Time for Jeff Bridges to dump Hyundai

[dbapig]

[quote=CONCHO]I have a college degree but because I don’t work for govt nor GM, I won’t be getting pension after I retire. Meanwhile auto workers graduated from high school and start working at car factory right away and end up with pension. I’m sure working on factory floor has its difficulties and all BUT it doesn’t make sense. That’s unsustainable. We can’t sustain what’s unsustainable.

Wow what an amazing example of the way we think here in the US. Note that pensions are common across Western Europe (and used to be here too!), where lots of good cars and other products come from. However here in the US they are considered “unsustainable” relics of a bygone era. Rather than thinking — “Hey why don’t we all have a pension like the autoworkers? We should organize and hassle our politicians to make that happen!” we instead think “those darned overpaid spoiled autoworkers! They should be totally f***ed like the rest of us and have to work until they drop!”

And most people here think this way. Go ahead and call me crazy for thinking otherwise, I’m used to it.[/quote]

Ok let’s say pension isn’t a crazy idea. Can you please tell me why I don’t have it? I have a college degree but don’t work for Govt./GM. BTW, Govt/GM are prime examples how things should NOT be managed. I would love to get pension so how can I get it?

It’s NOT sustainable. Look at what happened to GM.

[fm]

[quote=Rt.66]The Japanese Gov. funded a large part of Toyota’s Prius development.

I’d say foreign Govs. Embarrassed the US Gov. by protecting, funding and nurturing their automakers to the point at which we find our manufacturers in the predicament we are in today.

People, you cannot disagree that our very own manufacturers have been put at a distinct disadvantage for decades. Everything else is just looking for a reason by looking past the reason.

[/quote]
I always find it interesting when people say this. The US government gave approximately $1 billion to the Big 3 for diesel hybrid development during the Clinton Adminstration (and around $500 million for hydrogen during the Bush years), with additional money going to other auto related fields for the same programs. However, the government also passed stricter laws against diesel, thereby nullifying the use of such vehicles. How ironic is that.

I would suspect companies like Ford and Chrysler would have much less knowledge of hybrid without this program (as GM had EV1).

“The Clinton administration has given $1.4 billion over the last five years to national laboratories, universities, auto parts manufacturers and Detroit automakers to help in the building of a few experimental models.”

“For one thing, the Big Three have all focused on diesel-electric hybrid cars. Yet federal and state environmental regulators have just adopted new rules for tailpipe emissions that will make it very difficult after 2003 to sell automobiles with diesel engines. Meanwhile, Honda Motor and Toyota Motor, operating with much smaller government subsidies, have already begun mass production of small high-mileage cars that combine gasoline engines and electric motors, leaving Detroit scrambling to catch up.”

In any case, the cars from Germany, Japan, and the US are somewhat different, and that is part of the reason people chose different cars. German cars are more likely to handle tighter/firm and ride more sporty, while US cars are more luxury ride based with less feel of the road, while Japanese cars are closer to German cars but less costly. So someone used to a responsive, sporty car is likely to go with something like BMW or a less expensive Toyota.

This article about the new Buick even points this out:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jM0Ir-DUyLvPw5OUiMpfhkWNbHlgD98VVTMG0

“Lindland, who has seen the LaCrosse at a preview, described it as beautiful, but says she’s waiting “to confirm that it doesn’t drive like a boat.””

[fm]

[quote=Rt.66]The Japanese Gov. funded a large part of Toyota’s Prius development.

I’d say foreign Govs. Embarrassed the US Gov. by protecting, funding and nurturing their automakers to the point at which we find our manufacturers in the predicament we are in today.

People, you cannot disagree that our very own manufacturers have been put at a distinct disadvantage for decades. Everything else is just looking for a reason by looking past the reason.

[/quote]
I always find it interesting when people say this. The US government gave approximately $1 billion to the Big 3 for diesel hybrid development during the Clinton Adminstration (and around $500 million for hydrogen during the Bush years), with additional money going to other auto related fields for the same programs. However, the government also passed stricter laws against diesel, thereby nullifying the use of such vehicles. How ironic is that.

