Connect with us

Published

on

As American cars and trucks continue to bloat, growing longer and wider decade over decade while roads and parking spaces stay the same size, there may be hope glimmering on the horizon: tiny electric vehicles. I’m not talking about small cars. I’m talking about tiny ones – micro-cars, if you will.

They’re a small but growing category of motor vehicles in the US, and they may just save us from a future of massive, energy-guzzling vehicles that can somehow plow through a playground without noticing yet still struggle to wiggle into a parking spot.

This is Part 1 of a three-part series on these useful little vehicles. In today’s segment, we’ll dive into the “what” and “why” of electric micro-cars.

From the definitions (which have so far eluded most of the industry) to the use cases (which have so far eluded most Americans), we’ll set the stage for what could be the next big wave of tiny cars. In Parts 2 and 3 we’ll cover the legality of such vehicles and the options currently on the road.

What is an electric micro-car?

Let’s start off with a few definitions to set the record straight about these tiny vehicles.

There are three commonly used terms for describing these little runabouts: micro-cars, NEVs (neighborhood electric vehicles), and LSVs (low-speed vehicles). And they’re all wrong in one way or another. Let’s explore each, below.

Low-speed vehicles (LSVs)

The term LSVs is currently the least commonly used term for these, but it’s actually the most correct. That’s because it’s the only legally defined category. LSVs are a federally mandated class of motor vehicles in the US.

They’re more or less equivalent to what are known as “quadricycles” in Europe, with the exception that European quadricycles are allowed to reach speeds of up to 80-100 km/h (50-62 mph), depending on the country, while LSVs in the US are limited to just 25 mph (40 km/h).

microlino electric micro car
The Microlino is a European Quadricycle that reaches speeds far faster than allowed for LSVs in the US

It is a common misunderstanding that all that is required for a vehicle to be considered an LSV is for it to have a maximum speed of 25 mph (40 km/h). In fact, that is only one of many requirements. Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards for LSVs have laid out around a dozen standards that mostly cover speed and required safety equipment, but that also include requirements for the manufacturer’s factory to be federally approved by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (as well as the factories that produce key components like the auto glass, seat belts and other important components). That’s why it isn’t enough for a small vehicle to simply have seat belts and not exceed 25 mph.

For this reason, it is actually quite difficult for new manufacturers to receive street-legal status for LSVs, though we’ll dive into the legality of these vehicles in much more detail in Part 2 of this series. It’s an important issue since many of the supposed “street legal” LSVs now being offered for sale in the US are far from actually being street legal.

For now though, suffice it to say that LSVs are a federally mandated category of vehicles that are allowed to reach speeds of up to 25 mph (40 km/h) and are allowed to drive on roads with speed limits posted up to 35 mph (56 km/h).

The Wink Sprout above is one of a growing number of street-legal LSVs in the US

LSVs are not required to be electric vehicles, and many low-production-volume combustion engine models have existed over the past two decades, similar to the phenomenon of “kei cars” in Japan. But these days nearly all LSVs in the US are also electric vehicles, largely due to the simplification of manufacturing/maintenance as well as reduced regulatory hurdles associated with emissions testing.

The term LSV is really the only important term for this industry because it is the only one that is clearly defined. That brings us to… NEVs.

Neighborhood electric vehicles (NEVs)

The term NEV is probably the most commonly used term in this industry, which is problematic because it doesn’t mean anything. There is no clearly defined boundary for what makes up an NEV.

The term originated before the LSV category was created by the federal government, and it largely referred to small, slower-moving electric vehicles that were similar in appearance to golf carts, yet were designed for traveling on roads and around neighborhoods instead of across the golf course. The most famous example of an NEV is likely the GEM, which started out under the Chrysler umbrella before moving to Polaris and finally to its current owner, WAEV.

The GEM popularized the concept of an NEV before the US government had created an LSV category, and thus the term NEV stuck.

The problem is that despite everyday usage, there’s no clear line drawn to determine what is and what isn’t an NEV. It’s similar to the word “truck” in its vaguery. Is an F-150 a truck? What about an 18-wheeler semi-trailer? Or a U-Haul? They’re all called trucks in common parlance, yet the Department of Transportation would beg to differ.

