U.S Department of Energy:

“The cuts proposed in the DOE hydrogen and fuel cell program threaten to disrupt commercialization of a family of technologies that are showing exceptional promise and beginning to gain market traction.

“Fuel cell vehicles are not a science experiment. These are real vehicles with real marketability and real benefits. Hundreds of fuel cell vehicles have collectively logged millions of miles. 

“Both the National Academy of Sciences and NHA’s recent Energy Evolution report conclude that a portfolio of vehicle technologies is needed to achieve the nation’s energy and environmental security goals and that hydrogen is essential to success. Hydrogen also advances the Obama Administration’s goals of greener power generation and a smarter power grid.

“The National Academy recommended a portfolio approach and we are frankly puzzled at the Energy Department’s decision to ignore that recommendation even as the Department uses other material from the same report to justify its proposed cut.

“We are also concerned that the Department appears to be walking away from its Market Transformation activities, which support fuel cell deployment in early commercial applications. This Congressionally-mandated program is demonstrating the ability of fuel cells to provide a competitive and green alternative to battery-based systems in vehicles and in power supply.

“Finally, we are concerned that the Department has proposed to cut funds for the Solid State Energy Conversion Alliance (SECA). SECA success could dramatically lower the cost of carbon sequestration, improve power plant efficiency, and enable a virtually pollution-free coal plant in the future. Additional funding will hasten SECA progress.”

The NHA and USFCC collectively represent more than 200 companies and organizations.

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

A related post on TransportGooru.com: 

Biofuels Get a Boost – Secretary Chu Announces Nearly $800 Million from Recovery Act to Accelerate Biofuels Research and Commercialization

(Source: GreenBiz via Reuters)

The Obama administration established a Biofuels Interagency Working Group this week in a move that carries implications for the industry on several fronts, including regulatory and research and development. 
 
The Biofuels Interagency Working Group, comprised of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Energy (DOE)  and Department of Agriculture, will develop a biofuel market development program, coordinate biofuel infrastructure policies, study biofuel lifecycle and help existing biofuel producers secure credit and refinancing.

Meanwhile, the DOE will spend $786.5 million in stimulus funds on demonstration projects and research to accelerate the adoption of next-generation biofuels. 

For example, the agency will dole out $480 million on 10 to 20 pilot-scale and demonstration-scale projects, with a ceiling of $25 million and $50 million, respectively. Another $176.5 million shall be used to increase funding for two or more commercial-scale biorefinery projects that previously received government assistance.

The DOE biomass program also will dedicate $130 million toward research into ethanol, algal biofuels and biofuel sustainability research.

The proposal breaks down renewable fuels into four categories: cellulosic biofuels, biomass-derived diesel, advanced biofuels, and total renewable fuel. The fuels must produce fewer greenhouse gas emissions than conventional fuels, but there is great debate within the biofuel industry about how these lifecycle assessments should be calculated.

$480 million solicitation for integrated pilot- and demonstration-scale biorefineries

Projects selected under this Funding Opportunity Announcement will work to validate integrated biorefinery technologies that produce advanced biofuels, bioproducts, and heat and power in an integrated system, thus enabling private financing of commercial-scale replications.

DOE anticipates making 10 to 20 awards for refineries at various scales and designs, all to be operational in the next three years.  The DOE funding ceiling is $25 million for pilot-scale projects and $50 million for demonstration scale projects.

These integrated biorefineries will reduce dependence on petroleum-based transportation fuels and chemicals. They will also facilitate the development of an “advanced biofuels” industry to meet the federal Renewable Fuel Standards.

As reported in yesterday’s post, the House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry A. Waxman, Subcommittee Chairman Edward J. Markey, Chairman Emeritus John D. Dingell, Congresswoman Betty Sutton, Congressman Jay Inslee, and Congressman Bart Stupak reached an agreement on a “Cash for Clunkers” program that will help the auto industry while cleaning our air. This agreement is based on H.R. 1550, introduced by Congresswoman Sutton, and H.R. 520, introduced by Congressman Inslee.  The fact sheet published on the Committee’s website offers the following detail:

Consumers may trade in their old, gas-guzzling vehicles and receive vouchers worth up to $4,500 to help pay for new, more fuel efficient cars and trucks. The program will be authorized for up to one year and provide for approximately one million new car or truck purchases. The agreement divides these new cars and trucks into four categories. Miles per gallon figures below refer to EPA “window sticker” values

• Passenger Cars: The old vehicle must get less than 18 mpg. New passenger cars with mileage of at least 22 mpg are eligible for vouchers. If the mileage of the new car is at least 4 mpg higher than the old vehicle, the voucher will be worth $3,500. If the mileage of the new car is at least 10 mpg higher than the old vehicle, the voucher will be worth $4,500.

