According to USA Today, plug-in electric hybrid vehicles (PHEVs) like the Chevy Volt can actually increase air pollution in some areas. The executive director of the Environmental Law & Policy Center reckons  "plug-in hybrids are perhaps not good for all areas." Howard Learner explained that for "states that are heavily coal, that equation doesn't work out very well for the environment." With almost half of the nation's electricity coming from coal-fired plants, the Center equates running a PHEV in some areas to driving a coal-burning vehicle. The Natural Resources Defense Council said there's a "possibility for significant increases of soot and mercury" because of the increased demand on the plants, So a PHEV would produce 11 percent more greenhouse gas than a non-plug-in hybrid. A study by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency found PHEVs could also increase the amount of sulfur dioxide, a key component of acid rain, and CO2. Charles Griffith of the Ecology Center in Michigan admits "It seems a little premature to think of it being a problem – but there are a lot of issues we should have been thinking of sooner," including the use of land to grow crops for ethanol fuel vs. for food. Since when does rational thinking have anything to do with federal regulations, the environment and energy independence?

Canada's ZENN, Dynasty and Electrovaya make small, four-wheel, electric cars classified locally as Low-Speed Vehicles (LSVs). They mostly sell these zero emission machines to Americans as Neighborhood Electric Vehicles (NEVs). Though the 25 mph max speed NEVs must be approved at the local level, they are potentially legal on 35 mph roads in 40 US states. The Canadian EV makeers desperately want to sell their products in their home market. As The Toronto Star reports, both Transport Canada and Ontario's Ministry of Transportation restrict the sedate LSVs to "planned" areas like campuses and retirement communities; LSV owners are legally banned from taking their chances among Canada's mix of normal, fast and insanely fast traffic. While slower bicycles and scooters also use Canada's streets, officials are hung-up on the fact that the LSVs look like cars but don't have airbags, side-impact reinforcement or meet any crash-test standards. Makes sense, but is it sensible?

So there's this big deal panel of "independent experts" from the National Research Council that advises the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) re: federal mpg standards. The last time the Council got together, they deemed diesel engines too dirty and hybrids as "too niche" for inclusion in their final report. Flash forward seven years and the Council finds that diesels could deliver 30 to 40 percent improvement in fuel efficiency over comparable gas engines. This time 'round, full-electric and fuel cell-powered vehicles didn't make the cut; "the committee does not expect commercialization of fuel cell vehicles or widespread marketing of all-electric vehicles before 2020." Although Congress insists that regulations must focus on gas engines– as these represent the vast majority of vehicles on the road– the inclusion of diesels in the new report may presage regulations allowing a new era of European-sourced high-efficiency oil burners in the U.S. Provided, that is, California doesn't trump the feds again and tighten their particulate standards, again…

Tesla sent out a press release yesterday bragging that they'd raised $40m in "bridge financing" that was "co-led by Valor Equity Partners and [Tesla chairman] Elon Musk." They're really going to have to stretch that $40m; Tesla plans to use it "for the continued development of a 4 door, five passenger sports sedan planned for introduction in 2010, the establishment of company-owned sales and service infrastructure, and the continued production of the Tesla Roadster, a stylish, high-performance, zero emissions car." The use of the singular in describing the Roadster is appropriate, given they've only produced one Roadster, despite describing the company as "a manufacturer of high-performance production electric cars" in the opening paragraph. So let's see… that's $40m down and only $210m to go.

Tesla Motors has apparently run out of toilet paper again. Valleywag reports that they're off in search of another $250m to keep the lights on fund development of the "Whitestar" electric sedan. That's right, if you have a quarter of a billion dollars burning a hole in your pocket, you too can invest in a company that has produced exactly one working "production" car (delivered to the company's CEO) in five years, in exchange for over $145m and Federal regulatory exemptions. I'm not an expert, but this strikes me as a particularly optimistic investment. Oh, and Tesla also wants a guaranteed loan from the Department of Energy to build a factory for these new electric sedans. To quote President Bush, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me – you can't fool me again." [NB: I know we're a little late to this story, but that's kind of appropriate don't you think? And here's an old video for potential investors that shows the critical coverage given Tesla by our blogging pals. Driving range of 250 miles. Those were the days…]  

According to The Economic Times, Tara Shankar Ganguly, grandson of the founder, has revived defunct Bengal Enamel (don't ask) as a new-age electronics and telecommunications firm. Under the brand name Tara, Bengal is teaming with Chinese EV maker Aucma to develop battery-powered two-wheelers, three-wheelers, small cars, even buses and lorries (OK, trucks) to provide Western-style freedom and mobility for India's middle class. At present, Tara has more names (Titu, Micro, Mini, Tiny) than actual vehicles. But with a price of only Rs 99,999, the four-seat Tiny seems positioned as a Nano-killer. Yes, the four-seat Tiny will cost one less rupee than the one lakh ($2,500) Tata Nano. Other Tara models could range as high as Rs 5.5 lakh (~$13,750, I guess). While no one (other than us) is talking about range, and the Tiny must be recharged daily at a 220 Volt/15 Amp socket, it should nip along at a respectable 50 to 70kms an hour. So the Tiny by name (and by nature) will go fast enough for its intended market, but will it sell fast enough to sustain Tara's renaissance? We'll keep an eye on it for you. 

