With the much anticipated launch next year of quite possibly the two most important cars of our time, is it a wonder that people are confused with all the marketing hype and noise out there.  We’ve got color naming contests,  22 city road shows, gauntlet face slapping T.V. commercials, blog sites with daily content and even show and tell with middle school kids.  Is it really that hard to believe that people might be getting confused about which car does what, who has the best MPG, EV vs. Hybrid and why choose one over the other?

Talk about building up the hype, GM has announced the three finalist for their color naming contest.  “EV-ergreen”, “Veridian joule” and “EnviroMint”.  All fun and quirky names that conjure up thoughts of eco-warrior meets metrosexual chic.  Couple this with the constant “May the Best Car Win” TV ads and one might think that the Volt would be the hands down favorite in terms of mindshare.  But don’t count out that little company from Japan.  They have a few tricks up their sleeve too!!!

Nissan is on a “pilgrimage to mecha-annical” glory.  They have reached out to all the stakeholders and media alike and asked them to attend 1 of 22 different roadshows.  At the event, we get a chance to feast our excited eyes  on the Leaf, network with other EV enthusiasts and take turns driving a prototype around a little track at low speed.  A few of the people who have taken this opportunity to test drive the Leaf-like car use words like “seamless power delivery”, “smooth” and my favorite ” noticeably quite”.  All very positive endorsements.

The next and probably most aggressive attempt at winning the hearts of families is now being launched by GM.  Get ready for the biggest “show and tell” school event ever.  GM is inviting 800 middle school kids in LA. plus any other kid who wants to attend online to participate in a huge school yard education session.  Though the kids are probably not the ones who will buy the car next year, they will be the future purchasers of both Hybrids and EV’s and it makes sense to reach out to them now.

So who is the ultimate winner of the hype?  Hopefully it will be all of us in the end.

Neil Roland
Automotive News
November 24, 2009 – 3:08 pm ET
UPDATED: 11/24/09 6:55 p.m. ET

The administration has proposed raising fuel-efficiency requirements 40 percent — to 35.5 mpg — by 2016 for cars and light trucks combined. It plans to adopt final rules in April.

In a historic compromise with the industry, the administration last spring proposed moving up the 2020 deadline originally imposed by Congress for a 35.0 mpg standard.

“We want to make sure we don’t just rest on the 2016 numbers and that we’re prepared today, and get the industry to prepare, to move substantially beyond 2016,” Jack Gillis, a Consumer Federation of America spokesman and author of The Car Book, told reporters on a conference call today.

The consumer group’s statement is likely to be just an opening salvo in an extended debate over post-2016 standards.

The Consumer Federation, an association of 280 groups, also said the EPA should be primarily responsible for setting efficiency standards. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which shares rule-setting authority with the EPA, has allowed the automobile industry to exert undue influence, the consumer advocates said.

The consumer group said only 4 percent of 2010 model year vehicles achieve at least 30 mpg.

“Clearly, an important reason for much, much stronger fuel economy requirements in the future is to protect the car companies from themselves,” Gillis said.

The consumer advocate’s statement was issued as the Friday, Nov. 27, deadline approaches for public comment on the administration’s proposal.

Auto industry lobbyists declined to comment on the substance of the consumer association’s proposal while urging the administration to start considering post-2016 standards next year.

“We hope that once this rule making is finalized, NHTSA and EPA will begin the process of setting standards for future years,” said Charles Territo, a spokesman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, a lobbying group for 11 domestic and foreign automakers.

That view was echoed by the Association of International Automobile Manufacturers, which represents 13 automakers.

“Our industry is one where long lead times are especially important to accommodate the design, engineering and production planning for next-generation products,” said AIAM spokesman Kim Custer.

Territo also defended the role played by NHTSA, which is part of the U.S. Department of Transportation. He said Transportation’s expertise “is invaluable to the standard-setting process.”

NHTSA and EPA spokesmen did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The administration proposed 2012-16 standards in September. The increases would be among the largest over a four-year period in the 35-year history of the program, said Mark Cooper, the Consumer Federation’s research director.

Cooper said the rate of increase during this period, if projected to 2020, would put the standard at 45 mpg.

“In short, technologies identified in 2008 could already support the goal of 45 mpg by 2020, and the technological limits are not fixed,” he said in a statement.

The administration’s proposal unifies regulation of greenhouse gas emissions and fuel economy standards. It also encompasses an agreement with automakers in which the industry would back the administration’s tougher rules on the understanding that those standards would preclude any set by California and other states.

