Not like most of them have a choice anymore. What are GM and Chrylser going to do — say no? And the rest? Who wants to look anti-environment?

Automakers Support President in Development of National Program for Autos

Washington, DC – On Tuesday, May 19, automakers will join with President Obama, federal agencies, governors and environmental leaders to announce a commitment to establish a National Program that will reduce carbon emissions and increase fuel economy.

"For seven long years, there has been a debate over whether states or the federal government should regulate autos. President Obama's announcement ends that old debate by starting a federal rulemaking to set a National Program," said Dave McCurdy, president and CEO, Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers. "Automakers are committed to working with the President to develop a National Program administered by the federal government."

"What's significant about the announcement is it launches a new beginning, an era of cooperation. The President has succeeded in bringing three regulatory bodies, 15 states, a dozen automakers and many environmental groups to the table," said McCurdy. "We're all agreeing to work together on a National Program."

A National Program is a priority to automakers because a national fuel economy program allows manufacturers to average sales nationwide, so customers in all 50 states can continue to buy the types of vehicles they need for family, business and leisure. A National Program also avoids conflicting standards from different regulatory agencies, and it gives automakers much needed certainty for long-term product planning. In addition, a National Program delivers overall greenhouse gas reductions equal to or better than those that would be realized under separate programs by different regulatory bodies.

EPA and NHTSA intend to initiate a joint rulemaking that reflects a coordinated and harmonized approach to implementing the Clean Air Act and the Energy Policy and Conservation Act. The rulemaking is expected to include several elements important to automakers, including:

· Preserving Vehicle Diversity: Harmonized NHTSA and EPA standards would be attribute-based, or based on a vehicle's "footprint." This approach allows for a range of sizes of vehicles to meet consumer needs for passenger and cargo room.

· Providing Certainty for Long-term Planning: Automakers would know what standards will be through 2016, which is critical in an industry where bringing a product to market typically takes 5-7 years. The National Program is intended to give automakers sufficient lead-time to incorporate technology as part of existing vehicle design schedules, so manufacturers would not have to incur added costs from redesigning all their models at one time.

· Providing Flexibility in Achieving CO2-Reduction Goals: EPA and NHTSA would consider a range of compliance flexibility measures, such as earned credits, credit trading, air conditioning credits, and credits for using additional technologies that reduce carbon dioxide (CO2).

"The debate over who sets CO2 and fuel economy standards for autos has been decided, but there is still more to talk about. We have the broad outlines of an agreement, but we will need to work closely with NHTSA, EPA and California in the rulemaking process to resolve multiple issues, trying to fit all the elements together into one program. There is a strong commitment from everyone to move past any hurdles that may arise as we work through differences in the way these two federal agencies set standards," said McCurdy.
"We want to finalize a national program so we can move on to policy discussions on what the future of sustainable mobility looks like and how we can get there faster," said McCurdy. "Alliance members are supporting measures that reduce carbon dioxide even more, like low carbon fuels, advancements in battery technology and consumer incentives to get more advanced technology autos on our roads."

Autos represent 17% of all man-made CO2 in the U.S, according to EPA. Carbon dioxide is created when any fossil fuel burns, whether it is a car burning gasoline or a backyard grill burning charcoal. Therefore, to reduce CO2, automobiles will need to burn less fuel. That means automakers will need to sell fuel-efficient technologies that will produce less CO2.

"All industries will be called upon to reduce carbon emissions," said McCurdy. "Automakers play an important role. Today, there are more than 50 auto technologies on sale that reduce emissions, increase mileage and run on clean fuels." Automakers are selling 130 models of automobiles that achieve 30 mpg or greater on the highway. Consumers can now test drive 35 models of hybrids or clean diesel in dealer showrooms. More technology is on its way to market.

"We will need to use every engineer we have and every investment dollar available to make our vision of sustainable mobility a reality. And, we are going to need Americans to buy our clean, fuel-efficient autos in large numbers in order to meet this climate change commitment," said McCurdy.

The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers is a trade association of 11 car and light truck manufacturers including BMW Group, Chrysler, Ford Motor Company, General Motors, Jaguar Land Rover, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, Mitsubishi Motors, Porsche, Toyota and Volkswagen. For more information, visit the Alliance website at www.autoalliance.org.

According to the New York Times, President Obama will announce later today a series of environmental initiatives, the cornerstone of which would grant waivers to states seeking to enforce their own emissions laws.

California passed a law in 2005 requiring automakers to meet stricter auto emissions standards, only to be denied a waiver from the EPA and forced to sue the government along with approximately a dozen other states to enforce the states' guidelines.

