Higher ethanol blends are on federal agenda

The latest federal energy act, passed last December, requires more ethanol to be produced than the United States could consume even if all cars on the road used E10 (a 10-percent ethanol blend sold in most urban areas), and the six-million or so flexible-fuel vehicles (FFVs) in the country actually ran on E85 (85-percent ethanol). In reality, very few FFVs use E85, because it is not available in most areas. And it’s more expensive than gasoline. (We reported on this in “Ethanol - the challenges with too much of a good thing.”)

This week, the federal government planted another stake in the ground on its way to building up the ethanol infrastructure to match ethanol production mandates. The Energy Department and USDA released its Action Plan (PDF) to meet the expanded production, distribution, and sales targets in the December 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act. The biggest development is a stated policy to increase the use of so-called “intermediate blends” of ethanol, such as E20 and E30 (20 percent ethanol/80 percent gasoline and 30 percent ethanol/70 percent gasoline, respectively). Since ethanol contains less energy than gasoline, this is likely to result in lower fuel economy for all cars running on E20 and E30.

Other targets include:
•    Producing new machinery to harvest new materials to make cellulosic ethanol.
•    Research and development to reduce the costs of producing ethanol from non-food products.
•    Considering the effects of increased production of biofuels on food supplies and animal feed.
•    Studying and building out the ethanol distribution network, including analyzing the feasibility of building dedicated ethanol pipelines from the Midwest to the East and West coasts.
•    Studying the health effects of increased ethanol use, including air, water, and soil quality.

These are only some of the problems we have found with ethanol. Despite its lower fuel economy, automakers can receive fuel economy credits for building FFVs. Therefore, most FFVs are large vehicles that get poor fuel economy even on gasoline, and worse fuel economy on E85. So, ironically, fuel economy credits may be increasing overall petroleum consumption in the U.S. Those fuel economy credits are scheduled to phase out 10 years from now in 2019.

As the road to widespread ethanol usage continues to be paved, we will continue to report here on the latest developments.

—Eric Evarts

Learn more about alternative fuels in our guides to driving green and fuel economy.

Future of the Car: Honda FCX Clarity

Last May, Senior Engineer Gabe Shenhar and I drove a Honda FCX concept car, gaining an early impression of this fuel-cell-powered sedan. I got behind the wheel at the recent Consumer Reports Future of the Car event and drove the production model at modest speeds around the Auto Test Center grounds. 

The production car, now called the FCX Clarity, is available to select customers in Southern California for lease and costs $600 a month. So far, Honda has delivered just a handful of them, though it has announced plans to move approximately 200 to customers in the first three years of production.

The FCX Clarity uses a 100 kW fuel cell mounted vertically like a small suitcase between the front seats. A fuel cell – once known as a chemical battery – makes electricity by combining hydrogen and oxygen. It produces no pollution; slight water vapor comes from the tailpipe.

A 5,000-psi hydrogen tank filled with 4 kg of hydrogen gives it a range of more than 260 miles, according to Honda. Like other modern fuel-cell cars, it also uses a lithium-ion battery to store excess energy and provide short bursts of acceleration. Unlike other prototype fuel-cell cars we have driven, such as the Nissan X-Trail, the FCX Clarity emits a high-pitched electric whine while accelerating. 

As we wrote in a previous blog:
“This midsized sedan feels remarkably normal -- in a good way. The car gathers acceleration very promptly and quietly. The electric motor's immediate torque is felt right off the line. The electric motor whines on its way to highway speeds, but sounds quieter than most piston-engine cars. It sounds like a muted, distant hair dryer, with no traditional gas engine and or exhaust sounds.”

Some of the main challenges of fuel cells are cost, durability, and the car’s range. While other automakers are moving toward 10,000-psi fuel tanks to increase the amount of hydrogen on-board and increase range, Honda has addressed range by improving the fuel efficiency of the car.

The company is still working on cost, but says the fuel-cell system in the FCX Clarity costs half of what the one in its previous FCX fuel cell vehicle cost. Fuel cell durability issues are reduced by leasing the vehicles, rather than selling them to customers.

The car itself is impressive, but, in our opinion, costs too much. Currently, each car is estimated to cost about half a million dollars. And without subsidies, hydrogen costs more than twice as much as gasoline today.

Plus, just obtaining the hydrogen is a problem. It either comes from natural gas or from electricity, a process that consumes more energy than the hydrogen provides.

As good as the FCX Clarity is, it will still be many years before hydrogen is a mainstream fuel. Consider the FCX Clarity a car of tomorrow.

—Eric Evarts

New child booster seat ratings from IIHS

Today, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) released new ratings of child booster seats. The first of their kind, IIHS ranked boosters from those that performed as “best bets” to those that are “not recommended” based on the seat’s ability to correctly position a vehicle’s lap and shoulder belt for booster-age children, not on their performance in simulated crash tests. Unlike child restraints intended for smaller children that have internal harnesses, materials, and structures to restrain children and absorb crash energy, booster seats function as a positioning device to correctly place the child within the vehicle’s seatbelt system. It is the seatbelt that does the restraining with the boosters designed to position those belts across the stronger bony structures of the hip and clavicle/collar bone rather than across the softer tissue of the abdomen and neck.

