Americans Drive Less Even With Cheap Gas

Gas prices declined in October, but Americans continued to drive less than ever — 9 billion fewer miles than last October, in fact.

The decline points to a fundamental change in driving habits that began this summer during the gas-price spike but has continued even as prices have fallen. Since November 2007, Americans have driven 100 billion fewer miles compared to the same time span the year before that, which makes this the largest continuous decline in driving ever recorded.

The data, gathered by the Federal Highway Administration, doesn't stop there. Public transportation across the country has seen record increases, including Amtrak, which this fiscal year made the most money it's ever seen in its 37 years of operation. Car accident fatalities are also down 10% so far in 2008.

On the flipside, the Federal Highway Trust Fund continues to come up chronically short on funds because it relies on the gasoline tax. Congress already had to inject $8 billion into it earlier this year to keep important projects operating.

It doesn't take a Harvard economist to figure out that the economic sinkhole we've fallen into is largely responsible for the continued driving decline. Even if rising gas prices started the trend, tightening budgets and layoffs have continued it. Looking to cut expenses, Americans are taking fewer trips and telecommuting for work more frequently.

We're Driving Less Even as Gasoline Prices Drop (USA Today)

Stupid America? Automaker blame and cheap gas

Cheap gas hurts America

GM is bleeding money in the US, yet throughout the world GM’s auto business is profitable. Why? Why is GM near bankruptcy?

Is it all bad management? Is it all the fault of the UAW? Is it all because GM killed the electric car?

I don’t think so. Certainly, GM’s management was bad in decades past and the UAW was uncompetitive. However, killing the electric car didn’t kill GM. Even if GM was making as many EVs today as Toyota does hybrid cars, GM would still be on the precipice of bankruptcy.

Complacency killed the Big 3. Complacency caused by cheap gas.

Certainly, auto companies lobbied Congress not to raise fuel economy standards, and, until recently, Congress has been more than happy to oblige. And Americans didn’t care, as fuel economy was even less important than cup holders for the majority of car buyers.

Thus, any mention of a gas tax has been instant political suicide. Yet, protecting our foreign oil resources has cost more than a gas tax ever would have. And, what do we have to show for it?

Ooops. That’s right. We have the greatest military the world loves to hate, Whooohooo! America! We’re number 1!

Killing Detroit won’t lead to any greater fuel efficiency than if Detroit is bailed out. If you want to blame someone, or something, blame cheap gas. If you can’t do that, then you can’t handle the truth.

This entry was posted on Monday, December 8th, 2008 at 1:11 pm and is filed under Hybrids. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

Petrol drops in Sydney below $1 a litre

etrol prices across Sydney have fallen below a dollar a litre for the first time in three years.
 
Petrol prices across Sydney have fallen below a dollar a litre for the first time in three years.

The cheapest regular unleaded petrol (ULP) can be found at a BP service station at Croydon Park, in Sydney's inner west, where it is priced at 100.9 cents per litre, according to independent price tracking website motormouth.com.au.

Service stations at Fairfield, Brookvale, Beacon Hill and Frenchs Forest are selling ULP for 101.9 cents per litre.

However, ethanol-blended fuel E10 can be bought for as little as 98.7 cents per litre at the Speedway garage in Fairfield, and for 98.9 cents per litre elsewhere in Fairfield, Beacon Hill, Frenchs Forest and Forestville.

Diesel fuel remains about 30 cents per litre more expensive than ULP.

Wednesday's genuine drop in prices follows a stunt last month when a dozen independent petrol stations slashed 40 cents off their usual fuel price, selling it for 94.9 cents a litre in protest at what they said were anti-competitive practices by the oil giants.

What Will the Price of Gas be in One Month?

With the United States' Presidential election now over, it will be interesting to see how our economic situation changes over the next few months.

We've currently been on a trend of gas getting markedly cheaper (anything seems more reasonable than $4.00 per gallon) and our nationwide average is now sitting around the $2.25/gallon mark, with diesel fuel commanding roughly $0.80/gallon more. American consumers are hoping that fuel prices continue to drop, but the approaching holiday season may cause a slight upward climb.

What predictions do you make for the future of gas prices? Leave a comment with your best guess for what our country's average fuel price will look like one month from now.

Will Dropping Gas Prices Bring Back the SUV Craze?

Short answer: no.

Long answer: the SUV craze of the late 90's and early 21st century came into play from the perspective that they were safer and more practical. Even though they presented other challenges that made them more likely to get into an accident, they are considered "more metal" to have around you and are therefore seen as safer by many drivers.

The convenience factor is obvious. Families are able to fit more easily in them. Transporting 5 or more people is much more comfortable than in a car, truck, and sometimes even a minivan.

All of that makes it sound like the dropping gas prices will rejuvinate the failing market. There are two factors that will prevent it from happening.

1. Those who traded in their SUVs for fuel-efficient vehicles can't trust the drop in gas prices. They are low now, but how long will it last?
2. Manufacturers learned their lesson and have cut production across the board of these vehicles. Lower production means higher demand, which means higher prices, which means more people will lean towards more affordable vehicles, especially with the state of the economy.

Those who have kept their SUVs will continue to keep their SUVs.

Gas prices may have been the catalyst that started the reduction of SUVs on the road, but lowering prices will not change it back. With the environment becoming more of a mainstream issue that touches us all, people started feeling good about their decisions. Even if it was the prices of gas that pulled them our of their SUVs, they still felt like they were making the right decision for the environment as well.

Regardless of what gets people thinking about the environment, it's always difficult to stop thinking about it. Once it's embedded in a person's thoughts, their actions and decisions are normally effected forever.

Fix Detroit? Guaranteed Car Loans and $4 Gas

Last week, on NPR’s Diane Rehm Show, a panel of auto industry observers discussed the future of the United States auto industry. The consensus? Chrysler is on its last legs, and General Motors and Ford will need a bailout to survive.

