It was a long time coming, but the Tata Nano finally saw daylight this week when the US$2,230 car was officially launched.
Dubbed "the people's car", the 624cc-engine vehicle is the brainchild of Tata Group Chairman Ratan Tata, who aspired to build an automobile costing 100,000 rupees (roughly US$2,000), making it affordable to more Indian middle-class.
It's a great achievement for India's engineering, and underscores the country's ability to leverage technological innovation and further secure itself a place on the global IT map. With the Nano, India has done what the German, Japanese and American auto giants had thought impossible.
But, as I read the multitude of headlines that screamed "world's cheapest car", I wondered if cars had become a "need-to-have" rather than remain a "want-to-have" luxury item?
Despite my frequent grumblings that being a car owner is making me broke, I'll be the first to acknowledge that it's a luxury item and I should pay the price for the added convenience it provides. After all, I have the option to and can still survive on public transport, just like the majority of the global population already do.
Unlike water, food or education, cars aren't a life necessity--we can exist just as well without it. In fact, because more of the world's resources are required to build and sustain cars, they shouldn't be made accessible to the masses and ownership should come at a price.
And rather than focus on making cars cheaper, shouldn't we direct more attention on making them greener?
Critics of Nano have questioned the amount of pollution the car would exert on Earth's already-dismal state. In response, Tata had pledged to deliver eco-friendly models of the vehicle, including possible plans to use compressed air as an energy source and build an electric version of Nano.
But, a vehicle that cheap would spark massive production demand, consuming more of the world's already-diminishing resources to build something that should remain a luxury item.
I think it's great that India has further cemented its status as a leading IT innovator, and is helping to champion Asia as an important technology hub. It would, however, be more momentous if Tata could do the same in the realm of green IT and fortify the region's contribution to humanity.
Let us all ponder over that in the dark for 60 minutes tomorrow, as we mark Earth Hour.
Tags: Asia, Car, India, information technology, food, Earth, Green IT, auto company, chairman, pollution
RE: Cars should be made greener, not cheaper
Jayanta,
What's your problem? You talk as if we Indians do not need someone else to tell us what to do. Who do you want to tell us?
Our self-sacrificing politicians? Our socially resposible sportspeople? Godmen and goondas like Raj Thackeray? Amazingly humble industry bigwigs like Anil Ambani and Vijay Mallya? Exceptionally brilliant film stars like Rajnikanth?
Go take a walk outside and see whether this country needs a car. You will realise what Eileen says is true - that's, unless you are physically and mentally blind
Posted by Narsi on Friday, March 27 2009 03:57 PM
RE: RE: Cars should be made greener, not cheaper
Narsi wrote "What's your problem? You talk as if we Indians do not need someone else to tell us what to do. Who do you want to tell us?"
This is post by Narsi makes no sense. I am not saying that someone else other than Eileen has to tell us anything.
What I am saying is that "Those who themselves (by using cars) are not making any sacrifice... should not be telling others that using cars is bad"
My objection would have been the same if Eileen was Indian. As I said earlier, this post by Narsi makes no sense.
Posted by Jayanta on Saturday, March 28 2009 12:26 PM
RE: Cars should be made greener, not cheaper
HEAR HEAR!
Posted by YO on Friday, March 27 2009 08:20 PM
Cars should be made greener, not cheaper
Elitist hypocritical tripe. Get rid of your car(s), take a trip to India to see how much of a difference the Nano would make to the lives of it's target market - which doesnt always have the option of public transport. Where would you draw the line in price, Eileen?? Where would you establish the "cut-off" between who does or does not get to own a car? Are you suggesting we ban a lot of the cheap cars in markets world over to reduce automobile proliferation?? While the rich - who probably have more access to public transport, get to keep their private rides cos they are lucky enough to be loaded with cash?? Are you serious?
Posted by AKM on Saturday, March 28 2009 01:51 AM
Cars should be made greener, not cheaper
I try to use my car sparingly. I purchased a Toyota Corolla because it gave the best combination of economy, price and safety. A SMART2 would have been a better choice in terms of pollution. But it cost more. The Nano is 10 times cheaper. Perhaps a little less safe. But a more greener I would guess, due to it's miniscule engine. For that price I'll forgo some safety. So isn't the Nano then simply better?
Posted by skris88 on Saturday, March 28 2009 09:04 AM
Cars should be made greener, not cheaper
I think the company Better Place has it right. Their business model says, "Why pay for an addictive, expensive and harmful substance like oil when you can simply pay for transportation as a sustainable service?"
They compare their transportation business model to mobile phones (e.g. people don't pay much for mobile phones--we're really buying air time). For example, replace the phone with an electric car, replace the cell towers with battery recharge stations, and replace the cellular networks with an electric recharge grid. Now you're buying miles, not minutes.
I think this is a really cool company that is bringing us closer to green. Ultimately, people will pay for how much they drive rather than the car.
URL: www.betterplace.com
Posted by Jocelyn Penque on Wednesday, April 01 2009 05:31 PM
Cars should be made greener, not cheaper
Now the focus has shifted to how to save the earth? being green in itself is a joke when individuals are more interested in pointing fingers at other
people. Making a affordable (cheap) car has been every car owners dream.Now when it is out, it boils down to be green.I would suggest we go back to horse power and have horse carriages to transport people around.Technology has advanced so much that building a green car is not cost effective, in other words people are not interested to buy expensive cars....so capitalising on the existing need for individuals to move around faster, motor companies are in the process of making cheap cars.MONEY MONEY making industries.Now going bust and dragging the whole world economy down.Take a walk you will be healthy and fit.
Posted by Manoj on Monday, April 06 2009 12:20 PM
RE: Cars should be made greener, not cheaper
Hello this is Allan and I think that Technology has advanced so much that building a green car is not cost effective, or people are not interested to buy expensive cars.And according to me walking will proves to be the best to be healthy ,fit and fine.
-------------------------
Allan
find finance jobs
Posted by Allan on Monday, May 18 2009 01:31 PM
Cars should be made greener, not cheaper
The best is to produce an affordable, environmentally-friendly car :)
Posted by liz on Monday, August 31 2009 11:28 AM
Cars should be made greener, not cheaper
Hey Eileen,
Why don't you first sell your car, start using public transport, and then come back and preach? We won't think you to be hypocritical then.
Jayanta
Posted by Jayanta on Friday, March 27 2009 02:19 PM