IIHS, in conjunction with the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute (UMTRI), measured how the lap and shoulder belts fit a crash-test dummy representing the average size and weight of a six-year-old in each of 41 booster seat models. The booster seats were evaluated using a vehicle seat with lap and shoulder belts in a range of positions based on actual vehicle measurements. Though seatbelts are highly effective at reducing injury in a crash, those that are incorrectly positioned across the lap have the potential to cause injury to the abdomen if positioned too high and if they allow children to slide under them during a crash. Shoulder belts positioned too closely to the neck do not place the load ideally over the clavicle/collar bone but are also uncomfortable, which may cause children to hold the belt away from their neck or put the shoulder portion of the belt behind them, reducing the belt’s protection.

IIHS Best Bets

    * Graco TurboBooster backless with clip
    * Fisher-Price Safe Voyage backless with clip
    * Combi Kobuk backless with clip
    * Fisher-Price Safe Voyage
    * Britax Parkway
    * LaRoche Bros. Teddy Bear
    * Safeguard Go backless with clip
    * Volvo booster cushion
    * Recaro Young Style
    * Britax Monarch

Details of the ratings and how they were arrived at can be found at www.IIHS.org.

In making an assessment of which booster seats best fit children, IIHS provides an important and as yet unmeasured piece of the puzzle. Consumer Reports' Ratings include some of the seats also tested by IIHS and are based on our evaluations of how easy the seats are to use, how they fit in vehicles, and how they perform in a variety of simulated crash scenarios. Seats that we rate well and that also show as “good” or “best bets” in the IIHS evaluations provide the best potential for protecting a child in a crash.  If you own a seat that falls into the “not recommended” category from IIHS, it’s more important to perform your own assessment of fit with your own child and car based on the steps outlined below.

But don’t forget some important points:

•    Booster seats are an important step in child passenger safety and should not be overlooked.  Although laws in most states now require the use of boosters for children not yet ready for using the vehicle belts alone, and research has shown them to significantly reduce the potential for injury and death, non-use is still higher than among other child restraint types. Often, children are in vehicles wearing only the seatbelts or are not restrained at all before they’re old or large enough to do so safely.

•    Kids and cars come in all shapes and sizes. As IIHS points out, though the six-year-old dummy used in the study is designed to represent the average six-year-old in stature, it certainly does not represent all kids. Parents and caregivers should make a similar assessment of their own child in their own vehicle to determine if their booster seat is working as intended. Answer these questions to determine if your seat is providing the proper fit:
    o    Does the booster seat position the shoulder belt across the clavicle/collar bone, approximately mid-way between the neck and shoulder?
    o    Does the booster seat position the lap belt low across the hips/top of the thighs?
    o    Does either the booster seat or vehicle head restraint provide some support behind the child’s head?
    o    Is your child comfortable and not tempted to move the belts or themselves out of position after a period of time?

•     Don’t rush to move your kids to the next step (PDF download) in terms of restraint use. Very often a step-up to the next level of restraint means a step-down in terms of overall safety .

•    Regardless of how a seat rates, remember it is best for children to ride in any booster than to let them ride unbuckled or in the vehicle belts alone.

Learn more about how to choose the right child safety seat, including the available types and features.

—Jennifer Stockburger

Ford plugs in the Escape

The plug-in version of the Ford Escape looks and feels a lot like a regular Escape hybrid: the main difference being, you can’t buy one yet.

Using a 10 kilowatt-hour lithium-ion battery, Ford claims the cars can go up to 30 miles on an electric charge and up to 40 mph on battery power only. We didn’t have a chance to drive 30 miles, but were easily able to hit 40 mph on our test-track ride evaluation loop.

As with any plug-in hybrid vehicle, fuel economy depends mostly on how you drive it. The more time you spend at lower speeds on electric power, the better mileage you’ll get. However, Ford says the batteries are so expensive that it is looking at alternative business models to sell the cars. One possibility is consumers may buy the car but lease the batteries, guaranteeing ready replacements, ensuring the batteries are reused (likely by a power company) and reducing the cost. The company claims it takes six to eight hours to fully charge the plug-in Escape from a 110-volt outlet.

In partnership with Quantum Technologies, Ford is building up to 100 plug-in hybrids for testing at Southern California Edison and the South Coast Air Quality Management District.

—Eric Evarts

Chrysler EVs electrify future product plans

General Motors captured the media spotlight recently with the highly anticipated unveiling of the Chevrolet Volt in production trim. Then, in swooped Chrysler with a “me too” announcement, well-timed to coincide with discussions in Washington, D.C. regarding financial support for the auto industry. Chrysler’s shocker was that they have committed to produce an electric-drive vehicle for North America in 2010, with expansion to European markets to follow.

The company has unveiled prototypes of extended-range and pure-electric vehicles to demonstrate the technology applications developed by the in-house ENVI group (short for “environmental”). Simply put, the powertrains consist of an electric motor, lithium-ion battery, and a controller that manages energy flow. As demonstrated by the prototypes, the electric-drive system is being developed for front-, rear-, and four-wheel-drive applications.

