Who Killed The Electric Car? The EV-1: Shhhhh; Dark Secret - RI10

Who Killed The

Electric Car?

The EV-1: Shhhhh;

Dark Secret – RI10

Who Killed the Electric Car? New Documentary looks at the Mysterious Disappearance of the EV-1

Friday, April 13th, 2007
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/04/13/1421243

General Motors has been at the center of one of the nation's largest controversies over clean emissions-cars. In 1996 the company introduced the EV-1 electric car in California and Arizona. Hundreds of the electric cars were soon on the road. Then they all disappeared. The mystery behind their disappearance is the subject of the documentary “Who Killed the Electric Car?” We’re joined by the film’s director Chris Paine, and Chelsea Sexton, a former GM employee who worked on the EV-1 electric car. [rush transcript included]

In the San Francisco Bay Area, environmentalists are planning to hold a clean car rally on Saturday as part of the Step It Up day of action. The rally will feature plug-in hybrid cars, bio-diesel conversions, solar buses and electric cars. A clean car caravan is scheduled to travel to the General Motors dealership in Marin. Activists plan to call on GM to plug in hybrids, not hummers. It won’t be the first time protests have occurred outside a GM dealership in California. General Motors has been at the center of one of the nation's largest controversies over clean emissions-cars.

In 1996 the company introduced the EV-1 electric car in California and Arizona. Hundreds of the electric cars were soon on the road. Then they all disappeared. The mystery behind their disappearance is the subject of the documentary “Who Killed the Electric Car?”

In a moment the film's director Chris Paine and a former General Motors employee, Chelsea Sexton will join us. But first we play an excerpt from the film.

      Excerpt of “Who Killed the Electric Car?”

Despite the praise from drivers, General Motors stopped manufacturing the cars and forced all drivers to return their EV-1s. GM was able to do this because none of the cars had actually been sold, only leased. After the electric cars were removed from the road they were sent to Arizona where they were crushed. The film’s director Chris Paine joins us in our firehouse studio today. And in Los Angeles we are joined by Chelsea Sexton, she is a former General Motors employee who worked on the EV-1 electric car. She is now the executive director of Plug In America.

    * Chris Paine. Director of the documentary “Who Killed the Electric Car?”

    * Chelsea Sexton. Former General Motors' employee who worked on the EV-1 electric car. She is now the executive director of Plug In America.

RUSH TRANSCRIPT

This transcript is available free of charge. However, donations help us provide closed captioning for the deaf and hard of hearing on our TV broadcast. Thank you for your generous contribution.
Donate - $25, $50, $100, more...

JUAN GONZALEZ: In the San Francisco Bay Area, environmentalists are planning to hold a clean car rally on Saturday as part of the Step It Up day of action. The rally will feature plug-in hybrid cars, biodiesel conversion, solar buses, and electric cars. A clean car caravan is scheduled to travel to the General Motors dealership in Marin. Activists plan to call on GM to plug in hybrids not hummers. It won't be the first time protests have occurred outside a GM dealership in California. General Motors has been at the center of one of the nation's largest controversies over clean emissions cars.

AMY GOODMAN: In 1996 the company introduced the EV-1 electric car in California and Arizona. Hundreds of the electric cars were soon on the road, then they all disappeared. The mystery behind their disappearance is the subject of a documentary Who Killed the Electric Car. In a moment the film’s Director, Chris Paine and former General Motors employee and now whistleblower, Chelsea Sexton will join us, but first lets play an excerpt of the film.

      CHELSEA SEXTON: The car was so fast it looked like it would outrun its own shadow.

      TEST DRIVER: Awesome car to drive.

      GREG HANSSEN: It was the crest of a wave that we thought was coming in. It was the new thing that was going to change the way everybody travels.

      NARRATOR: Other car companies began to comply, often with conversions of gas cars, but with many of the same advantages of the EV-1.

      ALEXANDRA PAUL: I'm not mechanical at all and I love dealing with my electric car because it's so easy. I plug it in at night and when I need to drive it, I unplug and drive it away.

      J. KAREN THOMAS: They’re for people who love the environment.

      COLETTE DIVINE: I say they are just for people who love cars. They are for people who have to go somewhere.

      TOM HANKS: Well, this is amazing. What you do with this electric car, Dave, is put the key in and turn it, and then there is this thing on the floor called the pedal, a pedal.

      WALLY E. RIPPEL: The exciting thing about this, is that the cost of operating the car is the same as if you were driving a typical gasoline car, but the gasoline only costs 60 cents a gallon.

      CHELSEA SEXTON: Going to the gas station is a hassle believe it or not. Plugging the car in is not.

      TOM HANKS: The battery you charge at home. It gets between 70 and 80-miles per charge, which for me is more than all the driving I need to do in the course of a day.

      GREG HANSSEN: People started seeing the cars on the road and getting a better understanding of what they could do. Friends and neighbors and relatives started saying hey that's a neat idea, I should get one of those, we started see the momentum building for this, and the waiting lists being created for these cars.

