The New York Times is adding their first plug-in hybrid van to their New York City delivery fleet with the addition of a new Dodge Sprinter. The Sprinter is being provided by a partnership of DaimlerChrysler, the New York Power Authority (NYPA), Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and Con Edison. The van will be operating between the Times Queens printing plant, the Manhattan headquarters and various locations around the city.

The Sprinter is equipped with a 220V charging system, a lithium ion battery pack, and regenerative braking that combined can provide 20 miles of electric only driving. When the battery power is insufficient, the clean diesel engine will kick in. Urban driving in a place like Manhattan where lots of stop and go (mostly stop) is the order of the day is the ideal application for this type of system. The Chrysler press release is after the jump.

[Source: Chrysler]

Many of us green-minded car nuts have at one point or another suffered from the worst of all diametrical battles within - high performance v. high mileage. I'll be the first to admit that some years ago I owned a '69 Alfa Romeo GTV. The engine displaced just under 1.8 liters, but with high-performance camshafts and a stripped-out fuel injection system replaced by two 45mm Weber side-draft carburetors, mileage wasn't exactly an underlying (or even peripheral) theme. Now that I'm older and wiser, the car is gone and I've actually been able to manage a relatively small carbon footprint, but it's always interesting to hear the stories of others and their respective transitions from guzzler to green.

Alex Williams has a particularly interesting story which was printed in Wednesday's New York Times. He describes himself as a "pale green" environmentalist who's concerned about global warming, air pollution and oil dependency, though, he still loves muscle cars. In an effort to start his self re-education, he took a Prius out for a test drive. I won't synopsize the whole story as you should read it yourself, but there's one humorous bit I'll give up before you click the link.

He describes a recent hybrid convert from California who owns both a Prius and a 7.0-liter Corvette Z06. The gentleman says that driving the Prius is like a competition, although one in which you try to achieve the best possible gas mileage. "You're trying to stay above the 50 mile-per-gallon level, and it's usually just out of reach - Okay, the light is turning yellow up there, turn, better ease off the gas and let the brakes regenerate... It's so fun to watch it, and see if you can maximize."

If you feel those pangs of remorse when polishing your 'Stang or the pangs of desire when you see someone else's, take a look at the article and sympathize with Alex.

[Source: New York Times]

Graphic: New York Times

The use of aluminum in automobiles is by no means ground-breaking news. Sixteen years ago Honda pioneered the first all-aluminum unibodied mass-produced vehicle with the NSX. Since then we've seen automakers turn to aluminum to reduce the weight of drivetrain components, body parts, suspension parts and the chassis while Audi has quite possibly been aluminum's loudest proponent among the major manufacturers.

If you'd like to delve a little deeper into the use of aluminum in cars, here's a short, fun New York Times article discussing the matter. The first issue they tackle is the fact that while aluminum is about one-third the weight of steel, it's also about one-third as stiff. You might extrapolate that this being true, the amount of aluminum used in a vehicle would have to be about three times that of steel, so no weight savings would be realized, but you'd be wrong. The key is that the thickness of any given material used is determined not directly by material strength, but by its resistance to buckling when formed into specific shapes. Because of aluminum's specific properties, it can often be reduced to about 1.5 times the thickness of a corresponding steel structure at only about half the weight. For instance, the Audi A8 aluminum space frame tilts the scales at just 548 lbs which is 46 percent lighter than it would have been if manufactured from steel.

The article also mentions that recent developments in aluminum casting techniques can produce parts that are nearly as strong as if they were forged. Unfortunately, the depth of the article prohibits the author from getting into deeper levels of detail, however, it remains an interesting, light read if you've got the time.

[Source: New York Times]

Treehugger recently wrote about this article in the New York Times spotlighting General Motors for switching to solar power for electricity in some of their buildings. The reason why the General's accountants are so happy is because they're saving money on their electric bill and there wasn't a single penny to pay for upfront costs.

Take GM's parts building in Cucamonga, California. The photovoltaic cells that are installed on the building's roof can generate about 1.5 million kilowatt hours per year, however, GM buys the electricity from the cells just as they would from the grid. That's where the solar developer called Deers (Developing Energy Efficient Roof Systems) comes in. They signed GM to a long-term contract, bought the equipment and then installed it. And now, GM expects that the system will reduce their overall electricity costs by 10 percent.

Kamesh Gupta, manager of planning and programs for General Motors Energy and Utility Services, said that, "the savings are small, but it's exciting to create such an environmentally sound project without any need to shell out capital." To us, it sounds like a winning effort for all parties involved as well as the environment.

[Source: New York Times via Treehugger]

It's time to take a serious look at our country's federal gasoline tax. According to the New York Times, it's been set at 18.4 cents per gallon since 1993. This is FAR lower than any other industrialized nation. The article also points out that according to the International Energy Agency, America's overall gas taxes in August averaged just 40 cents per gallon while Britain and Germany were at $4.24 and $3.99, respectively.

