Follow this blog:: RSS

Ferrari president: I don’t believe in electric cars

By Channtal Fleischfresser | August 17, 2011, 4:00 AM PDT

There’s been a lot of talk recently about electric cars - and this blog is no exception. As new models are introduced sporting larger ranges and smaller price tags, EVs are likely to become a market fixture, if not a dominating presence, in years to come.

So it is all the more curious to see the president of a major car company, Ferrari, publicly declare his skepticism about the battery-powered vehicles. In a recent interview with Engadget, the Italian automaker’s president, Luca di Montezemolo, made it clear that there is no electric Ferrari in the works.

“You will never see a Ferrari electric because I don’t believe in electric cars,” Montezemolo said, “because I don’t think they represent an important step forward for pollution or CO2 or the environment.”

Indeed, electric cars are not a perfectly sustainable alternative to gasoline-fueled vehicles. Widespread use of EVs will put a strain on electrical grids, and unless large-scale renewable energy projects are developed throughout the world, most EV owners are likely to be powering their cars using coal-generated electricity. Still, electric vehicles are widely seen as our best bet towards cutting the use of fossil fuels and reducing our carbon emissions.

So it seems extreme for the head of a major automaker to unequivocally oppose the development of an electric vehicle. But Montezemolo did say he believed hybrids were the way forward, and that he hoped to see a Ferrari hybrid in a few years.

Watch the video of his interview here.

Start your week smarter with our weekly e-mail newsletter. It's your cheat sheet for good ideas. Get it.

About Channtal Fleischfresser

Channtal Fleischfresser is a contributing editor for SmartPlanet.

Full Bio
Disclosure
Contact

If you liked this, don't miss...

Comments

Add Your Opinion

Join the conversation!

Follow via:: RSS

Top
Rated

Luca di Montezemolo means well

However he is wrong. All things change. Electric cars can help balance the grid. lus there are a number of engineering advantages to electric cars that many have forgotten or overlooked. Luca needs to learn or relearn some things and perhaps he will agree that electric cars do have advantages. Actually I believe they have a better torque curve and braking can recover energy while braking. Each wheel should have a separate motor generator. Separate motor generators provide for better weight distribution and unsprung weight. Actually what engineers did almost 1 years ago can be done better today because of a number of advances in technology. Luca may know about what I am saying and his mindset is in the problems of the early days and he doesnt know or hasnt caught up on all the modern improvements. But I believe he will shortly change his mind.

Posted by tegil

17th Aug

Just
In

"energy costs for electric cars is far surpassed by traditional gas cars"-!

Firstly, I think you meant the opposite.

Secondly, what you meant is incorrect.

I back myself up with a source:
http://www.vtpi.org/tca/tca0512.pdf
which, in a nutshell, says that the resources used in building, operating and maintaining an electric car over its lifespan is considerably less than conventional gas cars. In 2007 dollars, the lifetime costs per vehicle mile including externalized costs like you are referring to was 16 cents/vm for electric, 38 cents/vm for standard gas and 31 cents/vm for compact cars. One of the externalized expenses of resource consumption must include the cost of the fuel, which is huge in refined oil fuels such as gasoline.
I'm open to a better source that shows the opposite only if it clearly proves that this one is wrong.

The same study showed that natural gas uses more energy per kilometers of passenger transport than a gas or diesel vehicle.

Posted by klassman6

23rd Aug

Show:

Please Select

-1 Votes

+ -

Why not a plug in hybrid?

That way, the car owner can make a choice between gas, electric, or pure electric.

Electical demand by electric cars does not have to put a strain on the power grid and spur additional coal-fired plants. By using off-peak electricity, the current number of plants should be able to handle the additional load, and with bi-directional batteries, the EV can actually provide additional stability to the grid as well as provide energy storage capability. For more information on these ideas, check out
http://www.electrificationcoalition.org/sites/default/files/SAF_1213_EC-Roadmap_v12_Online.pdf

Posted by klassman6

17th Aug

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

Electric Cars?!?!