      J. KAREN THOMAS: Cut two.

      COLETTE DIVINE: Cut two. I go on-line to look for other Toyota rav4s and I see Toyota rav4 EV. I say what's that? Click. Wow, my whole world opened up. This is an electric vehicle, it goes 100-miles to the charge, blah, blah, blah. I didn't know this existed. I didn't know this was a possibility. How come I don’t know about this? Have you seen this on TV?

      DOUG KORTHOF: When I first tried to buy the Honda EV-Plus, I drove in it and I said hey this is a great car. I said I’ll take it. The person that was trying to sell it to us was dumbfounded. He didn’t know what to do. He had never leased one before, didn't know how to do it and it took me six weeks of negotiations before I was able to get the car from their hands.

      PETER HORTON: There's nothing like driving a car when you realize as you are sitting in traffic there's no pollution coming out of your tailpipe.

      DAVID LETTERMAN: By driving an electric car, what are you sparing us from?

      TOM HANKS: I’m saving America, Dave. That's what I am doing; I am saving America by driving electric cars.

AMY GOODMAN: That was Tom Hanks speaking on the David Letterman Show. Despite the praise from drivers, General Motors stopped manufacturing the cars and forced all drivers to return their EV-1’s. GM was able to do this because none of the cars had actually been sold, only leased. After the electric cars were removed from the road they were sent to Arizona where they were crushed.

      CHRIS PAINE: We flew over at General Motors and looking down, we could see right next to the racetrack where the EV-1 was first tested, we saw maybe 50 EV-1s, crushed and put on top of semi flatbeds right next to the yellow crusher. General Motors is almost finished off I think. I don't imagine there's many EV-1s left that haven't been crushed out. It’s pretty sad.

      DAVE BARTHMUSS: There's one of four things that will happen with the EV-1s. They will go to colleges and universities, engineering schools. They’ll go to museums and other displays across the country. Other EV-1 vehicles are being driven by our engineers and the other option for EV-1s at the end of their life is recycling. But know that every part of the EV-1 is going to be recycled, dismantled through a third party and then reused. Everything is going to be recycled, we are not just going to crush it and send it off to a landfill.

      JIM BOYD: When I saw the picture of the pile of crushed cars, it hurt and I, you know, I thought it was pretty spiteful.

      IRIS OVSHINSKY: To see on the computer, on the Internet, that the crushed EV-1s that GM did – it was tragic.

      STANFORD OVSHINSKY: It was wrong. It was wrong, but more wrong is the reason for it.

      CHELSEA SEXTON: All the sudden we were sort of left at odds. You know, what do we do now? At the time most of this was going on, no one had any idea that every automaker was going to jump ship.

      NARRATOR: More Internet tips revealed that the EV-1s were not the only electric vehicles in jeopardy. A number Ford Thinks and Ranger electric trucks were discovered in Palm Springs and rumored to be set for destruction. In Los Angeles activists spotted a truckload of Toyota Rav4 EVs. Fearing the destination was a crushing facility they chased it. The next morning the truck turned back.

      LINDA NICHOLES: That guy was going as fast as he possibly could in a big transport like that. He was trying to lose us, it was clear, but wasn’t able to do it and that did change Toyota’s plan, it was so inconsistent. They didn't now what the hell to do.

      DOUG KORTHOF: Then he goes to the end of the pier and these two big security guards come out. They opened this locked gate. The truck goes inside and then the security guards come out and surveil us.

      LINDA NICHOLES: Somehow we ended up at this god-forsaken place.

      DOUG KORTHOF: This has everything. It has spewing smoke into the harbor that kids have to breathe. It has an oil well and it has Toyota, which is supposed to be the greenest car company, but which is simultaneously crushing, and hiding the fact they are crushing, clean rav4 EVs, instead of selling them to willing customers.

      NARRATOR: No one had seen Honda’s electric cars since they were taken to customers. Then an episode of California’s Green aired on PBS.

      HUELL HOWSER: So, we’re gonna be able to see cars shredded today.

      WORKER AT FACILITY: Absolutely.

      HUELL HOWSER: Which is not something most of us get to see.

      WORKER AT FACILITY: We shred about a car a minute. 1,000 cars a day, on a good day.

      HUELL HOWSER: And what’s interesting, the first thing we noticed when we drove up here, you are going to be shredding some new cars here too. These look like perfectly good cars, why are you shredding them up?

      WORKER AT FACILITY: Little bit of a mystery really. Since I have been here the last eight years. They bring us these cars from the dealerships, and they say they are test cars and they have been brought over to test various emissions and the insurance companies won't reinsure them so they have to watch them be destroyed here.

      HUELL HOWSER: That seems like a shame.

      WORKER AT FACILITY: It’s a terribly shame.

      HUELL HOWSER: I would like to drive off in one of these things. Ladies and gentlemen that's the sound of a crushed automobile being shredded into a million pieces.

