Who Killed the Electric Car?

[techs]

http://www.sonyclassics.com/whokilledtheelectriccar/electric.html
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/who_killed_the_electric_car/about.php

"Fashioned like a tongue-in-cheek murder mystery, Who Killed the Electric Car? sets out to uncover just who is responsible for the demise of this ill-fated vehicle. The spirited film runs through the prime suspects, including car companies, oil companies, the government, and consumers. Beginning in the early nineties, under pressure from the California Air Resource Board, car manufacturers were forced to develop nonpolluting vehicles. GM made the first car, the EV-1, available for lease in the midnineties. After less than 10 years, citing lack of interest by the public, the automaker took the vehicle off the market and officially discontinued the project. Government policy was rescinded, and currently, GM and other automakers are crushing all remaining electric vehicles. Filmmaker Chris Paine follows electric car activists who are desperately trying to save the few remaining cars from being destroyed and hoping to change policy. A very timely subject, Who Killed the Electric Car? serves as a potent reminder that the powers that be will stop at nothing to maintain their position in the world. The film is an informative and thoroughly entertaining journey into the world of environmentally conscious technology and the cars that may one day be here...again."

 

[Strk]

It's such a waste. Electric cars were weak, had no range, required hours to recharge and cost a lot. Who killed it? They killed themselves for being such pieces of crap. I'd rather buy a diesel and modify the engine a little bit, then head to McDonald's and fill her up for free.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Who killed the electric car? GM

There's probably no good reason to preserve the decades-old technology in the EV-1. People are already converting Prii to full electric.

But as Strk notes why tie ourselves to one solution? Let's keep it up with hybrid drivetrains but don't give up on diesel (certainly biodiesel) and ethanol as well (but definitely NOT corn).

 

[ExpertNovice]

Originally posted by: techsWho Killed the Electric Car? sets out to uncover just who is responsible for the demise of this ill-fated vehicle.

You even admit that it was illfated and then quote a movie to find out who killed it? I suggest China force their citizens to use only electic cars to help with the pollution in China. In America, still somewhat a capitalistic society, the economics of a product normally kills it.

Of course, GM could have helped its demise just like Bill Gates helped usher in the demise of many companies. In our country we used to try (mostly) to enforce laws preventing monopolies and oligopolies. Since Clinton made his deal with Microsoft I have noticed a horrific trend of major corporations merging into super-conglomerates. As long as such fascist tendences continue (and with both parties contributing it will be hard to stop) we and the world are in danger. Hopefully, a good conservative will come along and conservatives will toss out the corrupt
politicians and alter this dangerous course we are on.

As for the electric car. The batteries were massive polluters as was the acid they used, the cars were too inferior, too high priced, and too expensive to maintain. Other than that, they were good cars.

 

[Vic]

Delco killed the electric car -- with the invention of the electric starter for gasoline engines (back in 1910).

Otherwise, the electric car is junk. The automotive holy grail of the ignorant. I think the only reason LA liked them back in the '70s is because it would have moved the all smog to Bakersfield. Otherwise, they are horribly inefficient and environmentally toxic (and will continue to be until a miracle in battery technology occurs).

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Strk
It's such a waste. Electric cars were weak, had no range, required hours to recharge and cost a lot. Who killed it? They killed themselves for being such pieces of crap. I'd rather buy a diesel and modify the engine a little bit, then head to McDonald's and fill her up for free.

Yep. Biodiesel is the next big thing.

 

[QuantumPion]

I think in the near-future most cars will be plug-in hybrids. These are hybrids that run on only electric unless you drive a long enough distance to where the batteries would not provide enough range. So it is basically an electric car with a gas motor for long trips, that you recharge at home with AC instead of gasoline.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: QuantumPion
I think in the near-future most cars will be plug-in hybrids. These are hybrids that run on only electric unless you drive a long enough distance to where the batteries would not provide enough range. So it is basically an electric car with a gas motor for long trips, that you recharge at home with AC instead of gasoline.

Because the AC out of your wall outlet is created by magic, right?

(I won't even go into the toxicity of the massive batteries required).

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: techs
Who Killed the Electric Car?

All electric cars are non-polluting when they're running, but overall, they're not to be a viable solution, at least at the present state of the technology. As others have posted, they don't have sufficient range, but what's more important in terms of solving our transportation needs is, the cost of generating the electricity to keep them charged and the amoung of pollution added by the extra generating capacity reduce any potential benefits from self contained electric vehichles.

Another strangely related question is the title of the film, Who Framed Roger Rabbit?