This move by the Obama administration will force some automakers to make adjustments to their lineup sooner than required by federal laws passed in 2007. They've argued vehemently against the bills saying they'd be forced to make their cars meet different standards for different states. This is partially true, though most states follow California's lead. However, the potential for a patchwork quilt of emissions standards across the country becomes an even greater possibility with this precedent-setting decision on the part of the nascent administration.

President Obama will also likely have the Department of Transportation draft guidelines to get automakers to comply with enhanced mileage requirements laid out in the federal law enacted more than a year ago.

Given the timing of these actions, Obama is trying to show he's strongly committed to moving forward on environmental issues and win support among his green-focused constituency. Additionally, Obama avoids having to spend any political capital on this while in the middle of his fight for a stimulus package because both of those moves are purely executive, requiring no significant action on the part of Congress. However, by also not writing the guidelines first, the Obama administration has put political expediency ahead of good policy and working with Congress to create and reveal a more holistic energy package from the start.

Allowing CARB to set the emissions standards for the country takes the ball away from the federal government, makes the possibility of a patchwork quilt of emissions standards an actual possibility and fails to provide the necessary monies to automakers to help make the shift. That's not good business and it makes it difficult for automakers to build for the future with constantly shifting goals.

Lastly, whether it's CAFE or CARB's regulation of emissions, the issue isn't fixing supply of vehicles with better fuel economy, it's changing demand. Remember, CAFE does not directly offer incentives for customers to choose fuel efficient vehicles, nor does it directly affect fuel prices. Rather, it attempts to accomplish these goals indirectly by making it more expensive for automakers to build inefficient vehicles by introducing penalties. CAFE advocates assert most of the gains in fuel economy over the past 30 years can be attributed to the standard itself, while opponents assert economic forces are responsible for fuel economy gains, where higher fuel prices drove customers to seek more fuel efficient vehicles. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle. The truth is, the best policy for increasing overall fuel economy is to change consumer habits, and that means increasing the costs of low fuel economy vehicles. Countless automotive experts have claimed the best way to do that is not through mandating automakers make more efficient cars, it's to increase, artificially, the price of gas. But that would require more political capital than Obama — or any politician — appears willing to spend.

So, in a world of half measures, President Obama's decision may make sense. But in a utopia, it's nowhere close.

[NY Times]

The Miles Electric is the brainchild of Polo by Ralph Lauren Jeanswear founder and avowed environmentalist Miles Rubin and it has taken a more stealthy approach to the public spotlight. The Highway Speed is an all-electric converted version of the Hafei Saibao 3, a Chinese-made compact that actually passes European safety standards — shocking! Pun intended.

The Miles Electric Highway Speed, which is the unofficial but silly name, draws power from a 37 KW lithium iron phosphate battery pack which charges on 220V power and has enough juice for a 100 mile round trip. The still murky motivating motor reaches a claimed acceleration of 8.2 seconds 0-to-60 MPH with a top speed over 80 MPH. Chassis and battery components are built and assembled in China at the Hafei assembly line while the motor and controller are US made components.

But what's the bottom line on all of this? Price, somewhere in the neighborhood of $40,000 to $45,000, but considering the battery pack exceeds the 20 KW capacity which earns the federal $7,500 incentive, the price becomes a bit more reasonable. But that's not really the bottom line anyway is it? The real question is whether Americans, and Californians specifically, would consider buying a largely Chinese-made electric vehicle built by a company captained by a fashionista environmentalist. [via Hybrid Cars]

Jalopnik Snap Judgment: If you didn't know this was coming, you haven't been paying attention. With the recent focus on global warming and the minor, incremental advances that are left to be made on automobile engines, outdoor power equipment was the next target in sight. So, are we entering the malaise era of the lawnmower? Will our Briggs L-head motors drop from 5 HP to 2.5 HP, saddled with a 5:1 compression ratio and heaps of belt-driven emissions accessories? Probably not. OHV engines have already begun to take over, and they'll likely replace old mower technology, hopefully meeting the new standards with few additions. Boat engines have already gotten pretty high-tech, so it'll likely be even easier for them to pass. The only difference you're likely to see is higher prices. And you're used to that already, right?
UPDATED: More information now available at epa.gov. [Detroit News]

Said the NRMA president, "For too long, Australia's automotive industry has been allowed to play by its own rules, setting paltry voluntary targets and consistently building and importing cars that consume more fuel than their overseas counterparts." That's ridiculous; voluntary standards always work... [Drive.com.au]

The figures were published by Clean Green Cars, which also pointed out that "Every manufacturer with average new car emissions significantly above 200 g/km of CO2 saw sales slump from January to June." Clearly, voluntary agreements are working. Why oh why then did the EU have to implement non-voluntary emissions targets for 2012? Press release below the jump.

