Who+Killed+the+Electric+Car+-+JPH

**Director:** Chris Paine **Year:** 2006 **What is the central argument or narrative of the film?** This film takes a look at the birth and death of the electric vehicle (EV) movement in California. It examines the different technologies and stakeholders to determine what factors contributed to the death of the electric vehicle program and how the death of the program is a detriment to society and the environment. The film determines that big oil, car manufactures, California Air Recourses Board, and the Government contributed in various ways to the death of the electric car while the technology and demand for the product did not contribute to the death of the electric car program. **What sustainability problems does the film draw out?** //Government Administrations Not Enforcing Mandates and Law// The California Air Resource Board (C.A.R.B.) mandated that a certain percentage of car in California be zero emissions by certain milestone dates. This policy was enacted to help clean up the smog in California cities. Under great pressure from car manufactures C.A.R.B. created loop holes in the mandate which allowed for the car manufacturers to use their power, influence, and shoddy record keeping to destroy the mandate and then proceeded to the kill the electric car program. //Government Funding and Subsides// The government often subsides and funds unsustainable projects, commodities, or unproven technology which make current better alternatives more expensive. The government subsidizes oil to keep oil more affordable in place of alternative methods of transportation. The film explains how the government’s promise to fund hydrogen fuel cell technology helped to kill the electric car by diverting attention of politicians and the public away from the electric car so that the car companies could kill the program quietly. Hydrogen fuel cell technology is still extremely expensive and is currently extremely impractical. The alternative that is currently practical is the electric car which had any possible funding diverted to the hydrogen fuel cells which would not be available for 30 years at best. //Established Companies Afraid of Change// The car companies were afraid of the changes in their business that would take place if a significant portion of their business became electric vehicles. They would not be able to sell as many replacement parts because the electric cars didn’t have nearly as many parts and were much easier to service. They would have to reinvent the way that they did business to maintain their current profits. When GM realized that there was a demand for such a revolutionary product they became scared of how their business would have to change so instead of adapting to the challenge they worked to destroy the zero emissions mandate and kill the electric car program. **What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?** I was most persuaded by the C.A.R.B hearing where C.A.R.B. made the decision to create loop holes in the zero emissions mandate. This reinforced that there are so many vested interests out there that have much more influence on officials then citizen activists. There were 78 supporters of the zero emissions standards at that C.A.R.B. hearing while there were only 2 representatives from the auto industry and C.A.R.B. still agreed to de-tooth the mandate. **What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why?** I was not convinced that the electric car was the savior that the auto industry and the environment needed, as the film presents. I agree that there are many advantaged to the electric car in terms of negative environmental impact, however, there are also environmental issues with the electric cars that were not discussed. There are many toxic chemicals and metals that are used in the batteries and the car is only as good as the battery. Although I agree that the electric car can meet 92% of users needs, it begs the question of what users are supposed to do if they need to make a long trip that is out of the range of their car. **What audiences does the film best address? Why?** I think that this film best addresses young activists who are thinking about getting involved in environmental issues. This film provides a good case study of what types of resistance one will face when they try to enact change. One does not have to believe in the electric car to gain an understanding of the challenges of fighting the government, regulatory boards, and corporations to enact positive change. **What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?** The educational value of this film could have been enhanced by an examination of other alternatives to batteries or hydrogen such as ethanol and hybrids. Additional information on infrastructure for electric vehicles and the required infrastructure for other types of vehicles such as hydrogen fuel cell or ethanol fuels would have been helpful to allow viewers to look at the future possibilities. There was also not a discussion or action plan for how to bring the electric car back. The majority of the film was dedicated to the death of the electric car and learning about who had killed it. **What kinds of actions and points of intervention are suggested by the film? If the film itself does not suggest corrective action, describe actions that you can imagine being effective.** A point of intervention that is not suggested by the film, but I remember reading about several years ago is to sell the power rather than the car to make the electric car a more affordable and convenient alternative to gas. Auto companies should give the cars away for dirt cheap and charge them for the power. Instead of having plug in’s for individuals we need to create an infrastructure where when your battery is about to die you pull into a replacement station (just like a gas station) and your entire battery is replaced for a fully charged one. This way you “fill up” in about 5 minutes and never have to worry about charging your car and/or getting stranded by running out of power. Companies will make money on replacing the batteries and selling the power rather than on the car itself. This will encourage more people to buy the cars upfront and will be able to theoretically meet 100% of users. Other points of intervention include keeping **What additional information has this film compelled you to seek out?** I looked up more information on the Chevy Volt GM’s new hybrid/electric vehicle [] It was interesting to see where GM is at now after they destroyed their EV program. This article describes that the EPA could give the Volt a 230 mpg rating based on its electric vehicle status, but that they will have to evaluate how much mileage users should expect to actually get. This raises some suspicions on how EV’s mpg’s are being quantified. []
 * Film:** Who Killed the Electric Car?