The best science weekly (both online and in print) in the world is Great Britain's New Scientist, which--given that the Brits also produce the best news weekly in the world in The Economist, hardly seems fair.
Trust New Scientist to have researched the details on India's new ultra-cheap car that's causing all the fuss amongst environmentalists, the Tata Nano.
So it's a trade-off: less smog than motorcycles but more greenhouse gases and not as good gas mileage.
However, as David Reevely of The Ecolibertarian points out in a response to my original post, if a $2,500-3,000 car is right at the edge of affordability for the emerging Indian middle class, the market may well take care of this problem. Why? Because if this increased demand for fossil fuel causes the expected spike in gas prices, then Indian Nano owners may not be able to afford to drive them as much, and therefore will not emit as much greenhouse gas.
There's another aspect to this story that everybody keeps forgetting: competition. Nissan/Renault is already tooling up to go after the el-cheapo car market, and other competitors already exist.
The Hindustani Times reports on the Vikram EV, a three-wheeled electric car that has virtually no emissions and a range of 70-110 kilometers (43-66 miles) on a single charge. The downside to the Vikram at this point is cost (nearly $4,600 against the Nano's $3,000) and the need to replace the battery every four years at a cost of about $1,200. Given advances in battery technology, however, it's a good bet these costs will either come down decidedly, or appear more competitive as the price of gas goes up.
Point being: the Tata Nano is the beginning of a competitive, free-market process, and there is already evidence that the market will offer some new, viable alternatives in the next few years.
It would be a damn shame if, as seems to be the case, strong-arm tactics are used to keep this process from playing out.
Trust New Scientist to have researched the details on India's new ultra-cheap car that's causing all the fuss amongst environmentalists, the Tata Nano.
The Tata Nano will meet European emissions standards on exhaust. If you want to see details, check out the Euro IV line in this table. Bear in mind that exhaust emissions standards regulate the particles that make up smog, not emissions of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide (which the EU does not currently regulate, although it's trying).
The numbers come out in favour of the Tata Nano. Euro IV standards are more stringent than those in place for the motorcycles and scooters, which make up a big chunk of India's motorised traffic.
For instance, according to the Indian Federation of Automobile Dealers Association and the Society for Indian Automobile Manufacturers, the 2005 standards for two-wheelers limited carbon monoxide, hydrocarbon, and NOx emissions to 1.5 g/km travelled – compare that to just 0.5 g/km (carbon monoxide) and 0.3 g/km (hydrocarbon and NOx) under Euro IV.
But look at fuel efficiency and the balance is flipped. Tata's Nano travels 21 km for every litre of fuel it is fed, compared to up to 80 km/l you could achieve with a two-wheeler. That means not only a larger bill for the owner, but also more CO2 chucked into the atmosphere.
So it's a trade-off: less smog than motorcycles but more greenhouse gases and not as good gas mileage.
However, as David Reevely of The Ecolibertarian points out in a response to my original post, if a $2,500-3,000 car is right at the edge of affordability for the emerging Indian middle class, the market may well take care of this problem. Why? Because if this increased demand for fossil fuel causes the expected spike in gas prices, then Indian Nano owners may not be able to afford to drive them as much, and therefore will not emit as much greenhouse gas.
There's another aspect to this story that everybody keeps forgetting: competition. Nissan/Renault is already tooling up to go after the el-cheapo car market, and other competitors already exist.
The Hindustani Times reports on the Vikram EV, a three-wheeled electric car that has virtually no emissions and a range of 70-110 kilometers (43-66 miles) on a single charge. The downside to the Vikram at this point is cost (nearly $4,600 against the Nano's $3,000) and the need to replace the battery every four years at a cost of about $1,200. Given advances in battery technology, however, it's a good bet these costs will either come down decidedly, or appear more competitive as the price of gas goes up.
Point being: the Tata Nano is the beginning of a competitive, free-market process, and there is already evidence that the market will offer some new, viable alternatives in the next few years.
It would be a damn shame if, as seems to be the case, strong-arm tactics are used to keep this process from playing out.
Comments