With sales of the smart going well and cars like the MINI flying off the showroom floor, you might expect the big automotive giants to want in on that action too. Perhaps they do, but it doesn't seem likely that General Motors will be entering that particular segment of the market anytime soon. So says Fritz Henderson, who would know as one of the men making decisions at the top of the company's ladder. Despite the recent sales success-stories and the rapidly dwindling market for large vehicles, Henderson suggests that Americans are still more likely to choose a compact over a subcompact. For instance, if GM could get nearly the same mileage from a vehicle the size of the Cobalt, it would sell better than a car the size of the Beat. On the other hand, these types of cars sell very well in Europe, and we'll never know how well they can do in the States (now that Americans have gotten a taste of high gas prices) until an established automaker offers one. It looks like we'll just have to wait for the Ford Ka and Scion iQ to find out.

[Source: Automotive News - sub. req'd]

As promised, we got a chance to sit down with Wes Bolsen, the CMO and vice president at Coskata, during last week's Platts Cellulosic Ethanol Conference in Chicago. We wanted a little more information on the $1/gallon number for the Coskata process "cellulosic" ethanol (yes, Bolsen pointed out that it's really carbon ethanol, but he's OK with people using the cellulosic term, even though he prefers to call it "next generation" ethanol). About half of the cost is set aside for feedstocks, the rest is for things like utilities, maintenance, water, and nutrients. The Coskata process does not require buying enzymes, there's no pre-treateament, and there's no high-pressure chamber. Eliminating these items simplifies the process and, therefore, reduces the running cost to less than $1/gallon. I'm not sure if the fee for the microorganisms is included in this estimate or is part of the plant building fee (which is not part of the $1/gallon).

Because the Coskata process does not require sugars/cellulose, it can use input sources like trashed plastic bottles, tires, landfill gas, and steel mill gasses. Bolsen said that some estimates say 40 or 50 billion gallons of fuel could be created each year from these sources. Oh, and if you think ethanol will die out when we move away from liquid fuels, check out Bolsen's idea to use ethanol to produce hydrogen for fuel cellls. Want to hear more? Go ahead and listen in (13 min):



Our travel and lodging for this event was provided by GM.

If you get into a room with a lot of people who make up part of the cellulosic ethanol industry, things can get a little technical. This is the situation here in Chicago for the Platts 3rd Annual Cellulosic Ethanol and Biofuels conference. A few hundred representatives from a lot of companies in the cellulosic ethanol "space" (I hear this term so often these days - the green tech space, the green car space, etc. Why?) are here and the rapid-fire presentations are truly talking to the choir, as it were. Sure, attendees disagree exactly how to best make cellulosic ethanol, but they all understand, well, the space.

So, join me as I share a bit about what was said and done at the conference. This post will cover the first few seminars, when some of the broader questions about cellulosic ethanol and the market were taken up. I'll have more posts later about other aspects of the discussion. Jump past the fold for more.

When Toyota invited reporters to Portland last month for the Sustainable Mobility Seminar, we were greeted at the baggage claim with tickets for the Portland public rail system. Here in Chicago for GM's biofuels conference, we were met at the airport by a driver in an Escalade (and not the hybrid one that's pictured above, either). I know that Portland's public transportation system is one of the best in the country, but still.

GM had specified that only GM vehicles be used in getting us to the hotel, the driver told me and when I asked if there was any ethanol in the tank, he said there's probably E10, because that's what the pump sticker says, but no go on E85. He admitted that his company doesn't even have any vehicles that run on E85. I appreciated the ride to the hotel, but couldn't pass up the chance to share this little tidbit. Some real coverage of the conference coming right up.

There are two things that are really easy to understand about electric vehicles - aside from the don't-need-no-gasoline part. One, they have all their torque available from zero RPM. Two, they're quiet. Number one means that EVs are fast off the line (see: Tesla Roadster) and that could mean that, once electric motors and batteries are the powertrain of choice in the racing industry, everything we think we know about what a race sounds like could change. CNN describes the possible future this way:

Imagine a sun-swept Texas afternoon in 2015. After the roar of a ceremonial flyover, a Texas Motor Speedway crowd of 200,000 rises to its feet in anticipation of NASCAR's signature moment.

The celeb du jour grabs the microphone and bellows, "Gentlemen, start your engines!"

As the fans join in a full-throated cheer, 43 of the world's best drivers reach down and press a button. What follows is unprecedented: pin-dropping silence, save for 43 small clicks.

If NASCAR goes electric, CNN wonders, will fans stick around? Do they love the roar or the engines or the speed at which the cars move? Will they be satisfied with one but not the other? NASCAR isn't exactly at the forefront of automotive greenery (although it is thinking about it), but a U.S.-built Volt might be good enough to change some hearts and minds, no?

[Source: CNN]

People are most critical of the things they least understand. – Paul W. Spoor, Bits & Pieces, September 2008.