I would suspect companies like Ford and Chrysler would have much less knowledge of hybrid without this program (as GM had EV1).

“The Clinton administration has given $1.4 billion over the last five years to national laboratories, universities, auto parts manufacturers and Detroit automakers to help in the building of a few experimental models.”

“For one thing, the Big Three have all focused on diesel-electric hybrid cars. Yet federal and state environmental regulators have just adopted new rules for tailpipe emissions that will make it very difficult after 2003 to sell automobiles with diesel engines. Meanwhile, Honda Motor and Toyota Motor, operating with much smaller government subsidies, have already begun mass production of small high-mileage cars that combine gasoline engines and electric motors, leaving Detroit scrambling to catch up.”

In any case, the cars from Germany, Japan, and the US are somewhat different, and that is part of the reason people chose different cars. German cars are more likely to handle tighter/firm and ride more sporty, while US cars are more luxury ride based with less feel of the road, while Japanese cars are closer to German cars but less costly. So someone used to a responsive, sporty car is likely to go with something like BMW or a less expensive Toyota.

This article about the new Buick even points this out:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jM0Ir-DUyLvPw5OUiMpfhkWNbHlgD98VVTMG0

“Lindland, who has seen the LaCrosse at a preview, described it as beautiful, but says she’s waiting “to confirm that it doesn’t drive like a boat.””

[fm]

[quote=Rt.66]The Japanese Gov. funded a large part of Toyota’s Prius development.

I’d say foreign Govs. Embarrassed the US Gov. by protecting, funding and nurturing their automakers to the point at which we find our manufacturers in the predicament we are in today.

People, you cannot disagree that our very own manufacturers have been put at a distinct disadvantage for decades. Everything else is just looking for a reason by looking past the reason.

[/quote]
I always find it interesting when people say this. The US government gave approximately $1 billion to the Big 3 for diesel hybrid development during the Clinton Adminstration (and around $500 million for hydrogen during the Bush years), with additional money going to other auto related fields for the same programs. However, the government also passed stricter laws against diesel, thereby nullifying the use of such vehicles. How ironic is that.

I would suspect companies like Ford and Chrysler would have much less knowledge of hybrid without this program (as GM had EV1).

“The Clinton administration has given $1.4 billion over the last five years to national laboratories, universities, auto parts manufacturers and Detroit automakers to help in the building of a few experimental models.”

“For one thing, the Big Three have all focused on diesel-electric hybrid cars. Yet federal and state environmental regulators have just adopted new rules for tailpipe emissions that will make it very difficult after 2003 to sell automobiles with diesel engines. Meanwhile, Honda Motor and Toyota Motor, operating with much smaller government subsidies, have already begun mass production of small high-mileage cars that combine gasoline engines and electric motors, leaving Detroit scrambling to catch up.”

In any case, the cars from Germany, Japan, and the US are somewhat different, and that is part of the reason people chose different cars. German cars are more likely to handle tighter/firm and ride more sporty, while US cars are more luxury ride based with less feel of the road, while Japanese cars are closer to German cars but less costly. So someone used to a responsive, sporty car is likely to go with something like BMW or a less expensive Toyota.

This article about the new Buick even points this out:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jM0Ir-DUyLvPw5OUiMpfhkWNbHlgD98VVTMG0

“Lindland, who has seen the LaCrosse at a preview, described it as beautiful, but says she’s waiting “to confirm that it doesn’t drive like a boat.””

[fm]

[quote=Rt.66]The Japanese Gov. funded a large part of Toyota’s Prius development.

I’d say foreign Govs. Embarrassed the US Gov. by protecting, funding and nurturing their automakers to the point at which we find our manufacturers in the predicament we are in today.

People, you cannot disagree that our very own manufacturers have been put at a distinct disadvantage for decades. Everything else is just looking for a reason by looking past the reason.

