BMW M3 Forum (E90 E92)

BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Go Back   M3Post - BMW M3 Forum > BIMMERPOST Universal Forums > General BMW News and Cars Discussion
 
OneEighty
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      07-28-2010, 08:59 PM   #1
Jason
Administrator
 
Jason's Avatar
 
Drives: E90 M3
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: USA

Posts: 16,588
iTrader: (0)

Thumbs down BMW's ActiveE Zero Emissions Ads Banned in UK

In a rather strict interpretation of BMW's Concept AciveE's advertising message, the European Advertising Standards Alliance has banned BMW from advertising "Zero Emissions" with respect to its electric cars. Their basis is that this is a false claim by BMW. See the following explanation:

Quote:
LONDON (AFP) – A second BMW advert has been banned for claims about the low levels of carbon dioxide emissions produced by its cars, Britain's advertising watchdog said on Wednesday.

The Advertising Standards Agency said the German luxury car maker's newspaper ad claiming that the BMW Concept ActiveE electric car as "100 percent joy, zero percent emissions", was likely to mislead.

It said the advert breached their codes on substantiation, truthfulness and environmental claims and should not reappear in its current form.

The advert said: "Thanks to its electrifying performance and zero carbon dioxide emissions when driving, the ActiveE redefines BMW EfficientDynamics."

A reader challenged whether the claims "zero percent emissions" and "zero carbon dioxide when driving" were misleading, because they understood that the car needed to be charged with electricity from the national power network, which would result in the production of emissions.

BMW said its headline claim was explained lower down in the advert with the phrase: "Zero carbon dioxide emissions when driving," limiting it to when the car was in use and not across its whole life cycle.

But the ASA upheld the complaint, saying the claims were "likely to mislead".

"We considered that the claim 'zero percent emissions' was likely to be interpreted by readers to mean that the car's use would not result in the production of emissions," it said.

"We told BMW not to repeat claims that stated or implied that an electric vehicle would produce zero emissions in use."

Last week, the watchdog rapped BMW for claiming its latest Z4 Roadster model had low levels of CO2 emissions, when in fact it was only low for a BMW, not all cars. It ruled the ad could not be used again in its current form.

-- http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100728...autocompanybmw


Name:  activee.jpg
Views: 1773
Size:  89.4 KB
__________________
Check on the Latest BMW News
Become a fan of Bimmerpost Facebook
Follow us on Bimmerpost Twitter
Subscribe to Bimmerpost Youtube Channel

Jason is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      07-29-2010, 03:19 AM   #2
Sylon
Brigadier General
 
Sylon's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 135i, SG/CR, 6MT, M-Sport
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Michigan / Ohio

Posts: 3,411
iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2011 135i  [4.60]
Not to be an ass, but London is right. People don't understand what it takes to build and own an electric car. They only see that they are not producing emissions when they are driving, but they fail to see what goes into building the car and charging it.

It was said that building a Toyota Prius causes more damage to the environment than to drive a SUV everyday for a year, once you look into how the materials for the batteries are manufactured, not to mention transportation of those materials all around the world to the different places it has to go in order to become a battery. At no point is it beneficial to the environment to own an electric car.



Oh, BTW, the link on the main Bimmerpost page for this article doesnt work. Its been coded to take you to the www.bimmerpost.com page.
__________________

2011 BMW 135i | Space Gray | ///M-Sport | BMW CCA #450291
Facebook / Instagram / YouTube / Twitter
Sylon is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      07-29-2010, 06:23 AM   #3
Levi
Brigadier General
 
Levi's Avatar
 
Drives: Alfa Romeo
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Prague

Posts: 3,313
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sylon View Post
Not to be an ass, but London is right. People don't understand what it takes to build and own an electric car. They only see that they are not producing emissions when they are driving, but they fail to see what goes into building the car and charging it.

It was said that building a Toyota Prius causes more damage to the environment than to drive a SUV everyday for a year, once you look into how the materials for the batteries are manufactured, not to mention transportation of those materials all around the world to the different places it has to go in order to become a battery. At no point is it beneficial to the environment to own an electric car.



Oh, BTW, the link on the main Bimmerpost page for this article doesnt work. Its been coded to take you to the www.bimmerpost.com page.

