Autoblog

From 1990 to 2005, Nissan's carbon emission levels have grown more than any of the other top six automakers selling cars in the US -- and not by a little. The company's 2005 fleet is responsible for 9.2% more carbon output over its lifetime than the 1990 fleet, according to a study by Environmental Defense. The next highest gain was Daimler Chrysler at 4.8%, then Honda at 4.4%. GM -- often the whipping boy in studies like this -- had the smallest rise with 3%, and Toyota's comparative carbon output actually dropped 3%.

Not knowing the study's methodology, a host of factors could skew the outcome. Nissan replied to the study by saying "Since the end of this report in 2005, we have added the subcompact Nissan Versa, Altima Hybrid and flex-fuel-capable trucks." It's interesting to note, though, that Nissan has stood apart from the group of automakers fighting the CAFE battle in Congress, which is all about carbon emissions. It has also stayed out of the environmental debate spotlight, except to say that it is committed to being good to the earth. With Congress soon returning to the CAFE debate, Nissan might want to speak a little louder.

Thanks for the tip, Emanuel!

[Source: Detroit Free Press]

Congress asked the NHTSA to put together a report on electronic measures available in vehicles to help prevent fatalities from people being backed over. The NHTSA doesn't have exact stats on how many people are killed in these kinds of accidents because they mostly happen on private property. However, the agency does have a clear take on what it thinks of reversing cameras: they are "expensive, unreliable, and [give] drivers a false sense of security."

Some commentators have taken that to mean that there is something wrong with reversing cameras, in columns with titles like "Rear-View Cameras Not Foolproof." To put it simply: nothing is foolproof. True, there are rear view camera systems that don't provide much field-of-view or no nighttime visibility. And the gigantic backsides of some SUV's can make it difficult to get everything in the rather small screen used for the navi. Nevertheless, rear-view cameras are meant to be an aid to sound driving, not a preventive that can assure you never run over anyone when you reverse as long as you're looking at the screen.

The NHTSA is working on getting better numbers, but in the mean time it "plans to work to improve the use of detection systems to potentially help alert drivers to backovers."

[Source: Yahoo!]

T

The J.D. Power and Associates Alternative Powertrain Study has found that hybrid consideration among new car buyers is slipping, albeit only slightly. At the same time, the willingness to consider a clean diesel is growing. Overall, 7% fewer buyers are adding a hybrid to their list of potentials, but in the 16-25 age group the drop is actually 13%. For some reason, the hybrid message is getting lost on the people just entering the car buying market. One possible reason could be that, according to the study, buyers wanted to pay no more than $2,396 extra for a hybrid over a traditional competitor, but get 18.5 mpg more. As those shoppers have discovered that hybrids can't provide that cost/benefit ratio yet, they are perhaps staying with the standard option. It's not much different in the diesel category, with folks willing to pay $1,491 and expecting 15 mpg better. However, the perceived benefit of diesels is opposite that of hybrids -- hybrids could be coming down off the pedestal, while more people are realizing that diesels are fuel efficient and, finally, clean.

[Source: J.D. Power and Associates]