Dr. Sean McAlinden, chief economist and vice president, Research at the Center for Automotive Research, described his remedy to Detroit’s predicament:

What I think is really needed is a straight flat-out bailout: $15 billion dollars in cash with no restrictions except that it be spent in the United States—to carry these firms through to 2011 when this recession is over, and when their product line is 60 to 70 percent new, and with higher fuel economy, which is what the customer wants.

To set Detroit on the right course toward financial health and high-efficiency vehicles, Warren Brown, automotive writer and "On Wheels" columnist for The Washington Post, outlined an alternative plan:

Forget this crazy argument about socialism versus the free enterprise system. The bottom line is that we’re socialist when we need to be socialist and we’re free enterprise when that works. Right now, we need to be a little socialist.

Since we’re throwing money around anyhow [to rescue the financial sector], one idea could be federal guarantees of consumer loans [for cars], as long as they are for cars that get at least, let’s say, 35 miles per gallon.

To me, that would help accelerate the development of more fuel-efficient vehicles. But in the United States, we had the problem of making demands for more fuel-efficient vehicles, but doing nothing to encourage the purchase of those vehicles.

So let’s have federal subsidized loans of fuel-efficient vehicles. But there’s a catch. Let’s also have a floor under the price of gasoline. Four dollars a gallon seems to have done the job. It helped consumers make more considered judgments of the kinds of cars and trucks they buy. And it has also had some tangible effect on their driving behavior and fuel-wasting habits on the highway. The bottom line is that consumers need some skin in the game.

Oh, by the way, the Department of Energy today released official gas price figures for the week. The national average is now $2.71, exactly $1 less than the price at the beginning of September.

You can listen to the entire discussion from the Diane Rehm Show at the wamu.org website.

Kite-powered Cargo ship

As known, oil prices are going up and some companies are finding ways to save on this. The DHS cargo company has come out with the kite-powered cargo ship project (that reminds me something of kite-powered). The company that made the SkySails system said that it will help in reducing 30-percent of the oil consumption on a cargo vessel.
Wow 30-percent, that’s a lot, I wondered if I can put a mini version of this kite system on my car, I’m sure it saves more.

[via New Launches]

Cutting Weight: How Much Gas Does it Save?

Traverse City, Michigan—The change in consumers’ car choices over the last few months has rocked every automaker, import as well as domestic. Toyota’s Bob Carter illustrated the change today with a single, stark statistic: In May and June, more than 50% of the vehicles sold in the U.S. were fitted with four-cylinder engines—for the first time in history, or at least since WW2.

But lost amidst talk of hybrids, plug-in hybrids, full electric vehicles, and techniques like gasoline direct injection, is a simple fact of physics: The greater the weight, the more energy it takes to move.

Or put another way, cutting vehicle weight saves gas. And despite idealistic notions of an entire nation driving Honda Fits, it won’t happen—too many people really do need midsize, full-size, or truck-based vehicles.

So what’s the actual impact of cutting weight? On Tuesday, Michael Bull, director of technology at Novelis Corporation, presented data from two studies that quantified the fuel savings from a given weight reduction.

The first study, conducted by respected British design and consulting firm Ricardo, looked at the fuel savings in different vehicle classes from reducing weight by 10 percent—while keeping performance comparable. The study showed that a 10-percent weight reduction would cut fuel consumption 3 to 4 percent using the same engine. But the savings rose to 6 to 7 percent if the engine was downsized for the lighter weight—and those numbers stayed constant across most vehicle classes, and applied equally to gasoline and diesel engines.

Aluminum is the traditional way to cut weight from a metal body structure. For a midsize car, making “closure panels” (doors, hood, trunk) out of the lighter metal can save 140 lbs, or about 4 percent. Substituting aluminum for major parts of the car’s “body in white,” or base structure, takes savings to 470 pounds, or 12%—and downsizing the drivetrain for the lower weight brings the total reduction to 17 or 18 percent. That improves fuel consumption by 11 or 12 percent.

A second study, from Ibis, then compared the cost-effectiveness of different tactics for reducing weight, comparing gasoline, diesel, and hybrid drivetrains in both steel and aluminum vehicles. With the steel vehicle as the baseline, increasing the aluminum content of the structure cost $44 per unit of mileage—but adding hybrid drive to the steel vehicle cost $259 per mileage unit, with a diesel engine coming in at $192. Combining an aluminum structure with the hybrid drive reduced the cost per mileage unit to $173, and it fell further to $104 with a diesel engine in the aluminum structure.

In other words, cutting weight may be a more cost-effective way to save fuel than adding hybrid-electric drive. In reality, new fuel-economy regulations and carbon constraints will most likely encourage automakers to combine several techniques in the same vehicle.

But it’s noteworthy that Ford—whose CEO formerly worked at Boeing, where every ounce mattered in its products—has cited weight reduction as one of its five core strategies for sustainability. Even more significant, last month Toray Industries, Nissan, and Honda agreed to work together on developing carbon fiber for auto bodies, with the goal of replacing most of the steel in a car body—for a projected weight savings of 40 percent.

Car Owners may rake in $2,000 to ditch gas guzzlers

Do you think Archie would trade his trusty old jalopy for new shiny wheels even if the government gave him £1,000 ($2,000)? Incentives and cash is what the British Government plans on offering its citizens to dump old fuel inefficient cars. Apparently a similar scheme is up in France and the Brits want experiment it on their public. Due to the increase vehicle excise duty for people owning cars bought between 2001 and 2006, the citizens have been criticizing the government. More than one million people will see their road tax double and offering people money to switch vehicles may be the right option.Just to let you know, Texas motorists can receive vouchers worth more than $3,500 towards a hybrid car if a polluting vehicle is ditched. From next year, Canadians will get $300 or subsidized bicycles or public transport.

SHIFT: Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are a fraud

Who wouldn’t like the idea of a fuel cell car running on clean, pure hydrogen, the universe’s most plentiful element? Its byproduct is sparkling, drinkable water, with none of that pesky pollution spewing out the tailpipe. And then if there's any energy left over when you're done driving, why, you could use that car's fuel cell to power your house! We can get rid of gasoline! And fuel cells, hey, they use those in spacecraft, don't they? This is some modern stuff, and at first glance, hydrogen appears to be a viable solution to all our energy problems.

