Electric car

BEVs were among the earliest automobiles. Between 1832 and 1839 (the exact year is uncertain), Scottish businessman Robert Anderson invented the first crude electric carriage. Professor Sibrandus Stratingh of Groningen, Netherlands, designed the small-scale electric car, built by his assistant Christopher Becker in 1835.

The improvement of the storage battery, by Frenchmen Gaston Plante in 1865 and by Camille Faure in 1881, paved the way for electric vehicles to flourish. France and Great Britain were the first nations to support the widespread development of electric vehicles.^[1]

Just prior to 1900, before the pre-eminence of powerful but polluting internal combustion engines, electric automobiles held many speed and distance records. Among the most notable of these records was the breaking of the 100 km/h (60 mph) speed barrier, by Camille Jenatzy on April 29, 1899 in his 'rocket-shaped' EV, La Jamais Contente which reached a top speed of 105.88 km/h (65.79 mph).

BEVs, produced by Anthony Electric, Baker Electric (See Baker Motor Vehicle), Detroit Electric and others during the early 20th Century for a time out-sold gasoline-powered vehicles. Due to technological limitations and the lack of transistor-based electric technology, the top speed of these early production electric vehicles was limited to about 32 km/h (20 mph). These vehicles were successfully sold as town cars to upper-class customers and were often marketed as suitable vehicles for women drivers due to their clean, quiet and easy operation. (Did not require hand cranking to start.)

The introduction of the electric starter by Cadillac in 1913 simplified the task of starting the internal combustion engine, formerly difficult and sometimes dangerous. This innovation contributed to the downfall of the electric vehicle, as did the invention of the radiator, in use as early as 1895 by Panhard-Levassor in their Système Panhard design,^[2] which allowed engines to keep cool enough to run for more than a few minutes, rather than stop often at horse troughs to cool down and replenish their water supply. EVs may have fallen out of favor because of the mass-produced and relatively inexpensive Ford Model-T, which had been produced for four years, since 1908.^[3] Internal-combustion vehicles advanced technologically, ultimately becoming more practical than -- and out-performing -- their electric-powered competitors.

Another blow to BEVs was the loss of Edison's direct current electric power transmission system in the War of Currents. This deprived the BEV of the source of DC current necessary to recharge their batteries. As the technology of rectifiers was still in its infancy, producing DC current locally was unfeasable.

By the late 1930s, the electric automobile industry had completely disappeared, with battery-electric traction being limited to niche applications, such as certain industrial vehicles.

The 1947 invention of the point-contact transistor marked the beginning of a new era for BEV technology. Within a decade, Henney Coachworks had joined forces with National Union Electric Company, the makers of Exide batteries, to produce the first modern electric car based on transistor technology, the Henney Kilowatt, produced in 36-volt and 72-volt configurations. The 72-volt models had a top speed approaching 96 km/h (60 mph) and could travel nearly an hour on a single charge. Despite the improved practicality of the Henney Kilowatt over previous electric cars, it was too expensive, and production was terminated in 1961. Even though the Henney Kilowatt never reached mass production volume, their transistor-based electric technology paved the way for modern EVs.

As of July, 2006, there are between 60,000 and 76,000 low-speed, battery powered vehicles in use in the US, up from about 56,000 in 2004 according to Electric Drive Transportation Association estimates.^[4]

Since the late 1980s, electric vehicles have been promoted in the US through the use of tax credits. BEVs are the most common form of what is defined by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) as zero emission vehicle (ZEV) passenger automobiles, because they produce no emissions while being driven. The CARB had set a minimum quota for the use of ZEVs, but it was withdrawn after complaints by auto manufacturers that it was economically unfeasible due to a lack of consumer demand.

The California program was designed by the CARB to reduce air pollution and not specifically to promote electric vehicles. So the zero emissions requirement in California was replaced by a combined requirement of a very small number of ZEVs to promote research and development, and a much larger number of partial zero-emissions vehicles (PZEVs), an administrative designation for a super ultra low emissions vehicle (SULEV), which emit about ten percent of the pollution of ordinary low emissions vehicles and are also certified for zero evaporative emissions.

France

France saw a large development of battery-electric vehicles in the 1990s; the most successful vehicle was the electric Peugeot Partner/Citroën Berlingo, of which several thousand have been built, mostly for fleet use in municipalities and by Electricité de France.

Norway

In Norway, zero-emission vehicles are tax-exempt and are allowed to use the bus lane.