I agree with you, but why do they say this only to BMW and not to other car makers, as Audi with their E-Tron or E1?
Levi is offline   Czech_Republic
0
Reply With Quote
      07-29-2010, 06:45 AM   #4
Sylon
Brigadier General
 
Sylon's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 135i, SG/CR, 6MT, M-Sport
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Michigan / Ohio

Posts: 3,411
iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2011 135i  [4.60]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levi View Post
I agree with you, but why do they say this only to BMW and not to other car makers, as Audi with their E-Tron or E1?


Is Audi advertising the E-Tron or E1 on UK televisions? The UK isnt banning the cars, they are banning the ads.
__________________

2011 BMW 135i | Space Gray | ///M-Sport | BMW CCA #450291
Facebook / Instagram / YouTube / Twitter
Sylon is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      07-29-2010, 06:53 AM   #5
Matski
Captain
 
Matski's Avatar
 
Drives: A slow BMW
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: England

Posts: 630
iTrader: (0)

I dont think people buy electric cars because they want to reduce their emissions, I believe they do it so they don't get bent over and raped everytime they go to the petrol pump.
Matski is offline   England
0
Reply With Quote
      07-29-2010, 08:13 AM   #6
vincmo
Second Lieutenant
 
Drives: e90
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Montreal

Posts: 227
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sylon View Post
Not to be an ass, but London is right. People don't understand what it takes to build and own an electric car. They only see that they are not producing emissions when they are driving, but they fail to see what goes into building the car and charging it.

It was said that building a Toyota Prius causes more damage to the environment than to drive a SUV everyday for a year, once you look into how the materials for the batteries are manufactured, not to mention transportation of those materials all around the world to the different places it has to go in order to become a battery. At no point is it beneficial to the environment to own an electric car.



Oh, BTW, the link on the main Bimmerpost page for this article doesnt work. Its been coded to take you to the www.bimmerpost.com page.
Totally agree with you. I think that Hydrogen produced with wind and solar power is a much greener path. + you get to drive an explosion engine with sound and real gear shifting!
vincmo is offline   Canada
0
Reply With Quote
      07-29-2010, 08:16 AM   #7
mkoesel
Moderator
 
Drives: 2015 SO/CSAT F80 M3
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

Posts: 13,750
iTrader: (1)

But wait a minute here. This is complete bunk.

We have standards in place to govern the emissions of vehicles. These standards consider only the emissions the vehicle itself produces (strictly speaking, they actually use fuel economy since it is proportionate to emissions), not the emissions produced by the refueling infrastructure. Just like we don't take the emissions of the oil refinery that produces the gasonline nor the emissions of the transportation system that delivers it to the fueling stations into account when determining whether a car meets LEV, ULEV, SULEV, etc. standards, we should similarly not do so when determining whether a particular vehicle is considered a ZEV.

Double standard? Yes, absolutley unquestionably. Justifiable? Only if you are a hypocrite with an agenda.
mkoesel is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      07-29-2010, 08:39 AM   #8
Yearofthe1
An ex-addict :-(
 
Yearofthe1's Avatar
 
Drives: VFR1200F
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: N. Va.

Posts: 691
iTrader: (1)

One thing I believe people always fail to consider about electric cars is the efficiency of the energy they use.

The most fuel-efficient, cleanest running internal combustion engine is no where near as efficient at extracting energy as even the dirtiest coal-fired powerplant. What's more, of the energy that is extracted from the ICE, maybe 20% of it goes to actually providing propulsion. The other 80+% is lost as heat, whether directly from the combustion process, or indirectly through the friction of the powertrain.

And that report about the Prius being more environmentally damaging than driving an SUV for a year is extremely flawed, and this has been known for years. ALL autos get their parts and materials from all over the globe, thus failing to take into account the methods behind the manufacture of that hypothetical SUV driving for a year creates a very misleading, though attention-grabbing story.
__________________
135i Montego Blue, Grey Boston Leather, MT, Sport Package, Premium Package, Navi, Premium Sound, Heated Seats, iPod.

