Green Tech

The European Investment Bank, backed by European Union member states, approved 866 million euros ($1.2 billion) more in loan money to the auto industry on Tuesday.

The loans are specifically directed to "help design and build cleaner cars with lower carbon dioxide emissions," according to an EIB statement.

The package includes 400 million euros ($531 million) to Nissan's European division for the purpose of developing and building more fuel-efficient vehicles in Britain and Spain. Jaguar Land Rover was approved for a loan of 340 million pounds ($499 million) from the EIB to "to help cut vehicle emissions."

"A loan was also approved for a Volkswagen plant in India, which will produce small cars that meet tougher emissions requirements ahead of their introduction in major Indian cities from 2010," according to the EIB.

In December, the European public bank approved of 3.6 billion euros ($4.76 billion) in loans to European truck and car manufacturers. In March, the bank also approved loans to BMW, Renault, and Volvo Trucks.

The EIB on Tuesday said it plans to approve more loans in May and June to other types of companies involved in the auto industry, such as component suppliers.

It's worth noting that Jaguar Land Rover, a subsidiary of Tata Motors, was given a grant worth 27 million pounds--more than $37 million--from the British government in March to mass-produce a "green" crossover vehicle.

First, a confession: I am not much of a car aficionado. I truly appreciate the beauty of sports and luxury cars of different vintages, but when it comes to buying, I think about practicality.

So when I received a media alert on Friday that GM was going to unveil a "revolutionary vehicle to help people move through crowded cities" and solve other urban driving ills, I got excited.

The actual news was a bit of a letdown. GM and Segway showed off a two-wheel prototype vehicle based on Segway's scooter platform that lets two people tool around the city at 35 miles an hour on electric power. GM touted the vehicle's OnStar wireless communications to let people communicate with each other and stay clear of other vehicles.

It's an interesting way to rethink urban transportation. But it doesn't strike me as something that will make a dent on GM's income statement anytime soon.

What I really was hoping for was a GM mini-car. Something that's electric so it reduces in-city pollution. Small so that it can fit into tight spaces and ease congestion. And cheap so people around the world could afford it. That would show some innovation around fuel efficiency and offer proof that GM is serious about weaning itself from selling SUVs and trucks as passenger cars.

In fairness, it's worth noting that electric vehicles are a challenge in urban settings because people typically don't have a garage to plug into. But perhaps the community support automakers are seeking for electric vehicles could take the shape of charging pedestals or municipal fleet purchases.

(Credit: Martin LaMonica/CNET)

We've seen GM tout high-tech solutions before, arguing years ago that fuel cell vehicles were not too far away. GM certainly wasn't alone in that pursuit--which continues today--but hydrogen cars still need major technical breakthroughs to become practical.

The much-touted Chevy Volt, due by the end of next year, has a whiff of this high ambition as well. It's a "no compromise" car with both a battery and an internal combustion engine that will give people "hundreds of miles" of driving range, according to GM executives. An internal combustion engine acts as a battery generator for longer rides. The big battery will give drivers 40 miles on a charge but it takes up the middle of the back seat, making it a four-seater.

The company last week said that the Volt will have clever features like smart charging using its OnStar communication service that will let people schedule charging during off-peak times to potentially get cheaper rates. We can also expect the latest in car gadgetry like multiple displays and digital music services.

A high-volume seller?
Many people are excited by the Volt--the GM-Volt.com Web site, which was started by a Volt enthusiast with no affiliation with GM, has a "want list" of over 47,000 people.

By contrast, government auditors are lukewarm on the Volt platform, which GM plans to use with an Opel sedan in Europe. In its initial findings, the administration's task force said that the Volt was promising but "likely to be too expensive to be commercially viable in the short term."

General Motors hasn't said how much the Volt will cost but executives say that it's already working on a second-generation electric powertrain focused on cutting costs significantly.

Other automakers are placing some or all their bets on the all-electric route. Ford, Toyota, Nissan, Tesla Motors, and Detroit Electric are promising a driving range in the neighborhood of 100 miles or more per charge. In response to a poll I included in an article, over 80 percent of almost 700 readers said that a 100-mile range on batteries suits their needs for either a primary or second car.

Tesla Motors' CEO Elon Musk--who, admittedly, has a strong bias toward pure-electric vehicles--didn't have kind words for the range-extender concept of the Chevy Volt either.

A prototype of a Personal Urban Mobility and Accessibility vehicle, unveiled on Tuesday.

(Credit: GM)

In an interview with GM-Volt.com on Monday, he said that a range-extended electric vehicle is "neither fish nor fowl and ends up being worse (in our opinion) than either a gasoline or pure electric vehicle." Because of technicalities of battery types, the Volt's 40-mile battery pack is roughly half the size of a 200-mile battery pack for an all-electric vehicle, he said.

Certainly, gas-electric hybrids make sense. There are those like the Prius that run mainly on the gas engine and others like the Volt that run all the time in electric mode, augmented by the engine. Bright Automotive this month will unveil a plug-in electric that will get a 100 miles per gallon. Fisker Automotive's forthcoming plug-in electric luxury cars will have a range of 300 miles. Toyota and Ford have both said they expect gas-electric hybrids to be the dominant platform over all-electric vehicles in the years to come.

But for a revolution in city transportation? How about a cheap, small, low-polluting car, even one that's not electric? And why are only auto start-ups participating in the Progressive Automotive X-Prize contest to build a 100-mile-per-gallon car? If 100 miles per gallons is an achievable bar, then incumbent automakers need to learn how to do that profitably.

GM has some very good cars in its portfolio and I have a lot of respect for the people I've interacted with in the past several months writing about GM and electric vehicles.

But when it comes to product design choice, count me as a consumer who is wowed by innovation around fuel efficiency, reliability, and cost rather than the big concepts and bells and whistles. Sometimes high tech comes in a small and simple package.

A PUMA concept vehicle.

(Credit: GM)

General Motors and Segway plan to take a two-wheel concept vehicle for a spin around New York City on Tuesday.

The prototype vehicle, called Project PUMA (Personal Urban Mobility and Accessibility), is designed to ease congestion and pollution problems in cities. It is based on the Segway Personal Transporter but holds two people, instead of one, and lets them sit, instead of stand.

A PUMA runs on lithium ion batteries, can reach 35 miles per hour, and can travel up to 35 miles between charges.

It includes some high-tech touches, including GM's wireless OnStar communications technology that lets a passenger locate other drivers in a city.

The two-wheeler is meant to address the mounting problems of urban car transportation, according to the two companies that plan to unveil the vehicle at an auto show in New York.

GM is touting other features as well.

"Imagine small, nimble electric vehicles that know where other moving objects are and avoid running into them. Now, connect those vehicles in an Internet-like web and you can greatly enhance the ability of people to move through cities, find places to park and connect to their social and business networks," Larry Burns, GM's vice president of R&D and strategic planning, said in a statement.

GM is looking to drum up excitement for its vehicles as it undergoes a massive restructuring in an effort to become financially viable and more competitive with other automakers.

The Segway Personal Transporter, a two-wheel vehicle that allows people to stand and move around at slow speeds, was released with great fanfare several years ago, but it remains a niche form of transportation.

Photos: GM, Segway purr about PUMA

A new campaign to improve automotive fuel efficiency worldwide by 50 percent by the year 2050 was announced at the Geneva Motor Show on Wednesday.

The Global Fuel Economy Initiative and its "50 by 50" campaign has the backing of leaders of four major international organizations: David Ward, director general of the FIA Foundation; Nobuo Tanaka, the executive director of the International Energy Agency; Jack Short, the secretary general of the International Transportation Forum; and Achim Steiner, the executive director of the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP).

Car companies, the "50 by 50" report (PDF) says, must develop car fleets that collectively on average get double the gas mileage they get today, and people must buy them, in order to effectively reduce automotive CO2 emissions and oil consumption.

While the group praised all-electric cars and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles it noted that such advanced technology is not immediately necessary, nor a guarantee of carbon dioxide reductions until countries have cleaner electricity production.

"We have to find ways to reconcile legitimate aspirations for mobility, an ambitious reduction in CO2 from cars worldwide, and global economic recovery. There are opportunities to combine support for the industry with measures to achieve governments' environmental and energy policy goals," said a joint statement signed by the leaders of the four organizations.

The Global Fuel Economy Initiative report said a combination of simple steps when collectively applied could have a large impact.

On the technology side it recommended two main things:

• Develop more hybrids overall, offer more car models in a hybrid version, and when possible offer a plug-in hybrid version.
• Implement and improve less glamorous but achievable incremental technology for gas and diesel engine cars like weight reduction, better aerodynamics, and improved efficiency in the internal combustion engine.

But technology alone will not get the world to the goal unless it's propelled by political action, according to the report. On the political side, the initiative recommended the following:

• Present clear data on fuel economy statistics for cars as well as their effect on the global climate, and require automakers to be more transparent on a car model's real-life fuel efficiency.
• Lobby shareholders with significant stakes in automotive companies on the benefits of selling cars with fuel economy improvements.
• Convince governments to offer better incentives for companies to develop more fuel-efficient vehicles.
• Launch campaigns in different countries throughout the world to arm individuals with information on fuel efficiency and their options for car buying.

Taking those steps will save over 6 billion barrels of oil per year by 2050, and reduce carbon dioxide emissions from cars by about 50 percent, according to the report.

"Cutting global average automotive fuel consumption (L/100 km) by 50 percent (i.e. doubling MPG) would reduce emissions of CO2 by over 1 gigatonne (Gt) a year by 2025 and over 2 gigatonnes (Gt) by 2050, and result in savings in annual oil import bills alone worth over USD 300 billion in 2025 and 600 billion in 2050 (based on an oil price of USD 100/bbl)," said the report.

The initiative acknowledges that its goal is ambitious. The report points out that the amount of cars in the world is expected to triple by 2050. It attributes this expected growth to the surge of car ownership in developing nations.

Betting on his new energy plan, oil mogul T. Boone Pickens has helped invest $160 million in a company that makes taxi cab fleets that run on natural gas, a cleaner burning fuel.

T. Boone Pickens

(Credit: Boonepickens.com)

Pickens, along with lead investor Perseus, a private equity bank, invested this week in Troy, Michigan-based Vehicle Production Group (VPG). VPG makes natural gas-fueled taxi cabs and consumer cars that are wheelchair accessible. Clean Energy Fuels Corp., which was founded by Pickens, is also an investor in VPG. The company said it plans to use the funds to further production of vehicles for release by early 2010.

Of course, natural gas cars are part of Pickens' energy plan, which he announced with much fanfare in early July. The so-called Pickens Plan calls for greater use of natural gas cars in the United States to reduce the country's dependence on foreign oil. Still, Pickens himself has been criticized for drawing up an energy plan based on his own investments.

Car interiors and car seats are becoming less toxic, although "new car smell" continues to carry poisons linked to allergies and cancer, according to a report last week by the Ecology Center.

The Ann Arbor, Mich., group found that General Motors made the most progress in reducing potentially harmful materials, followed by Mazda and Nissan, since the nonprofit's initial Healthy Car report last year.

The Acura RDX appears to smell sweeter than other SUVs in a report by the Ecology Center.

(Credit: Corrine Schulze/CNET Networks)

The ingredients in question include lead, chlorine, and phthalates from plastics, as well as brominated flame retardants from cushions and padding.

The car with the best marks was the Acura RDX SH sport-utility vehicle. Three Smart cars made the list of 10 best picks, as did two Chevy models and two Toyotas. Also among the lauded models were the Chevy HHR SUV, as well as the BMW M5 and Honda Accord EXL sedans.

Among the worst vehicles, according to the rankings, were the Mitsubishi Eclipse Spider convertible and Suzuki Reno hatchback, as well as the BMW 120i and Volkswagen Beetle convertibles.

In addition, scores of children's car seats fared 27 percent better than in 2007. Sunshine Kids and Graco brands fared especially well, while seats from Alpha Sport and Britax were among the worst in the rankings.

The Ecology Center interpreted its results as proving that harmful chemicals are unnecessary for making safe cars and car seats, and it called for lawmakers to ramp up regulations.

The environmental watchdog group looked at more than 200 popular models of cars released between 2006 and 2008, as well as 60 types of car seats. It used X-ray fluorescence to examine components that drivers and passengers frequently come into contact with, such as steering wheels, seats, doors, dashboards, and armrests.

The presence of the ingredients detected isn't otherwise indicated by manufacturers. Nor do third-party green consumer labels usually describe such details for cars and car seats.

The results of the report can also be found by sending from a mobile phone a text message that includes the make and model of a car or car seat.

Critics of the Ecology Center's study have charged that it sensationalizes the health risks of cars, whose biggest danger comes from road accidents rather than toxic chemicals.

The California Clean Tech Open, dubbed the "start-up in a box" contest, named 44 finalists Tuesday. It awards $100,000 in cash, office space, and professional services to each of the six winners. Categories are air, water, and waste; energy efficiency; green building; renewables; smart power; and transportation.

The Google-sponsored contest, run by the nonprofit Acterra, touts success stories such as GreenVolts, which makes photovoltaic solar concentrating systems, and BuildFast, which sells eco-friendly house kits for developing regions. Contest organizers said that tech for the developing world has become an increasing area of focus.

Prizes are due to be announced November 6. Click here for a list of the finalists.

Shifting a fourth of U.S. freight from trucks to railroads by 2026 would spare each American an average of 41 hours of travel time, 79 gallons of fuel, and $985 in gas expenses each year, according to the seventh annual Congestion Relief Index on Tuesday.

"Freeing up space on our highways increases the flow of traffic and saves commuters' time, money, and gasoline," said Wendell Cox, who wrote the study, backed by the Association of American Railroads, and is the principal of market research firm Demographia.

Soaring fuel costs are triggering new interest in both freight and commuter trains, which remain relatively underdeveloped in the Americas. This illustration shows how high-speed trains might appear in California.

(Credit: California High-Speed Rail Authority)

In addition, the report estimated that more reliance on rail transport would prevent the release of 920,500 tons of air pollution, including nitrous oxide and carbon monoxide.

The cities of Chicago and New York would enjoy the greatest U.S. reduction in emissions, according to the report. And residents of Las Vegas and of the California cities of Riverside and San Bernardino would reap more than $2,100 each in fuel savings, the greatest in the nation.

"Railroads last year were able to move a ton of freight an average of 436 miles on a gallon of diesel fuel," said railroad association president and CEO Edward R. Hamberger, speaking before the U.S. Senate last week. "It's like moving a ton from Boston to Baltimore or Eugene, Ore., to San Francisco on a gallon of fuel."

He called for the government to support bills that would expand tax credits to help railways expand capacity. His group also backs public-private partnerships to fund railroads.

Meanwhile, the cry is growing louder to fix deteriorating roadways and other infrastructure. Next year, the fund that backs federal transportation projects will be $4 billion or more in debt, according to The Economist.

Rising fuel costs are causing those in the transportation industry, as well as commuters, to see trains as an increasingly attractive alternative to freeway travel.

Some Americans are rethinking long commutes that largely shape workday suburban lifestyles.

Many environmental groups and urban planners hope that high-speed trains, which have long zipped people around in Europe and Japan, will alleviate congestion and reduce pollution in the United States.

Californians will have the option to vote in November to back 220 mph high-speed railway projects, which have been proposed in the state for several decades and have the backing of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Others would like to see personal aircraft develop as an alternative to land-bound transport.

Gasoline prices this week reached a new record average of $4.02 per gallon, according to the AAA Fuel Gauge Report.

Gas prices have broken a record $4-per-gallon average for the first time in the United States.

(Credit: AAA Fuel Gauge Report.)

Two-thirds of Americans have already changed how much they drive due to high prices at the pump, according to a poll commissioned by Access America Travel Insurance and Assistance.

Seventy-four percent of those polled said they would drive less, once gas hits $4 per gallon. Eighty-five percent said $5 costs per gallon would motivate driving changes.

The median price to spark a shift in driving habits was $3.20 per gallon, which was near the average several months ago. Gas prices have risen by 29 percent in a year, according to the American Automobile Association.

However, 9 percent of respondents said no amount of sticker shock at the pump would change the way the drive.

To save money, 26 percent of people surveyed said they'd reduce recreational driving, and 21 percent said they would try to run multiple errands at once. Only 7 percent named carpooling as an option, followed by 6 percent claiming that they would walk or bicycle more.

Among the first people to adjust the way they get around are those in homes earning less than $50,000, as well as Southerners, parents of children younger than 18, and "those saying the country is headed on the wrong track," according to Access America. Public transportation was favored most by people earning less than $25,000.

The telephone survey of 1,000 adults was conducted by Ipsos Public Affairs between May 30 and June 2.

Soaring gas costs could bring a boost to the makers of hybrid cars and of electric vehicles, which remain in limited production.

Dealers report a short supply for hybrids, which people are waiting months to buy.

In January, 44 percent of respondents to a survey told trade group Hybrid Owners of America that they would consider buying a hybrid, once gas topped $4 per gallon.

Diesel, at $4.79 per gallon, costs even more than gasoline, according to the AAA.

Prices have also skyrocketed in the past year for biodiesel and other biofuels, which are increasingly demonized for driving up food prices. Waste vegetable oil, which restaurant owners used to beg green gearheads to haul away for free, is fetching high prices.

Web sites including GasBuddy.com help locate less-expensive gas- and diesel-filling stations.