Chrysler claims this EV technology could provide 40 miles of pure-electric range in the Town & Country minivan and Jeep Wrangler, with a small gasoline-fueled engine able to extend the range to 400 miles using just eight gallons of gas. The Town & Country has a 255-horsepower-equivalent motor, and a reported 0-60 mph time of nine seconds. The Wrangler has 268 horsepower. Engineers are exploring the use of electric motors for off-roading.

Engineered as a pure electric vehicle, the Dodge EV is a sleek, rear-drive sports car, reminiscent of the Tesla Roadster. The continuous driving range is 150-200 miles, and like the other prototypes, it can be recharged from a 110- or 220-volt outlet. The Dodge has a claimed 0-60 mph in less than five seconds, with a top speed in excess of 120 mph.

Chrysler has not announced which vehicle it will produce for 2010. As we drive a wide range of green machines during our Future of the Car day, it is clear that a plurality of solutions is on the near horizon, and electricity will play a key role. Keep an eye here on our Cars blog and follow us on Twitter for more news. And join our forum discussion on hybrids and alternative fuel vehicles.

—Jeff Bartlett

Car, pickup truck, SUV, and tire recalls

Recently, there have been several recalls worth noting from Audi, Bridgestone Firestone, General Motors, Hyundai, Jaguar, Mazda, and Mercedes-Benz. But first, a major one from Ford:

Ford, Lincoln, Mercury – Nearly five million unrepaired vehicles could pose serious fire hazard

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is urging owners of certain Ford, Lincoln, and Mercury SUVs, pickup trucks, vans, and passenger cars to take their vehicles to a local dealership immediately for a corrective repair. The vehicles contain a defective cruise control switch that could lead to a fire at any time, even while the vehicle is turned-off, parked and unattended. Repair parts are readily available.

NHTSA remains concerned that many owners have yet to respond to multiple safety defect recall notifications from Ford. Of the 12 million vehicles involved in the recall, nearly five million have not yet been brought to Ford for repair.

The involved vehicles are:

1993–2004 Ford F-150
1993–1999 Ford F-250 (gasoline engine)
1993–1996 Ford Bronco
1994–1996 Ford Econoline
1997–2002 Ford Expedition
1998–2002 Lincoln Navigator
1998–2002 Ford Ranger
1992–1998 Ford Crown Victoria, Lincoln Town Car, and Mercury Grand Marquis
1993–1998 Lincoln Mark VIII
1993–1995 Ford Taurus SHO with automatic transmission
1994 Mercury Capri
1998–2001 Ford Explorer and Mercury Mountaineer
2001–2002 Ford Explorer Sport and Explorer Sport Trac
1992–1993 and 1997–2003 Ford E-150-350 gasoline or natural-gas vehicles
2002 Ford E-550 gasoline engine vehicles
1996–2003 Ford E-450 gasoline or natural gas vehicles
1994–2002 Ford F-250 through F-550 Super Duty trucks (gasoline engine)
2000–2002 Ford Excursion (gasoline engine)
2003 F-250 – F-550 Super Duty, Ford Excursion
1995–2002 Ford F53 Motor home chassis
2002–2003 Lincoln Blackwood

Consumers with questions should contact their local Ford/Lincoln/Mercury dealer, or call 1-888-222-2751. Additional information is available at Ford.com.

Audi is recalling nearly 14,000 A8 vehicles equipped with a five-speed automatic transmission. The locking cable may slide out of position over time, allowing the shifter to be moved out of the "Park" position even if the ignition key is not in the ignition lock. This could allow the vehicle to roll, risking a crash. Dealers will make the necessary modifications to secure the locking cable in place. The recall is expected to begin this month. Owners may contact Audi at 1-800-822-2834.

Bridgestone bias-ply motorcycle and scooter tires

Bridgestone Firestone (BFNT) is recalling over 4,000 Bridgestone bias-ply motorcycle and scooter tires that fail to conform to the labeling requirements of a federal safety standard. BFNT will notify owners and replace the noncompliant tires free of charge. The recall is expected to begin this month. Owners may contact BFNT at 1-615-937-3442.

2006-2008 Buick Lucerne, Cadillac DTS and Hummer H2; 2007-2008 Cadillac Escalade, Escalade ESV, Escalade EXT, Chevrolet Avalanche, Silverado, Suburban, Tahoe, GMC Acadia, Sierra, Yukon, Yukon XL, Saturn Outlook; 2008 Buick Enclave – heated wiper washer fluid system

GM is recalling over 850,000 Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, GMC, Hummer and Saturn vehicles equipped with a heated wiper washer fluid system that could overheat. Dealers will install a wire harness with an in-line fuse free of charge. GM has yet to announce when owners will be notified. In the meantime, owners may contact Buick at 1-866-608- 8080; Cadillac at 1-800-982-2339; Chevrolet at 1-800-630-2438; Saturn at 1-800-972-8876; GMC at 1-866-996-9436; or Hummer at 1-800- 732-5493; or MyGMLink.

