The new Ford Fiesta will get 40 miles per gallon on the highway. (Photo courtesy of Ford Motor Company)
After years of dominating the market for big trucks and SUVs, Detroit automakers are getting into the small car business. Tracy Samilton reports they don’t just aim to compete with Toyota and Honda – they aim to beat them.
Transcript
After years of dominating the market for big trucks and SUVs, Detroit automakers are getting into the small car business. Tracy Samilton reports they don’t just aim to compete with Toyota and Honda – they aim to beat them.
The new Ford Fiesta will get 40 miles per gallon on the highway. That’s several miles per gallon better than the Honda Fit and the Toyota Yaris. Chevy’s Cruze Eco could also hit that magic 40. Erich Merkle is President of Autoconomy dot com – an auto consulting firm. He says Detroit’s new small cars will also be loaded with high-tech features. That could grab the attention of Gen Y, a group of 67 million young Americans.
“And it’s gonna have to be affordable, low-cost of ownership and yeah, if you wanna get them into your vehicle, it’s gotta be cool and have some sex appeal.”
Asian car companies won’t give up their former territory without a fight. Honda may postpone the new Civic in order to boost its fuel efficiency.
There’s a lot of talk these days in Washington about creating new laws
to cut greenhouse gas emissions. One major question right now is how
the government will handle carbon dioxide emissions from vehicles. Any
new regulation is expected to have some financial impact on automakers.
And, as Dustin Dwyer reports, the carmakers are looking to share the
burden:
Transcript
There’s a lot of talk these days in Washington about creating new laws
to cut greenhouse gas emissions. One major question right now is how
the government will handle carbon dioxide emissions from vehicles. Any
new regulation is expected to have some financial impact on automakers.
And, as Dustin Dwyer reports, the carmakers are looking to share the
burden:
Back in March, the House Energy and Commerce Committee held a hearing
on how the auto industry could help fight global warming. All the
bigwigs in the U.S. auto industry were there: the heads of Ford,
General Motors and Chrysler, the North American president of Toyota and
the head of the United Auto Workers.
At the hearing, all of them agreed they would support a cap on CO2
emissions from vehicles, but they had a sort of caveat:
“We believe that there’s a lot of merit to it. And we believe if it’s
upstream…”
“For Cap and Trade, I think the further upstream you go, the more
efficient you’re going to be.”
“I’d just echo the upstream part.”
“The upstream as I stated earlier and the rest is absolutely critical.”
That was Ron Gettlefinger of the UAW, Jim Press of Toyota, Alan Mulally
of Ford, and Tom Lasorda of Chrysler.
So what do they mean by “upstream”? Here’s Ford spokesman Mike Moran:
“Lower carbon fuels, so that it’s just not what comes out of the
tailpipe, but you’re moving upstream and including the fuels that would
be included in the equation in the transportation sector.”
Basically the idea is, if you have less carbon in the fuel, you’ll pump
less carbon dioxide into the air.
But car companies really can’t take the carbon out of fuel. That’s
really more of a job for the oil industry. So are auto executives just
passing the buck?
David Friedman of the Union of Concerned Scientists says yeah, they’re
dodging the issue:
“The auto companies are basically finding more creative ways to say,
‘No,’ they won’t do anything to improve their products.”
Auto executives would say they’re already working to improve their
products, with millions of ethanol-capable vehicles on the road, and a
growing number of gas-electric hybrids. And many in the auto industry feel that they’ve been singled out for
regulation in the past.
The carmakers main lobbying group, the Alliance of Automobile
Manufacturers says that for the past 30 years, the auto industry has
been the only industry subject to carbon dioxide regulations. Though
most people try to avoid saying so in public, there is clearly some
tension between the auto industry and the oil industry.
Louis Burke is with Conoco Phillips. He says his company is willing to
do more to cut greenhouse gas emissions. In fact, the oil company just
came out in favor of setting up mandatory federal rules. Those include a
possible system that caps carbon dioxide emissions, and allows
companies to trade carbon credits as if they were commodities:
“You can cap and trade at some point down within the value chain,
whether it’s all the way upstream, or whether it’s pretty far downstream. You
can also apply a carbon tax throughout the whole value chain. The whole
idea is it’s gotta be transparent, it can’t penalize any one group.”
So upstream, downstream, the point is something needs to be done.
David Friedman of the Union of Concerned Scientists says everyone can
do a little more:
“Everyone has to do their part. That means car companies have to
produce vehicles to get more miles to the gallon. Oil companies need to
have lower carbon fuels and yes, even consumers need to find ways to
drive less.”