Switzerland

In Switzerland, battery-electric vehicles are popular with private users. There is a national network of publicly accessible charging points, called Park & Charge, which also covers part of Germany and Austria.

United Kingdom

In London, electrically powered vehicles are exempt from the congestion charge. In most UK cities, low-speed electric milk floats (milk trucks) are used for the home delivery of fresh milk.

Italy

In Italy, all private ZEVs are exempt from taxes and have a substantial insurance fee reduction. In most cities the trash collection is performed by BEV trucks.

Some popular battery electric vehicles sold or leased to fleets include (in chronological order):

BEVs have become much less common than internal combustion vehicles. Therefore, it is often helpful to consider many aspects of BEVs in comparison to ICE vehicles.

Electric vehicles typically cost between two and four cents per mile to operate, while gasoline-powered ICE vehicles currently cost about four to six times as much.^[5]

The total cost of ownership for modern BEVs depends primarily on the cost of the batteries, the type and capacity of which determine several factors such as travel range, top speed, battery lifetime and recharging time; several trade-offs exist.

Production and conversion BEVs using NIMH battery chemistry typically use 0.3 to 0.5 kilowatt-hours per mile (0.2–0.3 kWh/km).^[6][7] Nearly half of this power consumption is due to inefficiencies in charging the batteries: The manufacturer of the Li-ion Tesla reports usage of .215 kWh per mile. The US fleet average of 23 miles per gallon of gasoline is equivalent to 1.58 kWh per mile and the 70 MPG Honda Insight gets 0.52 kWh per mile (assuming 36.4 kWh per US gallon of gasoline), so battery electric vehicles are relatively energy efficient.

When comparisons of the total, well-to-wheel energy cycle are made, the relative efficiency of BEVs drops, but such calculations are usually not provided for internal combustion vehicles. Generally well-to-station efficiency is left unstated (e.g. the energy used to extract & transport petroleum, produce specialized fuels or energy forms such as gasoline or electricity, and then transport finished products to market). Normally only the station-to-wheel efficiencies are provided. Further confounding attempts at comparison is the fact that little electricity is generated from petroleum. Coal, natural gas, hydroelectric, and nuclear power are the main sources of electricity, with no "well" involved. Generating electricity and providing liquid fuels for vehicles are thus almost entirely separate wings of the energy economy, with different inefficiencies and environmental harms.

Carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions are useful for comparison of electricity and gasoline consumption.^[8] Such comparisons include energy production, transmission, charging, and vehicle losses. CO₂ emissions improve in BEVs with sustainable electricity production but are fixed for gasoline vehicles. (Unfortunately, such figures for the EV1, Ford Ranger EV, EVPlus, and other production vehicles are unavailable.)

Aerodynamic drag has a large impact on energy efficiency as the speed of the vehicle increases. A list of cars and their corresponding drag coefficients is available.

You must add a |reason= parameter to this Cleanup template – replace it with {{Cleanup|October 2006|reason=<Fill reason here>}}, or remove the Cleanup template.
Many factors must be considered when comparing vehicles' total environmental impact. The most comprehensive comparison is a "cradle-to-grave" or lifecycle analysis. Such an analysis considers all inputs including original production and fuel sources and all outputs and end products including emissions and disposal. The varying amounts and types of inputs and outputs vary in their environmental effects and are difficult to directly compare. For example, whether the environmental effects of nickel and cadmium pollution from a NiCd battery production facility are less than those of hydrocarbon emissions and petroleum refining is unknown, although li-ion battery manufacturers generally indicate that their batteries are environmentally benign. Similar comparisons would need to be addressed for each input and output in order to make fair judgement of relative total environmental impact.

A large lifecycle input difference of BEVs compared to ICE vehicles is that they require electricity instead of a liquid fuel. When the electricity is provided from renewable or nuclear energy, this is a considerable advantage in terms of direct air pollution. However, if the electricity is produced from fossil fuel sources — as roughly half of electricity is in the U.S.— the relative advantage of the electric vehicle is substantially reduced.^[9] So, developing additional non-CO₂ emitting energy sources is necessary for electric vehicles to further reduce net emissions. Still, the environmental impact of electricity production (indirect emissions) depends on the electricity production mix, and are usually considerably lower than the direct emissions of ICE vehicles.^[10]

