I’m pleased to see that blogger Frank Eggers has become active here, who writes:
As one of the comment-posters stated, too little attention is being given to reducing the need for driving . . . With better urban planning, people could often walk where they need to go, ride a bicycle, or use public transportation. But with scattered development, public transportation cannot be made efficient.
This is all true. And I do think I see the seeds of this thinking in young people leaving college with the relevant degrees to get into this subject professionally. Clearly, however, such change will be a long time in the making.
Another issue slowing down the reduction in driving is simply individuals’ resistance to change. I’m reminded of Thomas Edison, who, when he introduced alternating current in the late 19th century, recognized that it represented a scary paradigm shift for American consumers, and wanted to “mess with” that paradigm as little as possible. So, to suggest a way in which electricity could replace gas for room lighting, he put his new lights in the wall sconces where the gas lamps had been. Previously, one could only light a room from the walls, since gas lamps on the ceiling would have brought the whole place down in flames. Even though Edison wished he could show the world a breakthrough in illuminating a room with the more practical and effective ceiling lighting, he wanted to introduce no more change than was absolutely necessary.
My point here is that the best ideas of the generation and use of energy are those that call upon people to make the least change in their attitudes and behaviors. This, btw, is my chief concern about the Commuter Car in the previous post; it calls upon the automotive consumer to make a radical shift in perception, and it’s unclear to me how that will be embraced.
I just had the pleasure of speaking with Rick Woodbury, CEO of Commuter Cars. Rick and his highly pedigreed team of auto designers and strategists have assembled a business plan surrounding the Tango, the small and unique commuter car. There are numerous write-ups floating around on the subject – most notably those on EV World — that I won’t try to paraphrase. In my mind, the facts are simple, and besides, the picture here tells the story quite well:
A super-quick, fun-to-drive NHSTA-approved EV needs to be designed from the ground up, at the considerable expense that one would associate with such a project. The car will meet the needs of commuters who will be asked to pay a premium over an ICE-equivalent for a narrow, short, two-person car that they can maneuver through stop-and-go traffic and park easily (parallel or even perpendicular to the curb).
Other quick details:
a) The Tango is the only enclosed and protected vehicle in the world at this time that can lanesplit, i.e., drive between lanes of stopped or slow-moving traffic, legal in California and most of the world for motorcycles, some of which are 5-inches wider than a Tango.
b) Tandem 2-seater, only 39-inches wide and 8-foot 5-inches long; the same width as a police Harley, and 5-inches narrower than a Honda Gold Wing
c) Most of its weight (batteries) is under the floor, providing a static rollover threshold equivalent to a Porsche 911.
d) With over 1,000 ft lbs of torque, and a zero to 60 acceleration in under 4 seconds, it can out-accelerate most supercars.
Obviously, the demand for such a vehicle has yet to be established. In fact, one could argue, it would be impossible to ascertain such demand with any accuracy, since the car represents disruptive technology; it’s SO different than anything available today that it’s hard to imagine the value of a focus group or quantitative market research effort in pointing to a reliable assessment of actual consumer acceptance.
I think it’s obvious that commuters outside of places like New York City, Washington DC, Boston, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Paris, London – etc. will have little appetite for the car, considering that its price – even with a good economy of scale in production, will be unlikely to be under $25,000. I’ll grant that it’s a blast to drive, but the real appeal is the convenience of a far faster commute, and much easier parking once that commute is over. This is a proposition that seems quite real to me for those in extremely congested areas. But the company is left with the challenge of selling this idea to investors with some fairly deep pockets and willingness to take significant risks.
I enjoyed Rick’s bright mind, his optimism, and the fact that he wasn’t in the least put off my “devil’s advocate” questioning. “Oh don’t worry about that,” he quips; “I’ve heard far worse.” Rick points out that, if a significant number of Tangos were deployed, the entire volume of traffic would decrease for everyone. Of course, I noted, this in and of itself skirts the issue that people do not make purchases based on the welfare of the society. Fortunately, as Rick responded, the value proposition for the consumer himself is considerable: less time in his car commuting to and from work; that society wins too is a lucky side-benefit.
Some current customers who have well over $100,000 apiece for hand-assembled kits include George Clooney, and the Google Founders, Sergey Brin and Larry Page. Of course, that there are a few celebrity environmentalists who can afford to do anything they like does little to convince anyone of the ultimate market demand. Yet I have to agree that there are millions of people who deeply resent their commute, are looking for creative new options — and wouldn’t mind doing the right thing in the process if it proves to be possible. The Tango certainly fits the bill.
Fresh back from my 36-hour pilgrimage to Manhattan, I have to admit the jolt to the system that a trip like that represents for a 54-year-old guy like me. As a younger man, I did the over-scheduled travel scene for decades (e.g., a trip from the East Coast at dinner to attend all-day meetings in Europe the next day — only to come back to the US that night) – but this one reminded me that I’m not 30 years old any more.