Well, think again. Hydrogen fuel cell cars are a dumb idea, and those who are pushing them are frauds. They want to advance their own agendas, and couldn’t care less whether their cars are practical or not. They just want to make more money. In fact, their tired ideas for fuel cell vehicles have already been left in the dust by electric and hybrid vehicles, and there are a lot of good reasons why.


Not for Sale
Fuel cell cars are available today. But wait, you can’t really buy the Honda FCX Clarity — you must rent it for $600 a month. Why? Because if this wasn’t a publicity stunt, you’d have to buy the FCX for its real cost. The car makers are secretive about how much it's costing to build these vehicles, but you can bet it's well into the hundreds of thousands of dollars apiece.

To give you an idea, mass producing a fuel cell-powered bus is going to cost $200,000 extra just for the engine, according to its designers at Caltech and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Pretty good, though, considering that just two years ago, the average cost of a fuel cell vehicle was a cool million dollars.

This huge cost issue is just the tip of this expensive iceberg. While some companies that are seeking funding for their fuel cell vehicle schemes say otherwise, the cars are notoriously impractical. I smell boondoggle.



Is Hydrogen a Fuel?
No, hydrogen is not really a fuel, but an energy storage medium. It's more akin to a battery that soaks up energy when it’s extracted from something else, and then delivers that energy when it’s used. And, it takes a lot of energy to create that hydrogen. The energy must come from other sources, such as natural gas, or elaborate electrolysis using platinum membranes that separate the hydrogen and oxygen in water, using, um, electricity. What? Using electricity to make hydrogen that's then turned back into electricity? Yes, it’s the laws of physics at work, where you have to put in energy to get some out. So you must use electricity or gas (or maybe solar energy) to make this stuff. So yeah, it works like a battery, except a whole lot more expensive. Why not just charge up an electric car instead?


Can’t we just mine hydrogen from the ground?
No, there's no such thing as a hydrogen well. It doesn’t just gather in one place like oil or natural gas does, but quickly dissipates into the atmosphere because of its simple atomic structure. Because of that number-one position on the periodic table, hydrogen is difficult to store and corrodes pipes. It’s a clever escape artist, and can even slip between the molecules of steel or aluminum containers. So hydrogen can't be stored long-term — it must be created on the spot by stripping it from other molecules.

These fuel cell cars need four times the volume to store an amount of energy equal to that of gasoline. Even though the energy-generating equivalent of hydrogen is lighter than its gasoline counterpart, you need a 60 gallon tank to store the same amount of energy that’s in 15 gallons of gasoline. These cars won’t go far before it’s time for more hydrogen.


Where will you get that hydrogen?
The oil companies would like to provide the infrastructure for such a “hydrogen economy.” The oil companies say to you, "No, don’t use electricity from your house to charge up that electric vehicle — depend on the oil company’s filling stations to get where you want to go, as you’ve always done."

Good luck with that, though, because so far there’s just one retail hydrogen station in the U.S. (run by, you guessed it, an oil company), far short of the thousands needed to make this hydrogen economy anything more than a pipe dream. The other experimental stations are nothing but showboat propaganda fronts that expend far more energy than they create. Anyway, the oil companies would be happy to invest in that costly infrastructure, because they know they'll get their money back. But it'll be coming out of your hide, just like it always has.


Plenty of Guff
There are a variety of impractical ideas for using hydrogen to propel cars, but they're years — and maybe even decades — from being cost-effective. Most of these schemes seem to suspiciously somehow involve the oil companies keeping their greedy paws in the “hydrogen economy.” To give you an idea, one great proponent of the “hydrogen economy” is energy expert, former oilman and conservation guru George W. Bush.


Somewhere Over the Rainbow
We're all for innovation, but the fantasy of cost-effective hydrogen fuel cell vehicles is just a distraction from the real work that needs to be done: perfecting electric and hybrid natural gas/electric vehicles, charged by electricity generated by clean and renewable nuclear, solar, wind, geothermal and hydroelectric power. These technologies are here now, and the associated batteries are getting more efficient at a rate that’s significantly faster than the snail's pace of impractical fuel cell technology. Maybe someday hydrogen fuel cells will be practical for personal vehicles, but not today, and not for a long time to come. Don’t be fooled by the self-serving frauds that keep trying to tell you otherwise.

California consumes more petrol than China and India

The growing wealth and prosperity of the APAC region especially China and India was a cause of worry for Mr George Bush, because according to him the increased consumption of fuel, food and natural resources were driving global commodity prices up. But little did Mr Bush know that even after a decade of strong economic growth China consumes less fuel than California, hell except for the US, California alone uses more gasoline than any country in the world. Its surprising for a state with 36 million people to consume 20 billion gallons of fuel which is more than a nation of 1 billion, India. With an average median household income of $54,000 compared to India's puny $1000 how a single Californian consume more transportation fuel than 30 Indians makes sense. But again in Asia masses use compressed natural gas, mass transportation, bicycles or good old walking to get around. In California, it's not unusual for a family of four to have four vehicles, and for each member to drive his or her own separate way, every day!

But China's oil thirst is growing -- to almost 20 billion gallons in 2007 -- and perhaps as early as this year, China's 1.3 billion people will overtake California's 37 million people in total gasoline and diesel usage.

Why Can't Our Cars Get Better Mileage?

One reason is that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration underestimates the price of gas.

Pricey Gas: Photo by iStockphoto

In April, the U.S. Secretary of Transportation proposed new CAFE (corporate average fuel economy) standards that would increase the average efficiency of passenger cars and light trucks by 4.5 percent per year from 2011 to 2015. A lot of people wondered why the federal government wasn't aiming higher.

One reason became clear when the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) released its Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the new standards last week. Buried in the 414-page report is a "sensitivity analysis" of the economic costs and benefits that would result from raising fuel economy standards. For this analysis, NHTSA relied on a "high-case" gasoline price of $3.37 per gallon for the years 2011-2015, and a "low-case" scenario of $2.04 per gallon. These prices came from the U.S. Energy Information Administration's "Annual Energy Outlook 2008 Early Release."

