AutoblogGreen reports that Tesla Motors held an open town hall meeting yesterday; "open" in the sense that only customers who've plunked down a hefty deposit for the thrice delayed lithium ion-powered Roadster were invited to attend, and "meeting" as in a conference call. Semantics aside, Tesla's top brass assembled the faithful to make a momentous announcement: Roadster Number One is in production! And who gets this historic vehicle? Tesla Chairman Elon Musk! It seems that Tesla still can't source a suitably robust transmission for their vaporwaricle, and nobody else was willing to take delivery of a Roadster with a tranny that's doomed to failure after "a few thousand miles." Actually, I lie. Tesla says it "might" give some customers their very own electric-powered tranny time bombs, and swap 'em over later. (Did Tesla talk to their insurance broker about this idea?) According to unofficial meeting secretary Tony Belding, "Production will be very slow until the transmission problems are fully resolved, which means full-rate production will probably begin about summer, probably late summer. There are some uncertainties about the schedule, and they are trying not to over-promise until they have it figured out better." That would make a change. Oh, and you remember everyone giving me grief about giving Tesla grief about their unverified range claims, after they released an unverified range claim of 245 miles? Well, it seems there was a software glitch. "Latest testing now puts the range in the 220-230 mile region," AutoblogGreen credulously reports, still without verification.  

One of the less publicized reasons the White House said it will veto the new Energy Bill: the legislation fails to sort out who controls fuel economy standards. It's become an urgent issue since California lawmakers decided CO2– produced in direct proportion to a vehicle's fuel efficiency– is a "greenhouse gas," and thus a pollutant. Hisotrically, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has waived their federal mandate to set air pollution standards, allowing the state to set their own. So when California decided that CO2 was tailpipe poison, they asked the EPA to set a national CO2 standard or get the Hell out of the way. The EPA said hang on, give us a minute, we'll get back to you. California said time's up and filed suit against the feds. As USA Today reports, a California federal judge has now ruled in California's favor, green lighting the state's efforts to set a combined car and light truck fuel economy standard of 43.7 miles per gallon by 2016, with all other trucks to average 26.9 mpg. The move completely usurps the role of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), which is in charge of monitoring and enforcing federal fuel economy standards. Needless to say, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers is sure to appeal the court's decision, taking it all the way to the Supreme Court if needs be. Now do you see why the White House wants Congress to clear up this jurisdictional bun fight? I mean, jeez. 

CNNMoney's caught diesel fever, echoing "experts" predicting sales of oil burners stateside are set to rise by 300 percent over the next ten years. That's "partly because diesel engines generally deliver anywhere from 20 to 40 percent better fuel economy than gasoline-powered engines, depending on the vehicle and engine size." While we’re impressed by the assertion's qualifier count, and wonder what the other part of "partly" might be (it can't be diesel engines' higher production costs), the real mystery is how CNN could write such a blatantly pro-diesel piece without once mentioning the word "particulates." Or comparing European diesel tailpipe regs to California's (which sets the U.S. standard). Instead, we get the happy-clappies from Patrik Borenius, manager of advanced product planning for Mercedes. "The new clean-diesel engines provide three key benefits," Borenius opined. "It's a more fuel-efficient technology, so the customer gets better gas mileage; it offers environmental benefits by producing less carbon dioxide and greenhouse gasses, and it's one of the answers to the energy issue, in terms of reducing our dependence on foreign oil." So where are these Mercedes' clean diesels? Again, talk to California. And what of Honda's new clean diesel engine that meets the CA standards? Nothing. 

Last November, all GM’s eight U.S. brands lost ground. As the automaker’s pretty much shot its vehicular wad, the falling stats have convinced many industry observers that GM’s turnaround is back in turnaround. Of course, there isn’t a turnaround to turnaround. Not now, and not in the last forty years. Since the sixties, GM’s market share has been on a downwards trajectory. In 1962, The General owned over 52 percent of the U.S. new car market. Today, The Big 2.8 combined can’t muster a simple majority. There’s a reason for that.