In any case, I’m happy to announce that the trip was more than worthwhile. I spent the day with Adrien Corbett, an extremely senior investment banker who has already begun to play a major role in helping 2GreenEnergy readers achieve their goals — making wise investments in renewables, and raising the investment capital necessary to achieve success. More on this soon.
I get the impression that folks don’t really understand the cost of electricity to charge an EV… When the local Costco decided after years of letting my charge my EV while shopping that I was stealing too electricity from them, I called the local power company got their commercial rate and figured out my 3 hour shopping spree cost them about $.45.
Actually, what seems to be happening here to me is the opposite: mall owners are establishing free charging stations to encourage their customers to stay longer (and thus spend more).
But you bring up a critically important point concerning the facilitation of the migration to electric transportation. I.e., an important factor is the use of information technology (based on the Internet) to square up for the purchase of electrical power when one is away from home.
You’ll be happy to know that dozens of people and organizations are working hard to bring this about. You will probably not be as happy to learn that by my wits, there is very little cooperation and sharing of knowledge between them. In fact, many of them seem to be deliberately working against one another, each seeking to establish a different “standard”, each fighting for leadership and ultimate market dominance. This, of course, would be no different than cell phone technology, computer hardware (Mac vs. PC), software (Microsoft vs. Linux/Unix) or any of dozens of different ways that corporate giants profit at the expense of the consumer.
I’ll ask Brian Wynne to comment on this more directly, as he’s in a unique position to look into this process and to comment on what I wrote here.
Thanks for the “Brass Tacks.” I am not suprised at your finding that market surveys very often ask the wrong questions and so get the wrong answers. The most recent in the auto field was of course the Ford Edsel.
I’m not sure that was the most recent, but in any case, thanks for the comment. And you’re so right about research – especially groundbreaking, paradigm-shifting things. I suppose all the discussion of consumer demand for EVs is mere speculation at this point. As you know, I personally believe that an EV at a good price and a decent range will sell like hotcakes—especially if it’s a family’s second car.
Speaking of paradigms, I think a great number of us are tired of “dad’s car,” “mom’s car,” and “Junior’s car.” We’re more than willing to trade that in for “the car for local driving” and “the car we take out of town when going someplace that will take us through a substantial stretch of questionable charging infrastructure.”
Even more to the point, I think a great number of us are rethinking our role as “consumers,” a word that actually means “destroyers.” Fortunately, more and more of us are not happy going through life destroying things for our own fleeting convenience.
I notice that there appears to be pretty solid consensus among readers (at least among those who leave comments) that the real problem in EV migration is more cultural than it is technological. As an example, Mike writes:
Resistance to change is systemic in (North American) society and institutionalized through numerous government agencies at all levels. Tens of thousands of people are employed to maintain and defend the status quo governing who drives, what they drive, where they drive, how fast they can or should drive and what multitude of standards they have to meet to drive at all…..To motivate people to change, innovation needs to be demonstrated and implemented at the local level in willing towns and cities but this would require changes at NHTSA, DOE, state legislatures and municipal councils.
I agree with all this, but I think the die is cast, i.e., that we’re far past the point of no return. It’s true that the low-speed vehicle laws may not change at the state level anytime soon, and that’s bad news for the NEV manufacturers like ZENN, Zap, Miles, etc. But there are so many people working to develop clean power generation and transportation solutions that the status quo you refer to is going to be under enormous pressure soon, regardless of how hard certain agencies work to keep it in place. And this isn’t because people like change; they clearly do not. Rather, it’s due to the fact that technology is improving rapidly every month – and the cost of cutting-edge renewable energy technology is falling fast.
I really can’t see a long-term future for big oil. My parents, whom I’m lucky enough to still have around, have considerable holdings in ExxonMobil, which I’m anxious to have them sell. Chevron’s ads would have us believe that they’re vigorously pushing for clean energy, but it’s obvious that this is completely untrue. Truth, eventually, will win the day.
Readers may be interested in the comments of my friend and client Serafino Carri, posted earlier. Sonny, as he is popularly known, being the good guy he is, wrote me a private email with his response, cautious about offending me with the candor of his remarks. I responded:
Sonny: Thanks so much for the excellent comments, and for notifying me about the typos, which I have fixed.
I truly appreciate your taking the time, and I don’t have a problem with your posting it to the blog; I value your ideas even though some (most?) are not in accord with my own. I’m sure other readers will appreciate your positions as well, and I see no reason not to publish them unedited.
You make some excellent points, the most interesting of which, to me, surrounds market demand, with your point about the $5 socks, i.e., most people won’t buy $5 socks made of organically grown wool when they can get perfectly good socks for $2.50. Yet, as I wrote just yesterday in the blog, all this thought — yours and mine — is mere speculation. Personally, I think my mink coat analogy is very powerful, i.e., that most people actually DO have sensibilities concerning other living creatures that can have powerful effects on their purchasing behavior. But I guess we’ll see shortly the level of demand for the Nissan LEAF, the Mitsubishi i-miEV, the BMW Mini E (which, at 200 hp, is a really cool car), etc. I’ll be very surprised if they don’t sell extremely well.