2008 Buick Enclave and 2007-2008 GMC Acadia and Saturn Outlook – windshield wipers

GM is recalling over 88,000 Buick Enclave, GMC Acadia and Saturn Outlook vehicles currently or previously registered in the following states: AK, CO, CT, DE, ID, IL, IN, IA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MT, NE, NH, NJ, NY, ND, OH, PA, RI, SD, UT, VT, WV, WI, WY and DC. Snow and ice buildup on the windshield or wipers could cause the wipers to become inoperative. Dealers will install a new wiper mechanisms. The recall is expected to begin during October. Owners may contact Buick at 1-866-608-8080, GMC at 1-866-996-9463, Saturn at 1-800-972-8876, or at MyGMLink.

2008 Hyundai Elantra – fuel pump

Hyundai is recalling 65,000 Elantra vehicles with 2.0-liter “beta” engines. The fuel pump motor may produce less pressure than required to supply the fuel-injection system. Dealers will replace the fuel pump subassembly free of charge. The recall is expected to begin this month. Owners may contact Hyundai at 1-800-633-5151.

2009 Jaguar XF – rear safety belt

Jaguar is recalling nearly 8,000 XF vehicles due to a problem with the rear safety belt. In the event of a crash, a seat occupant may not be properly restrained, increasing the risk of personal injury. Dealers will correct the condition. The recall is expected to begin this month. Owners may contact Jaguar at 1-800-452-4827.

2007-2008 Mazda6 – fuel tanks

Mazda is recalling 7,200 Mazda6 vehicles with California emission specifications. The metal fuel tanks on the affected vehicles may have been damaged during the assembly process, which could lead to a fuel leakage. Dealers will inspect and repair or replace the fuel tank, if necessary. The recall is expected to begin this month. Owners may contact Mazda at 1-800-222-5500, Option 2.

2001-2006 Mercedes-Benz CL-Class (Model 215), 2002-2006 S-Class (Model 220)
2003-2007 SL-Class (Model 230), 2007-2008 CL-Class (Model 216), 2007 S-Class (Model 221) – acceleration sensors

Mercedes-Benz is recalling over 4,500 CL-Class, S-Class and SL-Class vehicles equipped with Active Body Control (ABC) acceleration sensors on the front struts. The ABC sensors may have been installed improperly, which can adversely influence the vehicle's directional stability and could lead to a vehicle crash. Dealers will inspect and replace, if necessary, the front ABC sensors in all potentially affected vehicles. The recall is expected to begin this month. Owners may contact Mercedes-Benz at 1-800-367-6372.

—Desiree Calamari

Wake-up call: The dangers of texting

We’ve written about the dangers of texting while driving—particularly among teens—before. Now the practice has been brought to national attention with the news that texting may have played a part in last Friday’s fatal crash of a California commuter train. The National Transportation Safety Board reviewed cell phone records and found that the train's engineer was sending and receiving text messages while he was on duty. Federal investigators still need to determine if the engineer's texting with two teenage passengers while he was driving the train caused him to miss a stop signal, according to published reports. The California Public Utilities Commission has just banned the personal use of cellular communication devices while operating a train.

Six states and Washington, DC ban the use of handheld cell phones—for talking and/or texting—while driving. Simply put, if you’re driving any type of vehicle, keep your eyes on the road, not your cell phone, PDA, or other device. See our tips on how to reduce driver distraction. And share them with the teenagers in your life.

—Desiree Calamari

Comparing mileage: Not all mpg's are created equal

When thinking about saving gas, it's useful to remember that not all mpg's are created equal.

Among very fuel-efficient cars, the incremental savings for every extra mpg is small. However, among very inefficient cars, even a 1 mpg savings can be significant.

Researchers at Duke University Fuqua School of Business recently released a study showing that consumers often make poor decisions when it comes to fuel savings.

For example, consider a family that owns a Chevrolet Tahoe as a family vehicle and a Toyota Camry as a commuter car. The Tahoe gets 14 mpg and the Camry four-cylinder gets 24 mpg, according to Consumer Reports testing. (Mileage figures used to illustrate the mpg mathematics are based on late-model cars.) Assume each vehicle is driven the national average of 12,000 miles per year. In an effort to save fuel, the family might be tempted to buy a high-mileage hybrid. To maintain the convenience of the Tahoe, they consider trading in the Camry for a Honda Civic Hybrid that gets 37 mpg—a 13 mpg improvement. This transaction would save them 176 gallons of fuel a year. At $4 a gallon, that would be a savings of about $700 in gas alone.

MPG	Gallons per 100 miles	Fuel cost for 12,000 miles	Cost savings from 5 mpg gain
10	10	$4,800	—
15	6.67	$3,200	$1,600
20	5.00	$2,400	$800
25	4.00	$1,920	$480
30	3.33	$1,600	$320
35	2.86	$1,371	$229
40	2.50	$1,200	$171
45	2.22	$1,067	$133
50	2.00	$960	$107

But the savings could be even greater if they considered replacing the Tahoe with a Toyota Highlander that still seats seven and gets 18 mpg. While that’s only a 4 mpg improvement, the total savings in replacing the gas-guzzling Tahoe would be 190 gallons a year, or $762 in fuel.