According to American Honda VP Dan Bonawitz, Honda is the BMOC when it comes to automotive innovation, and that includes hybrids, clean diesels and fuel cells. As EV World reports, just don't put an E in front of Honda (either automotive or pharmaceutical). The Japanese automaker's investigating various electric drive technologies and may still introduce a hybrid-electric CR-Z sports car, BUT Honda isn't impressed enough with current battery technology enough to pursue a true electric vehicle. Bonawitz would rather talk about the new, improved FCX Clarity, in which the fuel cell system and battery pack take-up no more space than a gasoline-electric hybrid power plant. Bonawitz estimates that Honda's hydrogen fuel cell vehicle is three times more efficient than an equivalent conventional gas burner and 2.5 times more efficient than a compact hybrid. He rates the Clarity's EPA combined cycle at 68 mpg with a 60 percent reduction in CO2 emissions. Bonawitz also claims that the Clarity's tank-to-wheel efficiency has been improved to 60 percent. For some reason, he glosses over the hydrogen production inefficiencies. Until that process stops being a net energy loser, the fool cell label sticks.

After Tesla Motors chairman Elon Musk got the first production Roadster earlier this month, Tesla Founders Blog reader Pete asked ex-jeffe Martin Everhard when he'd receive his (he's supposed to get Roadster number two if/when they ever get it built). Martin's response:

I don't yet have a date for my car, Founders Series number 2, though they say the next cars will be delivered in March. I was the second person to deposit $100K, well over a year ago, and I have a certificate signed by Elon stating that the second production car is mine. As of today, I am a bit worried that they will pull something on me. I hope I am wrong, but I recently got a very bad signal from them.

When another reader asked about the delivery date, Eberhard requested him to inquire on the Tesla Motors blog for him. No such answer was forthcoming. On February 10, "Yanquetino" wondered if Tesla was muzzling Musk:

I am fairly confident in my ability to read between the lines of previous posts, but now I'm just going to ask point blank: is Tesla suing you? Only a negative answer is warranted, i.e., "NO, Telsa is NOT suing me." If, after a couple of days, you still haven't given said reply, or have removed this post from the blog, well… then we'll know how to call a spade a shovel.

As of today, Martin has not responded, even though he has replied to other comments posted after that date and the post is still on the blog.

In the Falls Church News-Press, editor and retired CIA analyst Tom Whipple continues with part four of The Future of Our Cars. Unlike the suitably skeptical Victor Juarez G., Whipple finds the plethora of speculative EV announcements nothing but encouraging: "… there is no practical alternative for personal mobility with the speed, flexibility and comfort that we have become accustomed to except the electric car." Assuming battery technology keeps pace, he writes, massive solar, wind, ocean and biomass power will provide enough juice to keep us happily motoring in all shapes and sizes of EVs, plugin hybrids and serial hybrids (which he calls "extended range" vehicles) like the oft-delayed Tesla and Volt. Whipple doesn't mention "Cleantech" by name, but warns that if we can't build a green infrastructure, or reliable batteries, we face an era of austerity and conservation. Perish the thought.

Claiming that America's economy is lurching ever more quickly from economic bubble to economic bubble, the founder of iTulip predicts a surge in alternative energy and infrastructure spending – sort of a green bubble. Writing for Harper's [sub], Eric Janszen defined the main economic drivers of "the cleantech bubble:" the need to recover from recession, weakness in the dollar, loss of petrodollar liquidity, loss of energy security and peak cheap oil. As a result, consumers will be faced with a bewildering array of fuels and vehicles: biofuels, electric vehicles, plug-in hybrids, hydrogen fuel cells, photovoltaics, wind turbines, ocean wave energy, geothermal energy, clean coal and even nukes. Janszen sees these technologies becoming the hot, overvalued commodities of the new bubble. At the same time, he predicts corporations will plan and (God forbid) implement the new energy infrastructure to power expensive new vehicles and public transit. Responding in the Association for the Study of Peak Oil & Gas – USA , commentator Dave Cohen notes that venture capitalists (VC) are already looking to invest in what they call “the largest economic opportunity of the 21st century.” Fortunately for cutting edge companies like Tesla Motors, there's a VC born every minute.

