document_title: History of rail transport in India

question_text: the first passenger train in india run between bombay and then when was this

text: History of rail transport in India

text: 1832–1852: Industrial railways[edit]

text: The first proposals for railways in India were made in Madras in 1832.[1] The first train in India ran from Red Hills to Chintadripet bridge in Madras in 1837. It was called Red Hill Railway. It was hauled by a rotary steam engine locomotive manufactured by William Avery. It was built by Sir Arthur Cotton. It was primarily used for transporting granite stones for road building work in Madras.[1] In 1845, a railway was built at Dowleswaram in Rajahmundry. It was called Godavari Dam Construction Railway. It was also built by Arthur Cotton. It was used to supply stones for construction of a dam over Godavari.[1] On 8 May 1845, Madras Railway was incorporated. In the same year, the East India Railway company was incorporated. On 1 August 1849, Great Indian Peninsular Railway was incorporated by an Act of Parliament. "Guarantee System" providing free land and guaranteed rates of return (5%) to the private English companies willing to work on building railways was finalized on 17 August 1849. In 1851, a railway was built in Roorkee. It was called Solani Aqueduct Railway. It was hauled by steam locomotive Thomason, named after a British officer in-charge of same name. It was used for transporting construction materials for building of aqueduct over Solani river.[1] In 1852, the "Madras Guaranteed Railway Company" was incorporated.

text: 1853–1924: Passenger railways and expansion[edit]

text: The first passenger train in India ran between Bombay (Bori Bunder) and Thane on 16 April 1853. The 14-carriage train was hauled by three steam locomotives: Sahib, Sindh and Sultan. It ran for about 34 kilometers between these two cities carrying 400 people. The line was built and operated by GIPR.[2][3] This railway line was built in 1,676 mm (5 ft 6 in) broad gauge, which became the standard for the railways in the country. The first passenger railway train in eastern India ran from Howrah, near Calcutta to Hoogly, for distance of 24 miles, on 15 August 1854. The line was built and operated by EIR.[4] In May 1854, the Bombay-Thane line was extended to Kalyan by building bridge over "Dapoorie viaduct" over Ulhas river.[5] This was also the first railway bridge in India. In the same year GIPR started its first workshops in Byculla. In 1855, BB&CI Railway was incorporated.[6] In August 1855, EIR 'Express' and Fairy Queen steam locomotives started hauling trains.[7] The first passenger train in South India ran from Royapuram / Veyasarapady (Madras) to Wallajah Road (Arcot) on 1 July 1856, for a distance of 60 miles. It was built and operated by Madras Railway.[8] In the same year, first workshop was set up by the Madras Railway at Perambur, near Madras. The Bombay-Thane line was extended to Khopoli in same year. In 1858, Eastern Bengal Railway was incorporated.[9] On 24 February 1873, the first tramway (a horse-drawn tramway) opened in Calcutta between Sealdah and Armenian Ghat Street, a distance of 3.8 km.[10] In 1874, GSIR and Carnatic Rly. merged to form the South Indian Railway. On 9 May 1874, horse-drawn tramway began operations in Bombay between Colaba and Parel. In 1880, Calcutta Tramways Company was incorporated.[11] In 1890, East Coast State Railway was incorporated. In 1897, lighting in passenger coaches was introduced by many railway companies. In 1902, the Jodhpur Railway became the first to introduce electric lights as standard fixtures. In 1920, electric lighting of signals was introduced between Dadar and Currey Road in Bombay.

text:
Railway map of India in 1865

Railway map of India in 1871

Railway map of India in 1893

Railway map of India in 1909

tag: ul

text: 1925–1950: Electrification and further expansion[edit]

text: On 3 February 1925, first electric passenger train in India ran between Victoria terminus and Kurla. It ran on 1500V DC overhead traction.[12] Cammell Laird and Uerdingenwagonfabrik companies provided the locomotives for the same. In the same year VT-Bandra section was also electrified and electric services began there, with an elevated platform at Sandhurst Road.[12] In the same year, the Oudh and Rohilkhund Railway was merged with EIR. The first railway budget was also presented in 1925.[13] East Indian Railway Company and Great Indian Peninsular Railway were taken over by the state in the same year.[14] In 1926, Kurla-Kalyan section was electrified with 1500 V DC. Electrification to Poona and Igatpuri (both 1500V DC) over the Bhore and Thal Ghats was also completed in the same year.[12] Charbagh railway station in Lucknow was built in the same year. On Jan 1928, Bandra-Virar section was electrified with 1500V DC. In the same year, the Frontier Mail made its inaugural run between Bombay VT and Peshawar.[15] and first automatic colour-light signals became operational in India, on GIPR's lines between Bombay VT and Byculla.[16] In the same year, Kanpur Central and Lucknow stations were inaugurated. In 1929, the Grand Trunk Express began running between Peshawar and Mangalore,[17] Punjab Limited Express began running between Mumbai and Lahore. Automatic colour-light signalling was extended to the Byculla-Kurla section in the same year. On 1 June 1930, the Deccan Queen began running, hauled by a WCP-1 (No. 20024, old number EA/1 4006) and with 7 coaches, on the GIPR's electrified route from Bombay VT to Poona (Pune).[18] In the same year, Hyderabad Godavary Valley Rly. was merged into Nizam's State Rly. In the same year, the route of the Grand Trunk Exp. was changed to Delhi - Madras.

text: 1951–1983: Zonal re-organisation and further developments[edit]

text: The re-organisation of railways in India into regional zones began in 1951.[19] On 14 April 1951, Southern Railway was created. On 5 November, Central Railway and Western Railway were created.[20] In the same year,the post of Chief Commissioner of Railways was abolished and the Railway Board adopted the practice of making the seniormost member Chairman of the board.[20] In the same year, the government of West Bengal entered into an agreement with the Calcutta Tramways Co. to take over its administrative functions. On 14 April 1952, Northern Railway, Eastern Railway and North-Eastern Railway were created.[20] In the same year, fans and lights were mandated for all compartments in all classes of passenger accommodation and sleeping accommodation was introduced in coaches. On 1 August 1955, Eastern Railway was split to form new South-Eastern Railway. In 1956, divisional system of administration was set up for the various regional zones. Also in 1956, the first fully air-conditioned train was introduced between Howrah and Delhi.[21] In 1957, after successful trials in France, SNCF proposed 25kV AC electrification for railways. Railways took a decision to adopt 25kV AC electrification and chose SNCF as technical consultant.[22] An organisation, Main Line Electrification Project (which later became the Railway Electrification Project and still later the Central Organization for Railway Electrification) was established in the same year.[23] In 1958, the North-Eastern Railway split to form a new Northeast Frontier Railway.[20] In 1959, the Raj Kharswan - Dongoposi section became the first section to be electrified with 25kV AC traction.[22] The first scheduled train using 25kV AC traction ran on Raj Kharswan - Dongoposi section on 11 August 1960.[22] In 1966, first containerized freight services were started, between Bombay and Ahmedabad. In the same year, electrification of several suburban tracks around Delhi, Madras and Calcutta was completed with the 25 kV AC system. In 1979, Main Line Electrification Project was reconstituted into Central Organization for Railway Electrification (CORE).

text: 1984–present: Rapid transit and later developments[edit]

text: On October 24 1984, first metro train ran in India between Esplanade to Bhowanipur (now the Netaji Bhawan station) in Calcutta.[24] Thus Calcutta Metro became the first metro in the country.[25] In 1986, computerized ticketing and reservation was introduced in India, for the first time, at New Delhi.[26] In 1988, The first Shatabdi Express was introduced in the country between New Delhi and Jhansi (later extended to Bhopal), and also became the fastest train at the time.[27] In 1990, first Self-Printing Ticket Machine (SPTM) was introduced, at New Delhi. In 1993, AC 3-tier coaches were introduced for the first time in India. In the same year, Sleeper Class was introduced on IR for the first time, separate from Second Class. On 16 January 1995, first regularly scheduled services on trains hauled by locos using the 2*25kV system of traction started on Bina-Katni. In September 1996, CONCERT system of computerized reservations was fully deployed at New Delhi, Mumbai and Chennai. In 1998, Coupon Validating Machines (CVMs) were introduced at Mumbai CST. The complete networked nationwide CONCERT system became operational on 18 April, 1999. In the same year, South East Central was constituted. Credit cards were started being accepted for booking tickets and reservations in some stations also in 1999. In February 2000, Indian Railways web site was deployed.[28] On 6 July 2002, the East Coast, South Western, South East Central, North Central, and West Central zones were created.[29] On 3 August 2002, IR began online train reservations and ticketing over the Internet. On 1 Dec 2002, Internet ticket booking was extended to many cities.[30] On 5 February 2012, WR switched completely to 25kV AC traction, ending its use of 1.5kV DC traction.[31] On 26 September 2013, Tatkal system of ticketing extended to ordinary trains. On 5 April 2016, Gatiman Express, India's fastest train with the maximum speed of 160 km/h, made its maiden journey from Delhi to Agra.[32] On 11 April 2016, CR completely switched to 25 kV AC traction, ending the use of DC traction completely in Mumbai area as well as on entire main-line rail network in the country.[33] On 31 March 2017, IR announced that the entire rail network in the country will be electrified by 2022.[34]


document_title: Cruise ship pollution in the United States

question_text: where does all the human waste go on a cruise ship

root

text: Background[edit]

text: More than 46,000 commercial vessels — tankers, bulk carriers, container ships, barges, and passenger ships — travel the oceans and other waters of the world, carrying cargo and passengers for commerce, transport, and recreation. Their activities are regulated and scrutinized in a number of respects by international protocols and U.S. domestic laws, including those designed to protect against discharges of pollutants that could harm marine resources, other parts of the ambient environment, and human health. However, there are overlaps of some requirements, gaps in other areas, geographic differences in jurisdiction based on differing definitions, and questions about the adequacy of enforcement.

