The heart of the matter is that the battery-electric Kia Soul is better for the environment. And not just because it doesn't create any emissions while on the road. From beginning to end, the Soul EV has a far lower environmental impact than its more conventional counterparts.

TUV Nord, the German technical inspection group, says the Soul EV has a carbon footprint that is 40-percent smaller than the one from the diesel-powered Soul sold in Europe. That's factoring in everything from the materials that go into building the car to the recyclability once it's defunct to, of course, tailpipe emissions. Or lack thereof.

Kia plans to start sales of the Soul EV in its native South Korea sometime this year and is keeping global sales expectations modest, saying it plans to make about 5,000 Soul EVs annually. The car will be priced at the equivalent of about $39,000 US in South Korea, though government subsidies will cut that down a bit. Kia hasn't set an official launch date for the car in the US, but expects for the Soul EV to be available to Americans by the end of the year, Kia US spokesman James Hope told AutoblogGreen. Check out the press release about the Kia Soul EV's TUV Nord score below and read our First Drive impressions of the model here.
Show full PR text
Kia Soul EV earns whole-life environmental certificate

- Soul EV achieves major TÜV Nord Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) certificate
- ISO 14040 certification considers whole-life environmental impact of Soul EV

(SEOUL) June 18, 2014 – The Kia Soul EV has become the latest model from the Korean brand to earn important certification for its outstanding whole-life environmental credentials.

TÜV Nord, an independent technical inspection organisation, has certified the new Kia Soul EV according to the ISO 14040 Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) standard. LCA examines the environmental impact of both the car and the overall manufacturing process throughout its whole life, taking into account factors such as choice of materials, tailpipe emissions and recycling.

Comparing the Soul EV to its diesel counterpart currently on sale in Europe, the zero-emissions electric vehicle scored particularly strongly for 'Global Warming Potential', emitting 39.7% fewer greenhouse gases over the whole life of the vehicle, such as carbon dioxide and methane. The Soul EV also scored an improvement in 'Photochemical Oxidant Creation Potential', limiting the amount of smog created by the vehicle's manufacturing process and by the vehicle itself throughout its life.

Kia's first TÜV Nord certification was earned in 2008 with the first-generation cee'd, and this year's certifications bring the total number of Kia models with ISO 14040 Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) certification to 11.

The product development process employed by Kia is aimed at minimising the environmental footprint of Kia's manufacturing operations, and all cars developed by the brand since 2006 have been built with the LCA in mind.

This more environmentally-friendly development process covers five major steps:

- Application of a check-sheet to evaluate the vehicle's environmental credentials throughout its lifecycle
- Utilisation of 3D drawings at the design stage to verify recyclability
- Detailed physical analysis of the product during the development process to verify recyclability
- Use of eco-friendly materials
- Streamlining of the manufacturing process through improvements in use of materials and simplification of parts design

The Soul EV produced for both Korean and European markets has been ISO 14040-certified, with models for the North American market due to follow in August.

Earlier this year, Kia announced its intention to achieve ISO 50001 certification across all its global production facilities which will result in tighter management of energy consumption. ISO 50001 is an international standard on corporate energy conservation planning and implementation. Kia's Gwangju plant has been ISO 50001-certified since 2012, with other facilities due to follow.

