0 The Silence of The Cars

Well Clarice, can you still hear the sounds of the engine screaming in your dreams?

There has been a lot of discussion about adding artificial noise to electric cars to serve as pedestrian alerts. I've been driving electric for over four years now and have driven over 120,000 miles, and I say they are simply not necessary. However as much as I wish it were true, I know the discussion doesn't begin and end with my opinion on this. Personally I'm all in favor for a backup beeper, which I actually think should be on all cars regardless of the type of fuel they use. But artificial noise when the vehicle is moving forward is silly and simply unnecessary. The quietness of the EV is something to celebrate, not shun.

Electric cars are quieter than gas cars, but only while driving at very low speeds (like under 10 mph) is there much of a difference. At speeds higher than that you can hear the tires on the pavement and the whine of the electric motor. Automakers are spending tons of money to make their gas cars quieter, and most cars - especially premium brands are extraordinarily quiet unless they are under heavy acceleration. In situations where pedestrians are most likely to have an issue, say crossing the street, cars are usually rolling along at lower speeds, coasting much of the time and much of the noise you hear anyway is the tire noise on the pavement. Plus, I think a bigger issue here is simply getting people to pay attention. Get off the cell phone, pull the Earbuds out and pay attention when you are crossing the street! And drivers need to stop texting and just drive the car. Look it's your responsibility not to run people over, it's not their responsibility to hear you coming and jump out of the way just so you can send "lol" to your bff! This is a sore subject for me because I was hit while crossing the street by a person texting three years ago and even needed surgery. I heard the car coming (a gas car!) just before it hit me and couldn't manage to get out of the way in time anyway.

Unfortunately our opinions may not eventually matter because our government may very well mandate a solution to a problem we don't have. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has proposed a new rule requiring hybrid and electric cars to make sounds to alert pedestrians. Even though our friends across the pond have actually done studies and come to the conclusion that these artificial noises are not necessary. Still, We'll likely rush to legislate something we don't have actual data on. In the UK, a study commissioned by the Department for Transport came up with these findings: "At low speeds of 7-8 kmh (5mph) electric cars were just one decibel quieter than petrol cars. When speeds were increased to more than 20 kmh (12mph), the noise levels were "similar", with tyre noise dominating. "There does not appear to be any significant difference in the acoustic nature of [internal combustion engine] vehicles and [electric and hybrid] vehicles, and as such nothing suggests a pedestrian would clearly be able to differentiate between vehicle types,"

Anyway as I said I'm just one opinion. I want to know your opinion on this issue. Automakers are struggling with this. They are conflicted because they aren't clear exactly what the consumer wants and they are also not sure themselves if it is actually needed. I know because I've talked with people from various OEM's about this very subject and they have asked me what I think about it. Some believe that while hardened EV supporters like me don't think it's necessary, that people new to electric vehicles may believe it is. That may be true in fact. So I'm putting up a poll here and asking people to vote how they would like to see their EV deal with this issue. Please vote, I can assure you this blog is monitored by every major OEM, and nearly on a daily basis. You never know who's listening. The poll is at the top of the right sidebar. Let your opinion be heard! By the way, all cars already have a pedestrian alert, it's called a horn!

Detail: The Silence of The Cars

0 Is This The Production BMW i3?

Autoblog scored some spy photo's of the BMW i3. The car is noticeably different from the original spy photo's that were taken last year of the car during cols weather testing. This looks VERY close to the concept i3 which is definitely good news.

At last weeks LA Auto Show, Richard Steinberg told George Parrot, reporting for Greencarreports that the concept i3 is “95 percent final” as compared to the production version. These photo's would seem to concur. The one obvious difference I can see is the doors. The concept had much larger doors that extended all the way into the wheel wells. The car in this photo clearly has smaller doors that do not extend to the wheel wells. Also, the rear "coach" doors do not have a handle so apparently they can only be opened once the front door is open, much like the MINI Clubman (and my Toyota Tacoma extended cab pick up).

Fake "Hybrid" badge on ActiveE

What Autoblog also reported was that they believe the car is fitted with the range extender (REx) option. I disagree. I think it's the pure BEV version. I see no sign of a tailpipe and the single reason they gave for this conclusion was that the car has badges that say "Hybrid Test Vehicle" That means nothing. When BMW was testing the ActiveE it had the same badges and that isn't a hybrid. I think BMW puts that on cars to confuse spy's and it worked!


Whether it is the BEV version or the REx version it really doesn't matter. What's important here is this proves the car will look very similar to the concept i3 and that's good news. The i3 that was photographed last year during testing look too boxy, this has much smoother lines. Can't wait to see it without all the camouflage! Here's some more pictures:

Detail: Is This The Production BMW i3?

0 BMW i3: The Intersection of Policy, Business, & Carbon

I recently came across this interesting report. It's titled "BMW: i3 Electric Vehicle. The Intersection of Policy, Business, & Carbon" and was written by Lauren Blasch, Jeremy Pomp, Marla Stancil, Shyam Vijayaraghavan.







The report focuses on electric vehicles and their carbon footprint in general, as opposed to being i3 specific. It demonstrates that depending on the source of the electricity used for charging the car, EV's can range from better to worse than a Toyota Prius in carbon emissions. It's interesting that they used the most efficient hybrid currently available to compare electric vehicle emissions to. I think it might have been more useful to use the Pruis and also show on the graph the average internal combustion engine cars carbon emissions also. They even go as far as to detail which states are better suited for electric cars based on their electricity generation mix. The good news is that New York and California, the target markets for the i3 since they both have "megacities" were two of the states that were "EV favorable" The report is only 28 pages long and many of the pages are graphs so it doesn't take long to read. There are some interesting fact in there so I recommend reading it if you are interested in electric vehicles and their impact on the environment.

One thing to consider though, the report is strictly focused on the carbon emissions of vehicles and I advocate electric cars for more reasons than just their carbon footprint. Even if you live in a state that produces 100% of it's electricity from burning coal, and by using an EV you are producing more carbon than if you owned a Toyota Prius, you are still spending your energy dollars on a DOMESTIC product. You are not contributing to the crushing trade imbalance, much of which is created from importing foreign oil and you are not sending some your money to radical Middle Eastern regimes, many of which hate us. Electricity is produced and distributed by local and regional companies, and 100% of the money you spend on it stays local. If you ask me, that's reason enough to drive an electric car.

Detail: BMW i3: The Intersection of Policy, Business, & Carbon