I'm a big fan of Autoblog. While there are some who might suggest that there's a good reason that re-writing (or republishing) press releases is a lost art form, and that a 53 minute podcast is the pistonhead version of waterboarding, I don't count myself amongst them. At least not until now. In any case, there's no denying that Autoblog is, as Justin says, the newspaper of record. Equally clearly, TTAC is a bunch of cybernetic muckrakers who abide by Oscar Wilde's dictum that if you can't say something nice about someone, come sit by me. While I don't begrudge Autoblog their success, there are times when I wish they'd grow a set of stones. But then I think, hang on, these are genuinely nice folks. Just because Autoblog doesn't share TTAC's jaundiced view of the auto industry doesn't make them bad people. Why be so [double] negative? Not all children are born with a desire to turn over rocks and unearth the life-and-death battles beneath. Why begrudge Autoblog their wide-eyed, unquestioning, puppy-dog enthusiasm? Because they get press credentials to the Detroit Auto Show and we don't? Well, yes, precisely. And while we await final word on that subject, rest assured we will not go quietly– or cheerfully– into that long good riddance. Or something like that. 

Slate's "Green Lantern" is the columnist who aspires to offer "illuminating answers to green questions." Kato in absentia, Brendan Koerner takes a quick look at the relative environmental impact of electric vs. gas-powered cars. Although you've got to wonder about Koerner's choice of the Tesla as an EV poster child– given that the Roadster remains unobtainable and the company's range claims are both vague and unverified– the man gets credit for almost shining his light on the entire environmental picture. (His calcs make mention of battery production and recycling.) Props for some fascinating energy-related links as well. And the winner is… the Tesla! In theory, the $100k plug-in go-kart requires 48.05 pounds of CO₂ per 100 miles, while the Corolla unleashes 63.11 pounds of carbon dioxide per 100 miles. [thanks to jpc0067 for the link]

Since the [now stalled] Energy Bill was first mooted, TTAC warned its readers to read the fine print. Detroit's support for the legislation was a sure sign it contained enough loopholes to maintain the status quo and enough sweeteners to make Hemlock a palatable potion. On the former point, we've learned that the bill maintained the distinction between light trucks and passenger cars for Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) calculations. (The system that made SUVs a roaring success and allowed Chrysler's PT Cruiser to be classified as a truck.) We also discovered that the CAFE regs were switching from a fleet-wide average to a footprint-based system– which bases mpgs on vehicle size and allows automakers to finagle the bagel (so to speak). And now, thanks to WardsAuto, we finally hear the number for the federal loan guarantees that the United Auto Workers helped arrange, to keep production stateside. It must be said that $25b is a lot of billions– especially when its your tax dollars on the line. That's doubly true given that the money was earmarked for companies retrofitting factories built before 1987. That means virtually all of the cash would go to The Big 2.8, as the transplants (Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, Nissan, Mercedes, BMW, etc.) built the lion's share of their domestic production facilities after that date. A federal bailout by any other name would still smell so rancid. 

For those of you who haven't yet sniggered, many industry observers are skeptical that Chevrolet electric – gas hybrid Volt will meet its publicly declared 2010 showroom target. So that means that Maximum Bob's AP "news flash"— "Automotive industry icon Robert A. Lutz wants to retire from General Motors Corp. after the company brings a plug-in electric car to market"– is unintentionally humorous. As the report inaccurately (accurately?) points out, "The company has set sometime in 2010 as a loose date to roll out the Volt." In advance of this momentous if Camaro-like announcement of the 75-year-old Car Czar's golden parachute unfurlment, the AP plays it both ways: icon worship and realistic assessment. "Lutz, who was hired in September of 2001 to reinvigorate GM's lackluster product designs, is widely credited with a resurgence in GM vehicles after two disastrous years in which it lost market share and more than $12 billion." And then "Still, GM sales are down 6.1 percent for the first 11 months of the year, with car sales dropping 8 percent and truck sales off 4.8 percent from the same period a year ago." But our favorite bit is this: "'You never know about your health. You never know about the needs of the corporation,' he said in his office at the company's design center. 'You never know what the board wants to do, or Rick wants to transition to a younger team. All of those things are possible.'" If Bob doesn't know what the board wants to do, who does? 