While the Civic Hybrid might yield better bragging rights, differences of a few miles per gallon are amplified with cars that get poor fuel economy, while cars that get good fuel economy face diminishing returns for each additional mile per gallon. Of course, when considering downsizing, it is important to look at the complete owner cost situation, as trading in too soon (say, mid-way through a loan term) may not be the best deal in the long run. (Read “When to downsize your car.”)

To help consumers make better comparisons, the Duke researchers propose comparing fuel consumption—gallons per mile—rather than fuel economy in miles per gallon. This would help consumers make more direct comparisons between fuel costs, emissions, and a car’s contribution to global warming or global oil consumption.

In addition to our fuel economy measurements, Consumer Reports also translates that into annual fuel consumption and costs in our model pages, available through pulldown menus on the major Cars pages and through the New Car Selector.

The chart embedded in this post illustrates the numbers, based on rounding the current national gasoline price average of $4.06. To look at this in a different way, try the university's "The mpg illusion" interactive quiz.

This Duke study shows the importance of knowing how numbers translate into real dollars and supports the notion that it is key to factor the total owner costs when considering buying a new vehicle, especially if pain at the pump is the prime motivator. Ultimately, every gallon saved helps not only your wallet, but also aids national conservation and benefits the environment. Just make sure you understand the full picture before you buy that next car.

—Eric Evarts

For more information on saving fuel see our reports on how to get the best gas mileage and where to find the cheapest gas.

Dangers of hot cars

Summer is in full swing and that means it's not only hot outside, but the temperature inside your car can be life-threatening. Each year, an average of 36 children die from hyperthermia after being left inside a hot car. At least 20 infants and children have died so far this year, according to a recent study by San Francisco State University (SFSU). In 2007, there were 35 fatalities. The ages range from infants to 13 years old, but the average age is about 24 months old. From 1998 to 2007, more than half of the incidents were caused by caregivers who forgot a child in the vehicle.

A car can heat up quickly even when it's relatively mild outside. On a summer day, temperatures inside the vehicle can climb more than 40 degrees in just an hour. The SFSU study points out that heatstroke occurs when a person's body temperature exceeds 104 degrees F. At just a few degrees more, 107 degrees F, cells are damaged and internal organs shut down, which can result in death. Children are particularly vulnerable, as their bodies are not as efficient as adults' bodies at managing temperatures. As a result, kids warm up much more rapidly.

Tips to help prevent these deadly accidents:

Never leave a child or pet unattended in a vehicle.

Check the car to make sure that all occupants leave the vehicle or are carried out when unloading. If you lock the door with a key, rather than with a remote, it would force that one last look in the car before leaving it.

Always lock your car and keep keys and remotes away from children.

Keep a stuffed animal in the passenger seat as a reminder of a child in the backseat.

Have a plan that your childcare provider will call you if your child does not show up.

For additional information on keeping your children  safe in and around motor vehicles, visit the Kids and Cars Web site.  Also, check out our car safety video above and learn more about hot cars. And do take extra care during the summer months to ensure that children and pets are not left behind.

—Liza Barth

Who is to blame for high gas prices? Motorists know.

Motorists have been feeling the pain at the pump, and it is impacting their lifestyles and shaping future car buying habits, according to the latest Auto Pulse survey conducted by the Consumer Reports National Research Center. And 99 percent have strong feelings about who is to blame. Respondents mostly pointed fingers at the federal government.

With fuel prices and the upcoming presidential election dominating headlines, we thought it would be interesting to see how these issues intersect. To check America’s pulse, we conducted a random, nationwide telephone survey from June 5-8, 2008 of adults aged 18 years or older who drive and whose household owns at least one vehicle. For the full story, read "Gas prices survey shows pain at the pump hurts at home." Here, we will focus on who motorists blame for the elevated gas prices and what recommendations they have for turning around this trend.

Blame game
During a period of record profits for many oil companies, it is no surprise these industrial giants were one of the leading targets, blamed by three-quarters (75 percent) of consumers. But more pointed a finger at lawmakers in Washington, singling out the failure of government to implement an effective national energy policy.

Who do you blame for higher gas prices?

77% Government’s failure to implement an effective energy policy

75 Oil companies

70 Foreign-oil producers

68 Congress

68 Middle East conflict

64 Bush administration

64 Rising demand from developing nations

62 Restrictions on increasing refinery capacity

61 Restrictions on domestic oil exploration

Notably, natural disasters (26 percent) and gas stations (21 percent) ranked much lower.

How to fix it
While survey respondents were quick to assign blame, they were equally responsive in providing solutions. In fact, there was strong consensus on many possible actions that could be taken by the federal government to reduce fuel costs.

Motorists agreed that the government should:

90% Increase support for alternative energy development

84 Negotiate lower prices with oil-exporting nations

83 Encourage conservation through tax incentives, alternative transportation

81 Allow more drilling in the U.S. and offshore

79 Encourage the construction of more refineries

69 Impose price controls on gasoline

Where do you stand on both blame and possible solutions? Post your comments below.