tag: p

text: Public attention to the environmental impacts of the maritime industry has been especially focused on the cruise industry, in part because its ships are highly visible and in part because of the industry’s desire to promote a positive image. It represents a relatively small fraction of the entire shipping industry worldwide. As of January 2008, passenger ships (which include cruise ships and ferries) composed about 12% of the world shipping fleet.[1] The cruise industry is a significant and growing contributor to the U.S. economy, providing more than $32 billion in total benefits annually and generating more than 330,000 U.S. jobs,[2] but also making the environmental impacts of its activities an issue to many. Since 1980, the average annual growth rate in the number of cruise passengers worldwide has been 8.4%, and in 2005, cruises hosted an estimated 11.5 million passengers. Cruises are especially popular in the United States. In 2005, U.S. ports handled 8.6 million cruise embarcations (75% of global passengers), 6.3% more than in 2004. The worldwide cruise ship fleet consists of more than 230 ships, and the majority are foreign-flagged, with Liberia and Panama being the most popular flag countries.[3] Foreign-flag cruise vessels owned by six companies account for nearly 95% of passenger ships operating in U.S. waters. Each year, the industry adds new ships to the total fleet, vessels that are bigger, more elaborate and luxurious, and that carry larger numbers of passengers and crew. Over the past two decades, the average ship size has been increasing at the rate of roughly 90 feet (27 m) every five years. The average ship entering the market from 2008 to 2011 will be more than 1,050 feet (320 m) long and will weigh more than 130,000 tons.[4]

text: To the cruise ship industry, a key issue is demonstrating to the public that cruising is safe and healthy for passengers and the tourist communities that are visited by their ships. Cruise ships carrying several thousand passengers and crew have been compared to “floating cities,” in part because the volume of wastes produced and requiring disposal is greater than that of many small cities on land. During a typical one-week voyage, a large cruise ship (with 3,000 passengers and crew) is estimated to generate 210,000 US gallons (790,000 L) of sewage; 1 million US gallons (3,800 m3) of graywater (wastewater from sinks, showers, and laundries); more than 130 US gallons (490 L) of hazardous wastes; 8 tons of solid waste; and 25,000 US gallons (95 m3) of oily bilge water.[5] Passengers can,singlehandedl, produce up to 7.7 pounds of waste in a single day aboard a cruise ship.[6] Those wastes, if not properly treated and disposed of, can pose risks to human health, welfare, and the environment. Environmental advocates have raised concerns about the adequacy of existing laws for managing these wastes, and suggest that enforcement of existing laws is weak.

text: A 2000 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report focused attention on problems of cruise vessel compliance with environmental requirements.[7] GAO found that between 1993 and 1998, foreign-flag cruise ships were involved in 87 confirmed illegal discharge cases in U.S. waters. A few of the cases included multiple illegal discharge incidents occurring over the six-year period. GAO reviewed three major waste streams (solids, hazardous chemicals, and oily bilge water) and concluded that 83% of the cases involved discharges of oil or oil-based products, the volumes of which ranged from a few drops to hundreds of gallons. The balance of the cases involved discharges of plastic or garbage. GAO judged that 72% of the illegal discharges were accidental, 15% were intentional, and 13% could not be determined. The 87 cruise ship cases represented 4% of the 2,400 illegal discharge cases by foreign-flag ships (including tankers, cargo ships and other commercial vessels, as well as cruise ships) confirmed during the six years studied by GAO. Although cruise ships operating in U.S. waters have been involved in a relatively small number of pollution cases, GAO said, several have been widely publicized and have led to criminal prosecutions and multimillion-dollar fines.

text: In 2000, a coalition of 53 environmental advocacy groups petitioned the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to take regulatory action to address pollution by cruise ships.[8] The petition called for an investigation of wastewater, oil, and solid waste discharges from cruise ships. In response, EPA agreed to study cruise ship discharges and waste management approaches. As part of that effort, EPA issued a background document in 2000 with preliminary information and recommendations for further assessment through data collection and public information hearings.[3] The agency released its final Cruise Ship Discharge Assessment Report in 2009. The report summarized findings of recent data collection activities, especially from cruise ships operating in Alaskan waters.[9]

text: Concurrently, litigation regarding the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program led to a 2008 decision by the Ninth Circuit Court, ruling that EPA could not exclude vessel discharges from NPDES requirements.[10] Subsequently EPA issued an initial Vessel General Permit (VGP) with an effective date of February 6, 2009.[11]

text: Cruise ship waste streams[edit]

text: Cruise ships generate a number of waste streams that can result in discharges to the marine environment, including sewage, graywater, hazardous wastes, oily bilge water, ballast water, and solid waste. They also emit air pollutants to the air and water. These wastes, if not properly treated and disposed of, can be a significant source of pathogens, nutrients, and toxic substances with the potential to threaten human health and damage aquatic life. Cruise ships represent a small — although highly visible — portion of the entire international shipping industry, and the waste streams described here are not unique to cruise ships. However, particular types of wastes, such as sewage, graywater, and solid waste, may be of greater concern for cruise ships relative to other seagoing vessels, because of the large numbers of passengers and crew that cruise ships carry and the large volumes of wastes that they produce. Further, because cruise ships tend to concentrate their activities in specific coastal areas and visit the same ports repeatedly (especially Florida, California, New York City, Galveston, Seattle, and the waters of Alaska), their cumulative impact on a local scale could be significant, as can impacts of individual large-volume releases (either accidental or intentional).

text: International laws and regulations[edit]

text: MARPOL 73/78 is one of the most important treaties regulating pollution from ships. Six Annexes of the Convention cover the various sources of pollution from ships and provide an overarching framework for international objectives. In the U.S., the Convention is implemented through the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships. Under the provisions of the Convention, the United States can take direct enforcement action under U.S. laws against foreign-flagged ships when pollution discharge incidents occur within U.S. jurisdiction. When incidents occur outside U.S. jurisdiction or jurisdiction cannot be determined, the United States refers cases to flag states, in accordance with MARPOL. These procedures require substantial coordination between the Coast Guard, the State Department, and other flag states, and the response rate from flag states has been poor.[7]

text: Federal laws and regulations[edit]

text: In the United States, several federal agencies have some jurisdiction over cruise ships in U.S. waters, but no one agency is responsible for or coordinates all of the relevant government functions. The U.S. Coast Guard and EPA have principal regulatory and standard-setting responsibilities.

text: Cruise ships that are 79 feet (24 m) in length or greater, are subject to the requirements of the EPA Vessel General Permit (VGP). The most recent VGP was published in 2013.[12] EPA issued a separate permit for smaller cruise ships,[13][14] however this permit currently only applies to ballast water. A Congressionally-imposed moratorium applies to other wastestreams for these vessels until December 18, 2017.[15]

text: The Department of Justice prosecutes violations of federal laws. In addition, the Department of State represents the United States at meetings of the IMO and in international treaty negotiations and is responsible for pursuing foreign-flag violations. Other federal agencies have limited roles and responsibilities. For example, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA, Department of Commerce) works with the Coast Guard and EPA to report on the effects of marine debris. The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) is responsible for ensuring quarantine inspection and disposal of food-contaminated garbage (these APHIS responsibilities are part of the Department of Homeland Security). In some cases, states and localities have responsibilities as well.

text: Sewage[edit]

text: Commercial vessels are required to obtain NPDES permits pursuant to Section 402 of the Clean Water Act. Section 312 of the Act prohibits the dumping of untreated or inadequately treated sewage from vessels into the navigable waters of the United States (defined in the act as within 3 miles (4.8 km) of shore). Cruise ships are subject to this prohibition. Commercial and recreational vessels with installed toilets are required to have marine sanitation devices, which are designed to prevent the discharge of untreated sewage. Beyond 3 miles (4.8 km), raw sewage can be discharged. On some cruise ships, especially many of those that travel in Alaskan waters, sewage is treated using Advanced Wastewater Treatment (AWT) systems that generally provide improved screening, treatment, disinfection, and sludge processing as compared with traditional MSDs. AWTs are believed to be very effective in removing pathogens, oxygen-demanding substances, suspended solids, oil and grease, and particulate metals from sewage, but only moderately effective in removing dissolved metals and nutrients (ammonia, nitrogen and phosphorus).

text: States may also establish no-discharge zones (NDZs) for vessel sewage, under section 312. A state may completely prohibit the discharge of both treated and untreated sewage from all vessels with installed toilets into some or all waters over which it has jurisdiction (up to 3 miles (4.8 km) from land). As of 2017, this designation has been used for 72 areas representing part or all of the waters of 26 states, including a number of inland states.[16]

text: Greywater[edit]

text: Graywater discharges from large cruise ships are regulated by the 2013 VGP.[12] Graywater discharges from small cruise ships are currently exempt from the EPA Small Vessel General Permit ("sVGP"), due to the Congressional moratorium.[15]

text: Pursuant to a state law in Alaska, greywater must be treated prior to discharge into that state’s waters.[citation needed]

text: Solid waste[edit]

text: Cruise ship discharges of solid waste are governed by two laws. Title I of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act makes it illegal to transport garbage from the United States for the purpose of dumping it into ocean waters without a permit or to dump material from outside the U.S. into U.S. waters. Beyond U.S. waters, no MPRSA permit is required for a cruise ship to discharge solid waste. The routine discharge of effluent incidental to the propulsion of vessels is explicitly exempted from the definition of dumping in the MPRSA.28

text: The Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships prohibits the discharge of all garbage within 3 nautical miles (5.6 km) of shore, certain types of garbage within 12 nautical miles (22 km) offshore, and plastic anywhere. It applies to all vessels operating in U.S. navigable waters and the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).

text: Hazardous waste[edit]

text: The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) is the primary federal law that governs hazardous waste management. The owner or operator of a cruise ship may be a generator and/or a transporter of hazardous waste, and thus subject to RCRA rules. Issues that the cruise ship industry may face relating to RCRA include ensuring that hazardous waste is identified at the point at which it is considered generated; ensuring that parties are properly identified as generators, storers, treaters, or disposers; and determining the applicability of RCRA requirements to each. Hazardous waste generated onboard cruise ships are stored onboard until the wastes can be offloaded for recycling or disposal in accordance with RCRA.[citation needed]

text: A range of activities on board cruise ships generate hazardous wastes and toxic substances that would ordinarily be presumed to be subject to RCRA. Cruise ships are potentially subject to RCRA requirements to the extent that chemicals used for operations such as ship maintenance and passenger services result in the generation of hazardous wastes. However, it is not entirely clear what regulations apply to the management and disposal of these wastes.[citation needed] RCRA rules that cover small-quantity generators (those that generate more than 100 kilograms but less than 1,000 kilograms of hazardous waste per month) are less stringent than those for large-quantity generators (generating more than 1,000 kilograms per month), and it is unclear whether cruise ships are classified as large or small generators of hazardous waste. Moreover, some cruise companies argue that they generate less than 100 kilograms per month and therefore should be classified in a third category, as “conditionally exempt small-quantity generators,” a categorization that allows for less rigorous requirements for notification, recordkeeping, and the like.[citation needed]

text: In addition to RCRA, hazardous waste discharges from cruise ships are subject to Section 311 of the Clean Water Act, which prohibits the discharge of hazardous substances in harmful quantities into or upon the navigable waters of the United States, adjoining shorelines, or into or upon the waters of the contiguous zone.

