Nissan's Leaf just underscores how boneheaded our automakers were.

[Skidmore]

Just saw a news article about it. Here's the link to Nissan's site on the car:

http://www.nissanusa.com/leaf-electric-car/#/car/intro

Detroit, in its shortsightedness and willingness to collude with Big Oil, really screwed the nation and itself over. I'm sorry if this offends any autoworkers, but it just really makes me angry when I think about how we could have been ahead of the curve AND have jobs to support a forward looking industry.

[Bluebear]

1. Zero emissions. That's what I'm talking about. nt

[Romulox]

4. Zero *tailpipe* emissions, you surely mean? nt

[anigbrowl]

11. Nothing at all can be manufactured without any emissions

However, you can limit emissions at the point of production, and the ones you can't help, you can measure and offset. The same goes for power generation (to charge up the batteries when it's plugged in at home).

[Romulox]

17. "you can measure and offset"...this does not compute

First of all, "zero emissions" is Nissan's (rather misleading, imo) slogan, not mine! Second of all, the question must be as to the overall environmental impact of the vehicle--from extraction of the raw materials, to the manufacturing process, to energy efficiency, and finally recycling impact.

None of which is to say that this Leaf doesn't represent a step forward. But "zero emissions" is misleading bordering on dishonesty.

[sendero]

29. Not to mention..

.... the emissions produced to generate the electricity required to power it.

[anigbrowl]

35. ...which are far more controllable at a power plant than on the road

Power plants burn fuel with much greater efficiency than a car engine because they have economies of scale, and emissions are also easier to manage since they're concentrated rather than diffuse.

[kestrel91316]

44. Here in CA we have substantial solar and wind power generation,

which is also emission-free. If a Leaf owner wishes to provide electricity for the vehicle via home solar panels and/or wind power, the car would absolutely run emission-free.

Compare that to a car running on gasoline or getting electricity from a coal-fired power plant. You DO see the relative levels of emissions, right?

[sendero]

52. Dont' get me wrong..

... electric vehicles are clearly an environmental win. I just don't like the "emissions free" thing, because it is pretty much factually incorrect.

Lower emissions, most certainly.

[anigbrowl]

34. Certainly it does

"the question must be as to the overall environmental impact of the vehicle--from extraction of the raw materials, to the manufacturing process, to energy efficiency, and finally recycling impact"

...yes, that's the stuff you can measure the costs of at the point of production, reduce to some degree (carbon sequestration, more power-efficient assembly methods and so on) and offset the rest by planting trees etc. What I'm saying is that the environmental costs are easier to measure and manage at the point of production than at the point of use.

This idea of the overall impact is well known - as you point out yourself, it's even been the subject of an ad campaign about Toyota striving to make the manufacturing as green as the operation. You're being needlessly picky here, quite a few industries have been working towards that 'big picture' metric now. I don't find it misleading in the least.

[Romulox]

41. The "offset the rest by planting trees" is a bit questionable, imo.

At any rate, this is not any different than the same metrics that can be used on gas burning vehicles. Which can be "offset" the same way, if you buy into this rather dubious concept in the first place.

So I'm not sure what point you're making. Certainly the most efficient petroleum burning cars are more efficient than the Prius on all counts. "Hybrid" and "Electric" aren't a magic wand!

"it's even been the subject of an ad campaign about Toyota striving to make the manufacturing as green as the operation."

I considered calling the FTC over that campaign. Some dullard out there probably believes their Prius was made by a woodchuck. :eyes:

[Romulox]

2. Until you can test-drive one, it's vaporware.

Does the commercial where they show a Prius made out of wood and bark impress you, too? :shrug:

[Skidmore]

5. The Prius is on the market and I have no doubt that the Leaf will

be on the market as well. AND that does not negate the fact that we should be further along in rolling out an affordable no emissions automobile that does not have us held hostage by the fossil fuel industry.

[Romulox]

6. The Leaf is not on the market now, so I guess it's time to wait and see..

There are any number of such proposals from every one of the major car manufacturers. Nothing special about the leaf.

