Americans have been slow to adopt electric cars due to their high cost and concerns over their range. Automakers have also improved the fuel efficiency of their traditional gas-powered engines more quickly than expected.

But it is difficult to forecast what consumers will prefer in the future and so Ford modified its Focus platform to build electric and gas-powered versions on the same assembly line.

Ford’s move differs from by both GM and Nissan, which build different platforms for the Volt and Leaf.

Electrifying the platform allows Ford to maintain “reasonable margins” on its EVs, which tend to be costly because of the price of the battery, Mulally has said.

The battery used in an all-electric vehicle, such as the Focus EV, can cost between $12,000 and $15,000. That would represent around a third of the Focus Electric’s overall price of around $39,000.

ZED COMMENT: The electric Focus has a range of 57 miles. It takes 8 hours to recharge. It costs $40,000. The conventional Focus has a range of 350+ miles, takes 5 minutes to re-fuel and costs $16,500. would you buy a conventional car that only went 57 miles, took 8 hours to get going when it ran out of power, and cost $40,000? Never. So why would you buy an electric? Oh, and by the way, that $15,000 battery will need replacing every 100,000 miles.

In contrast, ZED engines are a financially viable green tech alternative, that costs no more than a conventional engine. For more information contact corpcomm@zedpower.com

Talk about an extended-range vehicle. Incredibly, GM says Volts have traveled to the moon 167 times since the car went on sale in late 2010. Those slackers at NASA haven’t even managed to get there once in the last four decades.

If that sounds a bit fishy, what GM actually said, in a news release it put out this week, is that all of the roughly 14,000 Volts sold so far have traveled more than 40 million miles solely on battery power.

“With each click of the odometer, Chevrolet Volt owners are measuring their contribution to reducing America’s dependence on foreign oil and to preserving the environment,” Cristi Landy, the Volt’s marketing director, says in the release.

But they also show how far those cars are from being a bargain financially. Volt buyers could have saved a lot more than $8.5 million — which ignores the cost of electricity used to charge the batteries — by driving conventional cars instead.

In fact, data from TrueCar.com that I used recently to write a story in The New York Times, before joining Automotive News this month, showed that an average driver would have to put nearly 400,000 miles on his Volt before it became a better bargain than Chevrolet’s similarly sized Cruze Eco. That’s the distance to the moon and two-thirds of the way back — assuming you can find a gas station and electrical outlet in the Sea of Tranquility.

ZED COMMENT: Two words – “financially viable”. If a green-tech option is not financially viable, then it is not a replacement for conventional engines. Its that simple. Alternately, the ZED engine had be installed in any vehicle, and costs the same or less to manufacture as a conventional engine. For more information contact: corpcomm@zedpower.com

The conference comes on the heels of several high-profile investigations that NHTSA has launched into fires possibly caused by lithium-ion batteries in electric vehicles.

The agency announced today that it is conducting a preliminary investigation, or “field inquiry,” of a garage fire in Texas that scorched a Fisker Automotive Inc. Karma — the startup company’s $103,000 plug-in electric sedan.

NHTSA Administrator David Strickland said in a statement that the agency hosted a “robust dialogue” as government agencies, battery makers, automakers and safety personnel discussed new research, regulations and other issues pertaining to electric vehicles.

ZED COMMENT: The fuel cell frenzy has abated due to inherent technical issues. So too the electric frenzy is slowing as inherent performance limitations become evident. While they may serve niche markets, neither are, or ever will be, a universal replacement of the conventional engine. Alternately, ZED engines have the same power as a conventional engine, at the same cost, making them a true green-tech replacement powertrain. For more information email corpcomm@zedpower.com

The chief fire inspector for Fort Bend County, Texas, told Autoweek that the fire started in the Karma.

“Yes, the Karma was the origin of the fire, but what exactly caused that we don’t know at this time,” he said. The car was a complete loss.

Baker said the driver arrived home in the Fisker, pulled into the garage, and less than three minutes later the car was in flames. It was not plugged in at the time of the fire and the Karma’s battery remains intact, Autoweek said.

ZED Comment: Interesting! The “electric saga” continues.

Coda is the latest in a series of applicants that have failed to secure loan funding from the $25 billion program.