text: Bilge water[edit]

text: Section 311 of the Clean Water Act, as amended by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, applies to cruise ships and prohibits discharge of oil or hazardous substances in harmful quantities into or upon U.S. navigable waters, or into or upon the waters of the contiguous zone, or which may affect natural resources in the U.S. EEZ (extending 200 miles (320 km) offshore).[17] Coast Guard regulations prohibit discharge of oil within 12 miles (19 km) from shore, unless passed through a 15-ppm oil water separator, and unless the discharge does not cause a visible sheen.[18] Beyond 12 miles (19 km), oil or oily mixtures can be discharged while a vessel is proceeding en route and if the oil content without dilution is less than 100 ppm. Vessels are required to maintain an Oil Record Book to record disposal of oily residues and discharges overboard or disposal of bilge water.

text: In addition to Section 311 requirements, the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships (APPS) implements MARPOL Annex I concerning oil pollution. APPS applies to all U.S. flagged ships anywhere in the world and to all foreign flagged vessels operating in the navigable waters of the United States, or while at a port under U.S. jurisdiction. To implement APPS, the Coast Guard has promulgated regulations prohibiting the discharge of oil or oily mixtures into the sea within 12 nautical miles (22 km) of the nearest land, except under limited conditions. However, because most cruise lines are foreign registered and because APPS only applies to foreign ships within U.S. navigable waters, the APPS regulations have limited applicability to cruise ship operations. In addition, most cruise lines have adopted policies that restrict discharges of machinery space waste within three miles (5 km) from shore.

text: Cruise Ship Efforts to Reduce Pollution[edit]

text: After the intervention of the GAO, or Government Accountability Office, from 2003 to 2008, twelve cruise ship companies who violated pollution regulations implemented new environmental strategies. [19] Several cruise lines within this group and others who have not been found guilty of previous violations have sought to ameliorate their pollution of marine waters. Some of these have reduced their waste production by transferring over from single use plastic packaging to reusable plastic containers for food being prepared on board and cutlery being used on the pool decks. Princess Cruises as well as the Royal Caribbean Cruise Line are two cruise lines that have acknowledged the waste problem, and have adopted reusable items to work towards a resolution.Recycling programs have also been implemented, and, because of the use of compactors on ships, plastics and aluminums are condensed and made easily recyclable upon ships return to port. The United States,alone,gains upward of 18,000 pounds of recycled goods from these practices.[20] Some cruise lines have also taken it upon themselves to reduce air pollution, by using alternative, cleaner energy sources which has positive implications for marine waters as well. Battery power, fuel cells, and liquified natural gas are two such sources that are being explored. [21] Carnival Corporation is one example of a cruise liner that is currently pursuing cleaner energies. The company has agreed to partner with Shell and utilize liquefied natural gas, LNG, to power their next two ships.[22] Liquefied natural gas, although still a fossil fuel, is a much cleaner source of energy than oil and also much less expensive to the benefit of cruise companies.[23] Transitioning away from oil will help cruise liners combat their problems with bilge pollution. Cruise ships efforts to reduce their waste, recycle, and find more renewable energies will help alleviate their current rate of pollution of marine waters.


document_title: History of the electric vehicle

question_text: when was the first electric car made in the usa

text: History of the electric vehicle

text: Early history[edit]

text: Electric model cars[edit]

text: The invention of the first model electric vehicle is attributed to various people.[4] In 1828, Ányos Jedlik, a Hungarian who invented an early type of electric motor, created a small model car powered by his new motor. In 1834, Vermont blacksmith Thomas Davenport built a similar contraption which operated on a short, circular, electrified track.[5] In 1834, Professor Sibrandus Stratingh of Groningen, the Netherlands and his assistant Christopher Becker created a small-scale electrical car, powered by non-rechargeable primary cells.[6]

text: Electric locomotives[edit]

text: The first known electric car was built in 1837, in Scotland by chemist Robert Davidson of Aberdeen. It was powered by galvanic cells (batteries). Davidson later built a larger locomotive named Galvani, exhibited at the Royal Scottish Society of Arts Exhibition in 1841. The 7,100-kilogram (7-long-ton) vehicle had two direct-drive reluctance motors, with fixed electromagnets acting on iron bars attached to a wooden cylinder on each axle, and simple commutators. It hauled a load of 6,100 kilograms (6 long tons) at 6.4 kilometres per hour (4 mph) for a distance of 2.4 km (1.5 miles). It was tested on the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway in September of the following year, but the limited power from batteries prevented its general use.  It was destroyed by railway workers, who saw it as a threat to their security of employment.[7][8][9][10]

text: Between 1832 and 1839, Scottish inventor Robert Anderson also invented a crude electrical carriage.[11] A patent for the use of rails as conductors of electric current was granted in England in 1840, and similar patents were issued to Lilley and Colten in the United States in 1847.[12]

text: First practical electric cars[edit]

text: Rechargeable batteries that provided a viable means for storing electricity on board a vehicle did not come into being until 1859, with the invention of the lead–acid battery by French physicist Gaston Planté.[13][14] Camille Alphonse Faure, another French scientist, significantly improved the design of the battery in 1881; his improvements greatly increased the capacity of such batteries and led directly to their manufacture on an industrial scale.[15]

text: An early electric-powered two-wheel cycle was put on display at the 1867 World Exposition in Paris by the Austrian inventor Franz Kravogl, but it was regarded as a curiosity and could not drive reliably in the street.[16] Another cycle, this time with three wheels, was tested along a Paris street in April 1881 by French inventor Gustave Trouvé [17]

text: English inventor Thomas Parker, who was responsible for innovations such as electrifying the London Underground, overhead tramways in Liverpool and Birmingham, and the smokeless fuel coalite, built the first production electric car in London in 1884, using his own specially designed high-capacity rechargeable batteries.[18] Parker's long-held interest in the construction of more fuel-efficient vehicles led him to experiment with electric vehicles. He also may have been concerned about the malign effects smoke and pollution were having in London.[19]

text: Production of the car was in the hands of the Elwell-Parker Company, established in 1882 for the construction and sale of electric trams. The company merged with other rivals in 1888 to form the Electric Construction Corporation; this company had a virtual monopoly on the British electric car market in the 1890s. The company manufactured the first electric 'dog cart' in 1896.[20]

text: France and the United Kingdom were the first nations to support the widespread development of electric vehicles.[11] The first electric car in Germany was built by the engineer Andreas Flocken in 1888.[21]

text: Electric trains were also used to transport coal out of mines, as their motors did not use up precious oxygen. Before the pre-eminence of internal combustion engines, electric automobiles also held many speed and distance records.[22] Among the most notable of these records was the breaking of the 100 km/h (62 mph) speed barrier, by Camille Jenatzy on 29 April 1899 in his 'rocket-shaped' vehicle Jamais Contente, which reached a top speed of 105.88 km/h (65.79 mph). Also notable was Ferdinand Porsche's design and construction of an all-wheel drive electric car, powered by a motor in each hub, which also set several records in the hands of its owner E.W. Hart.

text: The first electric car in the United States was developed in 1890-91 by William Morrison of Des Moines, Iowa; the vehicle was a six-passenger wagon capable of reaching a speed of 23 kilometres per hour (14 mph). It was not until 1895 that consumers began to devote attention to electric vehicles, after A.L. Ryker introduced the first electric tricycles to the U.S.[23], by which point Europeans had been making use of electric tricycles, bicycles, and cars for almost 15 years.

text: Golden age[edit]

text:
Interest in motor vehicles increased greatly in the late 1890s and early 1900s.
Electric battery-powered taxis became available at the end of the 19th century. In London, Walter C. Bersey designed a fleet of such cabs and introduced them to the streets of London in 1897. They were soon nicknamed "Hummingbirds" due to the idiosyncratic humming noise they made.[24] In the same year in New York City, the Samuel's Electric Carriage and Wagon Company began running 12 electric hansom cabs.[25] The company ran until 1898 with up to 62 cabs operating until it was reformed by its financiers to form the Electric Vehicle Company.[26]

text: Electric vehicles had a number of advantages over their early-1900s competitors. They did not have the vibration, smell, and noise associated with gasoline cars. They also did not require gear changes. (While steam-powered cars also had no gear shifting, they suffered from long start-up times of up to 45 minutes on cold mornings.) The cars were also preferred because they did not require a manual effort to start, as did gasoline cars which featured a hand crank to start the engine.

text: Electric cars found popularity among well-heeled customers who used them as city cars, where their limited range proved to be even less of a disadvantage.  Electric cars were often marketed as suitable vehicles for women drivers due to their ease of operation; in fact, early electric cars were stigmatized by the perception that they were "women's cars", leading some companies to affix radiators to the front to disguise the car's propulsion system.

text: Acceptance of electric cars was initially hampered by a lack of power infrastructure, but by 1912, many homes were wired for electricity, enabling a surge in the popularity of the cars. In the United States by the turn of the century, 40 percent of automobiles were powered by steam, 38 percent by electricity, and 22 percent by gasoline. A total of 33,842 electric cars were registered in the United States, and America became the country where electric cars had gained the most acceptance.[27] Most early electric vehicles were massive, ornate carriages designed for the upper-class customers that made them popular. They featured luxurious interiors and were replete with expensive materials. Sales of electric cars peaked in the early 1910s.

text: In order to overcome the limited operating range of electric vehicles, and the lack of recharging infrastructure, an exchangeable battery service was first proposed as early as 1896.[28] The concept was first put into practice by Hartford Electric Light Company through the GeVeCo battery service and initially available for electric trucks. The vehicle owner purchased the vehicle from General Vehicle Company (GVC, a subsidiary of the General Electric Company) without a battery and the electricity was purchased from Hartford Electric through an exchangeable battery. The owner paid a variable per-mile charge and a monthly service fee to cover maintenance and storage of the truck. Both vehicles and batteries were modified to facilitate a fast battery exchange. The service was provided between 1910 and 1924 and during that period covered more than 6 million miles. Beginning in 1917 a similar successful service was operated in Chicago for owners of Milburn Wagon Company cars who also could buy the vehicle without the batteries.[28]

text: Decline[edit]

text: After enjoying success at the beginning of the 20th century, the electric car began to lose its position in the automobile market. A number of developments contributed to this situation. By the 1920s an improved road infrastructure required vehicles with a greater range than that offered by electric cars. Worldwide discoveries of large petroleum reserves led to the wide availability of affordable gasoline, making gas-powered cars cheaper to operate over long distances. Electric cars were limited to urban use by their slow speed (no more than 24–32 km/h or 15–20 mph.[27]) and low range (30–40 miles or 50–65 km[27]), and gasoline cars were now able to travel farther and faster than equivalent electrics.