It’s still not clear what exactly what approach Congress will take
toward cutting auto emissions, but while leaders in Washington try to
settle on a plan, local and state officials across the country are
coming up with their own plans.
California and 10 other states have their own plans to regulate
tailpipe emissions. Those plans are being challenged in court by the
auto industry. And California has also gone forward with the nation’s first low carbon
standard for fuels.
That “upstream” plan has the support of both auto and oil companies.
Fuel cell-powered cars will be much simpler and cheaper to build than internal combustion engine-powered vehicles. (Photo courtesy of Ford Motor Company)
Diagram of a fuel cell. (Image courtesy of Ford Motor Company)
Hydrogen fuel cells have been billed as the next big thing for cutting
down on vehicle emissions. Cars that run on these fuel cells emit only
water. Automakers are investing heavily in the technology, and there
are still some major obstacles. But as Dustin Dwyer reports, there is
at least one big advantage for automakers to push fuel cells:
Transcript
Hydrogen fuel cells have been billed as the next big thing for cutting
down on vehicle emissions. Cars that run on these fuel cells emit only
water. Automakers are investing heavily in the technology, and there
are still some major obstacles. But as Dustin Dwyer reports, there is
at least one big advantage for automakers to push fuel cells:
Of course, automakers want to be seen working on something that could
be good for the environment, and people in the industry will tell you
there are a number of reasons for pushing fuel cells. But there’s one
reason that might matter more than all the others.
(Sound of music…”money, money, money”)
Yep, money.
And if you don’t believe ABBA, you can just take it from Larry Burns.
He’s the head of research and development at General Motors. GM says
it’s spent more than a billion dollars developing fuel cell technology.
That’s money a company like GM can’t afford to waste.
At a recent energy symposium, Burns broke it all down, and talked about
the real reason GM is involved in the technology:
“First of all, we want to accelerate industry growth, for business
reasons. In fact, if I was up here telling you we were doing it for
reasons other than business reasons, you shouldn’t take me sincerely.”
So, what are those business reasons?
For Larry Burns it starts with the fact that today only 12 percent of
people worldwide own a car. To get the other 88 percent, Burns says
future vehicles need to be cheap and clean.
Some will debate whether hydrogen vehicles would truly be clean. They
say, at best, hydrogen just shifts the pollution upstream to the power
plant.
As for the cheap part, that’s also a problem. Right now, prototype fuel
cell cars cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to make. But fuel cells
have a few things going for them on the cost front. Take Ford’s new HySeries Drive Hybrid Edge prototype.
Engineer Mujeeb Ijaz looks under the hood:
“So I guess the first thing you’ll notice when you look under the hood
of the Edge is it doesn’t have a lot of equipment here. In fact, it’s
quite empty.”
It’s empty because all the important stuff, including the fuel cell, is
tucked in a sleek package hidden underneath the vehicle.
The fuel cell itself is only about six inches high, and about as big
around as a coffee table. That’s an incredibly simple design compared
to today’s complicated and clunky internal combustion engines:
“There’s a lot of technology that goes into it, but from a fundamental
standpoint, when you lay out a fuel cell and you lay out an engine,
we’re not dealing with a lot of unique parts.”
So, unlike an engine that has to be machined and assembled in different
ways for most vehicles around the world, a fuel cell only has a few
parts that get stacked together the same way every time. That means
once they ramp up to mass production, fuel cells could save automakers
a lot of, well…
(Sound of music…”money, it’s a gas”)
But before automakers can save all that fuel cell money, they still
have to answer all the questions about where the hydrogen itself comes
from, how to get it into gas stations, and how to store it in the
vehicle.
Automakers say they can make it work. But not everyone agrees. Joseph
Romm is an expert on energy issues, and he says, a lot of the problems
with hydrogen fuel cells might be out of automakers’ hands:
“Each of them probably requires a major technology breakthrough, and
you just don’t know. You might see a breakthrough in five years, you
might not see a breakthrough for fifty years.”
Romm wrote a book called The Hype About Hydrogen. He says fuel
cells have long been thought to be just over the horizon:
“Fuel cells are always just 10 or 20 years away, and so it allows the
car company to seem like they’re doing something for the environment,
without actually having to do anything.”
Romm says he’d bet on better battery technology and biofuels to cut
down on gas use.
Regardless of who’s right, what’s clear is that the auto industry could
be on the verge of a revolutionary change, one that could be good news
for the environment: the end of the internal combustion engine.
It won’t happen just to make people feel good, or to save the
environment.
