Forty or fifty years ago, every manufacturer built concept cars with alternative– and sometimes pretty outlandish– power plants (small nuclear reactor, anyone?). The gas turbine was a popular choice. GM, Ford and Chrysler were all deeply involved in gas turbine research, stretching back to the late '40s and early '50s. In 1963, Chrysler built a fleet of 50 distinctively-styled turbine-powered cars and gave them to consumers to generate real-world feedback. Turbine engines were the wave of the future– a technologically-advanced powerplant that could run on anything combustible that would flow through a pipe, from kerosene to perfume. Chrysler's test program racked-up over 1.1m miles. They continued turbine engine research until the mid 70s, when they actually planned to put a turbine into production. Then, suddenly, nothing. Chrysler's financial problems led to government loan guarantees that included stipulations that they abandon plans to produce turbines (too risky). GM and Ford had long-since been distracted by other shiny objects like rotary engines and winning LeMans. So turbine engine research halted. With all the emphasis now on alternative fuels, perhaps it's time to revive an engine that can run on hydrogen, biofuels, petroleum distillates or even coal dust. Combined with modern engine-control technology, it could be worth a second look. Or not.

Tesla Motors Chairman Elon Musk begins his NewsHour interview by putting the hate on hydrogen. "If fuel cells were good, don't think you'd see them somewhere, like maybe in a laptop or a cell phone or a $200 million military satellite maybe? And yet, where do you see them?" Not that the majority of Tesla's deposit bestowing proto-customers have seen their Roadsters. Anyway, NewsHour asks, what's so special about a laptop-powered car anyway? "It's combining those little cans of chemicals," Musk educates. "A very large number of them, and making it safe and making it reliable and making it last a long time, and those are very difficult things and nobody's succeeded in doing that except Tesla." Musk quickly deflects attention to "model two," a $59k luxury sports sedan that's "just going to be awesome." Musk then drops the bomb in our headline, and takes a shot at TTAC. "There are always skeptics and naysayers, but I think the smart money's on us." (Quick! Get SpongeBob on the line. Is it opposite day?). There's lots more BS ("we actually expect to have eventually millions of cars on the road"). Suffice it to say, Musk's inquisitor eventually guzzles the Kool-Aid. "SPENCER MICHELS: You could change the world. ELON MUSK: We need to change the world. There's no choice." Next up: Musk walks on water. Or is that hydrogen?

While you contemplate the full misery that this sad state of affairs inflicts upon the average UK motorist, eating into what's laughing called their after-tax income, consider this factoid. At various times in the last three years, the UK was an oil exporter. So why the masochism at the pump? Hey, you try running a socialist country– whose population's roughly equal to California and Texas combined– on just £552b per year. The bottom line: taxes. Pistonheads reports that "Duty on both petrol and diesel is now 50.3p a litre – around 40% of the total cost at the pumps. The duty on champagne is said to be £1.87 a bottle, which means that on a £20 bottle the duty makes up roughly less than 10%…. Polls have shown that more than half the population now blame the Government for the spiralling cost of fuel." So what's a government faced with disgruntled (disgruntled I tell you) motorists to do? Raise the fuel duty by .2p per [imperial] gallon. PH commentator 109 Bob shows how cynical UK subjects have become. "What bloody difference will it make by scrapping the 2p increase that is planned. What difference would it make if 10p was to be taken off duty, absolutely no difference what so ever to me our you. The decrease in price would just get swallowed up & prices will continue to increase." Yes they're mad as Hell and they're gonna take it some more. 

The Atlantic boasts a lengthy article on the Chevy Volt containing some pretty eye-opening revelations from author Jonathan Rauch. "And how, I ask [Volt chief engineer Andrew Farah] over coffee early one February morning in Detroit, is it going… The car, he says, is 10 weeks behind the original schedule. Any more slippage, and the 2010 deadline will be history. Even if no more time is lost, he will have only eight weeks to test the underbody, the car's structural base. Is that enough time? He answers indirectly. In some cars, he says, testing the underbody can take a year." And the mood permeates the entire program: "At the end of February, when I returned to the technical center, the picture looked different. December's ebullience had given way to a sense of strain that was evident even to a tourist. 'We currently are at the limit of our stretch,' one senior battery engineer told me." None of this seems to bode well for the timely arrival or reliability of what is arguably the most advanced automobile ever offered for sale in the U.S. Or for the company that's attempting to pull the miracle out of its ass hat.

Justin: prepare to be amazed. It works! Twice! In a row!