The problem is that the energy costs for electric cars is far surpassed by traditional gas cars. The production, use and maintenance of electric cars costs far more energy and resources and waste than gas cars. This is something that electric car proponents do not want people to know. The other problem is the giant drain on the national grid they would produce. It could be handled by more and smaller nuclear power plants but the greenies won't allow the best possible power option to be built. It doesn't matter that they are far fewer deaths from nuclear plants (including chernoblye, 3 mile island and japan) than from coal production and coal power plants. In fact coal plants death rate is about 500 times worse than nuclear power. Not to mention the damage done by coal power plants when they are operating normally as well. Electric car people also won't tell you that in about 5-10 years your going to need new rechargeable batteries for your car and that the cost is extremely high and then the problem of the waste from the old batteries as well. We are far better off to stay with gas cars than go with electric cars. We could go with natural gas powered cars like Brazil but then that isn't as sexy as electric cars now is it?

Posted by tim.w.jung@...

17th Aug

Reply
Flag

-2 Votes

+ -

Tuning a Ferrari combustion engine up costs 8,000.00 Euros.

Tuning a Ferrari combustion engine up costs 8,000.00 Euros. Contrast this with the cost of maintaining a Tesla Model S which is nothing, just like the cost of the wind, sunlight and air needed to produce electricity. Have you heard of CENIMAT paper batteries? The only reason for atomic power plants is to have access to plutonium that can be refined through centrifuges into nuclear weapons.

Posted by ChiefHuntingBear

Updated - 19th Aug

Reply
Flag

-1 Votes

+ -

Fantasy vs. reality

Seeing as how battery technology does NOT exist to store electricity in peak generating hours to be used at a later time (and yes,this includes the HIGHLY inefficient paper batteries) it is currently fundamentally impossible to rely solely on renewable energy sources. This would be exacerbated even more when more electric cars come online. Nor are these sources free.

Posted by DeusExMachina

19th Aug

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

Batteries for Tesla Model S are Not Fantasy

The conventional battery that is supplied by Tesla with the purchase of a Model S electric car stores enough energy for the driver to accelerate from zero to sixty faster than a Ferrari, operates for two hundred fifty miles and can be recharged with a windmill and a solar panel. Much better paper batteries have been used to power laser weapons since the 1970s and fighter jets since the 1990s. The real problem is that the descendants of the Egyptian Pharos who rule the world, including especially those of the English King John Lackland Plantagenet, who don't want their subjects to benefit from this, have threatened to put bullets into the heads of anyone who sells this technology to the general public. You can confirm that I directed a shadow Strategic Defense Initiative for President Ronald reagan by looking me up on the website http://www.inTeLiGaTor.com . my first name is PaulTerrenceWiggins. My last name is HuntingBear.

Posted by ChiefHuntingBear

19th Aug

Reply
Flag

-1 Votes

+ -

I am sorry you and the author are idiots!

There is no other way to put it. Proven fact that all those cars connected to the grid would actually HELP!!!!! the grid and act as a buffer and that is a PROVEN fact. The biggest problem is greed and taking short cuts in the manufacture of the batteries and of course causing even more toxic pollution. The shipping infrastructure that is in place and that is being used today needs to be cleaned up as well.......but the grid NEEDS all the help it can get and those extra batteries would bolster and help prop up the grid. The power companies know this.

Posted by killian48

19th Aug

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

"energy costs for electric cars is far surpassed by traditional gas cars"-!

Posted by klassman6

23rd Aug

Reply
Flag

+1 Vote

+ -

Bidirectional batteries?

Aren't, by their very nature, ALL rechargeable batteries bidirectional?

Posted by RoyLoo

17th Aug

Reply
Flag

-2 Votes

+ -

Man will never fly

The President of Ferrari has about 3 years of vision. Replace him now. Can he not see that all cars, except collectibles and race cars, will be electric (or something even better) within 20 years? If I plug my EV into a solar charger, is that not lowering the carbon footprint? It is such an idiotic stance that the only reason I can see for printing it is to incite the masses. Denial is more than a river in Egypt apparently.

Posted by uneekware@...

17th Aug

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

Please...

Tell me where you got your crystal ball? "...all cars...will be electric...within 20 years"- and you know this HOW? Who gives a rat's a$$ what Ferrari does, anyway? Last year, they sold about 6000 cars; total sales of vehicles worldwide in 2010 were 57 million. Ferraris account for .0001% of vehicles on the road- that's one Ferrari per 10,000 vehicles. This is a pinhole leak on the stern of the Titanic and NOT the area that you should be focusing on.