text: Gasoline cars became even easier to operate thanks to the invention of the electric starter by Charles Kettering in 1912,[29] which eliminated the need of a hand crank for starting a gasoline engine, and the noise emitted by ICE cars became more bearable thanks to the use of the muffler, which Hiram Percy Maxim had invented in 1897. Finally, the initiation of mass production of gas-powered vehicles by Henry Ford brought their price down.[30] By contrast, the price of similar electric vehicles continued to rise; by 1912, an electric car sold for almost double the price of a gasoline car.[11]

text: Most electric car makers stopped production at some point in the 1910s. Electric vehicles became popular for certain applications where their limited range did not pose major problems. Forklift trucks were electrically powered when they were introduced by Yale in 1923.[31] In Europe, especially the United Kingdom, milk floats were powered by electricity, and for most of the 20th century the majority of the world's battery electric road vehicles were British milk floats.[32] Electric golf carts were produced by Lektro as early as 1954.[33] By the 1920s, the early heyday of electric cars had passed, and a decade later, the electric automobile industry had effectively disappeared. Michael Brian examines the social and technological reasons for the failure of electric cars in his book Taking Charge: The Electric Automobile in America.[34]

text: Years passed without a major revival in the use of electric cars. Fuel-starved European countries fighting in World War II experimented with electric cars such as the British milk floats and the French Breguet Aviation car, but overall, while ICE development progressed at a brisk pace, electric vehicle technology stagnated. In the late 1950s, Henney Coachworks and the National Union Electric Company, makers of Exide batteries, formed a joint venture to produce a new electric car, the Henney Kilowatt, based on the French Renault Dauphine. The car was produced in 36-volt and 72-volt configurations; the 72-volt models had a top speed approaching 96 km/h (60 mph) and could travel for nearly an hour on a single charge. Despite the Kilowatt's improved performance with respect to previous electric cars, consumers found it[citation needed] too expensive compared to equivalent gasoline cars of the time, and production ended in 1961.

text: 1960s: Revival of interest[edit]

text: In 1959, American Motors Corporation (AMC) and Sonotone Corporation announced a joint research effort to consider producing an electric car powered by a "self-charging" battery.[35] AMC had a reputation for innovation in economical cars while Sonotone had technology for making sintered plate nickel-cadmium batteries that could be recharged rapidly and weighed less than traditional lead-acid versions.[36] That same year, Nu-Way Industries showed an experimental electric car with a one-piece plastic body that was to begin production in early 1960.[35]

text: In the mid 1960s a few battery-electric concept cars appeared, such as the Scottish Aviation Scamp (1965),[37] and an electric version of General Motors gasoline car, the Electrovair (1966).[38] None of them entered production. The 1966 Enfield 8000 did make it into small-scale production, 112 were eventually produced.[39]In 1967, AMC partnered with Gulton Industries to develop a new battery based on lithium and a speed controller designed by Victor Wouk.[40] A nickel-cadmium battery supplied power to an all-electric 1969 Rambler American station wagon.[40] Other "plug-in" experimental AMC vehicles developed with Gulton included the Amitron (1967) and the similar Electron (1977).

text: On 31 July 1971, an electric car received the unique distinction of becoming the first manned vehicle to drive on the Moon; that car was the Lunar rover, which was first deployed during the Apollo 15 mission. The "moon buggy" was developed by Boeing and GM subsidiary Delco Electronics (co-founded by Kettering)[29]  featured a DC drive motor in each wheel, and a pair of 36-volt silver-zinc potassium hydroxide non-rechargeable batteries.

text: After years outside the limelight, the energy crises of the 1970s and 1980s brought about renewed interest in the perceived independence electric cars had from the fluctuations of the hydrocarbon energy market. General Motors created a concept car of another of their gasoline cars, the Electrovette (1976). At the 1990 Los Angeles Auto Show, General Motors President Roger Smith unveiled the GM Impact electric concept car, along with the announcement that GM would build electric cars for sale to the public.

text:
In the early 1990s, the California Air Resources Board (CARB), the government of California's "clean air agency", began a push for more fuel-efficient, lower-emissions vehicles, with the ultimate goal being a move to zero-emissions vehicles such as electric vehicles.[41][42] In response, automakers developed electric models, including the Chrysler TEVan, Ford Ranger EV pickup truck, GM EV1 and S10 EV pickup, Honda EV Plus hatchback, Nissan lithium-battery Altra EV miniwagon and Toyota RAV4 EV.
The automakers were accused of pandering to the wishes of CARB in order to continue to be allowed to sell cars in the lucrative Californian market, while failing to adequately promote their electric vehicles in order to create the impression that the consumers were not interested in the cars, all the while joining oil industry lobbyists in vigorously protesting CARB's mandate.[42] GM's program came under particular scrutiny; in an unusual move, consumers were not allowed to purchase EV1s, but were instead asked to sign closed-end leases, meaning that the cars had to be returned to GM at the end of the lease period, with no option to purchase, despite leasee interest in continuing to own the cars.[42] Chrysler, Toyota, and a group of GM dealers sued CARB in Federal court, leading to the eventual neutering of CARB's ZEV Mandate.[citation needed]

text: After public protests by EV drivers' groups upset by the repossession of their cars, Toyota offered the last 328 RAV4-EVs for sale to the general public during six months, up until 22 November 2002. Almost all other production electric cars were withdrawn from the market and were in some cases seen to have been destroyed by their manufacturers.[42] Toyota continues to support the several hundred Toyota RAV4-EV in the hands of the general public and in fleet usage. GM famously de-activated the few EV1s that were donated to engineering schools and museums.[citation needed]

text: Throughout the 1990s, interest in fuel-efficient or environmentally friendly cars declined among consumers in the United States, who instead favored sport utility vehicles, which were affordable to operate despite their poor fuel efficiency thanks to lower gasoline prices. Domestic U.S. automakers chose to focus their product lines around the truck-based vehicles, which enjoyed larger profit margins than the smaller cars which were preferred in places like Europe or Japan.

text: Most electric vehicles on the world roads are low-speed, low-range neighborhood electric vehicles (NEVs). Pike Research estimated there were almost 479,000 NEVs on the world roads in 2011.[43] As of  July 2006[update], there were between 60,000 and 76,000 low-speed battery-powered vehicles in use in the United States, up from about 56,000 in 2004.[44] North America's top selling NEV is the Global Electric Motorcars (GEM) vehicles, with more than 50,000 units sold worldwide by mid 2014.[45] The world's two largest NEV markets in 2011 were the United States, with 14,737 units sold, and France, with 2,231 units.[46] Other micro electric cars sold in Europe was the Kewet, since 1991, and replaced by the Buddy, launched in 2008.[47] Also the Th!nk City was launched in 2008 but production was halted due to financial difficulties.[48] Production restarted in Finland in December 2009.[49] The Th!nk was sold in several European countries and the U.S.[50][51]  In June 2011 Think Global filed for bankruptcy and production was halted.[52] Worldwide sales reached 1,045 units by March 2011.[53] A total of 200,000 low-speed small electric cars were sold in China in 2013, most of which are powered by lead-acid batteries. These electric vehicles are not considered by the government as new energy vehicles due to safety and environmental concerns, and consequently, do not enjoy the same benefits as highway legal plug-in electric cars.[54]

text: 2000s: Modern highway-capable electric cars[edit]

text: California electric car maker Tesla Motors began development in 2004 on the Tesla Roadster, which was first delivered to customers in 2008.[55] The Roadster was the first highway legal serial production all-electric car to use lithium-ion battery cells, and the first production all-electric car to travel more than 320 km (200 miles) per charge.[56] Since 2008, Tesla sold approximately 2,450 Roadsters in over 30 countries through December 2012.[57] Tesla sold the Roadster until early 2012, when its supply of Lotus Elise gliders ran out, as its contract with Lotus Cars for 2,500 gliders expired at the end of 2011.[58][59] Tesla stopped taking orders for the Roadster in the U.S. market in August 2011,[60][61] and the 2012 Tesla Roadster was sold in limited numbers only in Europe, Asia and Australia.[62][63] The next Tesla vehicle, the Model S, was released in the U.S. on 22 June 2012[64] and the first delivery of a Model S to a retail customer in Europe took place on 7 August 2013.[65] Deliveries in China began on 22 April 2014.[66] The next model was the Tesla Model X. In November 2014 Tesla delayed one more time the start of deliveries to retail customers, and announced the company expects Model X deliveries to begin in the third quarter of 2015.[67]

text: The Mitsubishi i-MiEV was launched in Japan for fleet customers in July 2009, and for individual customers in April 2010,[68][69][70] followed by sales to the public in Hong Kong in May 2010, and Australia in July 2010 via leasing.[71][72] The i-MiEV was launched in Europe in December 2010, including a rebadged version sold in Europe as Peugeot iOn and Citroën C-Zero.[73][74] The market launch in the Americas began in Costa Rica in February 2011, followed by Chile in May 2011.[75][76] Fleet and retail customer deliveries in the U.S. and Canada began in December 2011.[77][78][79] Accounting for all vehicles of the iMiEV brand, Mitsubishi reports around 27,200 units sold or exported since 2009 through December 2012, including the minicab MiEVs sold in Japan, and the units rebadged and sold as Peugeot iOn and Citroën C-Zero in the European market.[80]

text: Senior leaders at several large automakers, including Nissan and General Motors, have stated that the Roadster was a catalyst which demonstrated that there is pent-up consumer demand for more efficient vehicles. In an August 2009 edition of The New Yorker, GM vice-chairman Bob Lutz was quoted as saying, "All the geniuses here at General Motors kept saying lithium-ion technology is 10 years away, and Toyota agreed with us – and boom, along comes Tesla. So I said, 'How come some tiny little California startup, run by guys who know nothing about the car business, can do this, and we can't?' That was the crowbar that helped break up the log jam."[81]

text: 2010s to present[edit]

text: The Nissan Leaf, introduced in Japan and the United States in December 2010, became the first modern all-electric, zero tailpipe emission five door family hatchback to be produced for the mass market from a major manufacturer.[82][83] As of  January 2013[update], the Leaf is also available in Australia, Canada and 17 European countries.[84]

text: The Better Place network was the first modern commercial deployment of the battery swapping model. The Renault Fluence Z.E. was the first mass production electric car enable with switchable battery technology and sold for the Better Place network in Israel and Denmark.[85] Better Place launched its first battery-swapping station in Israel, in Kiryat Ekron, near Rehovot in March 2011.  The battery exchange process took five minutes.[86] As of  December 2012[update], there were 17 battery switch stations fully operational in Denmark enabling customers to drive anywhere across the country in an electric car.[87] By late 2012 the company began to suffer financial difficulties, and decided to put on hold the roll out in Australia and reduce its non-core activities in North America, as the company decided to concentrate its resources on its two existing markets.[88][89][90] On 26 May 2013, Better Place filed for bankruptcy in Israel.[91] The company's financial difficulties were caused by the high investment required to develop the charging and swapping infrastructure, about US$850 million in private capital, and a market penetration significantly lower than originally predicted by Shai Agassi. Less than 1,000 Fluence Z.E. cars were deployed in Israel and around 400 units in Denmark.[92][93]