"There have been many articles about forced labor in Brazil and also ecological issues, deforestation of the rain forest, local pollution," says Anders Fredikson, vice-president at Swedish ethanol importer Sekab. "We are in the business and know many are exaggerated, some are false." Of course, that also means that some of the claims about Brazilian ethanol production are true. But you can't blame Fredrikson for playing with weasel words. The guy helped broker a deal to import 115 million liters of anhydrous ethanol from South America that "adheres to certain social and environmental standards." OK, we're listening. "Mills must use at least 30 percent mechanized harvesting today and increase this to 100 percent by 2014. An independent international company will audit all the groups production units twice a year." Wow! Twice a year! That's, what, once more than once a year. And it's not like these companies might attempt to hide any transgressions in an attempt to, say, save tens of millions of dollars in capital expenditure. The UK's Guardian newspaper isn't nearly so cynical. "At least 10 groups around the world are currently discussing sustainability standards for ethanol and a certification criteria that could be adopted worldwide but no decision has been taken yet about this. Brazil's industry expects to meet part of the world's demand for alternative fuels in the coming years and is preparing to address growing concerns about environment and social concerns related to ethanol production." Ready, set… ethics!

The Easton, Pennsylvania City Council is set to pass a town ordinance that would seize the cars of "johns" cruising through their town looking for prostitutes. The Morning Call reports that the new law would apply to any vehicle used ''to solicit prostitution or to engage in an act of prostitution or to solicit or engage in sexual activity.'' We're not talking about impounding (so to speak); the ordinance would allow the city to keep or sell the confiscated vehicles. Councilwoman Elinor Warner introduced the ordinance, which was last mooted a decade previous. She has no doubts that the law will scare off the mobile sex trade that's been plaguing the city for years. In an unfortunate choice of words, she claimed it would attack the demand side of the equation and ''spread the love around, and make it hard on the johns as well.'' Warner's City Council colleagues have no problem with silly little things like constitutionality. Councilman Roger Ruggles told the paper that state law already allows police to seize vehicles used in drug deals. ''I don't see much of a difference." I wonder what kind of car he drives…

CNN Money's editor at large, Paul LaMonica, thinks GM should be kicked out of the Dow Jones Industrial Average. He argues that GM's poor performance, their plans to ditch HUMMER and the current 0% financing offer are all indicators that GM is in trouble. (If I were a cynic, I'd ask where he was when GM dumped Oldsmobile and had their "anyone with a pulse" financing deals.) What does LaMonica suggest to replace GM in the Dow? It "can still have an automotive component… GM is continuing to lose share to Japanese rivals Toyota (TM) and Honda (HMC). While the editors at the [Wall Street] Journal have maintained that the DJIA is only for American companies, I think that's a view whose time has passed." He concludes GM's just one of several companies "that are just not as relevant as they used to be, such as Sears, Eastman Kodak and U.S. Steel… GM's time has come." Ok — enough is enough. What took you (and everyone else) so long to figure this out?

C'mon, let's face reality here. If you were a foreign automaker aspiring to sell your products in the U.S., there are a few facts that should stop you dead in your tracks. 1) North America is the world's most competitive automotive market. There's a reason The Big 2.8 are fighting for their survival and it's not because they're the only kids on the block 2) You couldn't imagine a worse time to be selling cars in the U.S. The new vehicle market is in chaos. And it's about to get worse. When Chrysler, Ford and/or GM files for C11, there will be a cataclysmic and unpredictable market upheaval. 3) If there's one car brand you don't want to bring to the U.S. it's FIAT. I know people who've never SEEN a FIAT, who weren't BORN when FIAT sold cars in the U.S., who know that the Italian brand is famous for rust, mechanical failure and parts unavailability. You'd be better off pulling a Lexus and creating an entirely new brand; that cane won't hunt. Now, The Detroit Free Press' Mark Phelan has a corner (stay in that corner and don't come out until you have a story!), in which he reports "Italy's Alfa Romeo and Fiat cars are on the verge of returning to the United States, Fiat Group CEO Sergio Marchionne told the Automotive News Europe Congress." Yes, "The Fiat Group, which owns Alfa Romeo — and the Ferrari, Maserati, Fiat, Lancia and Abarth brands — plans to relaunch Alfa in America next year and may also sell the stylish Fiat 500 subcompact here." Oh, Alfa. That's alright then. Isn't it? 

Motor Authority reports that a new, smaller Bavarian SUV has been caught running the 'Ring. And they're doing so with a straight face (BMW, not the Australian bloggers). Based on the 1-Series (not our favorite Bimmer), the X1 will be smaller than the X3. Uglier too, which is quite an impressive feat. The X1 will borrow design cues from the sleek CS Concept, including the big flat nostrils, headlights and an "aggressive bumper" (whatever that may mean). The X1 will not only be more expensive than the 1-Series (gulp), it will share many parts with the upcoming MINI Cooper SUV in order to reduce costs. You can also order your X1 with a 145 hp 1.8-liter four-banga or a 3.0-liter diesel, though probably not here. Look for your daughter's best friend to be driving an X1 xDrive35i to the prom in 2009.