      CHELSEA SEXTON: There's no precedent for Car Company rounding up one of a particular type of car and crushing them as if they are afraid one might get away.

      S. DAVID FREEMAN: I think they wanted to be sure that none of them were driving around the streets any more to remind people that there is such a thing as an electric car.

AMY GOODMAN: David Freeman is Energy Adviser to the Carter Administration, from the documentary Who Killed the Electric Car. The film’s director Chris Paine joins us in our firehouse studio, in Los Angeles and we are joined by Chelsea Sexton. Yes she is the whistle-blower, the former General Motors employee who worked on the EV-1 electric car, now Executive Director of Plug In America. We welcome you both to Democracy Now!.

Chelsea Sexton, you must have been shocked when you thought you were just doing your job for General Motors, selling EV-1 cars or pushing them out to the public, and yet, describe what happened when you actually did that?

CHELSEA SEXTON: Well it was sort of interesting because we were hired to create a market and get these cars on the road. Through a series of small steps along the way we became really aware that that was not really what General Motors and the other auto manufacturers in fact, wanted to happen. The more we did it, the more liability we became. There was an organization of factions. Some people to this day really loved that little car and some people in General Motors never wanted to see it happen, there was a bit of a power struggle going on in the company.

AMY GOODMAN: Chris Paine why did you do the film?

CHRIS PAINE: I had driven that EV-1 for five years and I had just a terrific experience. I got an electric car as kind of a notion I tried out. Within about two months, it was the only car I was driving. My gas car was sort of in the background for emergency days when I needed to go on long trips. And in that five years I don't think I needed service once. And so, all you do is plug it in at night and every day you go 60-miles. If you really need to go farther, you have your gas car.

When they announced they were taking the cars away, well, why? Could I buy it? They wouldn't let you buy it; it was only a lease option. And we all tried to hold onto our cars, and the car companies said no. It wasn't just GM, it was Toyota, and Ford; they all said you can't keep the electric cars. And we thought of everything we could do including -- maybe we should steal the cars. And we thought no, that’s not what this is about. So, we thought well, we have to tell the story, because the public press version of the story was that nobody wants electric cars and there's no demand and we went that's not true. That is not the whole story. So let's go get the story and see what happens.

JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, if it was all of the car companies doing it at the same time, that would suggest there was some kind of policy decision or collusion on their parts all to reach the same goal.

CHRIS PAINE: You know, the only reason that the cars ever hit the roads is because California told car makers if they wanted to sell gas cars they also had to sell some electric cars and they enforced it through a mandate. And it was a very good mandate. Because electric cars had been trying to come into the market place for a long time and for new technology like electric cars, or bio-diesel, or anything to really get a foothold you need to have government pressure on vested interests.

And in this case the vested interests being the internal combustion engine car companies and the oil companies. So they put this pressure on and the car companies fought it for, really, what, Chelsea, 12 years? Something like that.

CHELSEA SEXTON: Yeah.

CHRIS PAINE: And they finally buckled and as soon as they buckled the car companies took the cars off the road and then, unbelievably, they destroyed them.

AMY GOODMAN: You have scenes and Chelsea Sexton you are intimately involved with the whole film, you are one of the stars of the film if you will. Mel Gibson, you had famous people driving these cars, of course, Tom Hanks, and others. And you were pushing to get these cars out there. You were fighting your own employer. Why do you think the electric car was such a threat to the company that made it? To General Motors? It's as if you were fighting the competition, but you were fighting your employer.

CHELSEA SEXTON: Absolutely. I don't think any of them expected how popular those little cars would become. And they thought we’ll make a good show of this and we’ll get these really enthusiastic kids to go out there and push this car and they’ll never actually get cars on the road and we’ll be able to call it a day. And then not only did we run out of cars, but we had a waiting list of thousands of people and the cars became their own best advertisement.

And you could sort of see the thought almost ripple upon the -- across the collective face of the automotive companies sort of saying what do we do now? And that's when they started really actively trying to pull back. The more we created a market for the cars, the more they considered that a liability because truly their core products are larger cars, trucks, and SUVs, and so the more that we showed the benefits of these clean, quiet, little cars, the more that begged the question: Well what about the Suburban? The Impala? And some of these less than clean cars.

AMY GOODMAN: Chelsea I want to go to another clip of the film, a part of Who Killed the Electric Car?, that examines the various parties responsible for killing off the electric car.

      NARRATOR: Oil companies have rarely shied away from global issues, but why did they lobby so hard to build public opposition to the electric car in California?

      JIM BOYD: I find it difficult to rationalize why the oil industry got so intimately involved in this other than maybe they saw it as a threat to what I would call a monopoly they had on providing the transportation FUEL.

      JOSEPH ROMM: There's no question that people who control the marketplace today, the oil companies have a strong incentive to discourage alternatives, except the alternatives that they, themselves control. You know, just as General Motors 40, or 50 years ago bought up the trolley systems and shut them down, the oil companies have opposed the creation of an electric infrastructure.