Over the past 13 years a lot has changed. Just look at the Consumer Price Index (CPI). It has gone up 59.4 points during that time, meaning what would have been priced at $1.45 in 1993 would cost $2.04 today. Yet, the federal gas tax has remained rock steady. Earlier, Mike pointed out that the U.S. only consists of about 5 percent of the global population and yet consumes 25 percent of its oil, two-thirds of which is used for transportation. What happens when the rest of the world starts asking for its fair share? Peak oil, anyone?

There's more, like right-wing support and a touch of Pigovian economics, after the jump...

On Monday, Dr. Cornelius Murphy, Jr. president of the State University of New York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry (SUNY-ESF) and Timothy S. Carey, president and chief executive officer of the New York Power Authority (NYPA), were presented a plug-in hybrid electric Sprinter van concept vehicle by DaimlerChrysler for use in SUNY-ESF's fleet of 34 alternative-fuel utility vehicles.

NYPA has joined the Electric Power Research Institute with the cooperation of DaimlerChrysler to test and demonstrate plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) in real-world conditions for a three-year period. Throughout the rest of 2006 and 2007, five prototypes which are currently being tested in Germany will make their way to the U.S. and will be placed in various fleets across the country. Robert Graham, Electric Transportation Program manager at EPRI says that internal studies indicate that fleet applications offer the best opportunity for the early demonstration of plug-in hybrids. One of the vehicles will be put to the test in the fleet of The New York Times.

Dr. Murphy was notably pleased that SUNY-ESF was chosen as one of the testing environments and said, "Today's demonstration of a new plug-in hybrid electric Sprinter Van is another step forward toward a cleaner, greener world."

[Source: State University of New York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry]

After a visit to Brazil, the world's only major ethanol exporter, Pulitzer Prize-winning foreign affairs columnist Thomas L. Friedman wrote a piece published in Friday's New York Times (Times Select subscription required) fully endorsing ethanol as a renewable alternative to gasoline.

I usually hold Mr. Friedman's work in the highest regard, however, his relentless support for increased ethanol production and the further development of flex-fuel cars in the States seems somewhat careless. He says he traveled to Brazil "to better grasp what is real and what is not in the ethanol story," yet he doesn't provide a single remark about the downside of ethanol except for the well-known fact that it contains less energy than gasoline and quickly dismisses it noting that with a calculator one can make sure he/she is still paying less for their fuel as ethanol's going rate in Sao Paulo is about $2 per gallon compared to $4 per gallon for gasoline.

Mr. Friedman goes on to say that "not only is ethanol for real, but we have not even begun to tap its full potential." He points to the words of Plinio Mario Nastari, one of Brazil's top ethanol consultants, who says that each stalk of sugar cane contains 3 energy sources:

1. The ethanol extracted from the cane.
2. The cane waste, bagasse, which is used to heat steam boilers that produce more than enough electricity to power the refining process. He adds that if refiners converted to new high-pressure boilers they could yield 3 times the amount of electricity.
3. The potential cellulosic ethanol derived from leaves which are currently just left in the fields, though, he concedes that this is a technology about 5 years away.

It seems as though Mr. Friedman fails to notice that his primary source of information in this specific case is highly biased. What about the energy balance debate? Is ethanol energy positive? The DOE says yes, but there are still studies that dispute their findings. What of the harmful environmental impact of growing massive amounts of corn on U.S. farmlands and converting it to ethanol? Granted, Mr. Friedman's primary focus is to ween the U.S. off foreign oil, however, it's an issue that can't be dismissed when discussing the future of America's energy infrastructure. And finally, is the U.S. even capable of producing enough ethanol to significantly reduce our oil imports?

While it seems as though ethanol can provide a partial answer to America's energy problem, Mr. Friedman posits Brazil's successful ethanol industry as a model for the U.S. without revealing the flip-side of the argument and goes as far as implying America's hesitation to embark on a full-fledged ethanol effort as stupidity by saying, "If only we were as smart as Brazil ..."

[Source: New York Times]

With the end of Honda's production of the Insight this year, The New York Times takes a nostalgic look at America's first modern gas-electric hybrid.

Introduced in 1999, the Insight offered an E.P.A. rating of 70/61 on highway and city streets. In 2006, the little two-seater still offers the best estimated mileage numbers. Despite it's fuel savings, the Insight didn't fair well in sales over its production run. It offered no trunk with an uncomfortable suspension set-up riding atop hard, narrow tires to Americans paying an average of just $1.39 per gallon for gasoline. The Insight, in turn, never seemed to break out of its niche role as a utilitarian mode of transportation for extreme treehuggers.

Honda estimates that since 1999, the total sales of the Insight will be roughly 18,000. It's a pretty modest number when compared to Toyota's Prius which was introduced in Japan in 1997 and then exported to Europe and North America in 2000. Just this last April, the Prius passed the half million mark.

Honda, however, was able to pave a path for the recent surge of high mileage, alternative-power cars in the U.S. by introducing the word hybrid to the American automotive scene and offering an insight into future possibilities.

