If you are getting tired of reading all the news on the government's "cash for clunkers" program, don't worry... the Obama administration announced this afternoon that the popular incentive program will come to an end this Monday.

There has been a lot of controversy over the program as of late, but one thing is for sure, car buyers have definitely been taking advantage of the program since it launched last month.

The Energy Department is set to lend money to Ford (NYSE: F), Tesla, and Nissan (NASDAQ: NSANY), according to the Associated Press. The report cites anonymous sources, with the official announcement set for today in Dearborn, Michigan.

Reportedly, Ford has asked to receive $5 billion in loans by 2011, although the sources were not certain on how much money the automaker would receive. Nissan's requested amount was undisclosed and Tesla has reportedly asked for $450 million. The loan program the automakers are trying to tap into was approved by Congress last year in order to help car companies and suppliers develop green vehicles and components (such as the advanced battery) and help automakers meet the new fuel-efficiency standards of 35 miles per gallon by 2020.

There are two ways one can look at the current state of the U.S. auto industry: 1) things are pretty bad or 2) the auto sector has no where to go but up.

With cash dwindling, General Motors' and Ford's shares appear to be making a run at inclusion in the penny stock category.

Deutsche Bank (NYSE: DB) Monday did not offer research to reverse that prediction: in a research note it downgraded GM to Sell from Hold, with a target of $0 (that's correct: zero dollars), commenting that even if the company avoids a bankruptcy, it will face a bankruptcy-like future, marketwatch.com reported Monday.

A U.S. Government rescue of GM, Ford and Chrysler is likely in the early weeks of the Obama Administration, if it isn't passed by the current Congress before then, "probably on the order of $25-30 billion in loans and investments," so says economist David H. Wang, with even more assistance beyond that, if the formerly 'Big Three' automakers agree to certain performance terms. General Motors Corporation (NYSE: GM) shares plunged 96 cents to $3.40, while Ford Motor Company (NYSE: F) shares fell 8 cents to $1.94 in Monday afternoon trading.

Obama to seek next-gen vehicle

Further, Wang said President-elect Obama will likely try to solve a portion of the U.S.'s energy problem and the auto sector's woes in one program.

General Motors Corp. (NYSE: GM) has said its new global small car that will compete with Japanese automakers like Honda Motor Ltd. (NYSE: HMC) and Toyota Motor Co. (NYSE: TM) will be able to sell for more than the competition, as it will have better gas mileage than small cars do now. The new Chevrolet Cruze was announced Monday as GM prepared to celebrate its 100th anniversary, and at a precarious time for the storied automaker.

The new Cruze, set to be unveiled for sale in the summer of 2010, will be a much larger car than what it replaces -- the Chevy Cobalt -- but will have up to 40 miles per gallon, beating almost all the fuel efficiency figures of cars much smaller like the Honda Civic and Toyota Corolla. Therefore, GM believes it will be able to charge more for the Cruze. It's a risky but calculated move made necessary as the profit margins from SUVs and large trucks are evaporating as consumers move away from those products and into smaller vehicles. At some point, automakers will have to up the prices on smaller and mid-size vehicles to ensure they remain profitable. That is, unless gas prices fall back down and the more profitable, gas-guzzling SUVs fall back into style.

It's no secret that GM needs to make more money per vehicle than its Japanese competition, and GM general manager Ep Peper said as much yesterday. Peper pointed out that more features in newer cars will justify higher prices, but consumers won't really care or be swayed by the argument. When prices rise, everyone gripes. When they fall, shopping sprees happen. Note to GM: consumers are very fickle -- get used to it.

Despite the onset of the latest high energy price era, it goes without saying that the car will remain the main mode of transportation in the United States as the 21st century progresses.

First mass-produced on a national scale by Henry Ford, subsidized by the construction and expansion of the public interstate highway system after World War II, and immortalized by such films as George Lucas's American Graffiti (1973), the car and car culture is intrinsic to modern American life.

The car fuel alternatives

Cheap oil is not intrinsic, however, and that's a major reason why the nation is exploring car / vehicle fuel alternatives. Many options exist, each with strengths / weaknesses, and currently there's no clear winner.

Hence, in a very real sense, your say in the matter will play an important role in determining what fuel most Americans will use for car transportation in the decades ahead.

There's an upside and a downside regarding major auto companies and the quest to develop vehicles with increased fuel-efficiency.

The upside: Auto makers are positioning themselves to carve out niches in fuel-efficient technology and design, The Wall Street Journal reported Monday (subscription required).

The downside: Auto makers appear to be exhibiting a 'herd mentality' on the current propulsion technology -- hybrid engine cars with both a modest electric power source and a mainstay internal combustion engine.

An electric hybrid focus

Following up on its successful electric-gasoline Prius hybrid, Toyota (NYSE: TM) announced it will make hybrid engine systems available on all models by 2020, The Journal reported. Meanwhile, Honda said it would import new hybrid technology to the U.S. to compete with Toyota and Ford (NYSE: F) plans to double its hybrid lineup next year, and Chevrolet's (NYSE: GM) Volt hybrid that will go on sale in 2010.

Economist David H. Wang said investors and consumers should not be overly optimistic or pessimistic regarding the sector's concentration on electric-fuel hybrids.