[/quote]
I always find it interesting when people say this. The US government gave approximately $1 billion to the Big 3 for diesel hybrid development during the Clinton Adminstration (and around $500 million for hydrogen during the Bush years), with additional money going to other auto related fields for the same programs. However, the government also passed stricter laws against diesel, thereby nullifying the use of such vehicles. How ironic is that.

I would suspect companies like Ford and Chrysler would have much less knowledge of hybrid without this program (as GM had EV1).

“The Clinton administration has given $1.4 billion over the last five years to national laboratories, universities, auto parts manufacturers and Detroit automakers to help in the building of a few experimental models.”

“For one thing, the Big Three have all focused on diesel-electric hybrid cars. Yet federal and state environmental regulators have just adopted new rules for tailpipe emissions that will make it very difficult after 2003 to sell automobiles with diesel engines. Meanwhile, Honda Motor and Toyota Motor, operating with much smaller government subsidies, have already begun mass production of small high-mileage cars that combine gasoline engines and electric motors, leaving Detroit scrambling to catch up.”

In any case, the cars from Germany, Japan, and the US are somewhat different, and that is part of the reason people chose different cars. German cars are more likely to handle tighter/firm and ride more sporty, while US cars are more luxury ride based with less feel of the road, while Japanese cars are closer to German cars but less costly. So someone used to a responsive, sporty car is likely to go with something like BMW or a less expensive Toyota.

This article about the new Buick even points this out:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jM0Ir-DUyLvPw5OUiMpfhkWNbHlgD98VVTMG0

“Lindland, who has seen the LaCrosse at a preview, described it as beautiful, but says she’s waiting “to confirm that it doesn’t drive like a boat.””

[fm]

[quote=Rt.66]The Japanese Gov. funded a large part of Toyota’s Prius development.

I’d say foreign Govs. Embarrassed the US Gov. by protecting, funding and nurturing their automakers to the point at which we find our manufacturers in the predicament we are in today.

People, you cannot disagree that our very own manufacturers have been put at a distinct disadvantage for decades. Everything else is just looking for a reason by looking past the reason.

[/quote]
I always find it interesting when people say this. The US government gave approximately $1 billion to the Big 3 for diesel hybrid development during the Clinton Adminstration (and around $500 million for hydrogen during the Bush years), with additional money going to other auto related fields for the same programs. However, the government also passed stricter laws against diesel, thereby nullifying the use of such vehicles. How ironic is that.

I would suspect companies like Ford and Chrysler would have much less knowledge of hybrid without this program (as GM had EV1).

“The Clinton administration has given $1.4 billion over the last five years to national laboratories, universities, auto parts manufacturers and Detroit automakers to help in the building of a few experimental models.”

“For one thing, the Big Three have all focused on diesel-electric hybrid cars. Yet federal and state environmental regulators have just adopted new rules for tailpipe emissions that will make it very difficult after 2003 to sell automobiles with diesel engines. Meanwhile, Honda Motor and Toyota Motor, operating with much smaller government subsidies, have already begun mass production of small high-mileage cars that combine gasoline engines and electric motors, leaving Detroit scrambling to catch up.”

In any case, the cars from Germany, Japan, and the US are somewhat different, and that is part of the reason people chose different cars. German cars are more likely to handle tighter/firm and ride more sporty, while US cars are more luxury ride based with less feel of the road, while Japanese cars are closer to German cars but less costly. So someone used to a responsive, sporty car is likely to go with something like BMW or a less expensive Toyota.

This article about the new Buick even points this out:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jM0Ir-DUyLvPw5OUiMpfhkWNbHlgD98VVTMG0

“Lindland, who has seen the LaCrosse at a preview, described it as beautiful, but says she’s waiting “to confirm that it doesn’t drive like a boat.””

[Coronita]

Speaking of Tesla…….Looks like our government decided to loan money to three automakers for building energy efficient vehicles…..

Ford, Tesla, and…..NISSAN……

BTW: It’s interesting to see who is CEO of Nissan. Nope, not a national from Japan…Same guy that runs Renault….Carlos Ghosn….

