A story by Lawrence Ulrich on MSNBC over the weekend made a claim I think we need to explore a bit here on AutoblogGreen. Ulrich writes about driving a very clean six-cylinder gasoline engine 2008 Honda Accord, then says the car is only available in certain states:

You can't actually buy this ultra-green Accord, or the four-cylinder version that also produces near-zero pollution. That is, unless you live in California, New York or six other northeast states that follow California's tougher pollution rules. Only there can you buy this Accord, or the roughly two dozen other models that meet so-called Partial Zero Emissions Vehicle standards, PZEV for short.

Not only can't you buy one, but the government says it's currently illegal for automakers to sell these green cars outside of the special states. Under terms of the Clean Air Act-in the kind of delicious irony only our government can pull off-anyone (dealer, consumer, automaker) involved in an out-of-bounds PZEV sale could be subject to civil fines of up to $27,500.

This law against selling PZEVs outside of certain areas is a topic we haven't really explored on AutoblogGreen. Until now.

Currently, fourteen states have adopted or are poised to adopt California's rules. Florida is the most recent, taking the step in July. The others are Vermont, Connecticut, Arizona, Maryland, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, New York, Oregon, Maine, New Jersey, Rhode Island, New Mexico and Washington. To see when these other states followed California's lead, check out the Pew Center on Global Climate Change's map here.

So, how does the Clean Air Act prevent PZEV sales outside of the California-law-abiding states? Or, is Ulrich full of it and this law he's talking about simply doesn't exist? Click past the jump with me to investigate.

After running their radio and print ads for the last few weeks, and creating a few websites all designed to sway consumer opinion away from higher government-mandated fuel economy requirements, The Auto Alliance is back with similar tactics, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists. The problem, as UCS sees it, is that the ads are only focusing on the surcharges that gas-guzzling vehicles would receive while leaving out the vital information that the other 65 percent of vehicles would qualify for a rebate or fall between the rebate and the surcharge - effectively zero-ing out. The Alliance has also created a California-specific webiste: wedrivecalifornia.com.

According to Charles Territo, a spokesman for the Alliance, "We fundamentally think that these car taxes are unfair to large families, small businesses, working people, farmers, contractors and anyone else who needs a larger vehicle." Read more to his argument here.

We've got the more of the statement from the Union of Concerned Scientists after the break.

Related:

• GM, Chrysler and The Auto Alliance create websites to sway consumers to contact Congress
• Automakers create radio and print ads in an attempt to stall fuel economy regulations

[Source: Union of Concerned Scientists]

The Union of Concerned Scientists say the technology to build a highly fuel efficient family vehicle is already available and on the shelf. So Bob Lutz challenged the scientists to show him.

"This is a challenge I want to put out to people who think they have a solution, and are so much smarter than we are," Lutz told the Wall Street Journal, and this quote was repeated in a Detroit News story. "Let them come and see us. If the technology were readily and easily available, what on earth would our motive be for withholding it?"

So the meeting with David Friedman of the UCS was held in Lutz' office, but no one is talking much about what was said. Friedman appeared to be the most frustrated, telling the News that the scientists will "have to build a driveable vehicle" to convince GM that the technology is ready and available. On the other side, Lutz maintains that the scientists don't understand the business, regulatory and consumer issues necessary to sell a car.

[Source: David Shepardson / Detroit News]

Honda has been making headlines on sites such as ours as of late with the greening of their automotive fleet. Remember, Honda is not exactly a newcomer to the world of green vehicles, their Insight brought them into the hybrid game right from the start. Not only that, the combined fuel economy of their fleet of vehicles is the best in America. They offer hybrid versions of their Civic and Accord, and have been working on their hydrogen fuel cell vehicles for years. They also have CNG versions of the Civic. So, it should come as no surprise that they have won the award as the "Greenest Automaker" for the fourth consecutive year from the Union of Concerned Scientists. Want to know more? Check out this article from The Auto Channel. Don't forget to watch the included video.

[Source: The Auto Channel]

The Union of Concerned Scientists say the technology to build a fuel-efficient family vehicle that can meet future emissions standards is already implemented in some of today's vehicles. Instead of fighting against these government mandates with lawyers and lobbyists, they say just let the engineers build the vehicle.

To demonstrate their position, the group designed a theoretical minivan called the UCS Vanguard that runs off-the-shelf powertrain components and technology.

"All of the technologies in the Vanguard are in vehicles on the road today, but automakers have yet to combine them all in one single package," said a UCS news release

Some of these technologies include variable valve timing, cylinder deactivation, 6-speed transmission and biofuels.

Implementing all modern technologies may not as simple in reality as on a computer screen. First, it's expensive. I know that prices would come down with higher production numbers. But it's still expensive.

Also, I'm quite sure powertrain engineers have built test mules with even more technology. The problem is integrating different technologies because the tuning has to be so precise. I've had this discussion with many powertrain engineers. There are always tradeoffs when tuning variables are adjusted. Go for fuel economy and NOx might go up. Simply piling on technology doesn't always solve problems. There has to be integration and tuning, and sometimes that takes time, and it certainly takes money. But I wholeheartedly agree with UCS that Detroit should stop whining through their lobbyists and direct more efforts toward engineering.

[Source: Union of Concerned Scientists]

"Out of Balance" is a short film that addresses ExxonMobil's impact on the climate and how the company influences governments and media. The filmmakers have recently posted a two-and-one-half minute trailer on their website and have announced that the movie has been accepted by the Sierra Club Energy Film Festival. As each festival hits a city, expert panelists will also be available for comments.The movie interviews numerous scientists and draws footage from Greenpeace and Union of Concerned Scientists. In addition to offering evidence that ExxonMobil ignores climate science, the film offers ideas for the social changes necessary to help turn around the situation. The film is for sale through Joe Public Films.

[Source: World Out of Balance]

A small-town paper near where I grew up in Michigan recently published a long and detailed explanation on biomass energy. I poked around online a bit and found out it was taken from the Union of Concerned Scientists and, since the entire thing is available online, I thought I'd pass it along to AutoblogGreen readers interested in some of the details of how ethanol and biodiesel fit into the realm of biomass and other possibilities of turning plants into energy humans can use.

The UCS says that trees and grasses are best suited for biomass use, even though corn is the main ingredient today. They also estimate that using biomass to produce electricity will someday soon return ten units of energy for every one used to produce the juice.
The UCS has an entire section on clean energy technologies, including solar, wind, geothermal and hydroelectric. If you – or someone you're trying to explain these energy types to – are unclear on some of the basics, these pages will make things much easier to comprehend. The simple explanation they use to describe biomass, for example, is to think of it as a "natural battery for storing solar energy".

[Source: Union of Concerned Scientists]