In February, Chrysler Group pulled its application, expressing frustration that the process was taking too long and the terms were becoming too restrictive. Others, such as startup Bright Automotive, were forced to close their doors, in part because of delays in the review process.

DOE officials have said they’re committed to the program but must balance support for clean-vehicle projects with the department’s responsibility to taxpayers.

So far, only five companies have received loan guarantees since 2008, the year the program was funded. The DOE has about $16 billion left to disburse, but it hasn’t made another commitment in more than a year.

Fisker has drawn down about $193 million in loans, but the DOE has blocked access to the rest. The carmaker had missed several government-imposed deadlines last year when it delayed the sales launch of its first car, the Karma luxury plug-in hybrid, which starts at $103,000, including shipping.

ZED COMMENT: DOE officials have said they’re committed to ……….. the department’s responsibility to taxpayers. That’s refreshing. With a deluge of electric hype now coming under close scrutiny for poor performance, high cost, safety and other issues, the DOE is acting responsibly. ZED engine development has been independent of any government funding, putting taxpayers “on the hook” for zero. For more information contact: corpcomm@zedpower.com

The numbers are even grimmer if repurchase behavior among Toyota Prius owners is taken into account. The Prius is by far the most popular hybrid, making up nearly 50% of all hybrid car sales in March. But when Prius numbers are taken out of the equation, hybrid loyalty drops to a paltry 25%. For comparison’s sake, the industry average for brand loyalty, with all types of cars taken into account, is 49%.

No matter how you slice it, the report has to take some of the wind out of the sales for hybrid manufacturers, who are riding high in 2012. With only a third of return costumers, and another report stating that the majority of hybrids can take up to a decade before saving their owners money, these fuel efficient cars are under the microscope at a time when gas prices are primed to hit an all-time high.

But if only 1 in 3 costumers is coming back for more, it could spell trouble for the hybrid market down the road.

ZED COMMENT: No payback on fuel savings, expensive batteries, safety issues, small limited use vehicles….. the reasons for poor loyalty are many, no matter how much “hype” is out there.  Unlike a hybrid or electric, the ZED engine can be installed in any production vehicle, costs the same or less, has the same power, and delivers fuel savings from day one. No hybrid can claim the same attributes. For more information contact: corpcomm@zedpower.com

Fisker was approved for the $529 million loan in 2009 under a DOE program aimed at helping automakers make more fuel-efficient cars and trucks.

Fisker received about a third of the money initially to mainly support U.S. engineering and other efforts to roll out its first electric car, the $100,000 Karma, that was assembled in Finland. But delays in getting that car to showrooms prompted the DOE to hold additional financing.

Grassley and Thune asked Chu whether he believed it was prudent to spend taxpayer funds to help finance Fisker’s development of high-end vehicles. They also want to know the degree of technical expertise the DOE used to evaluate, originate and monitor the loan.

Online comment by reader Edward McLaughlin:

Fisker- What a difference two years and almost a Hundred Million US Taxpayer dollars later makes;

From High Profile Photo ops by “Stimulus Joe Biden” , and UAW Officials ,at the former GM Delaware plant, and proclamations of the Power of the Presidents “Stimulus dollars Green Initiative” as a driving force to create “New High Paying Green Jobs!

To now Two years later:

Stimulus loans used to prop up a company whose vehicles are assembled bu Finish auto workers , not US auto workers -

A Re-Shuttered Dormant GM Assembly plant with NONE of the 2, 500 “High Paying Green Jobs” promised by “Stimulus Joe” anywhere in sight

DOE Officials “reviewing Fisker’s New ( ? ) Business Plan

The Recall of the $100,000 Fisker cars for “Battery Issues”

The lay off- of A123 Employees because Fisker has ” reduced it’s production schedule and thus needs fewer batteries. From a company that Also received “Stimulus Dollars”

And what do we hear from Stimulus Joe and the President as to the Fisker Financial situation, The Lack of New High Paying Green Auto Jobs – Nothing – Not a word on Still Another High Profile “Green Energy ” boondoggle

Well probably to be expected : it wasn’t Their Money that They wasted anyway.

