In return for $34 billion from Congress, the Big Three are pledging to go green faster.
Plug-in electric hybrids, all-electric vans are in our future, the car makers say, if only they can get to the future.
One problem. Before the future can get here, Detroit will need to sell a lot of cars.
University of Maryland Professor Peter Morici, a manufacturing expert and skeptic of the Big Three, says you should not expect we'll all be driving that spiffy Chevy Volt electric car right away.
Morici says "General Motors has to produce and sell three and a half million cars a year. They'll likely sell 100,000 Volts. The future of the automobile industry for the next five years will be centered around making the internal combustion engine more efficient than it is."
Some ways to make the internal combustion engine more efficient: Stop-start technology that switches the engine off at stop lights and back on the moment you touch the gas pedal. Braking technology that recaptures energy. More efficient valves.
Technologies that are almost ready for market could improve fuel efficiency by 30%. Which may be enough to get us to the day when we don't need the internal combustion engine at all.
Comments
I just read a same article in GreenBizSite.
The good thing about fuel efficiency from a sales point of view is that when consumers are looking to upgrade to a new vehicle it could be a factor in making a buying decision. If there was a significant increase in efficiency then there would be more reason to buy especially with unpredictable fuel prices. Alternative fuels are a good idea whose benefits far outweigh the costs. Brazil and Argentina have been using them for a long time already. It is important to have sustainable income for farmers as well, who benefit from having the option of growing energy crops. Farmers have been long facing difficult times and energy crops may help save many of them while at the same time keeping the domestic food supply sustainable. Alternative fuels could be used in power plants as well to produce electricity.
The one greatly overlooked factoid of this economy is the never spoken of "Need Index". I have two Fords - one a 93 and the other a 98. They actually get better gas mileage than many cars Ford and GM sell now. Most of us do not need a new car. I was at my Ford dealer lot the other day and you'd never guess Ford is in trouble. From 15 ft away I could see stickers starting at $32,500...prior to the taxes, shipping, etc. One big selling point is "Hey! Please note you can plug your iPod into this slot!" Over at the GM lot not far away they had hybrid SUVs... 17mpg! The way things look what we really require is a program to retrain UAW workers to do other things. What the public is finding out via this massive recession is that they really do not need most of the stuff they once thought they had to buy. We are finding out we don't need cars as much as we thought.
My first new automobile (Ford) cost $1500.00. My first career position was with Gulf Oil Corporation. Gulf introduced Gulftane brand gasoline and dealers sold it for .17 cents per gallon. The dealer stations were full service and when you pulled up to the pump someone else pumped the gas while they cleaned the wind-shield, checked under the hood for oil and water levels then swept out your car. Today Ford wants $25,000.00+ for a new car; I pay $1.75 for a gallon of gas and pump it myself. Since my first adult experiences in my life, there have been many changes.
While I agree that the anemic housing market is a major challenge in the economy, I hear a large number placed on the home-owners in foreclosure but is anyone looking into why? Is the Mortgage holder more to blame than the homebuyer? Maybe they should be the one taking the loss
The automobile industry needs to be saved but not without a cost to the companies who put themselves into this situation themselves. Give them a bail-out with oversight, tight oversight. Establish a pay-back time line tied in with cost cuts benchmarks. Use some of the monies to establish a centralized lending institution such as the ones they already have (Ford Motor Credit, GMAC, etc.) but with the same tight oversight. The banks will not make loans to the consumer for a new car purchase; let the manufacturers generate their own loans under strict government guidelines. The banks have said no to the consumer market too long while they add unreal charges to the accounts they already have. Let them be the ones going into Chapter 11.
With the high labor costs of the Big Three it is questionable that Detroit can make a profit on the hybrid and electric cars that Congress is so enamored with. The foreign companies have already penetrated this market, and if past is prologue, American consumers will prefer their cars over Detroit's. I just don't see a path to profitablity for Detroit without going through bankruptcy.
Lets hold up a mirror before criticizing Detroit too much. The plight of the auto makers is as much a reflection on consumers and rapidly changing buying habits. Just a few short years ago consumers demanded and bought big powerful gas guzzling trucks, suv's, more than cars. Fuel consumption increased disproportionately, oil and gas prices spiked, and consumers instantly demanded cars that burned less fuel. Combine that with a recession precipitated by an irresponsible home buying credit binge on the part of the public in general. Of course sales are down...domestic and foreign alike. The difference being that foreign auto makers enjoy the advantage of the generous financial support of their home governments.
Giving the automakers a $34B bailout or going through bankruptcy is going to cost taxpayers either way. The bailout is a bargain compared to AIG at $150 billion or Iraq at $1 trillion....and you think we'll see any of that back? I would go with the bailout and preserving jobs at least until the economy picks up.
Technologies that are almost ready for market could improve fuel efficiency by 30%.
Yeah, but technologies that are currently ON THE MARKET improve it even better than 30%. By ignoring recent developments in hybrid and diesel (especially the latter), the Big Three have more or less dug their own grave. I agree about making more 4-cyl B Class cars, but those of us who care about quality would sooner buy a diesel Mini Cooper (which really needs to be made available in the US).
The problem with the US automakers ahs nothing to do with products, but wih labor costs. At $135 per hour, no US automaker can compete. Pelosi and her union-controlled dems are paying off a campaign promise by throwing money at their emploayers. Isn't is odd that pelosi avoids paying other companies to keep them afloat, but claims a disaster wouldoccur if Detroit failed.
Detroit needs Chapter 11 and some labor relief. Giving them money to keep them limping along for a few more years won't help. Neither will making "Green" cars do anything for them. "Green"
cars that they currently produce aren't selling, either. What a joke.
I'm so sick of ''green''. I don't care to go green .... ever. The environmentalists are sick people. There is no global warming, I will not use those nasty light bulbs that are quite dangerous to use and to one's health, I love plastic bags, I want the USA to drill for our own oil, windmills are for Don Quixote (have you ever been near them? The sound they make will drive you nuts (but then you're there already if you believe in them.) They cost a fortune to maintain. I want my big cars back, I sick of the ugly import cars.
Don't talk about new technology to improve fuel economy just yet. To get green, the big three should make higher percentage of smaller 4 cyl cars. Government should imposed extremely higher taxes on big car like the European. Thus consumer will follow the rule of economics and buy smaller car. Good for the consumer and good for the environment as well. We can really reduce dependancy on foreign oil and help in the effort of reducing global warming too.