Automotive News [sub] reports that Pininfarina is building a one-off based on Rolls-Royce's unobtainable Phantom Drophead Coupe. The Pininfarina Hyperion is a stylish convertible boulevardier built for a mysteriously unnamed private collector. The Hyperion will debut at the Pebble Beach Concourse d'Elegance this August. No word on what this monument to excess will cost its lucky owner, but given the bloated price points of other Italian reskins of the latest and hottest, one can only expect a price tag that would make Croesus blush. That saidm, besides a fresh new Italian suit, the Hyperion doesn't offer anything that's not available at the Drophead's if-you-have-to-ask price of $412k. Besides envious looks at even the toniest of locales, of course. Which we can all agree is more important than mere money.

A widely touted goal of the environmental movement: increasing American's percentage of renewable energy use to 25 percent by 2025. According to a report by the RAND corporation, meeting the so-called "25 by 25" goal without significant consumer cost will require "major technological developments." Green Car Congress reports that 9.5 percent of electricity and 1.6 percent of motor vehicle fuel currently comes from renewable energy sources. The RAND report identifies biomass and wind energy as the two greatest opportunities for meeting the 25 by 25 goal. But it also points out that both require significant improvement to make a low-cost impact on renewable energy usage. For motor vehicles in particular, biomass-based (non-foodstock) "second-gen" biofuels must become significantly cheaper and more prevalent. Reducing renewable fuel goals to 10 or 15 percent by 2025 would also disproportionately reduce consumer expenses. Then again, the higher the cost to consumers, the more competitive renewable fuels become. The preceeding was brought to you by the Energy Future Coalition of UAW Boss Ron Gettelfinger's "Marshall Plan" fame. Over to you, taxpayers. 

Toyota's dominance in hybrid technology has other OEM's straining to leapfrog on to The Next Big Thing. While GM tries to beat ToMoCo to the PHEV punch, Mazda decided to combine three imperfect technologies into one over-the-top rolling lab. By modifying a Wankel rotary engine to run on hydrogen, and then adding a hybrid system, Mazda's Premacy Hydrogen RE Hybrid wins the prize for the most complicated possible approach to high-efficiency motoring. But let's not condemn this franken-hybrid to the scrap heap of engineering excess just yet. Wards Auto has learned that the Japanese Ministry of Land Infrastructure and Transport has given the Premacy Hydrogen RE Hybrid permission to undergo testing on Japanese roads. Of the three systems, hybrid technology is clearly the most promising. But Mazda's blind technophilia has mated it to an immature fuel source and an inherently inefficient ICE. Who cares that it gets 124 miles from a tank of hydrogen and boosts power 40 percent over a "standard" hydrogen Wankel. Mazda plans on leasing these people-movers in Japan later this year. Here's hoping that the lease comes with an uncompromising warranty.

Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama is set to meet with both GM CEO Rick Wagoner and Ford CEO Alan Mulally this week, in what the Detroit Free Press calls (thinks/hopes/opines) a "thaw" in frosty relations. A year ago, Barack Obama slammed manufacturers for their fuel efficiency and excuse mongering. "But expensive is no longer an excuse for inaction," Obama railed. "The auto industry is on a path that is unacceptable and unsustainable – for their business, for their workers, and for America. And America must take action to make it right." Whether "America" was code for "we the people" or Senator Barack Obama isn't clear– though the fact that Ford and GM are hurting for dough is. And now that Detroit's on the ropes, it's ready to meet Mr. Obama's challenge, begging bowl at the ready. Barack baby, we want to build more fuel efficient cars. We can build more fuel efficient cars. We already are building more fuel efficient cars. We bloody well have to build more fuel efficient cars. We will be building more efficient cars. So now can we have our subsidies, tax credits and CAFE exemptions? And you know what? They'll get it. 

We've argued for some time that OEMs should respond to high fuel prices by improving and lightening existing models and drivelines, rather than developing moon-shot, "game-changing" technologies. Et voila! Green Car Congress reports on the Pintle Regulated Venturi (PRV) induction system, developed by PRV Performance. The PRV-9 induction system is a bolt-on replacement for stock intake manifolds. By inducting air through a venturi throat, the doo-hickey burns a high-velocity homogeneous fuel-air blend more efficiently than standard induction; eliminating throttling losses and improving fuel vaporizing, precluding cylinder wall stratification. [You can read all the gory technical details at Green Car Congress] PRV Performance tested its intake on a JDM D15B SOHC-equipped Honda Civic, driving it at a steady 65 mph on a hilly 203-mile test run. The Civic achieved a reported 52 mpg, up from 41.7 on an unmodified Civic, with similar reductions in pollutant emissions. The EPA has tested an earlier prototype at 48 mpg, and will test this newer system later this year. PRV Performance claims that the technology is hybrid-compatible.