• Light-Duty Trucks: The old vehicle must get less than 18 mpg. New light trucks or SUVs with mileage of at least 18 mpg are eligible for vouchers. If the mileage of the new truck or SUV is at least 2 mpg higher than the old truck, the voucher will be worth $3,500. If the mileage of the new truck or SUV is at least 5 mpg higher than the old truck, the voucher will be worth $4,500.

• Large Light-Duty Trucks: New large trucks (pick-up trucks and vans weighing between 6,000 and 8,500 pounds) with mileage of at least 15 mpg are eligible for vouchers. If the mileage of the new truck is at least 1 mpg higher than the old truck, the voucher will be worth $3,500. If the mileage of the new truck is at least 2 mpg higher than the old truck, the voucher will be worth $4,500.

• Work Trucks: Under the agreement, consumers can trade in a pre-2002 work truck (defined as a pick-up truck or cargo van weighing from 8,500-10,000 pounds) and receive a voucher worth $3,500 for a new work truck in the same or smaller weight class. There will be a finite number of these vouchers, based on this vehicle class’s market share. There are no EPA mileage measures for these trucks; however, because newer models are cleaner than older models, the age requirement ensures that the trade will improve environmental quality. Consumers can also “trade down,” receiving a $3,500 voucher for trading in an older work truck and purchasing a smaller light-duty truck weighing from 6,000 – 8,500 pounds.

Here is a PDF copy of the Fact Sheet:

(Source: Glenn Havinoviski, Columnist @ ITS Virginia)

Glenn N. Havinoviski is an Associate Vice President and ITS Group Director for HNTB Corporation in Arlington, Virginia.  In his recent column on ITS Virginia’s quarterly Newsletter, Glenn discussed his views on the stimulus funding towards transportation projects and their impact on ITS, jobs, etc.  Here is an excerpt from the PDF version attached here.  

You gotta hand it to the new President. In less than four weeks,he got his way, running roughshod over a political opposition unableto develop or convince others of their own vision and ideas. Uncle”O” signed into law a $785 billion stimulus, an ode to the power ofhope, change and the ability to print lots of money. In Virginia alone,some $700 million will be provided for “shovel-ready” transportationprojects, to be selected in the next few weeks by state officials.Among those projects will be several initiatives related to trafficmanagement, operations and ITS. While the purpose of the stimulusis first and foremost the creation of new jobs, closer to home I knowit may preserve some existing jobs.While I believe this example of Federal largesse will end upbeing more a historical exception rather than the rule, we’ve alreadythrown a like amount at the banks and the struggling auto industry,courtesy of Mr. Obama’s wayward predecessor.So far, it is unclear what that money has gotten us. Banks stillwon’t make loans, GM still can’t sell cars, and too many bank executivesare still partying in Vegas and elsewhere. The toxic assets arestill toxic, and still dwindling in value, seemingly by the hour.

With the horrendous transportation funding cut-backs at thestate level and limited support from elected officials, VDOT hasbeen forced to create an austere vision, one which emphasizesoperating what we have, as opposed to ramrodding a programcontaining projects which in many cases have been deferred acrossseveral lifetimes. The new-look Federal government may be seekingto bankroll a future transit and clean-energy vehicle utopia. But Virginia, as with many other states, has been economically forcedto be more pragmatic with their own money and make very hardbut practical choices.

With all the excitement over a suddenly activist Federal government,what is in danger of getting lost in the mix has been theprogress made in the last decade toward innovative use of resources- including partnerships to leverage both government and privateinvestment, using tolling and road pricing both as revenue streamand as demand management tool, and development of a networkof vehicle-roadside communications for both safety and mobilityapplications.Such approaches to transportation improvements heavily dependon collection and monitoring of real-time information, alongwith electronic payment services and dedicated short-range communications(DSRC). They also create new opportunities for jobs,as well as new markets for information and technology services.No question that they could benefit from, but are not completelydependent on, the largesse of the young handsome Uncle “O” anda largely (but not completely) sympathetic Congress. “

(Source: Detroit Free Press & Image: Jalopnik)

WASHINGTON – The Obama administration and U.S. House members have reached a compromise over a “cash for clunkers” bill that would offer as many as one million vehicle buyers a voucher for up to $4,500 each to spur car and truck sales.