And this comment from egpenet probalby belongs in this thread as well:

The powerplant programs at GM are much further along than at Ford. Chrysler is relying on Benz.
But the Japanese are way far ahead on hybrids. New models are coming out again from Toyota.

During the JunkInYourTruck this Fall, sponsored by the Ruiverside Neighborhood Association, a neighbor pulled into the lot with her Prius, paid her seller's fee, then silently (electric) pulled forward into her spot. It was really fun to watch. In excess of 40mpg city!

Further back in time, my marketing clients included General Electric who made train engines and GM Truck & Bus Group, who made bus diesels. And I remember electric street cars and electric busses in Detroit, growing up.

More recently, my wife boarded the train in Depot Town to commute for her teaching jobs in Detroit.

Hopefully, Dingel, who should have the same memories and more, will get the Transportation Industry to focus on "transport" and not just individual luxury.

I think we just need to ask:

* What's the trend look like on the locations of auto manufacturing jobs?

* How much energy are we burning for the privilege of shipping jobs overseas and cheaply produced cars back?

It pained me deeply to see Granholm and DeVos arguing over which could better bring back the auto industry with tax breaks - I think that time in Michigan's history is past, unless we want to dismantle every labor and environmental protection and every social program we've got. We need to work within new models.

My answers to the above questions, "Going, going, gone," and "Way too much."

And it's not just shipping cars here from the third world that burns energy unnecessarily, but the creation of new cars in the first place. The one-way product lifespan of manufacture -> ship -> use up -> junk is hugely energy (and resource) wasteful.

I'd like to see Dingell (and the rest of us) consider a model that egpenet will find quite familiar: repair, don't replace.

With a product lifespan that looks like manufacture -> ship -> use repair, we benefit twice. First, we save loads of energy on the manufacture and ship stages, even before we consider things like fuel efficiency, in the use stage. Second, repair is a strictly local phenomenon, and relies on human intelligence, skill, and labor rather than on capital and cheap energy. We will never be shipping our cars to China for mechanics.

What would happen if we built our cars to last for 20 years, rather than 4, and hired people to repair them as needed, rather than junking and starting over? I believe it's BMW that, years ago, started barcoding every part on the vehicles. Because some European countries require deposits on cars (while we still argue about bottled water), BMW gets their used cars back, at which point they can disassemble them and put the still-good parts back into the manufacturing or repair streams - they're replacing capital and energy with labor! My bicycle is 20 years old; faraway capital and materials expenditure plays much less a part in this than paying for a local tune-up every once in a while and judiciously replacing worn parts. The same thing is possible with cars, if we get over our disposable attitude.

But why limit the discussion to cars? Why not look for further opportunities to repair, rather than replace, and thereby direct our consumption dollars back towards local labor, and away from distant capital and cheap energy?

Quick question: you all know Michigan is the number 1 cherry producer in the US. Sure, that's easy. But how about #2 in asparagus, after Washington? How about #3 in apples? (WA, NY, MI, CA, PA) Washtenaw County is Michigan's leading producer of sheep, no less. But when was the last time you saw Michigan asparagus, apples, or lamb chops in the grocery store? You probably have no idea.

If you did see such a thing, it was probably asparagus that was picked in Michigan, but shipped off to some processing plant in Colorado, where it was mixed with asparagus from all over the world for processing, freezing, and showing up in anonymous supermarket bags. And, at that point, the global system will replace expensive Michigan labor with cheaper south american labor (note: even within Michigan, actually) and cheap energy. If we let our food be anonymous, then agriculture, Michigan's second largest industry after manufacturing, will wither just as manufacturing has, victim to the mobility of capital allowed by cheap energy.

Let's move on to housing. Obviously, living in an old house is environmentally the best thing you can do, both in terms of material use and locationally. One neat thing that's popped up in New Orleans, though, is a new prevalence of home deconstruction, on the other end of the lifespan. Even in a house that's been rendered unliveable by flooding, 85% of the material can be salvaged for reuse if the house is deconstructed rather than bulldozed. Sure, yes, deconstruction takes a little longer, and requires more labor - but the increased labor requirement comes in exchange for reduced landfill space and also a chance to use materials you already have in construction or remodeling, rather than buying new ones from distant places or cutting down trees. (Note: tourism is the third of Michigan's big three industries - preventing landfilling and intensive resource harvesting is a good thing there, too.) Here, again, is a way to spend less on distant capital and cheap Saudi energy, more on local labor.

I don't know if this is even readable. It's early yet, and I'm just having my coffee. But hopefully my gist is clear - we can't pull back manufacturing based on a model of cheap production. We have to look for ways to tip our spending, societally, towards repairing, reclaiming, and reusing - things which are more dependent on local labor, less on big business's capital and the cheap energy model of lowest-cost labor manufacturing.