Another lifecycle input of electric vehicles differing from internal combustion vehicles is the large battery pack. Modern batteries have been shown to be able to outlast the vehicle they are used in. Batteries tested by Toyota have shown only minimal degradation in performance after 150,000 miles. There is some question as to the lifetime of Li-ion batteries: Li-ion batteries tend to have a chronological life around 5 years that is independent of usage, and lower per year mileage would raise per mile costs. More sophisticated BEV charge management and cooling systems may address this problem. BEVs do not require a fuel-burning engine and their support systems or the related maintenance, so they are often more reliable and require less maintenance. If the BEV used all electric breaks and actuators (as currently being installed in the Boeing Dreamliner) then the car's body could be completely sealed, which would have a significant impact on corrosion. Although BEVs are uncommon, advances in battery technology have taken place in other markets such as for mobile phones, laptops, forklifts and hybrid electric vehicles. Improvements to battery technology in such other markets may make BEVs more practical when the new battery technology is proven usable for EV.

Relatively few of today's BEVs are capable of acceleration performance which exceeds that of equivalent-class conventional gasoline powered vehicles. An early solution was American Motors’ experimental Amitron piggyback system of batteries with one type designed for sustained speeds while a different set boosted acceleration then needed.

Electric vehicles can utilize a direct motor-to-wheel configuration which increases the amount of available power. Having multiple motors connected directly to the wheels allows for each of the wheels to be used for both propulsion and as braking systems, thereby increasing traction. In some cases, the motor can be housed directly in the wheel, such as in the Whispering Wheel design, which lowers the vehicle's center of gravity and reduces the number of moving parts. When not fitted with an axle, differential, or transmission, electric vehicles have less drivetrain rotational inertia. A gearless or single gear design in some BEVs eliminates the need for gear shifting, giving such vehicles both smoother acceleration and braking. Because the power output of an electric motor is a function of current, not rotational speed, electric vehicles can use their peak power at all speeds during acceleration; Internal combustion engines can only use their peak power at high RPM.

For example, the Venturi Fetish delivers supercar acceleration despite a relatively modest 300 horsepower, and a top speed of around 100 miles per hour. Some DC motor-equipped drag racer BEVs, have simple two-speed transmissions to improve top speed.^[11][12] Larger vehicles, such as electric trains and land speed record vehicles, overcome this speed barrier by dramatically increasing the wattage of their power system.

Rechargeable batteries used in electric vehicles include lead-acid ("flooded" and VRLA), NiCd, nickel metal hydride, lithium ion, Li-ion polymer, and, less commonly, zinc-air and molten salt batteries.

Batteries are usually the most expensive component of BEVs. Although the cost of battery manufacture is substantial, increasing returns to scale may serve to lower their cost when BEVs are manufactured on the scale of modern internal combustion vehicles. For new battery technology considered appropriate for serious competition with internal combustion vehicles, large cost decreases will certainly occur when patents covering the new technologies expire.

Since the late 1990s, advances in battery technologies have been driven by skyrocketing demand for laptop computers and mobile phones, with consumer demand for more features, larger, brighter displays, and longer battery time driving research and development in the field. The BEV marketplace has reaped the benefits of these advances. If BEV production quotas had been met instead of being repealed, even more demand-driven R&D for large-scale battery technology would likely be taking place.

Batteries in BEVs must be periodically recharged (see also Replacing, below). BEVs most commonly charge from the power grid, which is in turn generated from a variety of domestic resources; such as coal, hydroelectricity, nuclear and others. They may also be charged while the vehicle is being driven free of charge by regenerative braking. Home power such as roof top photovoltaic solar cell panels, microhydro or wind may also be used. Electricity can also be supplied with a portable fueled generator. Although not strictly a BEV, the Ford Reflex concept car incorporates photovoltaics into its exterior to help power its hybrid powertrain.

Charging time is limited primarily by the capacity of the grid connection. A normal household outlet is between 1.5 kilowatts (in the US, Canada, Japan, and other countries with 110 Volt supply) to 3 kilowatts (in countries with 240 V supply). The main connection to a house might be able to sustain 10 kilowatts, and special wiring can be installed to use this. At this higher power level charging even a small, 7 kilowatt-hour (14–28 mi) pack, would probably require one hour. This is small compared to the effective power delivery rate of an average petro pump, about 5,000 kilowatts. Even if the supply power can be increased, most batteries do not accept charge at greater than their charge rate ("C1".)