Fiat tops the CO2 league; Porsche is rock bottom

Figures published exclusively by Clean Green Cars today reveal that Fiat and MINI are only mainstream manufacturers whose average tailpipe CO2 is now under 140 g/km. That figure was the target car makers' set themselves a decade ago in their voluntary agreement. Data for 2008 shows how far they have fallen short.

"Some manufacturers have delivered on their promise, but the vast majority have to raise their game significantly," said Jay Nagley of Clean Green Cars. "Porsche has the most work to do: bottom of the league, with CO2 emissions that actually went up slightly in the first half of 2008.

"What is interesting is that, as fuel prices rocket and the new car market falters, car makers with the highest emissions are being punished by the consumer. They have been complaining about pressure from the EU to meet what they say are 'unrealistic' targets. Now they are having to face much stiffer targets from the people that really matter: consumers."

Every manufacturer with average new car emissions significantly above 200 g/km of CO2 saw sales slump from January to June. Even bigger drops were reported last month by the five with the worst average CO2 output.

Porsche and Jeep sales were down by more than a half, Land Rover and Chrysler fell by nearly 30% while Subaru registrations plummeted 17.8%. As the total market only fell by 6.1%, there is clear evidence that high-CO2 cars are being heavily penalised.

Eventually the team is looking into a long-term strategy that would involve creation of a truly and completely sustainable system. I'm still trying to wrap my head around the process as well, so take a gander at the press release below and see if you can figure out all of the eggheady scientific jargon.

ATLANTA (February 11, 2008) —Researchers at the Georgia Institute of Technology have developed a strategy to capture, store and eventually recycle carbon from vehicles to prevent the pollutant from finding its way from a car tailpipe into the atmosphere. Georgia Tech researchers envision a zero emission car, and a transportation system completely free of fossil fuels.

Technologies to capture carbon dioxide emissions from large-scale sources such as power plants have recently gained some impressive scientific ground, but nearly two-thirds of global carbon emissions are created by much smaller polluters — automobiles, transportation vehicles and distributed industrial power generation applications (e.g., diesel power generators).

The Georgia Tech team's goal is to create a sustainable transportation system that uses a liquid fuel and traps the carbon emission in the vehicle for later processing at a fueling station. The carbon would then be shuttled back to a processing plant where it could be transformed into liquid fuel. Currently, Georgia Tech researchers are developing a fuel processing device to separate the carbon and store it in the vehicle in liquid form.

The research was published in Energy Conversion and Management . The research was funded by NASA, the U.S. Department of Defense NDSEG Fellowship Program and Georgia Tech's CEO (Creating Energy Options) Program.

"Presently, we have an unsustainable carbon-based economy with several severe limitations, including a limited supply of fossil fuels, high cost and carbon dioxide pollution," said Andrei Fedorov, associate professor in the Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering at Georgia Tech and a lead researcher on the project. "We wanted to create a practical and sustainable energy strategy for automobiles that could solve each of those limitations, eventually using renewable energy sources and in an environmentally conscious way."

Little research has been done to explore carbon capture from vehicles, but the Georgia Tech team outlines an economically feasible strategy for processing fossil or synthetic, carbon-containing liquid fuels that allows for the capture and recycling of carbon at the point of emission. In the long term, this strategy would enable the development of a sustainable transportation system with no carbon emission.

Georgia Tech's near-future strategy involves capturing carbon emissions from conventional (fossil) liquid hydrocarbon-fueled vehicles with an onboard fuel processor designed to separate the hydrogen in the fuel from the carbon. Hydrogen is then used to power the vehicle, while the carbon is stored on board the vehicle in a liquid form until it is disposed at a refueling station. It is then transported to a centralized site to be sequestered in a permanent location currently under investigation by scientists, such as geological formations, under the oceans or in solid carbonate form.

In the long-term strategy, the carbon dioxide will be recycled forming a closed-loop system, involving synthesis of high energy density liquid fuel suitable for the transportation sector.

Georgia Tech settled on a hydrogen-fueled vehicle for its carbon capture plan because pure hydrogen produces no carbon emissions when it is used as a fuel to power the vehicle. The fuel processor produces the hydrogen on-board the vehicle from the hydrocarbon fuel without introducing air into the process, resulting in an enriched carbon byproduct that can be captured with minimal energetic penalty. Traditional combustion systems, including current gasoline-powered automobiles, have a combustion process that combines fuel and air — leaving the carbon dioxide emissions highly diluted and very difficult to capture.

"We had to look for a system that never dilutes fuel with air because once the CO2 is diluted, it is not practical to capture it on vehicles or other small systems," said David Damm, PhD candidate in the School of Mechanical Engineering, the lead author on the paper and Fedorov's collaborator on the project.

The Georgia Tech team compared the proposed system with other systems that are currently being considered, focusing on the logistic and economic challenges of adopting them on a global scale. In particular, electric vehicles could be part of a long-term solution to carbon emissions, but the team raised concerns about the limits of battery technology, including capacity and charging time.

