While browsing the web, I found something a little weird... a website claiming
Toyota: Not as green as you think." The website (http://TruthAboutToyota.com) seems almost as if a competing manufacturer grasping for something to use against Toyota funded it. The website seems to associate Toyota's stance against strict government regulation to raise average fuel economy standards fleet-wide to 35 MPG by 2020 and other similar regulations mandating 75% of all vehicle production be Flex-fuel capable by 2015, and 100% by 2020 with Toyota not wanting to save the environment. The claim is that the regulation, if implemented, would...
-Save 1.2 million barrels of oil per day (more than double the amount currently imported daily from Iraq)
-Save American consumers $25,000,000,000/year (nearly $900 for a family of 4)
-Remove more than 200 million tons of pollution per year from the atmosphere
So with all these claimed benefits, wouldn't the choice be OBVIOUS? As a leading environmentally conscious company, shouldn't Toyota unequivocally back any legislation that would allow this to be our future? My (along with most vehicle manufacturers' - including Toyota's) opinion is NOT NESSICARILY. Why, you ask? According to an Automotive News article, lawmakers seeking 100% flex-fuel vehicles and exceptionally high fuel-efficiency standards by 2020 may not be quite in touch with reality. The cost for the Research & Development in addition to the cost to produce such vehicles might be higher than the average consumer would be willing to pay. Another major concern is the relative lack of availability of alternative fuels now (fewer than 1% of the 170,000+ fueling stations nationwide even offer E85, and currently more E85 vehicles are produced than could even be sustained).
For the sake of argument, let us say that Toyota and all the other manufacturers in the world said “no problem!” and even exceeded the minimum standards of 35 MPG average across their fleets. What would the consumer be sacrificing?
-Performance - Would the BMW drivers of the world simply have no more “Ultimate Driving Machine”?
-Comfort / Convenience - Would drivers simply have to learn to deal with fewer comforts and conveniences to decrease weight and production costs?
-Fuelling Availability - Would consumers have to grit their teeth while a new network of Hydrogen or electric fuelling stations were developed?
-Price - Would vehicles offer the same or better performance with similar or better amenities while the Retail Prices soar?
In all likelihood, it would be a combination of the above, but principally pricing, and secondly, perhaps, fueling availability. One of the business courses I took in college had a simulation that ran the course of the semester where we were divided into teams and had to develop widgets and continually improve them by making them smaller with higher technology and modifying pricing accordingly. My team took what we believed to be a very intelligent, well-planned out course. We would devote the majority of our budget to R&D in the early stages and automating the production process, minimizing money spent in other areas (such as marketing, etc.), and after we had a significant advantage over the competition in both cost to build and superior technology, we would devote the majority of our resources to marketing. Over the course of the semester, our team created the smallest, highest tech, best overall priced widget… AWESOME, right? Wrong. We wound up struggling financially due to poor sales. Why? Although we had the best product, by far, and some of the most competitive pricing – even with reasonable margins - the reason we failed (according to the professor) is that we so far ahead of our competitors and the market that the “Sim Population” was not ready for what we had to offer. On paper and in theory, we should have KILLED the competition (I’m still a little disappointed about it), but the reality of the simulation was that the infrastructure to support our INCREDIBLE widget was not in place. Much like the auto industry is now facing. While I am ALL FOR the development of nifty new technologies that will make things more efficient and “Save the Earth”, I can’t help but feel that if congress tries to force a bunch of R&D work on the automotive manufacturers and leaves it to them to develop the best widget, Toyota will probably not only meet, but exceed their request. The ability to develop the technology, to me, is not the issue with which manufacturers have a problem. I see the issue as two-fold:
1.) The problem lay in the fact that there is not the infrastructure to support alternative fueling options including Hydrogen (such as BMW’s Hydrogen 7) fuelling stations; Plug-in Electric (such as Tesla) fueling stations for long-range trips or even at apartments / parking garages, etc.; E85; Algae power; or fuel cells, etc. If the United States is serious about relieving dependence on foreign oil, they need to start planning renewable, attainable, scalable alternative fuelling networks now. E85 is not a realistic option, as it offers lower power output/gallon than its oil-based brother, and would require an immense amount of land to actually sustain the entire United States’ energy demand. Clean, mass-producible energy (such as Hydrogen) appears to be the clear choice. So the United States would need to make a commitment to a new standard (say Hydrogen, for argument sake), and then make a commitment to create a nationwide infrastructure by 2020. They need to regulate more than just the automakers to make it economically feasible.
2.) The average consumer is not going to willingly pay large premiums over previous generation vehicles just to “Save the Earth”. The vast majority of people looking to “Go Green,” in my experience, are not simply buying a Toyota Prius because of its low emissions. People are most interested in what directly affects their pocketbook. It is not by mere coincidence that retail sales of the hot-selling Toyota Prius sharply increase each time that gas prices raise another 10 cents – when I used to sell cars, our paycheck seemed directly proportional to the price of a gallon of gas. Sure, people love the “warm fuzzies” of being a good steward of the environment but when that stewardship shows a monetary return is when it is most effectual. There will always be the die-hard environmentalists that will pay whatever they perceive it takes to “Save the Earth”, and early adopters that are not swayed as much by price as they are by having bragging rights to ownership of the coolest new technology. As for the rest of us… we are interested in what gives us the best overall cost of ownership for what we are looking.
New technologies take time to create and implement. While I’m certainly not trying to suggesting that companies not be innovative, I am proposing that the United States government and its citizens need to realize that the impact may not be as immediate as they hope, and they, therefore, should encourage companies to continue Moving Forward (as Toyota would put it), but not over-regulate and cripple the companies’ ability to sell cars in the mean time. Toyota didn’t introduce a Hybrid of every model in one year, they started with the Prius and are starting to have the technology permeate the Toyota lineup (including my personal favorites in the Toyota lineup: Toyota Camry Hybrid, Toyota Highlander Hybrid, Lexus RX400h, Lexus GS450h, & Lexus LS600h). Rome was not built in a day. Rather than a website picking on Toyota for not wanting a government to force them to spend a LOT of money with little initial return, perhaps they should look to the automotive manufacturers that have been resting on their laurels and, perhaps, never heard the saying “It wasn’t Raining Before Noah Built the Ark.” If you must get upset, look to those who have seen “the writing on the wall” for years but – due to laziness and complacency – have decided to not pursue more efficient technologies for their product offerings. Still, the beauty of capitalism is that people have the ability to take stupid companies and “vote them off the island” when they choose to spend their money elsewhere (see Toyota & Honda).
________________________
Jeff Rance, II
Online Part Sales Manager
Direct: 972.792.4823
E-mail: Parts at ShopTRD.com
|JT2Auto.com|ShopTRD.com|USAToyotaParts.com|
Toyota of Richardson Parts Department
404 Monte Blaine Lane, Richardson, Texas 75080-4606
Toll Free 800.527.2781 | Main 972.238.4460 | Fax 972.238.4470
_w606w.jpg)
_w606w.jpg)