“Utter market failure.” That’s how Mark Cooper, research director for the consumer advocacy group Consumer Federation of America describes the U.S. vehicle supply. For the 2010 model year, just 44 models (4 percent of all EPA-rated vehicles for the year) get 30 MPG or more, despite widespread consumer interest in more fuel efficient vehicles, according to a new survey conducted this month and released today from the group.

Published just days ahead of the deadline for public comments on tighter fuel economy standards, the CFA survey finds 78 percent of Americans support raising the bar to 35 MPG by 2016 (up from 25 MPG today) for the average MPG of an automaker’s fleet, as the Obama administration has proposed.

Go ahead with stricter standards, CFA’s survey respondents (which included 1,000 people) seem to suggest, but then open the information floodgates to let me make my own decisions. Support for “workplace programs that discourage driving alone to work,” and “feebate” programs that would offer rebates to buyers of fuel-sippers while putting a surcharge on gas guzzlers was underwhelming in the survey, with more than half of respondents opposing the ideas. But a whopping 80 percent say they support a requirement for auto companies to include MPG ratings in all TV and print ads for new vehicles, and 75 percent want to see in-dash MPG gauges.

Whether car buyers would be willing to pay a premium for these features or higher-efficiency vehicles, CFA has not explained. But drivers who want those tools have a growing number of low-cost options available via smartphone apps that build upon or mimick newer in-car displays (helping drivers track fuel consumption and save money on gas, for example). And as CalCars.org founder Felix Kramer noted to us recently, after-market options include “relatively cheap add-on for all vehicles” that can boost MPGs.

To address what the group sees as disparity between strong consumer interest in higher-efficiency vehicles and the relatively small number of high-MPG cars in the pipeline for next year (especially from U.S.-based car companies), CFA urges the Obama administration to put the Environmental Protection Agency in charge of setting fuel economy standards at 45 MPG or better by 2020, and “much higher levels in the future.”

With an increasing number of holiday festivities being held in the home this year, we’re all looking for creative and cost effective ways to spruce up our table settings and create a look that will impress our guests. When it comes to setting your Thanksgiving table, options for the adventurous host are limitless. What are the hottest trends for you to bring to your table this year? Here are a few ideas that will take your Thanksgiving table from ordinary to extraordinary:

Color, Texture and Mix – Match:

In table linens and accessories, this year we are seeing rich, saturated colours. We are also seeing a lot of texture and the mixing and matching of patterns with solids. There are a lot of options out there to do something warm and inviting.

Color Trends

Warm tones have always been popular for Fall and that continues with some of the biggest trends in colour combinations this year. Some of those include:
- Deep Spice and Aubergine with muted Gold accents – Dark Chocolate with Blues and Gray accents – Olive Green, Aubergine and softer greens as accents – Dark Chocolate, Taupe and Natural

Tabletop Decor

- Use things that you already have in your home – pull out your 3 or 4 of your favourite vases of different heights. Use complementary colors of fresh flowers for a simple and stunning arrangement. Fill three or four vases and/or glass bowls with different colors and sizes of ornaments, fruits, leaves – anything with color and texture that will create visual excitement.

- Your guests are all unique – why not celebrate their individuality? Use different patterns and/or colors of napkin rings that match their unique personalities. Are they simple or sophisticated? Fun or formal? Unpredictable or conservative? Show them you care with a little customization to complement your table linens.

- Candles are always a dramatic and cost effective way to make a statement – use votives at each place setting with a name card and emphasize beautiful table linens for a classy and simple look. Or go more dramatic and cluster your favourite candle sticks of varying heights and looks as a centerpiece. Use colors that complement or match your dishes, glasses and table linens.

- Nothing brings subtle sophistication to your table like a well-selected runner. Use one the length of the table plus 12 inches to hang over the edge (usually a 90″ or longer) as the perfect centerpiece. If you are using a solid tablecloth or placemats, make sure to jazz it up with a festive pattern. If you have a patterned look already, use a vibrant solid runner that picks up on one of the colors in your runner.

- Use 2 napkins instead of one with a napkin ring. With a solid napkin inside, and a more decorative napkin on the outside.

When setting your table, just remember: do what feels right for the mood. A casual gathering calls for a relaxed setting. A formal meal should feel that way at the table. Either way, it doesn’t take much to elevate your in-home dining experience. Replacing an old tablecloth with something fresh an exciting, and adding a few simple table accessories can go a long way to impressing your guests. It’s that time of year when family gatherings abound and everyone spends countless hours congregating around the dinner table. With the hours spent preparing the perfect meal, make sure you don’t forget to finish it off with the perfect setting.