Toyota Motor Corp. (NYSE: TM) says that a hybrid version of every one of its vehicles will be available by 2020.

According to The Wall Street Journal, "The announcement came as all of the auto makers at an industry conference this week in northern Michigan maneuvered to carve out their own niches in fuel-efficient design."

But, 12 years from now, hybrids may be useless.

Nuclear energy may drive 100% of the U.S. needs for electric power.

The massive oil reserves found off Brazil and in the Arctic may have driven up oil supplies so that gas is back to $1.25.

Wind power may have undercut the need for oil-heat in many American homes.

Solar power will probably have replaced other fuels for furnishing most homes and small businesses with energy.

The hybrid car may not be such a great idea.

Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 247wallst.com.

With gasoline prices sitting at record highs, and the auto industry struggling to deal with the situation, there is a new shift in the design of cars. Historically, when you bought a smaller engine car, that engine came in a vehicle that had far less in the way of comfort and amenities... well, that is changing.

Think back a few years. You went to your local auto lot to pick up a new car, and your first choice was what size engine you wanted, the heavy duty 8-cylinder, 6, or 4-cylinder car? Suppose you decided the 8-cylinder was for you, can you picture the car that supported this engine? Typically these cars had all the bells and whistles you could imagine: the sunroof, the leather seating, fancy radios, power windows, etc. Basically, the bigger the engine, the better the "packaging" that it came along with.

Now, picture the 4-cylinder car from the past. Not much to picture here. Power windows? Doubtful. Yes, the 4-cylinder cars of the past were typically your bare bones vehicle with few fewer amenities than those coming with the 8-cylinder alternatives. If you were lucky, you would at least get some power steering in the car, but that was not always the case either.

Gasoline prices continue to increase along with crude prices, and the latter seem to find a new record every single day. Wasn't it just a few months ago that the media was going crazy about oil reaching the $100 per barrel mark? It hit $122 this week. Now, that's not a year later; that's less than half a year later. It's not surprising then that automakers with an inflexible SUV-selling strategy are getting pummeled, while automakers with a decent offering of gas-efficient vehicles are seeing product mix changes in retail sales.

Ford Motor Co. (NYSE: F), which showed a surprising profit in its most recent quarter, said that it plans to really up the presence of gas-efficient six-speed transmissions by the end of 2009, and wants to have these transmissions in 98% of its North American vehicles by 2012. If Ford follows through with this commitment, it'll be a game-changer for the industry. And, it will force General Motors Corp. (NYSE: GM) to do the same thing. Ford stated that the newer 6-speed automatics will get 4% to 6% better gas mileage than the standard 4-speed and 5-speed automatic transmissions.

GM is not sitting idly by at the same time, though. It debuted a 6-speed automatic transmission in the popular 2008 Chevy Malibu, which it is pitting as a strong competitor to market leaders Honda Motor (NYSE: HMC) Accord and Toyota Motor Corp. (NYSE: TM) Camry. Will the new trend in the consumer vehicle market be smaller 4-cylinder engines with advanced, fuel-efficient 6-speed automatic transmissions? You can count on it until oil prices fall to $50 a barrel. And, that'll be when pigs fly.

With the passage of a new energy bill that requires a drastic increase in the average fuel efficiency of automobiles sold in the U.S., automakers are feeling a bit steamed right now. Mandating significant increases in gas efficiency for vehicles even within a little more than a decade is an enormous task for automakers. New designs, manufacturing processes and probably a hundred more things become necessary.

At the same time, the financial pressure the big three automakers are under make large changes like this hard to swallow. But this doesn't only affect domestic manufacturers ---- all automakers selling vehicles in the U.S. have to conform. The trick is that other automakers like Honda and Toyota started reacting to the market's need for more fuel-efficient cars (and the marketing of them) long before domestic automakers did. Now, those automakers are sitting in a much prettier setting than General Motors (NYSE:GM) or the Ford Motor Co.(NYSE:F). It's estimated that the fuel economy changes mandated for the future will cost GM $40 billion alone. Yikes.

The just-passed energy bill required a fuel economy increase of about 40% (to 35 miles per gallon) by 2020 -- just over 12-and-a-half years from now. Is that even technically possible? Most global automakers, who are united on this front (with the curious absence of Nissan), say that this expectation is way out of whack. The bill was passed late last night in the U.S. Senate by a vote of 65-27, and a vote by the U.S. House is probably coming next week. President Bush also added his opinion, stating that Congress must be "realistic" about this kind of legislation, and that he opposes much of it (while still supporting alternative methods like ethanol use).

General Motors Corp. (NYSE: GM), Ford Motor Co. (NYSE: F), DaimlerChrysler AG (NYSE: DCX) and the United Auto Workers just can't stop complaining about new, tougher fuel-efficiency standards that the U.S. Congress likely will pass.

The companies and union are taking their case to Capital Hill today at a private luncheon with leaders of the U.S. Senate to convince them to reconsider an overhaul of Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency (CAFE) standards, according to the Associated Press.

Let's hope that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reed has the guts to tell them to pound sand. The public is fed up with high gas prices and the growing problem caused by global warming. Even GM Chief Executive Rick Wagoner has acknowleged this reality, though the AP quotes him cryptically saying "let's make sure that we also fix the real problems while we're doing that."