—Jeff Bartlett

Join the discussion in the Cars forums to share how gas prices have impacted your lifestyle and what adjustments you are making to compensate.

Learn how to save at the pump by visiting Consumer Reports’ guide to driving green. Check the latest national average gasoline prices.

Survey says: Americans feel the impact of gas prices at the pump and at home

A year ago, the Consumer Reports National Research Center took the pulse of American motorists and found them to be anticipating making significant changes in their spending and lifestyle to offset rising fuel costs. This month, we again reached out to random households that own a vehicle and interviewed adult drivers, finding that the consumers have indeed been cutting back on spending, altering their driving habits, and shifting their car-shopping priorities—all in a big way.

It is no wonder the automotive market has turned upside down. Just this year, gas prices have skyrocketed from $2.96 per gallon (February 11, 2008) to $4.08 (June 23)—a 38-percent increase, according to data from the Energy Information Administration. (Check the latest gas prices.)

Now we find:

80 percent of car shoppers are considering a diesel, flex-fuel, or hybrid vehicle.

79 percent of car shoppers intend to buy a vehicle with better fuel economy.

74 percent are driving less due to fuel costs.

54 percent would pay more for a more fuel-efficient vehicle.

24 percent have cut spending on essentials like food or health care.

17 percent have charged more expenses on credit cards.

The survey shows that consumers are conserving in many ways, and they plan to focus more on fuel economy with their next purchase.

Read “Gas prices survey shows pain at the pump hurts at home” to learn more about how gas prices are impacting the American lifestyle and buying habits, plus who motorists blame.

—Jeff Bartlett

Join the discussion in the Cars forums to share how gas prices have impacted your lifestyle and what adjustments you are making to compensate.

Learn how to save at the pump by visiting Consumer Reports’ guide to driving green. Check the latest national average gasoline prices.

Future Honda hybrid cars take shape

Honda has revealed more information about its plans for future hybrid cars, announcing a timeline with several upcoming, fuel-efficient models.

In the past, the company has talked of a new “international hybrid” due out in early 2009, as well as the CR-Z hybrid sporty car due out in 2010. But little was known about the so-called “international hybrid” until now, except that logically it would probably be meant to compete with the Toyota Prius.

Honda president Takeo Fukui has revealed in a speech that the international hybrid would be reminiscent of the FCX Clarity fuel-cell model the company plans to lease to a few consumers starting this fall. The FCX Clarity is a family sedan about the size of the 2007 Honda Accord (a little smaller than the redesigned 2008 model). But the international hybrid will be a five-passenger car (rather than four in the FCX Clarity) and have a hatchback in place of the FCX’s trunk. It will not have the latest lithium-ion batteries, because Fukui says the company still considers them too expensive and risky for cars. He says Honda plans to build 200,000 of the cars worldwide, with 100,000 destined for America. Last year Toyota sold 181,000 Prius hybrids in the United States alone.

Honda also says it plans to build a hybrid-powered Fit by 2015, according to a report in Automotive News.

The company also announced the number of FCX Clarity fuel-cell cars that it will build. There will be 200, mostly for lease to consumers in Southern California. (Last fall, General Motors began loaning a fleet of its fuel-cell powered Chevrolet Equinoxes to consumers in Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., and New York metropolitan areas.)

—Eric Evarts

As gas prices increase, consumption decreases

Have you noticed that there are fewer cars on the road lately? Recent trends seem to point in that direction. According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), U.S. gasoline consumption has been declining for at least six months. In the first quarter of 2008 fuel demand was 1.4 percent below last year’s levels and it’s the third straight quarter of declines according to the American Petroleum Institute.

The EIA projects that for 2008, gasoline consumption is expected to decline by 0.3 percent. In particular, the summer (April through September) is expected to show a 0.4-percent decrease from last year. If you’re planning on hitting the road this summer, be prepared for sticker shock as regular retail gas prices are predicted to average $3.54 a gallon (up from $2.93 last summer) with some areas crossing $4.00.

With summer beyond the traditional time for road trips, it is no surprise that elevated fuel prices has lead to “staycations”—money-saving, stay-at-home vacations.

Another sign that people are changing their driving habits is the increase of public transportation use, which rose to its highest level in 50 years—10.3 billion trips in 2007, up 2.1 percent over the previous year. Americans are looking into alternative modes of transportation such as trolleys, trains, subways, and buses, which all showed a ridership increase, with the largest growth in major cities.

These fuel-consumption indicators are not surprising considering the rise in gas prices and slowing economy.

What steps have you taken, if any, to decrease your fuel consumption? Post your answers in the comments below.

To see what gas prices are in your area, see our average gas prices, which is updated weekly. Also, read our fuel saving tips and learn about alternative fuels in the Consumer Reports Guide to Driving Green.

—Liza Barth

Talking in the slow lane

Besides being a potential safety hazard, drivers who talk on cell phones may be contributing to the country’s traffic woes. According to a recent study by the University of Utah, cell phone users drive slower, pass less often, and take longer to get to their destination.