This triggered a memory of a story I heard a few years ago about a car dealership in Australia or New Zealand. An aboriginal tribe had begun buying cars (probably with money given to them in exchange for raping their ancestral homelands) but lacked a clear understanding of how they worked. They would buy a car, which of course came with a full tank of gas. After a few days or a week, it would run out of gas, and thinking that the magic had run out, they would abandon the car. The dealership saw this, retrieved the car, refilled it, and sold it back to them. At some point someone told them about gas, and they learned that they could refill the tank and not have to keep buying new cars. The dealership thought the cash cow had died, until months later when the car got a flat tire, or the starter died, or whatever. The aborigines again abandoned the car, the dealership again retrieved it, spent $50 on a new tire, and again sold it back to them.

Finally, the aborigines discovered what was going on, and decided on a final solution to the problem. Rather than allow the dealerships to make money hand over fist, whenever something happened to make the car unusable, they would simply light it on fire and let it burn.

I think this is a metaphor for our current situation, but if I think about it too much, my head starts to hurt.

Great points all. I think we need to do several interrelated things:
-develop new energy technologies and alternative sources of energy;
-reduce consumption of energy (especially fossil fuels);
-reduce CO2 emissions and other causes of global warming;
-restructure the American auto industry; and
-improve America’s transportation infrastructure.

The PROGRESS Act (http://www.house.gov/commerce_democrats/Press_109/109nr45.shtml) proposed by Dingell and other House Democrats in July addresses many of these goals, but it is focused on energy independence and not global warming.

I will try to write Dingell a letter soon; I’ll let you know what his response says.

I happen to know that an event built around next generation transportation is being planned for May in Ann Arbor. While I believe the focus is solely on single-family vehicles (as opposed to mass transportation alternatives, etc), there may still be an opportunity to work in a thread about policy. (As it's been explained to me, it will, for the most part, be auto company execs talking about hydrogen, other forms of fuel, and their visions for the future.) I'm thinking that one could pitch the idea of a policy conference to a student group at UM's Ford School (of policy) to happen earlier that same day, perhaps in cooperation with the College of Engineering, School of Natural Resources and/or B School. If someone could get Dingell, the rest would fall into place.

And all of your other ideas are great. I wish I had time to comment on all of them right now… I’ve got to do some stuff for the Shadow Art Fair tonight though, so I think my comments are going to have to wait until tomorrow. Keep the ideas coming in the meantime.

For what it's worth, this comes from our pal Jim Kunstler:

...It would be nice if the Democrats put forward some concrete policy ideas for moving this society away from extreme car dependence and continued suburban sprawl-building -- for instance, a federal project to repair the passenger rail system that was once the envy of the world and is now so fucked up that the Bolivians would be ashamed of it -- but the Democrats have been too brain-dead, too chicken, and too distracted by sex-and-race politics to actually lead the American public. The only change they have really beat the drum for is gay marriage, which more than a few people of sound mind regard as something that will not necessarily make the USA a better place...

And here’s something else worth considering… I just received the following note from an anonymous source:

You might want to check out Dingell's financial info at Open Secrets.

His major donors are what you'd expect, but what is really surprising are his investments: 77% in transportation! Okay, so his wife is a GM exec, but a little diversification wouldn't hurt their portfolio. If 3/4 of my $2-6 million were in automotive stocks, I'd be hesitant to increase fuel efficiency standards too.

Hmmmmmm……

Maybe start a children's letter writing campaign. It would get press, and it may melt the old man's heart.

Who could think about dividends with a ten year old asking about Hurricane Katrina and the tie to global warming?

Most retired GM execs I know sold their stock the moment they left the coporation and/or traded them for GMAC demand notes which pay high dividends. Dump that junk, Mrs. Dingell!

On the other hand ...

My earlier comment comes from the thinking that GM, Ford and Chrysler should get back into the bus, trolley and railcar businesses.

They only got out of it because some marketing guy showed they'd make more with cars and trucks ... not to mention the fact that a few ranting and raving lunatics in Washington were screaming about "busting up" the Big Three for anti-trust.

If they would simply shift the emphasis ... wow!

If you want an alternative transportation source for personal use ... Google the Trabant ... and the movie: "Go Trebbi Go!" The young East German woman I had dinner with the other night gigled talking about the Trebbi that was shared in her village, and how every time it needed repairs, it was so simple to do, and yet there was always one or two parts left over ... and it STILL worked!

For other so inclined to explore their neighborhood or the changing Ypsilanti downtown-scape ... I suggest they look down at the ends of their legs and reacquaint themselves with their left and right feet, which, if properly insulated, fitted and weather-protected, work well as a method of personal transport known as walking.

Murph reminded me that I responded on his blog to repair don't replace concerning my Ford Aerostar Van with 209,000 miles ... kept in fine repair by local mechanics at Conley's Auto, Washtenaw @ Washington in Ypsilanti.

I am at the same time upset with the Whirlpool appliances purchased after our house fire, which are each having their little fits ... the ice marker in the fridge dowsn't work ... the clothes washer's transmission blew ... and some of the control panels are tempermental. That's less than five years. Even our Thermador super-duper six-burner beast-cooker has had two control panel replacements! That's taking repair, do not replace too far! Buy the warranty.