In 1995, some charging stations charged BEVs in one hour. In November 1997, Ford purchased a fast-charge system produced by AeroVironment called "PosiCharge" for testing its fleets of Ranger EVs, which charged their lead-acid batteries in between six and fifteen minutes. In February 1998, General Motors announced a version of its "Magne Charge" system which could recharge NiMH batteries in about ten minutes, providing a range of sixty to one hundred miles.^[13]

In 2005, handheld device battery designs by Toshiba were claimed to be able to accept an 80% charge in as little as 60 seconds.^[14] Scaling this specific power characteristic up to the same 7 kilowatt-hour EV pack would result in the need for a peak of 336 kilowatts of power from some source for those 60 seconds. It is not clear that such batteries will work directly in BEVs as heat build-up may make them unsafe.

In 2007, Altairnano's NanoSafe batteries are rechargeable in a few minutes, versus hours required for other rechargeable batteries. A NanoSafe cell can be charged to over 80% charge capacity in about one minute.

Most people do not always require fast recharging because they have enough time, six to eight hours, during the work day or overnight to recharge. As the charging does not require attention it takes a few seconds for an owner to plug in and unplug their vehicle. Many BEV drivers prefer refueling at home, avoiding the inconvenience of visiting a petro-station. Some workplaces provide special parking bays for electric vehicles with charging equipment provided.

The charging power can be connected to the car in two ways:

• The first is a direct electrical connection known as conductive coupling. This might be as simple as a mains lead into a weatherproof socket through special high capacity cables with connectors to protect the user from high voltages.

• The second approach is known as inductive coupling. A special 'paddle' is inserted into a slot on the car. The paddle is one winding of a transformer, while the other is built into the car. When the paddle is inserted it completes a magnetic circuit which provides power to the battery pack.

The major advantage of the inductive approach is that there is no possibility of electrocution as there are no exposed conductors, although interlocks can make conductive coupling nearly as safe. Conductive coupling equipment is lower in cost and much more efficient due to a vastly lower component count.

An alternative to recharging is to replace drained batteries with charged batteries. Discharged modular electric car batteries could be replaced by charged ones in fuel stations, car shops, general shops or similar places. This would, however, likely require some standardization of the battery and associated components, a particularly difficult job given the rapid, continuing development of battery technology.

The range of a BEV depends on the number and type of batteries used, and the performance demands of the driver. The weight and type of vehicle also have an impact just as they do on the mileage of traditional vehicles. Electric vehicle conversions usually use lead-acid batteries because they are the most available and inexpensive. Such conversions generally have a range of 20 to 50 miles (30 to 80 km). Production EVs with lead-acid batteries are capable of up to 80 miles (130 km) per charge. NiMH batteries have higher energy density and may deliver up to 120 miles (200 km) of range. New lithium-ion battery-equipped EVs provide 250-300 miles (400-500 km) of range per charge.^[15] Finding the balance of range versus performance, battery capacity versus weight, and battery type versus cost challenges every EV manufacturer. With an AC system regenerative braking can extend range by up to 50% under extreme traffic conditions without complete stopping. Otherwise, the range is extended by about 10 to 15% in city driving, and only negligibly in highway driving, depending upon terrain.

EVs can also use battery trailers, pusher trailers or genset trailers in order to extended their range when desired without the additional weight during normal short range use. If rented then maintenance costs can be deferred to the agency. Such BEVs become either ICE or Hybrid vehicles depending on the trailer and car design. However, since portable generators, in general, produce many times the pollution of original car engines, this is not a responsible practice.^{[citation needed]}

Individual batteries are usually arranged into large battery packs of various voltage and ampere-hour capacity products to give the required energy capacity. Battery life should be considered when calculating the extended cost of ownership, as all batteries eventually wear out and must be replaced. The rate at which they expire depends on a number of factors.

The depth of discharge (DOD) is the recommended proportion of the total available energy storage for which that battery will achieve its rated cycles. Deep cycle lead-acid batteries generally should not be discharged below 80% capacity. More modern formulations can survive deeper cycles.

In real world use, some fleet Toyota RAV4 EVs, using NiMH batteries, have exceeded 100,000 miles (160,000 km) with little degradation in their daily range.^[16] Quoting that report's concluding assessment:

"The five-vehicle test is demonstrating the long-term durability of Nickel Metal Hydride batteries and electric drive trains. Only slight performance degradation has been observed to-date on four out of five vehicles.... EVTC test data provide strong evidence that all five vehicles will exceed the 100,000-mile mark. SCE’s positive experience points to the very strong likelihood of a 130,000 to 150,000-mile Nickel Metal Hydride battery and drive-train operational life. EVs can therefore match or exceed the lifecycle miles of comparable internal combustion engine vehicles.