Compared to undistracted drivers, those who used cell phones drove an average of 2 mph slower. This may not seem like a lot of time, but can be significant when compounded by a recent study that suggests that ten percent of all drivers talk on cell phones.

The Utah study involved 36 psychology students. Each of them "drove" via a simulator through 9.2-mile-long highway scenarios: two each in low, medium, and high-density traffic. The participants were told to obey the 65 mph speed limit and use turn signals. They also used a cell phone during one drive at each level of traffic intensity.

In medium and high traffic, those who talked on cell phones were 21 percent and 19 percent respectively, less likely to change lanes. In low, medium, and high traffic situations, cell phone users spent 31 percent, 16 percent, and 12 percent more time following a slow moving vehicle than undistracted drivers. Those who didn’t use a cell phone got to their destination faster.

This study, though small, shows that cell-phone users can significantly reduce the flow of traffic by not changing lanes, and driving slower.

So, hang up and drive safe, for all our sakes'.

—Liza Barth

IIHS study contradicts government on roof crush—more lives could be saved

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has recently published a report looking at vehicle roof strength and its relation to protecting people in rollover crashes. This study raises serious questions about earlier U.S. Government studies that predicted a very minimal positive effect from strengthening vehicle roofs to prevent their caving in during rollover crashes. Before this study there was “no conclusive evidence about the specific contribution of a vehicle’s roof strength to occupant protection.” The IIHS report focused only on midsized, four-door SUVs, and it supports CR’s position on the importance of stronger roofs as one way to mitigate rollover injuries and deaths.

Background: The Government’s roof-crush standard, known as FMVSS 216, hasn’t changed in decades. It was implemented back in 1973 for cars, and extended to light trucks and vans in 1994. This standard specifies a test where a steel plate is pressed against the roof’s edge above the driver’s door and loaded up with a force equal to 1.5 times the weight of the vehicle. The roof is allowed to collapse no more than five inches. The federal government’s auto-safety agency, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), proposed in 2005 a revised test that would increase the load on the steel plate to 2.5 times the vehicle’s weight.

The upgraded standard also specifies that roof crush cannot exceed the space available above the head of a 50th-percentile male crash dummy. In a follow-up proposal dated January 2008, NHTSA suggested it might extend the test to include both the passenger and driver’s side of the vehicle, instead of just one side of the roof.

Benefits questioned: NHTSA has estimated that its new roof-crush standard would prevent only 13 to 44 fatalities per year. That’s out of some 10,000 rollover fatalities that occur annually. If the standard were raised to three times the vehicle weight instead of 2.5 times, NHTSA estimates life-saving at 49 to 135 fatalities. Meanwhile, NHTSA has pegged the cost to the industry for its new regulation at $88 to $95 million for the 2.5-times-weight load, but at more than 10 times that, $1.2 to $1.3 billion, for the 3-times-weight load.

The IIHS concludes that NHTSA’s life-saving estimates are far too conservative. The IIHS examined just 11 vehicles, midsized four-door SUVs. But it concluded that if they had all had roofs as strong as the strongest among them, the 2000-2004 Nissan Xterra, then about 212 of the 668 deaths that occurred in those SUVs in 2006 would have been prevented.

Both NHTSA and the IIHS assert in their reports that electronic stability control will go a long way toward preventing rollover injuries and fatalities because ESC seems to be highly effective at preventing rollover in the first place. However, even with ESC, vehicles can still trip over a curb and roll, or roll down an embankment. Higher roof strength limits would help prevent injuries form these accident scenarios. Side-curtain air bags are expected to reduce fatalities and injuries when a rollover does happen, both by cushioning occupants and by preventing occupant ejection.

Nevertheless, the IIHS believes that the link between roof strength and injury risk remains. For instance, even if a vehicle is equipped with side-curtain air bags, they may not work so well if the roof collapses and the vehicle’s doors pop open. “There will still be rollovers,” says the IIHS Communications Director Russ Rader, “even when all vehicles have stability control.”

—Gordon Hard

Read “Raising the roof standard for rollover safety.” See Consumers Union’s stand on roof crush from 2005. Learn more about car safety in our Safety section and in the CR Safety blog.

Pregnant drivers and passengers: Buckle up

Many pregnant women worry that using a seatbelt when driving could be unsafe for their baby, but a recent study debunks that myth. The University of Michigan found that about 200 unborn babies would be saved each year if expectant women properly buckled up every time they get in a car.

The researchers analyzed data from 57 car crashes involving pregnant women. The findings conclude that proper seatbelt use would reduce the risk of serious fetal injuries or deaths due to car accidents by 84 percent. Women who were involved in these crashes were unbelted 62 percent of the time.

The study estimates that about 170,000 car crashes in the United States each year involve pregnant women and as many as 370 unborn babies die from them. The estimates indicate that there are more deaths to unborn children from car crashes than motor-vehicle crash deaths to infants under age one.

So, how can pregnant women protect themselves? If you are an expectant mother or know someone who is, here are some driving safety tips from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).

Always wear a seat belt.

Use it properly by placing the shoulder belt across your chest and away from your neck. Never place the shoulder belt behind you or under your arm. The lap belt should lie across your hips and below your belly.

