Today, at the New York International Auto Show, the XPrize Foundation and Progressive Insurance announced a $10 million dollar eco-friendly car design competition. More than 60 teams from nine countries have already entered the competition where teams are tasked with designing and building vehicles that can achieve no less than 100 miles per gallon and are commercially viable.

“We’ve been working hard to make a difference in car insurance for 70 years,” said Progressive’s CEO, Glenn Renwick. “Now we have a chance to make a difference by supporting the Progressive Automotive X PRIZE. This competition will result in more choices of more fuel-efficient vehicles for drivers and will be a catalyst for moving this technology forward, faster.”

“This competition represents what we’re all about in name and spirit—new ideas, competition and always working to do better,” added Renwick. “Being a part of this gives us a chance to make a real difference.”

According to the XPrize Press Release – “The window for applications will be open until mid 2008, when a thorough qualification process will assess safety, cost, features and business plans to ensure that only production-capable, consumer-friendly cars compete. Those that qualify will race their vehicles in rigorous cross-country stage races in 2009 and 2010 that combine speed, distance, urban driving and overall performance. The winners will be the vehicles that exceed 100 MPGe, meet strict emissions standards and finish in the fastest time. Host cities involved in the competition route are to be announced shortly.”

To see the the teams that have signed letters of intent to compete and to read more about the program read here.

Eco-Friendly & Fair Labor Clothing
http://www.sattlerclothing.com 

Well, while we are on the topic of green cars - D.C.- based ACEEE (American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy) released their 11^th
annual Green Book 2008 with scores on cars for their environmental friendliness. The report publishes the top “green” cars and the top “meanest” cars.

For the 5^th consecutive year the number one spot on the list of the greenest cars goes to the Honda Civic GX followed by the Prius, the Civic Hybrid, and others. And American based car company, Ford, took 9^th place, making up for an absence of domestic carmakers on last years list.

“Hybrids stand out, even after being taken down a notch by the new fuel economy calculations,” said ACEEE vehicle analyst Shruti Vaidyanathan. “And sales rose by a whopping 40% last year. This interest in hybrid vehicles should shine the spotlight on other green vehicle technologies that can significantly improve fuel efficiency.”

Widely regarded as the pre-eminent buyer’s guide to environment-friendly passenger cars, trucks, and SUVs, greenercars.org provides the facts necessary to examine the eco-performance of any 2008 model. Vehicles are analyzed on the basis of a “Green Score”, a singular measure that incorporates unhealthy tailpipe emissions, fuel consumption, and the emissions of gases that cause global warming. 

So who is on the mean list? The list of meanest cars list is dominated by European imports with the VW Touraeg taking the spot as the year’s most environment-unfriendly vehicle followed by Bugatti, Mercedes, Bentley, and, of course, the Hummer and Yukon aren’t too far behind.

ACEEE  

See the top 12 green cars and compare

See the Meanest Vehicles

Read This Years Market Trends in the Auto Industry

Yeah. Apparently in a closed-door session with reporters in January, Bob Lutz, GM’s Vice Chairman said that “Global Warming is a total crock of poo” (read poo insert other naughty word). Lutz continued to say that hybrid cars, like those made by Toyota, “make no economic sense” because their price will never come down, and that diesel autos like those touted by Chrysler are also uneconomic. Never mind that Toyota forecasts that it is unable to meet the ever-growing demand for it’s flagship Prius in ’08.

Mr. Lutz responded to criticism of his remarks with a post on GM’s FastLaneBlog. I will post some of his remarks here followed by a translation. Now, I am not fluent in BS-ese but I’ll give it my best try.

Jewel #1 - “But among my strongest beliefs is that my job is to do what makes the most business sense for GM”

Trans. - “People that work for GM may actually read this”

Jewel #2 - “And I think that many of the people who’ve been spewing their virtual vitriol in my direction in the past week are guilty of taking the easy way out.”

Trans. - Something akin to “I’m rubber your glue bounce off me and stick to you” or “Whoever smelt it dealt it”

Jewel #3 - “General Motors is dedicated to the removal of cars and trucks from the environmental equation, period. And, believe it or don’t: So am I! It’s the right thing to do, for us, for you and, yes, for the planet.”

Trans. -“I am committed to dragging my feet as the industry moves toward eco-friendly innovations. I don’t understand why these cars are so popular but by george I’ll sell them to you!”

Jewel #4 - “The Chevrolet Volt program is occurring under my personal watch, because I — and others in senior management — believe in it. I fully expect that it will revolutionize the automotive industry, and I’m committed to seeing it successfully developed and in showrooms.”

Trans. - “I believe, along with others in our management, that we can make a fair chunk of change with the Volt and it sure better, we spent a lot of money and effort on it.”

That is coming from the VP involved in Global Product Development. Tough spot, I’d think. struggling with the greatest differentiator in the auto industry right now - alternative energy. You know, that’s fine if that is his opinion. I almost don’t even care if his excitement about the Chevy Volt is purely because he thinks it will fatten his wallet. What I think is too bad is what his remarks along with this one from GM Director Vehicle Emissions Issues Bob Babik tell me about the company -

“The key is offering technology at a cost-effective level so that the consumer values it and makes that choice. This is why in the early years of a certain technology, GM supports government incentives when the technology may be more costly to help consumers make that choice.”

– Read - blah-blah-blah. Hear - we want the government to subsidize any risk that we take as a company. Innovation is evil and scary.

What does this tell me? Don’t look for any real industry-leading innovations from GM. Look for them to be the last company trying to sell gas-powered cars and the first one with lobbyists in your Senators office looking for cash.

January 10, at the New Delhi Auto Expo, Tata Motors (US $7.2 billion) unveiled the most talked about car at the U.S. Auto Show, that wasn’t even on display – the Tata Nano. The dirt cheap Nano ($2,500) boasts 30 horsepower, 4-speed manual transmission, and no power steering. The barebones dashboard hosts only a fuel gauge, speedometer, and an oil light.

Tata claims that the Nano, or the “people’s car”, meets safety and environmental standards (Euro IV emissions compliance) and cruises around getting 54 miles per gallon. (The Prius is listed as 48 city and 45 hwy) According to Tata’s own website, U.S. based Time magazine cited the Nano as one of the top 12 automobiles that “have been able to fundamentally change the way we live and dream” alongside the Volkswagen Beetle, the Mini, and the Ford Model T. Wow. Can anyone say “hype”?
Sanjay Khanna, over at Worldchanging.com wrote an interesting article wherein he writes that “Journalist Hamish McRae of The Independent argued in an op-ed piece that [the Tata Nano] is a “great step forward for the burgeoning Indian middle class, bringing safe, affordable personal transport to families.” And: “…while more cars on the planet will mean more fuel consumed, this small, efficient vehicle represents a more sustainable environmental path than that chosen by the other great, growing economic power, China.

A more sustainable environmental path than…China? From a serious environmentalist’s perspective, that’s like saying “a more sustainable directional path than the Titanic, but I digress.”

I think it’s great - making mobility more available, and at 54 mpg some would probably even call it eco-friendly. But is it innovative? The guys over at Reware are innovative - the Nano is a barebones, glued together car for cheap. Now lets take a look at Chery, China’s leading automaker, is doing to be innovative and eco-friendly. According to the guys at www.autobloggreen.com , Assistant General Manager of Chery, Liu Zhijia made the statement;

“New energy is a driving force for the sustainable development of auto industry, by 2010 more than fifty percent of the vehicles produced by Chery will be equipped with hybrid systems, and half of those vehicles will be powered by new energy”

Both companies have plans to enter the U.S. – how will they fare? Beats me. Hard to say if consumers will want a glued together car (Nano) or a hybrid car from China - consumers seem a little fatigued with the quality shortfalls coming from China. Either way look for a Chery hybrid or Nano at a dealership near you in the not so distant future. Or convert your car into lean, mean vegetable oil burning machine at www.greasecar.com or read it here on ehow