The other issue with the term NEV is that it implies a purely neighborhood use for these vehicles. While neighborhood and local community use is a common application, densely populated cities are quickly becoming another major market for these tiny electric vehicles.

An LSV could easily drive from Battery Park on the southern tip of Manhattan up to Washington Heights, a 13-mile (21 km) commute covering dozens of neighborhoods. In fact, I drove an LSV across the Brooklyn Bridge earlier this year as I travelled around NYC, highlighting the urban appeal of such small electric vehicles.

I drove an LSV from Wink Motors across the Brooklyn Bridge on a day trip through NYC

What are micro-cars?

The term micro-car has become something of a catchall. Similarly to NEVs though, there is no clear definition for the term. It is generally used more for fully enclosed LSVs than for open golf cart-style buggies like the GEM vehicles (though GEMs do have optional hard doors that make them fit better into the loosely defined micro-car category).

This door quasi-requirement is likely due to the fact that many people think of micro-cars as looking more like a conventional car, but simply scaled down into a smaller (and often cuter) vehicle.

Micro-cars can be as small as single-seaters or can even fit a family of five. I’ve driven a Chinese micro-car around Florida with my wife and our three nieces and nephews, showcasing the family-friendly nature of electric micro-cars.

Micro-cars, just like NEVs, are not a federally defined class of vehicle, and thus the term is limited largely to everyday language. For legal use, LSV is the only federally defined category of motor vehicle.

Believe it or not, I’ve had five people in this micro-car

Golf carts

Golf carts are perhaps the most commonly understood of all of these categories due to their ubiquitous use on golf courses around the country.

While they can be powered by a combustion engine or by an electric motor, most golf carts produced today are electric.

They generally reach speeds of up to 20 mph (32 km/h), though can often be modified to reach speeds of closer to 30 mph. Some come with seat belts, radios, and other fancier features, but many are bare-bones vehicles designed for basic transportation.

golf cart on the street

Traditional golf carts are not street legal, though many small communities have created local golf cart ordinances to allow for their use on low-traffic roads.

Several large golf cart manufacturers have begun to produce LSV versions of their carts that have been homologated for street use. These versions, if produced to meet the LSV regulations laid out in the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, can be used like any other LSV on public roads that have posted speed limits of 35 mph (56 km/h) or less.

Golf carts are generally open-air vehicles that lack doors or locking storage. This is one of their main downsides compared to micro-cars, which generally have locking doors that can provide security as well as an all-weather ride.

Use cases for electric micro-cars and small vehicles

LSVs have two main uses in the US: transportation and utility use.

For transportation, LSVs have several advantages. Many owners prefer their small size that makes them nimbler in traffic and easier to park. They can often even be parked in small spots or psuedo-spots on the edges of parking areas that a traditional car couldn’t fit into.

Their simpler design and smaller size also means that they generally cost much less than a traditional electric car, both to purchase and to charge. Some new LSVs can start at below $10,000, compared to much more expensive electric family cars.

For some people, they’re also more fun to drive due to the novelty and go-kart feel that the small size offers. The 25 mph (40 km/h) top speed can be appropriate in many cities and communities, and the slower pace is often more fun for folks that enjoy cruising around their community and seeing the smiles on faces from onlookers. This is especially true in beach communities, older resident villages, and other planned communities.

electric mini-truck
My mini-truck may be small but it carries quite a load!

For utility, LSVs can offer many of the same benefits. Electric mini-trucks are becoming more popular in the cargo and delivery fields, especially in crowded cities that can be difficult to navigate with a larger box truck.

These vehicles can often offer similar bed sizes compared to traditional pickup trucks or small flatbed trucks, yet the entire vehicle is much smaller.

The increase in demand for electric mini-trucks has even spawned a new US-produced vehicle known as the AYRO Vanish.

Which LSVs and NEVs are street legal?

Street-legality is perhaps the most important aspect of electric micro-cars, especially as new importers and manufacturers begin to crop up.

We’ll cover this issue in-depth in Part 2 of this series, which will return this Wednesday. Stay tuned!

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Canadian study finds that 33% of commercial trucks are ready to electrify – today

Published

on

By

Canadian study finds that 33% of commercial trucks are ready to electrify – today

A new study by the Pembina Institute shows that a third of the commercial trucks and vans on Toronto’s roads are ready to electrify today – while nearly half could be electrified by 2030.