Keep the air bag switch on. They work with seat belts to protect passengers in a crash.

Adjust your seat. Your breastbone should be at least 10 inches from the steering wheel or dashboard. As you continue through your pregnancy and your belly grows, move the seat as far back as possible for you to safely reach the pedals.

Once the baby is born, make sure car seats are properly installed.

See our Ratings and recommendations on car seats.

—Liza Barth

Chrysler threatens to pull plastic plug on “Playskool” interiors

Last week, the bankruptcy news of an auto parts supplier in Dearborn, Michigan, may have a direct impact on consumers. And it reveals some insight into what goes into the parts of the car that owners see and touch every day.

Plastech Engineered Products makes interior components for Chrysler, Ford, and General Motors vehicles. About a week ago, Plastech declared bankruptcy amidst a dispute with Chrysler, as widely reported. As a result, Plastech stopped supplying Chrysler interior components, causing the automaker to run short of parts and shut down four factories temporarily, with the potential to close many more.

The standoff didn’t last for long before a temporary agreement could be reached and production resumed. According to the trade paper Automotive News, the new arrangement will “allow the automaker to resume production at four idled plants and avoid shutdown of all its assembly operations.” Plastech has secured a line of credit to keep operations running for the time being.

Chrysler’s initial announcement of the four plant closings gives us an idea what cars have critical interior parts built by Plastech:
• The Belvidere, Ill., factory builds the Dodge Caliber, Jeep Compass, and Jeep Patriot SUVs.
• Newark, Delaware builds the Chrysler Aspen and Dodge Durango SUVs.
• Sterling Heights, Michigan, builds the Chrysler Sebring and Dodge Avenger.
• The Dodge Nitro, Jeep Liberty, and Jeep Wrangler are built in Toledo, Ohio.

Consumer Reports has tested the Caliber, Compass, Patriot, Durango, Sebring (three of them), Avenger, Nitro, and Wrangler, and we are currently testing a Jeep Liberty.

When we tested the Nitro, we said its interior “looks cheap, with hard plastics, rough-finished components, large gaps, and loose pieces.” Likewise the Patriot, we said, “is full of cheap plastics, some of which are poorly finished.” We said the Sebring’s interior, “looks cheap and insubstantial.”

All these vehicles came in for similar harsh criticism. (Of course, suppliers like Plastech build components to manufacturer specs.) Some automotive writers have referred to this generation of Chrysler interiors as looking like they come from Playskool toys. One of our engineers likened driving the Compass to “sitting in an Igloo ice chest.”

Last year Chrysler announced it would create a new “advanced” interior design studio to focus on building better interiors. The first product of that effort, according to the company, is the new Dodge Ram pickup displayed at the Detroit Auto Show. It certainly had the highest initial quality interior we’ve seen on a new Chrysler design in a long time.

The particulars in this dispute remain a bit unclear. If Plastech had collapsed, many people would have been in trouble. The same Automotive News article mentioned that the company “owns more than 35 plants in North America and generated $1.4 billion in sales last year, [and] employs 7,700 people.”

In the end, we hope future Chrysler products will offer consumers more comfortable, better-finished interiors. (In theory, that could be good for everyone’s business.) The 2009 Ram has us optimistic. Just hope more jobs aren’t lost, or threatened, in the process.

—Eric Evarts

Edited 2/12/08

Pain at the pump—Why are gas prices so high?

Historically, autumn is a time of falling leaves, falling temperatures, and falling gas prices.  This year, however, expect only two out of three.  Gas prices typically decline after a high summer travel season, but this year they are on the rise and are expected to increase even more as the holiday season approaches. (See our U.S. gas prices blog, for the weekly gas prices in your region.)

A major reason for the high price at the pump is the high cost of crude oil, which is now over $95 a barrel. There are a number of factors for the surge in crude oil prices. World oil demand has continued to grow much faster than oil supply outside of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA). This puts pressure on OPEC and inventories to bridge the gap. Other factors cited by a recent EIA report include geopolitical instability, reduced commercial inventories, and worldwide refining bottlenecks that reduce the industries ability to accommodate refinery outages. In addition, a weak U.S. dollar has fostered continued oil consumption in foreign countries, since oil is traded in dollars. The rise in oil cost therefore is less in many other countries than in the United States. All these factors combined with bad weather forecasts in a few oil regions such as the Gulf of Mexico have contributed to the rise in prices.

Despite higher oil and gas prices, total U.S. petroleum consumption is expected to increase by 0.5 percent in 2007 and 1.0 percent in 2008. Economic growth combined with forecasted colder average temperatures this winter may push demand higher and prices will likely follow.

All this is bad timing for consumers. An increase in gas prices will most likely affect retail spending, according to a recent New York Times article. Consumers are already feeling the pinch at the pump and that will affect their wallet as we embark on holiday shopping.

So, how will the increase in oil and gas prices affect you this season? And how will you compensate for the hit on the household budget? Feel free to post a comment in this blog.

For information and tips on saving fuel and alternative fuels see our fuel economy guide.

—Liza Barth