LyrArc Article Gist
Such realism is needed today to listen to all so that climate change action on auto carbon emission can be de-politicized and realistic plan can be adopted. Too many floods, fires and adverse events by 2024 for the US not to have a plan and deny climate change does not exist. The Biden administration gives flexibility to automakers to meet auto carbon emissions rules by 2032 by accelerating the progress in the last 3 years as the capital investments, research and learning curve for new technologies, manufacturing improvements and cost reduction, and charging station infrastructure enlargement have taken place by 2030. Biden administration officials clearly understand resistance of carbuyers when the charging stations needed do not exist and costs are high in 2024, and EV technologies are at learning stage.

LyrArc Article Gist
The new EPA rules for auto emission standards were setup under the Obama administration in 2012. The rules are a major part of the effort to meet the challenge of pollution and clean air. The Trump administration and EPA chief Scott Pruitt plan to reverse the higher standards. The new standards which had the support of automakers when enacted require that average fuel economy be doubled to about 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025. This would cut oil use by 12 billion barrels over the lifetime of the cars and reduce carbon dioxide pollution by about 6 billion tons.  The EPA under president Trump does not say how much the standards will be rolled back. This also leads to one more tension between California and the Trump administration. California plans to vigorously oppose the rollback. Under the Clean Air Act of 1970 California has historically made its own rules and was followed by 12 other states making up one third of the car market in the U.S. If the Trump administration is able to to this it would create two markets for automobiles in the U.S. which is not in the interest of automakers who are having second thoughts about the change. Amazingly a suburban Virginia Chevy dealership has vigorously opposed being used as the location for the EPA under the Trump administration making an announcement on this issue. Chevy dealerships are saying the Trump administration does not have the facts, that the auto industry has done very well in the last 4-5 years. Chevrolet and GM do not want to be associated with the politics on this issue. California has historically acted as a pioneer in automobile standards with the rest of the nation following. The Trump administration move would be an effort to break this precedent.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
How electric utilities and the oil industry are backing California's fight with the EPA to regulate auto emissions, cutting them by 30% by 2016 for new cars and trucks in the state. Its a fight endorsed by 14 states in the Northeast and Northwest. California sued the EPA, and in effect the Bush Administration which controls the EPA, in federal district court and federal appeals court. THe EPA has taken two years to respond to California's request for a waiver so that it can regulate auto emissions in its state. California's auto emissions rules are part of a broad effort to reduce all emissions in the state by 25% by 2020, including by manufacturing, electric utilities and the oil industry. Utilities and the oil industry share the opinion that all sectors of the economy should be required to take on this responsibility, including the transportation sector. In the past oil companies and the auto industry have been at loggerheads about who is responsible for the worsening dependence of the USA on foreign oil and the worsening impact of the oil consumption on the environment and their advertising campaign have often shifted the blame on each other. Is this part of the continuing debate about oil as oil prices rise and consciousness about global warming rises as it has already done so in Europe. See the links to the Frankfurt Auto Show. BMW known for gas guzzling machines has done an aboutface in the face of public opinion in Germany and is advertising its image as environment friendly and investing in new technologies to curb emissions and increase fuel economy. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This perspectives piece in the DW.com says Germany should now have cleaner air and cleaner cars on the road thanks to a little pressure from the EU and from the courts. This comes after a federal court in Leipzig ruled in favor of cities imposing ban on diesel cars where air pollution is bad. DW.com points out that Chancellor Merkel was known as the "climate chancellor" early in her first term after her push for international climate protection policies, but she forgot to take along the German auto industry.

The German auto industry it says neglected to take heed to the shift in policy and continued to develop high diesel emission vehicles ending up in the situation of diesel emissions data manipulation in the diesel emissions scandal.

 

LyrArc Article Gist
The US gets the lowest score among the large industrialized nations- way behind Europe- in its record on greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution policies, agricultural policies, smog, and other environment criteria in a survey done jointly by researchers at Yale and Columbia Universities. On regional smog the US has a very poor score.