A new analysis by the Pembina Institute titled Electrifying Fleet Trucks: A case study estimating potential in the GTHA finds that as many as a third of trucks in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA) could go electric today, rising to more than half by early 2030s — insulating businesses from rising fuel costs and reducing harmful air pollution that drives up health care costs. What’s more, the report found that battery range and charging access are less of a barrier than expected.

Real-world travel data from Canadian trucks, collected over summer and winter months, shows that electrification is possible today,” says Chandan Bhardwaj, Senior Analyst at the Pembina Institute. “In fact, with a staggered approach, the GTHA — home to over half the province’s vehicle stock — could reach 50% sales for lighter trucks by 2030, helping offset lower adoption rates for heavier trucks.”

So, what’s holding back electric vehicle adoption? According to the study’s authors, it’s a matter of public policy. But without the right policies in place, the study argues, businesses face unnecessary hurdles in making the switch.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

“Our analysis shows that Ontario has a clear path to accelerating the transition to zero-emission trucks — unlocking economic opportunities, improving public health and positioning itself as a leader in clean transportation,” says Adam Thorn, Transportation Director at the Pembina Institute. “With the right policies in place, businesses can reap the benefits of lower costs while the province strengthens its manufacturing sector and energy security.”

We already knew this


Schneider electric semis charging in El Monte, CA; via NACFE.

If all of this sounds a bit familiar, it’s probably because you’ve heard this before. The California Air Resource Board (CARB) came to very similar conclusions in their report, titled, Determining energy use patterns and battery charging infrastructure for zero-emission heavy-duty vehicles and off-road equipment.

CARB staff believe that several heavy-duty ZE vocational trucks are ready to be electrified because of their low daily mileage demands (<100 mi). Long-haul Class 8 trucks continue to be a challenge to fully electrify because of the long operation range (300+ mi) and on-demand charging need.

CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCE BOARD

In fact, the California study came to almost the exact conclusion that the Toronto study did when examining the heavy-duty Class 7 and 8 EV market. Which is to say: it’s not a question of capability, but a question of availability.

“The availability of on-road heavy-duty ZE trucks has increased in recent years,” reads the report. “But their numbers remain significantly lower than their diesel and natural gas counterparts. As of 2022, an estimated 2,300 on-road ZE medium- and heavy-duty vehicles are operating in California, with the vast majority located in South Coast Air Bassin (Figure 1). On-road heavy-duty ZE transit buses account for the majority of all on-road heavy-duty ZEVs in California, but, as of 2023, sales of ZE heavy-duty trucks and medium-duty step vans have outpaced other vocations, indicating that these vehicles will be more prevalent in fleets in the near future.”

That’s proven to be true, with sales of Class 2 vans and other medium-duty EVs rapidly outpacing the general public’s adoption of EVs as new options became available in 2024, with no signs of slowing down in 2025 (at least, where the right policies are in place).

Here are some of the key takeaways from the Pembina Institute study from the Toronto truck market. Obviously, it won’t directly translate to every city’s truck fleet – but take a look at Toronto’s demographics and some of the key variables involved (truck size, average loads, miles driven, etc.) and you might be surprised at how similar your city and your fleet might be.

  • Businesses can save up to 40% of fuel and maintenance costs by switching to electric trucks.  
  • Electric trucks eliminate tailpipe emissions, cutting harmful air pollution and improve public health.  
  • Traffic related air pollution in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area leads to 700 premature deaths and 2,800 hospitalizations every year, costing health care system $4.6 billion annually.  
  • Ontario’s Driving Prosperity plan highlights the need for increased electrification, while the City of Toronto is targeting 30% of all registered vehicles to be electric by 2030.  
  • Governments worldwide are embracing electrification, setting ambitious sales targets for zero-emission vans and trucks.  
  • By 2030, jurisdictions like Europe, China, California, British Columbia and Quebec aim for about 35% of new truck sales to be zero-emission, ramping up to nearly 100% by 2040.  

SOURCES: CARB, Pembina Institute, via Electric Autonomy; featured image by PACCAR.


