Launching a “Race to the Top” challenge for communities to encourage advanced vehicle adoption:

The President is announcing a new $1 billion National Community Deployment Challenge to catalyze 10 to 15 model communities to invest in the necessary infrastructure, remove the regulatory barriers, and create the local incentives to support deployment of advanced vehicles at critical mass.

This proposal embraces a strategy similar to that outlined by Senators Merkley and Alexander in their Promoting Electric Vehicles legislation.  This proposal, however, would be ‘fuel neutral’, allowing communities to determine if electrification, natural gas, or other alternative fuels would be the best fit.  Deployment Communities would serve as real-world laboratories, leveraging limited federal resources to develop different models to deploy advanced vehicles at scale.  The program would also support the development of up to 5 regional Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) corridors where alternative fuel trucks can transport goods without using a drop of oil.

Making advanced vehicles more affordable: The President proposes to improve the current tax credit for electric vehicles by

o   Expanding eligibility for the credit to a broader range of advanced vehicle technologies;

o   Increasing the amount from $7,500, making it scalable up to $10,000;

o   Reforming the credit to make it available at the point-of-sale by making it transferable to the dealer or financier, allowing consumers to benefit when they purchase a vehicle rather than when they file their taxes; and

o   Removing the cap on the number of vehicles per manufacturer eligible for the credit and, instead, ramping down and eventually eliminating the credit at the end of the decade.

Accelerating deployment of alternative-fuel trucks: The President is proposing a new tax incentive for commercial trucks that provides a credit for 50% of the incremental cost of a dedicated alternative-fuel truck, including trucks powered by natural gas or electricity, for a five-year period.  This incentive – paired with support through programs like the Energy Department’s National Clean Fleets Partnership, which provides technical assistance to large company fleets interested in moving toward vehicles that rely on little or no oil – will not only drive down domestic demand for oil, but also drive up demand for the sorts of vehicles built at Freightliner’s Mt. Holly Plant and, in turn, spur job creation in the American manufacturing sector.

Launching ‘EV Everywhere’, a clean energy grand challenge to make electric-powered vehicles as affordable and convenient as gasoline-powered vehicles for the average American family within a decade:

This national effort is the second in a series of Clean Energy Grand Challenges designed by the Department of Energy to bring together America’s best and brightest scientists, engineers, and businesses to work together to solve the most pressing energy technology challenges of our time.  EV Everywhere will enable companies in the U.S. to produce electric vehicles at lower cost, with an improved vehicle range and an increased fast-charging ability, so average American families will be able to own and drive an electric vehicle as affordable and convenient as today’s gasoline-powered vehicles.  The savings from using lower-cost electricity instead of gasoline, roughly $100 per month for the average driver, combined with the reduction of upfront vehicle cost, will lower energy costs for American consumers and businesses.

The President’s FY13 Budget includes $650 million to advance vehicle and battery technologies at the Energy Department, including investments that support this new grand challenge.  EV Everywhere will invest in breakthrough R&D for advanced batteries, electric drivetrain technologies, lightweight vehicle structures, and fast charging technology.

The White House is expected on Wednesday to make “a major announcement,” in a push for electric and alternative fueled vehicles.

Including:

“…an increase in funding for tax credits for alternative-fuel vehicles, funding for communities to build alternative-fuel infrastructure such as electric vehicle charging stations, money for research and development of alternative vehicles, and incentives for natural-gas-powered trucks. Later in the day, he’ll give a speech on the economic impact of clean energy at the Mount Holly truck manufacturing plant in the battleground state of North Carolina.”

America needs more electric and other alternative-fuel cars on its roads because they reduce our dangerous reliance on foreign oil, a fact that the Department of Defense, the CIA, and the National Intelligence Council have all attested to. Often money we spend to buy oil makes its way through the sluices to terrorists groups and hostile nations like Iran.

Electric and alternate fueled vehicles reduce our dangerous oil dependency and make America safer.

More details can be found here throughout the day.

Yesterday, President Obama delivered a speech at the University of Miami in Florida, addressing concerns about rising oil prices and America’s energy future. The President argued that the “Drill, Baby, Drill!” method of energy policy is less a strategy than a bumper sticker, explaining that the oil we produce in the U.S. minimally impacts global energy prices and will not help America.

President Obama argued that the the U.S. has to become the leader on green energy, the future of both U.S. and world energy needs.  Through green investment, we can create a base of manufacturing jobs in the United States which  have the potential to transform into the next boom-industry, driving our future. All of those solar panels, wind turbines, and biofuel research laboratories need to be built somewhere, and that ought to be right here.