You said it yourself- collectibles and race cars are the exceptions... well, Ferraris ARE race cars, and collectibles as well. The very thing that makes these cars so special are their sound, their balance and their brute force- characteristics which would be completely lost in an electric version. Bastardizing these legendary achievements of mankind isn't worth the drop-in-the-ocean energy savings.

There is "green", and then there is ridiculously petty. I'm glad that Ferrari has the balls to fight for their impressive legacy.

Posted by ddferrari

17th Aug

Reply
Flag

-1 Votes

+ -

Luca di Montezemolo is only half right

The odds are, no electric car will ever win a high speed auto race. And Ferrari's are only good for high speeds.

And unlike Mercedes Benz, I've never heard of a Ferrari trash or produce truck, or bus.

Posted by Dr_Zinj

17th Aug

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

Knowing what you are talking about

1) Top speed of Ferrari FF: Between 202 and 208 MPH. Current top speed of fastest electric car: 208 MPH. I think the odds are not with you.
And in the "just because YOU never heard about it" department:
2) The comment re: Ferrari utility trucks could not possibly be more irrelevant.

Posted by DeusExMachina

Updated - 18th Aug

Reply
Flag

-1 Votes

+ -

Electric Ferrari?

Somehow I don't think the subtle hum of electric power is going to do enough make up for the um..shortcomings of the typical Ferrari owner.

Posted by kmurk

17th Aug

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

Jealous?

Your statement is a cheesy cliche. People buy Ferraris because they are exhilarating to drive and their build quality is second to none. If you're rich enough to afford one then you've already made it to the top... in which case you have nothing left to prove. Living a better lifestyle than your neighbor is not showing off, it's the reward that wealth offers. Anyone who claims they'd rather fly coach and stay at the Holiday Inn than privately jet and stay at a five star hotel is either lying or stupid.

The middle class are the ones trying to show off. They're the people who have to finance a car and often spend way more than they can rightly afford- 50% or more of their annual salary- and with the smallest possible downpayment. Exotic car buyers have to pay cash, and could probably do so another 50 times that day if needed.

Posted by ddferrari

Updated - 19th Aug

Reply
Flag

-1 Votes

+ -

Not included

A battery powered Ferrari would be like a quartz Rolex.

Posted by meniskos@...

17th Aug

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

Electric

Why would anyone want a electric Ferrari?

Posted by fooooot@...

17th Aug

Reply
Flag

+1 Vote

+ -

it would be faster.

Don't believe me? Check out the dragster scene, where electric dragsters are mopping up.

Posted by klassman6

23rd Aug

Reply
Flag

+1 Vote

+ -

Coal not a fossil fuel?

The man is correct as the electricity for these electric cars is coming from coal (a fossil fuel) burning power stations or nuclear power stations. There might be a trickle of hydro, solar and wind but they would be a small proportion. The other side of the deal in terms of environment is how to handle the batteries when they no longer take a charge. The way forward is renewable fuels such as hydrogen or alternative nuclear sources such as thorium or, if it can be solved, fusion.

The electric car industry is a passing fashion. I will be interested to see how many are still getting around on the roads in 20 years time. There are some classic Ferraris still out there doing some excellent service. That is a sustainable manufacturer!

Posted by DOSlover

17th Aug

Reply
Flag

+1 Vote

+ -

Luca di Montezemolo means well

Posted by tegil

17th Aug

Reply
Flag

-1 Votes

+ -

Stockholm Syndrome

Ferrari will never produce electric cars, even though they could be powered by ambient energy from sunlight, wind and CENIMAT paper batteries that recharge themselves through exposure to air. This is one of the reasons I will never sell them the logo Luca the Noble of the Marquises of Montezemelo has begged me to give Ferrari a charity rate on, instead of my ironclad 250,000,000.00 Euros per year price.

Posted by ChiefHuntingBear

19th Aug

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

CENIMAT Battery At Least 10x More Efficient Than Li-On

Engineers at the Center For Materials Research in Portugal have already demonstrated they can produce 1.5 volts of electricity per .05 x 3 x 5 millimeters volume of carbon nanotubes grown on a paper substrate, at a cost of one american penny.

Posted by ChiefHuntingBear

19th Aug

Reply
Flag

Join the SmartPlanet community and join the conversation! Signing up is fast and free. Don't wait -- we want to hear your opinion!