Seems shrinking gas prices haven’t deterred Toyota’s need for hybrid developin’ speed. Starting with the third generation Prius and the new Lexus hybrid, the HS250h, which are being unveiled at the North American International Auto Show in Detroit, the car company has announced that it will launch as many as 10 new hybrids by the early 2010’s.Some of highlights from the incoming hybrid lineup? News that the Plug-in Prius will launch by the end of this year, and confirmation that Toyota will release a Battery Electric Vehicle, the FT-EV urban commuter vehicle, by 2012. Plug-in Prius Comes Early. The much-anticipated Plug-in Prius, which was originally slated for launch in 2010, will now be arriving a year early. The lithium ion battery-powered Prius Plug-in Hybrid Vehicle will hit US shores by the end of 2009, though only 150 will be placed with U.S. lease fleet customers. The FT-EV Battery Electric Vehicle Only Years Away. Even more intriguing is the prospect of Toyota’s BEV, the FT-EV, which is evidently only 3 years away from a US arrival. According to Toyota,

The FT-EV concept shares its platform with the revolutionary-new iQ urban commuter vehicle. Already a huge hit in Japan, the iQ is lightweight and seats four passengers in comfort and security, while delivering exceptional mileage, sporty performance, unique refinements and a fun, youthful image. Toyota’s FT-EV concept imagines an urban dweller, driving up to 50 miles between home, work and other forms of public transportation, such as high-speed rail. Although, for now, the FT-EV remains a pure concept, it represents a natural pairing of product strategies.

Sounds great, but will American consumers take to the compact electric car as readily as the Japanese have?
A Hybrid Future. Toyota just revealed a concept for a compressed natural gas powered Camry Hybrid at the LA Auto Show in 2008. We’ll have to keep our ears peeled for further details on both it and the promising FT-EV. So that makes five out of ten—what other kind of hybrid-ery does Toyota have in store for the next few years? Time will tell, but the company is forecasting selling at least a million gas-electric hybrids by the early 2010s, so we can bet there’ll be a decent consumer-friendly variety.

Moviebook VPD400 de ViewSonic

Gonzalo Tirado Yepez ha revelado su siguiente gran apuesta en el mercado de las películas y multimedia:  la ViewSonic Moviebook VPD400. Con su tecnología que soporta varios formatos de archivo incluyendo AVI, FLV, MKV, MPG, MOV, VOB, RMVB, H.264, WMA, MP3, WAV, FLAC e incluso DTS/AC3, provee una fantástica experiencia musical con 6 horas de reproducción continua, 8 GB de memoria, ranura para tarjeta de expansión microSD y una genial pantalla de 4,3 pulgadas. Permite al usuario poner subtítulos opcionales a las películas que se ven. Dice Gonzalo Tirado que el Viewsonic Moviebook VPD400 cuesta $130 dólares.

Stories on the newest apps for the iphone and ipod touch.

Richard Truett
Automotive News
November 16, 2009 – 12:01 am ET

2011 Chevy Volt

Nissan North America says the Nissan Leaf all-electric car will get 367 mpg.No, it won’t.
General Motors Co. says the plug-in hybrid Chevrolet Volt will get 230 mpg.

No, it can’t.

The Leaf’s miles-per-gallon rating will be zero, nada, zilch. The car doesn’t burn a molecule of petroleum. It doesn’t get a miles-per-gallon rating, simply because no gallons are involved. And the Volt’s true fuel economy is more confusing and difficult to calculate because it uses both gasoline and electricity.

“The current system isn’t relevant anymore,” says Matt Mattila, a consultant at the Rocky Mountain Institute, an environmental consulting firm in Denver.

Still, consumers need a simple way to compare vehicles, one that gives them at least some guidance as to which will cost more to drive.
A new calculation

Let’s park the old way of computing miles per gallon for this new generation of electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids. Instead, let’s create a fair, simple and accurate way to calculate the cost of driving 100 miles straight — regardless of fuel.

There are lots of reasons that some folks will oppose our proposed formula. We’ll get to those later. For now, though, here’s how a per-100-mile formula would work.

You start with some assumptions. The first is an average price of a gallon of regular-grade gasoline. Base it on the average price in the United States the previous year. For 2008, I’ve seen various numbers. But one, taken from a Department of Energy Web site, puts it at $3.21.

Next we need an average price for electricity. Across the United States, electricity typically costs between 11 and 14 cents per kilowatt-hour. Let’s go with 12 cents per kilowatt-hour.