Kia Motors Corporation (www.kia.com) – a maker of quality vehicles for the young-at-heart – was founded in 1944 and is Korea's oldest manufacturer of motor vehicles. Over 2.7 million Kia vehicles a year are produced in 10 manufacturing and assembly operations in five countries which are then sold and serviced through a network of distributors and dealers covering around 150 countries. Kia today has around 48,000 employees worldwide and annual revenues of over US$43 billion. It is the major sponsor of the Australian Open and an official automotive partner of FIFA – the governing body of the FIFA World Cup™. Kia Motors Corporation's brand slogan – "The Power to Surprise" – represents the company's global commitment to surprise the world by providing exciting and inspiring experiences that go beyond expectations.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 67 Comments
      A Middle American
      • 1 Day Ago
      The TUV Nord analysis that is referenced in the article and the press release is flawed in terms of being an objective analysis of the actual greenhouse gas effect of two vehicles. It is flawed for the simple reason that is accounts for tailpipe emissions and thermal efficiency of the vehicles, but it does not account for the emissions and energy losses in the production of the fuels. There is much more emissions and energy lost in the production of electricity than there is in the production and distribution of gasoline or diesel fuel. There is very little difference in the total greenhouse gas effect of a electric vehicle using electricity produced with a fossil fuel and a conventional vehicle running on fossil fuel. Electric vehicles can be cleaner if using electricity produced with a cleaner fossil fuel produced in a more efficient power plant (example: combined cycle natural gas) or when running on electricity from renewable sources. However, the natural gas electric vehicle isn't really cleaner if compared to a conventional natural gas vehicle. The upshot: The CO2 and pollutant emissions are there either way, it's just where they are generated that changes.
      Scott Satellite
      • 1 Day Ago
      What about THE OTHER factory that makes the batteries? That seems to be glossed over, as usual.
        purrpullberra
        • 1 Day Ago
        @Scott Satellite
        You fail reading comprehension. That IS taken into account. But the energy required to explore for oil isn't. The cost of military intervention in the middle east to keep prices from spiking isn't taken into account. The environmental costs of oil spills aren't taken into account. The dollar costs of oil spills aren't taken into account. Not to mention that once you burn oil you can never get it back. We have no right to use up all the oil on the planet, that took billions of years to form, in less then 130 years. You are a clod to think your comment has any truth behind it.
      2 wheeled menace
      • 1 Day Ago
      Oh really? an zero emissions electric car is cleaner than a diesel engine car... i would have never thought... ;)
      FuelToTheFire
      • 1 Day Ago
      Gasoline will ALWAYS be the least environmentally harmful energy source for cars. Hybrid: The lithium ion batteries are MUCH more damaging than the internal combustion engine in the Hummer. The batteries inside hybrid cars depend on materials like lithium and cobalt. Mining for those minerals is an extremely destructive process, and one that has left entire mountains leveled in their wake. Local residents benefit little from these endeavors. Furthermore, the countries with the most lucrative mines tend to also be some of the most unstable, including Bolivia and the Democratic Republic of Congo. So increasing our dependence on electric and hybrid cars may mean trading the conflicts in the Middle East for another set of problem Additionally, these cars required MUCH more energy to produce than regular cars. Electric: Take the Tesla Model S which you guys are so fervently lapping up. It is one of the MOST environmentally harmful cars on the road because, well, electricity doesn't come from burning pixie dust and unicorn hair. And don't bring up other energy sources as a counterargument.Wind farms are far less efficient than non renewable than non renewable sources due to the capacity factor. Solar energy is not green either. The energy cost to make solar panels (it's energy parity) is about 15 years IF they are operated at maximum capacity. What this means is that the power used to mine for the minerals plus the trasportation costs plus the manufacturing costs will take the solar panel 15 years to generate when operating at full capacity.Now, a solar panel is meant to last 20 years.At best (given that panels never work at full capacity), the power that solar panels generate will only break even with the power cost that it takes to make them Diesel: requires more energy to produce and have much more emissions. They emit cancer causing particles. Seeing as the cancer rate in Europe is much more and they use mostly diesel cars, you can see why this is. My 2008 Hummer H2 may not seem environmentally friendly, but in reality, it is MUCH less environmentally damaging than the typical EV. And I have to give up NOTHING in return. It's a much more manly car and it enhances my inner masculinity in the same way that hunting on lifting weights would. On the other hand, the drivers of hybrids all seem to be metrosexuals and girly boys. You can tell that they accept the fact that they have a tiny pecker by choosing their car.
