1996 Toyota Corolla Base Sedan 4-door 1.6l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

These are the 'Greenest' and 'Meanest' cars in 2015

As has become tradition, the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) has come up with a ranking of what it refers to as the "greenest" cars of 2015, and, by way of contrast, a list of the so-called "meanest" cars, so those who value eco-friendliness over all else can choose which vehicles they should or should not consider buying. As you may expect, electric cars make up the majority of the greenest cars on the list, but, perhaps surprisingly to many, the Tesla Model S didn't make the cut. It's worth noting, too, that where the electricity an owner uses to charge their electric vehicle has a big impact on its overall environmental impact. "A car that is charged using electricity generated from natural gas or renewables is going to have significantly less impact on the environment than one charged on a coal-heavy grid," says ACEEE lead vehicle analyst Shruti Vaidyanathan. The ACEEE's list for 2015 looks very different than it did in 2014. It's an interesting collection, though – and we're sure this goes without saying, really – we'd recommend doing a bit more research into each vehicle and how it might fit into your daily life before making any purchase decisions. Click here to see the ACEEE's list of the Greenest and Meanest vehicles sold in the United States in 2015. Green Bugatti Chevrolet Fiat GM GMC Mercedes-Benz Nissan RAM smart Toyota greenest greenest cars

Subaru to stop building Camry for Toyota in the US

It was back in 2007 that Subaru of Indiana Automotive, under contract from Subaru minority shareholder Toyota, built the first Toyota Camry at its plant in Lafayette, Indiana. Rumblings of the end of that contract work have been around for a while, as Subaru talked of expanding capacity to build more units and add a line for the Impreza, and Toyota talked of moving Camry production to its Georgetown, KY plant. The news was official internally last November when SIA Executive Vice President Tom Easterday told the Louisville Courier-Journal that Camry production would end. Now, Automotive News reports that both automakers have admitted publicly that the end will come in 2016.
SIA currently has a 170,000-unit capacity devoted to the home-brand Legacy and Outback models, while a $400-million expansion increases that to 300,000 units to prepare the facility for Impreza production in two years. Freeing up the 100,000 units of production devoted to the Camry means a 400,000-unit capability, which is far more than Subaru needs at the moment, but the Toyota exit will allow it to expand any way it sees fit. Subaru has said it will absorb the workers on the Camry line and no jobs will be lost, the mayor of Lafayette saying the development could change the timetable for the expansion.

Ford fights back against patent trolls

Some people are just awful. Some organizations are just as awful. And when those people join those organizations, we get stories like this one, where Ford has spent the past several years combatting so-called patent trolls. According to Automotive News, these malicious organizations have filed over a dozen lawsuits against the company since 2012. They work by purchasing patents, only to later accuse companies of misusing intellectual property, despite the fact that the so-called patent assertion companies never actually, you know, do anything with said intellectual property. AN reports that both Hyundai and Toyota have been victimized by these companies, with the former forced to pay $11.5 million to a company called Clear With Computers. Toyota, meanwhile, settled with Paice LLC, over its hybrid tech. The world's largest automaker agreed to pay $5 million, on top of $98 for every hybrid it sold (if the terms of the deal included each of the roughly 1.5 million hybrids Toyota sold since 2000, the company would have owed $147 million). Including the previous couple of examples, AN reports 107 suits were filed against automakers last year alone. But Ford is taking action to prevent further troubles... kind of. The company has signed on with a firm called RPX, in what sounds strangely like a protection racket. Automakers like Ford pay RPX around $1.5 million each year for access to its catalog of patents, which it spent nearly $1 billion building. "We take the protection and licensing of patented innovations very seriously," Ford told AN via email. "And as many smart businesses are doing, we are taking proactive steps to protect against those seeking patent infringement litigation." What are your thoughts on this? Should this patent business be better managed? Is it reasonable that companies purchase patents only to file suit against the companies that build actual products? Have your say in Comments.