"In June 2003 the 320 RAV4 EVs of the SCE fleet were used primarily by meter readers, service managers, field representatives, service planners and mail handlers, and for security patrols and carpools. In five years of operation, the RAV4 EV fleet had logged more than 6.9 million miles, eliminating about 830 tons of air pollutants, and preventing more than 3,700 tons of tailpipe carbon dioxide emissions. Given the successful operation of its EVs to-date, SCE plans to continue using them well after they all log 100,000-miles."

Jay Leno's 1909 Baker Electric (see Baker Motor Vehicle) still operates on its original Edison cells. Battery replacement costs of BEVs may be partially or fully offset by the lack of regular maintenance such as oil and filter changes required for internal combustion engine vehicles, and by the greater reliability of BEVs due to their fewer moving parts.

Batteries can pose an environmental hazard, incurring disposal or recycling costs. Some of the chemicals used in the manufacture of advanced batteries such as Li-ion, Li ion polymer and zinc-air are hazardous and potentially environmentally damaging. ^{[citation needed]} Traditional car batteries have very successful recycling programs. Widespread use of battery electric vehicles would require the implementation of similar recycling programs. More modern formulations also tend to use lighter, more biologically remediable elements such as iron, lithium, carbon and zinc. In particular, moving away from toxic metals such as cadmium and chromium makes disposal less critical. Batteries might not pose a greater risk than is currently accepted for fossil fuel-based transportation, as petroleum-powered transportation leads to substantial environmental damage in the form of spills, smog, and distillation byproducts.

The safety issues of battery electric vehicles are dealt with by the international standard ISO 6469. This document is divided in three parts dealing with specific issues:

• On-board electrical energy storage, i.e. the battery
• Functional safety means and protection against failures
• Protection of persons against electrical hazards.

Firefighters and rescue personnel receive special training to deal with the higher voltages and chemicals encountered in electric and hybrid electric vehicle accidents. While BEV accidents may present unusual problems, such as fires and fumes resulting from rapid battery discharge, there is apparently no available information regarding whether they are inherently more or less dangerous than gasoline or diesel internal combustion vehicles which carry flammable fuels.

Hobbyists often build their own EVs by converting existing production cars to run solely on electricity. There is a cottage industry supporting the conversion and construction of BEVs by hobbyists. Universities such as the University of California, Irvine even build their own custom electric or hybrid-electric cars from scratch.

Short-range battery electric vehicles offer the hobbyist comfort, utility, and quickness, sacrificing only range. Short-range BEVs may be built using high-performance lead–acid batteries, using about half the mass needed for a 60 to 80 mile (100 to 130 km) range; the result is a vehicle with about a thirty mile (50 km) range, which when designed with appropriate weight distribution (40/60 front to rear) does not require power steering, offers exceptional acceleration in the lower end of its operating range, is freeway capable and legal, but are expensive due to the higher cost for these higher-performance batteries. By including a manual transmission, short-range BEVs can obtain both better performance and greater efficiency than the single-speed BEVs developed by major manufactures. Unlike the converted golf carts used for neighborhood electric vehicles, short-range BEVs may be operated on typical suburban throughways (40 to 45 MPH or 60 or 70 km/h speed limits are typical) and can keep up with traffic typical on such roads and the short "slow-lane" on-and-off segments of freeways common in suburban areas.

Some drag race such conversions as members of National Electric Drag Racing Association (NEDRA). Battery electric vehicles are also very popular in quarter mile (400 meter) racing. The NEDRA regularly holds electric car races and often competes them successfully against exotics such as the Dodge Viper or Saleen S7.

Japanese Professor Hiroshi Shimizu from Faculty of Environmental Information of the Keio University created the limousine of the future: the Eliica (Electric Lithium Ion Car) has eight wheels with electric 55 kilowatt hub motors (8WD) with an output of 470 kilowatts and zero emissions. With a top speed of 370 kilometers per hour, and a maximum reach of 320 kilometers provided by lithium-ion-batteries. (video at eliica.com) However, current models cost approximately $300,000 US, about half of which is the cost of the batteries. ^{[citation needed]}

The future of battery electric vehicles depends primarily upon the cost and availability of batteries with high energy densities, power density, and long life, as all other aspects such as motors, motor controllers, and chargers are fairly mature and cost-competitive with internal combustion engine components. Li-ion, Li-poly and zinc-air batteries have demonstrated energy densities high enough to deliver range and recharge times comparable to conventional vehicles.

