Another long posting with multiple followups from the LA Auto Show

* Governor Schwarzenegger talks about, sees and
hears about PHEVs for the first time
* Green Car Journal/Green Car Award and PHEVs
* LA Times Op Ed summarizes California's challenge and opportunity


In our November 10 CalCars-News analysis/report,
"California Leaps Ahead: PHEV Center:
100-Household Test; Early Driver Report; Air
Resources Board Evolution"
http://www.calcars.org/calcars-news/874.html , we
said, "We're still hoping the Governor will
realize he can achieve his goals sooner and
better with plugs than with hydrogen." That
evolution continues as last Thursday at the LA
Auto Show was the first time (to our knowledge)
that the Governor saw a PHEV and talked about
them. We start with what the Governor heard and
said, then go on to the Awards and to new
resources in understanding the situation in California.

On Thursday, the Governor showed up in front of
hundreds of journalists and photographers,
speaking in front of a half-dozen "green cars"
ranging from diesel and fuel cells to hybrid
SUVs, and, most notably from our perspective, two
PHEVs: the Chevy Volt concept "extended range
electric vehicle" and one of four plug-in Priuses
converted by Toyota and now in California. See
our photos of him with the Volt and the Prius at
http://www.calcars.org/photos-leaders.html


OUR EXCERPTS AND COMMENTS

GOV. SCHWARZENEGGER: Before hearing each
automaker explain what they were showing, the
Governor's remarks included, "This is exactly the
kind of innovation we need.Thanks, GM, for
bringing its electric car, the Volt. Thank you,
Toyota, for bringing its Prius.plug-in hybrid."

GENERAL MOTORS: He heard Al Weverstad, GM's
Executive Director, Environment and Safety
Policy, explain that the company had made
"considerable progress in making the Volt a
production reality" since unveiling it last
January. Weverstat promised "triple-digit fuel
economy beyond its 40-mile range," and told the
Governor that "some families may never burn a
gallon of gasoline in that car for the lifetime
of the vehicle. He concluded, "For
transportation, electricity offers a variety of
benefits beginning with the ability to use a
variety of fuel sources, including many that are
renewable. So whether your concern is energy
security, global climate or natural disasters,
the high price of gasoline, the volatile price of
oil, the effect of unpredictability on Wall
Street, all of these lead to a diverse energy source for our vehicles."

TOYOTA: We include more lengthy excerpts from
Toyota's representative, VP of Communications Irv
Miller, who has blogged frequently at Toyota's
Open Road on PHEVs, including some exchanges with
CalCars and with V2G advocates. He explained to the media and the Governor:

"The plug-in Prius you see behind you is just one
of several technologies Toyota is working on. It
is similar to the two vehicles we delivered last
Friday to the Unversity of California at Irvine
and UC at Berkeley. We are active in the
development stage of this technology. We are in
pursuit of what we call the ultimate eco-car. We
have three goals. The first is to reduce
air-polluting emissions the second is reducing
CO2 emissions, and third, using diverse forms of energy.
We believe with larger battery packs than the
current Prius, our plug-ins are able to run in
full-electric mode more often and at higher
speeds. Toyota is aggressively developing battery
technology IN-HOUSE. And we will continue to push
our R&D efforts in advance of all possible
solutions to reduce greenhouse gases and
emissions impacts of the automobile. But we can't
do it alone. That's why just last week we
announced a Clean Mobility Partnership that
builds on our long history of working with
the Universities of California, and partnering
with them in their research and development. …..
Under a grant from the California Air Resources
Board, enabled I might add by AB1811 legislation,
thank you Governor for that, and with the support
of the Bay Area and the South Coast Air Quality
Management Districts, the Universities will help
us and California better understand what it takes
to take these vehicles into operations, rather
than just having them on the drawing board.
There's a tremendous promise of fuel cell
vehicles and plug-in vehicles and other advanced
technology. But there are still many questions
that have to be answered and challenges that have
to be resolved before Toyota WILL bring these
vehicles to market. UC Berkeley will primarily
focus on the customer experience. UC Irvine will
focus on some of the technical challenges as well
as determining the emissions benefits of plug-in
technology. Developing alternative fuels and
high-efficiency low-emissions vehicles will
require the cooperation and coordination of many
partners. So I'll take this opportunity to thank
our partners again, the Governor, the ARB,
legislature for helping to develop this. It's
breakthrough technology and we're there to push the envelope.

GOV. SCHWARZENEGGER: I'm very excited to see
actually first-hand how those beautiful cars. And
they have shown us now that they don't have to
change the size of the cars or anything else.
They look great, they look sexy, they are
fantastic looking, all those cars, but the
technology inside is changing so this is what is
so terrific. Thank you very much for being here today and I'll be back


OUR COMMENTS

GM's representatives now routinely include the
same points PHEV advocates make, including, in
their own way, our fundamental message, that
compared to gasoline, "electricity is cleaner,
cheaper and domestic." For our take on the Volt,
see our posting to CalCars-News, "The Chevrolet
Volt: GM's EREV a Work In Progress"

TOYOTA
* Of course it's great that Toyota is now showing
its own PHEVs, even though it minimizes their
potential and has resumed the lapsed strategy of
pairng them with fuel cell solutions, perhaps to
convey the message that both are distant options.
* The multi-year single-vehicle university
research projects are minimal in comparison to
those beginning at UC Davis, among utilities and
national labs, at Google and elsewhere. And
somehow all the thanks make it sound like Toyota
is an impoverished company that would not have
begun this research program without a few million
dollars from the State of California's new
Alternative Fuel Vehicle Incentive Program. At
the same time, perhaps we can conclude that were
the state to allocate significant funds (for
instance form the $120M/year forthcoming from
AB118), it could have a big impact on what carmakers build?
* We included a few words in all caps because Miller emphasized them:
- "IN-HOUSE battery development:" This may be
about insider controversies. In addition to
charges and countercharges about "who's dissing
who," GM's Bob Lutz was quoted in LA saying that
Toyota would not make its batteries available to
other companies. Since it appears that GM is
actually using more advanced nano-phosphate
lithium batteries (compared to the
Toyota-Panasonic lithium cobalt batteries that
Toyota has decided are not ready for use in
hybrids) maybe Lutz or Miller know something we don't.
- "WILL bring these cars to market:" Toyota wants
to have it both ways, reassuring us that its
research program means it's on the way to
commercialization, but it's not racing to be first.

GOVERNOR: It's not clear how much he heard the
presentations, and of course as a muscle-car guy,
his focus is on greening the big cars, but we do
know that word is starting to reach him that his
enthusiasm for the Hydrogen Highway will not
result in anything meaningful for the forseeable future.


GREEN CAR AWARD AT THE LA AUTO SHOW

The cover story for the Fall 2007 Green Car
Journal http://www.greencar.com , widely read in
the industry for 16 years, is "Electric Drive!
Why We Want To Plug In." The reasons are on the
page: *pennies per mile *no more oil *zero
emissions. The photo shows the Volvo Concept Recharge PHEV.

Inside are four pages on the benefits and
potential of PHEVs, focusing on the Volvo, four
pages on the GM Opel Flextreme, an editorial
proposing battery leasing, and a preview of
Venture Vehicles' three-wheel highway-speed
series PHEV. There are also short articles on the
Toyota Prius Plug-In, the Mitsubishi iMiEV EV,
and Brammo's electric motorcycle. This magazine
has been covering PHEVs with ever-increasing attention in recent years.

Last week, publisher Ron Cogan also announced the
third Annual Green Car Award at the LA Auto Show.
Since the awards can go only to vehicles drivers
can buy, none of these cars were eligible --
because of the simple fact that there are no
production PHEVs or EVs. That meant the
contestants lagged far behind the cars we are working to bring to market.