AP source: Government to lend Ford, Nissan, Tesla money to develop fuel-efficient vehicles

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Energy Department is expected to announce Tuesday it is lending money to the Ford Motor Co. and two other automakers from a $25 billion fund to develop fuel-efficient vehicles.

Energy Secretary Steven Chu was scheduled to announce the loan funding for Ford, Nissan Motor Co. and Tesla Motors Inc. in Dearborn, Mich., congressional officials said. They requested anonymity because an official announcement was pending.

Dozens of auto companies, suppliers and battery makers have sought a total of $38 billion from the loan program. Ford has asked to receive $5 billion in loans by 2011, but it was unclear how much money the automaker would receive. Nissan has applied for an undisclosed amount of assistance, while Tesla has sought $450 million.

The Energy Department declined to comment on the plans. Chu has not yet announced the first recipients of the loans, which have been closely watched by members of Congress from states with auto plants and suppliers.

Congress approved the loan program last year to help car companies and suppliers retool their facilities to develop green vehicles and components such as advanced batteries.

The loans were designed to help the auto manufacturers meet new fuel-efficiency standards of at least 35 miles per gallon by 2020, a 40 percent increase over current standards.

General Motors Corp. and Chrysler Group LLC have received billions of dollars in federal loans to restructure their companies through government-led bankruptcies, but Ford avoided seeking emergency aid by mortgaging all of its assets in 2006 to borrow about $25 billion.

General Motors has requested $10.3 billion in loans from the program, while Chrysler has asked for $6 billion in loans. Energy officials have said the loans could only go to “financially viable” companies, preventing GM and Chrysler to qualify for the first round of the loans.

Ford has sought a total of $11 billion from the loan program and has previously said it would invest $14 billion in advanced technologies over the next seven years. The loan application, which was submitted by the company late last year, would help Ford finance the investment.

Ford has said it intends to bring several battery-electric vehicles to market. The automaker has discussed plans to produce a battery-electric vehicle van in 2010 for commercial use, a small battery-electric sedan developed with Magna International by 2011 and a plug-in electric vehicle by 2012.

Ford spokesman Mark Truby declined to comment.

Nissan is developing an all-electric car with 100 miles of pure battery range for release in late 2010. The car will be made in Japan initially but company officials have said they eventually want to build the vehicle at Nissan’s plant in Smyrna, Tenn.

Nissan spokesman Fred Standish said the automaker hoped “to be approved for this loan as we provided a very strong business proposal. At this time, we have nothing further to say or to announce.”

Tesla is seeking $350 million in loans for an assembly plant to build its Model S four-door sedan, which is scheduled to go on sale in 2011. The San Carlos, Calif.-based company is also seeking $100 million to finance an advanced battery and powertrain manufacturing facility.

Tesla spokeswoman Rachel Konrad referred questions about the loan program’s timing and approval to the Energy Department.

AP Auto Writer Kimberly S. Johnson in Detroit contributed to this report.

[Coronita]

Speaking of Tesla…….Looks like our government decided to loan money to three automakers for building energy efficient vehicles…..

Ford, Tesla, and…..NISSAN……

BTW: It’s interesting to see who is CEO of Nissan. Nope, not a national from Japan…Same guy that runs Renault….Carlos Ghosn….

AP source: Government to lend Ford, Nissan, Tesla money to develop fuel-efficient vehicles

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Energy Department is expected to announce Tuesday it is lending money to the Ford Motor Co. and two other automakers from a $25 billion fund to develop fuel-efficient vehicles.

Energy Secretary Steven Chu was scheduled to announce the loan funding for Ford, Nissan Motor Co. and Tesla Motors Inc. in Dearborn, Mich., congressional officials said. They requested anonymity because an official announcement was pending.

Dozens of auto companies, suppliers and battery makers have sought a total of $38 billion from the loan program. Ford has asked to receive $5 billion in loans by 2011, but it was unclear how much money the automaker would receive. Nissan has applied for an undisclosed amount of assistance, while Tesla has sought $450 million.

The Energy Department declined to comment on the plans. Chu has not yet announced the first recipients of the loans, which have been closely watched by members of Congress from states with auto plants and suppliers.

