If the headline writer responsible for the example above is indicative, the future of diesels in the US market doesn't look good. The Detroit News got a chance to drive the new Jeep Grand Cherokee CRD and while Chrysler said he should be able to run 450 miles on a tank, I doubt they meant gasoline. For the record, the range estimate in the instrument panel was on the conservative side and the writer probably could have cover the distance. Fortunately, Mr. Burgess saw fit to use diesel fuel instead of gas.

[Source: Detroit News]

While I was reading this column, I almost thought I was perusing my latest copy of Car and Driver. Then, I realized that the writing was not as good, and the attempts at humor less successful. But, anyway, John McCormick did cover some of the points that Patrick Bedard consistently seems to touch on in his monthly column. Namely that global warming is either fake or that man's contribution to greenhouse gases is insubstantial.

One thing that McCormick wrote did make me think, though. Is it really fair to "double tax" certain automobiles based on both their gasoline consumption and their CO2 output? I'll go out on a limb and say yes. Why? Because the two items are different. Gasoline consumption is closely tied with a vehicle's emissions, but they are certainly two different measurables of a vehicle's impact on the environment.

Walking further out on that limb, let me suggest that the gas-guzzler tax and the so called Clean Air Discount Bill which McCormick's article is about (not a law - just a proposal at this time) should probably not be as high as they currently are. A higher gas tax across the board would have greater effect, and isn't that the point of both laws in the first place? With a gas tax, all vehicles are treated exactly the same, which seems to make more sense.

As always, we welcome your comments and suggestions. Remember, if you want to have some influence yourself, you can always contact Congress as was suggested by the Auto Alliance themselves.

[Source: John McCormick / Detroit News]

We'll be keeping an eye out for GM CEO Rick Wagoner's upcoming speech which was announced this week. The speech will be on GM's strategy to beat Toyota at developing and selling green cars. A source in the know from GM told Bloomberg News that Wagoner will deliver a speech before the end of the year on how GM will use some of the $9 billion it saved by cutting costs and eliminating jobs over the past few quarters to produce cars and trucks that match Toyota's offerings in technology and fuel efficiency. These steps include plug-in hybrids, more efficient ICEs, hydrogen fuel cells vehicles and more.

Doesn't there seem to be a bit of desperation in leaking that GM's big strategy is to match what Toyota is doing? GM isn't even going to try and beat Toyota, just catch up? All right, GM, do it your way. You should know what you're doing. After all, you are losing millions each quarter.

[Source: Bloomberg News / Jeff Green via Detroit News]

Neil Winton, a columnist for the Detroit News' Auto Insider, wrote a piece arguing that we should leave automakers alone and let market forces determine the outcome of emissions and global warming. He states his case in a clever way by not actually stating it at all. He paints the media, environmentalists and left-leaning politicians as emotional opportunists and leaves the rest of his argument to the quoted words of a high-level automotive executive and two automotive experts.

Read the rest after the jump...

[Source: Detroit News]

"We have always found a way to clean the environment and grow the economy at the same time. And when it comes to global warming, we'll do it again." Former President Bill Clinton takes his own words, spoken in the 1998 State of the Union Address, to heart as he gives up his Secret Service issued SUV for a Mariner Hybrid.

The Detroit News reports that Mr. Clinton got a sneak peek at the customized hybrid on Wednesday, but the formal delivery will appropriately occur at a conference on climate change later this month.

USA Today notes that the car's extra features include extra legroom in the rear, a swing-up desk, a refrigerator and some electronic devices to which Ford is sworn to secrecy.

I suppose at some point in the future when Mr. Clinton upgrades to a ZEV, the Mariner will proudly retire along side his '67 'stang in Arkansas' Museum of Automobiles.

Related:

• Top ten green machines
• 2006 Mercury Mariner Hybrid: In the Autobloggreen garage, Day 1-2

[Source: Detroit News]

DaimlerChrysler announced Monday that the company will stop making the diesel Jeep Liberty SUV for sale in the U.S., despite better-than-expected sales in 2005. According to the Detroit News, the compact SUV's engine doesn't meet new tough federal emissions standards that will kick in next year and Chrysler didn't want to put a newer engine into the Liberty. A Chrysler spokeswoman told the Detroit News, "The emission standards are becoming very stringent, and we weren't able to make a credible business case for a limited production vehicle."

The company is not giving up on diesel altogether. A diesel version of the Grand Cherokee SUV is coming in 2007. Diesel Liberty vehicles, which are built in Toledo, will still be sold in Europe. The new diesel regulations have also affected Volkswagen, which recently announced they would not release any diesel versions of their Jetta, Golf or Beetle models in 2007.

[Source: The Detroit News]

GM recently announced a program to lower gas costs for buyers of some of the company's most gas-inefficient vehicles. GM's "fuel price protection program" reimburses the buyer enough money to bring the cost of all of that buyer's gas during the first year down to $1.99 a gallon. The reimbursement process is slightly confusing, and GM, the supposed "Live Green, Go Yellow" company, has taken a lot of flack since its introduction a few weeks ago. Instead of encouraging less gas consumption, the program seems designed to encourage more gas usage. The program only applies to buyers in Florida and California and ends July 5. There are no plans to expand the program outside of those two states.

Critics are comparing GM's promotion to "a crack dealer looking to keep his addicts on a tight leash" and calling it "lunacy", according to the Detroit News.
Eric Haxthausen, who works at Environmental Defense, said the program is "a gimmick, and if GM would focus more on making fuel-efficient cars and trucks, they wouldn't need such gimmicks."

My least favorite part of the article is from David Cole, head of the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, who politicizes the program. He said, "The liberal philosophy is we ought to not be buying GM SUVs and instead buying Toyota Priuses. That's their perfect world but it's not the world in which we live." As if clean air and better mileage is something only "liberals" want. How does that make sense?

[Source: Detroit News]

The Detroit News reports the House Energy and Commerce Committee is looking in to new federal fuel economy standards this week for passenger cars. The bill would use the same language as the light truck regulations, allowing for annual fuel economy increases. The current Corporate Average Fuel Economy standard for passenger cars is at 27.5 mpg, while the industry is averaging 29 mpg. While the bill itself might be on the fast track, don’t expect changes in passenger car fuel economy anytime soon, the bill includes an 18 month lead time, meaning no changes are to happen until at least the 2009 model year. It seems automakers are offering some support to the proposed legislation. A stronger bill, which would require automobiles manufactured by 2015 to have a fuel economy of at least 33 mpg is being opposed by automakers. Michigan legislators are hesitant in their support, clearly fearing these rules might affect their local economies.

[Source: The Detroit News]