You can laugh, but if you remember the plot, it centered around the General Motors Streetcar Conspiracy, a plot involving General Motors, Standard Oil and Firestone Tire and Rubber in which they conspired to buy up electric streetcar lines in 45 cities, including New York, San Francisco, Philadelphia, St. Louis, Salt Lake City, Tulsa, Baltimore and Los Angeles (the locale in Roger Rabbit), and destroy electric urban trolley systems so that urban transit would be forced to rely on GMC buses (along with fuel from Standard Oil and tires from Firestone), and that this is the principal reason that modern-day trolley systems are rare in the United States today.

You don't have to be too far into paranoia to consider whether similar forces could conspire to kill the electric car. :shocked:

 

[piasabird]

I think electric cars are a flawed concept. The battery pack is really expensive, and really heavy and mostlikely will not last more than 5-10 years. Then the batteries are toxic waste.

 

[fitzov]

http://www.pbs.org/saf/1403/index.html

 

[BDawg]

Wasn't it Steve Guttenburg and the Stonecutters?

 

[desy]

No Guttenberg was just made famous by the stonecutters, I don't know why?
Economics have kept the electric car down with some interference by the auto industry and big oil. those technological and economic hurdles are coming down.
Hybrids today full electrics tommorrow.

 

[shortylickens]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Who killed the electric car? GM
There's probably no good reason to preserve the decades-old technology in the EV-1. People are already converting Prii to full electric.
But as Strk notes why tie ourselves to one solution? Let's keep it up with hybrid drivetrains but don't give up on diesel (certainly biodiesel) and ethanol as well (but definitely NOT corn).

I havent been keeping up on the specifics of alcohol engines but whats your problem with corn?

 

[Strk]

Originally posted by: shortylickens

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Who killed the electric car? GM
There's probably no good reason to preserve the decades-old technology in the EV-1. People are already converting Prii to full electric.
But as Strk notes why tie ourselves to one solution? Let's keep it up with hybrid drivetrains but don't give up on diesel (certainly biodiesel) and ethanol as well (but definitely NOT corn).

I havent been keeping up on the specifics of alcohol engines but whats your problem with corn?

Ethanol pretty much has unlimited sources, but they're all not equal. Each source requires a different amount of energy to produce ethanol. Corn is near the bottom of the list.

 

[Thump553]

Originally posted by: Harvey
* * *
Another strangely related question is the title of the film, Who Framed Roger Rabbit?

You can laugh, but if you remember the plot, it centered around the General Motors Streetcar Conspiracy, a plot involving General Motors, Standard Oil and Firestone Tire and Rubber in which they conspired to buy up electric streetcar lines in 45 cities, including New York, San Francisco, Philadelphia, St. Louis, Salt Lake City, Tulsa, Baltimore and Los Angeles (the locale in Roger Rabbit), and destroy electric urban trolley systems so that urban transit would be forced to rely on GMC buses (along with fuel from Standard Oil and tires from Firestone), and that this is the principal reason that modern-day trolley systems are rare in the United States today.

You don't have to be too far into paranoia to consider whether similar forces could conspire to kill the electric car. :shocked:

I'm running out the door now, so I don't have the time to document this with links, but the GM/streetcar supression is true and was a well known incident from the 1930s.

 

[thraashman]

In the end you realize the major way that electricity is produced in this country is through burning of fossil fuels. So with using electricity to recharge an electric car, you don't really save any burning of fossil fuels.

Hybrids are great if you live in an area with heavy traffic. They save the most fuel in stop and go traffic.

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Who killed the electric car? GM

There's probably no good reason to preserve the decades-old technology in the EV-1. People are already converting Prii to full electric.

But as Strk notes why tie ourselves to one solution? Let's keep it up with hybrid drivetrains but don't give up on diesel (certainly biodiesel) and ethanol as well (but definitely NOT corn).

I read an article about 5 years ago saying that GM had the FINEST electric car in the world (in terms of power and longetivity of charge...could go over 200 miles).

But since electric cars suck, still nobody bought them. I don't blame them...but you can't blame GM for building the best one.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: shortylickens

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Who killed the electric car? GM
There's probably no good reason to preserve the decades-old technology in the EV-1. People are already converting Prii to full electric.
But as Strk notes why tie ourselves to one solution? Let's keep it up with hybrid drivetrains but don't give up on diesel (certainly biodiesel) and ethanol as well (but definitely NOT corn).

I havent been keeping up on the specifics of alcohol engines but whats your problem with corn?

Makes sense on the cob . . . sux in the car.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Ever see what happens to the efficiency of a battery at -40? Probably not a concern for you guys down there but up here it's important.