Congress approved the loan program last year to help car companies and suppliers retool their facilities to develop green vehicles and components such as advanced batteries.

The loans were designed to help the auto manufacturers meet new fuel-efficiency standards of at least 35 miles per gallon by 2020, a 40 percent increase over current standards.

General Motors Corp. and Chrysler Group LLC have received billions of dollars in federal loans to restructure their companies through government-led bankruptcies, but Ford avoided seeking emergency aid by mortgaging all of its assets in 2006 to borrow about $25 billion.

General Motors has requested $10.3 billion in loans from the program, while Chrysler has asked for $6 billion in loans. Energy officials have said the loans could only go to “financially viable” companies, preventing GM and Chrysler to qualify for the first round of the loans.

Ford has sought a total of $11 billion from the loan program and has previously said it would invest $14 billion in advanced technologies over the next seven years. The loan application, which was submitted by the company late last year, would help Ford finance the investment.

Ford has said it intends to bring several battery-electric vehicles to market. The automaker has discussed plans to produce a battery-electric vehicle van in 2010 for commercial use, a small battery-electric sedan developed with Magna International by 2011 and a plug-in electric vehicle by 2012.

Ford spokesman Mark Truby declined to comment.

Nissan is developing an all-electric car with 100 miles of pure battery range for release in late 2010. The car will be made in Japan initially but company officials have said they eventually want to build the vehicle at Nissan’s plant in Smyrna, Tenn.

Nissan spokesman Fred Standish said the automaker hoped “to be approved for this loan as we provided a very strong business proposal. At this time, we have nothing further to say or to announce.”

Tesla is seeking $350 million in loans for an assembly plant to build its Model S four-door sedan, which is scheduled to go on sale in 2011. The San Carlos, Calif.-based company is also seeking $100 million to finance an advanced battery and powertrain manufacturing facility.

Tesla spokeswoman Rachel Konrad referred questions about the loan program’s timing and approval to the Energy Department.

AP Auto Writer Kimberly S. Johnson in Detroit contributed to this report.

[Coronita]

Speaking of Tesla…….Looks like our government decided to loan money to three automakers for building energy efficient vehicles…..

Ford, Tesla, and…..NISSAN……

BTW: It’s interesting to see who is CEO of Nissan. Nope, not a national from Japan…Same guy that runs Renault….Carlos Ghosn….

AP source: Government to lend Ford, Nissan, Tesla money to develop fuel-efficient vehicles

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Energy Department is expected to announce Tuesday it is lending money to the Ford Motor Co. and two other automakers from a $25 billion fund to develop fuel-efficient vehicles.

Energy Secretary Steven Chu was scheduled to announce the loan funding for Ford, Nissan Motor Co. and Tesla Motors Inc. in Dearborn, Mich., congressional officials said. They requested anonymity because an official announcement was pending.

Dozens of auto companies, suppliers and battery makers have sought a total of $38 billion from the loan program. Ford has asked to receive $5 billion in loans by 2011, but it was unclear how much money the automaker would receive. Nissan has applied for an undisclosed amount of assistance, while Tesla has sought $450 million.

The Energy Department declined to comment on the plans. Chu has not yet announced the first recipients of the loans, which have been closely watched by members of Congress from states with auto plants and suppliers.

Congress approved the loan program last year to help car companies and suppliers retool their facilities to develop green vehicles and components such as advanced batteries.

The loans were designed to help the auto manufacturers meet new fuel-efficiency standards of at least 35 miles per gallon by 2020, a 40 percent increase over current standards.

General Motors Corp. and Chrysler Group LLC have received billions of dollars in federal loans to restructure their companies through government-led bankruptcies, but Ford avoided seeking emergency aid by mortgaging all of its assets in 2006 to borrow about $25 billion.

General Motors has requested $10.3 billion in loans from the program, while Chrysler has asked for $6 billion in loans. Energy officials have said the loans could only go to “financially viable” companies, preventing GM and Chrysler to qualify for the first round of the loans.

