More on the Chevy Volt
By Beth Lowery
GM Vice President, Environment and Energy
Wow — what a great response!
I’ve been really happy to see all the comments generated by my recent post about the new Chevy Volt. What makes it even better for me is that the conversation across the blogosphere has been overall pretty positive, even among groups that have typically been very critical of GM.
In addition to the great blog discussions, I was thrilled to see that traditional media really ran with the Volt’s story, too. In fact, among traditional media, the Volt generated more than twice as many stories as the wildly popular Camaro concept did when we revealed it a few years ago.
As you might guess, some people are still skeptical of General Motors and some people are really positive about this exciting new vehicle. Some of you are even as excited about it as I am!
I can’t address each comment individually, but I would like to talk about what I’ve been seeing on FastLane from both fans and critics.
The fans have provided lots of interesting suggestions, including having “a really impressive high performance version of it too” or “Get it into production within two years with keeping the price under 30K and this car will certainly be a top seller” or “Build 4 to 5 vehicles off this platform . . . a midsizer, a high roof car looking crossover, a 2-door and an SUV-looking crossover and you will not be able to make enough of them, guaranteed.”
A number of fans said things like, “I have never owned a GM vehicle, but if you produce this car that could very well change.” And others asked us to get this vehicle onto the market as soon as possible, the better to quickly and dramatically reduce our dependence on oil.
We appreciate all the great comments, and we’re excited about the Volt’s prospects too. It’s a little early to talk in detail about the specific applications beyond the Volt or about a specific timeframe for its release, but we believe E-Flex is a very versatile technology that could be right for general applications.
Skeptics of the Volt have been asking questions like “Is GM making this car to get into the good graces of the ‘environmental’ public?” and making statements like “No use getting excited about something just presented at an auto show just to try and boost GM’s popularity.”
I can understand why people are skeptical. Several of you referred to the circumstances surrounding the end of the EV1 program. All I can tell you is that we recognize the role that electricity will play in future cars –that’s why we’ve worked so hard to bring you the Volt. But we do not believe that electric cars are the only answer. We believe there are a number of solutions to ending our dependence on oil, and we are working on many of them simultaneously, including hydrogen fuel cells, clean diesel, FlexFuel and hybrids.
And we have designed the E-Flex system for the Volt so it can be coupled with motors using any of these fuel sources.
One of the most common comments has been along the lines of “I’d love to buy one,” “I’d put down a deposit on one today,” “Please build this car,” and “When can I get one of these?” Your enthusiasm will drive us even harder to try to make the Volt everything you want it to be by the time it hits showroom floors. I don’t know exactly when that will be, but I will do my best to keep everyone updated on our progress.
Thanks again for your comments.
68 Comments
Leave a Reply
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)
Beth,
The production capacity and demand for lithium are now nearly in balance, with most lithium coming from South America.
If GM and other major auto makers have plans to put hundreds of thousands (or even millions) of vehicles on the road carrying lithium-ion or nanoscale lithium-ion batteries, what will happen to the price of lithium as demand dramatically increases, and how will that affect the final price of the Volt?
There are now only a handful of autos on the road using lithium-ion batteries. If in the next three-five years you and others attempt to put huge numbers of electric autos on the road, won’t that put a great deal of stress on the lithium extraction industry and your battery suppliers?
Should we be buying stock in lithium suppliers?
Regards,
Gary Dikkers
I’m curious about how you’re planning to work around a number of problems that I see with this design:
1. You can’t allow gasoline to sit in the tank for months because it gets stale. You can’t realistically expect owners to remember to put gasoline stabilizer in every tank. You also don’t want to burn summer gasoline in the winter and vice versa.
2. If the engine is not run for a long period of time, the piston rings will rust to the cylinder walls. And the metal parts of the engine will be completely dry and without oil the next time the engine is started, which will cause premature wear on the engine. There will also be confusion with how often the oil in the engine should be changed.
3. Where will the power steering, power brakes, heat and air conditioning come from? Every accessory in the car will draw power from the batteries, which will shorten the range when running only on the batteries. Turning on the headlights, wipers, cranking the stereo and so on will draw power from the same batteries powering the car.
4. Batteries have the drawback of being heavy. The more batteries you add to increase range or performance, the more weight you add, which offsets some of the gain by making the motors work harder to push the added vehicle weight. Two steps forward, one step back, you could say.
