[sustran] Re: any details on Nano and safety and environmental regs?

[Michael P. Walsh]

My understanding is that it will  comply with the emissions requirements 
at Type Approval (a prototype well maintained vehicle) but I am 
skeptical that it will comply in use over its lifetime. But of course no 
one has any actual data at this point.

Best regards,

Mike


Lee Schipper wrote:

> Mike, can you help. 
>I was interviewed by CNN Business but no response yet..
>
>
>Lee Schipper
>EMBARQ Fellow
>EMBARQ, the WRI Center for Sustainable Transport
>www.embarq.wri.org
>and
>Visiting Scholar
>UC Transportation Center
>Berkeley CA USA www.uctc.net
>skype: mrmeter
>+1 510 642 6889
>Cell +1 202 262 7476
> 
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: sustran-discuss-bounces+schipper=wri.org at list.jca.apc.org
>[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+schipper=wri.org at list.jca.apc.org] On
>Behalf Of Walter Hook
>Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 1:58 PM
>To: 'Sarath Guttikunda'; sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org
>Cc: 'Anumita'; Rhys Thom
>Subject: [sustran] any details on Nano and safety and environmental
>regs?
>
>I was "mis" quoted in the Daily News saying the Nano does not meet
>Western emissions, road worthyness and safety standards.  What i said
>was that it "might" not but that i didn't know. 
>
>Does anybody know for sure?  Would it be in compliance with euro IV or
>EPA standards, etc? 
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org at list.jca.apc.org
>[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org at list.jca.apc.org] On
>Behalf Of Sarath Guttikunda
>Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 6:41 AM
>To: sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org
>Cc: Anumita; RThom at wri.org
>Subject: [sustran] Re: [SUSTRAN] Re: Tata Nano:
>CriminalizingMobilityorMobilizing Crime
>
>Dear Anumita,
>
>Thanks for your elaborate email..
>
>My 2 cents,
>
>In an interview with Ratan Tata, he mentioned that goal behind making
>Nano is family safety and he is inspired to making Nano after seeing a
>family on a motorcycle. I have seen some arguments in papers and on net,
>that the largest jump in buying a Nano will come from the MC group. This
>I doubt.
>
>A simple math between MCs and Cars, assuming all gasoline (priced at
>Rs.50per liter) and a family traveling 30 km per day. MCs give 60 km per
>lit, which translates to Rs.0.83 per km or Rs.7800 per year per family.
>If the family jumps to a Nano, assuming a 20 km per lit, math translates
>to Rs.2.50per km or Rs.23,400 per year per family. One year = 6 working
>days per week and 52 weeks.
>
>On an average, a middle class family with MC in India earns between 10K
>to 15K. Even if we take the higher end of 15K, this accounts to 4% for
>MCs and 13% for cars on fuel expenses per year. That is a big change.
>
>This does not account for the price difference (~Rs.40K for MC and
>Rs.125Kfor Nano) and interests they will incur for 5 or 10 years of
>loans, insurance, and maintenance. And lets not forget Parking - even if
>it is cheap compared to the developed nations.
>
>There is no doubt that with growing demand for cars, Nano will be a hit
>(similar to Maruti 800 when it arrived in the 80's) - given the
>production levels are as high as the current demand. What we saw on TV
>is a glimpse of the car which is still a year away or less from hitting
>the roads. A good public awareness campaign with numbers will do good -
>explaining what people will end up spending - both in terms on money and
>time (leading to more congestion).
>
>MCs are by far the largest number in the country and will remain so for
>the coming decades. On the other side, a good price differential and
>extra tax for cars, Nano could shift some people away from buying SUVs,
>who knows :-) Cars are not bad, but more cars on road make it worse.
>
>Similarly, there are some discussions on how Nano will cut into the 3Ws
>and Taxi market, which is also stretching the limits. In the cities like
>Delhi, Mumbai, Hyderabad, or Bangalore, parking has already become a
>problem, and more cars will not make it easy. Under a parking cap, 3Ws
>and Taxis still rule the short trip version.
>
>As we argue on cars and MCs, as Anumita pointed out, we have to also
>understand the lack of "public transport" in place to take the current
>travel loads. And also the share of diesel on road. We are basically
>stuck at "Access to Mobility".
>
>with regards,
>Sarath
>
>--
>Sarath Guttikunda
>New Delhi, India
>Phone: +91 9891 315 946
>Email: sguttikunda at gmail.com
>
>On Jan 25, 2008 11:56 AM, Anumita <anumita at cseindia.org> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Lee,
>>
>>I guess all of us are saying the same thing. Clearly, this fuss over 
>>Nano is just not about Nano but about cars, all cars - big, small, 
>>cheap, expensive cars.
>>Nano has
>>given us the chance to focus the public debate on congestion, oil 
>>guzzling and emissions and make these concerns more visible. This 
>>debate is certainly very nuanced.
>>
>>-- Look at the Indian paradox today - super cheap cars like Nano will 
>>expand the bottom of the market pyramid when rising incomes have 
>>already triggered a steady drift to bigger cars and SUVs. So the ends 
>>are stretched both ways. Car companies will continue to compete on 
>>costs in a price sensitive market. With frugal engineering, weak 
>>regulations, fiscal largess to the car companies, even for their 
>>production facilities, cars can come very cheap. Question is how do we
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>deal with it?
>>
>>-- Interestingly, in a car to car comparison nano or any small car can