While hybrid vehicles apply many of the technical advances first developed for battery electric vehicles, they are not considered BEVs. The development and production of hybrid vehicles are, however, improving the cost and performance of batteries, electric motors, chargers, and motor controllers, which will help battery electric vehicles and plug-in hybrid vehicles (PHEVs). As hybrids become more refined, battery life, capacity and energy density will improve and their internal combustion engine will be used less. A non-profit program, the California Cars Initiative, or "CalCars" at the University of California, Davis, has converted hybrid Toyota Prius automobiles to operate as a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) through the installation of additional batteries and software modifications. This vehicle operates as a pure electric for short trips, taking its power from household and workplace rechargers. For longer trips the vehicle operates normally as a hybrid. Prototype conversions using lead-acid batteries are in use today. It is expected that a production conversion would use a more advanced battery. CalCars is currently soliciting donations of additional vehicles and funds for their project.

Various pre-production announcements by major manufacturers suggest that there may soon be a breakthrough in the availability of commonplace, general purpose electric vehicles suitable for everyday use on available roads in mixed traffic conditions:

• General Motors has reportedly been developing a plug-in hybrid, which may be ready in time for the Detroit auto show in January, 2007.^[17]

• Mitsubishi has committed to creating a flexible product line based upon the Colt minivan with motors within the wheels that can be produced as a BEV, a hybrid, or a fuel cell vehicle. However, no North American import commitment has been made.^[18]

• Subaru may accelerate their R1e prototype development. Initially proposed for 2007 production, this was pushed back to 2010 but may be moved up in response to fuel prices, advances in battery technology, and worldwide market interest. The maturity of Subaru's in–house developed lithium batteries is indicated by a technology exchange agreement with Toyota, swapping the Hybrid Synergy Drive methods of the Prius and Camry hybrids (to be incorporated in a turbocharged 4WD sport-SUV crossover) for the battery technology of the R1e (to be incorporated in the next generation Prius in the 2007 model year) - see next item.

• Toyota had hinted that the next generation Prius may have Lithium-Ion batteries and a nine mile "stealth" range to support 110 MPG in appropriate conditions, suggesting the future possibility of a plug-in hybrid Prius. On July 18, 2006, Toyota announced that it "plans to develop a hybrid vehicle that will run locally on batteries charged by a typical 120-volt outlet before switching over to a gasoline engine for longer hauls."^[19]

• Lithium-ion: No oil or automobile company yet controls the lithium battery market. Developed by East Asian and Canadian firms for use in portable computer equipment, with developing penetration of the hand power tool market, the patents and production are beyond the reach of US automakers and oil companies, except as they may lobby for tariffs on the import of batteries or vehicles (as has been done with imports of ethanol fuels currently taxed at 100 percent of value at the behest of maize-based ethanol producers). There is hopeful speculation among BEV developers and converters that market suppression may prove difficult for both the global oil and US auto industries as there is no domestic (US) mass market electric vehicle production to protect and such tariffs would be counter to the prevailing "free market" philosophies of neo-liberalism. Suppressive regulations promoted by entrenched industrial interests under some guise such as consumer protection, electricity grid protection, automotive industry jobs protection, even the infant industry argument, etcetera, remain problematic for the future of BEVs in the U.S. however.

The following BEV models have been announced as entering production:

• Mitsubishi, a Japanese automobile manufacturer, announced on May 11 2005 that it will mass-produce its MIEV (Mitsubishi In-wheel Electric Vehicle.) Test fleets are to arrive in 2006 and production models should be available in 2008. The first test car, revealed to be Colt EV, is expected to have a range of 150 km (93 miles) using lithium-ion batteries and in-wheel electric motors. The target price of a MIEV should be around US$19,000 [4] [5].

• Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles have been developed by the California Cars Initiative, Edrive Systems, Hybrids Plus and Hymotion. They take a Toyota Prius, add more battery capacity and modify the controller. Then they can get 250 mpg (1 L/100 km) by plugging in at home for a small light charge each night. Edrive and Hymotion in 2005 announced plans to modify other hybrid models, including the Ford Escape.^[20]

• SVE (Société de Véhicules Électriques, a company formed by the French Dassault and Heuliez group) announced they will produce the Cleanova II (French only), based on the Renault Kangoo. It will be available in pre-mass-production in 2007 and mass-production in 2008. The system exists in two versions: all electric (200 km autonomy) and rechargeable hybrid (500 km autonomy). The system include an electric engine developed by TM4 a subsidiary of Hydro-Quebec, from Quebec Canada who developed also since 20 years an electric wheel motor.