This week, the North American International Auto Show in Detroit opens to the public. Every year, the event is a showcase for the newest trends for tomorrow’s cars and trucks, and this year, the big trend is fuel-efficient vehicles. Cleaner cars have been promised before, but Dustin Dwyer reports that this year’s green car concepts could be more than just an attempt to polish up a dirty image for the auto industry:
Transcript
This week, the North American International Auto Show in Detroit opens to the public.
Every year, the event is a showcase for the newest trends for tomorrow’s cars and trucks,
and this year, the big trend is fuel-efficient vehicles. Cleaner cars have been promised
before, but Dustin Dwyer reports that this year’s green car concepts could be more than
just an attempt to polish up a dirty image for the auto industry:
The press previews for this year’s Detroit auto show were made up of three straight days
of back-to-back new product launches. Dozens of new vehicles were unveiled. Hundreds
of glossy brochures were offered to reporters, and nothing generated as much interest as
the new Chevrolet Volt concept vehicle:
(Sound of buzzing)
A packed crowd gathered for the flashy and noisy unveiling. GM executives announced
that the concept car could run up to 40 miles without using a single drop of fuel. It runs
instead on electricity cranked out by its next-generation lithium-ion batteries. When the
liquid fuel system eventually does kick in, it recharges the battery for better fuel
economy, getting up to 150 miles per gallon.
And as GM CEO Rick Wagoner told the audience, the Chevy Volt represents a new way
of thinking for the world’s largest automaker. It comes from a realization that oil alone is
highly unlikely to supply enough energy for all of tomorrow’s vehicles:
“For the global auto industry, this means that we must as a business necessity, develop
alternative sources of propulsion based on alternative sources of energy in order to meet the
world’s growing demand for our products.”
GM wasn’t the only automaker to unveil a fuel conscious vehicle at this year’s auto show.
Ford’s Airstream concept, and Toyota’s FT-HS sports car concept both featured hybrid
style powertrain systems, backed by a lithium-ion battery.
It might not be all that surprising for automakers to release such vehicles after a year in
which gas prices surged beyond three dollars a gallon, but analyst Jim Hall of Auto
Pacific says gas prices aren’t the reason for automakers to get into low or no emission
vehicles.
“You do it for two reasons, one, the potential of getting out of the business of making a
mechanical engine that has to be machined and made of multiple pieces and assembled,
and the other part of it is, you never have to spend another penny on emissions controls,
and emissions research, and emissions development and emissions engineering, which, at
every major car company is billions of dollars.”
So, basically, greener technology will eventually be cheaper technology. That means that
for perhaps the first time in the history of the auto industry, the interests of
environmentalists and the interest of business-minded bean counters are finally in line.
The big question now is how to get to that greener future. The concepts at this year’s
Detroit auto show all point to lithium-ion batteries as the next frontier. These batteries
are more powerful, and potentially cheaper than the batteries in today’s hybrids, but
they’re also less stable, and don’t last as long.
GM executives say they think they can resolve those issues and have a lithium-ion
powered vehicle by the end of the decade, but Jim Hall says no way:
“I worked on an electric vehicle program when I was employed in the auto industry
directly, and I learned that there are three kinds of liars in the world. There are liars,
damn liars and battery engineers.”
Of course, not everyone agrees with Hall’s assessment. Some lithium-ion proponents
even argue that the technology could be ready to go right now. Ford, General Motors and
the Chrysler Group have asked the federal government for more funding to speed-
development of lithium-ion batteries.
They say the Japanese government is giving its car companies several hundred million
dollars for battery development, and they want a comparable effort from the US
government. But even if Detroit automakers don’t get the money, almost everyone agrees
that big changes are coming for the auto industry, and that decades-long battle between
the good of the environment and the good of carmakers could be coming to a close.
GM will build three new crossover SUVs at the Lansing plant. Production will start this fall. (Photo by Dustin Dwyer)
GM chose materials inside the Lansing Delta Township Assembly Plant to minimize indoor air pollution. (Photo by Dustin Dwyer)
GM says its new Lansing Delta Township Assembly Plant is the first auto manufacturing plant in the world to get a gold certification from the U.S. Green Building Council. (Photo by Dustin Dwyer)
A new assembly plant from one of Detroit’s Big Three car companies is getting attention for its “green” qualities. Big Three automakers may not rank at the top of most environmentalists’ list for companies of the year. But some say the new auto plant is a sign that environmentally-sensitive manufacturing has finally gone main-stream. It’s not just because building green plants is the right thing to do. Really, it comes down to a different kind of green. The GLRC’s Dustin Dwyer has the story:
Transcript
A new assembly plant from one of Detroit’s Big Three car companies is getting attention
for its “green” qualities. Big Three automakers may not rank at the top of most
environmentalists’ list for companies of the year. But some say the new auto plant is a
sign that environmentally-sensitive manufacturing has finally gone main-stream. It’s not
just because building green plants is the right thing to do. Really, it comes down to a
different kind of green. The GLRC’s Dustin Dwyer has the story:
The first thing you notice about the smell of General Motors’ newest plant is how much
you don’t notice it. The plant smells like nothing at all. Not paint, grease or even that
new car smell. GM says it specifically selected materials for its new Lansing Delta Township
Plant in Michigan to limit indoor air pollution. And there’s a lot more to not notice about the plant.