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>offer fuel savings - certainly more sensible than the bigger, more 
>>powerful, high performance cars that are about several hundreds per 
>>1000 people in many industrialized cities.
>>But the new investments in the Indian auto sector will have to be 
>>linked with stringent emissions regulations, in-use compliance 
>>requirements and efficiency standards.
>>
>>- But the reason why we are debating Nano, and, are so concerned 
>>today, is because we still have the time, the chance and the 
>>alternatives to plan mobility systems differently in Indian cities. We
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>already have a reasonable strength in the usage of public transport at
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>least in big cities, NMT and walking -- that if protected and improved
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>can help us to take an alternative route and avoid huge emissions and 
>>oil guzzling in Indian cities. Building alternatives at this stage of 
>>motorisation is critical
>>-- cars may drive growth and aspirations, but they can never meet the 
>>commuting needs of the urban majority.
>>
>>-- But this is where we draw a blank. As in the rest of the world we 
>>have also realized that to a very great extent mobility management 
>>hinges on fiscal measures (in addition to providing good public 
>>transport).  But the wisdom of taxing a product for the vice and not 
>>just for their values is still quite alien to the Indian and many 
>>other Asian fiscal regimes. The governments are strongly entrenched in
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>command and control strategies. They are still not looking at fiscal 
>>measures that can change consumer and commuter choices, push cities to
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>make better choices on transportation options, create alternative 
>>sources of revenue and broaden the revenue base to fund mobility and 
>>technology transition. But this will require a different kind of 
>>maturity and sophistication in our fiscal regimen.
>>
>>-- Greening of taxes will be an even bigger battle in the present 
>>context of governance and public awareness. Aspirational vote bank 
>>never says tax our cars and the governance systems in cities are not 
>>strong enough to force it down.
>>Therefore, just the opposite is happening today. The city governments 
>>penalize buses by taxing them higher per passenger they carry than 
>>cars that carry lot less and use up more road space etc.
>>
>>-- In Delhi, we are amidst discussions on fuel taxes, parking charges,
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>road taxes etc.
>>But resistance is unbelievable. Even if matters move in Delhi it will 
>>still be a drop in the ocean. The policy mandate on transportation and
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>mobility matters is so decentralized that it is the ability of all 
>>individual cities that will ultimately decide the progress on this 
>>front. National policies like JNURM etc are still not strong enough 
>>framework to create a template for the cities. Smaller cities are 
>>going to be even more badly hit by small car explosion as public 
>>policies on public transport are virtually non existent for these 
>>cities - just because these cities do not have high density travel 
>>corridors to justify investment in 'profitable' public transport.  
>>This means millions are left to organise their own mobility and will 
>>happily graduate from bicycles and cycle rickshaws to cheap cars.
>>
>>-- We need to understand that when it comes to practical planning for 
>>mobility management in our cities the basic policy tools, databases, 
>>policy indicators of sustainability etc do not even exist to enable 
>>city level planning and action. Even public voice remains dormant. 
>>This is where we need to move fast to see some real action. Otherwise,
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>good ideas will remain good ideas while cars take over.
>>
>>Anumita
>>
>>******************************
>>    
>>
>>>**************************
>>>Anumita Roychowdhury
>>>Associate Director,Research and Advocacy Centre for Science and 
>>>Environment 41, Tughlakabad Institutional Area New Delhi 110062
>>>Tel: 91-11-29955124, 29955125, 29956394
>>>Fax: 91-11-29955879, 29955870
>>>Email: anumita at cseindia.org
>>>Website: www.cseindia.org
>>>***************************************************
>>>      
>>>
>>On 24 Jan 2008 at 10:40, Lee Schipper wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Anumita, what do you say? Sounds like we're between a piece of 
>>>rubber and a spare tyre
>>>
>>>
>>>Lee Schipper
>>>EMBARQ Fellow
>>>EMBARQ, the WRI Center for Sustainable Transport www.embarq.wri.org 
>>>and Visiting Scholar UC Transportation Center Berkeley CA USA 
>>>www.uctc.net
>>>skype: mrmeter
>>>+1 510 642 6889
>>>Cell +1 202 262 7476
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------
>IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via
>YAHOOGROUPS. 
>
>Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to
>join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The
>yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to
>the real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem
>like you can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement.
>
>================================================================
>SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred,
>equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries
>(the 'Global South'). 
>
>
>  
>