LyrArc Article Gist
This is a big desicion by the Obama administration, and has global implications for the amount of oil consumed and the emissions discharged. The Obama administration will introduce one national standard for automile emissions and mileage standards, replacing the patchwork of standards and skipping over the challenges to the California standards by using those standards to set the national rules. The rules take effect in 2012. It will create a new national standard for a car and light truck fleet in the USA, that is 40% cleaner and more fuel efficient by 2016 than it is now, with a new average of 35.5 miles per gallon. The current national standard is 25 miles per gallon, and this standard has fallen way behind the Japanese and the Europeans. The Europeans went through their battles for fuel efficiency a few years ago with auto industry resistance, and this was finally settled with tougher standards, giving the European industry advantages in technology over the Americans. The American car industry stalled higher standards, and what standards were passed were whittled down by heavy lobbying in Congress. As a result a battle raged between those interested in conservation and the environment and the Detroit car industry, especially in a deteriorating global environment for this type of prolific oil consumption on American highways. This lack of foresight on the part of Detroit carmakers, and their management, accelerated their financial collapse in 2008 and 2009, as large car and truck sales collapsed. That this tough new standard of 40% improvement in 2016, would in fact not have been possible without this fiinancial collapse and turning to the government for a bailout - with the entire board of General Motors being replaced- is one of the ironies of this situation. This decision will almost certainly accelerate the development of smaller models, and bring the kind of attention to them that will give them the quality and features and comfort to make them command higher prices and become profitable, as is the case in Europe. For too long the American small car became synonymous with being a lesser car in many dimensions of design, quality, comfort and performance, so that it became a cheap car that you upgraded from to a larger car as you became affluent. It had been that way, but did not have to be that way after the world had changed. And the larger models like the pickup trucks and large cars are more likely to be phased out with the new regulations. This will also bring a `new sanity to oil prices, as the reduced consumption in the US will accomodate the increased consumption in India from the small cars like the Tata Nano which look set to sell in the millions, and still keep oil affordable for tight budgets worldwide. In this sense it is a victory for global good sense. For President Obama this is a personal quest, as he co-sponsored 2 bills in 2006, during this second year in the US Senate, one to raise fuel economy standards, and the other to encourage the use of alternative fuels....