text: The Smart electric drive, Wheego Whip LiFe, Mia electric, Volvo C30 Electric, and the Ford Focus Electric were launched for retail customers during 2011. The BYD e6, released initially for fleet customers in 2010, began reatail sales in Shenzhen, China in October 2011.[94] The Bolloré Bluecar was released in December 2011 and deployed for use in the Autolib' carsharing service in Paris.[95] Leasing to individual and corporate customers began in October 2012 and is limited to the Île-de-France area.[96] In February 2011, the Mitsubishi i MiEV became the first electric car to sell more than of more than 10,000 units, including the models badged in Europe as Citroën C-Zero and Peugeot. The record was officially registered by Guinness World Records. Several months later, the Nissan Leaf overtook the i MiEV as the best selling all-electric car ever,[97] and by February 2013 global sales of the Leaf reached the 50,000 unit mark.[84]

text: Models released to the market in 2012 and 2013 include the BMW ActiveE, Coda, Renault Fluence Z.E., Tesla Model S, Honda Fit EV, Toyota RAV4 EV, Renault Zoe, Roewe E50, Mahindra e2o, Chevrolet Spark EV, Mercedes-Benz SLS AMG Electric Drive, Fiat 500e, Volkswagen e-Up!, BMW i3, and Kandi EV. Toyota released the Scion iQ EV in the U.S. (Toyota eQ in Japan) in 2013. The car production is limited to 100 units. The first 30 units were delivered to the University of California, Irvine in March 2013 for use in its Zero Emission Vehicle-Network Enabled Transport (ZEV-NET) carsharing fleet. Toyota announced that 90 out of the 100 vehicles produced globally will be placed in carsharing demonstration projects in the United States and the rest in Japan.[98]

text: The Coda sedan went out of production in 2013, after selling only about 100 units in California. Its manufacturer, Coda Automotive, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on 1 May 2013. The company stated that it expects to emerge from the bankruptcy process to focus on energy storage solutions as it has decided to abandon car manufacturing.[99]

text: The Tesla Model S ranked as the top selling plug-in electric car in  North America during the first quarter of 2013 with 4,900 cars sold, ahead of the Chevrolet Volt (4,421) and the Nissan Leaf (3,695).[100] European retail deliveries of the Tesla Model S began in Oslo in August 2013,[101] and during its first full month in the market, the Model S ranked as the top selling car in Norway with 616 units delivered, representing a market share of 5.1% of all the new cars sold in the country in September 2013, becoming the first electric car to top the new car sales ranking in any country, and contributing to a record all-electric car market share of 8.6% of new car sales during that month.[102][103] In October 2013, an electric car was the best selling car in the country for a second month in a row. This time was the Nissan Leaf with 716 units sold, representing a 5.6% of new car sales that month.[104][105]

text: The Renault–Nissan Alliance reached global sales of 100,000 all-electric vehicles in July 2013.[108] The 100,000th customer was a U.S. student who bought a Nissan Leaf.[109] In mid January 2014, global sales of the Nissan Leaf reached the 100,000 unit milestone, representing a 45% market share of worldwide pure electric vehicles sold since 2010. The 100,000th car was delivered to a British customer.[110]

text: As of  June 2014[update], there were over 500,000 plug-in electric passenger cars and utility vans in the world, with the U.S. leading plug-in electric car sales with a 45% share of global sales.[111][112] In September 2014, sales of plug-in electric cars in the United States reached the 250,000 unit milestone.[113] Global cumulative sales of the Tesla Model S passed the 50,000 unit milestone in October 2014.[114] In November 2014 the Renault–Nissan Alliance reached 200,000 all-electric vehicles delivered globally, representing a 58% share of the global light-duty all-electric market segment.[115]

text: The world's top selling all-electric cars in 2014 were the Nissan Leaf (61,507), Tesla Model S (31,655), BMW i3 (16,052), and the Renault Zoe (11,323). Accounting for plug-in hybrids, the Leaf and the Model S also ranked first and second correspondinly among the world's top 10 selling plug-in electric cars.[107] All-electric models released to the retail customers in 2014 include the BMW Brilliance Zinoro 1E, Chery eQ, Geely-Kandi Panda EV, Zotye Zhidou E20, Kia Soul EV, Volkswagen e-Golf, Mercedes-Benz B-Class Electric Drive, and Venucia e30.

text:
General Motors unveiled the Chevrolet Bolt EV concept car  at the 2015 North American International Auto Show.[117] The Bolt is scheduled for availability in late 2016 as a model year 2017.[118] GM anticipates the Bolt will deliver an all-electric range more than 320 km (200 miles), with pricing starting at US$37,500 before any applicable government incentives.[119] The European version, marketed as the Opel Ampera-e, will go into production in 2017.[120]
In May 2015, global sales of highway legal all-electric passenger cars and light utility vehicles passed the 500,000 unit milestone, accounting for sales since 2008. Out these, Nissan accounts for about 35%, Tesla Motors about 15%, and Mitsubishi about 10%.[121] Also in May 2015, the Renault Zoe and the BMW i3 passed the 25,000 unit global sales milestone.[122] In June 2015, worldwide sales of the Model S passed the 75,000 unit milestone in June 2015.[114]

text: By early June 2015, the Renault–Nissan Alliance continued as the leading all-electric vehicle manufacturer with global sales of over 250,000 pure electric vehicles representing about half of the global light-duty all-electric market segment. Nissan sales totaled 185,000 units, which includes the Nissan Leaf and the e-NV200 van. Renault has sold 65,000 electric vehicles, and its line-up includes the ZOE passenger car, the Kangoo Z.E. van, the SM3 Z.E. (previously Fluence Z.E.) sedan and the  Twizy heavy quadricycle.[123]

text: By mid-September 2015, the global stock of highway legal plug-in electric passenger cars and utility vans passed the one million sales milestone, with the pure electrics capturing about 62% of global sales.[125] The United States is the plug-in segment market leader with a stock of over 363,000 plug-in electric cars delivered since 2008 through August 2015, representing 36.3% of global sales.[125] The tate of California is the largest plug-in car regional market, with more than 158,000 units sold between December 2010 and June 2015, representing 46.5% of all plug-in cars sold in the U.S.[126][127][128][128][129] Until December 2014, California not only had more plug-in electric vehicles than any other state in the nation, but also more than any other country.[130][131]

text: As of  August 2015[update], China ranked as the world's second top selling country plug-in market, with over 157,000 units sold since 2011 (15.7%), followed by Japan with more than 120,000 plug-in units sold since 2009 (12.1%).[125] As of  June 2015[update], over 310,000 light-duty plug-in electric vehicles have been registered in the European market since 2010.[132][133] European sales are led by Norway, followed by the Netherlands, and France.[125] In the heavy-duty segment, China is the world's leader, with over 65,000 buses and other commercial vehicles sold through August 2015.[125]

text: As of  December 2015[update], global sales of electric cars were led by the Nissan Leaf with over 200,000 units sold making the Leaf the world's top selling highway-capable electric car in history. The Tesla Model S, with global deliveries of more than 100,000 units, is the world's second best selling all-electric car of all-time.[134] The Model S ranked as the world's best selling plug-in electric vehicle in 2015, up from second best in 2014.[135][136] The Model S was also the top selling plug-in car in the U.S. in 2015.[137] Most models released in the world's markets to retail customers during 2015 were plug-in hybrids. The only new series production all-electric cars launched up to October 2015 were the BYD e5 and the Tesla Model X, together with several variants of the Tesla Model S line-up.[138]

text: The Tesla Model 3 was unveiled on 31 March 2016. With pricing starting at US$35,000 and an all-electric range of 345 km (215 miles), the Model 3 is Tesla Motors first vehicle aimed for the mass market. Before the unveiling event, over 115,000 people had reserved the Model 3.[139] As of  7 April 2016[update], one week after the event, Tesla Motors reported over 325,000 reservations, more than triple the 107,000 Model S cars Tesla had sold by the end of 2015. These reservations represent potential sales of over US$14 billion.[140][141] As of  31 March 2016[update], Tesla Motors has sold almost 125,000 electric cars worldwide since delivery of its first Tesla Roadster in 2008.[142] Tesla reported the number of net reservations totaled about 373,000 as of  15 May 2016[update], after about 8,000 customer cancellations and about 4,200 reservations canceled by the automaker because these appeared to be duplicates from speculators.[143][144]

text: The Hyundai Ioniq Electric was released in South Korea in July 2016, and sold over 1,000 units during its first two months in the market.[146] The Renault-Nissan Alliance achieved the milestone of 350,000 electric vehicles sold globally in August 2016, and also set an industry record of 100,000 electric vehicle sold in a single year.[147] Nissan global electric vehicle sales passed the 250,000 unit milestone also in August 2016.[147] Renault global electric vehicle sales passed the 100,000 unit milestone in early September 2016.[148] Global sales of the Tesla Model X passed the 10,000 unit mark in August 2016, with most cars delivered in the United States.[149]

text: Cumulative global sales of pure electric passenger cars and utility vans passed the 1 million unit milestone in September 2016.[3] Global sales of the Tesla Model S achieved the 150,000 unit milestone in November 2016, four years and five months after its introduction, and just five more months than it took the Nissan Leaf to achieve the same milestone.[150] Norway achieved the milestone of 100,000 all-electric vehicles registered in December 2016.[151] Retail deliveries of the 383 km (238 miles) Chevrolet Bolt EV  began in the San Francisco Bay Area on 13 December 2016.[145] In December 2016, Nissan reported that Leaf owners worldwide achieved the milestone of 3 billion km (1.9 billion miles) driven collectively through November 2016, saving the equivalent of nearly 500 million kg (1,100 million lb) of CO2 emissions.[152] Global Nissan Leaf sales passed 250,000 units delivered in December 2016.[153][154] The Tesla Model S was the world's best-selling plug-in electric car in 2016 for the second year running, with 50,931 units delivered globally.[124][155]

text: In December 2016, Norway became the first country where 5% of all registered passenger cars was a plug-in electric.[156] When new car sales in Norway are breakdown by powertrain or fuel, nine of the top ten best-selling models in 2016 were electric-drive models. The Norwegian electric-drive segment achieved a combined market share of 40.2% of new passenger car sales in 2016, consisting of 15.7% for all-electric cars, 13.4% for plug-in hybrids, and 11.2% for conventional hybris.[157] The highest-ever monthly market share for the plug-in electric passenger segment in any country was achieved in Norway in January 2017 with 37.5% of new car sales; the plug-in hybrid segment reached a 20.0% market share of new passenger cars, and the all-electric car segment had a 17.5% market share.[158] Also in January 2017, the electrified passenger car segment, consisting of plug-in hybrids, all-electric cars and conventional hybrids, for the first time ever surpassed combined sales of cars with a conventional diesel or gasoline engine, with a market share of 51.4% of new car sales that month.[158][159] For many years Norwegian electric vehicles have been subsidised by approximately 50%, and have several other benefits, such as use of bus lanes and free parking.[160] Many of these perks have been extended to 2020.[161]

text: In February 2017 Consumer Reports named Tesla as the top car brand in the United States and ranked it 8th among global carmakers.[162] Global sales of the Nissan Leaf achieved the 300,000 unit milestone in January 2018.[163]

text: Electric bicycle[edit]

text:
The principal manufacturer of e-bikes globally is China, with 2009 seeing the manufacturer of 22.2 million units. In the world Geoby is the leading manufacturers of E-bikes. Pedego is the best selling in the U.S.
China accounts for nearly 92% of the market worldwide. In China the number of electric bicycles on the road was 120 million in 2010. Jiangsu Yadea, an electric bicycle producer of renown in China, leads the ranking of China National Light Industry Council (CNLIC) electric bicycle industry for three years. It retains capacity of nearly 6 million electric bicycles a year.