 

[Krakn3Dfx]

GM killed the electric car due to payoffs from big oil, there's no mystery there. No, electric cars in 1995 weren't viable for everyone, most were 2 seaters, they were slower in most cases, and they didn't work for long trips. That's all true. It's also like saying the first cars rolled onto the market by Henry Ford weren't for everyone because they didn't have FM stereo or AC. The research should have continued, and GM should have kept on it. 10 years of continuous electric automobile research and development would have put us almost beyond gas powered automobiles today. Instead, because of the short sightedness and instant need for wealth and power on the oil companies' and GM's behalf, we have just now started to revive the need for alternative fuel based transportation. It was a huge mistake to abandon it then, and we're paying the price for it now.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Who killed the electric car? GM

There's probably no good reason to preserve the decades-old technology in the EV-1. People are already converting Prii to full electric.

But as Strk notes why tie ourselves to one solution? Let's keep it up with hybrid drivetrains but don't give up on diesel (certainly biodiesel) and ethanol as well (but definitely NOT corn).

I read an article about 5 years ago saying that GM had the FINEST electric car in the world (in terms of power and longetivity of charge...could go over 200 miles).

But since electric cars suck, still nobody bought them. I don't blame them...but you can't blame GM for building the best one.

Dude . . . what's the logic in building the best POS? GM made a huge investment in electric vehicles but RUSHED to market b/c they thought people would buy a POS just to own the first POS. But instead of "learning" from the experience GM just said FI . . . let's go build some more trucks.

Can you imagine the return on investment if GM had spent a couple of hundred million on battery technology or hybrid drivetrains over the past decade? GM could have sold millions of light hybrid trucks/SUVs with built in generators by now. Eventually, the technology would be cost-effective enough to trickle down to passenger cars. Considering consumers have been willing to pay several thousand dollars more to buy comparable foreign vehicles . . . hybrid GM cars would be quite cost/feature competitive. Worse case scenario is that GM would be neck and neck with Honda tech but would have substantially greater offerings . . . including a full electric for people wanting to go that route.

Instead, GM is essentially praying for hydrogen to work but I don't think they are winning that race, either. And even if they do . . . if there's no infrastructure (we spent that money in Iraq) . . . we may have the EV-1 Part Deux.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Who killed the electric car? GM

There's probably no good reason to preserve the decades-old technology in the EV-1. People are already converting Prii to full electric.

But as Strk notes why tie ourselves to one solution? Let's keep it up with hybrid drivetrains but don't give up on diesel (certainly biodiesel) and ethanol as well (but definitely NOT corn).

I read an article about 5 years ago saying that GM had the FINEST electric car in the world (in terms of power and longetivity of charge...could go over 200 miles).

But since electric cars suck, still nobody bought them. I don't blame them...but you can't blame GM for building the best one.

Dude . . . what's the logic in building the best POS? GM made a huge investment in electric vehicles but RUSHED to market b/c they thought people would buy a POS just to own the first POS. But instead of "learning" from the experience GM just said FI . . . let's go build some more trucks.

Can you imagine the return on investment if GM had spent a couple of hundred million on battery technology or hybrid drivetrains over the past decade? GM could have sold millions of light hybrid trucks/SUVs with built in generators by now. Eventually, the technology would be cost-effective enough to trickle down to passenger cars. Considering consumers have been willing to pay several thousand dollars more to buy comparable foreign vehicles . . . hybrid GM cars would be quite cost/feature competitive. Worse case scenario is that GM would be neck and neck with Honda tech but would have substantially greater offerings . . . including a full electric for people wanting to go that route.

Instead, GM is essentially praying for hydrogen to work but I don't think they are winning that race, either. And even if they do . . . if there's no infrastructure (we spent that money in Iraq) . . . we may have the EV-1 Part Deux.

Sigh... every company wants to create the miracle battery, the mythical "Shipstone." It's the next great thing we're all waiting for. The ROI would be beyond belief. So put the conspiracy theories down, Big Oil could not possibly pay enough from discouraging companies like GM from finding it. And here's a tip: the hydrogen fuel cell is IT. Due to hydrogen's low cost-yield ratio as a fuel (yes, it's abundant, but not cost effective to produce because most of it is locked up in water), the miracle of hydrogen fuel cell will be to use it as a low-weight, high-yield, environmentally-friendly battery for electric vehicles. GM is way ahead of everyone else on this, but -- just like hybrids -- it will not reduce fossil fuel dependency. It will just increase efficiency a bit (which will result in an increase in consumption, of course) and will move the pollution from city streets to the power plants.
It's still a couple decades away too. It's not the fuel cell that's the real problem anymore, it's storing the hydrogen safely on millions of vehicles. Makes a Pinto look like a firecracker.

 

[Strk]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Ever see what happens to the efficiency of a battery at -40? Probably not a concern for you guys down there but up here it's important.

Does windchill count?