[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

We search for certainty and call what we find destiny. Everything is possible, yet only one thing happens.
-Michael and Ellen Kaplan
Yearofthe1 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      07-29-2010, 08:54 AM   #9
PsychoSlug
Lieutenant
 
PsychoSlug's Avatar
 
Drives: E90
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Nowhere

Posts: 563
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel View Post
But wait a minute here. This is complete bunk.

We have standards in place to govern the emissions of vehicles. These standards consider only the emissions the vehicle itself produces (strictly speaking, they actually use fuel economy since it is proportionate to emissions), not the emissions produced by the refueling infrastructure. Just like we don't take the emissions of the oil refinery that produces the gasonline nor the emissions of the transportation system that delivers it to the fueling stations into account when determining whether a car meets LEV, ULEV, SULEV, etc. standards, we should similarly not do so when determining whether a particular vehicle is considered a ZEV.

Double standard? Yes, absolutley unquestionably. Justifiable? Only if you are a hypocrite with an agenda.
Very well stated and spot on.
PsychoSlug is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      07-29-2010, 09:56 AM   #10
Tegs4tugs
First Lieutenant
 
Tegs4tugs's Avatar
 
Drives: BMW E90 33?i | 90 Integra B20
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Westchester County, NY

Posts: 389
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel View Post
But wait a minute here. This is complete bunk.

We have standards in place to govern the emissions of vehicles. These standards consider only the emissions the vehicle itself produces (strictly speaking, they actually use fuel economy since it is proportionate to emissions), not the emissions produced by the refueling infrastructure. Just like we don't take the emissions of the oil refinery that produces the gasonline nor the emissions of the transportation system that delivers it to the fueling stations into account when determining whether a car meets LEV, ULEV, SULEV, etc. standards, we should similarly not do so when determining whether a particular vehicle is considered a ZEV.

Double standard? Yes, absolutley unquestionably. Justifiable? Only if you are a hypocrite with an agenda.
Agreed
__________________

|33?i e90|Platinum Silver black leather w aluminum trim|6spd|Sport Packege|Premium Package|Mtec v3|Rockford Fosgate Subs and Amps|
|2000 integra DC4|Silver Gray int|5spd|B20 Motor|
When you turn your car on does it return the favor
Tegs4tugs is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      07-29-2010, 10:28 AM   #11
kyleb350
Brigadier General
 
kyleb350's Avatar
 
Drives: F30 335i M-Sport
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: LoMbard, IL

Posts: 4,182
iTrader: (6)

Now we just need solar/wind powered charging stations!
kyleb350 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      07-29-2010, 10:37 AM   #12
Freakazoid
Captain
 
Freakazoid's Avatar
 
Drives: Saturn Redline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Pittsburgh

Posts: 967
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel View Post
But wait a minute here. This is complete bunk.

We have standards in place to govern the emissions of vehicles. These standards consider only the emissions the vehicle itself produces (strictly speaking, they actually use fuel economy since it is proportionate to emissions), not the emissions produced by the refueling infrastructure. Just like we don't take the emissions of the oil refinery that produces the gasonline nor the emissions of the transportation system that delivers it to the fueling stations into account when determining whether a car meets LEV, ULEV, SULEV, etc. standards, we should similarly not do so when determining whether a particular vehicle is considered a ZEV.

Double standard? Yes, absolutley unquestionably. Justifiable? Only if you are a hypocrite with an agenda.

I don't understand your point here? There's a massive difference between saying light emissions, etc, and saying ZERO.
The problem here in the UK is the ZERO emissions. They're not saying the lowest emissions of any car, they're stating zero.

It's not an agenda, and it's not bunk... what they're saying is completely justifiable.

SULEV, etc are all relative. *zero* is not relative.
Freakazoid is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      07-29-2010, 11:10 AM   #13
mkoesel
Moderator
 
Drives: 2015 SO/CSAT F80 M3
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

Posts: 13,750
iTrader: (1)

No sir. SULEV is abolutely NOT relative. It's all defined here:

http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/ld_ca.php

And none of these figures - NONE - take into account any of the things I mentioned in my first post.

Zero emissions means zero emissions from *the car*. We don't just get to suddenly redefine *what* is emitting the polutants just because someone builds a car that gets the established number down to zero.