      EDWARD H. MURPHY: I differ strongly with that; we did not kill the electric car. The petroleum industry did not kill the electric car. What killed the electric car was antiquated technology. It's good example, and something that we should not repeat. An example that we need to avoid.

      WALLY E. RIPPEL: There's still roughly a trillion barrels worth of oil in the earth's crust. And if you figure that the average price of that subsequent oil will be $100 a barrel, that's $100 trillion worth of business yet to be done. However, at some point when an alternative is good enough, people will snap over. That's what the oil companies fear the most.

      NARRATOR: Federal policy has always had tremendous power to shape the future. As it gave enormous incentives to buy SUVs, the Federal government also sued California to stop the electric car. Some pointed to the influence of the oil and auto industries.

      S. DAVID FREEMAN: They controlled things in Washington. They and the automobile industry. Now they have Andy Card, their former lobbyist, right there as Chief of Staff in the White House. And I guess they don't have to pay lobbyists any more so they are saving a little money there.

      NARRATOR: Andrew Card was Chief of Staff when the Bush Administration joined the suit against California. Card had also been President and CEO of the American Automobile Manufacturers Association during its campaign to kill California’s electric car mandate.

      JIM BOYD: Industries began to see, if we don't kill this cancer in California, it's going to spread to the rest of the country. I think it became a strategy on the part of many companies to make it a national issue. I was even told once by a very prominent Congressman who I shall not mention by name that I can understand and tolerate what you are doing in California, but if you ever try to spread your California program to the rest of my country, I am going to have to do battle with you.

AMY GOODMAN: An excerpt of Who Killed the Electric Car. Juan?

JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, were you able to find if any electric cars are still on the road?

CHRIS PAINE: Well, there are, you know, thanks to great protests, about 1,000 cars were saved of the 5,000 cars. So there are a few left in California and they are coming back.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, we will see what happens when your film goes around as you speak on your college tour. Tonight you will be in Princeton and then traveling the country. Chris Paine, director of the documentary Who Killed the Electric Car and Chelsea Sexton the General Motors whistle-blower who thought she was just doing her job trying to create a market of electric cars, now Executive Director of Plug In America.





      

The Tesla is the rightful successor to the Impact and EV1,
via the AC-150, T-zero and AC propulsion's E-Box Scion conversion.

Linda, featured in the recent history of the EV1, and her husband, Howard (not pictured here), have been EV-PV solar homeowners and plug-in EV drivers for six years. Howard had obtained a rare "fleet of one" Toyota NiMH RAV4-EV back in 2001, prior to Toyota's offering the last 328 of the Toyota NiMH RAV4-EV for sale to the general public (March 2002 to Nov., 2002). This was termed a "boutique lease", different from other Toyota NiMH RAV4-EV fleet leases, when Toyota allowed her to convert the lease to a purchase option for the Toyota NiMH RAV4-EV.

They've been living essentially "oil-free" for years now, thanks to their Toyota NiMH RAV4-EVs and rooftop solar power. The money saved on gas has more than repaid their solar investment, allowing them to splurge on a Tesla last year (you had to pay $100K up front to get on the delivery list).

Later, thanks to a campaign at L.A.D.W.P., Toyota has agreed to convert other fleet-lease NiMH Toyota RAV4-EV to a lease-purchase option. Howard's Toyota NiMH RAV4-EV is named "ELECTRON", and her Toyota NiMH RAV4-EV is called "ELECTRA".

Here's the latest information about the amazing TESLA,
and a comparison with the Bentley Arnage.

2007 Bentley ARNAGE T       2007 Tesla plug-in EV
Price $271,000.                        $92,000 plus tax.
BHP 500 at 3200-RPM               EHP 200+
Weight 5687 lbs.                       3,000 lbs. or less
Zero to sixty 5.2 Seconds          Zero to sixty 3.8 seconds
11 miles per gallon                   125 miles per GGE
6.75 liter OHV V8 six speed       Motor with two speed trans
trans
Top speed 179 mph                  130 mph (regulated)
Pollution: 2 lbs. CO² per mile    None if powered by home
                                                solar system
Range 440 miles on 40 gallons  250 to 300 miles on the
of gasoline                                energy equivalent of less than                                                     two gallons of gasoline
    

You can see why the Tesla is far superior: Styled by Lotus, sports car suspension, less money and it can smoke the competition

   1. There will be a TESLA battery guarantee for five years, 100,000 miles.
   2. After five years, there may be a gradual reduction in range but acceleration will still be "crackling".
   3. The batteries have a shelf life, so drive 'em while ya got 'em.
   4. Tesla has an on-board charging system to plug-in to 220 or 110 outlets at almost any amps.
   5. The Lithium batteries like to be topped off and kept full, like lead-acid and unlike NiMH.
   6. When and if the batteries lose power, you can rejuvenate the pack by partial replacement.
   7. Standard high-performance tires, not LRR.
   8. The Tesla is not silent; the cooling system creates a slight fan noise.