In that context, it may have been unfortunate
that the conversion project we participated in
outside the LA Auto Show, where we received a
"GreenEST Car of the Year Award" from the
co-sponsors -- see photo at
http://www.calcars.org/photos-groups.html --
might have been seen as a criticism of the Green
Car Awards. That was not our intention. Ron
Cogan, before giving out his awards, took a few
minutes to give his thoughts about the Awards and
the "challenge." We appreciate the way he
expressed his gracious support for plug-in cars,
and his full statement (below) is worth thinking about.


TEXT FOR RON COGAN'S 2008 GREEN CAR OF THE YEAR PRESENTATION
November 15, 2008, Los Angeles Auto Show
Good morning.

We're here today to recognize the achievements
that have been made in "green" cars that bring
higher fuel efficiency and lower emissions to our
highways. These milestones are noteworthy, and
the mission more important than ever because fuel
efficiency no longer represents just an abstract
concept that we may, or may not, embrace. It is now our reality.

Today's high fuel prices make fuel efficiency
everyone's business. While fuel economy has
appealed to a select group of buyers for years,
it has represented but a small blip on the radar
for most new car buyers. This has changed
dramatically. High gas prices are prompting a
major shift in the way that drivers look at their
cars and their operating costs. It's hard to
escape this when gas prices are over $3.00 per
gallon and a fill-up for many costs $50 to $70, or more.

We should take a moment to share how we define
what makes a "green" car, and how these cars fit
within the context of Green Car Journal's "Green Car of the Year" program.

Some would say that a vehicle like a 100 mpg
plug-in hybrid or a full-function battery
electric car should rightfully be at the top of
our list. Others would point to one of the more
popular high-fuel economy hybrids that's been on
the market for a number of years. From our
perspective, these are important cars. But they
are not nominees for Green Car of the Year at this time.

We look for vehicles that move the bar forward in
real-time and will be widely offered for sale to
the general public by January 1st of the award
year. Since Green Car Journal began focusing on
this field in 1992, we've learned many times over
that some of the most amazing technologies
invented, and the vehicles that seek to
commercialize them, never quite make it to
commercial sales. To recommend such a vehicle by
prematurely declaring it the "Green Car of the
Year" would be irresponsible. If everyday
consumers can't buy it, then its chances of
making a quantifiable and real-time difference in
emissions and overall fuel efficiency is nil.

Green Car of the Year focuses on real products,
available in real time. As much as we believe in
the potential of vehicles like plug-in hybrids,
no readily-available plug-ins are available to
the mass market at this time. This could change
in the next few years if battery challenges are
overcome. It's a worthy goal and should be pursued with all possible speed.

Plug-in conversions available now are primarily
focused on fleets, and for good reason. While
plug-in activists are quick to point out these
vehicles' benefits, there's rarely a word said
about their additional cost of $10,000 or more
than conventional hybrids. That's no small
challenge in a competitive automotive market where dollars really do count.

Green Car of the Year will clearly consider
plug-ins if, and when, they move beyond
demonstrations and fleets and become a consumer
product. The same holds true for battery electric vehicles.



In our evaluations, we look for continuing
progress. Choosing a vehicle that raised the bar
in environmental performance some model years
back but has not achieved new milestones is not
our goal. These vehicles are readily available
and already present a high fuel efficiency option for buyers.

What we do look for in the Green Car of the Year
is a vehicle that brings new or important
innovations to consumers now and moves the bar
forward in meaningful, synergistic ways. Vehicles
that incorporate environmentally positive
technologies that are likely to make their way to
additional models and platforms are especially important.

This brings us to our 2008 Green Car of the Year.
Our nominees include the first-ever hybrid sedans
for three automakers - the Chevrolet Malibu
Hybrid, Saturn Aura Hybrid, and the Nissan Altima
Hybrid. Two nominees are hybrid SUVs, also
representing firsts for Mazda and Chevrolet.