It's really quite basic. Falacial logic, however, can easily complicate the matter to the point where it almost seems like there is something to actually debate here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freakazoid View Post
I don't understand your point here? There's a massive difference between saying light emissions, etc, and saying ZERO.
The problem here in the UK is the ZERO emissions. They're not saying the lowest emissions of any car, they're stating zero.

It's not an agenda, and it's not bunk... what they're saying is completely justifiable.

SULEV, etc are all relative. *zero* is not relative.
__________________
A gen-u-ine BMW eff-eight-zero with them tandem clutches in the transmission and that dad gum sun roof on the top-a da cawr.
mkoesel is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      07-29-2010, 11:45 AM   #14
Addict...Nah Im A Junkie!
Captain
 
Addict...Nah Im A Junkie!'s Avatar
 
Drives: 09 135i, 98 M rdstr
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: NY

Posts: 786
iTrader: (0)

That ad is only misleading because the majority of the worlds population is made up of morons. Seriously, could a person think that because they bought an electric car then producing power at a generation station would not produce any emissions? Seriously? This is really too much. It's just like BMW having to block the brake ducts on the e36 m3 due to litigious Americans. Once again we have all been brought down by the common denominator (too bad the common denominator is a moron.) Should Toyota have to put that making a Prius pollutes? I don't recall seeing anything about that in any of the advertisements.

Sad. If only we could send 90% of the population to mars.
__________________
'09 135i 6MT : Space Grey/Black ette : Cold Weather Package : Sport Package : Glacier Silver Aluminum Trim : iPod and USB : Nav : HD radio : Premium hi-fi system
Addict...Nah Im A Junkie! is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      07-29-2010, 12:23 PM   #15
Levi
Brigadier General
 
Levi's Avatar
 
Drives: Alfa Romeo
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Prague

Posts: 3,313
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Addict...Nah Im A Junkie! View Post
If only we could send 90% of the population to mars.
Just keep all the nice ladies on earth...
Levi is offline   Czech_Republic
0
Reply With Quote
      07-29-2010, 01:28 PM   #16
southlight
Moderator / European Editor
 
southlight's Avatar
 
Drives: BMW
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Germany

Posts: 6,748
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel View Post
But wait a minute here. This is complete bunk.

We have standards in place to govern the emissions of vehicles. These standards consider only the emissions the vehicle itself produces (strictly speaking, they actually use fuel economy since it is proportionate to emissions), not the emissions produced by the refueling infrastructure. Just like we don't take the emissions of the oil refinery that produces the gasonline nor the emissions of the transportation system that delivers it to the fueling stations into account when determining whether a car meets LEV, ULEV, SULEV, etc. standards, we should similarly not do so when determining whether a particular vehicle is considered a ZEV.

Double standard? Yes, absolutley unquestionably. Justifiable? Only if you are a hypocrite with an agenda.
Very good point. I have to check, but I think there is an European standard considering emissions for plug-in hybrids driving in electric mode. If memory serves, they use the same driving cycle they use for 'regular' cars and measure the power consumption (in kWh per 100 km). The result will be multiplied with the so called 'EU Mix' CO2 value, the average of the CO2 emission for all different kinds of power generation, and you have a similar figure in CO2 per km. That being said, you're perfectly right that only electric cars use these well-to-wheel figures, so there is a double standard.


Best regards,
south
__________________
Those forums...WHY NOT?


JOIN THE 6MT CLUB GROUP
southlight is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      07-29-2010, 01:39 PM   #17
HTRules
1LT Co. B 16th Signal Battalion
 
HTRules's Avatar
 
Drives: Schwarz 2008 E92
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Bay Area, CA

Posts: 131
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Addict...Nah Im A Junkie! View Post
That ad is only misleading because the majority of the worlds population is made up of morons. Seriously, could a person think that because they bought an electric car then producing power at a generation station would not produce any emissions? Seriously? This is really too much. It's just like BMW having to block the brake ducts on the e36 m3 due to litigious Americans. Once again we have all been brought down by the common denominator (too bad the common denominator is a moron.) Should Toyota have to put that making a Prius pollutes? I don't recall seeing anything about that in any of the advertisements.

Sad. If only we could send 90% of the population to mars.
Not to be too political here (yeah, right) but if you follow the social trends in the grand old UK (principally England) it's increasingly clear that it has fallen and can't get up.

