Tata Shall Lead Us

When it comes to sustainable mobility and our transportation future, the popular imagination longs for the exotic and groundbreaking. The goal is to completely eradicate the old, noxious mindset -- symbolized by the polluting, gas-burning car -- and replace it with something drastically different, such as Aptera's sleek, otherworldy plug-in hybrid three-wheeler, which has a Jetsons-esque design, is constructed from composite materials, and reportedly gets 300 miles per gallon.

Aptera speaks to the rarefied sensibility of the developed world, but also to the contemporary assumption that function follows form: Aptera builds a car that looks alarmingly fuel efficient, so therefore it must be, just as Apple builds an MP3 player that looks as if it must be the state-of-the-art, and as a result it is. Right? Well, design matters, but it can also be a distraction, fostering a kind of mass hypnosis.

With flashy hardware like Aptera's vehicles, sustainable mobility is flirting with revising the status of the automobile, from a relic of the old manufacturing economy to a totem of the gadget-y new consumer product economy. Which sounds groovy, because we love our iPods and Flip video cameras, and why shouldn't our cars evoke the same cheerful emotions? Unfortunately, cars aren't yet a disposable thrill. Their mission has been unchanged for a century: For most people, they need to get you from A to B safely, be affordable, offer a modicum of comfort and versatility. Style is just a plus.

Even though what Aptera and many of the other new start-up car companies are doing is admirable and in fact quite cool, it's worth asking if the model they promote really has a chance to make sustainable mobility happen. They're creating niche experiments that may influence a later stage of our transportation development, but provide limited or negligible progress now. The fact is, we may have to continue to look to guidance from boring, old-fangled, large-scale manufacturing enterprises to make mobility truly sustainable for the next half century.

The company that's actually poised to take the lead is India's Tata Motors. Tata created a sensation recently when it introduced its Nano "People's Car," a $2,500 four-door that gets something in neighborhood of 50 miles per gallon (it's slated to go on sale in India next year). Tata has also announced plans to license technology and the manufacturing apparatus to build vehicles that run on compressed air and tiny amounts of gas and other combustible fuels. Meanwhile, Tata is maintaining its traditional vehicle-building operations and buying storied brands from other carmakers, including Land Rover and Jaguar from Ford.

Tata is poised to become a minor juggernaut in the brave new automotive world. As far as sustainable mobility goes, it's in an almost ideal position to determine the shape of the future -- a shape that won't be based on out-there tech, but on practical solutions to everyday problems. For example, India's burgeoning middle class needs personal transportation. Enter the Nano, which is all the car many car-less Indians require at the moment. Detractors on the environmental front have argued that mass-motorization in India is the worst thing that could happen as far as global warming is concerned, but India is going to motorize regardless. Doing so with the high-mileage, relatively low emissions Nano is by far the best way to go.

At the same time, Tata is expanding into exports and luxury brands, giving itself three points of access to the global car market. The United States and Japan each lack the ultra-low-cost entry-level segments. Or do they? Tata's air car tech has already captured some attention among those consumers who want an urban-commuting option. Is it such a stretch to think that a version of the Nano, upgraded to meet U.S. safety benchmarks, could be taking to our roads in the next decade? We have some experience with small, rear-engine imports, after all: It was called the VW Beetle.

Tata Motors represents a modern-day version of what Detroit could have become if it had begun to adjust its products to obviously impending future needs back in the 1970s. At that time, in the wake of the first gas crisis, Americans were still highly receptive to smaller, more fuel-efficient cars. It took pressure from Japanese imports to get Detroit to build their own versions, which of course it abandoned as soon as oil prices entered a prolonged stasis in the 1990s. Now Detroit has no flexibility and is enduring the extreme pain that comes from ignoring sustainability. (OK, they didn't call it "sustainability" in 1974, but the same basic issues were at play in the environmental movement.)

Ironically, the North American automobile market is ripe for sustainable mobility. Americans can think about their future automotive purchasing in a multi-layered manner: affluence allows for mileage and emissions goals to be factored in -- hence the success of the Toyota Prius, which sells at a premium of thousands of dollars relative to other fuel-efficient, low-emission cars. The Prius advertises one's virtuous commitment to the cause. The Nano, on the other hand, is sustainable by necessity. And we all know that's the true source of change.

Comments

[darthdarcy]

Tata's Compressed Air Vehicle should be used as Taxi's in every major city in America...

Also we should already have most of our city buses running on hydrogen due to their sharing a centralized fueling depot, as already in Germany..