• The Tesla Roadster, a two seat sports car to be released in mid-2007 starting from US $89,000 to $100,000, travels about 250 miles (400 km) on a single charge, with a top speed of 130 mph (209 km/h), acceleration from 0 to 60 mph (0-100 km/h) in about 4 seconds, and a 135 mpg (1.7 L/100 km) equivalent operational cost at 2006 gasoline prices: Detailed white paper at teslamotors.com; Wired News article;
• Venturi Fetish sports car uses AC propulsion components from venturi.fr (Flash animation with music background; see also Forbes — Vehicle of the Week — Car Fetish)

• Phoenix motorcars, SUV and SUT from phoenixmotorcars.com 250 mile range, battery pack can be recharged in 10 minutes @ 250KW Altair Nano battery info

Recent prototype EVs include:

• Chevrolet Volt^[21]
• Cree SAM
• eBox, a conversion of the Scion xB by AC Propulsion intended for production. EV World article, web review with video,
• Eliica (Electric LIthium-Ion Car) designed by a team at Keio University in Tokyo, led by Professor Hiroshi Shimizu.
• Ford E-Ka
• Lexus EV (Featured in the film Minority Report)
• Maya-100: Li-ion "super"-polymer battery; 360 kilometer range claimed (announcement at electrovaya.com)
• Mitsubishi Colt EV: Li-ion battery, in-wheel motors (annoucement at media.mitsubishi-motors.com)
• Pinanfarina Ethos II
• Renault EV Racer
• Solectria Sunrise
• Subaru R1e (announcement at msnbc.msn.com)
• Suzuki EV Sport
• Volvo 3CC: Three seater with lithium ion batteries (announcement at volvocars-pr.com)
• Smart fourtwo EV:(announcement at www.smart.com, [6])
• PML Mini QED

The three major US automobile manufacturers, General Motors, Chrysler Corporation and Ford Motor Company have been accused by a variety of consumer advocates, activists, commentators, journalists, and documentary makers of deliberately sabotaging their companies' BEV efforts through several methods: failing to market, failing to produce appropriate vehicles, failing to satisfy demand, and using lease-only programs with prohibitions against end of lease purchase. By these actions they have managed to terminate their BEV development and marketing programs despite operators' offers of purchase and assumption of maintenance liabilities. The Chrysler "golf cart" program has seemed to some as an insult to the marketplace and to government mandates; Chrysler has been accused of intentionally failing to produce a vehicle usable in mixed traffic conditions. Moreover, the three major American motor companies have almost exclusively promoted their electric cars in the American market, where gas has been comparatively cheap, and virtually ignored the European market, where gas is significantly more expensive.

The manufacturers, in their defense, have responded that they only make what the public wants. At the end of their programs GM destroyed its BEV fleet, despite offers to purchase from drivers. Ford's Norwegian-built "Th!nk" fleet was covered by a three-year exemption to the standard US motor vehicle safety laws, after which time Ford had planned to dismantle and recycle its fleet. However, Ford was persuaded by activists to refrain from destroying its fleet and return them to Norway and sell them as used vehicles. Ford also sold a few lead-acid battery Ranger EVs, and some fleet purchase Chevrolet S-10 EV pickups are being refurbished and sold on the secondary market.^{[citation needed]}

Critics have pointed out that General Motors' customer survey highlights the company's efforts to lower demand. GM called interested customers and emphasized negative characteristics disputed by EV1 drivers. CARB removed their zero emission regulations in part because such surveys purported to show that no demand existed for the EV1s.^{[citation needed]}

Both Honda and Toyota also manufactured BEVs. Honda followed the lead of the other majors and terminated their lease-only programs, completely destroying their fleet and its components by shredding. Toyota offered vehicles for both sale and lease. While Toyota has terminated manufacture of new vehicles, it continues to support those manufactured. A small number of Toyota RAV4 EVs are still on the road.^{[citation needed]}

A film on the subject, directed by former EV1 owner and activist Chris Paine, entitled Who Killed the Electric Car? premiered at the Sundance Film Festival and at the Tribeca Film Festival in 2006, and was released July, 2006.

