Did former Toyota executive James Press rat out his old company?

[FreakinDJ]

Did former Toyota executive James Press rat out his old company?
Posted by: David Kiley on April 02

Or was he just pointing out how smart the Japanese were to back gas-electric hybrid technology, which has been a boon to the company’s fortunes and image, especially in the U.S.

Chrysler LLC vice chairman James Press said Wednesday that he was not intending to speak negatively about Toyota, his former employer, when he told BusinessWeek that the Japanese automaker benefited from government investment in its gas-electric hybrid technology.

Press was responding to a statement made by Toyota, where the Chrysler executive worked for 37 years and served as a board member before leaving last year, denying Press’s assertion made in an interview with BusinessWeek on March 20 that the Japanese government had subsidized “100% of the research and development costs” of the automaker’s gas-electric hybrid system that was launched in the 1997 Prius and now powers all of Toyota’s hybrid vehicles.

http://www.businessweek.com/autos/autobeat/archives/2008/04/chryslers_jim_p.html

[madrchsod]

1. that`s really no surprise but....

it`s nice to actually get confirmation on this practice of the japanese government`s role in r&d.

our trade agreements with the asian countries is the reason why our manufacturing base is in shambles.

[DainBramaged]

2. Old news, no one believed me when I first posted this

In fact the thread died a quick death.

[fascisthunter]

3. "Japanese government had subsidized “100% of the research and development costs”

the Big three are in trouble due to business decisions, and not because of the UAW and how much their employees cost the company.

Restructuring should consist of all upper management being replaced by more forward thinking intelligent individuals and not a bunch of greedy frat boys and girls who are i the back pocket of Big oil.

[DainBramaged]

4. Notice how little attention this thread is getting?

[FreakinDJ]

6. When they see a 6 - 8% increase in Unemployment they'll pay attention

Anyone here beleive the Bush administrations estimates of 1.5% increase in unemployment if the Big 3 close their doors ?

[prairierose]

5. I wonder if many really understand the implications...

of this story. It is much easier to believe that the unions and those retirees are the biggest villains in the current state of the US auto industry.

Because after all, science and research really aren't important. Isn't that what the pubs have been saying with their war on science for most of the last 30 years and especially the last eight?

I have to say that it has been refreshing to watch Obama appointing actual scientists to science posts. Maybe attitudes will begin to change and I think that is the most important thing that needs to happen. People must begin to recognize the need for science and clear thinking rather than relying on the lies and fuzzy thinking of the past.

[lectrobyte]

7. Even if this story is true, I don't see what implications you are getting

at... The U.S. Government has funded lots of things for vehicle development, and other subsidies for the car makers. Too bad our lobbyists killed things like PNGV, and instead focussed on getting tax breaks for folks to buy SUVs over 6000 lbs.

[ContinentalOp]

8. So, when the Japanese govt funds their auto companies, we all benefit, but when the US govt...

funds automotive R&D, we get nothing in return for our tax money? Do the Big 3 executives really want to call attention to this fact?

"Is Press forgetting that the U.S.-government, under the Clinton Administration’s Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles, spent more than a billion dollars to produce three 80-mpg hybrid prototypes, including the Chrysler ESX? The vehicles were never put into production. What about the continued work and taxpayer support of the U.S. Advanced Battery Consortium?"

http://www.hybridcars.com/news/jim-press-toyota-government-funding-prius.html


"1990: California establishes the Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) Mandate; requires 2% of vehicles to be ZEVs by 1998, 10% ZEVs by 2003. GM shows their production EV initially named, Impact; later it was re-named the EV-1. (US government spent $194 million on all energy efficient research. Much less than the $1 billion for a single day of Desert Storm, or the $1 billion per week of 2003 Iraq conflict.)"

http://www.eaaev.org/History/index.html

[ContinentalOp]

9. Some other funding...

Hydrogen Fuel Initiative
• $1.2B over five years
• $309M in FY 08 completed commitment

Energy Policy Act of 2005
• Authorizes $4B for hydrogen/fuel cell R&D, demonstrations
(over 2006-2010)

Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
Highlights of the Authorizations
• Vehicle Technologies ($10B)
• Biofuels R&D ($2.3B)
• Energy Storage (Transportation/Electric power) ($2.9B)

http://www.wacleantech.org/TechVision21_Nov13.pdf