It looks like General Motors might once again be trying to kill the electric car—or at least any electric car that doesn't have a range extender like the Volt. Jalopnik reports that the carmaker is seeking to trademark the phrase "range anxiety" for the purpose of marketing its plug-in (which as we all know by now, runs on gas after its 40 miles of battery range are depleted.)
The trademark filing says that the goal would be "promoting public awareness of electric vehicle capabilities," which can be roughly translated to: "promoting the Chevy Volt by spreading fears about the Nissan LEAF." GM spokesman Rob Peterson told Wired that he isn't aware of any current plans to use the phrase to market the Volt. But if that's not the plan, why would a trademark be necessary?
Fear Factor
When GM designed the Volt, it did so based around the idea that consumers wouldn't be willing to drive a car that can't be filled at a gas station. The theory was that Americans simply wouldn't feel safe in a car that could potentially leave them stranded along the side of the road without the ability to get home. Now it appears that the carmaker is poised to help nudge them toward that conclusion.
We saw the first hints of this strategy at a dinner hosted by GM at the Plug-in 2010 conference in July. Before a room filled with journalists, marketing chief Joel Ewanick stood up to announce (or perhaps defend) the Volt's price tag, proclaiming that the car was unique because despite its plug-in capability, it was still a "real car." (The implication being that the Nissan LEAF and other fully electric plug-ins are not.)
In recent years, so-called "range anxiety" has become a major topic of discussion among those who write, research and think about cars for a living. But there isn't any real-world evidence at this point to tell us just how big an effect it will actually have on electric vehicle sales.
Several surveys have suggested that at least half of drivers say they'd be unlikely to consider an electric vehicle because of its limited range, but how many consumers ever actually consider purchasing a new technology as soon as it hits the market? In the beginning, every major product starts with a group of enthusiastic early adopters spreading the gospel about its benefits. Furthermore, nobody has ever expected EVs to make up half of the auto market in the near future—if 40 percent of drivers are giving the cars consideration 15 years from now, it would be considered a major victory.
If GM moves forward with plans to "promote public awareness" of range anxiety, it would be more than a cheap knock on a competitor's vehicle. Such a campaign would constitute an attempt to create fear where it doesn't yet exist—undermining efforts to get consumers to keep an open mind about battery electric vehicles.
Of course, this could all come to nothing and the Chevy could choose to remain above the fray, selling its car on its merits and letting consumers make their own decisions about whether a limited-range electric vehicle fits their lifestyle. Let's hope this is the case. Both GM and Nissan stand to benefit from the long-term adoption of plug-ins, and it would be tragic to watch them tear each other down until the perception formed that plug-ins aren't practical for anyone.
And why is this surprising coming from a company where 75% of the management and workers are directly tied to the Internal Combustion Engine? While possibly good for GM (and other car manufacturers') bottom lines and future sustainability, EVs do absolutely no good for anyone involved with designing or building engines, ignitions, transmissions, radiators, fuel systems, emissions systems, starter systems, etc.
You could see this is an attempt to preserve the ICE.