   
GM's EV1 remains a great car, but inoperative like the GM Volt.
   

True Story of the EV1

There are a lot of mistakes and untruths in stories about the amazing electric EV1, the car that won the enduring love of so many former drivers in its brief 6 years of existence. The following is the true account, which you will be able to comment on for corrections or recollections, or for how your feelings were smashed when the beautiful EV1 cars were taken away and killed.

The EV1 originated from the GM Sunraycer, a solar-powered Electric car. Using a $3 million budget, a prototype all-electric battery-powered version was delivered by 1989.

    * Prototype EV1 delivered to GM in 1989 for $3 million.
    * Electric cars are much easier to design, having basically only one moving part. There is no clutch, gearing, oil changes, smog check, pistons, rings, valves, crankshaft, flywheel, rods, wrist pins, etc., etc.
    * The only complicated part of an EV is the motor controller, basically a bunch of electronic stuff that is cheap and lasts forever.

This prototype was driven into the L.A. Auto Show in 1990 by former GM Chairman Roger B. Smith (of "Roger and Me" fame), intended to prove that GM had good intentions about reducing emissions.

The California Air Resources Board ("CARB"), under pressure from the federal Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"), was trying to reduce car emissions "by 10%" with a deadline of 2003.

The Zero Emission Vehicle ("ZEV") provided one easy, bureaucratic method for doing so: CARB simply "mandated" that "10%" of all cars sold by 2003 must be ZEV!

For years, automakers, their industry association (then the American Automobile Manufacturers Association, "AAMA"; later Japanese makers were allowed to join and it became the Auto Manufacturers Assn., "AMA"), with oil companies and their industry associations (Western States Petroleum, "WSP"), had been fighting any sort of increase in miles-per-gallon ("mpg") or decrease in refinery or auto emissions.

    * CARB now, it seemed, had the facts required to force GM to produce the EV1, and to force other carmakers to follow with other ZEV.

CARB is in a weak legal position, because interstate commerce is regulated by the federal government, not the states, and the only way CARB has power over autos would be under mandate by the EPA, which is charged with enforcing the federal Clean Air Act ("CAA").

    * If the EPA chose not to enforce the CAA, then California would be off the hook, and could drop the ZEV mandate.
    * In effect, California is dependent on federal policies for any leverage over auto companies.
    * This proved fatal to the ZEV mandate.

Each two years, a review was held by CARB of the ZEV mandate, and automakers' progress toward their ZEV targets. Instead of progress, auto and oil industry groups testified that the goal was unreachable, impossible, and that no one wanted an Electric car like the EV1.

In 1994, they engaged a public relations firm run by Joe Cerrell to fight the ZEV mandate. A letter writing campaign, bused-in retirees, focus groups, and other tricks were used to try to derail the ZEV mandate.

After years of acrimony, CARB and the AMA reached, in 1996, a Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU"), which seemed to be an amicable solution. Unfortunately, this MOU was kept secret from the public, which was unable to review it.

As events proved, the AMA had a couple of nasty surprises in store for CARB. First, one ploy to weaken the Mandate was the idea of trading off pure ZEV production for hybrids, and giving "PZEV" (partial ZEV credit) for better gas mileage. This led to an injunction since it infringes on the federal government's sole power to regulate MPG and CAFE standards. In the aftermath, automakers used the hiatus to dismantle their battery ZEV programs and crush the EVs. Thus, CARB should have resisted oilie pressures, and stuck to requiring ZEV production. Their conciliation proved a weakness. The second shock was revealed at the CARB 2000 ZEV review: the MOU, contrary to the ideas of CARB, did not commit the AMA to a "good faith effort" to build a market. Rather, it only committed them to put out a certain number of ZEV cars for a certain number of years. The fate of the ZEV was not spelled out in the MOU:

    * CARB staff thought the ZEV program would expand, and ZEV numbers on the road would increase; while
    * AMA intended, and the MOU text permitted, the ZEV to be taken back and crushed after the demonstration period ended.

This is why GM, Honda, Ford, Nissan and, for a while, Toyota were able to keep control of the ZEV and not sell to the public (their bete noir!) and were able to get away with never offering their ZEV for sale. It was only Toyota, from Mar. to Nov. 2002, which offered the last 328 Toyota RAV4-EV for sale to the general public.

    * Only Toyota honorably sold a production EV on the free market, without trick or artifice, although there were only 328 to sell. The gas RAV4-EV had undergone two design changes by 2002, so any further production, beyond the 328 sold, would need a complete re-design of the RAV4-EV's 500 EV-specific parts. Toyota abruptly cancelled the RAV4-EV sale, stopped taking deposits, and spent months finding the parts and car bodies to fulfill unexpectedly heavy orders. All orders were filled, but it took a while.