Weighing the merits of these vehicles this year
was a jury comprised of four Green Car Journal
editors and a larger number of invited outside
jurors. They include Carl Pope, executive
director of the Sierra Club; Christopher Flavin,
president of Worldwatch Institute; Jean-Michel
Cousteau, president of Ocean Futures Society;
Jonathan Lash, president of World Resources
Institute; and two individuals well-known in the
automotive community, Carroll Shelby and Jay Leno.

When looking at the implications each nominee
held for the market, it became clear to a
majority of our jurors that one stood out as
offering an approach that was truly
revolutionary. One that would have both short-and
long-term impact not only on the automotive
market, but the world in which we live because of
the diverse ways in which this vehicle is used.

To be revolutionary requires rethinking some
fundamental assumptions. For instance, that SUVs
must by nature be inefficient and anything but
"green." That larger vehicles designed for
maximum utility must sacrifice environmental
ethic. That providing the features most
sought-after by large families and those seeking
the ability to tow heavy loads cannot be attained
without sacrificing environmental sensitivity.

Our 2008 Green Car of the Year represents this
revolutionary thinking. It provides maximum
functionality with an ability to seat eight
passengers, carry 60 cubic feet of cargo, and tow
up to 6200 pounds. Importantly, it achieves the
same EPA estimated 21 mpg city fuel economy as a
much smaller four-cylinder sedan. That, in our
considered opinion, represents an achievement worth celebrating.

Green Car Journal is proud to award its 2008
Green Car of the Year honor to Chevrolet's 2008 Tahoe Hybrid.


CALIFORNIA REGULATIONS AND PLUG-IN CARS

The November 10 CalCars-News item we cited at the
beginning of this posting included considerable
discussion of the Air Resources Board's history
and its current reconsideration. The realization
that energy independence and global warming will
not be affected by what happens with hydrogen
fuel cell cars for two or three decades continues
to sink in. (The latest: at the Auto Show, US
News and World Report's Rick Newman asked GM's
Bob Lutz (in an online interview accompanying an
excellent print magazine story), "So of all the
different technologies GM is working on, how
would you prioritize them? Lutz: Electric.
Advanced hybrid. Plug-in hybrid. Advanced clean
diesels. And far out, there's hydrogen."
http://www.usnews.com/articles/business/economy/2007/11/16/qa-gms-bob-lutz-on-th\
e-volt-and-more.html


We end this posting with an excellent Op-Ed in
the LA Times by Sherry Boschert, author of
"Plug-in Hybrids: The Cars That Will Recharge
America" and Founder of the San Francisco Chapter
of the Electric Auto Association. Her focus here
is on PHEVs and EVs; as the former begin glimpse
a slightly more level playing field in state
policies, electric vehicles continue to be seen
as not arriving soon (though four automakers say
they are expecting to produce them in the next
few years). This doesns't make sense if the
strategy is to displace imported fossil fuels with electricity!


Bring back the electric car
The state should reverse its mistake of putting
its clean-air hopes in hydrogen instead of battery-powered autos.
By Sherry Boschert November 19, 2007 Los Angeles Times
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-boschert19nov19,0,4608381.story

Californians are being taken for a ride by state
clean-air regulators, who are bringing the rest
of the country along. Decisions made by the
California Air Resources Board early next year
will determine whether we get the option of
driving zero-emission, non-polluting cars soon,
or whether we'll see smoggy business as usual
from the car companies for another decade.

Many consumers would love to drive cars that
reduce greenhouse gases and our addiction to oil,
but the automakers resist. Fortunately, the Air
Resources Board has the power to compel them to
make the clean cars society needs. Progress
through regulation is nothing new: It took laws
to get seatbelts, airbags and catalytic
converters. It took laws to get average mileage
standards up from 12 mpg to 27 mpg. It will take regulations to get clean cars.