The hydrogen economy presents yet another possible solution to carbon emissions but also yet another roadblock — infrastructure. While liquid-based hydrogen carriers could be conveniently transported and stored using existing fuel infrastructure, the distribution of gaseous hydrogen would require the creation of a new and costly infrastructure of pipelines, tanks and filling stations.

The Georgia Tech team has already created a fuel processor, called CO2/H2 Active Membrane Piston (CHAMP) reactor, capable of efficiently producing hydrogen and separating and liquefying CO2 from a liquid hydrocarbon or synthetic fuel used by an internal combustion engine or fuel cell. After the carbon dioxide is separated from the hydrogen, it can then be stored in liquefied state on-board the vehicle. The liquid state provides a much more stable and dense form of carbon, which is easy to store and transport.

The Georgia Tech paper also details the subsequent long-term strategy to create a truly sustainable system, including moving past carbon sequestration and into a method to recycle the captured carbon back into fuel. Once captured on-board the vehicle, the liquid carbon dioxide is deposited back at the fueling station and piped back to a facility where it is converted into a synthetic liquid fuel to complete the cycle.

Now that the Georgia Tech team has come up with a proposed system and device to produce hydrogen and, at the same time, capture carbon emissions, the greatest remaining challenge to a truly carbon-free transportation system will be developing a method for making a synthetic liquid fuel from just CO2 and water using renewable energy sources, Fedorov said. The team is exploring a few ideas in this area, he added.

Gov. Schwarzenegger Issues Statement after U.S. EPA Rejects California's Tailpipe Emissions Waiver Request

Governor Schwarzenegger today issued the following statement after the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), after nearly two years of delay,
rejected California's request to regulate tailpipe emissions from passenger
cars and light trucks. Over the past year, the Governor has lobbied the
federal government, meeting and sending letters to both President Bush and
USEPA Administrator Johnson. Last month, the Governor announced
California's lawsuit against the agency for failing to act. Today, he
vowed to appeal the decision and pursue every legal opportunity to obtain
the waiver.

"While the federal energy bill is a good step toward reducing dependence on
foreign oil, the President's approval of it does not constitute grounds for
denying our waiver. The energy bill does not reflect a vision, beyond
2020, to address climate change, while California's vehicle greenhouse gas
standards are part of a carefully designed, comprehensive program to fight
climate change through 2050," said Governor Schwarzenegger.

"California has a long and proud history of leadership in reducing pollution
and fighting for clean air. Our citizens place a high priority on good
health and a clean environment, and we are ready to implement the nation's
cleanest standards for vehicle emissions. It has been nearly two years
since we requested the waiver and, now, sixteen other states are following
our lead to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, increase fuel efficiency
and help reduce harmful greenhouse gases. A ruling from the U.S. Supreme
Court earlier this year made it clear that the USEPA has the authority to
limit greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles.

"It is disappointing that the federal government is standing in our way and
ignoring the will of tens of millions of people across the nation. We will
continue to fight this battle. California sued to compel the agency to act
on our waiver, and now we will sue to overturn today's decision and allow
Californians to protect our environment."

Under the Federal Clean Air Act, California has the right to set its own
tougher-than-federal vehicle emission standards, as long as it obtains a
waiver from USEPA. Over the past 30 years the USEPA has granted California
more than 40 such waivers, denying none.

The original request for a waiver of federal preemption of California's
Motor Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards was made by the California
Air Resources Board (ARB) on December 21, 2005. The waiver, allowing
California to enact and enforce emissions standards to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions from automobiles, was requested after the Air Resources Board
developed regulations based on a 2002 California law, AB 1493 by
Assemblymember Fran Pavley.

That law required California to establish new standards for motor vehicle
greenhouse gas emissions beginning in model year 2009. The ARB-adopted
regulations will phase in and ramp up over eight years to cut global warming
emissions from new vehicles by nearly 30 percent by model year 2016.

by implementing these standards, California would be eliminating greenhouse
gases equivalent to taking 6.5 million cars off the road by the year 2020.
If all the other states with similar plans follow through, that figure would
grow to nearly 22 million vehicles and would cut gasoline consumption by an
estimated 11 billion gallons a year.

In letters sent on April
10, 2006 and

October 24, 2006 to President Bush, the Governor reiterated the urgency of
approving California's request to address global warming. On
April 25, 2007, 16 months
after the original waiver request, Governor Schwarzenegger sent a letter to
Administrator Johnson informing him of California's intent to sue after 180
days under the Clean Air Act and Administrative Procedure Act, which
provides mechanisms for compelling delayed agency action.