EV1 clean cars and loving drivers

EV1 wait anxiously for ABC news crew to publicize the danger, but it was in vain. Not even the news could save them from being destroyed. In the background, dozens of EV1 drivers do their best to try to save their beloved cars.

GM only leased the EV1 under special conditions that removed the purchase option. If you didn't sign the lease, you didn't get the car: as one Honda Honcho stated, "...they don't care whether you take it or not, they are losing money on each one...".

In 1997, GM released the first of two "builds" totaling about 650 1997 EV1. Originally powered by Delco (now Delphi) lead-acid batteries, they only had a 60-70 mile range and the battery packs often proved defective. After 1998, the defective Delco packs were gradually "upgraded" to Panasonic lead-acid batteries, which increased the range to 110 miles and never failed. While peppy, there was an alarming sway under heavy acceleration, the windshield seals leaked into the dashboard electronics, and the windshield tensioning led to persistent windshield blowouts. These leases had "unlimited miles", but that didn't do much good since the cheap Delco batteries kept breaking down.

On Mar. 2, 2000, GM issued a "voluntary recall" of ALL 1997 EV1, claiming that the 1997 EV1 had design flaws, one of which could lead to fires under certain conditions. This was an underbuilt Magnecharger input port, which needed an upgrade that affected all the charging electronics. After 14 months, GM re-released the "upgraded" 1997 EV1 back to their original lessees, this time under modified two-year leases that did not include unlimited mileage. All the "non-upgraded" EV1 were destroyed, and crushed. Just when the EV1 really could travel 200 miles per day with the new Panasonic batteries, this change now billed extra miles at 35 cents per mile.

All of these 1997 EV1 found lessees; none was unclaimed. Those EV1 drivers who lost their "non-upgraded" EV1 were put at the top of the list for getting a 1999 Nickel Metal Hydride ("NiMH", 160 mile range) model, when and if they were ever released.

GM hinted that they were unable to produce the EV1 with NiMH batteries, which is the reason they released it originally in 1997 with lead-acid batteries. The Impact prototype was crammed with lead-acid batteries in a battery "T" shaped tunnel, which was difficult to ventilate. Putting NiMH batteries into this tunnel was a design disaster. What was needed was a redesign, putting the NiMH batteries under the EV (as Honda and Toyota had done). Unwilling to change from the original design, GM just added a cooling system that used up a lot of energy.

Putting the lie to the claim that NiMH was not usable, Toyota designed and released a ZEV version of its then-new 1996-99 RAV4, which used NiMH batteries, and Honda released a version of its CRX called the Honda EV Plus, which also used NiMH batteries. By starting with existing gasoline-powered vehicles, design and production costs were minimized; also, a simpler permanent magnet brushless motor was used, and, most importantly, the NiMH batteries were deployed in a tray under the floorboard. This aided cooling, and also, it turned out, was beneficial for the weights-and-balance and strength analyses. No such EV ever turned over, and the battery pack provided a natural "crush zone" in collisions.

These Japanese EVs were the first production EVs with range over 120 miles on a charge, thanks to the more powerful, longer-lasting, and more reliable NiMH batteries. Toyota, recognizing the importance of batteries, had formed an alliance with Matsushita (Panasonic) called "PEVE", which developed the EV-95 NiMH battery, the most-researched, most-powerful, most-tested, and the only successful battery that lasts longer than the life of the vehicle, perhaps over 200,000 miles. CARB recognized this in a 2000 position paper resulting from the Battery Technology Assessment Workshop that put an upper cap on NiMH costs at $350/kWh, or at most $12,000 for a typical 30 kWh 770 lb. NiMH battery pack. This amortizes out to no more than 6 cents per mile, less if the 90 lbs. of Nickel metal is recovered when the batteries are scrapped.

This might have been intended as a mild slap in the face of GM, which had gotten them into this trouble in the first place. Essentially, Honda and Toyota were faithfully trying to fulfill the letter of the ZEV mandate, which might have embarrassed GM if it were capable of embarrassment.

To add insult to injury for GM, the Honda and Toyota offerings were issued for $499/month, less money than the $599 lease cost of the EV1, which had less powerful, defective batteries. GM was forced to lower its lease cost.

EV1 was destroyed; Toyota RAV4-EV is still running fine on the same NiMH battery pack

The most successful EV ever made, the Toyota RAV4-EV on the right, is still active in California in fleet and individual use, still running on the original pre-2002 Nickel Metal Hydride batteries and still retaining a range over 100 miles. All the other EVs produced under the prodding of the ZEV Mandate, including the 1997 EV1 on the left, were NEVER SOLD OR OFFERED FOR SALE, and all have been destroyed by permission of CARB when, in March, 2003, CARB surrendered to the petroleum industry and the Bush regime.

Only three (3) CARB Commissioners voted to preserve these EVs.

Those voting to kill the EV1 were Chair Alan Lloyd and 7 other Commissioners.