5. What happens if you run out of gas? Does the car keep running on the remaining reserve battery power or does it force you to stop before you drain the batteries? What happens if you overload the batteries when they are almost drained?
6. How do the batteries perform in extreme cold? And does extreme heat cause any problems?
7. How do you prevent people from trying to back the car out of the garage with it still plugged in?
And there are probably a wide variety of other problems I haven’t thought of. I hope you can find clever solutions, because I think this is an impressive technology.
Ms. Lowery,
I’ve heard it from enough GM executives that I absolutely do not doubt your commitment to this program now. So you’ve made me a believer.
Now, don’t laugh but hear me out on this. You should make a pure electric version of the Hummer with a range of 250 miles or so. With nano-based batteries like those of A123Systems and AltairNano, recharge time is quite fast. And one of the interesting things about electric motors is the more powerful you make them, the more efficient they become. There is plenty of room for a large battery pack. And Hummer owners expect to pay a premium anyway.
Imagine that. A green Hummer that’s not a gimmick. You win over your foes, and offer no compromise to the Hummer types (in fact, improved torque and acceleration). Only in America.
I’m one of those skeptics you refer to, posting to GM’s blogs now that I’ve stumbled across them (one of my posts was accepted, others rejected). The main point that I, and others, raise is that it is very hard to give any credence to GM’s promises about the E-Flex system and the Volt, because GM has yet to stop misrepresenting the reasons they abandoned past promises regarding the EV1. When GM talks about the Volt, there’s usually an assertion that “the batteries aren’t ready yet”; in light of the history of the EV1, it seems that you’re setting up for a “we tried, but…” escape clause.
Several GM blog entries about the Volt say you’ve listened to and learned from the criticism about the handling of the EV1, and your CEO has called killing the EV1 his biggest mistake; some of my EV correspondents say that’s as close as GM will ever come to retracting its spin about why the EV1 was killed, much less apologizing. However, if GM is indeed backing away from its past anti-EV1 spin, I would expect that GM spokesmen would at the very least stop disseminating that same spin! But just over a week ago, I read an interview on AutoblogGreen containing more of the same ol’ same ol’. If GM wants to get past the skepticism of those who were disillusioned (crushed?) by your treatment of the EV1, you need to stop misrepresenting the results of your abandonment of the EV1 (e.g., only 800 leased in California and Arizona) as reasons for that abandonment.
On a more positive note: between us, my wife and I have owned two Chevies, three Saturns, and a Pontiac over the years (and one Dodge), and I’d love to plug in a Chevy Volt in my garage. Even better, how about an E-Flex variant where you ditch the internal-combustion engine and replace it with a modest amount of extra batteries? The 80 to 160 mile range-per-charge of the 1999 EV1s would have been plenty for me.
I love the concept, but I’m concerned about GM’s ability to build a better battery. Japanese companies, especially Toyota, have such an advantage over GM because of their very tight relationship with Japan’s Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry which spends upwards of 80 million dollars a year on battery research. The Japanese government does research for Japanese companies at no cost to them so they can take market share and jobs away from American companies – nice. Now that Toyota has bought a majority stake in battery giant Panasonic EV Energy Co I can only see GM’s job of building a better battery getting harder since much of the technology for a better battery now comes from a company mostly owned by GM’s direct competitor. Good luck getting the US Government to pony up some dollars to help with research that would benefit all of us – they’re too concerned with coming up with programs for people who worked during a time when companies actually offered pensions and health coverage.
Great to see some positive GM press for a change – keep up the good work!
In my opinion the Chevy Volt’s technology is the same revolutionary to the automotive world, like the invention of the jet engine was for aircraft industry.
The Volt just might be the beginning, which should be extended on the entire worldwide GM-Portfolio.
The Volt concept is growing on me, I think this is the ticket. The growth froms the fact that mutliple platform applications are being considered about it. Personally, I am a meat and potatoes guy, so I wouldn’t be all that interested in driving a golf cart, but lots of drivers would be!
I don’t think trying to save oil should be done to head off foreign dependence; it is ok to buy cars from Japan and junk from China, so why not oil from the Middle East? We are all the same, so why are they different? My point is it should be done because it is the right thing to do, it is right for the environment.
Hope to see a Volt in my rear-view mirror in the near future!
Ms. Lowery,
It was only one year ago that GM unveiled the Camaro…but time flies when you’re having fun.