[Bonobo]

7. Head meet sand. nt

[Romulox]

9. I guess that will have to do until the rubber meets the road.

:hi:

[anigbrowl]

22. Well, here's a review of it

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/08/01/2010-nissan-leaf-electric-car-in-person-in-depth-and-u-s-b/

You won't be able to buy one for about a year, but that's partly because it takes time to ramp up the production line. Nissan has already started fitting production facilities for it, though. It's attracted some attention in the business world because Carlos Ghosn (the boss of Nissan) has stated bluntly to investors that the company's future depends on all-electric vehicles and it's the centerpiece of their corporate strategy. In a nutshell, he's betting the farm on it, partly because he doesn't think Nissan-Renault has any competitive advantage in internal-combustion engines. This isn't just PR-speak, it involves a very large financial commitment and one that comes at the expense of research into conventional engines, so he is putting the company's money where its mouth is.

[Romulox]

24. It says they weren't allowed to drive it!

And that what they viewed was a concept vehicle not representative of a production model. By contrast, Ford has supplied a functioning Ford Focus Electric to the Jay Leno program:



:hi:

[anigbrowl]

28. And that's not the whole point I'm making. As for Ford, I hope they succeed too

It's not that I want Nissan to win out for any particular reason, I just disagree with your suggestion that it's vaporware because they've already committed serious financial resources. I don't buy into the OP's contention that US manufacturers are doomed to lose this race - what's important to me is that the race is on and multiple car companies have decided this is a market worth competing for. The more competition there is the better for consumers, the environment, and the economy in general.

[Romulox]

37. A "review" of a car implies sitting in the driver's seat and directing the vehicle's motion...

:shrug:

[anigbrowl]

38. And that's not the whole point I was making. Context: it matters.

[Romulox]

40. To be fair, "context" involves the points both parties to the conversation are making

as well as the commonly agreed upon definitions of words. :shrug:

[alfredo]

68. The Ford Focus is a popular addition to the European Rally scene.

[bigmonkey]

54. Speaking of the rubber meeting the road ...

I used to live in the Bay Area, and one day I read a very interesting article about the contamination of bay sediments by unusual chemical compounds. A scientist had been curious, and his investigations found that these were chemicals that were used in auto tires. In other words, rubber particles (with chemical adulterants) were washing off the roads and winding up in the sediments in the bay.

I'm not mentioning this to quibble, I just thought it interesting, in that it points out just how pervasive the effects some of our industrial processes are. So, technically, there would still be "emissions" from the tires of the electric cars.

That said, I'd buy one now if they were available. I think they can likely fix the tire thing, in the long run. :-)

[divideandconquer]

8. Prius has to use slave labor to make it profitable

The Dark Side of the Toyota Prius
By PAUL ABOWD

The National Labor Committee (NLC), a New York-based human rights group, has been investigating working conditions at Toyota Motor Corp., and the labor used to produce its best-selling Prius hybrid cars.

In its 65-page report released in June, NLC includes first-hand testimony of factory conditions in “Toyota City,” outside of Nagoya, Japan — less than 200 miles southwest of Tokyo — where the largest auto company in the world employs some 70,000 people.

The report alleges that Toyota exploits guest workers, mostly shipped in from China and Vietnam. According to the NLC, these workers are “stripped of their passports and often forced to work — including at subcontract plants supplying Toyota — 16 hours a day, seven days a week, while being paid less than half the legal minimum wage.” Workers are forced to live in company dormitories and deported for complaining about poor treatment, the report finds.

Low-wage temporary workers make up one-third of Toyota’s Prius assembly-line workers, mostly in the auto-parts supply chain. They are signed to contracts for periods as short as four months, and are paid only 60 percent of a full-time employee’s wage.
----------------------------------------------
<http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/3796/the_dark_side_of_the_toyota_prius>

BTW, Toyota Tundra and Sequioa are huge gas guzzlers, worse than comparable Chevys.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

10. you mean they are building part of it in the US?

we have becomes slaves to the corporate world, after all.

[Skidmore]

16. Right. How many boneheaded decisions lead to no-wage American

worker?