The 1999 EV1 was delayed, GM stated, by a cooling issue. The original EV1 was designed for lead-acid batteries, which were more heat-resistant than the much more powerful Nickel Metal Hydrid batteries used in the 1990 Impact.

Finally, in Dec., 1999, under pressure from CARB's Jan. 1, 2000 deadline, GM released about 200 1999 EV1 with NiMH batteries. They proved to have a 160-mile range, and never failed. In addition, GM solved some of the flaws in the 1997 version, removing the sway, new seals, etc.

As one EV1 driver, the late Mr. Don Devlin, happily exclaimed, "...Its a sensation...Huge congratulations ... A revolution in ... range..."

All the 465 1999 NiMH EV1s, which were made available, found happy lessees. None ever went unwanted; none ever had problems. All were mourned when they were abruptly crushed by GM.

No more were ever built after 1998. GM had dismantled the EV1 supplier and manufacturing plant in 1998, it was reported by GM insiders; the only question was who would be allowed to lease the already-built EV1. Over the next 18 months, the remaining 200-odd 1999 EV1 were released, a few at a time, to selected lessees, mostly high-profile celebrities and politicians.

    * There was never a time when an EV1 could not find a willing lessee.
    * In 1999, ex-Governor Davis appointed Alan Lloyd, a fuel cell advocate and enemy of Battery EVs ("BEV"), to the position of Chair of CARB. CARB gradually weakened and then withdrew the BEV component of the ZEV mandate (it was existing EVs that were killed: the ZEV mandate itself is nominally still in force, but currently "inoperative" so far as actually doing anything).
    * With the 2000 seizure of power by oil politicians and the ascension of Andy Card, GM's chief lobbyist against ZEV Mandate, federal EPA policies were modified and CARB's ability to affect AMA policy and production diminished. At meetings, AMA execs just stood with arms folded, refuseniks.
    * In March and April 2003, CARB Chair Alan Lloyd presided over postponing the ZEV mandate to 2018, "back-ending" compliance and relying upon Hydrogen Fuel Cell cars which would be much more expensive and would require extensive research over 15 years.
    * No one can explain why Lloyd considered BEV "too expensive" but why the proposed 15 years of research into a new infrastructure and technology, less promising than Compressed Natural Gas, would be "practical".
    * The batteries exist, the cars existed: the failure was CARB.

The EV1s were trucked to Mesa, AZ, stripped of tires and batteries, subjected to an 18" crush, then trucked back to smelters in California. It is estimated that GM spent about $600 to destroy each EV1 instead of selling them for $25,000 each.

Helpless, without allies, the EV1 were herded up, sequestered, then hauled in covered car transporters to the great killing ground in Mesa, AZ. After the assassination, the remains were melted down, far from the drivers who longed to save them.

Solar Electric Photo-Voltaic (PV) Power is one of the enabling technologies to solve the biggest political problem of the 21st Century: Energy Independence. The other enabling tool is the Plug-in Electric car (EV).

Together, PV-EV allows us to substitute renewable solar energy you can make yourself on a rooftop solar system to replace oil. It's not for everyone, but it's definitely for some! If enough people are able to go PV-EV, we can avoid overseas oil imports and avoid overseas political entanglements with oil dictators. Ordinary individuals can commute using an 80 mph, fun Electric car, charging overnight with cheap, otherwise unused grid power.

With credits from solar rooftop power, live essentially oil-free of the gasoline pump, free of smog checks, oil changes and tune-ups. Each morning, the Electric car is full, ready to drive. You never know how much fun an Electric car is until you feel the smooth acceleration from a standing stop, and the joy of driving gas-free.

Solar power and plug-in EVs for energy independence
    

Solar rooftop electric power and plug-in Electric cars for Energy Independence now.

    

There was always a waiting list for the 465 1999 EV1 Electric cars, even though they were only leased and cost $500 per month plus 50 cents per mile. Most on the list did not have a chance to get a car. NO other model was confiscated and destroyed like this, even alleged mistakes like the Corvair and Edsel, which are still on the road and still have car clubs and fans.


Hybrid cars, that cannot plug-in to charge, are still tied to the gasoline pump, still require oil changes, smog checks and tune-ups. Only a car that plugs in can cut oil dependency.

Hydrogen is a myth not worth waiting for. Compressed Natural Gas is a clean car technology that is here, now. If GM were serious about Fuel Cell cars, it would start by making CNG generally available. Hydrogen cars would need many new power plants to free, compress and store the Hydrogen. The "hydrogen hype" is just a PR campaign to delay battery electric cars.

Electric cars charge up overnight, using off-peak electric power. Electric cars are so efficient, we could easily eliminate more than 40% of our gasoline usage just with existing off-peak electric capacity, as shown on DrivingTheFuture.com.


The weak point of an Electric car is the batteries. GM bought control of the advanced NiMH batteries needed for all plug-in EVs but showed no intention of improving them or perfecting them.