The Volt is important…with T’s and H’s relative hybrid success it’s important to implement a bold flanking movement to regain a preception of GM as an alternative propulsion innovator.
In the short run, IMO, quality “regular’ cars like the new Malibu are of utmost importance.
Nice post, Beth. As for the other posters out there: Most of your long-winded posts reveal an almost embarassing lack of knowledge about the auto industry and business in general. Do you people really think that Lutz and the rest of the GM folk that post here are less informed about the state of their business than you are? That most of these asinine suggestions, theories and ideas are helpful? Honestly, most of the posts are good (Mr. Langlitz for example) but a lot of you don’t seem to have any worthwhile to offer. Think before you post. Lutz has been in this business longer than a lot of you have been alive. I think he knows what he’s doing.
VOLT could be produced right now, using lead-acid or Nickel-metal-hydride batteries.
The EV1 had range of up to 110 miles with lead-acide, and the 120-mile-range RAV4-EV small SUV is still running fine after five years of up to 80 mph driving, faultlessly using NiMH batteries.
Waiting for Lithium means that GM really doesn’t intend to produce the VOLT, they are just using it for Public Relations.
If GM were serious, it would release the VOLT right now, using a small lead-acid or NiMH battery pack.
NiMH batteries last longer than the life of the vehicle and provide both deep-cycling and very long cycle life, without any help form an IC engine.
So get serious, if GM were, it would produce the volt right now.
The Volt is a fantastic concept and I hope that it comes to market soon. One of your tasks will be to describe to the public all of its advantages and capabilities.
A key challenge in educating the buying public will be its overall cost structure. The cost of a tank of gas is easy to understand.
Though it will be just sipping gas (which is a good thing), the power for the motor needs to come from someplace – the battery. The question you will need to be able to answer is “Since it is supposed to plug-in to charge the battery, about how much electricity will it take to be fully charged and how much can I expect my home electric bill to rise as a result?”
If you can answer that question in an honest and convincing fashion, and communicate the answer to the public in an effective fashion, I think you will have a real success with the Volt.
I was one of the ones who said that I would put down a deposit right now, which I am totally willing to do. So I figure that gives me standing to say the following.
Other bloggers have correctly said that this is a race with Toyota, et al. Some have suggested getting the car into the showrooms with some sort of a less sophisticated battery system, or some such.
I completely agree. If you wait around for the perfect batteries (some have hinted that this is actually an excuse, but I’m a bit more generous than that), and the competition beats you to the market, much of the halo value of the project will be lost.
I have often accused GM of using the customers to do the last 20% of the development work on new cars. Many believe that one should never buy a first year new car from GM for this reason. In this case, the need is so critical that I would be only too willing to take the chance.
Let’s get going, and take the initiative of technological leadership back from the competition while the opportunity is there.
GM may be leveraging its EV1 experience in this effort, but Toyota and Honda are leveraging their hybrid experience just as hard. Again, if they beat you to the market with the plug-in hybrids, much of the bang of this will be lost.
Beth,
I’m glad to see that GM does seem serious about bringing this technology to the forefront. I don’t think anyone here would disagree that bringing a car like this to the market would do wonders for both GM’s brand perception and sales.
To do so will be a delicate balancing act. A car like this that unleashes new technology can be quickly branded by niche groups. The Prius, for example, while selling decently only sells in very select markets (SF, Boston, NYC… etc etc) but misses the market entirely in other less metropolitan areas. Much has to do with the car’s public perception. In rude honesty, the Prius is undeniably a hippy-branded car, not unlike VW’s were in the 60’s.
Launching a car like this might require doing so in several flavors. Launch an eccentric, Prius-esque model ( which the Volt might border into), a muscle car version, a big honkin’ truck, and a bread and butter family car. Someone else already hit on this a bit, but I think it is very important to study the most effective way to market this technology from one extreme to another. market it for those who want people to know they are driving a plug-in car complete with kooky looks and a giant “HYBRID” badge. But at the same time, sell it in plainclothes form, like a regular looking car like a Malibu for those that simply want a car that gets good fuel economy and cares less about being seen. Tickle both appeties.
lastly- A portion of the public admittedly skeptical of a brand like GM who might consider GM if they bring the goods will be hypercritical of anything that might go wrong with the car. It goes without saying that any or all failure points,especially battery replacement information and longevity had better be solved and addressed long before it hits showrooms.