Then we determine how much electricity, fuel or both the vehicle needs to travel 100 miles. From our price assumptions, we can calculate how much that will cost. Let’s run some hypotheticals.

If gasoline-powered car X gets 25 mpg combined city/highway, then it needs four gallons to go 100 miles. Voila: It costs 4 times $3.21, or $12.84, to go 100 miles.

If electric vehicle Y can go 100 miles on a single charge and that charge amounts to 44 kwh, then that vehicle’s energy/fuel cost per 100 miles is 44 times $0.12, or $5.28.

By the way, that energy use figure for a highway-valid electric vehicle comes from Henrik Fisker, founder and CEO of Fisker Automotive. He estimates an electric car would need 22 kwh of electricity to go 50 miles. Fisker Automotive’s first car, the $87,000 Karma plug-in hybrid, will be assembled in Finland by Valmet Automotive Inc. starting next year.

Plug-in hybrids such as the Volt admittedly are more complicated to calculate, but not impossible.

GM says the Volt will go 40 miles on electricity before switching to gasoline power, which is directed through the electric motor. So figure the cost for the electricity for 40 miles, then the cost for enough gasoline to drive the next 60 miles. Add the two figures.

A new calculation

Let’s park the old way of computing miles per gallon for this new generation of electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids. Instead, let’s create a fair, simple and accurate way to calculate the cost of driving 100 miles straight — regardless of fuel.

There are lots of reasons that some folks will oppose our proposed formula. We’ll get to those later. For now, though, here’s how a per-100-mile formula would work.

You start with some assumptions. The first is an average price of a gallon of regular-grade gasoline. Base it on the average price in the United States the previous year. For 2008, I’ve seen various numbers. But one, taken from a Department of Energy Web site, puts it at $3.21.

Next we need an average price for electricity. Across the United States, electricity typically costs between 11 and 14 cents per kilowatt-hour. Let’s go with 12 cents per kilowatt-hour.

Then we determine how much electricity, fuel or both the vehicle needs to travel 100 miles. From our price assumptions, we can calculate how much that will cost. Let’s run some hypotheticals.

If gasoline-powered car X gets 25 mpg combined city/highway, then it needs four gallons to go 100 miles. Voila: It costs 4 times $3.21, or $12.84, to go 100 miles.

If electric vehicle Y can go 100 miles on a single charge and that charge amounts to 44 kwh, then that vehicle’s energy/fuel cost per 100 miles is 44 times $0.12, or $5.28.

By the way, that energy use figure for a highway-valid electric vehicle comes from Henrik Fisker, founder and CEO of Fisker Automotive. He estimates an electric car would need 22 kwh of electricity to go 50 miles. Fisker Automotive’s first car, the $87,000 Karma plug-in hybrid, will be assembled in Finland by Valmet Automotive Inc. starting next year.

Plug-in hybrids such as the Volt admittedly are more complicated to calculate, but not impossible.

GM says the Volt will go 40 miles on electricity before switching to gasoline power, which is directed through the electric motor. So figure the cost for the electricity for 40 miles, then the cost for enough gasoline to drive the next 60 miles. Add the two figures.

A new calculation

Let’s park the old way of computing miles per gallon for this new generation of electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids. Instead, let’s create a fair, simple and accurate way to calculate the cost of driving 100 miles straight — regardless of fuel.

There are lots of reasons that some folks will oppose our proposed formula. We’ll get to those later. For now, though, here’s how a per-100-mile formula would work.

You start with some assumptions. The first is an average price of a gallon of regular-grade gasoline. Base it on the average price in the United States the previous year. For 2008, I’ve seen various numbers. But one, taken from a Department of Energy Web site, puts it at $3.21.

Next we need an average price for electricity. Across the United States, electricity typically costs between 11 and 14 cents per kilowatt-hour. Let’s go with 12 cents per kilowatt-hour.

Then we determine how much electricity, fuel or both the vehicle needs to travel 100 miles. From our price assumptions, we can calculate how much that will cost. Let’s run some hypotheticals.

If gasoline-powered car X gets 25 mpg combined city/highway, then it needs four gallons to go 100 miles. Voila: It costs 4 times $3.21, or $12.84, to go 100 miles.

If electric vehicle Y can go 100 miles on a single charge and that charge amounts to 44 kwh, then that vehicle’s energy/fuel cost per 100 miles is 44 times $0.12, or $5.28.

