Thursday, September 26, 2013
Classroom Screening #2: "Who Killed The Electric Car?" directed by Christopher Payne
After watching "Who Killed The Electric Car," please reflect in 5-7 sentences on what this film reveals about our Culture of Automobility. Draw on our texts, classroom conversations, and your emerging understandings of automobility in your response.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This movie goes so much further than the car industry. The fact big oil and the draw of money can manipulate the world how they see fit is such a BIG problem. When profits come before environmental health (yes, animals, humans, trees, etc. are all a part of the environment) that says a lot about our society. Yes this is a HUGE missed opportunity, but merely the symptom of a much bigger problem. I had never heard of the EV1, that alone says a lot for this. The fact that we are out there right now pushing for “better batteries” , “more technological advancements in solar”, “better gas milage”, “electric cars” etc.., when the 1% is sitting back with the technology in their pockets and are simply not making it available to the masses because they get a bigger paycheck at the end of it. WHAT! how does this make sense! We are puppets in this grand scheme and we need grassroots movements to make a change. When I see stuff like this, it makes me draw in, makes me feel super overwhelmed with it all and want to just give up. But at the same time it makes me do that much more back home, locally and in my community. No we cannot go head to head with multi billion dollar mega corporations...alone that is, but together we are strong. Like they said in the documentary, we need a lot of Davids to fight this Goliath.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteCleopatra Doley
ReplyDeleteThis was a difficult movie to watch for me. It illustrates the big companies winning while the people who fight long and hard lose. It was completely infuriating to see how many actors were cooperating in stopping the electric car. However, I the main driving force of killing this car was the economic loss electric cars would cause for those in the car industry. The idea that money controls companies way more than any sort of moral obligation to the health of the people and the cleanness of the environment (while STILL making money) is just crazy to me. People all over need to stop letting money control them. Or we need to change just how beneficial electric cars are in financial terms that could out weigh the views of the oil companies.
This was a great, very informative documentary on the adoption of the electric car and how many forces came together to squash the movement. I feel like you cannot put the blame on one specific entity as there were many interests that came together (much like the government shutdown) to stop the widespread production of EVs. I believe the actor that had the most influence was the oil companies though. I think that the oil companies put pressure on both the government and the car companies in order to suppress the desire to move forward with EVs and caused them to turn to fuel cell cars, which is something that I don't think will ever be economically viable on a large scale. I also find it shocking that there are technologies that car companies are holding onto that would increase battery life and MPG but are delaying their inclusion in their products in order to make a bigger buck.
ReplyDeleteI think the first initial fact at the beginning of this piece about the concept that there were more electric cars then gas was rather shocking. I think this fact says a lot about how industrialization and the introduction of the gas car shaped our society and culture in a very negative way, and turned us down a path of consumption and pollution. After learning that fact, there was that immediate feeling of “what if...” What if we went towards electric when they were the majority on the road, what would the world look like today. I think the second issue that really irked me was that the federal government sued California to stop electric cars, as Bush didn’t want it to spread, while president Jimmy Carter, prior to Bush, vowed to never use foreign oil and put solar panels on the white house, while Reagan removed them. I think this shows again a lot about how society was and is run and it’s influence on the culture, the government had a major impact in my opinion. Shifting towards other issues, I found the funeral a good touching yet humorously look into a not so humorous issue. What was certainly far from humorous was witnessing the efforts that the owners of EV1’s put into protecting their vehicles, and getting lied to where they were being taken. I’m still confused, or maybe upset, by the fact that these such beneficial environmentally vehicles were ironically crushed, not even used for learning opportunities, museums, colleges, or even recycled. Why did that have to happen... How and who allowed for that to happen? It overall ended up being quite a heart wrenching film for an inanimate object, but I think there was a lot that the owners said that the cars obviously couldn’t and here you found yourself attached to the cars, and the owners fighting for their vehicles life. I look forward to the sequel to see what has come of the issue.
ReplyDeleteExcellent reflections so far, colleagues. Indeed, WHO KILLED illuminates the powerful influence CAR corporations have over shaping PUBLIC POLICY, in addition to their economic clout as big industries in the US. Look for "REVENGE OF THE ELECTRIC CAR" in the next few weeks!
ReplyDeleteThe film reveals a lot about our culture and automobility. The car culture just seems so corrupt to me, especially after watching this film and seeing how GM just slowing took back all these great EV’s then crushed them, but stated to the public that the cars would be safe. It is scary that our culture depends so much on cars, which clearly is something we have little control over, just like the EV, car companies could take back any car they wanted (or so it seems). It was also alarming knowing how many contributing factors went into the killing the electric car: oil companies, car companies, hydrogen fuel cell technology, government, CARB, and consumer interest. So many things killed this car, and so far have been successful enough to keep it in the ground and avoid an all-out comeback. Now there are hybrid vehicles and I am confident that in the future, EV’s will make a comeback. In relation to Carjacked, Lutz points out how cars are like our family members and no longer tools because society relies so heavily on them; killing the electric car was killing a family member to many people, and because we are currently moving towards a sustainable shift, those members will soon be resurrected!