The air board's first attempt to compel clean
cars -- the zero-emission-vehicle mandate of 1990
-- put thousands of gas-free electric cars in the
hands of consumers, who loved them. In 2001,
however, the board started giving car companies
partial credit toward meeting the mandate if they
sold hybrids and other gasoline-dependent cars.
Bad move. Automakers sued, asserting that because
the 2001 standards included gas-burning cars,
they were, in essence, fuel-efficiency standards.
And only the federal government can set those.

At the same time, automakers were making inflated
promises to build zero-emission hydrogen fuel
cell vehicles -- if they could just have a few
years more. So the board gutted the
zero-emission-vehicle mandate in 2003 and
essentially turned it into a hydrogen research
program. General Motors dangled claims that
hydrogen fuel cell cars would be competitive in
showrooms by 2004. Daimler-Chrysler predicted
that it would sell 100,000 fuel cell cars by 2006.

But since 2003, automakers have produced fewer
than 200 hydrogen fuel cell cars, each costing
about $1 million, with a fuel cell lifespan of
two to four years and many technological challenges left to overcome.

A few major automakers are trotting out their
hydrogen hardware this week at the Los Angeles
Auto Show, claiming they'll lease small numbers
of them to handpicked drivers in the next few
years. In a deja vu to 2003, automakers are
hyping the promise of hydrogen just as the air
board is again revising the zero-emission-vehicle
mandate. Behind the scenes, car companies have
convinced the board's staff that they can't meet
the goal of producing 25,000 hydrogen fuel cell
vehicles after 2012, so the staff is suggesting
that the board ease that requirement.

There are signs, however, that the bloom may be
fading from the hydrogen rose. This month, one of
the biggest fuel cell companies, Ballard Power
Systems, bailed out after pouring millions of
dollars into fuel cell vehicles. A Toyota
official predicted that fuel cell cars won't be
mass commercialized until after 2030.

That's not soon enough to avoid global warming,
thousands of deaths from air pollution and wars over oil.

Meanwhile, the battery electric cars produced
until 2003 have shown that they can do the job.
Some have passed 100,000 miles on the odometer,
and the batteries are still going strong. A few
hybrid owners have added batteries and converted
their cars to plug-in hybrids that drive mostly
on electricity but retain a gas engine for
long-distance trips. Building a network of
fast-charging stations would cost a fraction of
the tab for building hydrogen fueling stations.

The persistent bias in favor of hydrogen among
state regulators defies logic -- and yet it could
once again distract from fair treatment of
more-realistic electric cars. Examples:

* On Thursday, the air board adopted a state
alternative fuels plan that suggests using
plug-in hybrids and biofuels would be cleaner
than scenarios that rely on hydrogen fuel cell
cars. But the plan largely ignores battery
electric vehicles. That's foolish, especially in
light of a study done for the state Energy
Commission that found that electric cars -- which
use the existing power grid -- reduce overall
greenhouse gas emissions by 68% compared with
conventional cars. Hydrogen fuel cell cars -- for
which there is no infrastructure -- would achieve only a 54% reduction.

* State-funded studies starting soon at UC
Berkeley and UC Irvine will compare plug-in
hybrids with conventional hybrids and with
hydrogen fuel cell cars -- but not with battery
electric cars. That makes no sense, especially
because right now several major automakers are
expressing interest in resuming production of
electric cars. The air board should provide
state-owned electric cars for the studies, if
necessary, for complete comparisons.

* The board's current zero-emission-vehicle
regulations favor hydrogen by granting one fuel
cell vehicle the same amount of credits as 10
electric vehicles in meeting state goals; the
proposed regulations for 2008 give three fuel
cell cars the same credits as four electric
vehicles. Narrowing that credit gap isn't enough.
The board should insist on one-to-one
technological neutrality and not push back the
deadlines just because hydrogen cars aren't
ready. Treat hydrogen and electric vehicles equally, and let the market decide.

There's no time to waste. Only California can
pass clean-air laws that are stricter than
federal standards. But many other states adopt
California's requirements, so what the board does
has national implications for our health, for the
environment and for national security. A slower
drive away from gasoline is a ride we don't want to take.