By underestimating gas prices, NHTSA also underestimated consumer demand for fuel-efficient vehicles. And that is one of the factors that led the agency to conclude that it would not be feasible to raise CAFE standards to more than 35.7 mpg for passenger cars by 2015, and 28.6 mpg for light trucks.

NHTSA says it will reconsider its analysis if the Energy Information Administration raises its estimates. For now, though, the price at the pump doesn't seem to matter.

2008 BMW Z0 hydrogen car

The 2008 BMW Z0 hydrogen car concept is designed by Romanian fresh industrial design graduates Andrei Avarvarii (exterior design) and Adrian Vasiliu (interior design). It is powered by 1.6 liter hydrogen L4 engine, generating 200 hp @ 8000 rpm, boosts from 0-62 mph at 4 seconds and capable of reaching a top speed of 136 mph. Continue reading for more pictures.

As the name suggests the car is intended as the smallest sports car produced by BMW. The “0” number signifies that the vehicle is reduced to the essence and it has zero harmful emissions.

Specs:

• Body: CFRP chassis with GRP and aluminum body parts
• Powertrain Layout: FR
• Estimated kerb weight: 450 kg (992 lbs)
• Length: 4384 mm (172.5 in)
• Width: 1990 mm (78.3 in)
• Heigth: 1130 mm (44.5 in)
• Wheelbase: 2631 mm (103.5)
• Wheel track: 1730 mm (68.1)
• Engine: Hydrogen fueled 1.6 liter DOHC turbo L4
• Power: 200 bhp @ 8000 rpm
• Torque 220 Nm @ 2500-5000 rpm
• Transmission: 6+1 MT
• Suspension: McPherson (front), Multilink (rear)
• Brakes: 350 mm (13.7 in) drilled discs (front), 300 mm (11.8 in) drilled discs (rear)
• Tires: 255/50 ZR19
• 0-100 kmh (0-60 mph): 4s
• Top speed: 220 kmh (136 mph)
  

[via Serious Wheels]

Out-of-Gas Emergency Calls in Texas up by 53% this Year

Now here’s a good one; according to Allstate Motor Club, the number of Texan drivers who have been stranded on the highway with an empty gas tank has risen 53% during the first five months of 2008 compared to last year. In all, from January through May 2008, 506 Texan drivers have called the motor club to deliver them gas. The worst month was by far May with a record 140 out-of-gas calls across the state!

"We can't directly correlate this rise in the number of people running out of gas to the rise in prices at the pump, but we know that consumers are trying hard to stretch their dollar and sometimes that means stretching fuel into fumes," said Evelyn Murphy, an Allstate Exclusive Agent in Austin. "Drivers should remember running out of gas on the highway can be a lot more than an inconvenience, it can be hazardous."

We can’t agree more. You’re better off paying a few more bucks at the petrol station than paying who knows what if knock on wood, something happens on the highway…

Pic: Carscoop

Green Basics: Hybrid-Electric Cars

Ed. note: This is now the fifth post in the Green Basics series of posts that TreeHugger is writing to provide basic information about important ideas, materials and technologies for new greenies (or those who just need a quick refresher). Read on and stay tuned!

One of the most symbolic and popular symbols of the "green" movement is the hybrid-electric car, known better as simply the hybrid car. These vehicles extend the functionality of traditional internal combustion engines by combining them with a battery-powered electric motor, which takes some of the work off the combustion engine's hands. This allows the cars similar performance to a comparable conventional car with a much smaller gasoline engine, and an overall increase in fuel efficiency. Contrary to what some people think, these hybrid cars do not need to be plugged in to charge up the batteries.

Honda's Insight was the first hybrid car made commercially available in the US

The on-board batteries in hybrid cars are recharged by capturing the kinetic energy created when using the brakes (commonly referred to as "regenerative braking"), and some hybrids use the combustion engine to generate electricity by spinning an electrical generator to either recharge the battery or directly feed power to an electric motor that drives the vehicle.

The Toyota Prius is the best-selling hybrid in the US

Generally, there are two kind of hybrid cars: full hybrids and mild hybrids. Full hybrid systems allow both the gasoline engine and electric motor to provide power to the wheels; often, this allows the vehicle to shut down the gasoline engine when stopped at a red light, and to start driving the car on electric power only. The hybrid systems available from Toyota, Lexus and Ford employ this technology. Mild hybrids, by contrast, use the electric motor primarily to boost the performance of the gasoline engine, when it needs extra power; this technology is seen most often in the hybrids sold by General Motors. In the mild hybrid vehicles available today, most use what's known as a Stop/Start hybrid system, which shuts the gasoline engine off at idle (like at a red light) and instantly starts it up again on demand (like when the light turns green and you hit the accelerator). For a full explanation of the differences between full and mild hybrids, see this article at HybridCars.com.

There are currently eight hybrid cars available: Toyota Prius, Toyota Camry, Honda Accord, Honda Civic, Lexus GS 450h, Lexus LS 600h L, Saturn Aura Green Line and Nissan Altima; the Honda Insight has been retired, but many are still on the road. Additionally, there are five hybrid SUVs and minivans available: Toyota Highlander, Lexus RX 400h, Ford Escape, Mercury Mariner and Saturn Vue Green Line. A handful of other hybrid cars, SUVs, minivans and pick-up trucks are expected to go into production and be available in the next two or three years.

Here's an illustration of the basic operation of a hybrid car

All of the hybrid cars available today are considered "parallel hybrids," for the ability of both the electric motor and gasoline engine to provide power to the wheels. A "series hybrid," by contrast, uses the gasoline engine to turn an electric generator, which then either powers the car or charges on-board batteries. As such, the gasoline engine is not used to make the car go. The Chevy Volt, the much-hyped concept car from General Motors, is such a hybrid, though as HybridCars.com notes, "The folks from GM don't want to use the term 'series hybrid' to refer to their Chevy Volt concept vehicle (for marketing purposes), but that's what it is."