Supporters point out the following:

• BEVs reduce dependence on oil.
• BEVs reduce dependence on price manipulated oil markets.
• BEVs reduce vehicle energy costs by up to 90%
• BEVs are up to 75% energy efficient (with ReGen) VS as little as 15% for a petrol ICE powered car (inc. transmission losses)
• BEVs have much more torque than an ICE (for a given power rating) and a flat torque curve.
• BEVs mitigate global warming.
• BEVs are quieter than internal combustion engine vehicles.
• BEVs do not produce noxious fumes.
• BEVs can readily satisfy the needs for short trips and up to 500kms with Li-Ion and regeneration.
• Home recharging is more convenient than trips to gasoline stations. If combined with green home energy or devices like Honda's Home Energy Station (which uses hydrogen to produce electricity) BEVs can truly be considered emission-free.
• Regenerative braking can significantly improve vehicle efficiency.
• Recharging costs are more predictable than gas prices, and not subject to volatile international incidents.
• Maintenance such as oil changes, smog inspections (and their sometimes expensive consequences), cooling fluid replacement, and periodic repair and adjustments are reduced or completely eliminated, significantly reducing the cost of ownership.
• BEVs can be powered indirectly by home photovoltaics using net metering, which offers advantages to both power producers and other grid users through peak demand satisfaction and to the EV user through cost reduction and load balancing, especially with time of use net metering.
• BEV's can provide power to a home in the case of a power outage if specially equipped.
• Even if powered by electricity from polluting coal plants, they are still far more energy efficient than gasoline-powered cars.
• In case of an accident or during refueling no need to be worried about burning or exploding gasoline.

The greatest supporters of BEVs are often those who have obtained or built and used them. This is a self-selected group because BEVs have not been promoted by the major manufacturers in the United States, so their enthusiasm may be misleading. Owners of conventional gasoline vehicles, once given the chance to live with a BEV often leave their gasoline cars sitting in the driveway.

Skeptics of the viability of BEVs argue on conventional practicality grounds and in more general terms. Practicality grounds include:

• Electricity is produced using such methods as nuclear fission, with its attendant regulatory and waste issues, or (more often) by burning coal, the latter producing about 0.97 kg of CO₂ (2.1 pounds) per kilowatt-hour[7] plus other pollutants and strip-mining damages: electric vehicles are therefore not "zero emissions" in any real-world sense, except at their point of use unless solar, wind, wave, tidal, geothermal, or hydro power is employed;
• Limited driving range available between recharging (using certain battery technologies) ;
• Expensive batteries, which may cost $2,000.00 (lead acid) to $20,000.00 (li-ion) to replace; most real EV cars do not get 20,000 miles (32,000 km) from a set of batteries due to low miles per day, therefore the cost per mile can be 20 to 30 cents more than gasoline cars due to battery replacement.^{[citation needed]}
• Poor cold weather performance of some kinds of batteries
• Danger of electrocution and electromagnetic interference
• Production of rubber tires still produces sulfur dioxide emissions, so there is no such thing as a ZEV that has rubber tires.
• Zero emission electrical sources such as solar panels must still be manufactured, producing various pollutants.

Those arguing in more general terms ponder the future of the car as a transport solution for even more widespread global adoption, noting that the issues of traffic jams, noise pollution, total life-cycle pollution, energy expenditure and the health toll of a sedentary lifestyle, will not be solved by zero-emission vehicles.

While not explicitly stated, the reduced needs for maintenance and associated parts sales could negatively impact the income of vehicle dealerships, possibly leading to the necessity to recover profit through higher dealer markup and thus higher retail prices, although ameliorated by a corresponding reduction in dealership overhead.

• Battery electric railcar
• Electric boat
• Electric vehicle production
• Future of the car
• Hybrid vehicle
• Hydrogen vehicle
• NanoSafe
• Neighborhood electric vehicle
• Tribrid vehicle
• Zero-emissions vehicle
• Who Killed the Electric Car?

4-wheel drive electric hybrid Super Mini (Mini QED) at http://www.pmlflightlink.com/

• NanoSafe battery datasheet Template:PDF.

• U.S. patent 523,354, E. E. Keller, Electrically Propelled Preambulator
• U.S. patent 594,805, Hiram Stevens Maxim, Motor vehicle
• U.S. patent 772,571, H. S. Maxim, Electric motor vehicle

• Electric Vehicle RevolutionElectric vehicle news
• Largest electric car plant under construction in N.China Dec 21, 2006
• 10 million electric bikes sold per year in China Accessed Dec 21, 2006
• Think to sell electric car over internet Dec 19, 2006
• Sales of e-bikes rising in India Dec 15, 2006
• GM does U-turn on electric car program, now says electric cars are the future 7 November 2006

Template:Energy Transportation Template:Sustainability and energy development group