ReplyDelete"Who Killed the Electric Car," went much deeper than the initial question in the title of the film. The film dissected the oil companies and big corporations and shows how much influence they have on the government's decisions. The most ironic part of the movie was that GM created the first ever electric car and the demand for the car was so high and then along with other outside forces killed the electric car. I have never heard of a product that was environmentally friendly and had a high demand by consumers and then was discontinued by the same company that knew it had potential. This film opened by eyes to show how powerful the oil companies are and how corrupt our system has become. After the death of the GM EV, there have been many car companies that have created hybrids that are the closest step back to electric cars. I think it is ironic that GM created the first electric car and now Toyota has the most famous hybrid, the Prius and GM is far behind with less popular hybrid cars compared to foreign cars.
ReplyDeleteI found this documentary to be incredibly informative and intelligently made. With that said, it frustrated me beyond belief. What struck me is just how political the car industry is. It makes me wonder who is really in charge of our nation. Is it the federal government who ultimately make the laws we must follow? Is it the big oil companies who seemingly have the whole world in a vice grip? . I don't think anyone can provide an answer to this question, because we have become a backwards, profit driven nation run by special interests instead of people. The federal government and oil companies are apparently intertwined, based on the fact that George W. Bush had some oil representative as a colleague. I can accept that we have built a world in which we need cars to function. However, if we had a car that ran on electricity instead of gasoline over a decade ago, why didn't we go for it! People obviously knew that we would run out of oil one day. Instead we invested in Hydrogen fuel cells, which this movie uncovered to be incredibly impractical. Hydrogen would require completely new infrastructure, whereas electric requires basically none. After reading some of Kunstler's book, I have come to realize just how deep the relationship between the federal government and the auto industry is. Kunstler writes, "The federal government got into the act of subsidizing auto use in 1916 with the $75 million Federal Road Act to improve post roads and to encourage states to organize their own highway departments by giving them money". That was about a century ago, and history continues to repeat itself. Even when a better option came around, like the electric car, history was on the side of gasoline powered vehicles and that is the way it will stay.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteThis documentary did a good job of exposing which entities have stifled electric car production and distribution. Before watching the film, I did not know that the EV1 had existed – the Telsa is the first fully electric vehicle that I had heard of. It is now clear, however, that a decade ago an electric vehicle was not only on the market, but was also in high demand among some consumers. I am not as disgruntled as I was with lack of initiative and outrage by the American public in regards to pollution that harms human and environmental health – there is outrage, it’s just been overshadowed by the power of fossil fuel companies, the automobile industry, and crooked politicians. I am excited to see the sequel.
This documentary was an informative and alerting commentary that utilized strong persuasive techniques. The film as a whole was represented a discursive shift evident from the obvious bias. It tended to target the limbic brain and neo cortex as manipulated the emotions of the audience with persuasive imagery and charismatic people. This is not to say that it did not use irrefutable facts or that the thesis is wrong, but rather the opinion of the filmmaker was clear through his choice in the use of power tools. This film also illustrates that celebrities can be powerful tools of persuasion but it is risky because the celebrity you choose can always meltdown in a few years.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed “who killed the electric car,” but some of the things they revealed about the culture of automobility and what it has become were disturbing. The main one being how much political and economic pull the car and oil industries have, exposing their close relationship with the federal government. There were multiple things that seem to be responsible for killing the electric car, but the most predominant one was the roll GM played. They were the ones that introduced the electric car and then proceeded to remove it from the market as quietly as possible. They were completely opaque about their reasoning, blaming it on lack of demand, when it was clearly proven that there was plenty of demand. It was hard watching people fight for what they want and believe in only to be silenced by big corporations.
ReplyDeleteOk, so I would like to start by saying that I have just returned from Powershift, so when reflecting on this film we are watching I am definitely looking at it with a unique lens which is in response to some of the information I learned this weekend.
