by Mark Izeman, via NRDC’s Switchboard
Nearly seven years ago, the first hybrid yellow taxis rolled onto the streets of New York City as part of an effort to improve fuel economy and reduce emissions. Today, about 5,000 of these cleaner, greener taxis—nearly 40 percent of the total fleet—are in operation, working to cut air pollution, lower noise levels, and lessen our dependence on fossil fuels. The city’s hybrid taxi program was one of the first of its kind, and has served as a model of urban sustainability for other cities around the country.
But these cleaner cars could soon become obsolete when — and if — New York City’s new “Taxi of Tomorrow” hits the streets. Last spring, Mayor Bloomberg announced that the Nissan NV200 was the winner of the City’s Taxi of Tomorrow competition. And today in New York City, Nissan is scheduled to officially unveil the NV200 Taxi prototype, which is slated to become the new standard.
The initial NV200 vehicle design, despite safety and other enhancements, is a conventional, non-hybrid vehicle. Thus, based on air emissions and fuel efficiency, it is unquestionably a step backwards environmentally compared to the hybrids already on the road.
But all hope is not lost.
Concurrent with the introduction of the NV200s, the Taxi and Limousine Commission (TLC) will also launch a pilot program to test six all-electric Nissan LEAF cabs. And, as announced last year, one factor is choosing the NV200 was the prospect of Nissan’s ability to produce an all-electric NV200 by 2017. Indeed, Nissan is seeking to position itself internationally as the leading car manufacturer of electric cars.
As things now stand, however, the contract between Nissan and the City on the Taxi of Tomorrow fails to include clear language relating to the eventual manufacture of these cleaner vehicles. Further, we believe that details included in the current contract have the potential to actually block the introduction of strong hybrid or electric-only taxis into New York City’s fleet.
Removing the current hybrid taxis without ensuring that equally green, or greener electric taxis, could eventually take their place, would be an environmental loss for the city.
There is no question the NV200 is indeed an improvement over the iconic old-standard, gas-guzzling Crown Victoria, which averages a mere 14 miles per gallon. Mayor Bloomberg also deserves credit for notably promoting the use of hybrid vehicles in the city’s personal fleet.
But at the end of the day, introducing the non-hybrid Nissan NV200 without an opportunity to pivot down the road to strong hybrids and electric cabs would indicate that the promise of New York City’s taxi program as a sustainable leader may be fading.
Still, we remain hopeful that in their remaining negotiations, TLC and Nissan can still find a way to ensure that the final agreement offers a path forward to cabs that are class leaders in low emissions and fuel-efficiency.
This result would make the NV200 a true Taxi of Tomorrow.
Mark Inzeman is a Senior Attorney and Director of the New York Urban Program at the Natural Resources Defense Council. This piece was originally published at NRDC’s Switchboard and re-printed with permission.
Previous in TP Climate Progress
Language Intelligence: Lessons on persuasion from Jesus, Shakespeare, Lincoln, and Lady Gaga
When I read the NY Times article about the review process on the NV 200, I was disappointed to see there was absolutely no reference to how the vehicle is powered. Nissan has developed an experimental all-electric version of the NV 200, but until we get better batteries or Nissan adopts Renault/Better Places battery swap system, NYC’s Yellow Cabs will be shackled to gasoline.
Yes. The Better Place battery swap concept for electric vehicles is such a terrific idea I can hardly sit still.
Battery swapping gives you lower cost, more convenience, cleaner air, grid storage and load balancing to integrate wind and solar.
And did I mention lower cost? It’s being rolled out in Israel right now, and bears watching closely.
Within 10 years, IBM expects to be manufacturing lithium-air batteries that will be lighter and cheaper than today’s lithium-ion batteries with ten times the energy density — enabling electric cars to go 500 MILES PER CHARGE:
http://www.ibm.com/smarterplanet/us/en/smart_grid/article/battery500.html
That’s what the taxi of tomorrow will be: an IBM PC (“Personal Car”).
Tesla’s Roadster 85 k/wh version has already 244 miles http://ecarvolution.com/ecars/item/tesla-motors-roadster.html?category_id=12
Not bad for a sports car :)
The new Fisker Sedan (4 doors) gets 230 miles. But both cars price tag is in the 6 digit.
Actually the Fisker is a plug-in car and the max electric range it seems is 52 miles. Not sure currently if they plan an all electric version…
If there would be any sense of urgency when considering the catastrophic situation we caused with burning fossil fuels, we would go 100% electric for public transport. Anything else means, not to acknowledge the dangers ahead. Also everything else beside electric vehicle transport means to put human health in jeopardy, from carcinogenic gasoline-diesel fumes.
Infiniti Zero Emission Concept: NY Auto Show Live Photos
At auto shows, sometimes cars get uncovered before their official unveilings.
The car you see here is Infiniti’s Zero Emission Concept, a four-door sedan that will be formally introduced tomorrow morning at a press conference.
But when Nissan CEO Carlos Ghosn stopped by the stand, the covers came off just long enough for photos of Ghosn with his company’s latest concept car.
The silver sedan has all the Infiniti styling cues, including Infiniti’s double-arced grille and the “crescent” roof pillar.
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1075100_infiniti-zero-emission-concept-ny-auto-show-live-photos?utm_source=GreenCarReports+
In the rest of the world, operators choose their own cars. Since they’re the ones paying the gas bills – their largest single cost, they tend to prioritise low fuel consumption. Off course, size, comfort, and other things come into play (and are often regulated), but it works. Locking everyone into a single standard, which will soon be obsolete, is a very bad idea.
They don’t prioritise fuel consumption as much as you might think. My brother used to drive a taxi, in Australia where fuel has always been MUCH more expensive than in the US (currently about US$ 5:85 per US gallon, although that’s still not nearly as much as in the UK).
Anyway, while his taxi certainly had the smallest available engine for the model, it was still somewhat of a gas-guzzler considering it had a low-tech automatic gearbox and the airconditioning almost permanently on. Cost of repairs (and particularly of engine swaps) was the main factor in model selection.
Remember (here, anyway) that the taxi OWNER may not be the taxi DRIVER, and it’s the driver that pays the fuel bill. (Where the owner, or owner’s family, did all or most of the driving the taxi would often be modified to use LPG, but that wasn’t the case with the car my brother drove.)