Honda's baby hybrid will surely be considered a classic in the years to come.

[Source: The New York Times]

Everyone's heard about individual survivalists rejecting modern society and, instead, living off the land. But how about an entire town? The tiny town of Reynolds, Indiana, won't be building barricade and polishing shotguns. However, it's still a first, a "biotown" that will power itseflt using modern devices with renewable resources such as biodiesel, human and animal waste.

The state originally presented the idea to the conservative town of 533. Hesitation quickly gave way to passionate support as townsfolk experienced rising gas prices which they blame on Middle East countries. Residents have purchased nearly 100 flex-fuel vehicles while the town government has replaced its three vehicles with those that can run ethanol or bio-diesel. And officials are looking into a plant that is fueled by animal and human manure. Many of the funds to support these costly technologies are provided by the Department of Energy. The town and state are also looking to private investors for many of the projects like a future methane plant.

There are a lot of barriers with some as simple as the cost of installing ethanol tanks in the town's only gas station. Personally, I hope they succeed. But even if BioTown fails, there will be plenty of data for future experiments.

[Source: New York Times]

Even though Volkswagen's recent announcement it is cancelling three diesel models for 2007, there still is hope for a thriving diesel market in the U.S. The New York Times reports on the general market for diesel, which promises to grow in the U.S. Buyers of SUVs and cars that normally opt for larger gasoline engines will be open to spending some extra money on diesel engines, which will provide exceptional performance and durability, while saving money on fuel. In addition, tax incentives currently available to hybrids will be offered on clean diesel engines, made possible by the low-sulfur diesel fuel which will be available at filling stations starting October 1st, 2006.

The diesel skeptics point to the refining capacity in the U.S., which is heavily slanted towards gasoline. The comparison is made to the European market, where diesel has become extremely popular, in large part due to tax policy. A former oil executive comments that diesel buyers in Europe drive more, and therefore save no net fuel. In my opinion, this argument is flimsy at best. Diesel buyers in Europe do not drive more because they use less fuel; they drive more because they need to for various reasons. And the argument that the same benefits can be achieved from hybridization or advances in gasoline technology is a stretch as well. While hybrids work excellent for the driver with significant stop-and-go driving, they do not provide significant fuel savings for those consumers that do mostly highway driving. Advances in gasoline engines could eventually reach the efficiency of diesel engines, but more research in that area is needed. Clean and efficient diesel engines are available today, and provide an excellent alternative for some consumers. If you look at the love for SUVs and pick-up trucks in the U.S. market, it is surprising diesel engines have not made inroads in the light duty market much sooner. These heavier vehicles are ideally matched to the characteristics of diesel engines.

[Source: New York Times]

Scott Sklar, over at Renewable Energy Access, synthesizes three recent polls that ask Americans their opinions on energy and how it affects them. His point is that the three polls, when taken together, show an "American consensus" on energy attitudes. The New York Times/CBS News, Reuters and Pew Research took the polls, which were conducted or released in April. The highlights, as far as green driving is concerned, are that 90 percent think our lack of energy independence jeopardizes national security, huge majorities favor more research and development of renewable energy sources and over half said they'd accept a tax increase on gas if it reduced dependence on foreign oil or resulted in less consumption or eased the threat of global warming. All in all, the people seem ready for real leadership on green issues.

[Source: Renewable Energy Access]

Recycling beer bottles just isn’t what it used to be. The New York Time has a story about an old Miller Lite brewing facility in New York state that shut down over ten years ago is getting ready to brew some more alcohol, but this time the fermentation tanks and kettles that used to brew beer will be used to make ethanol. The project makes sense, as the fuel will be produced near where it will be used. In a nice bit of human interest, one of the people spearheading the project worked at the plant for 15 years making beer until it closed in 1993.
The owners of the plant, Northeast Biofuels, will be taking willow tree byproduct from nearby paper mills and turning it into ethanol. The large scale of the project using willow tree bits is untested, but the plan is to have the ethanol rolling out the door by 2008. Hopefully by then there will be gas stations in the Northeast that sell E85 or some other ethanol-gasoline blend. [Source: New York Times]

The other day, I wrote about TerraPass, a way to buy your way out of your car’s polluting ways, a sort of indulgence for the modern age. TerraPass is just one such sticker-based way to announce that, “yeah, I drive but I’m considerate”, as this New York Time article shows. The voluntary offset programs the article mentions – including Carbonfund, Native Energy.com and Self.org as well as TerraPass – all rely on people feeling guilty enough to pay something for their carbon producing sins, but not feeling enough guilt or desire for change or whatever to buy an electric car or bike or walk. As the article mentions, these programs don’t actually decrease the amount of pollution cars pump into the air. They invest in new technologies so that energy producers in other areas can use wind or solar energy. If you’re thinking about spending a little bit of money to green up your car, the article give you a good idea of what you’re getting into. The article online even has a video on the subject. [Source: New York Times, Image from the New York Times]