What's with Bloomberg (and The Detroit News for carrying this story)? As GM prepares to unleash the imported Saturn Astra on the American hinterland [see: TTAC review], the financial news organization suggests that the model could be built stateside. Ostensibly, this is not new news. Unlike the case of the Australian Pontiac G8, GM has not backed away from its plan to test the American waters with the Astra, and then decide if sales volumes justify re-planting production in an American (Mexican?) plant. And in fact, it's not new news either. "We have to look at the volume and what prices are realistic," said Hans Demant, who heads GM's Adam Opel division, at a Handelsblatt automotive conference Tuesday in Frankfurt." So, is Bloomberg/Detroit News shilling for GM? (Perish the thought.) If there's anything else to be gleaned from this "news" report, it's that Demant put a number to the "let's do it stateside!" threshold: 250k U.S. Astras per annum. That would be 4807 per week, or 119 per day (with no time off for holidays). What are the chances?

AdAge reports "supermodel" Ganna Makeeva is suing Leo Burnett for negligence. Apparently, whilst shooting a superbowl ad for Cadillac back in '05, Ms. Makeeva was asked/instructed/paid to walk down a runway with a hole in it, as lights flashed, music thundered and her stomach rumbled (my add). The model fell. She sustained injuries to her "legs, knee, hands, wrists, stomach, head, neck and rib cage" and that she "has already undergone one knee surgery and must undergo yet another one to try to repair the painful and debilitating injury caused by the fall. She presently attends multiple therapy sessions each week in an effort to heal and recover from injuries she sustained." Wow. That sucks. But not, it seems, as much as the ad. "The ad… ultimately earned 2.5 out of four stars from Ad Age critic Bob Garfield, who wrote at the time: 'This is beauty photography, ostensibly eye-catching and sexy, in which slinky, exotic runway models strut their couture fashions while dripping with liquid chrome. Then, up from the vat, rises the 2006 Escalade, also slick with chrome. The visual is designed to stop you in your tracks. It won't.'" Stop you in your tracks. Geddit? If you didn't know ad folk are cold-hearted bastards before, you do now. Oh, and we reckon GM should step-up here and offer Ms. Makeeva a free car. Wouldn't you?

While greens (and tax collectors) the world over have hailed London's Congestion Charge (CG), the scheme is far from the showpiece legislation its proponents suggest, and it’s about to get worse. The Times reports that London's traffic has returned to pre-CG levels. Even less surprisingly, well-paid bureaucrats swallow a full 47 percent of the £800m raised by the CG– to the point where London has cut bus subsidies. At the same time, "The introduction of more bus lanes and pedestrian-friendly measures, TfL [Transport for London] admits, have also contributed to congestion." And now The Evening Standard reports that the recent tweak to the system– adding low CO2 cars like the Fiat Panda and Ford Fiesta to the hybrids who get a free pass– threatens to hole its income. As you (but not London Mayor Ken Livingstone) might imagine, the city cars' exemption from the £8 daily fee has sparked a boom in small car sales. I'm sorry, did I say £8? As part of the tweak, "gas guzzlers" will have to pay £25 a day to drive in inner London. Anyway, a study commissioned by Land Rover (for obvious reasons) reckons that the Mayor's plan to give A and B-class cars a free ride could add an extra 10k cars to London's traffic and "contribute to global warming" (way to stick the boot in). 

Regular readers may recall that this blog doesn't do recalls, like today's re-do on 1.1m 1997 – 2003 model year Ford vehicles equipped with 7.3-liter diesel engines, including the E-Series van, Excursion, and F-450 Super Duty and F-550 Super Duty trucks. They're too damn many recalls, and we risk incurring the wrath of the bias bashers if we cover one brand's recall and neglect another's. But this little non-recall GM gem caught our editorial eye. Trading Markets reports "General Motors Corporation (GM) has determined that certain model year 2005, 2006 & 2007 Cadillac STS passenger cars equipped with sunroofs do not fully comply with paragraph S4(e) of 49 CFR 571.118, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 118 Power-Operated Window, Partition, and Roof Panel Systems." That's because "for 60 seconds after the vehicles are started, if the engine is turned off and a front door is opened, the sunroof module software allows the sunroof to be closed if someone in the vehicle activates the control switch." Which is no biggie because "the following sequence of actions must occur: Driver starts engine, driver turns off engine, and driver or front passenger opens a front door. After this sequence of actions and still within the 60 second time frame, occupants must take additional actions: Push the sunroof close switch and position an occupant to create the risk of sunroof entrapment." Still, you have been warned.

