KCRG-TV reports that the Iowa legislature is getting ready to roll out the pork barrel for the ethanol industry. Previewing the Tall Corn State's upcoming legislative agenda, the TV station foreshadows the tax breaks to come, and makes it seem as if there's a passel of pistonhead demand for E85, motorists just itching for a local E85 station. "Lawmakers also expect to talk about ways to make it easier for drivers to pump ethanol into their vehicles. 'There's tens of thousands of vehicles in Iowa right now that could run on E85, but they really don't have access to the infrastructure where they can go buy it,' Rep. Kraig Paulsen (R) said." Could or would? (We sure as Hell don't recommend Iowans try and find one of 69 state stations with an E85 pump via Iowacorn.org's "E85 finder;" the Adobe player crashes your browser.) Iowa already pays 50 percent of the total cost of an E85 pump. Question: if one of the nation's top E85 producing states– a state without large ethanol transportation expenses (E85 can't go down a standard gas pipe)– needs more subsidies to convince gas stations to provide E85 pumps, what does that tell you? 

Automobile.com reports that the brand best known for symmetrical all-wheel drive and seemingly endless aesthetic affronts is set to launch the R1e electric vehicle (EV). Subie developed the EV version of its brand faithfully ugly R1 in conjunction with the Tokyo Electric Power Company. "Its battery pack affords the car a small-ish range of 50 miles, but the car can be recharged to 80-percent capacity in just eight minutes. A full charge takes about six hours." Never mind the range; EV supporters reckon most in-city journeys are less than 40 miles. Feel the longevity! "Despite the low range, Subaru says that the car has a lifespan of 120,000 miles or ten years." So not only can you go nowhere slowly, but you can do so for a long, long time. In terms of production numbers, Automobile goes for passively constructed English understatement. "Subaru isn't being overly optimistic about the EV's take-rate either, so for its first year only 100 units will be produced." But here's the real news: "To help promote electric vehicles, the Japanese government has agreed to slash the car tax and sales tax by a whopping 90-percent, and will allow the car to park in public areas and travel on toll routes at a reduced rate." What was that commentator Stu was saying about the Japanese government encouraging long term investment? 

KY3.com reports that that Missouri Governor Matt Blunt is so deep inside the ethanol industry's pockets that he's using the lint for a pillow [paraphrasing]. The Gov wants The Show Me State's legislature to craft some new E85 pork barrel filler: $2m worth of tax credits for gas stations to re-equip with E85 pumps. As we've heard that it takes $200k to convert a gas station to E85itude, Blunt is either trying to fly under the radar or doing some symbolic showboating to appease the ethanol lobby. But wait, there's more! "Another of the governor’s proposals is for state income tax credits for people who buy E85. The credits would be 25 cents per gallon in the first year, 20 cents per gallon in the second and third years, and 15 cents per gallon after that, with a maximum of $500 per taxpayer per year." Blunt reckons that little deal would save Missouri's theoretical E85 [only] users an average of 70 cents per gallon over regular gas. Which  is just as well, considering that the corn juice is some 28.5 percent less efficient than non-E85 gas. 

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. 

The majority of this morning's New York Times article on the auto-oriented provisions of the new energy bill profiles the industry's posturing, infighting and kvetching over higher Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards. To wit, “'We’re not whiners,' Dominique Thormann, a senior vice president at Nissan North America, said in Washington during a lunch with reporters on Wednesday, in a thinly veiled jab at competitors that originally fought fuel economy increases." Breeze through this politically correct interpretation– transplants ready to rumble, domestics foot (not to say knuckle) draggers, Toyota playing both side down the middle– and Michelle Maynard finally reveals some of the more important "details." For example, we learn that the bill offers federal loan guarantees to "help auto companies that invest in factories that are at least 20 years old to build vehicles with advanced technology." Hey! Guess what? The General will [theoretically] build the new Chevrolet Volt plug-in electric hybrid at a Detroit factory that opened in the early '80s. No word on the new "footprint-based" CAFE calculations– which make a mockery of fleet-wide fuel economy averages– or ethanol credits– capable of transforming a gas-sucking SUV into a high mileage green machine (in regulatory terms).  

Dutch Transport Minister Camiel Urlings has announced his government's intention to introduce satellite-based road pricing for all vehicles plying the Netherlands' roadways. Radio Netherlands reports that trucks will be the first to get the mandatory GPS (Global Positioning Satellite) monitoring devices in 2011, with cars gearing-up the year after. Drivers will be charged a per-mile fee depending on any number of variables: type of vehicle (to penalize larger cars and SUVs), location (i.e. congestion charging for cities), time of day, etc. Eurlings says the road pricing system will be countrywide by 2016. To soften the blow, the Dutch government will eliminate road tax and BMP (new car purchase tax). Eurlings claims that means the road pricing will be fairer, with more than half of road users paying less under the new system. The article makes no mention of personal privacy implications– which is scary enough. But it gets really scary when you consider the fact that the other European Union (EU) member nations are sure to monitor Holland's scheme in the hopes of implementing it in their home countries or, indeed, throughout the EU.

Thomas L. Freidman is at it again. After earning the American auto industry's ire by portraying Detroit automakers as lazy, greedy, foot-dragging Luddites, the New York Times columnist has some advice for aspiring Indian motorists: don't do it. Spooked by the potential environmental impact of a new (if still theoretical) $2500 car, Friedman's urging India to look at wasteful western ways and "leapfrog us, not copy us." Apparently, it's common sense calling.  "Just as India went from no phones to 250 million cell phones — skipping costly land lines and ending up with, in many ways, a better and cheaper phone system than we have — it should try the same with mass transit." To that end, Friedman's championing the ideas of Sunita Narain, the "dynamo" who directs New Delhi's Center for Science and Environment: "India can't ban a $2,500 car, but it can tax it like crazy until it has a mass transit system that can give people another cheap mobility option." Friedman tries to recruit our support for his Indian anti-car stance by suggesting that it's one of those win-win deals. "An India that makes itself the leader in both cheap cars and clean mass mobility is an India that will be healthier and wealthier. It will also be an India that gives us cheap answers to big problems." I'm confused. While it's easy (enough) to imagine an Indian mass transit utopia, how exactly would that help us?

OK, here's the rule for car buyers looking to claim a federal tax credit for their hybrid: "Original owners may claim the full amount of the allowable credit up to the end of the first calendar quarter after the quarter in which the manufacturer records its sale of the 60,000th vehicle. For the second and third calendar quarters after the quarter in which the 60,000th vehicle is sold, taxpayers may claim 50 percent of the credit. For the fourth and fifth calendar quarters, taxpayers may claim 25 percent of the credit. No credit is allowed after the fifth quarter." So the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) had a butcher's (look) at GM and Ford hybrid sales for the quarter ending Sept. 30 and decided neither automaker's sold enough gas – electric vehicles to start the winding down process. Ford's getting there; The Blue Oval Boyz sold 38,743 hybrids last quarter. GM's not even close, at 9,577 hybrids. For a full list of the qualifying vehicles and the tax credits for each, click HERE. Oh, and in case you're wondering, Toyota blew by the 60k hybrid tax barrier on June 30, 2006. In the second quarter of '07 alone, Toyota sold sold 79,723 hybrids (54,821 Prii). 

The Daily Telegraph reveals that the Labour govenment has ditched plans to introduce a "pay-as-you-go" pricing scheme for UK motorists. The move comes after an on-line petition against so-called road pricing (a.k.a. "Electronic Road Pricing" or ERP) garnered an unprecedented 1.8m signatures. The Telegraph, which lead a journalistic campaign to strangle the idea in its metaphorical, non-MTV crib, predicts that the Department for Transport will officially signal a shift from national road pricing to local schemes (a la London's Congestion Charge) in a statement to Parliament next week, as follows: "We agree that there are congestion problems on parts of the strategic road network, but 88 per cent of congestion is in urban areas. Therefore it is sensible to prioritise the assessment of road pricing in these areas." Reading between the lines, the government has left the door open to local or country officials seeking to introduce ERP schemes on national or trunk roads within their territory. In other words, the battleground has now shifted to Manchester, Birmingham and Newcastle. Watch this space (and we're not charging you for it either). 

Is there an ICLU (as opposed to the ACLU)? If so, they may want to have a word with the Indian government re: their plans to require automotive manufacturers to equip all new cars with radio-frequency identification (RFID) tags. The Economic Times reports the Ministry of Heavy Industries' rationale: "violations by motorists could be tracked and all violations identified." But it's RFID-enabled tolls that's really got the Powers That Be all excited. Clearly, India is not unaware of the potential revenue possibilities environmental benefits of an RFID-based congestion charges. The article cites Connaught Place in Delhi, MG Road in Bangalore and Colaba and Andheri in Mumbai as the most toll-deserving of traffic hot spots. In fact, "the Delhi government is planning to substantially increase the parking fee and entrance charge in such core areas to convert them into traffic-free zones." Traffic-free? Wow, that's harsh.  

Over the last two days, there's been a definite upswell in UK government policies and plans that seem specifically designed to make UK motorists as miserable as possible. Yesterday, Pistonheads (birthplace of TTAC) reported that Nottingham City Council is planning a £350 annual tax on workplace parking spaces to force commuters to abandon their cars for public transportation. Subtext: Nottingham doesn't have the political or financial capital (or money) to create a London-style Congestion Charge; a parking spot tax is the next best thing. Eight other UK councils are considering the same idea. Also yesterday, Pistonheads revealed that the UK's Director of Public Prosecutions Ken McDonald said all UK drivers caught violating the ban on using a cell phone while driving should be charged with dangerous driving, which inflicts a driving ban and a maximum two year jail sentence upon convicted license holders. And today, Pistonheads says the Department for Transport and the satnav company Trafficmaster are secretly testing a system to monitor drivers' movements, as a possible prelude to a national, pay-as-you-go road pricing scheme and/or a method for speed enforcement. Can it get any worse for the UK's beleaguered motorists? Yes it will.