[SoCalDem]

18. Then why aren't our wonderful legislators slapping tariffs on it, or even banning it?

Because the almighty dollars is the only thing they see.. dollars from oil companies, and all their slimy buddies.

no manufaturing process is totally clean or uses "fair" labor the way we would like it to be, but people will buy cars because they need cars to get to work..

we are shortsighted as a nation because every 4-8 years we try to UNDO what the guy before did, and we never move ahead.. we are perpetually focused on the past, except for the part where we could learn from it:(

[Romulox]

20. Are you kidding? Our gov't will give you $4800 to buy a foreign made car.

god bless america!

:eyes:

[tabasco]

66. A big crock of doodoo.

In fact, as I always say, a little research goes a long ways. First, this is coming from complaints from an organization called the NLC, some pro labor union interest group. The NLC apparently has a huge beef with Toyota because, through various means, they skip dealing with any labor unions at all, even when it comes to parts distribution which is supposedly (according to the NLC) hard to do.

Now, sort of off topic, I am trying to figure out where bit is a shock to anybody. Notice how every single major auto manufacturer who follows union rules is in a financial sh*t storm right now. In fact most of them don't even have a sustainable business model. Look at the companies like Toyota on the other hand, who ignore labor unions, and are *gasp* doing well right now, and as a result their employees have better job security. I mean really? Aren't labor unions supposed to be good for their members? Or are they just there to skim a bit off of the top of their wages while pretending to help? Sounds like the NLC is appealing to bleeding hearts to sustain their business model - food for thought.

But I digress. Moving along: The NLC doesn't seem to offer much proof for some of these claims. In fact, they are trying to reach out to celebrities to back their cause. True sign of an unbiased report, right? Toyota has, on the other hand, responded to these claims, which you can find elsewhere on NLC's website:

http://www.nlcnet.org/article.php?id=576

Yet the NLC offers no response to this. But that's not all, here's another tidbit reported by the BBC:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7433145.stm

http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=139959&page=3

[Xithras]

21. It's not vaporware. You can sorta test drive one today.

And you can test drive a gas burning model. Instead of reinventing the wheel like so many other companies have done (like GM, who insists that bringing an electric car to market must cost billions and take many years of R&D), the Leaf is simply a Nissan Versa with an electric power train and some lightened body panels. They took an existing platform, and retooled it slightly.

Ford will be doing the same thing with the Focus for the 2011 model year, and several other foreign manufacturers have similar projects coming out in the next 2-3 years.

GM is actually going to be in a bit of trouble with the Volt because of this. They are pricing the Volt ~$40k because they have massive R&D costs to recoup. Nearly all of their competitors are going to be significantly cheaper, because they built on existing technology instead of redeveloping from scratch. While the Volt will certainly have a better electric feature set than its competitors, there's a real question as to whether those features will justify a $10k-$15k price difference. That's a LOT of money.

And where is Chrysler? Oh yeah, they dumped their entire electric line a few days ago.

[Romulox]

25. You can test drive a gas burning Ford Focus today, too. nt

[Xithras]

42. Yep.

And I gave Ford credit for that. It's just a shame that they ruined an otherwise attractive subcompact in the last redesign by turning an edby compact hothatch into one of the most boring sedans I've seen in a while. Not that I'm giving Nissan a pass here either. I can't, for the life of me, figure out how they ended up with something as fugly as the Leaf when they started with the Versa (which isn't the most attractive thing either, but it's not bad looking).

Auto designers seem to think that electric cars have to be bulbous and ugly, even when there is no practical design reason for doing so.

[Botany]

3. thanx for posting

n/t

[Romulox]

12. Looks like Ford's electric vehicles will beat the Leaf to market...

Electric Van in 2010
Electric Focus in 2011

Leaf is not set for public sale until 2012! :wow:

http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2009/05/electric-ford-focus-in-2011-what-it-means.html

[anigbrowl]

26. that's a touch misleading

2012 is the date suggested for public sale, but they plan a leasing program to begin next year. I can see them pushing to companies like Zipcar and similar to begin with, because the car will depend on having some infrastructure built up to support it (charging stations and so on). High voltage charging stations are already appearing in the Bay Area, don't know about the rest of the country. These charging stations will work for any electric vehicle, of course.

[Romulox]

43. The point being is that until production vehicles are available, these are ALL press releases.

:hi:

[Skidmore]

27. At $40K a pop, you won't see us buying a Focus soon.

I'm looking forward to seeing how these other cars are priced.

