A challenge has gone out for the first American automaker to take fuel efficiency to the next level. No, it's not from the Sierra Club or 40-mpg.com. It's from Republican U.S. Congressman Dan Lungren from California's 3rd District. LA CAR: BACK SEAT DRIVING THE RACE FOR THE FIRST MASS MARKET 100-MPG CAR July 1, 2006 U.S. Congressman Dan Lungren wants the United States to offer a $1-billion prize for the first American automaker to sell 60,000 midsized sedans that can travel 100 miles on one gallon of gasoline. "It wouldn't be a panacea for our energy problems, but it would stimulate the development of viable technologies to reduce oil consumption while we develop alternatives to petroleum," says Lungren. The Congressman points out that there's a long history of offering prize money for important inventions. "As Amory Lovins and E. Kyle Datta point out in 'Winning the Oil Endgame,' the Orteig Prize for aviation, offered in 1919, was awarded to Charles Lindbergh in 1927 for his flight across the Atlantic. In fact, the 1895 Great Chicago Car Race — which was really a test of innovation rather than speed — played an important role in giving birth to the American automobile industry." Lundgren has, in fact, introduced the New Options Petroleum Energy Conservation Act in Congress to establish a prize for a 100-mile-per-gallon car. To win, a vehicle has to prove itself commercially viable and meet all federal safety standards. "It is critical to the U.S. national interest to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, urges Lundgren. "The growth of the Chinese and Indian economies increases global demand for oil, while the vulnerability of our supplies has been spotlighted by Venezuelan unrest, veiled Iranian threats to disrupt Persian Gulf shipping and the attempted attack on Saudi oil facilities by Al Qaeda. Our economic lifeblood must be immunized against the dictates of a global petroleum cartel. We must not allow our potential energy vulnerability to become the Achilles heel of our status as a global superpower. Our ability to pursue our interests and promote our values in the conduct of U.S. foreign policy must not be encumbered by our petroleum dependency." Some members of the British press say such a car is already in the works, albeit not from an American automaker. Press sources indicate that Toyota is readying a version of the next-generation Prius that aims to go 100 miles on a gallon of gas. How can this be done? With lithium-ion batteries and, possibly, through a plug-in option. The boost in electrical resources will allow the car to operate in pure electric mode, with the gas engine kicking in only for rapid acceleration assist and high speeds. Alas, the Brits measure their miles per gallon a little differently than we do. So, if the reports are correct, we're looking at more like 94 mpg than 100 mpg. According to David Gow of the UK's The Guardian, Toyota is working on plans for plug-ins for the battery from the grid at fuel stations, with future hybrids carrying a traditional power-point for domestic appliances to be used outside the home. Shinichi Abe, head of Toyota's hybrid division, informs The Guardian that the next Prius model will be able to do a nine-mile commute to work without using any petrol or diesel. One thing is for sure. If the next-generation Prius does indeed do 94 miles per gallon, the waiting list is going to be even longer than it is now. http://lacar.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=654
Why can't GM just point to Darryl's electric vehicle and claim the prize? I am suspicious that since there is no longer such a thing in the USA as honesty, honor or integrity (thanks leaders of both persuasions) and given that Clinton 'gave' such a similar reward to US automakers who did indeed come up with such a car (which they subsequently repossessed and crushed) what's to stop them from playing the same game again. Isn't our national pastime "take the money and run?". No no no it's a good idea, but without safeguards it will be a 'freebe' for unconscionable US automakers, using MY money to once again enrich the rich and in the long run not benefit anyone else. Instead I'd propose giving the 'winner' rights to make and market such a winning car for, say, 3 years without any taxes on the car as incentive for buyers to support the new technology. Yea, it's still a tax dollar give away, but at least it's not an offer of build em and cheat (by crushing).
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MarinJohn @ Jul 1 2006, 11:32 AM) [snapback]279684[/snapback]</div> :wacko: -_- :blink: :huh: :mellow:
They basically already did this 10 years ago with Clinton/Gore's PNGV program with up to $2 billion spent. Did that produce anything except crushed EV1s and more SUVs? Even a $4K credit was being fought against back then. http://www.autoworld.com/apps/news/FullStory.asp?id=298 What hypocrisy from this Congress.
