Developments from Wal-Mart, Project Better Place
and Tesla may appear to be in the category "And
now for something completely different" -- but
they're not: each in its own way is earth-shaking.


TODAY'S NEWS FROM WAL-MART COULD BE A GAME-CHANGER!
Whatever you think of the company's global
impact, employment and health policies and other
controversies, it's clear that its efforts to
build sustainability and awareness of carbon
footprint to its business practices, supply
chain, facilities, products and go well beyond
what even the wary would call "greenwashing." Here's the latest:

"The Company of the Future" -- Remarks As
Prepared for Lee Scott, CEO and President of
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.at Wal-Mart U.S. Year Beginning Meeting
January 23, 2008 *DELIVERY MAY DIFFER FROM
WRITTEN TEXT* http://www.walmartfacts.com/articles/5625.aspx

27 months ago today, I spoke with you about
leadership in the 21st century. I discussed a
range of issues where we could lead and set
specific goals to guide our progress.

With the environment, we said that our goals are
to be supplied 100% by renewable energy, to
create zero waste, and to sell products that
sustain our resources and our environment. We
also pledged to become more engaged with working
conditions in factories, to work for more
affordable and accessible health care for
associates and customers, and to reflect to an
even greater extent the diverse needs and nature of the communities we serve.
<snip>
Like health care, one of the biggest issues in
the world today is the rising cost of energy. It
is on the front page of every newspaper. Every
presidential candidate talks about it in his or
her speeches. And they all wrestle over who has
the best plan to reduce energy costs when they
debate. But so much of this talk is either about
geopolitics that are difficult to change or technology that is years away.

Every day in our stores, we see the impact of
$100 a barrel oil and high natural gas and
electricity prices. We see our customers having
to choose between filling up their gas tanks or
buying food and medicine and clothes. In
America, out of pocket energy costs for working
families have doubled over the past
decade. These families now spend an estimated
17% of their monthly income on energy. Somebody
has to do something. And your Wal-Mart will.

Let me ask you this: What if we extended our
mission of saving people money so they can live
better -- to saving people money on energy? We
believe we can do this. Wal-Mart can help our
customers use less energy and spend less on
energy. This will also help every country where
we operate reduce their dependence on foreign oil.

Our first commitment has to do with products that
we sell. A household is made up of hundreds of
items that contribute to energy use -- sometimes
wastefully. Microwaves, televisions, computers
and portable phones, for example, draw standby
power even when they are not in use. Energy is
also wasted when heat leaks out of our homes and cold leaks in.
<snip>
Now let me turn to something that you might think
is completely out there. I have been talking
with the heads of the major auto manufacturers
over the past few weeks. And I have been asking
them if there is a place for Wal-Mart in the
hybrid electric or plug-in electric car market,
so our customers do not have to spend so much
money filling up their gas tanks. Maybe there
isn't room for Wal-Mart in this right now. But
something tells me that there may be some role
for us in the future, and we are going to continue taking a look at this.

Let me throw another idea out there. What if we
looked at whether Wal-Mart could provide eco-
friendly energy to our customers? What could we
do in the U.S. -- where per capita energy use is
among the highest in the world?

Imagine your customers pulling into your parking
lot, and seeing wind turbines and solar panels,
and being able to charge their cars while they
shop. I think that would make them feel good
about shopping at your stores. It would also
make them feel good if they could save money in
the process. What if we fed the power generated
by those wind turbines and solar powers back into
the electrical grid? Just imagine the impact of
our customers being able to buy eco-friendly
energy at the unbeatable Wal-Mart price.

Everything I have talked about will help our
customers use less energy and spend a smaller
portion of their hard-earned money on energy. We
also want to work with our suppliers to help them
use less energy too. Working together, we
believe our suppliers can reduce the amount of
energy they use to make our products by 20%.

Of course, all these efforts will also help the
environment and address the challenge of climate
change. Taking waste and non-renewable energy
out of our supply chain reduces the amount of
pollution and greenhouse gases our suppliers send
into the atmosphere. Helping customers buy more
sustainable products and be better stewards of
the environment reduces their own carbon
footprint. This is something that I think all of us can be proud of.

See also Bloomberg News report with background and comments:
Wal-Mart Chief Spoke With Carmakers on Hybrid Sales
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=alRNqZ5W5UrU&refer=us


PROGRESS ON EVs Part 1: Project Better Place
We've been following the progress of this
important new startup with great enthusiasm. (See
our October posting
http://www.calcars.org/calcars-news/869.html
.) Its message: there are 'transportation
islands" where most travel is short distances and
all-electric vehicles are very practical nowl,
and the issues about extended range that fuel the
interest in PHEVs are not relevant, has started
many people thinking -- as has the news that
Founder Shai Agassi raised $200M to prove his
point. The company's business model, leasing the
batteries, entirely removes the main risk factor
and objection presented by car companies. Last
week came the most important developments yet:
announcement in Israel that the Renault-Nissan
Alliance will build electric versions of its
Renault Megane, followed by ground-up EV designs
for Project Better Place. And many different
parts of the Israeli government have come
together to create the basis for the market
success of this project. (We, like many others,
are still suspending judgment on the "battery
swapping" idea, which may be hard to implement.) Read about it at:

* http://www.projectbetterplace.com/ The company's home page
* http://www.evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=1390
Interview with Michael Granoff (a long-time
CalCars supporter) who helped bring together
investors and some of the players in Israel. This
story describes how the government dropped the
72% tax for internal combustion cars to 10%. And
the story explains the economics that could
enable the company to give customers who sign
long-term agreements their cars for free,
following the cellphone model: give the phone
away, sell the service. (To read this article,
you need to subscribe to EVWorld @$29/year --
which we hope you readers of CalCars-News decide
to do -- the only thing we'd wish more is that
you send CalCars a tax-deductible contribution at
http://www.calcars.org/sponsor.html .)
*
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/22/opinion/l22ethanol.html
Granoff's great short letter published in the NYTimes
*
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/21/world/middleeast/21israel.html
-- NY Times story (by a reporter on the
international, not the automotive or environmental beat)
* http://shaiagassi.typepad.com/ Agassi's "The
Long Tailpipe" blog has his launch speech, his
thoughtful comments a day later on what it all
means (in the form of a speech at the World
Economic Forum in Davos, where he first started
thinking about the project four years ago), and a
wonderful 2.5-minute video for fifth graders that
can inspire people of all ages.
* http://www.ourpower.org -- at Our Power
(Silicon Valley Leadership Group's PHEV
organizing center) thanks to former Novellus CEO
Novellus Sass Somekh, another CalCars supporter
working also with Project Better Place, Shai
Agassi has signed up as one of several dozen
"movers and shakers" who's in the market for a PHEVs as soon as possible.


PROGRESS ON EVs Part 2: Tesla Motors (and Series PHEVs)

Those who have been following Tesla Motors know
that it's had engineering and management
challenges -- but we are all hoping that this
company, which has done so much to change
peoples' expectations for what plug-in cars, will
have a great 2008. Motor Trend's review at
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/alternative/112_0803_2008_tesla_roadster
says "I'm being eerily teleported down the barrel
of a rail gun, head pulled back by a hard, steady
acceleration. Bizarre. And before too long,
profoundly humbling to just about any rumbling
Ferrari or Porsche that makes the mistake of
pulling up next to a silent, 105-mpg Tesla
Roadster at a stoplight." Car&Driver, Road &
Track etc. will follow. AutoWeek's drive review
starts with the headline, "Don't worry about the
future of transportation being fun"
http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080124/FREE/398811820/1024/\
FREE
and ends
"That car is set to be unveiled 'in the first
half' of this year. It will be followed by a
compact car and, ultimately, a whole range of
electrics taking over the earth. Maybe the earth
could use something like that." Edmunds' Green
Car Advisor reports the company will start
deliveries March 17 http://blogs.edmunds.com/GreenCarAdvisor/189 .

It has not been widely reported that the current
management of Tesla says the second generation
Whitestar may be a PHEV. Here's Tesla's Chairman
of the Board, Elon Musk, blogging on the subject
back in December http://www.teslamotors.com/blog2/?p=54 "
As was alluded to in the customer town hall
meeting last week, Tesla will likely provide both
pure electric and range extended electric drive
options in the future. We refer to the latter as
a REEV (Range Extended Electric Vehicle) to
distinguish it from "hybrids," which are really
just gasoline engine cars with a small electric
motor and tiny battery. The REEV battery in our
scenario would fully cover the range needs for
reasonable daily usage, but there would be an
onboard generator for the occasional long trip.

It's also interesting that Tesla's co-founder,
Martin Eberhard (no longer with the company), is
also paying lots of attention to PHEVs. He
provides confirmation from his end to media
reports of Bob Lutz saying that watching Tesla
helped motivate GM to begin the Volt project.
Here's a story at Edmunds followed by Eberhard's blog posting.

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=124325
Former Tesla Guru Offers His Take on the Chevrolet Volt
Date posted: 01-15-2008

DETROIT - Martin Eberhard, the deposed co-founder
of Tesla Motors, is putting in his two cents
about how General Motors should proceed on a
commercially viable version of the electric
Chevrolet Volt. In a posting late Monday,
Eberhard suggests that the Detroit automaker
consider an "interim" solution for the Volt in
the form of a range-extended electric vehicle (REEV) priced around $35,000.

"The REEV concept is a good one for the interim,
until nanotech (or whatever) batteries come along
and whack the price of batteries down by at least
a factor of two and increase the capacity by
something like a factor of two," he writes.

His vision centers around a vehicle with a small
gas engine of about 75 horsepower, "plus its
various support systems plus a generator and a
rectifier" that will "cost only about $1,000 more or less."

"Think about the cost," Eberhard said in a
posting entitled "Getting from Here to There." "A
battery pack that goes 50 miles will cost more
like $5,000. Add in the generator system and you
are still talking about at least $14,000 saved
per car - making a $30,000 (or maybe $35,000) Volt is suddenly possible."

Eberhard admits that such a setup is an
"imperfect solution.... But the REEV is something
that GM could make today," he insists. "With its
forecasted price and driving range, many people
will buy them; it will out-green the [Toyota]
Prius for sure. And as batteries improve over the
years, the range extender will be used less and less until it can go away."