Ford has sought a total of $11 billion from the loan program and has previously said it would invest $14 billion in advanced technologies over the next seven years. The loan application, which was submitted by the company late last year, would help Ford finance the investment.

Ford has said it intends to bring several battery-electric vehicles to market. The automaker has discussed plans to produce a battery-electric vehicle van in 2010 for commercial use, a small battery-electric sedan developed with Magna International by 2011 and a plug-in electric vehicle by 2012.

Ford spokesman Mark Truby declined to comment.

Nissan is developing an all-electric car with 100 miles of pure battery range for release in late 2010. The car will be made in Japan initially but company officials have said they eventually want to build the vehicle at Nissan’s plant in Smyrna, Tenn.

Nissan spokesman Fred Standish said the automaker hoped “to be approved for this loan as we provided a very strong business proposal. At this time, we have nothing further to say or to announce.”

Tesla is seeking $350 million in loans for an assembly plant to build its Model S four-door sedan, which is scheduled to go on sale in 2011. The San Carlos, Calif.-based company is also seeking $100 million to finance an advanced battery and powertrain manufacturing facility.

Tesla spokeswoman Rachel Konrad referred questions about the loan program’s timing and approval to the Energy Department.

AP Auto Writer Kimberly S. Johnson in Detroit contributed to this report.

[Coronita]

Speaking of Tesla…….Looks like our government decided to loan money to three automakers for building energy efficient vehicles…..

Ford, Tesla, and…..NISSAN……

BTW: It’s interesting to see who is CEO of Nissan. Nope, not a national from Japan…Same guy that runs Renault….Carlos Ghosn….

AP source: Government to lend Ford, Nissan, Tesla money to develop fuel-efficient vehicles

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Energy Department is expected to announce Tuesday it is lending money to the Ford Motor Co. and two other automakers from a $25 billion fund to develop fuel-efficient vehicles.

Energy Secretary Steven Chu was scheduled to announce the loan funding for Ford, Nissan Motor Co. and Tesla Motors Inc. in Dearborn, Mich., congressional officials said. They requested anonymity because an official announcement was pending.

Dozens of auto companies, suppliers and battery makers have sought a total of $38 billion from the loan program. Ford has asked to receive $5 billion in loans by 2011, but it was unclear how much money the automaker would receive. Nissan has applied for an undisclosed amount of assistance, while Tesla has sought $450 million.

The Energy Department declined to comment on the plans. Chu has not yet announced the first recipients of the loans, which have been closely watched by members of Congress from states with auto plants and suppliers.

Congress approved the loan program last year to help car companies and suppliers retool their facilities to develop green vehicles and components such as advanced batteries.

The loans were designed to help the auto manufacturers meet new fuel-efficiency standards of at least 35 miles per gallon by 2020, a 40 percent increase over current standards.

General Motors Corp. and Chrysler Group LLC have received billions of dollars in federal loans to restructure their companies through government-led bankruptcies, but Ford avoided seeking emergency aid by mortgaging all of its assets in 2006 to borrow about $25 billion.

General Motors has requested $10.3 billion in loans from the program, while Chrysler has asked for $6 billion in loans. Energy officials have said the loans could only go to “financially viable” companies, preventing GM and Chrysler to qualify for the first round of the loans.

Ford has sought a total of $11 billion from the loan program and has previously said it would invest $14 billion in advanced technologies over the next seven years. The loan application, which was submitted by the company late last year, would help Ford finance the investment.

Ford has said it intends to bring several battery-electric vehicles to market. The automaker has discussed plans to produce a battery-electric vehicle van in 2010 for commercial use, a small battery-electric sedan developed with Magna International by 2011 and a plug-in electric vehicle by 2012.

Ford spokesman Mark Truby declined to comment.

Nissan is developing an all-electric car with 100 miles of pure battery range for release in late 2010. The car will be made in Japan initially but company officials have said they eventually want to build the vehicle at Nissan’s plant in Smyrna, Tenn.

Nissan spokesman Fred Standish said the automaker hoped “to be approved for this loan as we provided a very strong business proposal. At this time, we have nothing further to say or to announce.”

Tesla is seeking $350 million in loans for an assembly plant to build its Model S four-door sedan, which is scheduled to go on sale in 2011. The San Carlos, Calif.-based company is also seeking $100 million to finance an advanced battery and powertrain manufacturing facility.

Tesla spokeswoman Rachel Konrad referred questions about the loan program’s timing and approval to the Energy Department.

AP Auto Writer Kimberly S. Johnson in Detroit contributed to this report.

[Coronita]

Speaking of Tesla…….Looks like our government decided to loan money to three automakers for building energy efficient vehicles…..

Ford, Tesla, and…..NISSAN……

BTW: It’s interesting to see who is CEO of Nissan. Nope, not a national from Japan…Same guy that runs Renault….Carlos Ghosn….

AP source: Government to lend Ford, Nissan, Tesla money to develop fuel-efficient vehicles

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Energy Department is expected to announce Tuesday it is lending money to the Ford Motor Co. and two other automakers from a $25 billion fund to develop fuel-efficient vehicles.

Energy Secretary Steven Chu was scheduled to announce the loan funding for Ford, Nissan Motor Co. and Tesla Motors Inc. in Dearborn, Mich., congressional officials said. They requested anonymity because an official announcement was pending.

Dozens of auto companies, suppliers and battery makers have sought a total of $38 billion from the loan program. Ford has asked to receive $5 billion in loans by 2011, but it was unclear how much money the automaker would receive. Nissan has applied for an undisclosed amount of assistance, while Tesla has sought $450 million.

The Energy Department declined to comment on the plans. Chu has not yet announced the first recipients of the loans, which have been closely watched by members of Congress from states with auto plants and suppliers.

Congress approved the loan program last year to help car companies and suppliers retool their facilities to develop green vehicles and components such as advanced batteries.

The loans were designed to help the auto manufacturers meet new fuel-efficiency standards of at least 35 miles per gallon by 2020, a 40 percent increase over current standards.

General Motors Corp. and Chrysler Group LLC have received billions of dollars in federal loans to restructure their companies through government-led bankruptcies, but Ford avoided seeking emergency aid by mortgaging all of its assets in 2006 to borrow about $25 billion.

General Motors has requested $10.3 billion in loans from the program, while Chrysler has asked for $6 billion in loans. Energy officials have said the loans could only go to “financially viable” companies, preventing GM and Chrysler to qualify for the first round of the loans.

Ford has sought a total of $11 billion from the loan program and has previously said it would invest $14 billion in advanced technologies over the next seven years. The loan application, which was submitted by the company late last year, would help Ford finance the investment.

Ford has said it intends to bring several battery-electric vehicles to market. The automaker has discussed plans to produce a battery-electric vehicle van in 2010 for commercial use, a small battery-electric sedan developed with Magna International by 2011 and a plug-in electric vehicle by 2012.

Ford spokesman Mark Truby declined to comment.

Nissan is developing an all-electric car with 100 miles of pure battery range for release in late 2010. The car will be made in Japan initially but company officials have said they eventually want to build the vehicle at Nissan’s plant in Smyrna, Tenn.

Nissan spokesman Fred Standish said the automaker hoped “to be approved for this loan as we provided a very strong business proposal. At this time, we have nothing further to say or to announce.”

Tesla is seeking $350 million in loans for an assembly plant to build its Model S four-door sedan, which is scheduled to go on sale in 2011. The San Carlos, Calif.-based company is also seeking $100 million to finance an advanced battery and powertrain manufacturing facility.

Tesla spokeswoman Rachel Konrad referred questions about the loan program’s timing and approval to the Energy Department.

AP Auto Writer Kimberly S. Johnson in Detroit contributed to this report.

[blahblahblah]

Ok let’s say pension isn’t a crazy idea. Can you please tell me why I don’t have it? I have a college degree but don’t work for Govt./GM. BTW, Govt/GM are prime examples how things should NOT be managed. I would love to get pension so how can I get it?

It’s NOT sustainable. Look at what happened to GM.

You don’t have a pension because you live in the United States. Autoworkers (and workers of all sorts) have excellent pensions, healthcare, and retirement benefits in other countries. This has not stopped BMW, Porsche, Mercedes, Ferrari, etc… from making high-quality cars and being very successful in the marketplace.

The workers there got and keep their pensions by organizing and not being afraid to shut the country down. In France unions routinely shut down trash service, public transport, and factories over threats to reduce their 5-weeks of vacation or retirement benefits. But of course those are socialist countries and we can never have that sort of thing here in the US.

So I guess to make a long story short, most of us Americans will probably never have a pension. Unless you’re a firefighter (they have a union to protect them). But I suspect that we’ll be “privatizing” fire protection at some point so they will probably lose their pensions as well.

[blahblahblah]

Ok let’s say pension isn’t a crazy idea. Can you please tell me why I don’t have it? I have a college degree but don’t work for Govt./GM. BTW, Govt/GM are prime examples how things should NOT be managed. I would love to get pension so how can I get it?

It’s NOT sustainable. Look at what happened to GM.

You don’t have a pension because you live in the United States. Autoworkers (and workers of all sorts) have excellent pensions, healthcare, and retirement benefits in other countries. This has not stopped BMW, Porsche, Mercedes, Ferrari, etc… from making high-quality cars and being very successful in the marketplace.

The workers there got and keep their pensions by organizing and not being afraid to shut the country down. In France unions routinely shut down trash service, public transport, and factories over threats to reduce their 5-weeks of vacation or retirement benefits. But of course those are socialist countries and we can never have that sort of thing here in the US.

So I guess to make a long story short, most of us Americans will probably never have a pension. Unless you’re a firefighter (they have a union to protect them). But I suspect that we’ll be “privatizing” fire protection at some point so they will probably lose their pensions as well.

[blahblahblah]

Ok let’s say pension isn’t a crazy idea. Can you please tell me why I don’t have it? I have a college degree but don’t work for Govt./GM. BTW, Govt/GM are prime examples how things should NOT be managed. I would love to get pension so how can I get it?

It’s NOT sustainable. Look at what happened to GM.

You don’t have a pension because you live in the United States. Autoworkers (and workers of all sorts) have excellent pensions, healthcare, and retirement benefits in other countries. This has not stopped BMW, Porsche, Mercedes, Ferrari, etc… from making high-quality cars and being very successful in the marketplace.

The workers there got and keep their pensions by organizing and not being afraid to shut the country down. In France unions routinely shut down trash service, public transport, and factories over threats to reduce their 5-weeks of vacation or retirement benefits. But of course those are socialist countries and we can never have that sort of thing here in the US.

So I guess to make a long story short, most of us Americans will probably never have a pension. Unless you’re a firefighter (they have a union to protect them). But I suspect that we’ll be “privatizing” fire protection at some point so they will probably lose their pensions as well.

[blahblahblah]

Ok let’s say pension isn’t a crazy idea. Can you please tell me why I don’t have it? I have a college degree but don’t work for Govt./GM. BTW, Govt/GM are prime examples how things should NOT be managed. I would love to get pension so how can I get it?

It’s NOT sustainable. Look at what happened to GM.

You don’t have a pension because you live in the United States. Autoworkers (and workers of all sorts) have excellent pensions, healthcare, and retirement benefits in other countries. This has not stopped BMW, Porsche, Mercedes, Ferrari, etc… from making high-quality cars and being very successful in the marketplace.

The workers there got and keep their pensions by organizing and not being afraid to shut the country down. In France unions routinely shut down trash service, public transport, and factories over threats to reduce their 5-weeks of vacation or retirement benefits. But of course those are socialist countries and we can never have that sort of thing here in the US.

So I guess to make a long story short, most of us Americans will probably never have a pension. Unless you’re a firefighter (they have a union to protect them). But I suspect that we’ll be “privatizing” fire protection at some point so they will probably lose their pensions as well.

[Author]

Posts