[Romulox]

45. Leaf is set to cost about the same.

:hi:

[provis99]

13. the Leaf looks a whole lot better than that worthless GM Volt.

I think GM went out of its way to design a deliberately bad electric car, just so they could complain to the US government that electric car technology was beyond their means.

Two great electric cars already on the market:

http://www.teslamotors.com/

http://www.think.no/

Two tiny startup car companies that do electric cars better than GM.

[blue_onyx]

32. The Volt looks fantastic

The Leaf is hideous. The Volt is far more practical too. Until our infrastructure is adapted to serve electric vehicles, it makes sense to include a small gas engine.

[SteelPenguin]

49. yeah

100 miles a day without a charge makes a great city/commuter car, but I have 3 kids and we frequently drive 180 miles to their grandparents. The Leaf wouldn't do the trick. The Volt would, plus for our normal use it'd be emissions free. It'd just give us the flexibility of longer trips.

[Greyskye]

47. Volt technology is superior to that of the Prius

And I say that as a Prius owner who believes that it's the best car I've ever owned.

Series hybrid design is simply superior to a parallel hybrid design.

[Tikki]

14. I like what I've read......

I think it looks just fine.

Tikki

[nykym]

15. I really don't

care what reports, studies, projections etc are generated. The fact remains that the original energy crisis from the 70's was an opportunity for all corporations to start to do things differently. But because of outright greed nothing was done. Automakers in particular had ample time to start a green revolution and be the driving force behind getting us off OPE C's teat. Now all we hear is about the cost involved and how it will take x years yadda yadda yadda. If they would stop trying to tell us what kind of gas guzzling behemoth we should be driving and start listening to what is going on in the world instead of endless delays and end runs to put it off, they might have been more solvent now. Sorry had to rant.

[Skidmore]

19. Recommend,

if I could. Well said.

[anigbrowl]

30. Completely agree. It's a global problem, not just a US one. .nt

[pscot]

33. That conveniently relieves the motoring public

of all responsibility for the current debacle. Basically, Americans rejected small cars in favor of high-powered gas guzzlers. Yes the car companies pushed pickups and luxury sedans, but that was what the people wanted. The stupid doesn't begin and end with Detroit execs. In the words of the immortal Milo Minderbinder, everybody has a share.

[redqueen]

51. Then why all the complaining about all the Americans who want

tiny Hondas and Toyotas?

There is a market for environment/energy-cost conscious consumers. US automakers chose to cede that market to foreign automakers.

[dysfunctional press]

56. foriegn automakers made small cars for their own markets...

where gas prices were higher, and space is at a premium.

americans didn't want small cars until the oil embargo happened- and then they wanted them RIGHT NOW! american automakers didn't have them, and couldn't feasibly design, test, re-tool factories, etc. overnight, so the foriegn cars were able to grab market share.

[redqueen]

58. Yeah... that excuse actually worked *in the 70's*. And in the decades since?

While the evidence has been pouring in re: emissions and their role in climate change?

What's their excuse for continuing to sit on their hands and whine about costs/timeframes?

[dysfunctional press]

62. the embargo ended, gas prices went back down, and americans wanted bigger cars again.

hence the era of the suv.
and in the decades since, their reliability and quality have improved greatly..
to the point where they are pretty much on a par with the foriegn automakers.
but people still have their mindset in the 70's.

[Altoid_Cyclist]

36. Good job! As Skidmore already pointed out.

The automakers in this country wrapped themselves in the flag and tried to tell American car buyers that they should be real Americans and just do what they were told to do by the big three.

The American big three got away with the old "They'll buy whatever we decide to make" business model for so long that they became complacent, outdated and devoid of any new ideas to woo buyers who had many more options than A, B or C.

The company that I used to work for was heavily involved in the auto industry and even they adopted the same approach. The customer will get what we want them to get, when we want them to get it.

That's certainly worked out well for their competitors.

