L.A. Auto Show: Green Car of the Year finalists announcedhttp://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-mo-autos-laautoshow-green-ca...
Yeah, but a hybrid is? But these things are biased and lame anyway. Of course, I would have not only expected the Model S to be on this list but win it hands down and be the Poster-child for all Green cars. But I'm not biased at all! ;)
Being Tesla wan't at the LA Auto Show, might explain this outcome.
@TikiMan - I guess that would explain it, wouldn't it...
IMO, Tesla is better off without such "accolades". That title would make the car seem more like an item exclusively for the eco-fringe. And while (as opined earlier) that is actually the case for most early adopters, I suspect Elon, George et al eventually want the mainstream to also consider buying the car.
Green car of the year really is not viewed as exclusively for the "eco-fringe". They have picked many main stream cars and SUVs in the past. The fact that Tesla did not attend the LA car show is why they were not even considered. For Tesla this makes no difference at all.
Better to become Car of the Year!
Eco nuts prefer their Eco Car of the Year because it's more virtuous and stuff. Much higher Righteousness Quotient.
Right on, +inf. It is an totally invalid reason to buy something. There are good reasons and bad reasons to buy. That is how capitalism is supposed to work!
Which organization chose those cars? I bet it was the same that chose this years cars, and if the reasoning has not changed Ford wins again (because they are sponsored by Ford AFAIK). Only time Ford doesn't win is when they don't participate to the competition.
OTOH if the "green value" is the only point of consideration, then there are other cars that beat Model S. Model S is best, but not the greenest, of all BEV:s out there.
"...there are other cars that beat Model S. Model S is best, but not the greenest, of all BEV:s out there."
How do you figure? Just curious.
"Green" meaning energy saving, least energy used to travel. Model S is just too heavy for that, you end up having lower mpge than your competition, Leaf and iMiEV have better figures there. If you count in people moved with max load, then I think price goes to some electric train. You need to actually set the criteria correct to get Model S as winner. It is best car IMO, but it is not greenest or cheapest (meaning less will be sold than its competition).
If the competition would be "the most practical clean vehicle" (clean as in no tailpipe, not green) then Model S would win. Nothing else would come even close to it.
tesla.mrspaghetti, I don't know Timo's reasoning behind the statement, but the Model S certainly has worse MPG(e) than, e.g., a Leaf or i-MiEV (within the speed and range that a Leaf/i-MiEV can offer), and very likely also has accumulated a far greater "eco-debt" than these before it even hits the road, in part due to its all-aluminum body.
Timo, you beat me to it, posting at the same time.
"I think prize goes ..."
Price is what you pay; prize is what you win!
Ok, I see what you mean. Thanks for the explanation.
BTW, it seems that this competition was created by Green Car Journal, the same website that failed to recognize Tesla motors as real competition last year too. I then asked them at which criteria you choose the winner and it apparently was all about the company, not about the car: IE capability to produce huge number of cars using same platform. It's not about the how clean the car is, not about the practicality or even actual impact on general pollution caused by cars because the actual sales is not measured (how could it, it's the next year car, not this year).
It is entirely arbitrary selection, not based on anything else than Journal writers opinions and preferences. From the answer I got I actually got a feeling that they get paid to select the "right" winner.
This means that winner is one of the Fords (again).
Unfortunately it seems like awards in many fields/industries are similarly arbitrary and/or predetermined. The entertainment industry awards (Oscars, Grammies, Emmies, etc) come to mind, as do the lists of "Top Colleges", "Top Places to Work in IT/HR/etc" put out by Fortune/Forbes/Time or whatever.
Not that I'm alleging a conspiracy theory, but there have been many times where the winner of a given award just seemed to have no correlation with reality.
It's sad that even athletic competitions are no longer trustworthy. You can be pretty sure who crossed the finish line first, but not about whether drugs were used to do it.
mrspaghet -- You can be pretty sure who crossed the finish line first, but not about whether drugs were used to do it.
I think you can be pretty sure drugs were used.
A small electric motorcycle would have the lowest MPGe. Does it mean it's the greenest? You have to look at the utility and the category. Sure the Leaf and i-MiEV have lower MPGe, but how many passengers and luggage can they carry? Even for ICE cars the fuel economy is compared per category.
I think you mean higher. MilesPerGallon Equivalent; less is worse, more is better.
Brian H: correct. Switched brain circuitry. Thanks for the correction.
Screw green. The driving experience with this tech is unbelievable. Any savings on the green side is simply a point of discussion. Compared to burning fuel, the feel of burning kwatts is wildly different and guilt-free. It is fun not having to take the time to stop at the gas station. The 50 cent equivalent plug in when I get home is my moment of green, but more on the money saving side of the term. If you really want green, get a leaf.