It isn’t a luxury or feel-good idea for us to get behind green energy on a national level, but a necessity. No matter what your politics are, it’s important to recognize that The United States faces a major challenge when it comes to energy policy, one that isn’t solved by recycling the same talking points and ideas of the past several decades. The continuation of poor energy policy will set the United States back for decades to come.

At the end of his speech- President Obama inspired and challenged our youth to be the generation that rises to the occasion and makes the decisions that will keep America strong. The energy problem, he says, won’t be solved a year, a term, or even a decade from now. It is an issue which requires a full scale commitment from all of us, especially the next generation of American leaders. We will not be able to lower oil prices tomorrow. But we will be able to set the stage for another century of American prosperity.

Stellar article from Torque News detailing Operation Free’s argument for breaking our addiction to oil. The article also features quotes from multiple veterans of Operation Free and a powerful counterpoint to National Automobile Dealers Association’s opposition to stronger CAFE standards.

Vets Who Served Overseas Seek Higher Fuel Standards

By Keith Griffin on Thu, 01/19/2012 – 17:05
Auto News
Some of the people who have made the greatest sacrifices for our country are pushing for higher CAFE standards so our fighting forces are no longer compelled to fight for our dependence on fossil fuel.

That’s the message that came out of the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) hearings in Philadelphia today and earlier this week in Detroit. An additional hearing is set for next week in San Francisco. Members of Operation Free, a nationwide coalition of veterans, spoke in support of strong fuel economy standards for US cars and trucks.

John Gensler, former Captain, US Army, testified, “My experiences in war have made me understand and care deeply about our national security, as countless friends are still fighting overseas, and not all of them have made it home safely. The longer the U.S. remains dependent on fossil fuel, the more the U.S. will have to engage in tough wars just to protect our energy supplies, putting American lives at risk.”

He added, “This isn’t just an academic or economic threat to veterans like me; it is a deeply and profoundly personal threat. In December of 2007, I helped lay to rest West Point classmate Captain Ben Tiffner, who was killed in Iraq by an advanced roadside bomb. That bomb was designed, built, and financed by the Iranian government propped up by global oil revenues. “Not two months later, nearly four years ago to the day, I was burying another friend and football teammate, Captain Torre Mallard, at West Point. He was killed in a similar incident, by a similar weapon, again funded by black-stained petrodollars. How many more of our bravest young Americans will we lose while we continue to debate and prolong action?”

Gensler served as an officer in the United States Army as a tank and infantry mortar platoon leader, and previously worked for the Dept of Energy’s Advanced Research Projects Agency – Energy (ARPA-E). He now works as a Project Developer for Borrego Solar Systems, helping develop solar energy projects for the Department of Defense and other federal agencies. Gensler is a graduate of United States Military Academy at West Point, MIT’s Sloan School of Management, and Harvard’s JFK School of Government.

Brendan Flynn, US Coast Guard Academy graduate and Operation Free organizer, testified, “It is very clear to me that America’s oil dependence makes us vulnerable. A number of my good friends from the Coast Guard have served in-theater guarding oil platforms just off the coast of Iraq from waterborne suicide boat attacks. U.S. forces recently turned over oil platform security duties to the Iraqis, but oil infrastructure continues to be a target for attack both overseas and here at home.

“This is why I believe that we must adopt the 54.5 mpg standard. Nearly half of the oil we use goes towards fueling our cars and trucks, meaning building cars that use less gas will help break our addiction to oil. This standard is good for our economy, as it will spur new investments in energy-efficient engines. It is good for our national security – as the less reliant we are on one source of energy, the less vulnerable we are to a major disruption of supply. Frankly, the only people that this standard is bad for are the insurgents and terrorists fighting against our troops and plotting to attack our nation.”

The members of Operation Free are facing strong opposition from organized groups like the National Automobile Dealers Association, which wants nothing to do with the new standards. The NADA’s government relations chairman, Don Chalmers, a New Mexico-based Ford Motor Co. dealer, was quoted in the Wall Street Journal as saying, “I want to sell very efficient cars. But if the customer can’t get the financing for that car, than it makes no difference. Finance sources do not look at how much you are going to save in fuel economy.” He added that the NADA plans to release a study next month that will estimate that technology costs would add up to $5,000 to the price of a vehicle.

Luke Tonachel a senior analyst in the Energy and Transportation program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, backed the Operation Free arguments in testimony in Detroit. In his testimony Tonachel portrayed the stakes as being very high. The higher CAFE standards would save the American economy “a half trillion dollars over the next 20 years,” according to an article posted by TorqueNews correspondent David Herron.

To Read More: http://www.torquenews.com/108/vets-who-served-overseas-seek-higher-fuel-standards

According to AutoBlogGreen, the overwhelming turn out for the Detroit hearings is indicative of the widespread support the new 54.5 standard enjoys.