California's request has been supported by recent judicial decisions. In
September, a court decision in Vermont confirmed that states do have the
ability to adopt California's motor vehicle greenhouse gas emissions
standards. Sixteen states, comprising about 45 percent of all U.S. auto
sales have adopted, or are in the process of adopting, California's
standards.

In the Vermont case, the judge dismissed the argument by automobile
manufacturers that they could not comply with the California-based
regulation because the technology was out of reach and that it would cost
too much. The Vermont decision came on the heels of a U.S. Supreme Court
ruling last April saying the U.S. EPA has the authority to regulate
greenhouse gases.

States that have adopted, or are in the process of adopting, California's
strict automobile emissions standards are: Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut,
Florida, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York,
Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont and Washington. [Sources: CA Governor's Office, NY Times]

There's a monetary penalty for not reaching the standards, based on the difference between the standard and the average multiplied by the volume of cars sold. Of course, there's still disagreement over that. Will this result in lighter, more efficient cars or just more exceptions? Only time and people with foreign accents will tell. [Guardian]

Where do they come from?

Our modern car emissions regulations come courtesy of the 1990 Clean Air Act and all of its happy amendments. Like most laws affecting cars, the federal government sets up some requirements and the individual states are supposed to enforce them. These guidelines are called State Implementation Plans (SIPs) and cover everything from your neighbor's Hyundai to how your local dry cleaner gets rid of their cleaning solvents.

Unlike some of the other laws we've talked about, there's a provision for federal control if state's plans for implementing restrictions don't meet the approval of the EPA (which also depends on who is controlling the EPA, which depends on the administration which is partially related to why some states are not happy).

It's not important to understand the history and full impact of the Clean Air Act, but it is helpful to note that because vehicles sometimes travel from one state to another (especially pollution causing large trucks) there are sometimes regional commissions on air quality. Even within states the are sometimes serious variations from one county to the next in terms of what is and is not required.

How do emissions laws vary?

It would break our server to list every variation in every emissions law for every state and county and zip code, but there are some basic provisions that should be understood and are generally applicable to most states (With 50+ SIPs out there not all of this will apply to everyone). We'll draw heavily from California, which has the strictest air quality standards of any state.

Do you need to get your car checked?

If you've purchased a new car it should already come cleared for a period of 2-6 years depending on where you live and what year you purchased it. When you register your car with the state one of the fees you usually pay on a new car is an emissions testing "abatement fee" where you pay to have your car not tested.

Beyond that point you'll almost always be informed either by a color-coded sticker on your license plate or windshield (as in Texas). If you're in a state like Illinois, you'll receive a letter informing you of where you can get your car inspected and by what date this inspection has to be completed. Always double check when you move and have your car reregistered.

When buying a used car, check to see when the latest emissions test was and assure that all proper paper work has been filled out. In California, for instance, you have to pay a small fee and transfer the smog certificate. If you transfer the car within your family you're exempt from this. If you sell your car to your family, you shouldn't overcharge them.

The test

There are two predominant forms of testing, though there are even variations within the two major types. Both tests involve sniffing your exhaust to see the presence of certain chemicals (specifically hydrocarbons, oxides of nitrogen and carbon monoxide). The hope is that this test will show how efficiently your engine is burning fuel (or not burning fuel).

The basic test involves idling your car and smelling the gas with a device hooked up to a computer. The more complicated test involves a chassis dynometer. This test is referred to as an IM240 because they run your car for approximately 240 seconds to simulate a short drive with an average speed of 29.4 mph and a top speed of 56.7 mph (see the simulation graph here).

Even if your car isn't brand new, as long as you take care of it and there are no known major issues with the engine then you shouldn't have major problems. If your car has had problems or is throwing up a check engine light you might want to figure that out before you take it to the testing facility. One faulty spark plug could be the difference between PASS and FAIL. If you bought a Project Car Hell car you may want to skip down to the exemptions section.

What if I fail?

Most states give you around a month to figure out what's wrong with your car and try again. It's best to take your test results to a friend or trusted mechanic that knows the score if you're not mechanically inclined. If you are mechanically inclined, we recommend checking out this article by PopMechanics.

If you decide not to go back and get your car reinspected you could be up for many levels of trouble. Until recently, you could go to jail in Illinois for not having an up-to-date emissions test. This was because the law required a suspension of drivers license immediately upon getting caught, meaning that if you drove the car you were driving without a license which is an infraction that requires arrest.

Am I exempt?

If your car is of a certain age and meets certain requirements for being a "classic" you might be exempt. For instance, Arizona adjusted their SIP a year ago to exempt cars that were 15 years or older and could be considered a classic. If you've got a malfunctioning Sephia, you're probably out of luck because that car would never qualify as a classic in any part of the country. In California the car has to be from 1975 or earlier to be exempt.