Taken as a whole, hybrids offer a mixed bag of issues, when it comes to their environmental considerations. They offer greater fuel efficiency and fewer greenhouse gas and particular emissions than conventional cars, but still run on gasoline, a finite and (some say) diminishing resource. They represent a technological step forward, but cost more money to buy and ultimately maintain than conventional cars. The electric batteries offer a way to power a car without using gasoline, but add weight to the car (reducing its efficiency) and are very costly (both financially and environmentally) to produce and dispose of. Green car enthusiasts generally accept hybrids as a positive step forward in greener personal transportation, but not as a long-term solution for a greener future.

In addition to the Chevy Volt series hybrid mentioned above, the next development in hybrid cars is likely to be the "plug-in hybrid electric vehicle" (PHEV), which has a larger battery pack more capable of powering the vehicle on its own, without the need of the gasoline engine, for a number of miles. Though not required, these cars can be plugged in to help charge up the batteries; stay tuned for a future "Green Basics" column, all about plug-in hybrids.

There are lots of resources for further reading; check out Wikipedia, hybridcars.com and hybrid-car.org to get started. Here at TreeHugger, have a peek at our Cars + Transportation category for more, or type "hybrid" into the search engine above to dig in to our coverage of hybrids.

by Collin Dunn, Corvallis, OR, USA

Why the U.S. Is Not Addicted to Oil, or How PHEVs Can Help Solve the Energy Crisis

In 2006, President Bush announced to the world that we were addicted to oil.

Given the President’s track record and horribly failed energy policies, I didn’t really buy what he was trying to sell. The fact is, I could write an entire book about why his declaration to wean ourselves off oil (which was made more than two years ago) doesn’t quite match up with the administration’s continued agenda of impeding the growth of promising alternatives.

But let’s face it: In these pages, I’d just be preaching to the choir. And my intention is not to tell you something you already know, but rather share with you the information and data that I use on a regular basis to validate the economic superiority of alternatives to fossil fuels.

And that’s why I’m asking you today…

Are we really addicted to oil?


The word addiction indicates that we have a compulsive physiological and psychological need for oil, as if it were cigarettes or caffeine. When you wake up in the morning, do you crave oil? Do you need it to get through the day?

It is true that, without oil, we don’t have gasoline. And without gasoline, how the heck are most folks supposed to get to work, school, or even the grocery store? The fact is that many Americans don’t live within walking distance of their workplaces, shopping districts and schools. So assuming your car runs on gasoline (a safe assumption to make), your oil requirement may be a real one.

But does this necessarily qualify as an addiction? Or is this merely a case of having a lack of options? In other words, if your car ran on something other than gasoline or diesel – something that was actually cheaper and better for the environment – would you still shell out $4.00 a gallon to fill your car with 87 Octane?

Is the idea that we are "addicted" to oil conspiratorial nonsense or good business?
It has long been suspected that Big Oil and the major automakers have spent millions on strategic suppression and misinformation campaigns regarding alternatives to oil and the internal combustion engine. Some consider this to be nothing more than conspiratorial nonsense, others consider it good business.

Either way, as oil prices continue to rise and the truth about the economic shortcomings of the oil industry are exposed by the marketplace, alternatives to oil and the conventional internal combustion engine are now surfacing. And just like so many investors made fortunes in oil and auto manufacturing, we’re going to do the same with the first validated alternative transportation market that will eventually force auto manufacturers to embrace the future–-or fall victim to it.

Commuters are being backed into a corner
There are certainly a number of alternative transportation technologies in existence today. But what we see as the best near-term solution for both consumers and investors is the Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV).

PHEVs exist right now. The infrastructure exists right now. The vehicles exist right now. And some of these things are delivering in excess of 100 miles per gallon.

Kind of puts that whole greenwash of the updated CAFE standard in perspective.

While the bureaucrats in Washington have patted themselves on the back for requiring a fuel-efficiency standard of 35 miles per gallon by 2020, there are companies--heck, there are just regular people--building PHEVs that can double, even triple that.

So why are we really only starting to hear about this stuff now?

Because there’s finally a market for it.

The daily commuting population in the United States is being backed into a corner.

Heck, just a few days ago, the American Public Transportation Association released a report that showed public transit trips from January to March rose 3 percent over the same period last year, and light rail systems saw a 10 percent jump.

Unfortunately, only about 20 percent of U.S. households have easy access to buses or trains. So mass transit, as it stands now, anyway, is not necessarily an option for many people. A sad commentary indeed on how the greater good of the country has been compromised by special interests.

Nonetheless, the PHEV can certainly provide the relief many of these commuters need from higher gasoline prices.

Why?

Because many of the PHEVs that are being developed today, including conversions, can deliver at least 30 “all-electric” miles on one charge.

That’s 30 miles without using a single drop of gasoline!

Since the average commute for a U.S. driver is 29 miles per day (according to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics), that 30-mile range is more than sufficient. And imagine, just for a moment, the impact this would have on the entire U.S. commuting population.

What is the real cost of oil?
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, there are 105,046,395 commuters in the United States who drive to work, alone, in their cars, vans, or trucks. Assuming all the passenger cars driving 29 miles per day delivered 27.5 miles per gallon (CAFE for passenger cars as of December, 2007—before the CAFE upgrade was mandated), these typical commuters will blow through 1.05 gallons per day.

Based on our 105,046,395 commuters, you’re looking at a total consumption rate of 110,298,714.75 gallons per day. At an average of $3.97 a gallon (the average cost at the time this post is being written), that’s $437,885,897.56 that hard-working Americans are paying every day—when they don’t have to!

These people aren’t addicted to oil. They just don’t have access to the vehicles that can get them to and from work, everyday, without using the stuff.

But they do exist. And it won’t be much longer until consumers will have the option to purchase these things at their local dealerships. We’re not talking about decades anymore, either. We’re talking about three to four years! And when this happens, you’re going to see the true power of consumers, as their purchasing decisions will reflect the demand for real fuel efficiency—thereby continuing the transition of the personal transportation marketplace.

This is why PHEVs have a real shot at being the first alternative transportation technology to become integrated on a large scale.