LyrArc Article Gist
The new Ford Focus being unveiled at the Detroit Auto Show in 2009, is a new kind of car for Ford. This is a new kind of effort, a new discipline that Ford CEO Mullaly has advocated from the beginning. Making one car for all markets worldwide. Early on Mullaly told Ford's chairman Bill Ford that Boeing did not have a 737 for Europe and a 737 for the US and a 737 for Asia, why was Ford building a Focus for Europe and a Focus for the USA. In fact before Mullaly the Focus for the USA was a stripped down version of the European Focus and did not make much of an impression. The new Focus will have 80% common parts and 75% of parts from the same suppliers worldwide, so that a Focus made in Germany and the USA will share the same parts as a Focus made in Russia and a Focus made in China. And all of these plants will go into production at about the same time with the new Focus. To accomplish this transformation of Ford for "One Ford" worldwide, which is also on every business card carried by Ford managers, Mullaly appointed Derrick Kuzak as head of global manufacturing. See link for Derrick Kuzak. And the strategy was announced in mid-2008 with the start of retooling of truck factories in Mexico, Kentucky and Michigan, to make small cars designed in Europe for global markets. The task of coming up with one design for a global car was given to Martin Smith, a British designer based in Cologne, Germany. Smith says tastes are converging worldwide with the internet use, and customers are more unified than one would think, and whats emerging is a new kind of global cool if one looks for it. This is what happened when Focus protypes were shown to consumer panels in Europe, the USA and Asia, with a good impression created in all 3 markets. Aligning the US and European tastes was easier, China was a bit harder and the yellow leather interior popular in Shanghai had to be crossed out. Another challenge that had to be met in adisciplined manner was the varying safety rules and emissions around the world. For example European designers liked to have the windshield further forward, and Ford's global small car chief had to tell his engineers to move it back to meet US crumple zone standards. Similiar challenges had to be met in purchasing by global purchasing chief, Tony Brown, with a massive coordination effort needed to be done globally. And plastic trim from Michigan has to fit perfectly with sheet metal stamped in Michigan, and Ford used a virtual manufacturing system that allows the car to be built in cyberspace, and the bugs taken out at that early virtual build stage. The entire change is part of a metamorphosis at Ford, a change of culture and mastering a new discipline in coordinated effort worldwide for "One Ford." One year ago the Wayne Truck plant here in Detroit made the Navigator and the Expedition large vehicles.. With a $550 million investment this plant will make the Ford Focus a year from now. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Smaller companies are being squeezed by rapidly escalating costs as costs are going up as fast as oil prices, and face tighter emissions rules in Alberta's oil sands projects. Some projects now cost 2 to 3 times the original projections and there is a severe labor shortage. Even the big players will find it difficult and expensive. To meet the stringent emissions rules, as Prime Minister Harper signs on to new international greenhouse emissions targets, Shell may have to use a technology that captures CO2 from the plants that process the oil sands and store the gas underground. This costs $120 a ton, and would cost Shell upwards of $2 billion a year just to capture and store the CO2, for the 15-20 million tons of CO2 that would be emitted when it increases production to 770,000 barrels a day. The cleanup from oil sands processing is costly because processing is very pollution intensive. Production of one barrel from these oil sands is 3 times more polluting than producing conventional oil. Synenco Energy, which had a project in partnership with China's Sinopec for mining and processing the oil sands called Northern Lights for $10.8 billion, called off the project last year because of all these hurdles, slashed its work force, and decided it may sell the company. Currently 1.1 million barrels a day come from the Alberta oil sands. 2020 output was expected to rise to 4.3 million barrels a day. But now this looks too optimistic. CAPP forecests 3.8 million barrels a day, but even this may be on the high side. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
An exceptional journalism story of what happened on Sept 16 and September 17, 2008, and the aftermath, by Pulliam, Rappaport, Lucchetti, Strasburg and McGinty, when Morgan Stanley stock lost more than half its value and was at risk of collapsing. What caused the collapse in price? This article shows how the biggest names in financial institutions were buying protection with credit default swaps, and as the price of these swaps skyrocketed on Sept 16 and Sept 17, the shortselling in Morgan Stanley's shares also skyrocketed. Shortselling on Sept 17 reaching nine times the normal, with 39 million shares sold short adding to the 31 million shares sold short in the prior two days, according to trading records examined by WSJ. It was at this point, on the pleas of John Mack CEO of Morgan Stanley, the SEC stepped in to temporarily suspend short selling. It is hard to clearly isolate the shortselling that went on for protection, from the shortselling for speculation, but hedge funds were involved and some of the shortselling was done to make a quick profit. Citigroup has faced the problem of losing half the share's value in a couple of days in the week of November 17, and shortselling in Citigroup's shares contributed to the collapsing stock. See the 3 graphs setup to show the influence of credit default swaps on short selling, and the on share price for Morgan Stanley. On Monday November 24, the government announced a rescue plan for Citigroup. That the uptick rule has not been reinstated as yet, means that when one looks back at this period a few years from now it will show errors in handling this economic and financial markets crisis were made, different from that in the 1930's, but with serious consequences. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
As the Obama administration plans a large stimulus spending plan that may approach $1 trillion over several years, considering also the second phase of the $800 billion first phase stimulus, there is a concern that there may be wasteful spending and social costs of borrowing and spending by the government of such proportions. In economics jargon this hinges on whether there is amultiplier effect of spending, higher if its efficiently and well spent with less impact on private consumption and investment, and lower if the opposite were true. The assumption behind amultiplier of 1.0 for an additional bridge or road is that resources like manpower and capital that would be otherwise idle are deployed to produce something useful. An increase in one unit of government purchases increases by one unit the real gross domestic product. The government has effectively created the additional bridge or road without a cut in anybody's consumption or a businesses investment. The other contrasting approaches are to say there is a multiplier of zero, meaning there is a social cost in two ways. One the reduction of consumption and the crowding out of businesses investing in new products and technologies for example, and second in the inefficent use of resources if a government bureaucracy is put to work allocating money and the additional dangers of favoritism and corruption. To say that there is a multipier of 1.5 would mean that the government figures out a way to get private investment through conversion of plants for automotive parts say to make wind turbine blades by giving incentives, tax benefits and grants, spends on a dilapidated road and public transportation infrastructure that may provide benefits in increased growth capacity over future years. The limits of a government bureaucracy and inefficiency of government would in this case be addressed by transparency rules adopted and measures that track progress that are freely available to all citizens say on a website on the internet, and by bringing in fresh management talent from the private sector. There appears to be no generalization that can be applied for one multiplier for all projects. It may be that the multiplier will vary with the project. Some projects like the conversion of a factory making unneeded auto parts to a badly needed wind energy part, to change the dynamics of energy market pricing, to meet energy needs and cut emissions, may end up having a multiplier much above 1.0. A redundant or less needed bridge has a lower multiplier than a bridge rebuilt before it leads to breakdown. And also the complication that too large a movement in one direction say of stimulus spending, might result in a shift of the curve towards a smaller multiplier and diminishing returns, as the resources to track such a large expenditure and the talent to adminster are overextended. The social cost of private investment not making that investment in new technology, new product or improved product has to be figured into all this, both at the conceptual level as all costs and benefits may not be picked up in the analysis, and at the macro level keeping in mind that the animal spirits, as they were once described, may just not be there to absorb the huge outlays which a government can make. These do not come without an opportunity cost and borrowing costs. All this leads one to to conclude that spending has to be carefully evaluated and projects assessed on a case by case basis for costs and benefits. The spending has to be balanced to provide just as many incentives for private investment to invest in new products and technologies. One way the Obama team is attempting to address this is to include a $300 billion tax cut for businesses and individuals. The business tax cuts are aimed at helping small business with losses, and for future investments and making hires and forgoing layoffs. The other part relates to careful evaluation of spending projects and transparency so the people can see if they are effective. See the link to this....