First hearing on 54.5 mpg proposal reveals widespread support

They came from as close as the General Motors headquarters across the street and as far away as Santa Fe, New Mexico.

They represented groups as diverse as automakers and the military, steel manufacturers and religious organizations.

And nearly all of the 90 or so people who testified on a proposal to raise the nation’s fuel economy standard to 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025 offered support for the plan before a joint government panel in downtown Detroit.

Noting that the Obama administration’s proposal had won the diverse support of auto industry insiders, labor unions, consumer watchdogs and environmental groups, Congressman John Dingell said, “this is an event that ranks with the loaves and fishes.”

Tuesday’s hearing, held by the Environmental Protection Agency and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, was the first of three that will give members of the public opportunity to comment on the joint-proposed Corporate Average Fuel Economy rules. Further hearings are set for Thursday in Philadelphia and Tuesday, January 24, in San Francisco.

But it was in downtown Detroit, the heart of the nation’s auto industry, that government leaders were offered widespread support for the 54.5 mpg standard Tuesday. Proponents said the U.S. would benefit in the form of increased automotive jobs, consumer savings and enhanced national security.

“The auto industry is coming back strong, and one of the reasons we are so confident about the industry’s future is green technology,” said UAW president Bob King. “The drive to bring fuel efficient cars to the market is transforming existing jobs and creating new ones. … These are the automotive jobs of the future.”

The EPA estimates the 54.5 mpg standard will save more than 4 billion barrels of oil between 2017 and 2025 and cut carbon emissions by more than 2 billion metric tons. Based on an average fuel price of $3.53 per gallon, it estimates consumers will save a net of $4,400, even with a higher upfront sticker price for new models.

While stating that they supported the proposal, that was the top source of reluctance among automakers and dealers.

More than worrying about meeting what they saw as aggressive deadlines, executives representing U.S. domestic automakers were more concerned with whether enough mainstream customers had the desire and financial means to purchase new cars.

Even as carmakers unveiled more than a dozen new electric vehicles and hybrids at the North American International Auto Show taking place down the street at the Cobo Center, they feared trying to peer at consumer purchasing trends more than a decade into the future left too much leeway for error.

“We must not lose sight of the most important question, and that is, ‘Are they buying the product,’” said Jay Wilton, Chrysler’s vice president of engineering and regulatory compliance. “Measuring even next year is challenging. Speculating 13 years into the future brings risk.”

Because of that, the U.S. automakers said their support for the 54.5-mpg proposal was contingent upon the EPA and NHTSA agreeing to a midterm review that would assess whether early estimates on government figures were accurate, whether they could develop fuel-saving technology in time and, primarily, whether customers were buying fuel-efficient cars.

A November survey conducted by Consumer Reports revealed 80 percent of consumers said they supported the 54.5-mpg target and that 83 percent said they would be willing to pay more for a car that offered better fuel economy.

That may not necessarily mean they can afford a more fuel-efficient car. While several car dealers testified Tuesday they supported the CAFE proposal outright, other dealers were concerned about the costs fuel technologies would add to new vehicles.

Don Chalmers, speaking on behalf of the National Automobile Dealers Association, said the new standards would limit financing options for some customers, potentially decreasing new car sales and shifting borderline customers into used cars instead.

Although the EPA estimated that fuel savings of $6,600 over a decade would pay for the $2,200 increase in upfront vehicle cost, he said that financing departments would not factor the long-term savings into a customer’s loan application.

“I can’t quite get around the affordability from a finance standpoint and whether you can get qualified for a loan in the first place,” said Chalmers, who said he would have lost several sales this fall had the proposal been in place.

“The bankers don’t get a chart and compare fuel savings. They’re looking at payments versus disposable income, and that’s the reality of vehicle financing today.”

Chalmers was the most tepid of supporters in Detroit. Overall, the increased regulation enjoyed wide support. In the afternoon, a group of women broke out in song while supporting the new rule. Nurses hoped the new standard would decrease asthma and NCAAP officials said it would create jobs for black workers.

And if the CAFE proposal brought together groups more disparate than auto industry insiders and environmentalists, it was pacifists and Marines nodding in agreement.

The Rev. Peggy Garrigues, a pastor from Clawson United Methodist Church in suburban Detroit, agreed.

“War is incompatible with Christian teaching,” she said. “The less we depend on foreign oil, the less incentive we have to go to war. These proposed standards will help people of faith live out their values and create a better world for God’s children.”

For more: http://green.autoblog.com/2012/01/18/first-hearing-on-54-5-mpg-proposal-reveals-widespread-support/