Next week, I will take a look at a few of the companies that are developing these PHEVs, and more specifically, the publicly-traded companies that investors are looking at as the most promising long-term investments in this sector.

To a new way of life, and a new generation of wealth…

by Jeff Siegel, Green Chip Stocks

21 ways to save at the gas pump

With the national price for gasoline over four dollars a gallon, many people will have big problems filling their car's gas tank. Americans are now spending about four percent of their take home pay on fuel. Gasoline now rivals the costs that consumers pay for housing and food.

Below is a list of different ways consumers can save at the gas station.

1. Use e85 ethanol - If your car is a flex-fuel compatible car, use e85. E85 is a blend of gasoline that consists of 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline. If you do not have a flex-fuel vehicle, consider using an e85 ethanol conversion kit. Using ethanol supports America and its farmers. Check your car's operation manual to see if your car is a flex-fuel vehicle.
   
2. Use natural curves to slow down - Using the ground to slow your speed seems more like a way to save your brakes. But if you don't use your brakes to slow down, this means you will have to take your foot off the gas pedal sooner when approaching a stop.
   
3. Use cruise control - Using cruise control will keep your car going at a constant speed. When you don't use cruise control, your speed will vary by a few miles an hour as your vehicle travels up and down hills. If you accelerate too much, you waste gas. If you slow down then accelerate again you use more gas. Staying at a constant speed will save on your miles per gallon.
   
4. Follow the speed limits - If you follow posted speed limits, you can improve your fuel economy by 7-23%. Different vehicles vary but gas mileage usually decreases when traveling above 60 miles an hour. Every 5 mph that you drive over 60 miles an hour is basically paying an additional $0.20 per gallon for gasoline.
   
5. Use cash when filling at the pump - Recently, many gas stations have been doing a little bit of underhanded advertising. They advertise a cheaper price on their large billboard, however, when you get to the pump you may see another, more expensive price, ten or so cents. That more expensive price is for people who pay with their credit cards, the cheaper price is for cash payments.
   
6. Keep tires properly inflated - Under-inflated tires can reduce your miles per gallon by 0.4 percent for every psi drop in tire pressure of all the tires. When the tires are properly inflated they are safer and they can last longer. Properly inflated tires add up to 3% to your fuel economy.
   
7. Remove excess weight - If your car has books, golf clubs, tools, clothes etc, take them out of your car. Extra weight means it takes more fuel to get up to speed.
   
8. Keep windows closed - Having the car's windows open all the time while driving creates drag. Drag reduces your car's miles per gallon.
   
9. Get regular oil changes - Having your oil changed every 3000 miles or every three months will help keep your engine well lubricated. A well lubricated engine runs smoother and more efficiently.
   
10. Change your oil and air filters - Aside from improving your gas mileage by up to 10%, changing your filters regularly will help save your engine. Air filters remove and keep out impurities from your engine.
    
11. Have your car tuned up - Keeping your vehicle properly tuned can increase your fuel economy by up to 4%.
    
12. Wax your car - A bit of a stretch since the savings are negligible but keeping your car clean will reduce drag. The smoother the surface, the more aerodynamic.
    
13. Remove roof rack - A roof rack, when loaded, can decrease a vehicle's fuel economy by 5 percent. If the roof rack is not being used, it still can produce drag.
    
14. Do not let your car idle - When you idle your car, you are simply wasting gas. Your car only needs about 30 seconds after it starts for it to be ready to drive.
    
15. Use the correct octane gasoline - Check your car's owners manual. If you are paying for premium gasolines, you may be paying five to thirty cents more a gallon then you need to be. Most cars on the road today needs the lowest octane gasoline. Using anything above that may be a waste since you will not get better gas mileage.
    
16. Use the recommended grade of motor oil - Using your car's recommended grade of motor oil will increase your fuel economy by up to 2%.
    
17. Use fuel injector cleaner - Regular fuel injector treatments allows your car to clean its fuel injectors. Clogged fuel injectors means the gas does not burn as efficiently as it should so your car will require more to counter act the inefficiency.
    
18. Use public transportation - If you pay taxes, you are paying for it anyway. Using buses and trains is much more friendly to the environment. However, it will reduce your gasoline budget but it may raise other costs.
    
19. Walk, run, bike etc. - Short trips in the car may be unnecessary. If you're driving around the block, try walking. It will save you gas and it will improve your health.
    
20. Carpool - If you can find one other person to drive to your school or place of work, you improve your fuel economy by 50%. If you find three other people, you fuel economy improves 66%. And so on.
    
21. Do one stop shopping - Don't drive from store to store. The constant stopping and starting will waste gas.

Estimates for tune ups, fuel savings from vehicle maintenance, full roof racks, keeping tires properly inflated, using the recommended grade of motor oil, and speed limits are based on studies and literature reviews performed by Energy and Environmental Analysis, Inc., Washington, DC.

Air filter savings based on Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 1981. Automobile Fuel Consumption in Actual Traffic Conditions. Paris, France. Tests were performed before the introduction of computer-controlled, fuel-injection engines. The Department of Energy is currently researching the fuel economy effects of clogged air filters on modern engines.

Electric Cars: They Need Gas

Here's an idea: Let's put a battery in a car and skip all that business with gasoline. We plug it in, charge it at home at night and run it all day. Has anyone thought of this? Well, yes--a long time ago.

Electric cars have been around in some form for about a century. They have a little problem, however. No battery is powerful enough to push 3,000 pounds far enough to make the electric vehicle worth $30,000. Battery-operated motors work in golf carts, in factory forklifts and in some buses that have room for lots of batteries under the floor and that never stray very far from recharging plugs at their base stations. They do not work in all-purpose passenger vehicles.

Fans of electric cars argue that people drive on average only 20 to 40 miles a day and that we can build one that will run that far, enough to take you to work and back. But we don't pay $30,000 just to go to work and back. We buy cars because they are versatile tools. They will take us to work and also from New York to California. They will carry 1,000 pounds of people inside and 500 pounds of stuff in the trunk or cargo area. They will run across the Mojave Desert, and, as I have said here before, when your kid turns blue at 2 a.m. on the coldest morning of the year, that car will start and get you to the hospital. That's why it is worth $30,000.