India's new car market is red hot. GM's Spark is not. As the Business Standard reports, "In the seven months between April and October this year, the Chevy Spark has managed to sell less than 12,000 units, or an average of 1,700 units a month, while its peers Alto and WagonR (Maruti Suzuki), Indica (Tata Motors) and Santro (Hyundai) have had average monthly sales of 10,000 – 18,000 units." Apparently, the Spark– a rebadged Daewoo Matiz– is a victim of GM's inability to move decisively (who'd a thunk?). Before GM took control of Daewoo in '01, the Daewoo Matiz– badged the Daewoo Matiz– had been India's best-selling car. Post-sale, The General dicked around trying to buy Daewoo’s assets in Surajpur, Uttar Pradesh. The deal went nowhere, leading to a five-year delay before the Spark's launch. And if that doesn't sound familiar (Camaro fans), how about this: "For 10 days in October, as a festival season offer, GM offered a massive discount of Rs 53,000 on the six-month old model, which got bookings for 12,000 units." Only capacity constraints at the Halol plant in Gujarat make timely delivery impossible. Never mind. GM's got big plans for the future, introducing six new Chevys from their Halol plant (85k capacity) and bringing its Talegaon plant (1.5m capacity) on-stream. 

GM's one two three green light campaign to leapfrog the competition with its E-Flex plug-in electric – gas (in that order) hybrid continues apace, The General has just opened a new design studio dedicated to the Chevrolet Volt and its antecedents. According to the press release, GM's new Warren, MI-based E-Flex Systems Design Studio will house 45 designers, sculptors, design engineers, scientists and administrative staff in a greener-than-thou environment. That would be a reused space kitted-out with sustainable carpet, energy efficient florescent lighting and window shades, rugs made of 100 percent wool and Cradle to Cradle-certified furniture. While we still haven't seen the new-look Volt, The Motley Fool (of all people) tell us that GM designers have already cut 30 percent from the concept's wind drag. "The easier it is to push this vehicle through the air, the less energy you use," said Nina Tortosa, the Volt's aerodynamic development engineer and [possible] future author of Aerodynamics for Dummies. Anyway, the Volt's design director is pleased with his new digs. “There’s a lot of history in this building,” said Bob Boniface, “and I feel we’re making our own history by designing a whole new generation of vehicles that don’t require gasoline." I guess someone forget to tell Bob about the gasoline part of the Volt's propulsion system…

We have it on good authority (from two independent sources, as required by All The President's Men) that Chrysler PR Chief Jason Vines was given the old heave-ho. This morning's Detroit News further substantiates the story. Scribe Eric Morath reports that Chrysler has "realigned" its communications team. They will now report to the head of human resources rather than the chief executive, indicating that their focus will switch from external to internal communications. The News speculates that the move is also designed to plunge the privately owned company into [relative] radio silence– which would suit the outspoken, combative Vines about as well as an actual muzzle. This from Gerald Meyers, the former chairman of AMC and current University of Michigan biz prof: "They're not trying to be public, they're not trying to be popular, they're not trying to be transparent. Private equity work very hard to be opaque and they probably won't miss a PR person who helped put things into black and white." Needless to say, the News ends its report with some positive spin. Mike Szudarek, a partner at Farmington Hills-based public relations firm Marx Layne & Co., sees the silver lining. "I think it's a positive move that breaks down silos and helps integrate internal and external communications." We shall see… Meanwhile, we invite Mr. Vines to contact TTAC when he bails on Aubrun Hills in the New Year.