That's really vague. What about emissions? Some dirty technologies are more efficient. And how the heck will "prove itself commercially" be judged? Why a sedan? What not any vehicle capable of seating 5 people? After all, requiring it to be a sedan could impair sales. Why 100 MPG? The PNGV goal of 80 MPG still hasn't been reached, so setting the threshold even higher makes it pretty unrealistic. Why must it be gas? How come the gas-equivalent amount of ethanol isn't allowed? After all, isn't the point to not depend on oil anymore? And why no electricity? Most importantly, what about continuation? Shouldn't there be some type of requirement to continue production? Automakers have been known to produce just a certain amount, then abruptly end the model. What's preventing them from doing the same thing after collecting the prize? Then comes the silly question... how exactly will the 100 MPG be measured? Prius has already been demonstrated to actually exceed that if you drive it in a very particular way. Of course, that is perhaps the very reason non-American automakers have been excluded from participating. - - - Needless to say, just my quick brain dump of this proposal is enough to reveal how unrealistic it is. But could you imagine if it were to become a reality? The cut-throat approach to be the first would be an ugly sight. And the loser would most likely not take defeat lightly.
Robert Castro writes: "I wonder which American car companies qualify for Congressman Lundgren's $1-billion prize? Certainly it's not DaimlerChrysler. Its most recent string of ads make it abundantly clear that DC is a German company. If Nissan and Renault end up purchasing a controlling share of General Motors, doesn't that knock GM out of the competition? That leaves us with Ford. Unlike its truck production, much of Ford's car production is conducted outside the USA. It seems Toyota actually builds more cars in the USA than does Ford. When all is said and done, it doesn't look like any company will be able to qualify."
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MarinJohn @ Jul 1 2006, 10:32 AM) [snapback]279684[/snapback]</div> Because the proposed law would require that 60,000 vehicles be sold. There were only 1,100 EV1s and they were leased, not sold. Interesting how they'll make sure Toyota doesn't qualify for this incentive either, even though it is the one car company that is ahead of the game and most likely to develop the exact car Dan Lungren is talking about. Otherwise, why stipulate only an American car company? Why not stipulate a car made in the U.S.? Toyota developed the Prius despite being left out of the incentive that led to the creation and then destruction of the EV1. A $1 billion prize from the government is an interesting solution to what the consumer-driven, free-market is supposed to solve. I can think of a lot of things I'd rather spend my tax money on. Let the Auto makers build a car I want to drive on their own dime. Why should they get money to do what other businesses have to pay for out of their own pocket? Namely, provide the consumer with what the consumer wants.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Jul 5 2006, 12:36 AM) [snapback]281306[/snapback]</div> http://priuschat.com/Globalization-adds-co...gin-t21597.html
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tideland Prius @ Jul 5 2006, 11:10 AM) [snapback]281440[/snapback]</div> You don't think Toyota would open a plant for the express purpose of building the newly designed "100 mpg" whatever if that would qualify them? There's been talk the Prius will be built in the U.S. soon. Just because it isn't happening now, doesn't mean it won't happen in the future. The article specifically states American Auto Manufacturers. That means no matter where the car is built.
I think in Germany they also had a prize for a "three-litre car" i.e. 3l/100km, which I think is about 76mpg (US). In this article (with somewhat unusual provenance but it's interesting) http://www.newmaterials.com/news/1186.asp they mention Audi's effort at the FE record gets 2.12l/100km on a trip in Germany, which I make out to be 108mpg (US). Ok, so it's not gasoline, but that can't be important can it? Also, the Audi A2 is what we in Europe would call a small car, but it's of course plenty big/safe/comfortable enough for commuting, shopping etc.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(molgrips @ Jul 12 2006, 09:17 AM) [snapback]284901[/snapback]</div> I think the prize was a big tax-break for people that bought them. I have also seen a Lupo 3L on our roads, a standard version recently managed 100 mpg (US) on a circumnavigation of the UK (link).
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(john1701a @ Jul 3 2006, 11:04 PM) [snapback]280786[/snapback]</div> I'm fairly sure they mean 100MPG in EPA testing... not 'downhill with a tail wind' for the Prius 100mpg.