From Think PRogress today:

ECONOMY -- AUTOMAKERS URGED TO SPEAK TRUTH TO POWER IN MEETING WITH BUSH: Today at the White House, President Bush will meet with the leaders of America's Big Three automakers -- General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co., and DaimlerChrysler AG's Chrysler Group. "Detroit's biggest automakers visit Washington in the midst of huge restructuring programs -- including massive job cuts and plant closures -- aimed at staying competitive with their overseas rivals." Approximately three million manufacturing jobs have been lost since 2000, hitting the automaking industry particularly hard. Key members of the Michigan congressional delegation urged the automakers to forcefully lay out their concerns to Bush. "The auto leaders need to speak truth to power," Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) said. "There have been no steps taken by this administration to support manufacturing." In the past, Bush has suggested that automakers should assume fault for the downslide, claiming they need to build "relevant" cars. That comment raised the ire of GM's sales chief Mark LaNeve, who told The Detroit News last May, "Five million who bought our cars last year think they're relevant." The automakers are expected to focus on three major issues in today's meeting: 1) energy security: the need to improve access to alternative fuels and create more research and development incentives; 2) health care costs: all three automakers spend more on health care per vehicle than on steel; and 3) fair trade and currency: the automakers argue Asian countries like China, South Korea, and Japan are depressing their currencies to make their products cheaper.

ENVIRONMENT -- UNITED STATES RANKED 53RD IN CLIMATE CHANGE PERFORMANCE: The United States comes in 53rd -- edging out only China, Saudi Arabia, and Malaysia -- in a new study ranking the climate change performance of the 56 top carbon dioxide-emitting nations. The study, released by Climate Action Network Europe at the U.N. Climate Conference in Nairobi this week, based its rankings on current emissions, emissions trends, and emissions policy. The Bush administration has consistently shirked serious action to reduce U.S. emissions, announcing a climate change plan without penalties or restrictions for polluters, refusing to sign the Kyoto Protocol, and covering up scientific research revealing the dangers and costs of global warming. The study points out that merely having high emissions, as the United States does, does not assure a low ranking. "If the USA, currently among the bottom five, were to exercise an international climate policy stance as progressive as the UK, it would move up more than 30 places," says the study, "but because of their adverse position in national and international climate policies the United States blows this chance."

One more Dingell link (this one with video):
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/15626530/

Why hasn't Ypsilanti signed the Kyoto Protocol. We should know how to calculate our individual, family, neighborhood, and city "carbon footprint." And we should take steps to reducee our impact in the county and state and region.

If Michigan's #2 in asparagus, does that mean we're the #2 producer of stinky urine?

(BTW, if that's how a pre-coffee Murph thinks then caffienated Murph scares me a little.)

That last link of Jim's contains the following:

Dingell, whose home district includes Detroit’s big three automakers -- Ford Motor Co., General Motors Corp. and Chrysler Group -- downplayed the need for boosting U.S. fuel economy rules.

“I’m not sure that there’s any urgent needs for us to address those questions,” Dingell told CNBC in an interview.

Environmental groups have lobbied for doubling fuel-efficiency standards, and some Democrats are on board with that idea.

Dingell told reporters that any rule changes should weigh ”the needs, the costs, the technological ability and the economic ability of industry and the market to absorb these changes.”

The U.S. transportation sector accounts for about half the nation’s daily oil needs of about 20 million barrels.

New U.S. vehicles are the fastest and heaviest in three decades, with the fleet’s fuel efficiency no better than the figure for 1994 -- about 21 miles per gallon -- according to government figures.

However, Dingell said Congress should approve more incentives for U.S. automakers to retool cars to burn alternative fuels like ethanol and clean-burning diesel, and to make more cars that rely on electricity rather than fossil fuel.

I guess we need to make him see the "urgent need."

As you mention Kyoto, I read somewhere recently that several countries are considering the adoption of a punitive tax against imports from countries that have not signed-on. I believe that France is leading the charge.

From today's Environment and Energy Daily:

In the House, Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) is poised to direct climate and air pollution policy as chairman of the powerful Energy and Commerce Committee. The veteran lawmaker is expected to hold a series of hearings on global warming specifically, as well as direct oversight of U.S. EPA's most controversial air emission regulations, before spelling out what steps he may take to address these issues.

Yet Dingell is widely seen as strongly sympathetic to his home state's auto industry, leaving open the question of exactly what regulations he would be willing to accept for one of the key sources of heat-trapping emissions that scientists say are causing global warming. Dingell is scheduled to speak with reporters this afternoon to discuss his plans.

I'm curious to hear what he has to say.

After fuel efficiency, I think the number two problem with the US automakers is quality. As the son and grandson of autoworkers, I'm saying to you I won't buy another American car. My Taurus wagon has had more problems than any car I've ever owned and it has less than 70,000 miles on it. It's been stable lately and I'm still planning on driving it until it won't run anymore, but that's more a matter of saving money and not taking on more debt.

Oh and Dingell's not the only one who needs to be putting the screws to the automakers. I heard Granholm earlier in the summer all but falate them on Michigan Public Radio.