The Killing of the Electric Car and American Ambition
I recently rented the documentary Who Killed the Electric Car? At first I wasn't sure if I would like the film; I was ready to write it off as another enviromentalist, anti-Bush conspiracy theory... and while some of that can be found in the film, I found myself really enjoying it. It doesn't just dwell solely on President Bush or environmentalism, it taught me about a moment in automotive history that I knew little about. It also kinda made me hate GM.
The movie covers the California zero emissions law of the 1990's, and General Motor's creation of the EV1 electric car. While the EV1 was sort of ugly (in my opinion), it appeared to be a peppy little car. It was amazing to hear about how the EV1 didn't require any sort of oil, mufflers, tune-ups, etc. Yes, it was imperfect (it could only go about 60-80 miles before needing recharged), but it was an important start. And just as I was beginning to dig the idea of driving an electric car to Pittsburgh every day, I remembered the title of the movie... and then I watched as GM took back every last EV1 they had leased, drove the cars to the Arizona desert, and destroyed them. It was mind boggling.
The story of the electric car reminded me instantly of the events in the beginning 200 pages of Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged," only in reverse. In the book, there's a steel mogul named Hank Rearden who invents a brand new type of metal called "Rearden Steel." It's set to revolutionize the steel and locomotive industry, just as GM's EV1 would have revolutionized the automobile industry. The difference between the two is that Hank Rearden is so driven by the desire to produce, to advance, and to succeed that he will do anything he can to make sure that his steel is produced. Economically-conscious scientists, unions, and the United States Government try to do everything they can do stop him, in the name of fairness to everyone else.
Compare that to General Motors in the instance of the EV1. GM did everything they could to make it appear as if the vehicle wasn't in demand, that people didn't want it. According to the documentary, they ignored and downplayed long waiting lists, they refused to do anything more than lease the vehicles, and made each lessee pass a litmus test before giving them a contract. Sure the cars were expensive, and GM was losing a good amount of money at first, but this was all start-up cost. Perhaps if the cars were moved over to the mass production lines, the cost would have gone down. Or the technology would have advanced further, making them cheaper. Unfortunately, we'll never know. General Motors didn't have the drive of Hank Rearden.
I'm not going to get into whether or not "big oil" is tied in with General Motors, or if the government was right to step in with the car maker's lawsuit against California. That's an issue for another day, and quite frankly, complaining about Big Oil and the Bush Administration doesn't help the matters whatsoever.
My main issue with the movie, and with the electric car movement altogether, is the fact that it's paired up with environmentalist extremists. What people need to realize is that the majority of Americans aren't going to go for the electric car because they are concerned about the environment. We, as American consumers, are interested in what is going to help our wallets. So rather than preaching on and on about how electric cars don't give out emissions (while they give off all sorts of other negative things...), talk about how the cars will save us money.
The movie sadly spiraled into a rant about the oil companies and the interventions of the Bush Administration into the California issue. Every interviewee in the documentary talked about how much they love the earth and how great electric cars are for the environment. They weren't selling me on anything. It wasn't until I saw how the thing ran, and how little extra money needed to be put into it, that I really perked up and listened. No more oil changes? I'm sold!
Each time a niche group (either on the Left or the Right) takes over a product or a service, it turns off the majority of Americans. It's sort of the same effect as when a corporation supports a political interest group. You instantly form an opinion about that company.
I was pleasantly surprised that the movie did offer a somewhat balanced perspective on things. The director blamed the motor companies and the government as much as he blamed the consumer and the state. They admitted that the cars weren't perfect, and rather expensive. At the end of the film, I was left feeling sort of saddened by the death of the car--which seemed to offer so much potential. I was furious at General Motors for just walking away from what had cost them billions. What's even worse is that we will never know the truth behind it all. It made me feel like taking off the 2009 Camaro wallpaper on my laptop... but then I remembered how cool that car's gonna be.
I recommend this documentary. If you find yourself on the left of the political aisle, you'll surely love every second of it. If you are of the more conservative persuasion, give it a shot. The environmental junk is a little annoying (and yes, they use that stupid stock satellite photo of swirling hurricane clouds every time they mention the phrase "global warming"), but if you can get past it you will find the story of the EV1 intriguing. It's a reminder that we live in a different time than that described in "Atlas Shrugged," where the dollar figure dictates innovation, rather than vice versa.
Posted by MikeRubino at July 19, 2007 10:29 PM | TrackBack