text: In 1997, Charger Electric Bicycle was the first U.S. company to come out with a pedelec.

text: Select historical production vehicles[edit]

text: Selected list of battery electric vehicles include (in chronological order):[164][165]

text:
Name

Production years

Number produced

Top Speed

Cost

Range

mpg USL/100 km(City)

mpg USL/100 km(Hwy)

Baker Electric[166]

1899–1915

?

14 mph 23 km/h

US$2300 or €1,700

80 km (50 miles)

Studebaker Electric[167]

1902–1912

?

?

?

?

Detroit Electric[168]

1907–1939

13,000[169]

20 mph 32 km/h

>US$3,000 or €2,250 depending on options

130 km (80 miles)

Henney Kilowatt[170]

1958–1960

<100

60 mph 97 km/h

?

?

Enfield 8000[39]

1966–1976

112

64 km/h (40 mph)

GB£2,000

40–90 km (25–56 miles)

Sebring-Vanguard Citicar

1974–1982

4,444including variants[171]

38 mph 61 km/h

?

Approximately65 km (40 miles)

Sinclair C5

1985

14,000

15 mph 24 km/h

£399

30 km (20 miles)

Škoda Favorit ELTRA 151L & 151 Pick-Up[172]

1992–1994

<1,100, perhaps 20 surviving

50 mph 80 km/h (limiter)

< US $20,000, without subsidy

80 km (50 miles)

General Motors EV1[173]

1996–2003

1,117

80 mph 129 km/h

~ US$40,000 or €30,000, without subsidies

255 km (160 miles)

Chevrolet S10 EV[174]

1997–1998

492

73 mph 118 km/h

~ US$40,000 or €30,000, without subsidies

145 km (90 miles)

Honda EV Plus[175]

1997–1999

~300

80+ mph 130+ km/h

US$455 or €340/month for 36-month lease; or $53,000 or €40,000 without subsidies

130–175 km (80–110 miles)

Toyota RAV4 EV[176]

1997–2002

1,249

78 mph 125 km/h

US$40,000 or €30,000 without subsidies

140 km (87 miles)

1251.88

1002.35

Ford Ranger EV[177]

1998–2002

1,500, perhaps 200 surviving

~ US$50,000 or €37,600; subsidized down to $20,000 or €15,000

120 km (74 miles)

TH!NK City

1999–2002

1,000+

56 mph 90 km/h

85 km (53 miles)

1061.59

832.83

REVAi[178]

2001–2012

4,000+[179]

45 mph 72 km/h £8,000[180], US$15,000 or €11,900

80 km (50 miles)

ZAP Xebra[181]

2006–2009

700+

40 mph 65 km/h, $100[182]

$10,000 or €7,500

40 km (25 miles)

Tesla Roadster[183][184][185]

2008–2012

2,500

130 mph 210 km/h [186]

US$109,000 or €99,000 base price [187]

355 km (220 miles)

less than 2 cents/mile off peak recharge

Modern series production electric cars

Mitsubishi i MiEV(Peugeot iOn/Citroën C-Zero)

2009–

~37,600as of  June 2016[update][188]

80 mph 130 km/h

US$29,125 base price[189]

160 km (100 miles) (Japanese cycle)100 km (62 miles) (EPA cycle)

Nissan Leaf

2010–

300,000 as of  January 2018[update][163]

175 km (109 miles) (New European Driving Cycle)

BYD e6

2010–

34,862in Chinaas of  December 2016[update][190][191]

Renault Kangoo Z.E.

2011–

25,205as of  December 2016[update][192]

Bolloré Bluecar

2011–

5,524 as of  July 2016[update](in France)[193]

Ford Focus EV

2012-

6764 as of Nov 2016[194]

US$39,995 base price (2012)
US$29,120 base price (2017) [195]

160 km (100 miles)[196]

118 MPGe / 1.99 l/100 km[196]

96 MPGe / 2.45 l/100 km[196]

Smart ED(2nd and 3rd gen)

2012–

~9,000as of  June 2014[update][197][198][199]

Tesla Model S[200]

2012–

158,159 as of  December 2016[update][124]

155 mph (250 km/h) for 90+kWh version [201]

US$69,900 base price with60 kW·h battery pack [202]

485 km (300 miles)

89 Combined2.64 Combined

Renault Zoe

2013–

61,205as of  December 2016[update][124]

Volkswagen e-Up!

2013–

9,157as of  October 2015[update][203][204][205]

BMW i3

2013–

~ 65,500 as of  December 2016[update][124]

130 to 160 km (80 to 100 miles)[206]

Kia Soul EV
2014–

150 km (93 miles)[207]

Volkswagen e-Golf
2014–
12,653 in Europe as of  October 2015[update][208][209] and 3,980 in the U.S.as of  November 2015[update].[210][211]

130 to 190 kilometres (81 to 118 mi)[212]

Mercedes-Benz B-Class Electric Drive
2014–

140 km (87 miles)[213]

Tesla Model X

2015–

25,524as of  December 2016[update][124]

237 to 289

BYD e5

2015–

17,065in Chinaas of  December 2016[update][191][214]

BYD Qin EV300

2016–

10,656in Chinaas of  December 2016[update][191]

Tesla Model 3[215]

2017–

1,550in USAas of  December 2017[update][216]

145 mph for LR version[217]

US$35,000 base price withStandard battery pack[218]

355 km (220 miles) with Standard version, 500 km (310 miles) with Long Range version

126 MPGe Combined

tag: table


document_title: Twenty-fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution

question_text: who decides if the president is incompetent to serve

text: Text[edit]

text: Section 1. In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.

text: Section 2. Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.

text: Section 3. Whenever the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President.

text: Section 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

text: Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.[3]

text: Background[edit]

text: Article II, Section 1, Clause 6 of the Constitution states:

text: In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the Same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.

text: That clause was unclear regarding Presidential succession and inability; it did not state who had the power to declare a President incapacitated.[1] Also, it did not provide a mechanism for filling a Vice Presidential vacancy before the next Presidential election. The vagueness of this clause caused difficulties many times before the Twenty-fifth Amendment's adoption:

text:
In 1841, President William Henry Harrison became the first U.S. President to die in office. Representative John Williams had previously suggested that the Vice President should become Acting President upon the death of the President.[4] John Tyler asserted that he had succeeded to the presidency, as opposed to only obtaining its powers and duties. He also declined to acknowledge documents referring to him as "Acting President". Although he felt his vice presidential oath negated the need for the presidential oath, Tyler was persuaded that being formally sworn-in would clear up any doubts about his right to the office. Having done so, he then moved into the White House and assumed full presidential powers. Tyler's claim was not formally challenged, and both houses of Congress adopted a resolution confirming that Tyler was the tenth President of the United States, without any qualifiers. The precedent of full succession was thus established.[5] This became known as the "Tyler Precedent".
There had been occasions when a President was incapacitated. For example, following Woodrow Wilson's stroke no one officially assumed the Presidential powers and duties, in part because the First Lady, Edith Wilson, together with the White House Physician, Cary T. Grayson, covered up President Wilson's condition.[1][6]
The office of Vice President had been vacant sixteen times due to the death or resignation of the Vice President or his succession to the presidency.[1] For example, there was no Vice President for nearly four years after the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. During the impeachment of Andrew Johnson there was no Vice President to succeed him. At that time, the Presidential Succession Act of 1792 provided that the President pro tempore of the Senate would succeed Johnson if he was removed from office.[7] Had the impeachment trial of Andrew Johnson resulted in Johnson being removed from office, Senator Benjamin Wade, then the President pro tempore of the Senate, would have become acting president pending a special presidential election.[8]

text: After having been temporarily incapacitated by several severe health problems, President Dwight D. Eisenhower attempted to clarify procedures through a signed agreement with Vice President Richard Nixon, drafted by Attorney General Herbert Brownell Jr.. However, this agreement did not have legal authority.[9] Eisenhower suffered a heart attack in September 1955 and intestinal problems requiring emergency surgery in July 1956. Each time until Eisenhower was able to resume his duties, Nixon presided over Cabinet meetings and, along with Eisenhower aides, kept the executive branch functioning and assured the public that the situation was under control. However, Nixon never made any effort to formally assume the status of Acting President or President.

text: All of these incidents made it evident that clearer guidelines were needed.[1] There were two proposals for providing those guidelines.

text: Keating–Kefauver proposal[edit]

text: In 1963, Senator Kenneth Keating of New York proposed a Constitutional amendment which would have enabled Congress to enact legislation providing for how to determine when a President is "unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office", rather than, as the Twenty-fifth Amendment does, having the Constitution so provide.[10] This proposal was based upon a recommendation of the American Bar Association in 1960.[11]

text: The text of the proposal read:[12]

text: In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the said office shall devolve on the Vice President. In case of the inability of the President to discharge the powers and duties of the said office, the said powers and duties shall devolve on the Vice President, until the inability be removed. The Congress may by law provide for the case of removal, death, resignation or inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what officer shall then be President, or, in case of inability, act as President, and such officer shall be or act as President accordingly, until a President shall be elected or, in case of inability, until the inability shall be earlier removed. The commencement and termination of any inability shall be determined by such method as Congress shall by law provide.