"Testing old cars adds a layer of complexity and often cost for the state agency charged with conducting the tests and the actual benefit to air quality isn't there to justify it," said an individual involved in the process. "Cars older than 25 years are such a minute proportion of total vehicles on the road that you really can't make a difference in air quality no matter what you do with them."

Other exemptions, depending on state, include hybrid vehicles, diesel powered vehicles, electric vehicles, natural gas vehicles of a certain size, trailers (because they don't have engines), cars with junk titles and motorcycles.

Where to get more info?

The best resource is your local Department of Motor Vehicles and you can find a list of your local DMVs here. It's a much easier way of getting the information than trying to parse the many amendments to SIPs (just trust us). The website DMV.org also has simple-to-understand instructions based on the latest laws.

What experiences have you had with getting your car or truck tested?

The point the French are making is that the amount they make per small car is so low that a differentiated requirement would make it less profitable to produce small cars. And that's actually the right point. As we've seen in America, luxury buyers will pay a high premium for just about anything you throw on a car. Just call it "electronic air freshening" and tack another few hundred on that S-Class. [Financial Times]

Gov. Schwarzenegger Announces Lawsuit against U.S. EPA for Failing to Act on California's Tailpipe Emissions Request

Governor Schwarzenegger today announced that California has filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for failing to act on California's tailpipe emissions waiver request. The Governor put the federal government on notice six months ago saying such a lawsuit would be filed if the U.S. EPA continued to delay action on California's request for authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions for cars and light trucks sold in the state. Fourteen other states are expected to join California's lawsuit today.

"California has a long and proud history of leadership in reducing pollution and fighting for clean air for our residents. And we are upholding that tradition today by filing a lawsuit against the federal government that takes a big step forward in the battle against global warming," said Governor Schwarzenegger. "California is ready to implement the nation's cleanest standards for vehicle emissions, but we cannot do that until the federal government grants a waiver allowing us to enforce those standards.

"Our air quality, our health and our environment are too important to delay any longer, and it is not just the people of California who are waiting. Those states that want to follow our lead cannot do so until federal permission is granted. In fact, fourteen other states are expected to join our lawsuit later today."

Following the filing of California's lawsuit against the U.S. EPA today, fourteen states will be announcing that they are joining California as interveners in the lawsuit, including: Massachusetts, New York, Arizona, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Pennsylvania.

Under the Federal Clean Air Act, California has the right to set its own tougher-than-federal vehicle emission standards as long as it obtains a waiver from U.S. EPA. Over the past 30 years the U.S. EPA has granted California more than 40 such waivers, denying none.

The original request for a waiver of federal preemption of California's Motor Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards was made by the California Air Resources Board (ARB) on December 21, 2005. The waiver, allowing California to enact and enforce emissions standards to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles, was requested after the Air Resources

Board developed regulations based on a 2002 California law, AB 1493 by Assemblymember Fran Pavley.

That law required California to establish new standards for motor vehicle greenhouse gas emissions beginning in model year 2009. The ARB-adopted regulations will phase in and ramp up over eight years to cut global warming emissions from new vehicles by nearly 30 percent by model year 2016.

By implementing these standards, California would be eliminating greenhouse gases equivalent to taking 6.5 million cars off the road by the year 2020. If all the other states with similar plans follow through, that figure would grow to nearly 22 million vehicles and would cut gasoline consumption by an estimated 11 billion gallons a year.

In letters sent on April 10, 2006 and October 24, 2006 to President Bush, the Governor reiterated the urgency of approving California's request to address global warming. On April 25, 2007, 16 months after the original waiver request, Governor Schwarzenegger sent a letter to Administrator Johnson informing him of California's intent to sue after 180 days under the Clean Air Act and Administrative Procedure Act, which provides mechanisms for compelling delayed agency action.

California's request has been supported by recent judicial decisions. In September, a court decision in Vermont confirmed that states do have the ability to adopt California's motor vehicle greenhouse gas emissions standards. Sixteen states comprising about 45 percent of all U.S. auto sales have adopted, or are in the process of adopting, California's standards.

In the Vermont case, the judge dismissed the argument by automobile manufacturers that they could not comply with the California-based regulation because the technology was out of reach and that it would cost too much. The Vermont decision came on the heels of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last April saying the U.S. EPA has the authority to regulate greenhouse gases.

States that have adopted, or are in the process of adopting, California's strict automobile emissions standards are: Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont and Washington.

# # #

In his September ruling, US District Judge Ron Sessions said industry's been known to respond "admirably" to such technological challenges. (We're sure Thomas Friedman is readying his fiery attack.) Since California proposed the legislation, 11 more states have adopted it. But before California or any other state can introduce its own emissions regulations, it must receive approval from the EPA, which is expected within the next few months. Additionally, the Bush administration will propose a new set of tailpipe standards before 2008. Scramble the lobbyists! Swarm! Swarm! [The Detroit News]

Press Release:

FRANKFURT LAUNCH FOR FORD ECOnetic RANGE OF ULTRA-LOW CO2 MODEL

The photos you choose to download will come from our North American server. If your response time is slow and you wish to try our European server, CLICK HERE.