Rick
HTRules is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      07-29-2010, 04:25 PM   #18
PINeely
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Drives: 2009 E90 N54
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Jackson, MS

Posts: 1,549
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sylon View Post
It was said that building a Toyota Prius causes more damage to the environment than to drive a SUV everyday for a year, once you look into how the materials for the batteries are manufactured, not to mention transportation of those materials all around the world to the different places it has to go in order to become a battery. At no point is it beneficial to the environment to own an electric car.
Just wanted to add to this. The study in question found that the Prius was about three times as detrimental to the environment to drive as a Hummer, when you calculate in all of the extraneous variables. The Hummer is also three times cheaper to drive and own.

http://www.impactlab.com/2007/03/14/...mental-damage/
__________________

Last edited by PINeely; 07-29-2010 at 10:38 PM.
PINeely is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      07-29-2010, 08:04 PM   #19
hubble bubble
Captain
 
Drives: 2008 335i
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada

Posts: 682
iTrader: (0)

Most drivers are morons. That is 100% correct. How good for the environment is a Chevy Volt or Tesla when 75% of the electricity in the USA is generated by burning coal.

As for the |Hummer vs Prius, the key is that the Hummer is really just a GMC 1500 pickup with different body work (and 15k added to the price tag). So, evey full sixed GM pickup and SUV shares 90+% of the parts, hose basic design is unchanged for 5-10 years at a time. So when one Hummer dies, the parts end up in the junkyard and can be use on ANY full sized pickup or SUV.
hubble bubble is offline   Canada
0
Reply With Quote
      07-30-2010, 08:30 AM   #20
Kiemyster
Bimmerpost Resident Marijuana Consultant
 
Kiemyster's Avatar
 
Drives: E90x4 (M3, 335xi, 325xi,320i)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Queens/NYC

Posts: 3,132
iTrader: (2)

Garage List
last night i was in the city, and saw 5 blue prius's parked in a line. I tripped the fuck out. I cant stand seeing these pieces of shit littering the roads, especially considering they are ugly as hell, and not efficient. The amount of pollution they cause is unrealistic.

when are we going to ban electric cars now? im waiting, patiently.
__________________
"AMG What! S-Line Who? If you ain't got that M I got no respect for you!"
'06 Alpine Weiss E90 320i | '06 The Green Machine E90 325xi | '11 Alpine Weiss E90 M3 ZCP | '10 Silverstone X5M | '11 Alpine Weiss E90 335xi
Kiemyster is offline   Trinidad_and_tobago
0
Reply With Quote
      07-30-2010, 10:48 AM   #21
Sylon
Brigadier General
 
Sylon's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 135i, SG/CR, 6MT, M-Sport
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Michigan / Ohio

Posts: 3,411
iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2011 135i  [4.60]
Quote:
Originally Posted by PINeely View Post
Just wanted to add to this. The study in question found that the Prius was about three times as detrimental to the environment to drive as a Hummer, when you calculate in all of the extraneous variables. The Hummer is also three times cheaper to drive and own.

http://www.impactlab.com/2007/03/14/...mental-damage/


LMAO, thank you for posting that, I added it to my favorites. Im sure I will use that later during an argument, lol.
__________________

2011 BMW 135i | Space Gray | ///M-Sport | BMW CCA #450291
Facebook / Instagram / YouTube / Twitter
Sylon is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      07-30-2010, 11:27 AM   #22
Revelate
Private First Class
 
Drives: 2010 LMB 135i
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Washington

Posts: 168
iTrader: (1)

The UK must think their entire population is morons. I've never been there, I can't confirm or deny.

Someone earlier made a great point about why people buy electric in the first place. Most don't care about the emissions, they care about the cost of fuel and being forced to support the oil companies.

As for the emissions debate, there's a legitimate argument for both sides. What I find disappointing with the UK advert bans is that their reasoning is not in line with how the world classifies emissions for automobiles. The behind the scenes impact has never been included in the emissions output of the vehicle. Taken literally just one step further, there will never be a zero emission vehicle unless it doesn't include any passengers since humans emit atmospheric CO2.


The UK's Advertising Standards Agency is just being a douchbag because they can. They probably want the publicity. They're in advertising.
Revelate is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:15 AM.




m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST