Who Killed the Electric Car?

[GyroGo]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13459799/site/newsweek/

[JohnM]

Just watched this. Informative and entertaining. Worth a glide to the video store.



http://www.sonyclassics.com/whokilledtheelectriccar/
From the website:

While consumers failed to embrace the electric vehicle in the era of cheap gas and big SUVs, auto producers and opinion makers like the press did little to convince them otherwise. Questionable advertising, limited availability, weak first-generation battery technology, and simple lack of awareness gave consumers little incentive to consider EVs as a practical alternative to gas cars.

Sounds familiar, huh?


Reviews at:
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/who_..._electric_car/

[Timezkware Tim]

When GM figured out that they wouldn't be able to sell gas pumps, oil filters, air cleaners, fuel injectors and a lot of other parts that wear out (a multi billion dollar business) the idea of an electric car didn't seem like such a hot idea.

Here in Santa Monica (one of the most progressively green cities this side of Portland) the city had a dozen electric vehicles parked at the pier. The east lot was transformed with electric car paddles at every slot. Even Santa Monica Place, the shopping mall, has "Electric Vehicles Only" slots on every garage level with free to use paddles. The slots are all still there. Empty.

Then Gm collected all the EV 1s and destroyed them.

The only one left is here at the Petersen Auto Museum, and it has been rendered undriveable by GM.

Go rent this movie. One day the world will look back and see what a crime against society this was.

One month after all the EV 1s were destroyed, GM distracted everyone by buying HUMMER and presenting a huge ad campaign. Unreal.

One good thing has happened in the alternative transportation world lately here in my little city: Taxi Taxi, our cab company has just recently converted all their cabs (Mercedes Diesels) to run on used vegetable oil collected from our restaurants. When the kids are screaming for french fries, be prepared for them to tell you that they are trying to help the environment, lol.

Tim

[stinggray]

Looks like Tesla Motors is picking up the ball.

http://teslamotors.com/index.php?js_enabled=1

[citivolus]

When GM figured out that they wouldn't be able to sell gas pumps, oil filters, air cleaners, fuel injectors and a lot of other parts that wear out (a multi billion dollar business) the idea of an electric car didn't seem like such a hot idea.

No they would sell other parts that wear out like batteries, inverters, charging "paddles", electric motor brushes, bearings, etc. and all at much higher markups.

It could equally be said that California decided that a command economy in the auto industry was a good idea and failed to recognize that the biggest command economy has done little else than bring itself to ashes. Perhaps GM and other automakers weren't enthusiastic about making electric vehicles, but then again I don't believe anyone jumps for joy when extortion is the only carrot.

In the first linked article, Mr. Eberhard, the founder of Tesla, calls it right when he says: "Pointing a gun to the head of the automakers was the wrong way to nurture the electric vehicles. On the other hand, he says, Tesla represents capitalism at its finest."

Go rent this movie. One day the world will look back and see what a crime against society this was.

If only people would see government mandates as the crimes against society that they are. I have not seen the movie, but from the trailer it seems clear they lay the entire blame at the feet of business without looking anywhere else. It strikes me as more of a long propaganda flick than a documentary.

One good thing has happened in the alternative transportation world lately here in my little city: Taxi Taxi, our cab company has just recently converted all their cabs (Mercedes Diesels) to run on used vegetable oil collected from our restaurants.

Did anyone check to see if they are breaking the law by doing so? They may wind up with fines from the EPA at $32.5K each as a commercial entity or $2750 personally. Then the state might step in because they didn't pay the road duty. It isn't just big business that does it wrong, big government makes equally large mistakes... but you can't punish government when they do.

[driley]

I am a very green minded individual but think that this movie may be distorting things a bit. I have not yet seen it though, but want to and expect to like it.

I do not believe that the EV-1 was ever sold. It was only available via short term leases. I thought that it was a vehicle designed to test the market and that GM lost money on the leases but did so as the only means to have significant real world testing and feedback from custumers. I thought they said this from the outset. These cars were simply too costly to be looked at favorably in a time when gas prices were not as high as they are today. I could be wrong on this but it is what I recall the situation to be when these vehicles came out.

Don't forget that even today, many consumer don't want to pay a premium for hybrid vehicles unless it will have a definite and positive effect on their bank account.

I believe that the eclectic cars of the 90’s were simply not able to deliver what was needed and consumers saw them merely as a curiosity.

Devin

[Timezkware Tim]

Originally Posted by citivolus

No they would sell other parts that wear out like batteries, inverters, charging "paddles", electric motor brushes, bearings, etc. and all at much higher markups.


It could equally be said that California decided that a command economy in the auto industry was a good idea and failed to recognize that the biggest command economy has done little else than bring itself to ashes. Perhaps GM and other automakers weren't enthusiastic about making electric vehicles, but then again I don't believe anyone jumps for joy when extortion is the only carrot.

In the first linked article, Mr. Eberhard, the founder of Tesla, calls it right when he says: "Pointing a gun to the head of the automakers was the wrong way to nurture the electric vehicles. On the other hand, he says, Tesla represents capitalism at its finest."


If only people would see government mandates as the crimes against society that they are. I have not seen the movie, but from the trailer it seems clear they lay the entire blame at the feet of business without looking anywhere else. It strikes me as more of a long propaganda flick than a documentary.


Did anyone check to see if they are breaking the law by doing so? They may wind up with fines from the EPA at $32.5K each as a commercial entity or $2750 personally. Then the state might step in because they didn't pay the road duty. It isn't just big business that does it wrong, big government makes equally large mistakes... but you can't punish government when they do.

Those are a lot of assumptions, citivolus. Please allow me to respectfully disagree with you on a couple of points:

If you look at the data about the sales of replaceable parts like oil filters compared to things like electric paddles which basically don't wear out, there's no comparison. Electric cars cost way less to maintain than gas engine cars, and that means a loss of parts sales for the auto makers. Initially, this sounds like it hurts all of us, but the big picture is the damage oil dependancy does to our economy is also damaging. Initially, the GM takes the hit, and that is my take on one of the reasons they destroyed all the EV1s, even though many people wanted them. It's only a popular opinion, but it's based on something that's pretty obvious.

"Pointing a gun"? That's one person's opinion. Another is that, that statement is an exaggeration.

The very famous smog problem in our state of 17 million vehicles is why there originally was a mandate for autos sold in CA to progressivly be 10% emission free over a period of several years. Laws created to control unhealthy products happen all the time (DDT, Asbestos, tobacco, etc). Considering the health risk here that far exceeds other places (the Santa Monica Mountain range alone traps the emissions from 10 million vechicles in LA alone), this was not an unreasonable law as far as many of us are concerned.

In the 1980s, if you drove on many of the freeways with your window open during rush hour, your eyes would turn red and tear from the severe pollution. Many people here have been hospitalized, contracted respiratory diseases, and died as a direct result of the crippling smog problem in CA. Some would say it was a state of emergency caused by cars with internal combustion engines, and that is not a stretch.

Before assuming that "Who killed..." is a propaganda film and not the documentary it claims to be, based on a trailer, you should actually see the movie. That claim was clearly unfair. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but it makes more sense to base opinions after actually checking things out. It's kind of like saying a Segway is unsafe without knowing anything about it, after just seeing one in a commercial.

I haven't checked the laws re: conversion of deisel engines to burn veg oil, but it was a featured piece on a national news magazine recently. I don't remember if it was 20/20 or 60 Minutes, but the coverage was quite extensive. It was also covered locally here in LA on KNBC, KCBS, KABC and KTLA. There is a treatment plant here that has been doing the oil conversion for some time now for other commercial vehicles, so with all that, I don't think anyone is breaking the law, or it would have been challenged by now.

Tim

[BillPaxton]

Eledctric cars died? Someone forgot to tell these guys..http://www.zapworld.com/ZAPWorld.aspx?id=388
cheaper than a hybrid, 240 mile range, and charge faster than a segway! This particular one goes 160mph and retails for USD $60k

[citivolus]

If you look at the data about the sales of replaceable parts like oil filters compared to things like electric paddles which basically don't wear out, there's no comparison. Electric cars cost way less to maintain than gas engine cars, and that means a loss of parts sales for the auto makers...It's only a popular opinion, but it's based on something that's pretty obvious.

I respect your point of view, but I make no more assumptions than anyone else, yourself included. As a hybrid owner for the past 6.5 years, I know the maintenance costs. The electric portion has cost double what the gas portion has and I didn't have to pay full price for the parts as some were still under warranty. You are ignoring the price difference of parts that get replaced. A power inverter can easily cost $1000, the battery charging circuit is another easy $1K. You may be right that these parts don't "wear out" but they do "die." You don't have to replace many of those components to make up for a lifetime of $4 filters. I admit that replacing these parts is more like changing large parts of the engine, but engines have been studied and evolved for a far longer period of time resulting in much greater reliability and efficiency. I expect that the same will be true for the equivalent electric components in several years but it just isn't there yet.

In the end, I know the TCO will be higher because I have a hybrid and I knew that going in. Add to that the fact that GM et al. don't make many of those parts and it just doesn't add up. Many consumable parts, like oil filters, are made by companies like Comarch Industrial in Jiangsu China and have been for many years.

The cars could also have been destroyed to prevent future liability. Popular opinion, while popular and often "obvious," isn't always correct.

The very famous smog problem in our state of 17 million vehicles is why there originally was a mandate for autos sold in CA to progressivly be 10% emission free over a period of several years...

Don't forget that several other states were considering adopting similar rules and that the batteries of electric vehicles of that era were not well suited to northern climates and the manufacturer has a heck of a PR problem. Let's put the shoe on the other foot. CA could just as easily refuse to allow people to register a car that guzzles gas, belches smoke or has high emissions. They could, but they would all lose the next election and they wouldn't get to ride in their own limo.

Before assuming that "Who killed..." is a propaganda film and not the documentary it claims to be, based on a trailer, you should actually see the movie. That claim was clearly unfair. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but it makes more sense to base opinions after actually checking things out. It's kind of like saying a Segway is unsafe without knowing anything about it, after just seeing one in a commercial.

I'm willing to give it the benefit of the doubt but if the movie is fair, the trailer certainly doesn't show it. Given a trailer is basically a commercial it would be more like figuring a Segway was unsafe after seeing a commercial that only shows it having accidents. If I get enough feedback that says the movie isn't a prop. piece, I might spend my money but not as it stands now.

... I don't think anyone is breaking the law, or it would have been challenged by now.

Not necessarily, a lot of people fly "under the radar" in part because those responsible for enforcement don't want to own the draconian "puppy killer" image and it is also nearly impossible to enforce because it is a federal violation that happens during use. The result is you get a lot of looking the other way and that's just as well. Also note that biodiesel has EPA approval but may still breaks laws about road taxes. There are reasons why many kerosene pumps, in my area anyway, carry stickers stating that it is illegal for use in road going vehicles.

[Timezkware Tim]

Originally Posted by citivolus

I respect your point of view, but I make no more assumptions than anyone else, yourself included. As a hybrid owner for the past 6.5 years, I know the maintenance costs. The electric portion has cost double what the gas portion has and I didn't have to pay full price for the parts as some were still under warranty. You are ignoring the price difference of parts that get replaced. A power inverter can easily cost $1000, the battery charging circuit is another easy $1K. You may be right that these parts don't "wear out" but they do "die." You don't have to replace many of those components to make up for a lifetime of $4 filters. I admit that replacing these parts is more like changing large parts of the engine, but engines have been studied and evolved for a far longer period of time resulting in much greater reliability and efficiency. I expect that the same will be true for the equivalent electric components in several years but it just isn't there yet.

In the end, I know the TCO will be higher because I have a hybrid and I knew that going in. Add to that the fact that GM et al. don't make many of those parts and it just doesn't add up. Many consumable parts, like oil filters, are made by companies like Comarch Industrial in Jiangsu China and have been for many years.

The cars could also have been destroyed to prevent future liability. Popular opinion, while popular and often "obvious," isn't always correct.


Don't forget that several other states were considering adopting similar rules and that the batteries of electric vehicles of that era were not well suited to northern climates and the manufacturer has a heck of a PR problem. Let's put the shoe on the other foot. CA could just as easily refuse to allow people to register a car that guzzles gas, belches smoke or has high emissions. They could, but they would all lose the next election and they wouldn't get to ride in their own limo.

I'm willing to give it the benefit of the doubt but if the movie is fair, the trailer certainly doesn't show it. Given a trailer is basically a commercial it would be more like figuring a Segway was unsafe after seeing a commercial that only shows it having accidents. If I get enough feedback that says the movie isn't a prop. piece, I might spend my money but not as it stands now.


Not necessarily, a lot of people fly "under the radar" in part because those responsible for enforcement don't want to own the draconian "puppy killer" image and it is also nearly impossible to enforce because it is a federal violation that happens during use. The result is you get a lot of looking the other way and that's just as well. Also note that biodiesel has EPA approval but may still breaks laws about road taxes. There are reasons why many kerosene pumps, in my area anyway, carry stickers stating that it is illegal for use in road going vehicles.

Very good points, and well stated.

I still don't buy the idea that Gm destroyed the EV1s for liability issues. At the time this was done, I think it was all about future profits.

The road tax is an interesting angle. If they start taxing canola oil, french fries could get very expensive, lolol.

Tim