This is true: there have been electric cars for a long time. But look around you - where are they? Why are there so few of them?

In my mind this is similar to the truth that Edison did not invent the light bulb. First he bought patents from inventors, then he spent years and years painstakingly going through materials until he made it last a long time before burning out, and subsequently making it cheaper to manufacture. But we do credit Edison as "inventor" of the light bulb.

I think if Nissan can build and sell a million electric cars in the next five years then they deserve the title of "inventors" of the electric car. That's just my opinion.

↓↑report

While the electric car, overall, is not a new invention, perhaps the number of patents involved with it warrant the title. Just a thought.

↓↑report

@Matt234

Exactly. How can you give someone an award before they really achieved anything? Kind of like Obama's peace prize.

↓↑report

jpm you beat me to it..

I hope Nissan will be able to follow through with this project and get out a reasonable priced all electric car...but it has YET to happen...

This is just as stupid as the Nobel Prize crap that was pulled for BO..all this kind of thing will do is to call into question the motives of Time and cheapen the overall authenticity of the list...but then again we are talking about time magazine...how much worse can they get.

↓↑report

@jpm "Exactly. How can you give someone an award before they really achieved anything? Kind of like Obama's peace prize."

The question I was answering was "I don't even think of new cars as "inventions"". If something is groundbreaking enough, then it will be thought of as an "invention". That's why I said "if Nissan can..."

That said, I 100% agree it is too early to actually establish this car as an "invention". It may have the potential, but that does not make it so. It's been argued by a lot of people (google it) that the peace prize was used as a political tool (not for the first time, either), to pave the way, raising the expectation. Not very helpful with domestic politics perhaps, but arguably more helpful in places where there is not peace. We'll never know if it helped or not, but at least it seemed to make a few Norwegian guys pretty happy.

Time Magazine doesn't have anywhere the clout of a Nobel Peace prize, but every little helps, I guess. Also, and it's been done before: if you say something enough times, it becomes true.

↓↑report

It may be premature, but the commitment to mass production next year clinched it for them. No one else has made a commitment.

Reasonable cost is certainly slippery concept. LA Times last week reported that it will cost between $25,000 and $33,000. An interview I heard on Saturday with a Nissan USA type whose name I do not remember said the battery would be leased, but the details had not been worked out. They are making the argument that use of the battery is like using fuel and a monthly charge seems fair. He repeated the Nissan goal of making it no more than 2-3 percent more than a conventional car of the same size.

It seems to me that the battery is a component like a fuel tank. Both store energy. You are paying for the "fuel" when you recharge. So equating the battery to "fuel" is just smoke and mirrors. The price minus the most expensive component is the in the Camry/Accord class, but the Leaf is obviously a smaller car. This is going to be a very expensive car that takes more than 10 seconds to get to 60mph like a Prius or Insight and only goes to 90 mph with a 100 mile range.

So this is very disappointing to me. They should sell some of these to the kind of folks who have some money and are committed to the environment, but it will not make economic sense to most people.

↓↑report

I did some checking and the dimensions of the Leaf are almost identical to those of the Honda Civic which sells for $16, 500 with an automatic transmission. The wheel base is identical. The Leaf is a little taller and a little shorter.

I am vague on battery prices, but I would guess if the battery were included it would cost as much as the predicted price of the Volt without the performance or the engine/generator range extender.

It would interesting to see which would be less, your monthly credit card bill for gasoline for a Honda Civic, which is a MUCH more capable car, or your monthly battery lease plus the increase in your electric bill to recharge the battery(at a much higher rate in many places).

So let's see.
Priced 2 to 3 percent more than a similar sized car. Not true.
The battery is fuel and should be paid for separately. Not true.
Cheaper to operate than a Honda Civic. Doubtful.
90 mph, 0-60 10.6 seconds, range 100 miles. Now suddenly doubtful if so much of the other stuff is not true.

Ah, I get it. The award is for the invention of new levels of "creativity" in a marketing campaign for new tech. Presumable GM will get one next year for the Volt.

↓↑report

They lease the battery so that the consumer doesn't get hit by it's enormous depreciation. Plus once you trade it back they can fit the car with a more advanced battery at no additional cost to the consumer. It also aides in recyclability as the battery is 99% salvageable post-use and Nissan can sell the cells for industry use.

Also, they never said "2-3% more expensive then a similar sized car". The quote (and I was at Dodger stadium in LA for the launch) was "1-2% more then a mid-sized sedan". The Honda civic is not considered a mid-sized sedan, look at something like an Altima or an Accord.

All that considered the price per mile versus an ICE vehicle is around 30% less. Volt will be close in terms of raw fuel cost but it TOC will be FAR higher considering it has a $45k+ price tag from the outset.

↓↑report

"This will help put the electric car on top of everyone's mind for 2010. Anything that can be done to make sure the Leaf is a success is welcomed. "

Even if it's bullshit? I'm not a believer in the end always justifies the means.

"Interesting that GM's Volt is not as highly regarded, yet the Voltec technology is way more complex."

Agreed. And the Volt is less expensive than the Leaf, once you take into account the price of the battery.

"I think that pure EVs, even with a limited range will be easier to market because the message is simpler: No More Gas."

It'll be interesting to watch.

↓↑report

I'm sorry nrb but you're just plain wrong with most of your facts. The LEAF will be priced at the same level as a mid sized sedan (22-30) including the battery LEASE (this is an important distinction as the battery degrades over time, and your better off trading it back after 5 years for a newer, potentially longer lasting battery. The lease is expected to equate to roughly 12% of the TCO). Besides that the Volt is prices above $45k, astronomically more expensive then the LEAF and you still have to put gas in it, plus you own the battery, a $10k+ investment that loses value by the mile.

↓↑report

"The LEAF will be priced at the same level as a mid sized sedan (22-30) including the battery LEASE"

How can a purchase price include a lease? They're two different things.

According to the article below, the purchase price of the Leaf (sans battery) is about $30K.
http://blogs.insideline.com/straightline/2009/11/more-details-emerge-on-the-nissan-leaf.html
I've read other articles that put it as high as $35K.

If you could purchase the battery, it'd be in the $15K-$25K range. We're looking at Volt pricing or higher.

If you like leasing, lease the battery in the Volt. You can lease anything you want.

I really don't get the excitement over the Leaf pricing. It's a basic car where they took out a complicated ICE engine (with tranny) and put in a simple electric motor (probably no tranny). They exclude the most expensive part (battery). It should cost LESS than an ICE car, not more.

↓↑report

If they'd used the word achievement, we wouldn't be as excited.

Also it's expected to sell for $30K, not counting the price of the battery.

↓↑report