Why is it so important to some to cast GM as a villain? To believe that the only reason we don't have affordable, practical pure-electric vehicles today is that GM doesn't want us to?

Why is it so difficult to believe that General Motors is not the same sadly mismanaged company it was in the 1970s and '80s? That it's a completely different enterprise run by completely different leaders with completely different values and priorities?

Why so difficult to accept that if GM – or anyone else – could make a buck building and selling the EVs of your dreams, they would be thrilled to do so? And will the minute they can?

As GM (and others) have learned from past, very expensive failed attempts, volume road-worthy EVs require a huge financial investment, and risk. But whoever gets there first with practical, affordable ones will make a killing. Why would any automaker not want to?

And why accuse me of lying or spinning, as some will, for explaining and defending – based on my knowledge and experience – GM, Ford, Chrysler, anyone else who deserves it?

I worked for GM two different times, the first (1965-'73) when it led the global industry and was as proud and arrogant as the day was long. The second (1987-'02) when it teetered on the brink of bankruptcy, learned humility and appointed different kinds of leaders to fix it. In between, as a widely published auto writer, I was as harsh a critic as anyone. I hammered GM's leadership and its products relentlessly, because both were shamefully bad.
But that began to change when Bob Stempel replaced Roger Smith as CEO in 1989 and gained momentum in 1992 when new CEO Jack Smith (no relation to Roger) effectively started to right the still-sinking ship. It's been rough and rocky sailing since, but – contrary to what many believe – GM leadership under current CEO Rick Wagoner has been outstanding.

Like other U.S. makers, they still can't make a living in North America due to high costs, our business-unfriendly government and other conditions beyond their control. But there have been no bad new GM products this decade, and most are world-class competitive, or better. As an employee, I had no great love for GM. As a journalist (again), I'm professionally neutral and objective. But as a former insider, I gained perspective on GM and the industry as a whole that no one who hasn't been there could understand. Also enormous appreciation for the smart, talented, dedicated, hard-working individuals who toil there 10-14 hours every day.

That said, I've responded to some of your questions about my previous columns after the jump.

Bloggers love environmentally friendly cars. Or so it seems, according to research performed by J.D. Power and Associates. The most commonly referenced brands in blog posts over the last six months are Toyota, Honda and General Motors. This shouldn't come as shocking news, considering that the Toyota Prius, Honda Insight and Chevy Volt are all hot topics right now and are all expected to be thoroughly redesigned or first introduced within the next few years. Naturally, then, these are the brands that are getting the most publicity and are likely the ones that you are most interested in hearing about.

Not all of the blog posts were positive, though, and JDP therefore kept separate numbers for each manufacturer counting how many good things were written about their sustainability and efforts to reduce global warming. The surprising winner of that group was Nissan, though that brand only got two percent of all mentions overall. We blog, they watch, we blog. Fun!


[Source: The Car Connection]

NOTE: If you missed them, you can read parts one and two.

High tech development, market launch and retreat

Because its 1,175-pound pack of 27 advanced lead-acid (PbA) batteries - 26 propulsion, one for accessories - held a mere half-gallon of gasoline-equivalent energy, the production EV1 would have to be an incredibly efficient teardrop-shaped two-seater to achieve even barely acceptable range. Stretching it to accommodate four passengers would have reduced its already very modest range some 25 percent due to added weight and aero drag.

"The fundamental variables are mass, aerodynamics, rolling resistance, accessory loads and driveline efficiency," says Bob Purcell, who was our Advanced Technology Vehicles (ATV) Div. Executive Director. "So the exercise was to ensure that we would meet all customer requirements using the least possible energy in each of those areas."

Continue reading after the jump.

Click above for more early images of the production Chevy Volt

It's no secret that we appreciate what General Motors has been able to do with just two-liters. The direct injected and turbocharged mill powering the rear-wheel drive Solstice GXP and Sky Redline along with the front-wheel drive HHR SS and Cobalt SS models is an excellent one. What's more, its 260 horsepower represents 130-horsepower per liter, the highest ever from a GM production engine and on par with the best from the world. Expect to see more of this kind of technology from new GM engines along with more six-speed transmissions. Also expect an ever-higher percentage of aluminum to appear in all engines from all manufacturers.

GM also has plans for diesels and hybrids. The upcoming 4.5-liter diesel for full-size trucks and SUVs manages to weigh about seventy-five pounds less than other diesels of similar size. On the hybrid front, Automotive News says that GM will offer one new hybrid per quarter for the next four years -- that's sixteen new hybrids. That number would not include the Volt, a car which GM considers fully electric with a range-extender, and is something we've heard for a while now.

GM is also hard at work on HCCI engines, which we have covered extensively and offer the promise of diesel-like economy with the ability to use gasoline. Fuel cells are still on the table, though we'd imagine that today's tough financial times could slow down the development of GM's hydrogen plans. We'll take the trade-off of an HCCI engine over a hydrogen fuel cell as it would likely have a much larger impact and be ready for primetime much sooner.