Please be aware that, even though I still support my mink analogy, I consider altruism a very small portion of the equation — especially in today’s financial climate. But I’m not sure how much we actually NEED altuism. A range of 100 miles will cause very little inconvience to the drivers of the vast majority of the 251 million cars on our roads right now. If a decent-quality BEV is available in the $25K price range, I’ll be stunned if they don’t sell like hotcakes. But again, we’ll have to wait and see.
And in terms of politics and political philosophy, you raise an excellent point about the “pollution tax.” The real problem that we EV advocates face is that, in the course of making a decision on how to move themselves around the planet, people are not paying the true costs. They buy gas, supplied by an oil company, and that oil company simply passes the cost of cleaning up the mess on to future generations.
If I were king of the world, I’d close that loophole this very minute. Immediately after donning my crown, the effective price of a gallon of gasoline would rise to include the cost of the healthcare to deal with the lung disease that is caused by burning it, and it would also include the cost of pulling the CO2 and other garbage out of the atmosphere. We’d have a level playing field on which EVs and renewable energy would be rightly perceived as the bargain of the millennium. And that, in very short order, would be the end of ICEs and the oil companies.
I’m flying to New York City tomorrow to meet with a new associate – a friend of a friend – who will be helping 2GreenEnergy fulfill its promise to investors and entrepreneurs. He runs a small but effective investment banking firm, and seems like a terrific human being. I’ve always loved The City, and I’m really looking forward to all aspects of this trip.
What I see developing at 2GreenEnergy is a community of many thousands of people who take the business of renewables seriously. I’ve spoken with numerous professional investors and scads of inventors with truly exciting business plans. In very short order, we hope to be bringing these two groups together, enabling the formation of dozens of new business ventures. Speaking for all of us here, I’m thrilled to be able to play such a role.
In my “past life” as a marketing consultant for IT, my company delivered services to scores of venture-capitalized start-ups, and I well remember the drill that my clients with new companies went through. Investors want clear paths to liquidity, and that comes from good ideas, but mainly from proven management teams, hungry for success. I’ll never forget what one my client’s investors told me 30 years ago, “If the CEO doesn’t have fire in his belly, I don’t want any part of it.” Here, I’m happy to say that I see a great deal of that “fire,” and this re-enforces my belief that we’re headed in the right direction.
If I have one thing to add to this, it’s the importance of a good marketing plan. When you think about it, a business plan IS a marketing plan. It’s an assertion of the existence of an unmet need, and a quantification of how the company proposes to fill that need.
I urge those with great ideas to follow their thinking through to the exact business model that will be implemented. For instance, I’m speaking with a gentleman with a radical idea for an alternative drive train, and I’m encouraging him to flesh out the business plan to include at least the broad strokes of marketing: Does he contemplate becoming an OEM in a particular niche that seems to be available? Cutting a deal with an auto OEM? With one or more motor/drivetrain suppliers? Entering the supply chain in some innovative new way? Offering a conversion kit? Developing an affiliation with a university known for its transportation engineering?
When I return from The City, I hope to be able to post a series of helpful tips about this entire process of preparing an effective business/marketing plan.
I’m always glad when readers write in to alert me to news items in renewables that I may have overlooked. Scott Ledgerwood writes:
Craig — enjoyed your hydrokinetics write-up. In case you missed this, see DOE notice on upcoming projects for Advanced Water Power Technologies; it specifically mentions hydrokinetics.
Thanks, Scott. I heard that the DoE received 3500 requests for grant money – obviously an order of magnitude or so more than they had anticipated. My partner with the HyPEG invention is busily applying for grant money to develop his idea, and I know he’ll be glad to see this. In particular, I note that that the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee is evaluating turbine designs for fish-friendliness. As I’m sure you recall, that is one of the key features/benefits of the HyPEG.
At the risk of stating the obvious, the subject of renewable energy is so much sexier than energy efficiency. I’m always amazed at all the interest on CFL bulbs, energy-efficient appliances – even hybrid electric vehicles. Every joule of energy your sending to the wheels of your Prius is coming from the chemical energy of the gas you’re putting in the tank; you’re just managing the process if bit better. Personally, I fail to see the excitement.
Energy efficiency is like dieting. You find ways to consume less, normally at the expense of some level of deprivation. What I like about renewable energy is that, once we’d gotten a handle on it, we can consume like utter pigs! Drive a Hummer with a 600 hp motor! Heat your swimming pool in February!
Again, a solar thermal farm in the shape of a square 92 miles on a side in the southwest US desert will produce more energy each day than the entire continent of North America can consume. We need this, or any of the other ways to capture and distribute 1/6000th of the energy our planet receives daily from the sun.
I’m convinced that we have the technology at our disposal. Google “solar thermal,” “molten salt,” and “high voltage DC” and see if you don’t become convinced as well.
I’m pleased to see that blogger Frank Eggers has become active here, who writes:
