Who Killed the Electric Car (Again)?
by Jeremy Elton Jacquot, Los Angeles on 03.29.08
Image courtesy of Osbornb via flickr
It wasn't quite the death-knell for electric vehicles that some had feared - as AutoblogGreen's Sebastian Blanco noted, many had expected the cut to the number of zero-emission vehicles sold to be as much as 90% - but it sure as heck came close. In a unanimous decision, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) voted Thursday to cut by 70% the number of zero-emission vehicles that automakers would need to sell in the coming years - down to 7,500 between 2012 and 2014 from the 25,000 figure set under previous rules - reports the LAT's Ken Bensinger.
According to Green Car Congress, this new floor target is still three times the number proposed by CARB's staff in their suggested revisions to the state's Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) program. Under the new rules, carmakers will be required to build 58,000 PHEVs, a provision that was missing from the previous scheme. In addition, its board adopted a resolution to overhaul the program to align it with California's stricter emission standards (those still in limbo because of the EPA's interference); on the downside, that overhaul won't take place until at least the end of 2009.
Mary Nichols, CARB's chairwoman, argued that the previous regulation was unrealistic in its provision for the number of zero-emission vehicles that needed to be sold (to which we'd say: go watch Who Killed the Electric Car?). The LAT notes that many of the last-minute provisions inserted into the measure will likely cause confusion by creating a hierarchy among different zero-emission vehicles - potentially leading to tremendous variation in the number of such vehicles produced by 2014.
On a whole, this decision is still better than nothing - but so much less than it could've been.
Via ::Green Car Congress: California Air Resources Board Votes to Modify ZEV Program in Short-Term; Complete Overhaul to Begin for New ZEV II (blog), ::Los Angeles Times: State deals blow to zero-emission vehicle supporters (newspaper)
See also: ::Who Killed the Electric Car?, ::EV1 Electric Car: Did it Suck or Not?
CARB does it to us again!
But so what this only affects the detroit auto makers, (maybe GM can "kill" the Volt before it is even born this time!) it will be small startup EV car co's and individuals who are fed up and start converting any car to electric that can make a difference....
As for the rest of the wait and do nothings I hope they dont live anywhere near an ocean below 200ft above current sea level! (unless they can hold their breath a really looooooong time :-)
I hope this guy's water-based fuel technology can be implemented in automobiles. It seems the automotive companies are the roadblock, cutting off their noses to spite their faces, and ours.
http://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DpwlOw7iCNrI
Too bad. The way I see it, limited-built transports are the way to go if people want to drive ZEVs. I hope the people who are building the Aptera, the Riley's XR-3, the Tesla and such vehicles can find more than enough clients so their cars can be sold at competitive prices.
Too bad. The way I see it, limited-built transports are the way to go if people want to drive ZEVs. I hope the people who are building the Aptera, the Riley's XR-3, the Tesla and such vehicles can find more than enough clients so their cars can be sold at competitive prices.
That CARB would dilute the ZEV mandate even further is beyond comprehension. One would think that they might want to clean a bit of the egg off their face from their past decisions. Nope. "Throw another omelette at us, please."
Here's my question: if you were in charge of CARB, what would you propose to facilitate and accelerate the transition to clean, renewable energy for transportation?
IMHO, I think that CARB should completely forget about percentages (like before) or numbers and credits (like now).
The ZEV mandate should simply require that, by 2012, all the major auto manufacturers (and I would lower that "threshold" to include companies like Mitsubishi, Subaru, Volvo, etc.) must comply with these stipulations:
I do not think that such a mandate is unreasonable. After all, the EV1 and the RAV4-EV were capable of that same speed and range back in 2002, so surely car manufacturers can do even better nowadays.
What kind of ZEV the car companies wish to provide should be left up to them --be it an electric car, a fool-cell vehicle, a series hybrid, or even one powered by a flywheel or a solar panel (ha!)— as long as it produces ZERO emissions for at least 125 miles. No more of CARB favoring one technology over another: let the technology itself decide.
And no more of this "no customer demand" excuse. If customers do not even know about the option, how can they demand it? This ZEV mandate would assure that customers DO know --and can decide accordingly. Get the ZEVs in the showrooms! Take advantage of the free market system instead of trying to thwart it.
What a tragedy for the people of planet earth, I mean the US of A, err...California. I suppose it takes more courage than the people of the CARB can muster to stand up to Big Oil and the declining American (entrenched) Auto Industry. It will be another blow to America when Chrysler, FoMoCo and GM lose market share due to such short sightedness. After all, there are Chinese companies looking to break into the American Market (under names such as Miles Motors) and a raft of small companies looking outside of the same old thing..
With a measure of good fortune, maybe names like Tesla, Commuter Cars, Aptera, Zenn and even Myers Motors will become common while Chrysler will go the way of the DeSoto, Ford the way of the Edsel and and GM the way of Oldsmobile.
So the outlook is not as bleak as feared after all (70% is not great but 90% would have been worse), however Former air board Chairman Robert Sawyer is quoted as having said "California needs every tool to meet its global warming goals... California is a place where electrical vehicles can and should happen."
That is true not just for California but for the whole world!
I am glad I am not living in California. That is very embarrassing. I think the new reduced amount is actually worse then no ruling. With companies like Tesla producing cars, the major players will not have to do anything and can point and say 'look, we are meeting or ahead of the goal". If it were an option, I would propose that the CARB board be impeached and a new board found.
Actually it is embarrassing to be an American when stuff like this happens.
This is reality. You can't legislate science. The requirement was first set with the expectation that some scientific discovery was just around the corner that would substatially decrease the cost of ZEV's, but the incremental improvement hasn't made much difference. With the current state of technology and cost of materials and energy, the opening price point of non-Chinese built, non-NEV, four-wheeled ZEV's equivalent to an average passenger car is about $50,000.
How many $50,000-$100,000 electric cars will Californians buy? I suspect somewhere closer to 7500 than 25,000 unless the state government is willing to provide some heavy subsities or increase the fuel tax, which it appears they are not, or a price cap on the ZEV's, which I doubt is legal.
Ultimately it doesn't matter how many cars are built if consumers aren't wiling to buy them in sufficient volume for at least what it costs to build them, the mandate is unsustainable and will fail.