text: Senators raised concerns that the Congress could either abuse such authority[13] or neglect to enact any such legislation after the adoption of this proposal.[14] Tennessee Senator Estes Kefauver, the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Constitutional Amendments, a long-time advocate for addressing the disability question, spearheaded the effort until he died of a heart attack on August 10, 1963.[15][16] Senator Keating was defeated in the 1964 election, but Senator Roman Hruska of Nebraska took up Keating's cause as a new member of the Subcommittee on Constitutional Amendments.[9]

text: Kennedy assassination[edit]

text: The assassination of John F. Kennedy showed the need for a clear way for determining presidential disability in the context of the Cold War.[17] The new President, Lyndon B. Johnson, had once suffered a heart attack[18] and – with the office of Vice President to remain vacant until the next term began on January 20, 1965 – the next two people in the line of succession were the 71-year-old Speaker of the House John McCormack[17][19] and the 86-year-old Senate President pro tempore Carl Hayden.[17][19] Senator Birch Bayh succeeded Kefauver as Chairman of the Subcommittee on Constitutional Amendments and set about advocating for a detailed amendment dealing with presidential disability.[17]

text: Bayh–Celler proposal[edit]

text: On January 6, 1965, Senator Birch Bayh proposed S. J. Res. 1 in the Senate and Representative Emanuel Celler (Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee) proposed H. J. Res. 1 in the House of Representatives. Their proposal specified the process by which a President could be declared "unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office", thereby making the Vice President an Acting President, and how the President could regain the powers of his office. Also, their proposal provided a way to fill a vacancy in the office of Vice President before the next presidential election. This was as opposed to the Keating–Kefauver proposal, which neither provided for filling a vacancy in the office of Vice President prior to the next presidential election nor provided a process for determining presidential disability. In 1964, the American Bar Association endorsed the type of proposal which Bayh and Celler advocated.[20] On January 28, 1965, President Johnson endorsed S. J. Res. 1 in a statement to Congress.[9] Their proposal received bipartisan support.[21]

text: On February 19, the Senate passed the amendment, but the House passed a different version of the amendment on April 13. On April 22, it was returned to the Senate with revisions.[9] There were four areas of disagreement between the House and Senate versions:

text:
the Senate official who was to receive any written declaration under the amendment
the period of time during which the Vice President and Cabinet must decide whether they disagree with the President's declaration that he is fit to resume his duties
the time before Congress meets to resolve the issue between the President, Vice President, and the Cabinet
the time limit for Congress to reach a decision[9]

text: On July 6, after a conference committee ironed out differences between the versions,[22] the final version of the amendment was passed by both Houses of the Congress and presented to the states for ratification.[23]

text: Proposal and ratification[edit]

text: The Congress proposed the Twenty-fifth Amendment on July 6, 1965, and the amendment was ratified by the following states:[2]

text:
Nebraska (July 12, 1965)
Wisconsin (July 13, 1965)
Oklahoma (July 16, 1965)
Massachusetts (August 9, 1965)
Pennsylvania (August 18, 1965)
Kentucky (September 15, 1965)
Arizona (September 22, 1965)
Michigan (October 5, 1965)
Indiana (October 20, 1965)
California (October 21, 1965)
Arkansas (November 4, 1965)
New Jersey (November 29, 1965)
Delaware (December 7, 1965)
Utah (January 17, 1966)
West Virginia (January 20, 1966)
Maine (January 24, 1966)
Rhode Island (January 28, 1966)
Colorado (February 3, 1966)
New Mexico (February 3, 1966)
Kansas (February 8, 1966)
Vermont (February 10, 1966)
Alaska (February 18, 1966)
Idaho (March 2, 1966)
Hawaii (March 3, 1966)
Virginia (March 8, 1966)
Mississippi (March 10, 1966)
New York (March 14, 1966)
Maryland (March 23, 1966)
Missouri (March 30, 1966)
New Hampshire (June 13, 1966)
Louisiana (July 5, 1966)
Tennessee (January 12, 1967)
Wyoming (January 25, 1967)
Washington (January 26, 1967)
Iowa (January 26, 1967)
Oregon (February 2, 1967)
Minnesota (February 10, 1967)
Nevada (February 10, 1967)
Ratification was completed on February 10, 1967. The following states subsequently ratified the amendment:
Connecticut (February 14, 1967)
Montana (February 15, 1967)
South Dakota (March 6, 1967)
Ohio (March 7, 1967)
Alabama (March 14, 1967)
North Carolina (March 22, 1967)
Illinois (March 22, 1967)
Texas (April 25, 1967)
Florida (May 25, 1967)

tag: ol

text: The following states have not ratified the amendment:

text:
Georgia
North Dakota[24]
South Carolina

text: Six days after its submission, Nebraska and Wisconsin were the first states to ratify the amendment. On February 10, 1967, Minnesota and Nevada were the 37th and 38th states to ratify, respectively. On February 23, 1967, in a ceremony in the East Room of the White House, General Services Administrator Lawson Knott certified the amendment's adoption.

text: Effect[edit]

text: Section 1: Presidential succession[edit]

text: Section 1 codified the "Tyler Precedent" regarding when a President is removed from office, dies, or resigns. In any of these situations, the Vice President immediately becomes President.

text: Section 2: Vice Presidential vacancy[edit]

text: Prior to the Twenty-fifth Amendment's adoption, a Vice Presidential vacancy remained until the start of the next presidential term. The Vice Presidency has been vacant several times due to death, resignation, or succession to the Presidency. Often these vacancies lasted for several years.

text: Under Section 2, whenever there is a vacancy in the office of Vice President, the President nominates a successor who becomes Vice President if confirmed by a majority vote of both Houses of the Congress.

text: Section 3: Presidential declaration[edit]

text: Section 3 provides that when the President transmits a written declaration to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, stating that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of the Presidency, and until the President sends another written declaration to the aforementioned officers declaring himself able to resume discharging those powers and duties, the Vice President discharges those powers and duties as Acting President.

text: Section 4: Vice Presidential–Cabinet declaration[edit]

text: Section 4 is the only part of the amendment that has never been invoked.[25] It allows the Vice President, together with a "majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide", to declare the President "unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office" by submitting a written declaration to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. As with Section 3, the Vice President would become Acting President.

text: Section 4 is meant to be invoked should the President's incapacitation prevent him from discharging his duties, but he is unable or unwilling to provide the written declaration called for by Section 3. The President may resume exercising the Presidential duties by sending a written declaration to the President pro tempore and the Speaker of the House.

text: Should the Vice President and a majority of the Cabinet believe the President is still "unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office", they may within four days of the President's declaration submit another declaration that the President is incapacitated. If not already in session, the Congress must then assemble within 48 hours. The Congress has 21 days to decide the issue. If within the 21 days two-thirds of each house of Congress vote that the President is incapacitated, the Vice President would "continue" to be Acting President. Should the Congress resolve the issue in favor of the President, or make no decision within the 21 days allotted, then the President would "resume" discharging the powers and duties of his office. The use of the words "continue" and "resume" imply that the Vice President remains Acting President while Congress deliberates.

text: However, the President may again submit a written declaration of recovery to the President pro tempore and the Speaker of the House. That declaration could be responded to by the Vice President and a majority of the Cabinet in the same way as stated earlier. The specified 21-day Congressional procedure would start again.

text: Proposed replacing of Cabinet[edit]

text: On April 14, 2017, Representative Earl Blumenauer introduced the Oversight Commission on Presidential Capacity Act.[26] This bill would replace the Cabinet as the body that, together with the Vice President, determines whether Section 4 should be invoked. Under the bill, an eleven-member commission would conduct an examination of the President when directed to do so by a concurrent resolution of the Congress.[27]

text: According to Blumenauer:

text: It is hard to imagine a better group to work with the vice president to examine whether the president is able to discharge the duties of the office. When there are questions about the president’s ability to fulfill his or her constitutional responsibilities, it is in the country’s best interest to have a mechanism in place that works effectively.[27]

text: Invocations[edit]

text: The Twenty-fifth Amendment has been invoked six times since its ratification. The first three times were applications of Sections 1 and 2 in the context of scandals surrounding the Nixon Administration. The latter three were applications of Section 3 regarding Presidents undergoing a medical procedure requiring general anesthesia.

text: Succession to presidency[edit]

text: President Richard Nixon resigned on August 9, 1974, resulting in Vice President Gerald Ford succeeding to the office of President.[28] Gerald Ford is the only person ever to be Vice President, and later President, without being elected to either office.[29]

text: Filling vice presidential vacancies[edit]

text: 1973: Appointment of Gerald Ford as Vice President[edit]

text: On October 12, 1973, following Vice President Spiro Agnew's resignation two days earlier, President Richard Nixon nominated Representative Gerald Ford of Michigan to succeed Agnew as Vice President.

text: The United States Senate voted 92–3 to confirm Ford on November 27 and, on December 6, the House of Representatives did the same by a vote of 387–35. Ford was sworn in later that day before a joint session of the United States Congress.[30]

text: 1974: Appointment of Nelson Rockefeller as Vice President[edit]

text: When Gerald Ford became President, the office of Vice President became vacant. On August 20, 1974, after considering Melvin Laird and George H. W. Bush, President Ford nominated former New York Governor Nelson Rockefeller to be the new vice president.

text: On December 10, 1974, Rockefeller was confirmed 90–7 by the Senate. On December 19, 1974, Rockefeller was confirmed 287–128 by the House and sworn into office later that day in the Senate chamber.[30]

text: Acting Presidents[edit]

text: 1985: George H.W. Bush[edit]

text: On July 12, 1985, President Ronald Reagan underwent a colonoscopy, during which a villous adenoma (a pre-cancerous lesion) was discovered. When told by his physician (Dr. Edward Cattau) that he could undergo surgery immediately or in two to three weeks, Reagan elected to have it removed immediately.[31]

text: That afternoon, Reagan consulted with White House counsel Fred Fielding by telephone, debating whether to invoke the amendment and, if so, whether such a transfer would set an undesirable precedent. Fielding and White House Chief of Staff Donald Regan recommended that Reagan transfer power and two letters doing so were drafted: the first letter specifically invoked Section 3 of the Twenty-fifth Amendment; the second only mentioned that Reagan was mindful of this provision. At 10:32 a.m. on July 13, Reagan signed the second letter and ordered its delivery to the appropriate officers as required under the amendment.[32] Vice President George H. W. Bush was Acting President from 11:28 a.m. until 7:22 p.m., when Reagan transmitted a second letter to resume the powers and duties of the office.

