Ford backs off on 250,000 hybrid promise
Bill Ford announced that his company is backing off on a promise he made last September to produce 250,000 hybrid vehicles by 2010 in an email sent to company employees Wednesday. While many see the move as Ford reneging on his promise, the automaker is saying that it "intends to pursue a broader environmental strategy that focuses more on other alternative-fuel vehicles," according to The Detroit News, which obtained a copy of the email.The email coincides with a letter sent to Congress penned by Ford and the CEOs of General Motors and DaimlerChrysler in which the trio promised to double their annual production of alternative-fuel vehicles to 2 million by 2010.
Ford stated in the email that the Blue Oval will focus more on other fuels like ethanol, clean-diesel and bio-diesel. In conjunction Ford is announcing a partnership with VeraSun Energy today to create an "ethanol corridor" with 50 new E85 pumps between Kansas City and Chicago.
The company still plans to go forward with its plans to produce a hybrid Mazda Tribute and hybrid version of the Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan in 2008.
Check out the nicely written article on Ford's new strategy by Bryce G. Hoffman and Deb Price of The Detroit News here.
[Source: The Detroit News]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Presto 1:59PM (6/29/2006)
After they spent all that money advertising to the general public that they would hit that number too... how convenient.
Reply
MikeInNC 2:17PM (6/29/2006)
I believe they are being smart. It's better to back off that number now than to regret not reaching that goal and spend untold resources just trying to hit a number at the expense of money that could be better spent in other areas.
Reply
jeff 3:13PM (6/29/2006)
i was really disappointed when i read this. what a let down.... i was so proud to be a ford fan when they announced the 250,000 number, and i was really looking forward to having the choice of several blue oval hybrids by the time i'm ready to buy a car if i do buy one. what about the hybrid edge, the hybrid 500 that would be perfect for all the taxi drivers in my city who own their cars.
I can only hope that they still plan on putting out some full size RWD hybrids, either suvs and pick ups or the crown vic or both.
Reply
Eric L. 4:04PM (6/29/2006)
'in his message to employees on Wednesday, Mr. Ford wrote, "What I didn't foresee at the time was how rapidly other technologies would evolve."'
What new technologies? All he's talking about is E85. Not only has E85 not "evolved rapidly" as a technology, Ford was recently patting itself on the back for having introduced flex-fuel years ago.
Ford is intellectually bankrupt when it comes to new fuel technology. Their attempt to appear to be a green car company is a sick, sad joke.
Reply
s 4:27PM (6/29/2006)
I have to agree with posting #4
Ford is a joke. I don't see where they have the cash to make 250,000 anyway. If I was Ford, I would get rid of Mercury and sell Jaguar.
Reply
snakesausage 8:17PM (6/29/2006)
Great decision. Give us clean diesels! Biodiesel is easier to make than ethanol and there is actually a net gain in energy. If now we could only convince our lawmakers to defer the NOx mandate a few years to allow technology to catch up.
Mandates like this should be done in stages, first mandate ULSD, then perado the most dangerous emission (particulate matter) then the others (NOx ect…) with about two to five years between each item so that the technology of each item can be stabilized.
Almost all of us are in favor of clean air but why neuter a technology with so many changes all at once that could reduce the amount of imported oil NOW.
Reply
PJ 8:39PM (6/29/2006)
"Their attempt to appear to be a green car company is a sick, sad joke."
Harshly-put enough to attract flame comments, I'm sure, but I have to agree. My favorite lame-ass move was when they introduced the Excursion and touted it as a SULEV vehicle. What they didn't tell the public was that the Excursion falls into the same EPA class as commercial delivery vehicles, and the requirements for a SULEV UPS truck are just a wee bit less strict than those for a SULEV sedan.
But we've also got to give credit where it's due: the Escape Hybrid is an excellent package, and has gotten people who'd never own a Prius or Insight into a utilitarian, clean-running vehicle.
Reply
Albert 11:39PM (6/29/2006)
We've heard similer from Ford before. Ford promised a 25% increase in SUV fuel economy in 5 years back in year 2000, and backed down from the claim later.
Reply
iQuack 2:38AM (6/30/2006)
Shit oozes from every pore of this company.
Better they should just make vehicles people want to buy and skip the worthless promises and excuses.
While Ford (and GM as well) diddle around with bland cars and close factories, companies like Honda and Toyota are building new factories because they make what customers want to buy.
Of course, much of the blame must be placed on the UAW which makes it nearly impossible for GM and Ford to make competitive cars while paying the price for outrageous benefits gained years ago when the UAW held guns to the heads of GM and Ford managers under strike threats.
Ford and GM won't recover until there's freedom from the dream world the UAW still thinks exists. The UAW is killing its hosts and all we can hope for is that the UAW will die first.
Reply
MikeW 2:09PM (7/01/2006)
Ethanol sucks, butanol is fungible for gasoline, ethanol is not.
Reply
Bryan 10:36AM (7/03/2006)
Ford are way behind in Europe, poor build quality, lack luster diesel engines and no alternative energy or hybrid drives. Toyota , VW etc offer better long term reliability and inovation my VW Passat does 48mpg,, 66mpg on a long journey and the latest are even better still. Residual value of VWs are better when you want to trade up. My colleagues have been forced to have overvalued Fords as company cars, as a result they pay more tax than they should, if the same spec in a SEAT, or a SKODA was used it would cost 75% of the FORD price. Give me German technology any day, its less disposable and more reliable. Wake up smell the fumes.
Reply