This would due wonders to relieve respiratory illness in our major cities which are on the rise including cancer caused by diesel soot which contains a known carcinogen NO2..

[Matthew DeBord - Huffpost Blogger]

The air car might not be rugged enough to do service as a taxi. Or large enough. As an urban runaround or light commuter car, however, it has some potential in the US market. I like it because you can run it on gas, which makes it easy for it to be adopted as a scooter/motorcycle alternative.

The whole hydrogen thing is really problematic. It costs a lot more than diesel and of course creates pollution during its (expensive) production. You could argue that subsidizing it in some way, through taxpayer action, could allow it to enter the transportation matrix more fully, as a means of achieving the local emissions reductions. But then you're creating an artificial economy that's vulnerable to natural market pressures. A key aspect of Sus Mo is to consider the whole picture as much as possible, rather than zeroing in on apparently pleasing stories about isolated, local achievements.

[JScott]

We kinda have this car now in this country-comes real close and they are best sellers and in a way groundbreaking albeit foreign but from what I understand best selling (often sold out)-the Honda Fit and the Nissan Versa. And these come close to what probably most of the country needs. All the Nissan Versa needs is an independent rear suspension and a towing capacity of the usual min. for that size car of 1000 lb. The Honda Fit needs the same TT capacity and I'd say a restyling/clean up of the rear of the car. If GM had only made their Saturn Astra more like these, they'd would have a best seller.

[Matthew DeBord - Huffpost Blogger]

Yes, the Fit has been hugely successful for Honda. It's a good model: small, versatile, fuel-efficient. Obviously, there's been pressure to produce this genre of vehicle due to gas prices. Now that the price of gas is falling, that urge may retreat. When you look at the dominant categories in the US auto market, historically you've had to focus on sedans and trucks. Smaller cars come and go. This is not helping us to achieve sustainability, so I think we need to look at ways to affect that market.

[ImmanuelGoldstein]

This is leadership? Leading the third world down the same unsustainable cul-de-sac WE are trapped in right now? Just what the world needs, more carbon spewing deathtraps! Hey, how about this for leadership? Create a society where everybody doesn't need a car to lead a normal life. As it is filling up all these little buggies will drive the price of gas right back to $4/gal/+ really fast,so we might as well work on REAL alternatives to Carworld.

[Matthew DeBord - Huffpost Blogger]

Carworld isn't going anywhere. There are going to be more cars in the world in the future, so we should accept that reality and strive to make it more sustainable. An inexpensive, relatively high MPG, low-emissions vehicles is a good start. Significantly higher gas prices would also help, because they would compel real change in driving patterns and product design/engineering. Our cul-de-sac was predicated on cheap and plentiful oil; the new paradigm can't reply on that so it will have to organize its visions of progress differently.

[ImmanuelGoldstein]

Why should we accept it? CarWorld is unsustainable,period so why go on this fool's errand? You said yourself our cul-de-sac was predicated on cheap oil so why support other's going down that cul-de-sac? I doubt the Tata's bought in India are going to be powered by some form of miracle power. They are going to be powered by good old petroleum, hundreds of million of "An inexpensive, relatively high MPG, low-emissions vehicles.." aren't a good start on anything except worsening our already severe environmental problems.

[Badbone]

Not 5% of Americans will buy a car like that. And the reason is not just because they are ugly, underpowered little boxes that scream "Ladies, please do not have sex with me".

They won't sell because very few American cities are like Bangalor. In America, most cities that have everything within driving distance are too congested to drive. In other cities, it's 30 miles to work, often via highway. These cars just don't fit.

I applaud any company trying to innovate. But mere innovation isn't enough. Even the most innovative idea in thwe world still has to abide by the most basic of marketing principals. "Does the consumer want it?"

For Tata, in America, the answer is no.

[Matthew DeBord - Huffpost Blogger]

I disagree. There are numerous American cities where a city/commuter car, such as the Nano, would fit into the overall transportation matrix. Consumers want more transportation choices right now. The goal should be providing that choice within a realistic and sustainable framework. However, my understanding is that for the moment Tata doesn't have any plans to export the Nano to the U.S. market. Nevertheless, as it becomes more a feature of life in India's global neighborhood, it will be interesting to see how people in the West respond.

[SomaMinneapolis]

"And a Little Tata Shall Lead Them" sounds like the last time I visited Las Vegas.

I am looking forward to India's engineers and scientists taking on some leadership in energy and transportation technologies.

[Matthew DeBord - Huffpost Blogger]

If they aim for a diversified and sustainable future economy, they will. Obviously, they're modifying the industrialization playbook somewhat.