* Class-leading 115g/km CO2 for conventional technology in Ford Focus ECOnetic model
* New Ford ECOnetic models will join Ford Flexifuel range to increase affordable low CO2 choices for customers

BRENTWOOD, Essex, August 24, 2007 - Ford of Europe will offer its customers ultra-low CO2 alternatives with the launch of a new range of Ford ECOnetic models at the 2007 Frankfurt Motor Show.

These cars will use the latest common-rail diesel powertrains with features engineered to reduce CO2 emissions. The first to be launched in early 2008 will be the Ford Focus ECOnetic, which promises to deliver best-in-class CO2 emissions for conventional powertrain technology at just 115g/km.

"Although all of our current European models are already highly competitive in terms of CO2, we know that more and more car buyers seek the lowest possible emissions as a key 'why-buy?'," said John Fleming, Ford of Europe president and CEO.

"By launching specific models, with dedicated Ford ECOnetic badging to indicate ultra-low CO2 results, we will give a clear alternative to those customers who prioritise low emissions performance.

"We chose the Ford ECOnetic name because it links ecologically friendly technology to our kinetic design 'energy in motion' philosophy for both driving quality and emotional styling."

Ford Focus ECOnetic: class leading emissions

Further details of the Ford ECOnetic range will be revealed in September at the 2007 Frankfurt Motor Show. The first vehicle to benefit will be the company's most popular model - the Ford Focus.

The new Ford Focus ECOnetic, powered by the highly efficient 109PS, 1.6-litre Duratorq TDCi engine with standard Diesel Particulate Filter, delivers an average fuel consumption of 65.7mpg - corresponding to an average CO2 emission of only 115g/km.

"The challenge for the engineering team was to deliver the maximum reduction in CO2 using available and affordable technologies," said Gunnar Herrmann, Ford's medium car line director.

The starting point for achieving these results was to reduce drive resistances and improve aerodynamics. By lowering the vehicle, adding an aerodynamics kit and using 195/65R15 tyres, a drag coefficient (cd) of 0.31 was achieved.

A further measure to reduce driving resistance, used for the first time in the Ford Focus ECOnetic, is the introduction of new low-viscosity transmission oil developed by Ford's fuel partner BP. Under testing, the efficiency benefits were found to be so significant that this new BP transmission oil is to be introduced across other Ford products in the C and CD segments.

Ford of Europe is already a leader in Flexifuel technology, with Focus and C-MAX models fuelled with bio-ethanol E85 (a blend of 85 per cent bio-ethanol and 15 per cent petrol), petrol or any mixture of both fuels in the same tank.
From early 2008, Flexifuel versions of the new Mondeo, the Ford Galaxy and the Ford S-MAX will be on sale, giving Ford one of the broadest ranges of Flexifuel vehicles in Europe.

Press Release:

SANTA MONICA, Calif., August 1, 2007 —The Automotive X PRIZE (AXP), a competition designed to inspire a new generation of viable, super-efficient vehicles to help break our addiction to oil and stem the effects of climate change, announced today that over 30 teams have signed a letter of intent to compete once the prize is officially funded and launched.

The international competition, in which qualified teams will compete head to head, aims to dramatically increase consumer access to ultra-efficient, clean, affordable and desirable vehicles. The 30 plus teams include diverse groups from the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany and Switzerland. More than 300 additional teams have inquired about joining and are actively considering entry.

"We are thrilled with the wide variety of teams and technologies from around the world that have expressed an interest in joining the competition," said Dr. Peter H. Diamandis, CEO and Chairman, X PRIZE Foundation. "We are confident that the Automotive X PRIZE will motivate and bring visibility to a range of non-traditional solutions from both traditional and non-traditional players. The time for incremental change is over. We need radical breakthroughs to stem the consumption of fossil fuels. An X PRIZE can help make this happen."

The independent and technology-neutral AXP competition is open to teams from around the world to prove they can design, build and bring to market 100 MPG or equivalent fuel economy vehicles that people want to buy. Industry experts will scrutinize team plans. Those that qualify will race their vehicles in rigorous cross-country stages that combine speed, distance, urban driving and overall performance. The winners will be the vehicles that exceed 100 MPG equivalent, fall under strict emissions caps and finish in the fastest time.

