Less than zero

By Cosmo Garvin
Sacramento News and Review

June 15, 2000

Tim Hastrup loves his car. He's like a lot of Californians that way. But, unlike the hulking, gas-guzzling SUVs that crowd the freeways today, Hastrup's ride soothes his conscience even as it shuttles him through his day. He drives a GM EV-1, a teardrop-shaped electric two-seater that glides almost noiselessly along the freeway from his home in Granite Bay to his office in Roseville.

The EV-1, like his wife's four-seater Honda EV Plus, produces non of the choking nitrous oxide or carbon monoxide that make ozone factories of rush hour traffic.

Hastrup never goes to the gas-station, and the cost of charging his EV is much lower -- 1 or 2 cents a mile -- than gassing up a conventional care. "It's just so easy to live with," he said.

As for aesthetics, Hastrup loves the smooth acceleration, the absence of a gas engine that chugs and lurches itself up to speed. "Once you have an electric car, there's no going back."

His love for the EV makes Hastrup a rare breed. And, if the auto industry has its way, he will remain so for a long time to come.

Why no interest?

Automakers grudgingly started introducing small numbers of electric vehicles in California after the state Air Resources Board mandated, in 1990, that 10 percent of all vehicles sold in the state be emission-free by the year 2003. Failure to comply could result in a fine of up to $5,000 for every vehicle not brought to market.

Since then, under the pressure by automakers and oil companies, the ARB has twice -- in 1996 and 1998 -- watered down the mandate. A more complicated formula has emerged that allows low-emission vehicles, like hybrid gas-electric cars, natural-gas vehicles and more-efficient gasoline engines, to receive partial credit toward meting the mandate.

All the while, the requirement for pure zero emissions vehicles (ZEVs) has declined, until it reached its present level of 4 percent of cars sold. Right now the only type of ZEV on the market is the battery-powered electric car. A hydrogen fuel cell vehicle is promising but still years from being reality.

Now, the ZEV mandate is up for another biannual review, and the ARB must decide by September whether to modify the program still further. The automakers are hoping to roll back the electric-car requirements even more -- or, better yet, eliminate them altogether.

"We certainly fell that there needs to be a change in the mandate. It's not going to work the way it is," said Steven Douglas of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, a lobbying group that represents the major automakers on environmental issues.

The argument goes like this: Batteries don't allow enough range (no more that 150 miles a charge), and the cost is too high ($34,000 for the two-seated EV-1) to produce enough demand for EVs.

"We're asking people to pay more for a vehicle that provides less," said Douglas. The barriers of range and cost, he said, have turned consumers off, and, as a result, "These vehicles have been available, but the customers haven't."

Dampening demand

In contrast, Hastrup and others have blasted the automakers for suppressing the demand for electric vehicles. "I suppose if they keep bad-mouthing them like this, then they can scare enough people away that there won't be any demand at all," said Hastrup.

So far, all of the automakers combined have placed about 2,300 EVs in California. The ZEV mandate requires that another 1,400 or so be produced, but GM and Honda have both bet their targets and discontinued the EV-1 and EV Plus, respectively. EV advocates say the industry has done the bare minimum under the law.

"We certainly think more vehicles could have been sold, had the manufacturers attempted to do that," said ARB spokesperson Jerry Martin.

Last month at an ARB workshop in Southern California, while the automakers testified that there was no demand for their EVs, scores of private citizens and business people complained to the board that they wanted EVs but couldn't get them.

For example, there's Lisa Rawlins, an executive with Warner Bros. She testified that her company contacted every major manufacturer in hopes of finding a good electric fleet vehicle but found only long waiting lists and discouragement. "To say we were frustrated by the lack of product and nonresponsiveness of the automakers is an understatement," said Rawlins.

"There's definitely a feeling that the automakers are not putting their best foot forward," said Jerry Martin of the Air Resources Board.

It is too soon to tell, but Martin said the board appears committed to the mandate as it stands now. That's not likely to stop the manufacturers from trying, however. "I don't think we've seen their best yet," said Martin.

While the board may be committed to the ZEV mandate, that doesn't mean Gov. Gray Davis will be.

What strategy the industry will follow to change the mandate remains to be seen, but getting the governor on board is the best bet. Perhaps that's why AAM has retained political heavy-hitters like former Assemblyman Phil Isenberg to lobby on its behalf.

"I can't imagine something this important happening without the governor having his say," said Kim Delfino of the California Public Interest Research Group.

In the past, CalPIRG linked heavy campaign contributions by automakers and oil interests to the Wilson administration to the 1996 and 1998 modifications of the mandate. Now EV advocates are watching the Davis administration closely, waiting for the other shoe to drop.