Chris
Paine Tells Hollywood Greens Who Killed the Electric Car
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Is
the electric car really dead?
Yesterday, I was at the Hollywood Goes Green forum, and
one of the most interesting sessions of the day was one
titled Easy Rider: Fuel
Usage, Energy Efficient Vehicles and Freight Options.
Chris Paine, a member of the panel for this session, and
his movie Who Killed the
Electric Car took center stage.
As a fan of electric cars, I agree with Chris that, if you
drive an electric vehicle, then you know that electric
cars are the cars of the future. Nonetheless, I don't
agree with Chris that anyone killed the electric car, nor
that the electric car was killed by "resistance to
change" from consumers, automakers and energy
providers.
The electric car is not dead.
While "resistance to change" is an important
point, the electric car was stalled
by a lack of cost-effective technologies, more than
anything else. The EV1 might have been killed, but
electric cars were not.
In reality, GM would have had to sell 100s of thousands of
EV1's in order to achieve the economies of scale that
would make such vehicles cost-effective for both producers
and consumers. GM's Dave Barthmuss told the panel that GM
had lost almost $2 billion on the EV1 program when it was
dismantled, yet they had produced barely any EV1's.
Still, even if GM had continued the EV1 program, how many
vehicles could really have been sold?
For instance, it took Toyota years to be able to purchase
enough NiMH batteries to catch up to demand for the Prius
hybrid car. The supplies just have not existed, and if
the future of hybrid
vehicles, plug-in
hybrids and electrics is driven by NiMH batteries,
it's a long, slow road ahead.
Because of real world factors, the EV1 would still be a
money-losing operation today if it had not been dumped.
Yet, GM didn't dump its electric vehicle program, just the
EV1 program. Before, during and after, GM has continued
efforts on another electric vehicle - fuel cell electric
vehicles. Nonetheless, considering GM's current financial
situation, is any one really surprised that the EV1
program was discontinued?
Sure, it would have been nice to see GM keep this program
alive, even if just as a PR effort, and GM's Barthmuss
indicated that many at GM felt the same. Even Bob Lutz has
admitted that killing the EV1 was a mistake.
Still, if the EV1 program were still going, electric cars
would not be taking over the automotive landscape because
of the limitations and costs of today's technology.
But let's get back to hydrogen for a second.
When asked if global warming would be reduced by electric
cars, Chris responded that it could if solar power, for
example, was utilized. On the other hand, if coal power
was used to power the electric vehicles, then there might
be problems.
Yet, later in the session Chris reaffirmed his belief that
hydrogen and fuel cell vehicles are a huge boondoggle
because producing hydrogen isn't efficient. In fact, Chris
claimed most are getting out of fuel cells and further
stated that GM should immediately abandon their fuel cell
vehicle efforts.
Really? Everyone is getting out of the fuel cell game,
Chris? I guess everyone except every major automaker.
Ok, so hydrogen isn't efficient today, solar panels aren't
yet efficient either. Yet, Chris has no qualms about solar
inefficiency.
But more interesting, one of the most promising forms of
hydrogen production is solar powered hydrogen production.
Of course, Chris would probably respond, who needs
solar-powered hydrogen? Just use the solar power to power
electric vehicles, it's more efficient.
--> Go
to Page 2
|