[Source: Automotive News - sub. req'd]

Now that British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has pledged some £90 million for the development of clean vehicles in the U.K., General Motors is seeing plenty to like about the European market for its E-Flex vehicles. The automaker has already reversed its stance on building the electric cars in America and shipping them overseas, with the Ellesmere Port plant now being considered for Opel and Vauxhall EVs. Just how many electric cars could GM sell in Europe? According to Bob Lutz, plenty. In fact, GM believes it could move as many as 30,000 units in the first year of availability, with the worldwide figure of one million by 2020.

While those sales targets are pretty ambitious, so are the goals of Gordon Brown. If the Prime Minister has things his way, all new cars sold in Britain by 2020 will be electric. Oh, and built in the U.K. (editor's note: FAT CHANCE!), which could become a small step closer to reality if GM decides to go with the Ellesmere Port factory.


[Source: Times Online]

The General, along with the rest of the American automakers, has a long established history of making the most profits from the largest vehicles. Small cars from the Detroit 3 have therefore fallen way behind the imports when it comes to desirability. GM Global Design Chief Ed Welburn went so far as to say, "In North America, we never did a good small car." Ouch. Instead, all the best designs come from overseas, which GM has plenty of experience in. "Today, we are able to draw on resources of design centers in Korea, Brazil and Europe who really know how to do small cars," says Welburn. Like the ones who designed the Aveo?

So, if the Cobalt and Aveo are not good small cars, at least they'd better be cheap, right? Sure, but expect that to change too as upcoming replacements for its aging small cars will be more expensive than current models. The Chevrolet Cruze, not expected in the U.S. for at least a few more years, will cost an extra few thousand dollars compared to the Cobalt. Hopefully by then, the Beat will be properly engineered for the American market as well.

[Source: Automotive News, sub. req'd]

Car dealers are realizing that there's more to green cars than what's under the hood. Check out what this innovative dealership has done to green their entire operations.This dealership houses its own geothermal pump, cleans its cars from recycled water, has a water-soluble paint booth, and powers its repair machinery on biodiesel. And....they've increased their sales as a result!

With the current GM slump in sales and increased layoffs, perhaps it would be wise for GM to encourage similar endeavors at more dealerships throughout the country.

The automotive world will be getting a new Chevy Equinox bestowed upon it for the 2009 model year, and news from General Motors now places a 2.3L direct-injected four-cylinder engine underhood. Currently, the Equinox comes equipped with a boat-anchor of a base engine in the form of a 185-horsepower 3.4L V6 engine. Of course, there is nothing wrong with a pushrod engine, as long as its been suitably updated along the way -- which this one hasn't. The only way to get a more modern powerplant is to step up to the Sport version with its 3.6L V6 with 263 HP, mated to a nice six-speed automatic tranny. A nice combo to be sure, but a little heavy on the 'go' side for fans of fuel savings.

The Equinox will be joined in 2009 by the GMC Terrain, which replaces the Pontiac Torrent as the non-bowtie branded small CUV from GM. It likely goes without saying that the Terrain will also get the new four-cylinder engine. So far, we don't have specific details on the new engine from the General, but considering how good its 2.0 turbocharged DI engine is, we have high hopes that the 2.3 will be a worthy powerplant as well.

[Source: GM]

"We have to build cars and trucks that people want to buy." So said Rick Wagoner, head of General Motors, at a recent conference in Dallas, Texas in response to why GM didn't begin offering hybrid cars earlier. Yeah, Rick, that's entirely true. But, your company also has to have at least a modicum of foresight in order to be successful in the tough American market these days. For instance, Toyota is just now reaping the benefits of its hybrid electric vehicles, despite the fact that the automaker has been building them since 1997. Did Toyota know something that GM didn't? Not really, as the entire world has been watching oil prices climb for the last few decades. It was bound to happen in the United States -- GM's own backyard -- as well, and now that it has indeed taken place, the three remaining American automakers have been caught with the wrong product at the wrong time sitting on dealer lots.

[Source: MSN Money Central]

GM has decided that the fuel economy of its vehicles should be the main focus in its advertising, rather than attempts to merely buff its battered brand image. Even the luxury line, Cadillac, is talking up miles per gallon in its new ads. Take the CTS, for instance. Please. It is capable of a somewhat surprising 26 mpg (on the highway, downhill, with a tailwind).

New "pump less and drive more" commercials will show the General's vehicles at the gas pump with the likes of Toyota, Ford, Mazda, and Chrysler to help try and make the point that their Pontiac, GMC, or Buick models either have better fuel economy or are capable of going farther on a fill up. GM hopes this will help slow the freefall its sales and stock price are currently experiencing. Yeah, that and $6,000 rebates (now without trade-ins!) ought to do the trick.

[Source: The Detroit News]