ReplyDeleteI think that this film serves as a documentation of the electric cars history, proof of the demand/need for more sustainable modes of mobility, and an expose of big name economic power players. I was definitely unaware of the evolution of the electric car- from the time of its development to the time of its death, the entire industry wasn't really on my radar. I enjoyed learning about the development of this car, the culture it created, and also I think the testimonials of EV car owners really did shine a interesting light on the plot. How are these cars which are in demand, more sustainable, utilize new technologically, and loved by their drivers not able to stay on the market? But furthermore, it showed all the factors at play in our policy and economy that the average consumer does not see. If not for production of films like thee, the general public would not know of the involvement of big oil and car corporations in the movement to "kill" the electric car. They produced editorials shaping public opinion, influenced policy in their favor, and denied the demand for a better product. These power players hid their real motives for keeping us hooked on gasoline and their car parts with planned obsolescence, in the end making them a bigger buck. This film can serve as an informational film but also as a call to action. If a healthier, smarter, safer good is in existence, as consumers we must demand the right to this good. The corporations thrive off of this free market, and say its the natural way, yet they do not even abide by its rules. Free markets believe that if there is a demand for a good, it will present itself and the market will act accordingly- but this is not the case when we are being denied goods.
Good catch up, CARS crew!
ReplyDeleteWe'll take a look @ REVENGE OF THE ELECTRIC CAR in a few weeks.
Go!
Dr. Rob
The film "Who Killed the Electric Car?" was both informative and disturbing, as we followed the path of the EV1 from creation to destruction. While it is important to consider that the makers of the film have very biased opinions (favoring the EV1 and its electric counterparts), the testimonials and stories being told clearly indicate that had the EV1 been successful, our driving culture and associated environmental impacts would have evolved very differently. The electric vehicles created in the mid 1990's would have served the transportation needs of the majority of Americans. Despite this practicality, General Motors and American car companies, in combination with the U.S. Government and other assorted actors, killed the electric car.
ReplyDeleteThe politics involved in the death of the electric car are particularly worrisome. G.M. has a history of manipulative behavior, all designed to enforce America's dependence on gasoline powered vehicles. This blatant disregard for the environment while in pursuit of capital is a classic example of a negative externality associated with capitalism. The single goal of General Motors was to build capital, regardless of associated environmental effects. Despite the perceived (and very real) demand for the EV1, G.M. recognized that the highest capital remained with gas powered vehicles, and decided to erase the electric car from the market.
Personally, this disregard for a practical, economic solution to one of the nations most persistent environmental issues is a crime. The idea of limiting the use of practical technology seems ridiculous, especially with the prevalence and popularity of the electric car today. Watching this, in combination with our current readings has led me to believe that G.M. is a sneaky, greedy company, and that all decisions made to alter our infrastructure should be carefully observed and considered in an environmentalist perspective.
This film was very enlightening. Our culture of automobility goes beyond drivers and their cars, but to car companies, oil companies, the government, etc. There are too many exogenous factors that affect on our car culture. Before this documentary, I have never heard of the EV. It made me sick to my stomach, when GM Motors confiscated all of the EVs. Confiscating the cars was one thing, but instead of salvaging any usable parts or recycling what they could from the car, GM Motors just crushed them and left them to rust in junk yards. I still do not understand the thought process behind that. With the current state of California, the EV sounded like a godsend. I understand the EV threatened profits of oil companies and the car company, but the EV had significant environmental benefits. Is money really more important than our health and the health of our environment? It was interesting to me to see the breakdown of sources that were responsible for the death of the electric car. The oil and car companies were just a fraction of who were responsible for the "death" of the electric car. The oil and car companies have so much power, our culture of automobility seems almost impossible to change, because they seem to control everything. There needs to be a power shift, or our culture of automobility seems unlikely to change and we will continue on the same path. This documentary left me a little pessimistic and I hope the second part of the documentary is a little more hopeful.
ReplyDeleteThe film definitelty emphasizes the combination of factors that led to the death of the electric car and it shows how deep the roots of the culture of automobility really reach. The most enlightening part of the film, for me, was when it goes back to era of Jimmy Carter, installing solar cells on the white house and promising to end the reliance on foreign oil via renewable energy. In steps Raegan, and the war on "regulations" starts. The Saudis drop the price, effectively getting US citizens addicted to oil, stopping any effort to create renewable energies in its tracks. I thought this was an excellent example of this grand domino effect that created the culture that says we need a gas-guzzling tank to protect our families. The electric car represented a significant alternative that fit perfectly into the car culture, but would go directly against profits, but benefit human and environmental health. It terrified me just how much power and control profits have over not only our country but our culture.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe film hints at the intriguing notion that or "culture" of automobility isn't organic, but is regulated from the producers down. If our culture were organic, then the preferences of the consumers would influence the output of car companies- the customer is always right. But, this isn't what we see. The consumers love the electric vehicle. You would think that this would lead to a shift in the production of cars towards electric vehicles, as producing goods which are in demand tends to be good business practice. However, the car companies do the opposite, and the preferences of the customers seems to have little effect on their out put. It leads us to the notion that what we like in cars is what we are told that we like. How much can our choices mean in a setting which limits them from the beginning?
ReplyDelete