        Henry Floyd
        • 1 Day Ago
        @FuelToTheFire
        At first I thought you were just an idiot who didn't read the article and blindly rejected the facts and numbers listed, choosing to replace them with your own assumptions about energy cleanliness. But then I read your hilarious last paragraph and realized you were actually a pretty great troll. You had me right up until "enhances my inner masculinity" and then suddenly it all fell into place. 9/10 Commendable Troll, would read again
        davebo357
        • 1 Day Ago
        @FuelToTheFire
        That's the longest, least convincing troll post you've done yet.
        purrpullberra
        • 1 Day Ago
        @FuelToTheFire
        You fling pure bullsh1+ around like a demented monkey. Such a failure as you is a scary and sad thing to see. Go away.
        EVSUPERHERO
        • 1 Day Ago
        @FuelToTheFire
        FTTF, take everything you said and do/think/imagine the opposite and you will be closer to the truth. I accidentally gave you a thumbs up taking you from -6 to -3, sorry about that.
      mary.keana
      • 1 Day Ago
      and CNW Marketing Research says a Hummer H2 is better for the environment than a Prius.
        DMac
        • 1 Day Ago
        @mary.keana
        LOL, is Limbaugh still regurgitating that BS report! Amazing how just a year later in 2008 the new "analysis" stated that lifetime mile cost for the Prius fell 23.5% to $2.191 and the H3 rose 12.5% to $2.327 per lifetime mile. Next time you see a Hummer idling at a stop light next to a Prius pick a tailpipe to suck on and come back and tell us if you agree that the Hummer is better for the environment!!!
          FuelToTheFire
          • 1 Day Ago
          @DMac
          Good God, why are people so ******* STUPID? The lithium ion batteries are MUCH more damaging than the internal combustion engine in the Hummer. The batteries inside hybrid cars depend on materials like lithium and cobalt. Mining for those minerals is an extremely destructive process, and one that has left entire mountains leveled in their wake. Local residents benefit little from these endeavors. Furthermore, the countries with the most lucrative mines tend to also be some of the most unstable, including Bolivia and the Democratic Republic of Congo. So increasing our dependence on electric and hybrid cars may mean trading the conflicts in the Middle East for another set of problems Keep sapping up whatever the liberal media is feeding you, like a good sheepie. You people are extremely myopic and cannot see beyond what is presented by the socialist media. Just because the Prius looks like a Barbie car unfit for those with a Y chromosome doesn't mean that they have any less of an environmental impact. The Prius uses 50 % more energy to produce than a Hummer. A well maintained Hummer will be on the road far longer than a Prius will. If the EPA red tape would just come off and the oil companies were allowed to drill, drill, drill wherever the hell they wanted to, then we wouldn;t have any problem with oil supply. Yet another problem that big government liberals created. You liberals are super gullible. Take the Tesla Model S which you guys are so fervently lapping up. It is one of the MOST environmentally harmful cars on the road because, well, electricity doesn't come from burning pixie dust and unicorn hair. It uses COAL, a much more environmentally damaging resource than gasoline. In fact, if your lights, heater, appliances, and so on were hypothetically powered by gasoline, the environmental impact would be cut in half.
          mary.keana
          • 1 Day Ago
          @DMac
          missed my sarcasm eh
        FuelToTheFire
        • 1 Day Ago
        @mary.keana
        You are ******* stupid for trying to be sarcastic when what you are saying is actually true. It's feeble minded peasants like you who are running our country down a drain. With your near zero reasoning ability and **** for brains, I can tell that you were educated in a public school, just like all other ignorant peasant commoners.
          DMac
          • 1 Day Ago
          @FuelToTheFire
          FTTF, it's time to take your Lithium pill again!!!
        Andy
        • 1 Day Ago
        @mary.keana
        That was a cost to drive impact assessment and not an environmental impact assessment. It was also for the year 2005 when Prius tech was new and expensive. As noted by CNW in a later statement the cost of the technology has fallen greatly since then.
          FuelToTheFire
          • 1 Day Ago
          @Andy
          Hey, MORON, the Hummer doesn't have the lithium ion batteries which the Prius has. The batteries are a LOT more damaging than the fuel consumption ever will be.
          mary.keana
          • 1 Day Ago
          @Andy
          missed my sarcasm eh.
          Aaron
          • 1 Day Ago
          @Andy
          @FuelToTheFire: The Prius has NiMh batteries which are easily recycled. LiOn batteries are also recyclable.
