Just back from seeing one of the most frustrating movies of the year: Who Killed the Electric Car?
You’ve heard President Bush hyping a hydrogen fuel cell technology that will very likely never see the light of day. But long before President Bush took office, California passed a law requiring any auto maker who wanted to sell cars in that state to produce a certain number of “zero emissions” (in other words, “no fumes”) cars. As a result, years ago, GM and other companies produced the EV1 — a quiet, clean electric car.
The EV1 was a marvel of technology, capable of traveling up to 100 miles on a single charge. (98 percent of Americans travel less than 28 miles in the course of the day’s commute.) They were sexy and zippy and affordable. Consumers loved them. So … why aren’t you and I driving electric cars today?
There are several reasons:
– Automakers, compelled by law to produce two clean-running, zero maintenance cars for every ninety-eight oil-burning, frequently-serviced cars sold in California, quickly realized advertisements for those new cars would be seen as an admission that the other 98 percent of their cars were dirty and inefficient.
– Criticized for not advertising the cars properly, GM launched a multi-million dollar ad campaign for the EV-1 electric vehicle. Instead of putting smiling, sexy women in the front seat, they created the most frightening car ads in history, complete with horror-movie sound tracks, tiny pictures of the car itself, and terrifying foreground images, including Hiroshima-style shadows of children burned into concrete walls and hulking scarecrows made of what look like human body parts.
– Dealerships hated the EV-1 because they couldn’t sell service — oil changes, engine repairs — for it. Sales reps were directed to sell the car by making sure potential buyers knew “all the limitations” first.
– When President Bush came to power, he appointed a cabinet of ex-oil executives; the White House quickly joined a car-company law suit against the state of California to overturn the zero-emmission vehicle law. Four weeks before the decisive hearing on the fate of the electric car, the head of the board overseeing the project took a job with a hydrogen fuel cell company; at the hearing, he limited pro-electric car testimony and gave auto makers unlimited time to tout new “fuel cell technology” — an impractical alternative technology still being touted by the oil and auto industries.
The consumers who actually managed to lease one of the cars (GM wouldn’t sell them) fell in love immediately. But when leases were up, GM snatched the cars away. And they didn’t just tow them off — GM had the cars smashed, crushed, and shredded. (If the cars had remained in circulation, they would remind consumers that we once had an affordable, non-polluting option.)
For the last several years, I’ve been a loyal Saturn (GM) customer. I like Saturn’s no-hassle pricing model, and I love my Saturn VUE. But I gotta tell you, after watching this movie, I’m almost embarrassed to drive a GM car. Instead of standing for innovation, GM took a short-sighted stand for corporate profits. The result? Today, with our President and Big Oil leading the way, we’re throwing billions of dollars at a hydrogen fuel cell pipe dream that will never see the light of day … instead of driving clean, silent, efficient electric cars.
I can’t do much about that … but I can promise you this: my next car won’t come from GM.
Hey, just caught your site and am checking out the Sony flick. After reading your post I was really interested in the movie. I have been a gear head for most of my life and have been interested in electric cars for their racing potential. I don’t discredit the filmmakers for telling their point of view about these vehicles but I feel like they haven’t done all their research. It’s great to see people get behind a good cause, and I agree with them full heartedly about all the governments melding in the problem. But we all need to realize all of the ramifications (ecological and economic) of slamming the auto industry and changing over from gas to electric/hybrid vehicles. There is maintenance on electric cars…albeit far from that of gas, however more expensive. What are we going to replace the profits earned by auto part manufacturers with in the economy (the auto industry is almost directly linked to our economy and has been since its conception)? What are the effects on our electrical power plants…doesn’t California have problems with blackouts as it is? Is this really going to help the problem…are our electrical power facilities capable of generating that much power for the masses…what are the effects of doing so? I’m all for helping the planet and for good causes but there is much more to the problem than simply getting behind one’s own egocentric convictions and asserting it as truth and creating consternation that will only lead to regulations and legislation that will line the pockets of some other industry and in actuality do little to nothing for the environment or our economy. I mean…it’s kind of reckless don’t you think?
Go solar — put flexpanels on your roof. One woman generates enough electricity to power her entire home, her completely electric car, and still sell electricity back to the utility company’s power grid. Her electric bill is a whopping $2 a month!
Why is not air quality so fundamentally important to you people living in LA???? I dot get why there is not MUCH protest as the technology is there…. there needs to be more protest…. or ppl will really believe your either a stupid nation or in a police state…. C,MON AMERICA WAKE UP UR DYING 🙁