Chevron owns the patent rights on the EV batteries!! What?? Why is this not a surprise?? Read or comment

Toyota, working to meet the Zero Emission Vehicle mandate, set up a production line in 1997 for the "large-format" EV-95 batteries needed for their Toyota RAV4-EV.

These EV-95 NiMH batteries, after years of research, were perfected for EVs:

    * Deep Cycle, no memory effect;
    * High energy output for acceleration;
    * Long lifetime, longer than the life of the car -- even a Toyota car.

Toyota's EV-95 batteries are still running Toyota RAV4-EV cars more than 20,000 miles per year, and for over 100,000 miles so far. But no more EV-95 batteries can be made, after Chevron sued Toyota.

In 1994, Stan Ovshinsky, the inventor of the NiMH battery and principal of Energy Conversion Devices with the late Dr. Iris Ovshinsky, sold control of the NiMH batteries to a joint-venture, GM Ovonic, between GM and his company, with the goal of manufacturing patented NiMH batteries for EVs. Ostensibly, GM was supposed to go into production, and thus, it seemed, perhaps, natural to allow them control of the battery they would, supposedly, be using. In the event, Honda and Toyota used NiMH 4 years prior to GM's final release of a NiMH version of the EV1.

But passing control of the batteries to GM proved a fatal mistake for the future of EVs.

GM announced on Oct. 10, 2000 the sale of the worldwide patent rights for the NiMH batteries to Texaco. Six days later, on Oct. 16, 2000, even before the sale was consummated, Texaco then merged with Chevron. The sale of the batteries was finally concluded on July 17, 2001, long after Texaco had become one with Chevron.

Chevron/Texaco received "...GM's 60 percent stake in [NiMH] batteries, and a 20 percent stake in ECD itself...", giving Chevron effective control of NiMH.

On Mar. 6, 2002, just months after inheriting control of NiMH batteries, Chevron's subsidiary filed suit against Toyota, Panasonic, their PEVE joint venture, Sanyo et al.

On December 12, 2001, Chevron's affiliates filed an arbitration demand...with the International Chamber of Commerce...In December 2002, an arbitration agreement...on Nov. 4-19, 2003, the hearing was held, and concluded on Jan. 21, 2004.

On July 7, 2004, the settlement agreement ended in complete defeat for Toyota, Matsushita and their joint venture, PEVE. NiMH was only mentioned for "hybrids", those which cannot plug in, and Cobasys, Chevron's unit, became distributor of PEVE batteries, received $20 million licensing fee, in addition to $10 million paid to Energy Conversion Devices.

"Cobasys will also receive royalties through December 31, 2013 on certain NiMH batteries sold by [Toyota] in North America."

Chevron oil, the successor to Standard Oil of California, thus worked with GM to eliminate the batteries needed for plug-in EVs, similar to how America's small urban commuter railroads were bought up by the same surprising buyers. The railroads were dismantled, the right-of-way lost to the public domain, just as the NiMH batteries are now unavailable to run EVs or plug-in hybrids that can replace our oil addiction and address global warming concerns.

Until we move to plug-in cars and electric trains, any talk of dealing with climate change, decreasing oil use, or getting free of our oil addiction anemia, is a sham.

Chevron's subsidiary sued Toyota, Panasonic and all other battery makers, forcing a settlement agreement and $30,000,000 payment from Toyota to Chevron's subsidiary.

    * Most importantly, Toyota's NiMH EV-95 production line was closed down, and
    * No more EV-95 batteries are available for any purchaser at any price.


Toyota closed down their production line, and the batteries which power the RAV4-EV or the 1999 EV1 are no longer available. Chevron's patent rights don't expire until 2014.

 
    
When auto makers, CARB regulators and oil companies claim "the batteries are not ready", they are asking you to ignore the hundreds of 2001, 2002 and 2003 Toyota RAV4-EV still running on EV-95 NiMH batteries, faultlessly performing to the specs needed for plug-in EVs and plug-in hybrids.

Don't let them get away with ignoring these real, working batteries, and oil-free cars!

It's not economical to ignore proven batteries in order to do endless "research" on battery technology that is no better than NiMH. They will lie, and say, "Nickel is too expensive", but they have no documentation, no facts. Ask them how much of the battery is Nickel, and how much that recycles for. Nickel has not advanced in price much more than other metals, and it's non-toxic, recyclable, and only a small fraction of the cost of the battery.

Rally pics from Feb. 26. Former EV1 drivers continued to offer to purchase their cars for cash for years.

This is a check for $1,700,000 representing the $24,000 residual value for each of the 77 remaining EV1 6-year old used cars.
GM refused to sell, and continued crushing and destroying the last of the EV1.

Blomberg bloops on GM's Volt
http://www.ev1.org/

    

tags: ev1  bush  chevron  religion  knowledge is power  disaster capitalism  oil  gm  warpeace  electric car  quasicon  richvspoor  takebackamerica  auto  business  politics