        DMac
        • 1 Day Ago
        @mary.keana
        Sorry MK, I missed the [sarcasm] font, no worries!
      Zeta
      • 1 Day Ago
      I'm sure it's clean but at that price?
        bakedpatato
        • 1 Day Ago
        @Zeta
        I've seen a brochure from Kia Norway showing the base model starting at around $32k USD which is slightly cheaper than the Leaf is there. Some Canadians that drove the car recently have said the PR guys told them that the car is going to be price competitive with the Leaf in the Great White North as well. I suspect that the price is that high in SK due to the subsidies .
      purrpullberra
      • 1 Day Ago
      Don't forget that the electric grid is getting greener by the day and a diesel engine will never be cleaner than it starts. I'm tired of the idiots and tools who have no clue how dirty or clean the electricity is compared to everything that goes into making gasoline. Gasoline is NEVER cleaner. There are too many spills and too much loss in every level of refining or transport. It makes electrical losses pale in comparison. And if you consider that a lot of people who buy electric cars also buy solar installations for their homes and therefore are emissions-free. I bet the Kia Soul EV would sell like crazy if it were sold in large numbers. But it will cost too much because they didn't go all-in and get costs down and benefit from larger-scale production. Especially if they stopped work on the stupid wasteful hydrogen concepts, they could afford to sell the Soul EV for less than the BMW i3.
      • 1 Day Ago
      I think this would be the car that I'm waiting for because I'm looking to buy a new car that is more evvironment friendly. It's time to make a clean environment to breath a cleaner air! www.sourcetecindustries.com
      NightFlight
      • 1 Day Ago
      Can AutoBlog PLEASE BAN FuelToTheFire??? Insulting troll needs to go away...
        Ele Truk
        • 1 Day Ago
        @NightFlight
        Actually, no it's not a good idea. FTTF spouts common misconceptions regurgitated from right wing radio commentators (Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck ,et al) who make claims with absolutely no data or facts to back up their nonsense. This forum gives commenters a chance to rebut their claims (hopefully with links).
      raughle1
      • 1 Day Ago
      This article might as well read "trolls post here."
      imtoomuch1
      • 1 Day Ago
      If you want electric vehicles, please allow them to build a coal or nuclear power plant in your backyard. Zero emission vehicles are a myth.
        Ryan
        • 1 Day Ago
        @imtoomuch1
        The solar panels on my roof that power my EV aren't a fantasy. But you are living in a delusional troll world.
          FuelToTheFire
          • 1 Day Ago
          @Ryan
          Solar energy is not green either. The energy cost to make solar panels (it's energy parity) is about 15 years IF they are operated at maximum capacity. What this means is that the power used to mine for the minerals plus the trasportation costs plus the manufacturing costs will take the solar panel 15 years to generate when operating at full capacity.Now, a solar panel is meant to last 20 years.At best (given that panels never work at full capacity), the power that solar panels generate will only break even with the power cost that it takes to make them. Typical ignorant peasant commoner using only the facts the socialist media has presented to him, without using any facts or judgement of his own. With your near-zero mental capacity, I can tell you were educated in a public school, like all ignorant peasant commoners.
          Ele Truk
          • 1 Day Ago
          @Ryan
          @FuelToTheFire, yes of course silicon for solar panels is so rare they have removed all the sand from the beaches. Your data about energy cost of solar panels is about 60 years out of date. In 1977, the payback was 6.7 years, for 12.5% efficient cells. http://www.csudh.edu/oliver/smt310-handouts/solarpan/pvpayback.htm So, these days with 20% efficient cells, it's down to about 1.5 years (average US).
        thecommentator2013
        • 1 Day Ago
        @imtoomuch1
        @imtoo... While I am a strong advocate for EVs, you're right: There is no zero emission vehicle. Then again, life is not zero emission either. Therefore, emitting emissions cannot be harmful. Wether from an EV nore from a petrol engine.
          Greg
          • 1 Day Ago
          @thecommentator2013
          Even bicycles have emissions (from fabrication to your breath 'exhaust'). I'm ok with that.
        m_2012
        • 1 Day Ago
        @imtoomuch1
        How about solar, wind, and hydro power? Many cars are charged at night, when the electric companies would otherwise burn the electricity off as heat - so the EV cars are actually helping balance the grid. You should read up on it. Coal is so yesterday and STILL cleaner than gasoline or diesel in EV's. Drilling, shipping, storing, refining, and shipping again a dirty, hazardous fuel will be just a faint memory before long.
      Bernard
      • 1 Day Ago
      Hopefully the next version of this uses some of those Tesla patents.
    • Load More Comments