This morning AT&T, which operates the largest fleet of vehicles in the world, said it would spend up to $565 million over ten years on alternative-fuel vehicles for its corporate fleet, a move aimed at cutting costs while promoting cleaner transportation fuels.
The Dallas-based telecommunications provider will purchase 8,000 vehicles that run on compressed natural gas (CNG) for its fleet of installation and repair vans and replace about 7,100 passenger cars with hybrid models. The company will deploy 800 new CNG and hybrid electric vehicles in 2009. "It's good for the environment, it reduces our reliance on foreign oil... and it gives a big boost to America's alternative-fuel industry, creating the opportunity for new clean-energy jobs," AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson said.
That's exciting, even wonderful, news. But the backstory is less cheerful. My sources indicate that AT&T was prepared to make an even larger commitment to CNG, but that the domestic auto industry wasn't willing to meet the customer demand -- and AT&T wanted in this economic moment to buy domestic. It's ironic that at the Wall Street Journal conference I attended in Santa Barbara last week Ford chief Alan Mulally kept repeating as his mantra "We give our customers what they want," and specifically cited that as why he wasn't taking Boone Pickens up on his challenge to make more use of natural gas as a fuel to back out dirtier foreign oil. Now it turns out that Ford has one of the world's largest customers beating on its door for less oil-dependent vehicles, and Ford isn't willing to meet the demand.
That fits with the rest of the recent pattern. The auto companies are lobbying hard, effectively with taxpayer money, that they can't do more to reinvent themselves and improve fuel efficiency. Recent lobby filings show that GM and Chrysler, both of which are operating only because of federal funding, have spent lavishly on slowing down technological innovation: GM about $3.9 million and Chrysler about $3.4 million.
Everyone keeps acting like nationalization would be the worst thing in the world for America's troubled industries -- banking and automobiles -- but at least if we nationalized them they wouldn't spend our money to slow down progress!
Electric is the answer for the future. Most flexible. Most efficient. Simplest.
Buy Ford's hybrids and electrics instead.
Maybe T. Boone Pickens doesn't like that Ford is taking that alternative route rather than cng, but he is a little conflicted there, yes?
Perhaps domesticly made cars are available, but what about work vans? As the article points out, the problem is that at least some of the vehicles that are needed are not yet made in sufficient quatity to fill a contract from a corporate buyer.
NOT FAIL THE U.S. AUTO INDUSTRY!
but FIX IT!
WHY?
Shareholders of Common Stock will lose everything!
Shareholders of Preferred Stock will lose almost everything!
Bond holders will lose almost everything!
Creditors will lose almost everything!
Those losses will be incurred by Mutual Funds, Personal 401K’s, Pension Funds, Banks, and by so many more entities that millions of people will suffer financial loss. Imagine the impact on the DOW and the Stock Market.
NEED MORE REASONS?
Loss of up to ONE MILLION JOBS or more when you include the ripple effect to suppliers and many small businesses tied to the industry.
Huge increase in Unemployment Benefits expense for the government.
Large increase in the cost of the Food Stamps program.
Costly Government Retraining Expenses for displaced workers.
Substantial Government Increase in temporary COBRA benefits and eventually MEDICAID expenses due to loss of medical coverage by auto workers.
Adding tens of thousand of auto industry RETIREES to the PENSION GUARANTEE FUND.
A FEW MORE REASONS: loss of local, state, and federal Tax Revenue, increased home foreclosures, increased burden on the Welfare System, etc…
We cannot afford to have it fail. It needs to be FIXED in a sensible way that will be fair to all. Perhaps, the example of RONALD REAGAN can be followed when he helped ‘fix’ CHRYSLER and HARLEY DAVIDSON.
Saying that, let me thank Pickens for IGNORING THE CLIMATE CHANGE/CARBON B.S. The whole "climate change" public relations battle has parasited itself on real concerns about energy independence and now has overcome the host. Now the cap and trade scam is the centerpiece of "environmental" sentiment in Washington and all big business is learning how to play the game to crush smaller competitiors--just hiring the talent from Europe who have been through it already.
Sierra Club was good too, for many years, avoiding "global warming". But I think their recent embrace of it is half-hearted.
Do you have any demonstratable evidence that domestic automakers refused to supply CNG vehicles?
And also, in regards to GM and Chrysler's technological inovation, or lack there of... Are you suggesting that while bleeding money in a market that has cratered by nearly 50%, these two companies can somehow find money to increase their R&D when they're having a hard time keeping the lights on? Do you not see the staggering logical disconnect?
http://www.pickensplan.com/news/2009/03/11/great-news-att-is-upgrading-8000-fleet-vehicles-to-natural-gas/
He's even tweeting about it: http://twitter.com/pickensplan
Don't let the eco-fascists ruin it for the rest of us gearheads.
No, seriously.
As for losing certain models... regardless of what happens, it is unlikely Chevrolet will ever lose the Corvette marque. It is their figure head, and for a sports car with a big V8, it actually gets pretty decent gas mileage. I wouldn't hold my breath on the Camaro though - they already missed the bus on the retro idea. Even if all was well with GM, I doubt it would last more than a couple years of production before novelty wore off and it stagnated again just like it did in the 90s.