Perhaps of even more interest is the fact that
Eberhard said he met with GM Vice Chairman Robert
Lutz in his "palatial office in the GM tower"
about a year ago. "This is when he told me that
he started the Volt program in direct response to
the Tesla Roadster," Eberhard claims.

"I walked away from that meeting deeply impressed
by Bob Lutz and willing to believe that the Volt
might be a real program," he said. "Over the past
year, I have come to meet several more people on
the Volt program. Hold onto your seats, people: I
believe that the Volt program is real, with top
GM talent moved onto the program, major bucks
behind the program, and support all the way to
the top within GM. I think GM is placing a huge bet with this program."

As of early Tuesday morning, Lutz had yet to fire
back a response - or a job offer - from his bully pulpit, the GMFastLane blog.

What this means to you: Eberhard informally
submits his impressive resume to Bob Lutz via the
Internet. - Anita Lienert, Correspondent

http://teslafounders.wordpress.com/2008/01/14/getting-from-here-to-there/
Getting from Here to There
January 14, 2008, 10:39 pm Plus 344 comments as of 1/24/08

Many people have asked me what I think about the
Chevy Volt ­ both about the vehicle as it is
conceived and what I think about GM's intentions.
What I say might surprise you who know me as the
vocal advocate of the pure battery electric vehicle (BEV).

Second things first: I saw Who Killed the
Electric Car. Man, that image of the Hummer
overtaking the EV1 is hard to get out of my head.
With this in mind, I assumed that the Volt was
pure eyewash ­ they killed the EV; their hybrid
efforts were lame compared to Toyota's; they have
invested a jillion dollars in fuel cell (fool
sell) programs. What would make me think the Volt was real?

Just about a year ago, I had the pleasure of
meeting Bob Lutz at his palatial office in the GM
tower. We spent a good couple of hours talking
about battery-electric vehicles, and what it
would take to make them happen. This is when he
told me that he started the Volt program in
direct response to the Tesla Roadster. I thought
this would be a story nobody would believe until
he said the same thing in the press!

My motivation for talking to him was mostly to
try and nudge GM towards change. His motivation
seemed to be to learn as much as he could from
me. This was okay by me ­ GM mass-producing EVs
is good for the world because of the sheer number
of cars they can sell, and good for Tesla Motors
because it validates the market in the eyes of the consumers and the press.

I walked away from that meeting deeply impressed
by Bob Lutz and willing to believe that the Volt
might be a real program. Over the past year, I
have come to meet several more people on the Volt
program. Hold onto your seats, people: I believe
that the Volt program is real, with top GM talent
moved onto the program, major bucks behind the
program, and support all the way to the top
within GM. I think GM is placing a huge bet with this program.

And I think this is an unbelievably good thing.
Imagine if GM leapfrogged Toyota and the Prius.
Imagine serious competition over who could make
the most fuel-efficient car, with GM as one of the players.

Okay, how about the whole concept of a
Range-Extended Electric Vehicle (REEV, no apostrophe)?

Like so many of you, I think the future of cars
is pure electric. But the REEV concept is a good
one for the interim, until nanotech (or whatever)
batteries come along and whack the price of
batteries down by at least a factor of two and
increase the capacity by something like a factor of two.

Here's why:

The battery pack for a mid-sized electric car
with a 200+ mile range, using best-of-breed
existing (I mean actually shipping) batteries
will cost about $20K, best case. Obviously, you
can't make a $30,000 list price car around a $20K battery pack…

But a small gasoline engine (say 75 hp) plus its
various support systems plus a generator and
rectifier will cost only about $1,000, more or
less. Can this offset a significant portion of
the battery pack cost while still making a difference in gasoline consumption?

Think about the cost: a battery pack that goes 50
miles will cost more like $5,000. Add in the
generator system, and you are still talking about
at least $14,000 saved per car ­ making a $30,000
(or maybe $35,000) Volt is suddenly possible.

Now consider that 50% of all miles driven by
Americans are on trips shorter than 50 miles. The
numbers are even better in large urban areas like
LA. This is the key: these trips should all be electric.

Many EV owners will argue that 50 miles' range is
actually not that big of a limitation. But I am
firmly convinced that the idea of such limitation
is the single biggest reason past EVs never sold
well. Not the reality of how far people drive,
mind you, but the idea of the limitation.

If the Volt can allow for true plug-in electric
driving for those short trips, while giving
potential buyers confidence that they can take a
long trip whenever they want to, this will be a
HUGE improvement in gasoline consumption.

It's an imperfect solution, but the REEV is
something that GM could make today. With its
forecasted price and driving range, many people
will buy them; it will out-green the Prius for
sure. And as batteries improve over the years,
the range extender will be used less and less until it can go away.

If the Chevy Volt was available on the market
today, I would definitely buy one. (But I sure as
heck would not lease one. Nobody's going to take mine back and crush it!)

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Felix Kramer fkramer@...
Founder California Cars Initiative
http://www.calcars.org
http://www.calcars.org/news-archive.html
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --