Auto blog

Fiat Chrysler, surprise, had to buy a lot of emissions credits

The world of carbon emissions uses some unusual units of measure. Take, for example, 8.2 million megagrams. Who needs to know how much that is? Someone at Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, that's who. FCA had to buy that many greenhouse-gas emissions credits from greener automakers, Reuters says, citing a report from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Because its vehicles' collective fuel economy continues to trail the industry average, FCA purchased the emissions credits at of the end of 2014 in order to meet US emissions regulations. About two-thirds of those credits were acquired from Toyota, while the rest were purchased from Tesla and Honda. Daimler and Ferrari, not surprisingly, were among the other automobile companies that had to acquire emissions credits in order to meet US greenhouse gas regulations. Because the price for these credits is set privately by the companies, the EPA didn't disclose how much FCA had to pay to stay on the green side. The reason for the millions FCA likely spent is because the company is making a slow progress building and selling cleaner cars. The company did increase average fuel efficiency by about one mile per gallon to almost 22 mpg for the 2015 model year, but it wasn't enough. Such a performance likely only put the automaker in a last-place tie with General Motors. The emissions credits purchased from Tesla are notable because that California-based maker of electric vehicles has long generated substantial revenue by selling various credits to its less-electrified counterparts. In 2013, Tesla sold more of California's ZEV credits than any other automaker, but Nissan took that title in 2014. While these are not the same as the EPA's GHG credits, they do offer another way to track which automakers are meeting the targets and which need help. Related Video: News Source: ReutersImage Credit: Flickr/Ian YVR Government/Legal Green Chrysler Fiat Fuel Efficiency mpg

Fiat-Chrysler alliance in jeopardy due to Pentastar's IPO filing?

The four-year relationship between Fiat and Chrysler has thus far been beneficial for both automakers, but it has also proven to be a complicated battle between Sergio Marchionne and the United Auto Workers - the latter controlling the remaining 41.5 percent of Chrysler. With the recent filing for a US IPO, it looks like Marchionne and the UAW appear to be playing a billion-dollar game of chicken, with both sides far apart on how much the union's shares are worth. If it comes down to Chrysler's remaining stake being publicly traded, it could act to drive a wedge between the two companies.
According to Bloomberg, Fiat's chairman John Elkann says "if the IPO will take place, there will be two companies, and that's different than having a single one." Now, we're not great at math, but this sounds like the complete opposite of the full merger that Marchionne has been pushing for since taking the helm at Chrysler. Bloomberg notes that the UAW's shares should be worth around $5.6 billion, but Fiat could end up paying as little as $4.9 billion for Fiat to gain full control of Chrysler. A story by The Detroit News points out that Marchionne's "alleged low-balling" is just the latest hurdle the Auburn Hills-based automaker must overcome as its ownership is being fought over for the fourth time in 15 years.

The problem with how automakers confront hacking threats

More than anyone, Chris Valasek and Charlie Miller are responsible for alerting Americans to the hacking perils awaiting them in their modern-day cars. In 2013, the pair of cyber-security researchers followed in the footsteps of academics at the University of Cal-San Diego and University of Washington, demonstrating it was possible to hack and control cars. Last summer, their research established which vehicles contained inherent security weaknesses. In recent weeks, their latest findings have underscored the far-reaching danger of automotive security breaches. From the comfort of his Pittsburgh home, Valasek exploited a flaw in the cellular connection of a Jeep Cherokee and commandeered control as Miller drove along a St. Louis highway. Remote access. No prior tampering with the vehicle. An industry's nightmare. As a result of their work, FCA US recalled 1.4 million cars, improving safety for millions of motorists. For now, Valasek and Miller are at the forefront of their profession. In a few months, they could be out of jobs. Rather than embrace the skills of software and security experts in confronting the unforeseen downside of connectivity in cars, automakers have been doing their best to stifle independent cyber-security research. Lost in the analysis of the Jeep Cherokee vulnerabilities is the possibility this could be the last study of its kind. In September or October, the U.S. Copyright Office will issue a key ruling that could prevent third-party researchers like Valasek and Miller from accessing the components they need to conduct experiments on vehicles. Researchers have asked for an exemption in the Digital Millennial Copyright Act that would preserve their right to analyze cars, but automakers have opposed that exemption, claiming the software that runs almost every conceivable vehicle function is proprietary. Further, their attorneys have argued the complexity of the software has evolved to a point where safety and security risks arise when third parties start monkeying with the code. Their message on cyber security is, as it has been for years, that they know their products better than anyone else and that it's dangerous for others to meddle with them. But in precise terms, the Jeep Cherokee problems show this is not the case. Valasek and Miller discovered the problem, a security hole in the Sprint cellular connection to the UConnect infotainment system, not industry insiders.