Who Killed The Electric Car Analysis

Profits are a major point of contention in many industries, the automotive industry being no exception. Undoubtedly, it is unreasonable to hold an industry to product standards resulting in unprofitable lines of business, but at which point does this become coddling and enabling? The key issue detailed in Who Killed the Electric Car? surrounds how to effectively build and market an electric vehicle without completely dismantling the oil business empire.

Doing so requires many stipulations: courage from automotive companies, passion and commitment from consumers, and governmental support, most of which were not prevalent at the time this documentary was made. The failure of the electric car cannot be placed solely on automotive and oil companies, consumers and the government were largely responsible as well. The California Air Resources Board was visionary in mandating ten percent of vehicles sold in California needing to be emission-free. While this mandate would eventually be repealed on April 24, 2003, it originally spurred companies like General Motors to create an electric vehicle, and the result was the innovative EV1. This vehicle had a passionate fan base, but auto companies failed to capitalize on

Typically, only celebrities were able to possess one, and even then, the process was incredibly complicated. Star Mel Gibson was reported having to submit a “resume” detailing erroneous factors of his life, such as birthmarks, just to be considered for ownership. Car companies claimed consumer interest was nonexistent, when in reality it was forcibly covered up. GM used this excuse to explain why producing such a vehicle was unprofitable, claiming consumers wanting to “pay less for a car that does less”. While a valid concern, GM exploited this by employing an excruciatingly slow production process as described by a former EV1