Published on March 13th, 2013 | by Zachary Shahan


Carlos Ghosn Interview On Nissan Leaf Price Cut, EV Sales (Video)

March 13th, 2013 by  

Here’s a great video from Mr. Energy Czar. He gives a nice intro on EV sales and the transition from gasoline-powered cars to EVs, and then he features an excellent interview with Carlos Ghosn, the CEO of Renault and Nissan.

One of the most interesting comments, I thought, was the emphasis that the $6,000 price cut for the U.S. Nissan Leaf comes from the establishment of the new U.S. factory (which cuts wage, transport, and currency costs), not from artificial company subsidy of the Leaf.

Check out our new 93-page EV report, based on over 2,000 surveys collected from EV drivers in 49 of 50 US states, 26 European countries, and 9 Canadian provinces.

Tags: , , , ,

About the Author

is tryin' to help society help itself (and other species) with the power of the typed word. He spends most of his time here on CleanTechnica as its director and chief editor, but he's also the president of Important Media and the director/founder of EV Obsession, Solar Love, and Bikocity. Zach is recognized globally as a solar energy, electric car, and energy storage expert. Zach has long-term investments in TSLA, FSLR, SPWR, SEDG, & ABB — after years of covering solar and EVs, he simply has a lot of faith in these particular companies and feels like they are good cleantech companies to invest in.

  • Pingback: 33 Top Electric Vehicle Stories Of 2013 (So Far) | CleanTechnica()

  • Pingback: Top 33 Electric Vehicle Stories Of 2013 (So Far) | PlanetSave()

  • Pingback: Tesla Motors Set To Repay Its Government Debt | PlanetSave()

  • socko

    where’s the rest of the interview?

  • jstack6

    The TV image looks so old fashioned because the screen frame is old looking. It’s just a cartoon frame ,why not make it OLED looking and up to date.

    Back to the LEAF it get better and lower in cost each year. If gas was not subsidies like it is sold in Europe at $10-12 a gallon ,EVeryone will drive an efficient Electric that is over 80% efficient compared to an old gas car that is only 15% efficient and make deadly pollution like carbon mon-oxide and di-oxide !

    • Otis11

      The high cost of fuel in Europe is due to high taxes on gas, not because the US subsidizes fuel in the US. Now we don’t tax it as much as some could argue it should be (for road costs, pollution costs, carbon costs, etc) But these are unaccounted for externalities, not subsidies. There is an important difference, especially in the perception it gives to the reader.

      • Fletche

        Either way. Tax gas consumption(one thing gov’t is for) to reduce over-consumption. Use these funds to develop/market cleaner transportation technologies. If you don’t like the gas tax……buy less. You have a choice.

        • Otis11

          Well yes, but also no. The government does absolutely have the right to tax gas, and I believe that tax should be raised as the “cost” of gas is not currently being reflected in it’s market “price”.

          But I would argue, the government is stepping out of it’s bounds and picking “winners-and-losers” when it funds outside tech developments (Not talking about the national labs nor some of the other public-private partnerships). By attempting this the government actually introduces more market forces that introduce inefficiencies in the free market system, instead of correcting the externalities like it would with the gasoline tax.

          Besides, it’s not even necessary. The pure economics of the matter say that if you actually charge the true price of fossil fuels, current renewables are absolutely economical in their own right, without any subsidies. Simply show the end consumer the costs of subsidized fossil fuels and the mass market will make the switch VERY rapidly.

      • Bob_Wallace

        Three oil wars and maintaining a significant military presence in the Middle East constitutes unrecognized US subsidy for oil.

        In addition, oil companies get some pretty sweet lease deals on public lands.

        I don’t think we should make a big effort to limit the meaning of “subsidy”. That let’s the fossil fuel industry get away with too much.

        We could talk about “direct subsidies” and “indirect subsidies”. I think people would start to better understand what oil and coal actually cost us if we switch away from the term “externalities” and to “indirect subsidies”.

        • Otis11

          Ok, fair enough – my point was that none of these externalities or subsidies decrease the cost of gas for the US market. The US is subsidizing the Global Market and we as consumers pay the global rate for these fuels. The reason gasoline is higher in other places is either taxation to account for externalities or other associated public goods or simply a lack of infrastructure, not direct subsidies.

          I do agree, however, than we do “subsidize” them quite heavily. (For lack of a better term)

    • The modern TV screen is a great idea. thanks.

Back to Top ↑