Unlike its GM and Chrysler counterparts, Ford seems to be embracing the future, and if we recall, never went hand in hat to Washington, D.C, crying for a bailout.

Ford has partnered with Magna International, using Magna’s electric car design, while the battery will be supplied by South Korea’s LG Chem.  The 2011 Focus Electric will have a range of 100 miles.

We expect to see more electric cars based on the Magna model since Ford did not secure sole rights to Magna’s technology.  Magna which has its own electric vehicle known as the “Mila Eva” with a range of 100 miles and charge time of 2.5 hours has also been in talks with BMW since last year.

This is not only a step in the right direction as it will reduce CO2 emissions, but it will also create new jobs and spur rapid development of the solar industry in the United states.

The Arizona plant will deliver clean power to 70,000 homes, reduce CO2 emission by 400,000 tons and create about 1500 jobs during its construction phase.

We may not all remember but President Jimmy Carter was a visionary in advocating alternative energy by bringing solar panel to the white house back in 1979.  President Reagan did the [now] unthinkable and removed them.

While President Obama clearly and ludly supports the green movement, we have yet to hear of his energy savings plan for the white house.  Sungevity which leases home solar systems is offering to install a solar system at the White House for no more than zero cent.

In pushing the envelope even further, Sungevity is also offering to lease the entire system to the government of the people for the low price of $537.  Assuming my math is correct and using the estimated population of 307,006,550 U.S. residents, that’s $6,444 annually or about $.000021 per U.S. resident per year.

Ronald Reagan may have lacked judgment in ordering the solar panels removed, but Obama can start leading by example in the fight against global warming.

Sungevity has already taken the first step with its offer and writing to the President and First Lady [see letter here] and started the Globama initiative.

Let’s bring solar energy back to the White House.  Let’s lend our support by signing the petition.

After a lifetime of trashing the planet or taking of it, one can now satisfy his desire to remain green in the afterlife thanks to alkaline hydrolysis also referred to as resomation.

Alkaline hydrolysis not only reduces carbon dioxide emissions by about 90%, it also uses less energy than conventional cremation. The water-based process can rapidly reduce the human body to ashes.

Although safer to the environment – no mercury is spewed into the atmosphere – this process does not come without its share of controversy. For example, the Catholic Church strongly opposes the process, stating this is not a respectful way to dispose of corpses. However, Christiannity, Judaism and Islam in the past have all been strongly opposed to cremation though it has now become accepted in many of these circles.

However, with a third of Americans and half of the Canadian population now opting for cremation, and more green-conscious citizens, resomation is poised to enjoy some noticeable success.

But let’s not start trashing the planet yet just because we can be green in the afterlife.

This cool watch uses the company’s “Tough Solar Technology” hoping to reduce the number of batteries thrown out each year, thus lowering the level of toxic contaminants to the environment.

The watch features a compass, an altimeter, a barometer, thermometer, stopwatch and world time for a number of cities; 30 to be exact.

Currently available in green shade only, anyone wearing it on his wrist will not only be recognized as a friend of the earth, but will also be making a bold statement.

Hopefully, the solar cell technology employed here will soon be transplanted in other popular devices such as cell phones.

But 2010 is here and GreenCoolHip wants you to go out and see two of the best green movies of 2009 if you have not already done so.

If I were asked to choose one movie last year that would be captivating and open our eyes to how we treat our planet and its living organism, it would be impossible. However, I could manage to round up two.

Food Inc., the documentary film by Robert Kenner, takes a hard look at how farm animals are raised in the United States and reveals the shocking truth about how we grow and harvest our crops. In our culture of more, bigger, faster and not necessarily better, we have traded quality and long term health concerns and let corporations put profits ahead of our safety and our environment. I bring up Food Inc. as a must-see movie because we all need to ask ourselves the following question. How can we take care of our planet if we don’t take care of ourselves?

Which brings us to our second choice, Avatar. After his 1997 blockbuster hit, Titanic featuring Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet, James Cameron waited 12 years before releasing his next movie, which almost instantly became a hit grossing over 1 billion dollars in a short period of time much like Titanic.

In Avatar, Cameron depicts a future where earth, after being trashed and having all its natural resources exhausted by its abusive inhabitants cannot longer sustain life. So we do what we do best and set out to exploit another people on another planet, except that we did not expect them to resist and fight back.

I will not delve too much into the movie as it’s excellent and I don’t want to spoil it for those of you who have yet to see it.

There will certainly be some great movies in 2010 urging us to think about the environmental impact of our actions. But for now, go out and see Avatar in theaters, or if you would rather stay home, grab a copy of Food Inc.

Enjoy!

With production set to debut in 2012, new factory and supplier jobs are expected to be created which will be a boost to this sagging economy.
The Department of Energy recently awarded a $528 million dollars low interest loan to the innovative new company.

Now, a Burger King in Hillside NJ is applying the same concept to produce electricity as vehicles go through its drive-thru.

With America being so dependent on imported fuel to power its industries, finding new creative ways to generate electrical power has become a necessity.

WATCH the video below.

According to Dr. Gerardine Botte and her team at the University of Ohio, extracting hydrogen from urine is easier than getting it from water, thus making a hydrogen vehicle powered by Mr. Pee very likely.
Our scientist tells us that a molecule of urea comprises four hydrogen and two nitrogen atoms and requires 33 times less electricity to be released than if it were extracted from water. This should make it hopefully easier and cheaper to power future vehicles.

Aqua Power Systems, a Japanese company, is already offering batteries that can be powered by urine, among other liquids, for sale.

Although this groundbreaking technology is still in its early stage, there’s hope my urine may some day become an additional source of income.

Happy Drinking!!

For simplicity, we’ll use 50 miles as the magic number that the average vehicle owner commutes daily in the United States and assume that a gallon of gasoline costs on average $3. The Volt has an effective range of 40 miles on a full electric charge, after which the gasoline engine kicks in. GM claims the gasoline engine generates electricity that is used to recharge the battery, but does not provide how much of the gasoline is used to drive the Volt. Getting to that number should be a matter of running the car in a test lab and compiling some data. GM has this capability and either has not done so or at least is keeping this number from the public. I tend to believe the latter.

So, let’s assume that the vehicle gets 50 miles a gallon and omit the cost of recharging the battery using your home standard 110 volt outlet at night. Ten (10) miles a day is driven on gasoline power. In a five-day workweek, the average commuter drives 50 miles on gasoline which consumes one (1) gallon of gasoline. Now, remember we also drive 40 miles a day on electricity, which is the volt range on a single full electric charge, according to GM. Thus we get 200 miles of electric driving over 5 days. Finally, add the 200 miles and the 50 miles, we can easily conclude the Volt goes 250 miles on a gallon of gas. Substract 20 miles for idle time, that would use either electricity or gasoline, and we have 230 miles.

Or we can arrive at the conclusion that it costs 40 cents to recharge the Volt’s battery when using your home power outlet and the cost of gallon of gasoline averages $2.30. Driving 40 miles or less a day, the cost of a gallon of gasoline would let us drive our Chevy Volt for 230 miles.

Now that GM has started this trend, we can expect every auto manufacturer to come up with such bogus number. Nissan is already claiming 367 miles per gallon with the Leaf, which is by the way a true zero emission car (no gas tank) but not much of a looker in my opinion.

So, if you fill up your tank and embark on a cross-country trip, will you get 230 miles a gallon and be able to drive from New York to Los Angeles on a full tank of gas, (assuming a 15-gallong tank)? ABSOLUTELY NOT.

Is the Volt the right step for GM? DEFINITELY.

Although, not a zero-emission vehicle, it surely looks Green, Cool & Hip.