According to EV World, smog-choked Mexico City requires taxi companies to replace their rides by their (the taxi's) tenth birthday. This year alone, some 30k Mexican taxis will become autobanditos. Looking for green creds, Mayor Marcelo Ebrard has mandated that ten percent of the new, replacement taxis must be hybrids, ten percent must be electric vehicles (EVs) and ten percent must run on compressed natural gas. It sounds crazy, but thanks to the $8k hybrid premium, Mexico's warm weather and the average cabbie's 200km daily drive, EVs might just work. Hence a consortium of RUTAS UNIDAS (bus and cab operators), Electro Autos Eficaces de Mexico (EAE) and Azure Dynamics (AZD) is developing the eLECTROTAXI®. Like they had to lower case the "e". And while we're at it, let's call this thing what it is: a Nissan Sentra taxi conversion. In a refreshingly honest statement, consortium spearhead Victor Juarez G. (no relation to Kenny G) cautions against speculative announcements. Sr. G says that premature prognostications by Phoenix and Tesla have been harmful to the EV movement. Amén.

The Detroit News reports that Senator Clinton spent part of her pre-primary warm-up touring a plant in Maryland that builds transmissions for GM's full-size hybrid and heavy-duty trucks. The presidential candidate immediately began touting her plan to create five million "green-collar" jobs. To that end, the Senator from New York pledged to give $5b of your hard-earned money to automakers for battery research, and provide $20b in "green vehicle bonds" for automakers wishing to retool elderly factories (i.e. Ford, GM and Chrysler). Ms Clinton also promised $10k in tax credits for plug-in hybrid buyers. All of this in addition to the $8m the Washington Post says Ms. Clinton's secured for GM for "alternate fuel research;" $3m of which was buried in the fiscal 2008 Pentagon spending bill. Coincidentally enough, the Post also reports that GM lobbyist Steve Ricchetti is one of Hillary's fund raisers. Senator Clinton's campaign spokesperson said Ms. Clinton doesn't consider fundraising efforts when she's making official decisions. Apparently, "one thing has nothing to do with the other."

Sorry cubicle dwellers but the truth hurts. D Magazine reports that GM Car Czar Maximum Bob Lutz told a group of journalists that global warming is "a total crock of shit." When pressed on his enthusiasm for the Volt, Maximum Bob explained "I'm motivated more by the desire to replace imported oil than by the CO2 (argument)." Yes but– MB wasn't so keen on on other automotive technologies aimed at diminishing our demand for foreign petrochemicals. Even though GM is touting their big, honkin' hybrid SUVs and hybrid-lite cars and spending multi-millions on a hybrid research center in China, he thinks hybrids "make no economic sense." GM's Vice Chairman of Global Product Development also stated diesel cars have no place in a market where gas and diesel prices are comparable (i.e. in the U.S.). And just to show solidarity with GM dealers facing GM's sliding market share and the current economic downturn, Maximum Bob said "they've got to isolate themselves from the economic forecasts and say, 'I make my own prosperity.'" Sounds like TTAC's leading candidate for our soon-to-be-announced Bob Lutz award may have been sniffing too much JP-8 or whatever imported-oil-based petrochemical he burns in his jets.

A number of media outlets are carrying the story that Tesla chairman Elon Musk's personal Roadster has finally made it across the Atlantic and into his waiting arms. Everyone is proclaiming this as the first delivery of a production Roadster. Yet Petrol Head reports that as Musk got his, he indicated "the first deliveries" would start in mid-March. In the meantime, the second car will go to Tesla founder Martin Eberhard. So what about it gang? Would you consider this transfer of a hand-massaged example with a temporary transmission to the head honcho as the official start of Tesla Roadster production? Should we end the Tesla Birth Watch series with this installment? Or should we wait until we actually see the cars getting into the hands of a paying customer?

Who killed the electric car? That's easy: GM. What killed the electric car? Also a no-brainer: an operational range of 55 to 95 miles. From the moment Tesla Motors announced its all-electric Roadster, we've called for independent verification of their official range claims, which started at 250 miles, slunk to 220, and ended up in a real-world figure of 93 (still unofficial). Despite a rear-guard defense on the issue, Tesla's new CEO Ze'ev Drori ain't no dope. At a press conference to announce the historic fact that Elon Musk's personal Tesla Roadster had finally arrived from Europe, Drori pulled a GM: talking about the next next Big Thing. And here's the thing: Tesla will offer the formerly all-electric WhitesStar sedan as a hybrid also, with a small gas engine powering an on-board generator a la Volt. Tesla says their sedan will hit the streets by 2009, stickering in the $50 to $70k range. After that, they'll focus their attention on an economy car. First things second, eh?