[Romulox]

39. Occam's Razor suggests it hasn't been done yet because it hasn't been feasible.

Else you have to chart a conspiracy that includes every manufacturing entity on the planet. For example, if cheap and reliable economic cars can be produced with existing technology, why isn't China's Chery motors making an aggressive stab at entering the US market with a low cost electric vehicle? Oil men got them? OK. What about Tata? Oil men, you say? Renault? Honda? BMW? Daewoo? Oil men got to all of them? Oil men bribing Tesla into an utter inability to deliver an affordable vehicle?

Or is it more sensible to believe that until now, this technology has not been feasible? :hi:

[Overseas]

70. But Reagan told us we didn't have to listen to that downer Jimmy Carter.

Reagan told us it was "Morning in America"-- he said we didn't have to listen to the Geek in Chief wearing sweaters in the White House, talking about limits to growth and sustainable development. Hell no! It was morning, he said. We could rip those solar panels off the White House, go play with junk bonds and cut taxes for the top earners so they could really show us how much we needed to buy to emulate the Lifestyles of the Rich & Famous.

Tax cut and spend, that's the Republican way-- but not that softy spending like helping people. No no. Not that socialized stuff. "Covert" wars were the way to rack up those deficits and keep the perks privatized. To keep the rich getting richer, to return them to the rightful position they had before that awful FDR interfered. Just had to bust those unions too, because they kept interfering in politics, getting their damn rabble to vote and comment on company management and economic justice.

The right wing succeeded in those efforts. And here we are now. Decades later with runaway climate changes due to our having continued to pollute our atmosphere with too much carbon burning.

[merh]

23. I like how it looks

[redqueen]

50. I do, too.

The real draw for me, though, is the emissions.

Priorities, right? :)

[merh]

60. emissions are important or rather, the lack of tailpipe emissions

the looking good is lagniappe

[Kalyke]

31. But, good God, that's ugly.

I'm so tired of bubble cars.

FWIW, my last, current and next car purchase will be a Ford. I support the UAW, American profits staying at home, fuel economy and the ability of an automaker to make a car that doesn't look like something Glenda the Good Witch would travel in.

ETA: I'm hoping to make a new car purchase again in 2014. I pray that, by then, Ford will come up with the technology to put a manual transmission drive train into hybird. I hate automatic transmissions.

[Greyskye]

57. Get used to the look

That's the look you get when you make a car aerodynamic. At 55 mph, 50% of your cars energy is used to simply push the car through the air resistance. Electric and hybrid vehicles can't afford to give away horsepower simply for aesthetics.

The manual transmission is also going away due to the drive for fuel efficiency. The new transmissions aren't really 'automatic' transmissions as much as they are 'Continuously Variable Transmissions'.

http://prius.ecrostech.com/original/Understanding/ContinuouslyVariableTransmission.htm
"True" Continuously Variable Transmission

The more gear ratios we have, the more choices we have in setting the engine spin rate for any given speed. This allows us to call for power when we need it by revving high but to cruise economically by lowering the engine spin rate and reducing losses associated with the fast-moving internal engine parts. A conventional CVT has an infinite (or a very large number) of gear ratios. It selects a ratio that can deliver to the wheels the power being demanded by the driver, but keeps the engine spin rate low within this constraint to improve economy and engine life. You can imagine that as the car picks up speed, the transmission continually shifts into a slightly higher gear. The result is that the pitch of the engine tone stays fairly constant and the acceleration falls off smoothly, instead of in steps, as the higher gear ratios have a smaller multiplying effect on the engine torque.

[Fumesucker]

63. The Lexus LS 460 has a Cd of 0.26..

One of the lowest on the American road..

http://www.pressroom.com.au/press_kit_detail.asp?clientID=3&navSectionID=6&categoryID=1000&kitID=222#2235

I doubt the Leaf is much, if any, lower.

[Greyskye]

67. I wouldn't have thought that the Lexus had a Cd that low.

The Japanese did a good job designing the Lexus 460; I wouldn't have thought that it had a Cd that low.

Here is some insight into the Leaf designers thoughts. Whether they were successful or not is up to individual interpretation. ;) :

So his team developed the bulging headlamps, conceivably to break up and channel the flow of air before it meets the seam of windshield and creates noise. They also paid particular attention to the shape and orientation of the side mirrors, to reduce wind nose from the side.