Your personalized home solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. The best part? You won’t get a single phone call until after you’ve elected to move forward. Get started, hassle-free, by clicking here.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Tesla’s former head of AI warns against believing that self-driving is solved

Published

on

By

Tesla's former head of AI warns against believing that self-driving is solved

Tesla’s former head of artificial intelligence, Andrej Karpathy, who worked on the automaker’s self-driving effort until 2022, warns against believing that self-driving is solved, and fully autonomous vehicles are happening soon.

Karpathy is a very respected leader in the field of artificial intelligence.

In 2017, Musk poached him from OpenAI and he quickly became the head of Tesla’s AI effort, including leading neural nets for Autopilot and Full Self-Driving.

He left Tesla in 2022 and return briefly to OpenAI in 2023 before starting his own in AI education company, Eureka Labs.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

The Slovak-Canadian computer scientist is widely regarded as one of the top computer vision experts and he pioneered Tesla’s vision-only approach to self-driving.

Karpathy gave a talk at Y Combinator’s AI Startup School event this week and made some interesting comments about self-driving.

He recounted when a friend working at then Google self-driving company, now Waymo, gave him a ride in a self-driving car in 2013:

We got into this car and we went for an about 30-minute drive around Palo Alto, highways, streets and so on, and that drive was perfect. Zero intervention. And this was 2013. It was about 12 years ago.It kind of struck me because at the time when I had this perfect drive, this perfect demo, I thought “well, self-driving is imminent because this just work. This is incredible.” But here we are, 12 years later, and we are still working on autonomy. We are still working on driving (AI) agents. Even now, we haven’t actually solved the problem.

12 years later, Waymo currently operates over 1,000 vehicles in California, Arizona, and Texas where it completes hundreds of thousands of autonomous rides with paying customers every week, but Karpathy explains that this doesn’t mean autonomy is solved.

He continues:

You may sees Waymos going around and they look driverless, but there’s still a lot of teleoperation and lot of humans in the loop in this driving.

Waymo has confirmed that it uses some teleopeartion, but it’s not clear to what level. It’s clear that it at least communicates commands to the vehicles remotely when they get stuck.

Kaparthy adds:

We still haven’t declared success, but I think it’s definitely going to succeed at this point, but it just took a long time.

The engineer added that “software is tricky” and that he believes that “AI agents”, which is a term often use to describe AIs that can perform tasks for humans, like driving a vehicle, are going to take time. He believes this is not the year of AI agents, but the decade of AI agents.

Here’s the full presentation:

Electrek’s Take

While Kaparthy didn’t name Tesla, the timing of his comments as Tesla is launching its “Robotaxi” service this weekend is interesting.

It certainly contracdits what his former boss, Elon Musk, is saying: that self-driving is solved.

He highlights the fact that humans are still “in the loop” in Waymo’s vehicles, but we recently learn that this is even more true with Tesla’s Robotaxi launch, which involved not only teleoperation like Waymo, but there’s also a Tesla employee in the front passenger seat ready to press a kill switch.

As we have often highlighted in recent weeks, Tesla’s Robotaxi launch is simply a game of optics for Tesla to be able to claim a win in self-driving after years of broken promises and missed deadlines just as Waymo is rapidly expanding its own self-driving services.

I think Kaparthy, who led Tesla’s computer vision effort behind self-driving, knows that has yet to solve the problem and will require human supervision for a while longer.

Based on the best data available, Tesla currently achieves a few hundred miles between critical disengagement with FSD and it needs to get into tends of thousands of miles to achieve a true level 4 autonomous systems.

We are still a few years away from that at best.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

How regime change in Iran could affect global oil prices

Published

on

By

How regime change in Iran could affect global oil prices

Iran could return to 2019 playbook and hit crude oil targets in Middle East, says RBC's Helima Croft

Senior Israeli officials said this week that their military campaign against Iran could trigger the fall of the regime, an event that would have enormous implications for the global oil market.

The oil market has reacted with remarkable restraint as Israel has bombed the third-largest crude producer in OPEC for eight straight days, with no clear sign the conflict will end anytime soon.

Oil prices are up about 10% since Israel launched its attack on Iran a week ago, but with oil supplies so far undisturbed, both U.S. crude oil and the global benchmark Brent remain below $80 per barrel.

Rising risk

Still, the risk of a supply disruption that triggers a big spike in prices is growing the longer the conflict rages on, according to energy analysts.