text: Books such as The President Has Been Shot: Confusion, Disability and the 25th Amendment, by Herbert Abrams, and Reagan's autobiography, An American Life, argue President Reagan's intent to transfer power to Vice President Bush was clear. Fielding himself adds:

text: I personally know he did intend to invoke the amendment, and he conveyed that to all of his staff and it was conveyed to the VP as well as the President of the Senate. He was also very firm in his wish not to create a precedent binding his successor.

text: 2002: Dick Cheney[edit]

text: On June 29, 2002, President George W. Bush underwent a colonoscopy and chose to invoke Section 3 of the amendment, temporarily transferring his powers to Vice President Dick Cheney. The medical procedure began at 7:09 a.m. EDT and ended at 7:29 a.m. EDT. Bush woke up twenty minutes later, but did not resume his presidential powers and duties until 9:24 a.m. EDT after the president's physician, Richard Tubb, conducted an overall examination. Tubb said he recommended the additional time to make sure the sedative had no aftereffects. Unlike Reagan's 1985 letter, Bush's 2002 letter specifically cited Section 3 as the authority for the transfer of power.[32]

text: 2007: Dick Cheney[edit]

text: On July 21, 2007, President Bush again invoked Section 3 in response to having to undergo a colonoscopy, temporarily transferring his powers to Vice President Cheney. President Bush invoked Section 3 at 7:16 a.m. EDT. He reclaimed his powers at 9:21 a.m. EDT. As happened in 2002, Bush specifically cited Section 3 when he transferred the Presidential powers to the Vice President and when he reclaimed those powers.[32]

text: Considered Section 4 invocations[edit]

text: There have been two instances in which invoking Section 4 of the Twenty-fifth Amendment was considered. Both involved the 40th President of the United States, Ronald Reagan.

text: 1981: Reagan assassination attempt[edit]

text: Following the attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan on March 30, 1981, Vice President George H. W. Bush did not assume the presidential powers and duties as Acting President. Reagan was unable to invoke Section 3, because he was in surgery. Bush did not invoke Section 4, because he was on a plane returning from Texas. Reagan was out of surgery by the time Bush arrived in Washington.[33] In 1995, Birch Bayh, the primary sponsor of the amendment in the Senate, wrote that Section 4 should have been invoked.[34]

text: 1987: Reagan's alleged incapacity[edit]

text: Upon becoming the White House Chief of Staff in 1987, Howard Baker was advised by his predecessor's staff to be prepared for a possible invocation of the Twenty-fifth Amendment[35] due to Reagan's perceived laziness and ineptitude.[36][37]

text: According to the PBS program American Experience,

text: What Baker's transition team was told by Donald Regan's staff that weekend shocked them. Reagan was "inattentive, inept", and "lazy", and Baker should be prepared to invoke the 25th Amendment to relieve him of his duties.

text: Reagan biographer Edmund Morris stated in an interview aired on the program,

text: The incoming Baker people all decided to have a meeting with him on Monday, their first official meeting with the President, and to cluster around the table in the Cabinet room and watch him very, very closely to see how he behaved, to see if he was indeed losing his mental grip.

text: Morris went on to explain,

text: Reagan who was, of course, completely unaware that they were launching a death watch on him, came in stimulated by the press of all these new people and performed splendidly. At the end of the meeting, they figuratively threw up their hands realizing he was in perfect command of himself.[36][37]


document_title: List of U.S. states by date of admission to the Union

question_text: what is the 20th state of the united states

text: List of U.S. states[edit]

text:
State
Date
(admitted or ratified)
Formed from

1
 Delaware
000000001787-12-07-0000December 7, 1787[8]
(ratified)
Colony of Delaware[b]

2
 Pennsylvania
000000001787-12-12-0000December 12, 1787[10]
(ratified)
Proprietary Province of Pennsylvania

3
 New Jersey
000000001787-12-18-0000December 18, 1787[11]
(ratified)
Crown Colony of New Jersey

4
 Georgia
000000001788-01-02-0000January 2, 1788[8]
(ratified)
Crown Colony of Georgia

5
 Connecticut
000000001788-01-09-0000January 9, 1788[12]
(ratified)
Crown Colony of Connecticut

6
 Massachusetts
000000001788-02-06-0000February 6, 1788[8]
(ratified)
Crown Colony of Massachusetts Bay

7
 Maryland
000000001788-04-28-0000April 28, 1788[8]
(ratified)
Proprietary Province of Maryland

8
 South Carolina
000000001788-05-23-0000May 23, 1788[8]
(ratified)
Crown Colony of South Carolina

9
 New Hampshire
000000001788-06-21-0000June 21, 1788[8]
(ratified)
Crown Colony of New Hampshire

10
 Virginia
000000001788-06-25-0000June 25, 1788[8]
(ratified)
Crown Colony and Dominion of Virginia

11
 New York
000000001788-07-26-0000July 26, 1788[13]
(ratified)
Crown Colony of New York

12
 North Carolina
000000001789-11-21-0000November 21, 1789[14]
(ratified)
Crown Colony of North Carolina

13
 Rhode Island
000000001790-05-29-0000May 29, 1790[8]
(ratified)
Crown Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations

14
 Vermont
000000001791-03-04-0000March 4, 1791[15]
(admitted)
Vermont !Vermont Republic[c]

15
 Kentucky
000000001792-06-01-0000June 1, 1792[16]
(admitted)
Virginia (District of Kentucky: Fayette, Jefferson, and Lincoln counties[d])

16
 Tennessee
000000001796-06-01-0000June 1, 1796[18]
(admitted)
Southwest Territory

17
 Ohio
000000001803-03-01-0000March 1, 1803[19][e]
(admitted)
Northwest Territory (part)

18
 Louisiana
000000001812-04-30-0000April 30, 1812[21]
(admitted)
Orleans !Territory of Orleans

19
 Indiana
000000001816-12-11-0000December 11, 1816
(admitted)
Indiana Territory

20
 Mississippi
000000001817-12-10-0000December 10, 1817[22]
(admitted)
Mississippi Territory

21
 Illinois
000000001818-12-03-0000December 3, 1818[23]
(admitted)
Illinois Territory (part)

22
 Alabama
000000001819-12-14-0000December 14, 1819[24]
(admitted)
Alabama Territory

23
 Maine
000000001820-03-15-0000March 15, 1820[25]
(admitted)
Massachusetts (District of Maine[f])

24
 Missouri
000000001821-08-10-0000August 10, 1821[26]
(admitted)
Missouri Territory (part)

25
 Arkansas
000000001836-06-15-0000June 15, 1836[27]
(admitted)
Arkansas Territory

26
 Michigan
000000001837-01-26-0000January 26, 1837[28]
(admitted)
Michigan Territory

27
 Florida
000000001845-03-03-0000March 3, 1845
(admitted)
Florida Territory

28
 Texas
000000001845-12-29-0000December 29, 1845
(admitted)
Texas !Republic of Texas

29
 Iowa
000000001846-12-28-0000December 28, 1846
(admitted)
Iowa Territory (part)

30
 Wisconsin
000000001848-05-29-0000May 29, 1848[29]
(admitted)
Wisconsin Territory (part)

31
 California
000000001850-09-09-0000September 9, 1850[30]
(admitted)
Unorganized !unorganized territory (part)

32
 Minnesota
000000001858-05-11-0000May 11, 1858[31]
(admitted)
Minnesota Territory (part)

33
 Oregon
000000001859-02-14-0000February 14, 1859
(admitted)
Oregon Territory (part)

34
 Kansas
000000001861-01-29-0000January 29, 1861[32]
(admitted)
Kansas Territory (part)

35
 West Virginia
000000001863-06-20-0000June 20, 1863[33]
(admitted)
Virginia (Trans-Allegheny region counties[g])

36
 Nevada
000000001864-10-31-0000October 31, 1864
(admitted)
Nevada Territory

37
 Nebraska
000000001867-03-01-0000March 1, 1867
(admitted)
Nebraska Territory

38
 Colorado
000000001876-08-01-0000August 1, 1876[36]
(admitted)
Colorado Territory

39[h]
  North Dakota
000000001889-11-02-0000November 2, 1889[38][i]
(admitted)
Dakota Territory (part)

40
 South Dakota
000000001889-11-02-0000November 2, 1889[38][i]
(admitted)
Dakota Territory (part)

41
 Montana
000000001889-11-08-0000November 8, 1889[39]
(admitted)
Montana Territory

42
 Washington
000000001889-11-11-0000November 11, 1889[40]
(admitted)
Washington Territory

43
 Idaho
000000001890-07-03-0000July 3, 1890
(admitted)
Idaho Territory

44
 Wyoming
000000001890-07-10-0000July 10, 1890
(admitted)
Wyoming Territory

45
 Utah
000000001896-01-04-0000January 4, 1896[41]
(admitted)
Utah Territory

46
 Oklahoma
000000001907-11-16-0000November 16, 1907[42]
(admitted)
Oklahoma Territory and Indian Territory

47
 New Mexico
000000001912-01-06-0000January 6, 1912
(admitted)
New Mexico Territory

48
 Arizona
000000001912-02-14-0000February 14, 1912
(admitted)
Arizona Territory

49
 Alaska
000000001959-01-03-0000January 3, 1959
(admitted)
Alaska !Territory of Alaska

50
 Hawaii
000000001959-08-21-0000August 21, 1959
(admitted)
Hawaii !Territory of Hawaii

text: Articles of Confederation ratification dates[edit]

text: The Second Continental Congress approved the Articles of Confederation for ratification by the individual states on November 15, 1777. The Articles of Confederation came into force on March 1, 1781, after being ratified by all 13 states. On March 4, 1789, the general government under the Articles was replaced with the federal government under the present Constitution.[43]

text:
State
Date

13 !1
 Virginia
000000001777-12-16-0000December 16, 1777

12 !2
 South Carolina
000000001778-02-05-0000February 5, 1778

08 !3
 New York
000000001778-02-06-0000February 6, 1778

11 !4
 Rhode Island
000000001778-02-09-0000February 9, 1778

01 !5
 Connecticut
000000001778-02-12-0000February 12, 1778

03 !6
 Georgia
000000001778-02-26-0000February 26, 1778

06 !7
 New Hampshire
000000001778-03-04-0000March 4, 1778

10 !8
 Pennsylvania
000000001778-03-05-0000March 5, 1778

05 !9
 Massachusetts
000000001778-03-10-0000March 10, 1778

09 !10
 North Carolina
000000001778-04-05-0000April 5, 1778

07 !11
 New Jersey
000000001778-11-19-0000November 19, 1778

02 !12
 Delaware
000000001779-02-01-0000February 1, 1779

04 !13
 Maryland
000000001781-02-02-0000February 2, 1781