By the way, that energy use figure for a highway-valid electric vehicle comes from Henrik Fisker, founder and CEO of Fisker Automotive. He estimates an electric car would need 22 kwh of electricity to go 50 miles. Fisker Automotive’s first car, the $87,000 Karma plug-in hybrid, will be assembled in Finland by Valmet Automotive Inc. starting next year.

Plug-in hybrids such as the Volt admittedly are more complicated to calculate, but not impossible.

GM says the Volt will go 40 miles on electricity before switching to gasoline power, which is directed through the electric motor. So figure the cost for the electricity for 40 miles, then the cost for enough gasoline to drive the next 60 miles. Add the two figures.

Objections

Sounds simple, right? Here are some of the objections to this method — all valid — and our responses.

1. The numbers will fluctuate wildly. After all, this year’s gasoline prices aren’t the same as last year’s. So the cost-per-100-miles figure will change every year for every vehicle.

True. That will make comparisons across years difficult.

One solution might be to set an arbitrary price for gasoline — say, $3 a gallon — and use that every year in addition to whatever the previous year’s average price was. That would provide a baseline for comparison across all years.

In addition, temperature, geography, traffic patterns and driving styles are going to dramatically affect the distance an electric vehicle can go — much more so than they do for gasoline-powered cars.

2. It’s misleading.

Again, true. But this is an old criticism, not one unique to this method. Every fuel economy test conducted in a lab differs from what different drivers will experience.

Remember how outraged Toyota Prius buyers were when their cars’ mileage fell short of the government number? You can bet some overwrought consumer backed (or led) by a lawyer will cry foul when his vehicle doesn’t deliver the advertised cost per 100 miles.

3. If you can recharge the vehicle using solar power from roof panels, it might not cost anything to replenish the batteries.

If an environmentalist makes this boast, I say: Good for you. How much did your solar panels cost? Using utilities’ electricity rates is the only fair way to get a nationwide cost.

These objections are valid, but aren’t serious enough to shoot down this approach. Remember, we’re not trying to create a measurement that is ironclad, repeatable in test labs or true to the real world.

Today’s miles-per-gallon ratings aren’t real-world-based either. And engineers can disagree on test methodologies until the cows come home. The EPA and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration each has a miles-per-gallon calculation — and they differ.

The goal here is simply an understandable measure that can be used to compare vehicles across power sources. The folks in Washington, working with the industry, probably can improve on this. But from where we sit, dollars per 100 miles — or $/100 miles — seems like a pretty good measurement.

What do you think? Join the discussion at autonews.com/mileage.

You can reach Richard Truett at rtruett@crain.com.

produkcja – PROSENS – sesja zdjęciowa Gdańsk

produkcja – PROSENS – sesja zdjęciowa Gdańsk

produkcja – PROSENS – sesja zdjęciowa Gdańsk

produkcja – PROSENS – sesja zdjęciowa Gdańsk

produkcja – PROSENS – sesja zdjęciowa Gdańsk

produkcja – PROSENS – sesja zdjęciowa Gdańsk

produkcja – PROSENS – sesja zdjęciowa Gdańsk

produkcja – PROSENS – sesja zdjęciowa Gdańsk

produkcja – PROSENS – sesja zdjęciowa Gdańsk

produkcja – PROSENS – sesja zdjęciowa Gdańsk

produkcja – PROSENS – sesja zdjęciowa Gdańsk

produkcja – PROSENS – sesja zdjęciowa Gdańsk

produkcja – PROSENS – sesja zdjęciowa Gdańsk

produkcja – PROSENS – sesja zdjęciowa Gdańsk

produkcja – PROSENS – sesja zdjęciowa Gdańsk

produkcja – PROSENS – sesja zdjęciowa Gdańsk

produkcja – PROSENS – sesja zdjęciowa Gdańsk

produkcja – PROSENS – sesja zdjęciowa Gdańsk

produkcja – PROSENS – sesja zdjęciowa Gdańsk

produkcja – PROSENS – sesja zdjęciowa Gdańsk

produkcja – PROSENS – sesja zdjęciowa Gdańsk

produkcja – PROSENS – sesja zdjęciowa Gdańsk

produkcja – PROSENS – sesja zdjęciowa Gdańsk

produkcja – PROSENS – sesja zdjęciowa Gdańsk

Driving to work the other day, I realized that the weather is no longer miserably H O T
Besides the fact that I was the only driver on the road, which is perfectly fine, on a Sunday morning (0530) in Tucson…The weather is something else, I really hope it will last for few months. 43F is nice…
Yes, my battery was 90% charged, this was another good thing on a Sunday morning.