Like how much space it doesn’t use.
On a tour with reporters, GM Environmental Engineer Bridget Bernal points out that less
than half of the plant’s 1,100-acre lot has been developed. The rest is left green, including
75 acres for habitat preservation:
“And basically in that 75 acres, we have a couple of pretty large wetlands, along with
some smaller wetlands. We have a rather large wood lot. And we’ve got a significant area
that’s being developed as native prairie.”
GM says it only planted native species on the site. And it planned ditches and culverts to
help filter water as it drains into other areas. A quarter of the materials used to build the
facility was recycled. The plant uses 45 percent less total energy than a traditional plant.
And, on the day GM gave reporter tours, it rained. Even that gets used. The water is
collected in cisterns, and used for flushing. GM says the plant saves a total of more than 4
million gallons of water per year.
Put together, all these elements were enough to win GM a LEED Gold Certification from
the U.S. Green Building Council.
Kimberly Hoskin is director of the council’s new construction program. She says she’d
been traveling a lot for work when one of her colleagues asked if she’d be willing to take
a trip to an event Lansing, Michigan.
“And I said, ‘Well, who’s it for? And she said, well, General Motors.’ General Motors, a
factory, is getting a LEED Gold Certification? Yes, I’ll go. Of course I’ll go. This is really
exciting.”
GM is not the first auto company to use green elements in an auto plant design. Ford’s
Rouge Plant in Dearborn, Michigan was built earlier this decade with a 10-acre “living”
roof that helped manage storm water runoff.
But Hoskin says, out of about 560 buildings in the nation that have been certified by the
Green Building Council, only five are manufacturing facilities, and GM says the Lansing
facility is the first auto assembly plant to get Gold, the agency’s top rating.
But for GM, the green elements of the Lansing Delta Assembly Plant aren’t just about the
environment. They’re about cold, hard cash. The lower energy use alone will save GM a
million dollars a year. That gives people like Hoskin comfort that the plant isn’t just a
public relations move by GM and it increases the chances that we’ll see more green plants
in the future.
Sean McAlinden is Chief Economist with the Center for Automotive Research:
“As we slowly replace our old big 3 plants, many of which are very elderly, they’re all
going to look like this. They’re all going to be green plants. In fact, some of them will
keep getting greener.”
That’s good news for places where there’s a lot of auto manufacturing, but many people
are not ready to absolve GM of all of its environmental sins.
David Friedman is with the Union of Concerned Scientists. He says a green plant is nice,
but the real problem is still the product:
“Over eight times the impact on the environment when it comes to global warming is
once that vehicle leaves that plant. That’s the biggest step that we need automakers to
take and to improve the fuel economy of all of their cars and trucks.”
GM, and other automakers, say they are working to make cars cleaner. High gas prices
may force even more changes as sales of big pickups and SUVs drop off. Ultimately, car
makers’ profits could depend on building cleaner cars, just as keeping manufacturing
costs down will depend on having cleaner plants.
That could change the way auto companies think about environmental improvements
because going green will be about more than just doing the right thing, or protecting the
brand image. It will be about protecting the bottom line. What’s sustainable for the
environment will also be sustainable for the business, and both will show a lot more
green.
The ag industry, some politicians and now automakers
are pushing the idea that ethanol made from corn will help reduce reliance on foreign oil. But another study further indicates that
corn ethanol is not the best solution. The GLRC’s Lester
Graham reports:
Transcript
The ag industry, some politicians and now automakers are pushing the idea that ethanol
made from corn will help reduce reliance on foreign oil. But, another study further
indicates that corn ethanol is not the best solution. The GLRC’s Lester Graham reports:
Despite the huge push for corn ethanol, a new study adds to the growing body of
evidence that indicates ethanol from corn is not a viable answer to replace gasoline. New
research from the University of Minnesota has been published by the Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences. It shows that ethanol from corn only yields 25
percent more energy than it takes to produce it.