When you begin subtracting what that car can do, it loses value. If a car's only utility is "it will get you to work and back," then it's not worth much at all, because any junker can do that.

Ignoring where the plug-in electricity would come from, electric cars would be wonderful if they could get that oil monkey off our back and end tailpipe pollution forever. Despite some progress on the technology, they are not coming all that soon.

Auto companies are betting on lithium ion batteries. These will push a car 40 miles or 200 miles, depending on who is bragging. Renault/Nissan has committed to building an electric car in volume for Israel, with charging stations across the country. The company also says it will sell a few in the U.S. and Japan by 2010 and be in serious production two years later.

The trouble is that no one has yet demonstrated that lithium ion systems are viable in a real world, mass market automobile. These batteries still produce too much heat and are costly. Israel's small size finesses the range limitation of electric vehicles. Nissan (nasdaq: NSANY - news - people ) hopes to fix the problem with how long it takes to recharge the batteries with a removable battery pack that an attendant could swap out at an electric fueling station. The car owner never owns the battery power pack but pays a monthly charge.

Still, Nissan, which has talked of an electric car range of 124 miles, now says it is thinking of "range extender auxiliary engines." That sounds as if the company is backing off pure electrics and into the direction of plug-in hybrids. The Nissan idea of removable battery packs is interesting, but get serious. How long will it take the Israeli station jockey to put down his cellphone and get to the job? In this country, fuel stations are usually self-service.

General Motors (nyse: GM - news - people ) also aims to have its plug-in hybrid electric car, the Chevy Volt, ready in 2010, or near that date. A lithium-ion battery pack runs the vehicle 40 miles or so, and when it runs out of stored electricity a small gasoline engine goes on and powers a generator that creates electricity that powers the wheels. Drivers can recharge the batteries at home at night.

Existing hybrids, such as the Toyota (nyse: TM - news - people ) Prius, have electric motors and small batteries but really run on their gasoline engines for the most part. Their point is not powering the car off the electric grid but rather reclaiming the energy wasted in stoplight idling and braking. To help prolong battery life, these hybrids never fully discharge or recharge the battery. Toyota, however, promises a plug-in hybrid that will recharge at night too.

Problems: Lithium battery packs probably will cost $5,000 or more, and range numbers are all over the lot. Rumor has the Chevy Volt, not in production yet, costing $40,000. Remember, too, cars must run perfectly. Rebooting at 60 miles per hour could mean crashing into a highway post.

You probably have read of other electric cars from small companies. Most are like big golf carts, but there is a real car here and there. The best known is from Tesla Motors, which boasts that its $109,000 two-seat sports car will have a range of 220 miles. A car-magazine tester drove a Tesla for 90 miles. That is not bad, but battery people question the system's reliability. I recall honest efforts by true believers from Preston Tucker to William Lear (the Lear (nyse: LEA - news - people ) Jet), who tried to build a steam car. There is so much that can go wrong.

Electric cars just are not here yet. Range, reliability and cost are still problems. Few readers of this column will ever own one. But maybe, someday, these cars will make sense.

by: Jerry Flint

Oil eases as gas rises to new high

Oil slipped in Asia on Tuesday, but traders saying prices could climb higher amid concerns over supplies, growing global demand and other geopolitical issues.

Crude futures pulled back Monday from last week’s record highs, falling $4.19 to $134.35 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange, after the dollar strengthened and Saudi Arabia voiced willingness to meet any increase in demand.

Late Tuesday afternoon in Singapore, light, sweet crude for July delivery was down 31 cents at $134.04 a barrel. Earlier, it rose above $135.

Gas prices. Retail gas prices edged 2 cents higher to a record $4.043 a gallon on average nationwide, according to auto industry group AAA. That’s 9% higher than last month and more than 31% higher than last year.

Gas prices are now $4 a gallon or higher in 23 states and the District of Columbia, according to AAA.

Supply concerns. “The market is taking a breather after the very sharp gain last week but it’s undeniable we have a strong uptrend in the oil markets. The market is still prone to further price spike,” said Victor Shum, an energy analyst with Purvin & Gertz in Singapore.

Shum said supplies could be hit if the current Atlantic hurricane season hurts production in the Gulf of Mexico. There are also still jitters over an Israeli cabinet minister’s warning of an attack on Iran if it didn’t halt its nuclear program, which sent oil prices sharply up Friday, he said.

That prospect appeared to dissipate over the weekend as Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert distanced himself from the comments and other officials noted that the minister had not been expressing official government policy.

“Given the sharp gains we have seen, a further spike to the $150 level is possible,” Shum said.

The jump began Thursday after European Central Bank President Jean-Claude Trichet suggested the bank could increase interest rates in July to counter rising inflation. That sent the dollar falling against the euro. Some investors buy commodities such as oil as a hedge against a weakening dollar.

Crude futures surged 8% Friday, touching an all-time high of $139.12 a barrel in after-hours trading.

Prices retreated Monday after the dollar improved against the euro on comments by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson that he would not rule out intervention to stabilize the U.S. currency. The euro fell to $1.5572 in Asian trading Tuesday from $1.5651 late Monday in New York.

Oil meeting. Saudi Arabia also called for a meeting of oil-producing countries after saying the current price of oil was unjustified. A Saudi minister said the kingdom would work with OPEC to “guarantee the availability of oil supplies now and in the future.”

Other factors supporting oil prices included an explosion last week at a natural gas production facility in Australia, which boosted demand for diesel by that country’s mining sector, said Addison Armstrong, director of market research at Tradition Energy in Stamford, Connecticut.

In Nigeria, a major U.S. oil supplier, a strike later this week could take 450,000 barrels in daily oil supplies off the market, Armstrong said. Both events highlight how tight oil supplies are.

Friday’s sharp $10.75 jump in oil prices had some of the hallmarks of a “blow-off top,” Armstrong said, or a rapid, explosive run-up in prices that’s followed by steep declines. Still, it’s far to early to tell for sure.

