In 1990 GM introduced the Impact concept car at the 1990 Los Angeles Auto Show. This was the prototype for the GM EV-1, delivered in 1997. Also in 1990, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) created the Zero Emissions Mandate (ZEV) in accordance with the Low-Emission Vehicle (LEV) Regulations which required an increasing percent of Zero-Emission Vehicles to be sold in California. In effect, ZEV meant battery-powered EVs, because at that time it was the only demonstrated technology with no emissions. The mandate required that, beginning in 1998, 2 percent of new car sales of the "Big 7" largest car makers would be ZEVs. The mandated volume was to increase to 10 percent of new car sales in 2003 – approximately 20,000 cars per year.

In 1996, as it became clear that the 2 percent EV sales requirement would not be possible, CARB eliminated the requirement. The Big 7 manufacturers were to produce up to 3,750 advanced battery vehicles between 1998 and 2000. A few thousand were built by the various manufacturers – many of which were leased to customers.

By 2002, the EV program was in shambles and the electric car had reached the end of its development. As already noted, GM withdrew the EV1 and Ford sold the Th!nk. Toyota announced that they would discontinue production of the RAV4 Electric Vehicle worldwide in the spring of 2003. And the CARB turned its attention to Fuel Cell Vehicles and hybrids. CARB's goals for fuel cell cars are much smaller than those for the EV – they will require only 250 fuel cell cars to be made in the next few years.

The EV effort of 15 years was not wasted. The technology of the electric drive train is used in current hybrid vehicles and will be used in others that will be delivered in years to come. Yet the failure of the EV was predictable at its inception – and the fuel cell failure is predictable as well.

The concept of the EV was to reduce pollution. Originally the designation was ZEV or "Zero Emissions Vehicle." The solution was the EV – the Electric Vehicle. And the automobiles developed met the requirement of "zero emissions." Yet the total system emissions were not zero. It required oil to turn the generators that generated the electricity that was used to charge the EV. Proponents of EVs and Fuel Cells speak of the "cleanliness" of these vehicles, noting that they generate no emissions – at the point of use!! In truth, emissions are being generated at the point of electricity manufacturing for the EV – the power station. This has the effect of distributing the pollution around a larger area. So for example, pollution in the Los Angeles basin from internal combustion engines would be reduced by increasing the pollution at some other point in the state or a nearby state. This may make it easier to breathe in Los Angeles, but over a period of years the effect on the environment and global warming is the same. This is the equivalent of dumping sewage downstream of one town into the drinking water of the village further down the river.

The fuel cell is similar. The hydrogen used is made from fossil fuels at a generating plant and the emissions are released into the atmosphere. The fuel cell itself has no emissions. However, at the plant plant there are enormous emissions reflecting the hundreds of millions of cars being used. Power plant emissions replace engine emissions. And it may take more total energy to run aÝ hydrogen car than it would to run an electric vehicle!

The typical consumer is unaware of the costs involved in using electricity rather than oil to power an automobile. The fuel cost of electricity generation is analyzed at the Web site of the Energy Information Administration, which is part of the US Department of Energy. The following quotation is found in the Electricity Chapter of the Energy in the United States: 1635-2000. This is part of the Annual Energy Review 2001:

"The unit cost of electricity is high because most of the energy that must be purchased to generate it does not actually reach the end user but is expended in creating the electricity and moving it to the point of use. In 2000, for example, approximately 40 quadrillion Btu of energy were consumed by the electric power sector to generate electricity in the United States, but only 12 quadrillion Btu worth of electricity were actually used directly by consumers. Where did the other 28 quadrillion Btu go? Energy is never destroyed but it does change form. The chemical energy contained in fossil fuels, for example, is converted at the generator to the desired electrical energy. Because of theoretical and practical limits on the efficiency of conversion equipment, much of the energy in the fossil fuels is "lost," mostly as waste heat."

This fundamental fact is ignored in the sales literature for both EVs and Fuel Cell cars. The energy costs of converting a fossil fuel to electricity is very high. Ignoring this fundamental factor brings into question the very reason for existence of an organization such as the CARB. At least their goals are more limited this time around – 250 fuel cell cars is far less than the 2000 or so EVs developed or the tens of thousands planned for.

Top of Page