So were they successful in reducing drag and noise? Nakamura thinks so. "I can not say Cd (coefficient of drag) but it is very good -- without making it the typical one motion aeroform," he says during an interview prior to the Leaf's reveal, alluding to the prosaic shape of both the Toyota Prius and Honda Insight that has become synonymous with low drag. "This is our own expression. But at the same time it doesn't compromise."

Read more: http://blogs.motortrend.com/6537775/green/zero-emissions-all-green-introducing-the-nissan-leaf-ev/index.html#ixzz0WqztBbMu

But I think this is more the direction we're headed: "The coefficient of drag is rated at 0.15, twice as efficient as most standard automobiles."
Click the image to go to the Aptera web site.


Recent review of the Aptera:
http://www.lvrj.com/drive/three-wheeled-aptera-is-striking-but-concept-is-not-entirely-new-69949877.html

[Fumesucker]

72. That's very good.

But the Mercedes Boxfish car gets a Cd of 0.19 and uses space much more efficiently.

And manages to look a smidgen less like something straight out of Bladrunner than the Aptera..

http://www.greencarsite.co.uk/CONCEPTCARS/Mercedes-BioFish.htm

[Greyskye]

73. "Mercedes don't ever expect to put the Bionic Fish into production"

Too bad.

[Strelnikov_]

64. Eliminate the rear fairing area and you have a VW Beetle

which is the preferred car for TDI hyper milers.

In fact, a few years back someone added a fairing to the back of a TDI beetle and got 70mpg+ as I recall.

[Midwestern Democrat]

75. Agreed. Fuel economy has just killed car styling - I understand that it's

necessary but it's also a major cultural loss. You're sure not going to see today's bubble cars in an auto collectors show 30 years from now.

[and-justice-for-all]

46. So much concern over a very unimportant issue here...

how the car looks. :eyes:

I really do not think it looks any worse than a Prius; not only is the idea to use no fossil fuel to propel the auto, but there is also a 'minimalist' approach to the design. I see nothing wrong with the this auto, especially knowing the consequences for doing nothing on this matter.

Global Climate change is far more of a concern then the look of this EV.

[Vehl]

48. Looks like a great car!....people need to watch "who killed the electric car" documentary

PS:
If anyone is interested in learning why many American automaker's neglected electric cars, they need to watch the excellent documentary "Who killed the Electric Car?"

[blue_onyx]

53. Except it wasn't just the US automakers

For example, where's the RAV4 EV that Toyota produced to meet California's zero-emisssion standards? Toyota started destroying them as leases ended, just like GM did with the EV1.

"Approximately 1500 all-electric RAV4s were built from 1997 to 2003, which offered a top speed of 80 mph and a range of nearly 100 miles. The full recharge time was 5 hours, and the MSRP at the time was $42,000. Although 1500 RAV4 EVs were built, only about 328 were sold, with the remaining vehicles being destroyed as they came off their leases."

http://www.trucktrend.com/features/news/2009/163_news090424_toyota_rav4_hybrid_suv/index.html

[Hannah Bell]

55. "our" automakers. lol.

[JVS]

71. +1

[Festivito]

59. Ha! Typical Repub bullshit followed by more bullshit.

Fault Detroit for making money and not being green when it did not pay.

Praise Japan for having decent enough government to nationally fund auto research for the good of the people -- while we DID NOT!

"I'm sorry if this offends..." No you're not. That's just a smartass way to push a right-wing talking point into quick readers.

[NNN0LHI]

69. Yes it is

Right out of Rush's playbook.

The OP is only fooling the dimwits.

Don

[DainBramaged]

61. Ahem......

The price of the Leaf will exclude the batteries. Nissan is counting on leasing the batteries at a price, including recharging, that is equivalent to gasoline. But the risk of that assumption is with the buyer. So if the initial cost of the vehicle and operating cost have no advantage over gasoline powered vehicles, and the range is limited, this will become another niche electric vehicle. And when the you realize that most of electricity is coming from coal, the Leaf is not so green after all.

[Strelnikov_]

65. Looks like a good form factor for a mass-market electric n/t

[Blue_Tires]

74. ironic because not that long ago Carlos Ghosn

was a huge detractor of efficient and green technologies...