We've been saying for almost a year that U.S. and European automakers need to watch their backs when dealing with their government-owned Chinese joint venture partners. Now that GM is paying a quarter billion dollars to hand over all their hybrid research set up an environmental research center in the military dictatorship known as The People's Republic of China, the Gerson Lehrman Group is sounding the same alarm. Jack Lifton says GM's "business model based on a shortsighted belief in mainly short term solutions to long term problems" has "led them to their latest mistake with regard to the Chinese OEM automotive industry." After decades of building up the Chinese auto industry, they now "have to bring to China as a gift the latest technology required for cars made to be sold in the American and European markets" to sell their products in the Chinese market.  If a Chinese company should offer to buy Ford or even Chrysler in the near future, "we should thank GM for so generously giving China a good part of the technology it will have needed to close the [market] gap." Ruh-roh.

The Detroit Free Press reports that Canada's Ballard Power Systems has so much faith in the future of hydrogen fuel cell-powered automobiles that they're looking to sell that part of their business. And here's the kicker: Ballard wants to off-load the whole hydrogen kit and caboodle on the unit's minority partner: Ford. The news comes one day after USA Today touted GM's recently released experimental fleet of 100 hydrogen fuel cell Equinox. And just two short years ago, "then-CEO Dennis Campbell was in Detroit touting the fact that a hydrogen economy was on the horizon and that fuel cells would likely replace the internal combustion engine." Yes, well, Campbell now reckons it's time to bail, due "to the lengthy projected timeline to commercialization and high cost of development." Needless to say, the move hasn't deterred the faithful, although they have moved the goalposts. Again. The National Hydrogen Association expects automakers to decide in 2015 whether to mass market the technology. We can't wait!

You'd think GM would have enough greens on its proverbial plate, what with its lackluster hybrid sales, the prospect of more lackluster hybrid sales (anyone fancy a two-mode two-ton hybrid SUV?) and the problem of inventing batteries for a plug-in hybrid that's due on the showroom floor in three years. But no; the automaker was into hydrogen fuel cells when hydrogen fuel cells were hot (cold?). So here we are with a fleet of 100 hydrogen fuel cell-equipped Chevrolet Equinox. Might as well gets some PR for the things. And USA Today is happy to play along, 'cause you know it could be the next Next Big Thing. "GM is working as hard and fast as we can for competitive reasons, rather than as pure research on a promising technology." This according to Larry Burns, GM vice president in charge of research and development. Never mind the fact that there isn't a hydrogen infrastructure to support these vehicles (or enough vehicles to support the hydrogen infrastructure). The race is on! Meanwhile, maybe GM should try to do something with the gas-powered Equinox to make it more competitive. No? Alright then. Let's plan on fitting the new Volt with hydrogen fuel cells and leasing customers the expensive power pack, you know, eventually. Sounds like a plan to me!

After being bashed by the greenies for standing as one with Detroit on an easy-does-it hoik in Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards (while producing fuel-sucking pickup trucks), after taking a beating in the press over quality issues (for not being Rolex reliable), Toyota has decided to launch a PR counter-attack. The Japanese automaker has unveiled a new ad campaign to prove their "social responsibility, environmental commitment and economic impact." Speaking to Advertising Age [sub], Toyota spinmeister Steve Strum says the campaign will use print, online and "poignant" TV ads "to touch U.S. consumers and give them a better sense of the corporation's vision." One ad described by Ad Age shows a group of people in an outdoor setting assembling a vehicle using natural materials. The narrator asks, "Can a car company grow in harmony with the environment? Why not?" Incidentally, Strum says there's no link between the new ad campaign and Toyota's recent bad press. So there's one more thing Toyota has in common with Detroit.

Speaking to Automotive News [sub], GM CEO Rick Wagoner promised his employer will plow the money saved by its new contract with the United Auto Workers (UAW) into "green products."  Specifically, in the next four to ten years, GM will build  more [some?] low-emitting diesels, hybrid vehicles and electric vehicles running on lithium ion batteries. "If we have a significantly profitable and cash-generating enterprise, that really opens up the opportunity to be more aggressive and take more risks." Never one to miss an opportunity not to ask GM's jeffe the hard questions surrounding the details of a major announcement, Automotive News doesn't reveal GM's strategy in the event that GM isn't "significantly profitable" and the company's cash conflagration continues. (By GM's own admission, they won't realize any major savings from the new contract for another four years.) Right. That's it. I'm going to the Detroit Auto Show to find this guy. Who's with me? 

According to the Luxury Institute's "2007 Social Responsiblity WealthSurvey" [sic], Lexus is the wealthy motorist's green machine of choice. The Institute (can they really call themselves that?) polled a "national sample" of 950 consumers with an average net worth of $3.1m and an average income of $307K. These not-so-super rich folk pegged Lexus as the "most admired brand for environmental concerns." The CEO of the Luxury Institute dismissed critics who dismiss his eco-oriented survey as PC pandering. "Being 'green' is no longer a luxury," Milton Pedraza asserted. "It is a requirement of doing business according to wealthy consumers." Apparently, 70 percent of well-heeled car buyers look for environmentally-friendly brands "with whom to do business." Environmentalists may be heartend to discover that America's most conspicuous consumers base their purchasing decisions on biodegradable packaging, zero-landfill manufacturing and EPA ratings.

"I would be surprised, shocked and dismayed if we decide not to do it." "It" is the Chevy Volt plug-in hybrid, and the speaker is Bob Lutz, quoted in the New York Times. Unfortunately, time waits for no man, even Maximum Bob. It's a little over two years until 2010, when GM has promised they'll have Volts on the road, silently whizzing around on their lithium-ion batteries. Except they still haven't developed a Li-Ion battery capable of powering the car. And once they finally have a viable design, auto industry economist Walter McManus surmises "when they break ground on a plant to make batteries, two years later the Volt will come out." In the meantime, GM is already advertising the Volt on TV, but with the disclaimer "Not yet available for sale" in small print at the bottom of the screen. Perhaps they should listen to Tony Posawatz, vehicle line director for the Volt, who admits "Until the product is done there is always some degree of uncertainty. No such batteries exist today, but our confidence builds as days go on." And as days go on, the clock keeps ticking down to 2010. Tick. Tick. Tick.

We've reported on calls from environmentally-minded academics and academically-minded environmentalists to ban cars completely from England's capital city. Up to now, these anti-car campaigners' only vision of an auto-free urban utopia arrived via London's annual "car free" day. The Telegraph reports that they could get 16-days of automotive respite when the Olympics blow into Stratford. Although the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA, sponsored by FedEx?) is not calling for a ban on car travel to and from the 2012 games, they do want "100 per cent of spectators travelling to the Olympic Park in Stratford by public transport, walking and cycling." Hmmm. Anyway, this "encouragement" doesn't include dignitaries and officials from the International Olympic Committee and sponsors, who will be able to drive in special Olympic lanes during Games time. As for the plebs, the ODA recently accepted delivery of their first "javelin" test train; a plethora of which should– I repeat should— ferry 240k people to and from the newly renovated Olympic park station every hour. The Commons transport select committee shares my skepticism.  Earlier this year, they published a report criticising the ODA's draft Olympic travel plan for "not exhibiting any sense of urgency" and being "vague." A highly budgeted, non-elected government quango that's slow and mellow? Who'd a thunk it?

Toyota's not the only one questioning GM's logic in pushing for plug-in hybrid technology. Honda's CEO Takeo Fukui told the Wall Street Journal that plug-ins don't have enough environmental benefits to interest his company. In fact, GM's Hail Mary Chevy Volt makes little sense. In a news conference, Fukui characterized plug-in hybrids as "a battery electric vehicle equipped with an unnecessary fuel engine and fuel tank." He added that Honda could easily develop a plug-in hybrid but won't because "I don't think that would contribute to the global environment, to reduce [global warming gas] emissions." Yes but– Fukui hinted that Honda is developing a battery electric vehicle. "Assuming that we can come up with a really high-performing battery that we are working on currently, I think a battery electric vehicle [that uses such battery technology] would actually be a plus from an environmental point of view." Given Honda's engineering track record, GM and Toyota both better watch their backs.

It's not such horrible news dear boy. It's not as if Bentley's sticking that frightfully underpowered Prius' Synergy Drive into the Arnage. Leftlane News tells me The Bentley Boys plan to hybridize their Eisenhower-era 6.75-liter V8 engine to keep the old girl kosher under the European Union's more stringent emissions laws. The historic powerplant stays. Huzzah! (I'll be sending the boffins some fine port when I get a minute.) While I'm thrilled– thrilled I tell you– that Bentley will use battery power to keep its rolling cathedrals motive, it's a shame they have to meet green laws. I mean, the idea that Bentley's limited production could somehow impact global temperatures is as preposterous as asking their owners to join the Peace Corps. If it was in this writer's hands, so long as Bentley makes cars with more torque than a Peterbilt, they're good to go. Shove a Bugatti Veyron's quad-turbo W16 in there? Why not old bean; why not?

No seriously. The Kingdom of Norway may become the first nation on God's green Earth to ban all gasoline-only cars. Citing Brazil's success with bioethanol as their rationale, Norwegian lawmakers are considering ditching petrol-only machines completely, in favor of biofuel-powered transportation. The United Press International reports that Center Party committee member Jenny Klinge feels banning sales of gasoline-powered cars to her country's 4.7m residents "would pressure the automobile industry into developing technology faster than it otherwise would." The Norwegian Transport ministry is trying to determine if such a ban would be legal. Meanwhile, Norway's many corn, soybean, and sugar cane farmers are excited about the prospects of a new market for their crops.

Hot on the heels of a New York Times Op Ed piece taking Toyota to task for its stance on new federal fuel economy regs, The Detroit Free Press reports that the National [sic] Resource Defense Council (NRDC) has bombarded Toyota with 8100 emails, accusing them of fraternizing with the enemy. The environmental pressure group is plenty pissed that the Japanese automaker has joined The Big 2.8's opposition to the Senate's proposed 35 mile-per-gallon corporate average fuel economy standard. Although ToMoCo's cars already average over 32 mpg under the federal rules, the automaker wants to move them V8 Tundras. They share Detroit's fear that lawmakers will lump cars and trucks together for future averages. The NRDC doesn't give a you-know-what. "They're out there with their green halo justifiably touting their technology with the Prius," the NRDC statement says, throwing Toyota a bone. "The question is why the inconsistency in terms of their issues on policy." Toyota's Open Road blog attemps to answer that question: "You can't bankrupt the industry if you want it to invest in our environmental future." Hang on; did Toyota just use the "B" word?

The oil industry is Southern California's top industrial polluter. The entertainment industry is number two. That's right– saukvalley.com reports that a two-year study conducted by UCLA shows that all those ecologically-conscious, hybrid-driving stars who criticize the government and diss the auto industry for ruining the environment are ruining the environment. The studios are trying to assuage their guilt by buying carbon credits, but some critics are not satisfied. Ed Begley Jr., probably the greenest person in Hollywood this side of Kermit the Frog, states "If you're going to drive around in a big ol' Hummer and then buy carbon offsets to mitigate that, that's like getting drunk on the weekends and throwing some money through the window of an AA meeting and thinking you're doing something." Some studios are going further by using biodiesel in their generators and converting a few sets to solar energy, but they still have a long way to go to clean up their act. Meanwhile, look for Hollywood's power elite to abandon their private jets and start car pooling. 

Prius/hybrid bashers have a new angle of attack, thanks to Cardiff University and UK automotive consultancy Clifford Thames (who currently features Toyota's logo on its website). The Financial Times reports that the dynamic duo studied a range of vehicles and concluded that many conventional petrol or diesel engined machines (e.g. the Mini Cooper D diesel hatchback and Fiat Panda) are "greener" than the gas – electric Prius. How's that then? "The Cardiff/Clifford Thames ranking gave CO2, nitrogen oxide and other emissions a 50 per cent weighting in assessing cars’ overall environmental friendliness. For the other 50 per cent, it ranked vehicles on their construction, energy and end-of-life costs, based on their length, width and weight." We'd like to see a  bit more detail on that formula. Meanwhile the study's author was aware that their results were a bit, um, skewed. “We’re not saying that any car that is the same size as the Prius is better," Clifford Thames’ Richard Barber admitted. "but the gap is closing very rapidly, and conventional technologies will pass the Prius." In fact, “Conventional technology will overtake the Prius over the next 12 to 18 months, and consumers won’t have to pay a premium for it,” said David Riemenschneider, Clifford Thames’ chief executive. Let the eco-games begin! Oh wait; they already have.

According to the Mercury News, in 2005, California officials entered discussions with GM on how to integrate flex-fuel (read "E85") vehicles into the state's fleet. This in spite of a then-three-year-old policy prohibiting the purchase of such vehicles because the fuel wasn't available. Several months later, the state and GM entered an agreement for a "small pilot project of 50 to 100 vehicles"– without allowing other automakers a chance to bid on the contract. Not long after that, the state bought a fleet of 1300 flex-fuel Impalas and Silverados totaling $17m, as only these vehicles qualified for purchase. Now for a few inconvenient truths: The 2002 policy prohibiting flex-fuel vehicles was conveniently eliminated "at the last minute." California has state laws requiring officials to seek competitive bids on large purchases; it's illegal to hold private meetings with one supplier to set the specifications. GM has contributed more than any other automaker to Governor Schwarzenegger's charitable and political causes. State contracting manager Rita Hamilton stated the E85 vehicles were added to the fleet "per the Governors (sic) request." On top of all that, the Mercury News reported in July, "the alternative fuel fleet was running exclusively on standard gasoline because high-grade ethanol has never been widely available in California." State senator Dean Florez has launched a legislative investigation of the contract, which could lead to a criminal investigation by the state's Attorney General.