President Donald Trump has threatened the life of Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and is considering helping Israel destroy the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program. For its part, Iran’s leadership is more likely to target regional oil facilities if it feels its very existence is at stake, the analysts said.

Israel’s primary aim is to degrade Iran’s nuclear program, said Scott Modell, CEO of the consulting firm Rapidan Energy Group. But Jerusalem also appears to have a secondary goal of damaging Iran’s security establishment to such an extent that the country’s domestic opposition can rise up against the regime, Modell said.

“They’re not calling it regime change from without, they’re calling it regime change from within,” said Modell, a former CIA officer and Iran expert who served in the Middle East.

Official denial

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu denies that regime change is Israel’s official goal, telling a public broadcaster on Thursday that domestic governance is an internal Iranian decision. But the prime minister ascknowledged Khamenei’s regime could fall as a consequence of the conflict.

Defense Minister Israel Katz on Friday ordered Israel’s military to intensify strikes on Iran with a goal to “destabilize the regime” by attacking the “foundations of its power.” Israel reportedly sought to kill Khamenei in the opening days of its campaign, but Trump vetoed the plan.

There are no signs that the regime in Iran is on the verge of collapse, Modell said.

But further political destabilization in Iran “could lead to significantly higher oil prices sustained over extended periods,” said Natasha Kaneva, head of global commodities research at JPMorgan, in a note to clients this week.

There have been eight cases of regime change in major oil producing countries since 1979, according to JPMorgan. Oil prices spiked 76% on average at their peak in the wake of these changes, before pulling back to stabilize at a price about 30% higher compared to pre-crisis levels, according to the bank.

For example, oil prices nearly tripled from mid-1979 to mid-1980 after the Iranian revolution deposed the Shah and brought the Islamic Republic to power, according to JPMorgan. That triggered a worldwide economic recession.

Anoop Singh: Energy shipping costs are increasing due to perceived risk

More recently, the revolution in Libya that overthrew Muammar Gaddafi jolted oil prices from $93 per barrel in January 2011 to $130 per barrel by April that year, according to JPMorgan. That price spike coincided with the European debt crisis and nearly caused a global recession, according to the bank.

Bigger than Libya

Regime change in Iran would have a much bigger impact on the global oil market than the 2011 revolution in Libya because Iran is far bigger producer, Modell said.

“We would need to see some strong indicators that the state is coming to a halt, that regime change is starting to look real before the market would really start pricing in three plus million barrels a day going offline,” Modell said.

If the regime in Iran believes it is facing an existential crisis, it could use its stockpile of short-range missiles to target energy facilities in the region and oil tankers in the Persian Gulf, said Helima Croft, head of global commodity strategy at RBC Capital Markets.

Tehran could also try to mine the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow body of water between Iran and Oman through which about 20% of the world’s oil flows, Croft said.

“We’re already getting reports that Iran is jamming ship transponders very, very aggressively,” Croft told CNBC’s “Fast Money” on Wednesday. QatarEnergy and the Greek Shipping Ministry have already warned their vessels to avoid the strait as much as possible, Croft said.

“These are not calm waters even though we have not had missiles flying in the straits,” she said.

Oil has a $10 geopolitical risk premium; China wants the Strait of Hormuz to stay open: Dan Yergin

Greater than even odds

Rapidan sees a 70% chance the U.S. will join Israeli airstrikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities. Oil prices would probably rally $4 to $6 per barrel if Iran’s key uranium enrichment facility at Fordow is hit, Modell said. Iran will likely respond in a limited fashion to ensure the regime’s survival, he said.

But there is also a 30% risk of Iran disrupting energy supplies by retaliating against infrastructure in the Gulf or vessels in the Strait of Hormuz, according to Rapidan. Oil prices could surge above $100 per barrel if Iran fully mobilizes to disrupt shipping in the strait, according to the firm.

“They could disrupt, in our view, shipping through Hormuz by a lot longer than the market thinks,” said Bob Bob McNally, Rapidan’s founder and former energy advisor to President George W. Bush.

Shipping could be interrupted for weeks or months, McNally said, rather than the oil market’s view that the United States Fifth Fleet, based in Bahrain, would resolve the situation in hours or days.

“It would not be a cakewalk,” he said.

Catch up on the latest energy news from CNBC Pro:

Continue Reading

Trending