Online comment by reader TSTone:

I wonder how Ford feels about this. The government confiscates their assets in order to transfer them to a foreign entity so the entity can hire engineers that Ford has to compete for. Then the engineers taken from Ford’s pool of eligible employees apply the resources of the foreign entity supplied by the 50% of Americans that pay taxes to build a so-called “green” car that ultimately runs on coal. You know what? If Fisker actually has any physical assets, they are absolute fools. Obviously the government was so eager to transfer this wealth away from the producers and to the non-producers that they threw the money in the first road ditch they found. All Fisker ever really needed were some movie props to create some halfassed illusion of an automobile manufacturer.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration announced Friday a meeting May 18 in Washington to convene government officials and auto and battery-industry representatives to talk about “safety considerations” for cars powered by lithium-ion batteries. The meeting was announced in a posting on the Federal Register’s Web site.

A Volt caught fire in June, three weeks after a crash test at a NHTSA facility in Wisconsin. Disclosure of the fire, which NHTSA and GM initially didn’t make public, prompted the automaker to offer to take back Volts leased by customers and to CEO Dan Akerson testifying before a U.S. House committee in January.

A123 Systems Inc. said last month it was recalling electric batteries it made for Fisker Automotive Inc. and other automakers after a $107,000 Fisker Karma shut down because of a battery defect during testing by Consumer Reports magazine.

ZED COMMENT: Safety considerations? That seems reasonable, but why wasn’t this done before the government poured billions into the industry? Speaking of safety, has anyone clearly spelled out that Lithium is highly poisonous? What happens if one bursts open in an accident — what are the hazmat protocols, if any? What global regulations are there for Lithium battery disposal? None? The smallest amount of Lithium can cause extensive, long term poisoning of water and land. In contrast, the ZED engine is made of base metals, all of which are benign and recyclable, for a true eco-friendly alternative to a conventional engine. For more information contact: corpcomm@zedpower.com

“While in this early electric vehicle market these products have higher up-front costs, knowing how much one can save by using electricity instead of gasoline is an important factor for consumers,” the study by the Cambridge, Mass.-based group said.

Ford Motor Co., maker of a Focus electric car scheduled to go on sale this year, said last month the price will start at $39,995 before a $7,500 U.S. tax credit. Nissan’s Leaf starts at $35,200.

ZED COMMENT. The whole point is “higher up front costs” which the authors of this study have ignored. So what if “projected savings” are $1200 a year. The Volt costs $40,000 and the Malibu $20,000. The difference is $20,000 which if saving $1200 a year will take 17 years just to reach break-even. And oops, the average car is scraped in 8 years, plus the Volt will need a $5,000 replacement battery pack every 100,000 miles. It just makes no economic sense. In contrast the ZED costs no more to buy, and delivers big fuel savings from day one. The result is real savings for the consumer. For more information contact: corpcomm@zedpower.com

In recent months, a series of setbacks have weakened A123′s financial position and sent its stock tumbling more than 40 percent so far this year.

On Wednesday, an explosion took place in a General Motors research lab in suburban Detroit from a lithium ion prototype battery. One employee was hospitalized.

The Wall Street Journal, citing people familiar with the matter, said the battery was made by A123 Systems, which didn’t comment on the incident. A123 will make the batteries for GM’s upcoming all-electric Chevrolet Spark.

In March, A123 posted its largest ever quarterly loss, hurt by a drop in battery orders from its main customer, Fisker Automotive.

Another blow came when a Fisker Karma plug-in hybrid sports car with an A123 battery failed during a test by Consumer Reports magazine. The cause was a manufacturing defect at an A123 plant. A123 said it would replace the batteries, which would cost the company $55 million.

President Barack Obama’s administration has been a strong proponent of electric vehicles and set a goal of getting 1 million battery-powered vehicles on the road by 2015.

Both A123 and Fisker received DOE funding as part of this goal. But Americans’ adoption of electric vehicles faces hurdles, including high prices and concerns over battery safety.

ZED COMMENT: If the investment market won’t support a technology, and neither will consumers, why is the government putting hard-earned taxpayer money at risk? As Toyota executive stated, the “Disney Effect” of wishing the technology would succeed loses to  “Thermodynamic Science” every time. Supporting dubious technology does not promote a solution, but instead drains valuable resources from other superior technologies. In contrast to A123, ZED is a market driven solution which has not accepted any government financial support. For more information contact: corpcomm@zedpower.com