“You never know you’ve been in a bubble until it’s gone,” Armstrong added.

In other Nymex trading, heating oil futures rose 4.5 cents to $3.8815 a gallon. However, gasoline prices dipped 4 cents to $3.39 a gallon while natural gas futures shed 4 cents to $12.6 per 1,000 cubic feet.

July Brent crude fell 54 cents to $133.41 a barrel on the ICE Futures Exchange.

How to Monitor Your Fuel Economy in Real Time on the Road

Tinkering with new mpg monitoring gadgets (not the “mega-efficient” gas savers he's debunked time and again), PM's senior auto editor reminds us of maybe the most obvious—if overlooked—advice when it comes to today's hell at the pump: Believe you can save gas, and you will. Pick up a cheap toy for the garage, change your driving habits, and you'll see more efficiency on your very next trip.

Mike's getting instant MPG readouts on the new ScanGauge gadget he hooked up to his motorcycle By Mike Allen

With gas hitting a national average of $4 a gallon, everyone's been talking about how to improve fuel economy—myself included, be it for taking summer road trips or avoiding goofy (and expensive) gas-saving gadgets. But how do we know if the fuel economy we're getting is accurate, whether we're driving an unmodified car—or one equipped with a supposed miracle product?

On the road, most drivers just read the trip odometer and divide by the amount of gas they purchase. Simple enough, eh? Sure is, but that doesn't account for differences in the driving cycle during each individual tankful. And that can vary an enormous amount. Of course, over a few tankfuls, the variances will average out, right? Not exactly. Your vehicle will get poorer fuel economy during the winter. That's because of the increased electrical use for lights, wipers, heat and longer warmups—not to mention the extra drag caused by moving snow and slush out of the way of the tires. Spring and fall are good, but A/C use can certainly cause a mileage hit during the hot summer months.

In the back-and-forth my weekly repair Q&A, one reader described to me his supposedly foolproof method for checking mileage—and subsequently the accuracy of his gas-saver gadget. It goes like this: He drove a delivery van on the exact same route twice a day. So he topped off the tank one morning, and drove the route like he normally does. He then installed a pretty pricey magnet (over $100) on the fuel line during his lunch hour, topped off the tank and drove the route again that afternoon. His mileage increased 12 percent, thereby proving his gadget worked. Right?

Well, even this sharp reader failed to account for the fact that in the cool morning temperatures, his fuel tank was also cooler and denser. It took a certain amount of fuel to fill the tank from the day before. And as he drove his route, the fuel heated up and expanded, largely because fuel pumps work continuously. Even then, only the excess fuel (heated up as it passes through the engine compartment) is returned to the tank. Consequently, it took a smaller amount of fuel to fill his tank. So he made the afternoon run with a warmer tank ... which he didn't refill until the next morning when the tank was cool. That cooler fuel had shrunk, making it appear that he had used less.

At my suggestion, our dear reader repeated the cycle with the magnet installed only during the afternoon runs. His results, it turned out, were very different. I had a feeling they would be.

But there's a whole lot more going on here. I'd argue that the mere expectation of increased mileage will actually make your mileage increase. I've seen it happen a thousand times: If you know the fuel economy and a gas-saving gadget are under scrutiny, you'll accelerate smoother—and probably drive a bit slower, too. I call it “voodoo mileage.” To find accurate results, a driver must remain ignorant not only to how much fuel is being consumed, but also to the entire experiment. It would have to be a true double-blind study.

Here at PM, we report fuel economy numbers on our long-term fleet by averaging the economy over a period of some months, and from a number of our staff's driving experiences. When we do a comparison test, we'll drive all of the vehicles on the same day, at the same time, at the same pace, on a several-hundred-mile loop. We even swap drivers every half-hour to equalize driving styles.

There are some tech tricks you can use to help monitor your fuel economy as you drive. I'm fooling around with a couple of devices right now. I just installed a Scangauge on my motorcycle. This $180 device plugs into the On Board Diagnostic System (OBD II) port under the dash of virtually any post-1996 car or light truck. It operates as a scan tool (much more on that here), so it gives me trouble codes and streaming data, but it also works as an electronic gauge cluster and trip computer. I can track battery voltage, coolant temp and sundry while tooling down the interstate. But one feature is invaluable: the instantaneous fuel economy readout. It gets fuel quantity data from the injection timing—the longer the injectors are open, the more fuel they squirt. It's amazingly accurate, too.

And I've just started tinkering with another gadget with some similar features: the CAMP2 from HKS. It's a scan tool/gauge package/trip computer like the Scangauge, but it uses either the car's internal dashboard display or an aftermarket TV screen of any sort. It's intended to be professionally installed, but I've made a portable enclosure that I can suction-cup to the windscreen with RAM mounts. Unlike the Scangauge, the CAMP 2 has a graphic display that can be configured to reflect a dizzying number of parameters available from the vehicle's OBD II system. Input the car's weight, and you can even get an instantaneous horsepower indication. You can look at raw numbers, or at a simple analog-style gauge with a moving needle. But my favorite is the display that gives you something looking more like an oscilloscope trace, showing you what any given engine parameter is for the last few seconds or minutes—including rewind capability, so you can review after you've pulled over to a safe place.

If you'd like to alter your driving style to achieve high fuel economy, these devices are unparalleled. The slightest upgrade, downgrade or movement of your right foot leaves a dent or a bump in the economy trace. I've only begun to investigate its potential, so stay tuned.

Don't feel like dropping hundreds of dollars for one of these high-tech gadgets? Pick up an old-fashioned vacuum gauge at the local parts store. Monitoring manifold vacuum as you drive around will give you a fairly clear picture of your instantaneous fuel economy. BMW models have had a vacuum gauge integrated into the instrument panel for generations—it's simply labeled in miles per gallon instead of inches of vacuum. Higher manifold vacuum means higher mileage—the needle will sink alarmingly as you open the throttle, which will soon teach you to featherfoot. That's good advice, because altering your driving style is probably the least expensive and most effective gas saver of all.