"In just a short time, we have seen a tremendous enthusiasm for the Automotive X PRIZE," said Donald J. Foley, executive director of the AXP. "We believe this enthusiasm reflects the strong interest among the car-driving public for new options of super-efficient vehicles. It is clear energy legislation in Congress will fall far short of encouraging the type of breakthroughs that are needed to provide a new generation of ultra-efficient vehicles. We have designed AXP to be a technology-neutral competition to help provide this new generation of vehicles, and we are pleased that the fairness of our competition guidelines has been ratified by the interest among a wide variety of teams and technologies."

The competition is expected to travel through multiple cities while broadcast to a global audience in 2009 and 2010, building consumer demand for vehicles in the competition and demonstrating many practical, clean and affordable vehicle options. Cities involved in the competition route have not yet been chosen.

Reflecting the nature of the non-partisan effort, two leading members of Congress on energy issues, Senators Richard G. Lugar (R-IN) and Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), have expressed their support for the AXP.

The AXP has also received support and encouragement from several government agencies that will help the privately-funded organization conduct the competition and test vehicle compliance, including the U.S. Department of Energy and Argonne National Laboratory; the U.S. Department of Transportation's National Highway, Traffic and Safety Administration (NHTSA) and Federal Highway Administration (FHA); the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ); and the California Air Resources Board (CARB).

In addition, non-governmental organizations supporting the AXP include the National Resources Defense Council, Union of Concerned Scientists, the Apollo Alliance, the Consumer Federation of America, Global Green USA, CALSTART and Greenpeace among others.

The AXP has recently finalized a supporting sponsorship from Adobe. Other early AXP sponsors and donors include Idealab, Ray Sidney of Big George Ventures, the Elbaz Foundation, and the Jack D. Hidary Foundation.

Once fundraising for the prize purse and administration is complete, the AXP will officially launch. "We are seeking assistance from major foundations, corporations and philanthropic individuals to help bring about this revolution in transportation," Diamandis said. "Visionary individuals and organizations have risen to this type of challenge before by backing the Ansari X PRIZE for personal spaceflight, and the Archon X PRIZE for Genomics. We're confident we can build a financial base for this competition as well, and expect one or more heroes to rise to this challenge."

The following 30 teams have signed a letter of intent signaling their intent to apply for the AXP competition:

* Aptera Motors - California, USA
* Commuter Cars Corp. - Washington, USA
* Cornell University - New York, USA
* DEHyds - Washington, USA
* Delta Motorsport - Northants, UK
* Desert Fuel - Arizona, USA
* Disruptech - California, USA
* Dragonfly Technology LTD - Northhampton, UK
* Fuel Vapor Technologies - British Columbia, Canada
* GreenIt! - Oregon, USA
* Herf Duo - Berlin, Germany
* HyKinesys - California, USA
* Kinetic Vehicles - Oregon, USA
* Kuttner Doran Inventions - Virginia, USA
* Loremo AG - Munich, Germany
* Maine Automotive X - Maine, USA
* MDI, Inc. & Zero Pollution Motors LLC - New York, USA
* Michigan Vision - Michigan, USA
* MotoTron Corporation - Wisconsin, USA
* Phoenix Motorcars - California, USA
* Porteon Electric Vehicles, Inc. - Oregon, USA
* Prometheus Systems, LLC - Arizona, USA
* Psycho-Active - Georgia, USA
* Roane Inventions - Texas, USA
* Society for Sustainable Mobility - California, USA
* Spirit One - Alberta, Canada
* Valentin Technologies - Wisconsin, USA
* Tesla Motors - California, USA
* Velozzi - California, USA
* X Tracer - Winterthur, Switzerland
* ZAP Motors - California, USA

ABOUT THE AUTOMOTIVE X PRIZE

The goal of the Automotive X PRIZE (AXP) is to inspire a new generation of viable, super-efficient vehicles that help break our addiction to oil and stem the effects of climate change. The multi-million dollar AXP purse will be awarded to the teams that win a stage race for clean, production-capable vehicles that exceed 100 miles per gallon equivalent fuel economy. For more information please visit auto.xprize.org or email autoprize@xprize.org.

ABOUT THE X PRIZE FOUNDATION

The X PRIZE Foundation is an educational nonprofit prize institute whose mission is to create radical breakthroughs for the benefit of humanity. On October 4, 2004, the X PRIZE Foundation captured world headlines when Mojave Aerospace Ventures, led by legendary aircraft designer Burt Rutan and Microsoft Co-founder Paul Allen, built and flew the world's first private vehicle to space twice in two weeks to win the $10 million Ansari X PRIZE. The Foundation has since expanded its mission beyond space exploration to offer new prizes for breakthroughs in the life sciences, energy and the environment, education and global entrepreneurship. In October of 2006, the X PRIZE Foundation announced the $10 million Archon X PRIZE for genomics, which will reward the first private effort to map 100 human genomes in 10 days ushering in a new era of personalized preventative medicine. For more information please visit www.xprize.org or email press@xprize.org