The study also found greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution improvements were
only slight using corn ethanol, a bit better using soy diesel. But, the researchers say even dedicating all U.S. corn and soybean production to bio-fuels instead of food would only
meet 12 percent of the demand for gasoline and six percent of the demand for diesel.
The researchers conclude that other more woody plants and wood by-products could
provide much greater supplies and environmental benefits than food-based bio-fuels.
The head of the Ford Motor Company is petitioning President Bush to convene a summit on U.S. energy policy and the role automakers should play. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Quinn Klinefelter has more:
Transcript
The head of the Ford Motor Company is petitioning President Bush to convene a summit on U.S. energy policy and the role automakers should play. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Quinn Klinefelter has more:
For much of the past decade, the auto industry has successfully lobbied Congress and the Administration against raising fuel economy standards which, automakers say, would force them ro raise prices.
Now, however, Ford Motor Company Chairman Bill Ford Jr. is requesting that the President hold a summit to discuss improving fuel mileage and limiting America’s dependence on oil.
Ford recently announced that roughly half of the models it offers would be available in hybrid form or other more economical versions by 2010. Ford supported the Bush Administration’s Energy Policy Act, but company officials say the country is in the midst of an energy crisis and the President must do more to help consumers.
White House officials say the President is considering the proposal.
The EPA reports that despite a slight improvement in the last year, the average fuel economy rating for cars and trucks is still lower than the peak reached in 1987-88. (Photo courtesy of the Department of Energy)
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has published its report on fuel economy trends for cars and trucks sold in the U.S. Environmentalists say it highlights the need for stricter fuel efficiency standards – an issue largely ignored in the Energy Bill recently passed by Congress. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mark Brush reports:
Transcript
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has published its report on fuel
economy trends for cars and trucks sold in the U.S. Environmentalists say
it highlights the need for stricter fuel efficiency standards – an issue
largely ignored in the Energy Bill signed into law by the President. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mark Brush reports:
The authors of the report looked at fuel economy trends for cars and trucks
over the last thirty years. They found the average fuel economy for today’s
cars and trucks is twenty one miles per gallon. That’s still less than the peak
reached more than fifteen years ago.
The downward trend in fuel economy has been blamed on the popularity of
trucks and SUVs. These vehicles make up close to half of all vehicles sold
in the U.S.
Several foreign automakers have been criticized for their fleets losing
ground in fuel efficiency. Nissan, VW, and Hyndai all saw decreases in
their average fuel economy ratings largely because they’ve jumped in the
truck and SUV market.
The report’s authors highlighted the fact that fuel economy is directly
related to energy security. These vehicles account for close to forty percent
of all U.S. oil consumption, and much of that oil is imported.
An automotive research firm has conducted another study showing that large sport utility vehicles are falling out of favor with American consumers. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jerome Vaughn has more:
Transcript
An automotive research firm has conducted another study showing that
large sport utility vehicles are falling out of favor with American
consumers. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jerome Vaughn has more:
A study conducted by the Power Information Network says near-record
high gas prices may be taking their toll on sales of large sport
utility vehicles. The research says most car and truck owners are less
likely to buy a large SUV now than they were in first two months of
2004.
Tom Libby is with the Power Information Network.
“Consumers who before did not have much of a choice if they wanted an
SUV had to purchase a truck-based traditional SUV, now have the option
of getting a car-based SUV, which has several advantages. One of which
is it drives more like a car. Second of all they tend to be smaller,
so they get better gas mileage.”
Libby says the trend could be troubling to the auto industry because
SUVs are among the vehicles generating the highest profit for
automakers. But he says it would take higher gas prices over an
extended period to make the trend away from larger SUVs a permanent
one.
A new report by an environmental group says car companies could be using environmentally safer plastics in their automobiles. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mark Brush has more:
Transcript
A new report by an environmental group says car companies could be using
environmentally safer plastics in their automobiles. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Mark Brush has more:
The Michigan based Ecology Center finds that five out of the six top automakers
in the world get below average grades when it comes to the kinds of plastics
they use in their vehicles. The group says many the plastics in today’s cars
release toxic chemicals.
Charles Griffith helped author the report. He says there is one plastic the
car companies should work to phase out now.
“A good starting point for the car companies would be to commit to phasing
out PVC by the end of this decade. That would be a great place to start and
would send a strong signal that they intend to move in the right direction.”
Griffith says of all the plastics used in today’s cars, PVC plastics pose the
biggest threats to environmental and human health. A spokesperson
representing the automakers says the report is too negative.
He says it
fails to recognize the significant progress car companies have made in
moving toward environmentally friendly plastics.
The new Ford Fiesta will get 40 miles per gallon on the highway. (Photo courtesy of Ford Motor Company)