Anyhow, I LOVE this car. Build it and you will have a winner!
Back tracking so soon? This is not a car requiring an ROI analysis of hard dollars. Nor is it a high volume car regardless of what the bloggers are saying. This is a car which would bring the Chevy name plate back into an aura of cool and social consciousness. The ROI is beyond quantified numbers.
So, will GM take this concept and run with it? Create a low volume, not overly engineered product with a low break even point or will we be waiting on this concept for another five years? Even if this car only sells 5,000 units a year and is dead in two years, it would be worth monetizing it.
The question shouldn’t be “if” but should be “how” can we back into the numbers to get this into a low volume production environment with minimal cost by mid 2008.
I’m of the opinion that most people who read Fastlane are rooting for GM to succeed. Some of us are disillusioned, but we still want GM to succeed. A few years ago, I was faced with an opportunity to invest in a company that put a turbine engine in a Saturn SC1 to generate electricity that would run 4 electric motors (one at each wheel). Unfortunately, batteries would weigh the car down, motors at the wheels were too heavy and cause a handling issue. Though the concept looked plausible, the technology wasn’t ready. So I passed on the investment opportunity.
When the Volt was introduced, my thoughts were “it’s about time”. For GM to succeed, they need to be THE game-changer. The technology you employ needs to be disruptive and not just a minor evolution of what is already there. Your competitors appear to do a better job at evolution than GM. Hybrids were certainly a good stop gap technology, but the Volt takes it to the next step. Can you have a reliable Volt in production, out in the market in the next year or two? Would you be able to retrofit fuel cell technology into the Volt in the future, hence future-proofing it for the day fuel-cells become a viable reality? Great challenges, this is exciting to watch. Let’s see GM step up to it and succeed.
As I suggested other times, maybe you can make a more rational use of space in the Volt. Instead of a lot of batteries spliting the interior in half and protuding from the floor, why not put them under the passengers, creating a full flat floor, also allowing this platform to have seating for 5 or even 6 people in two rows? It would also allow a lower center of gravity.
Other suggestion is instead of only 40 miles in electric power, why not a broader range? See the Tesla Motors car that can run a higher distance on its batteries, also Li-ion as Volt’s.
I saw the VOLT at the car show in Detroit just a few days ago and I can’t get it out of my mind! Now that I’m home, I’m telling everyone I can about this amazing car I saw. I’m a big supporter of alternative fuels and I’ve been wanting someone to invent a biodiesel/electric hybrid for some time now. I was most pleased to find that this vehicle could use a variety of fuels. I am already the proud owner of 2 GM vehicles and I’d like to have another: CHEVY VOLT!
I’d like you to talk about the design of the motor a little. Your EV1 had a revolutionary A/C induction motor. The Volt has gone back to D/C brushless, more common in lower-powered parallel hybrids. Why the switch? Also, the b-roll video of the Volt has a loud noise when the motor is running, almost sounding like a turbine. Why does it sound so loud? Will the Volt be quiet in battery only mode?
This is exactly the type of vehicle and technology that Wall Street and Main Street alike wanted GM, expected GM and asked GM to be doing all along. Just like you would test the envelope with designs like the Efigy, you have to test the envelope with propulsion technologies. Just like if you were in the drug industry we would expect you to be working on new and amazing drugs.
Just like your designs in the recent past, your propulsion technologies were getting stale.
Our celebration is still a tempered one, like we discovered a cancer drug that has yet to get FDA approval, likewise we await the approval process at GM to render this concept a go. Just like the other drugs that can cure GM’s ills, such as the Velite and Efigy.
I don’t want you to build these vehicles for me, I want you to do it for yourself.
If I were the GM Doctor these would be your prescription to cure what ails you at this time.
Can’t wait for ultracapacitors like the new one from EESTOR.
Will you be using those?
“1. You can’t allow gasoline to sit in the tank for months because it gets stale. You can’t realistically expect owners to remember to put gasoline stabilizer in every tank. You also don’t want to burn summer gasoline in the winter and vice versa.” – from “Skepticman”
I can assure you on my own experiences, that’s no problem. I am driving a 2001 Alero running on LPG. There’s just required a tiny amount of gasoline, when I start the engine and until the systems switches on LPG-use. Consequently it also takes several months until I have to refill my gasoline-tank (maybe twice a year). I couldn’t watch that the fuel did make any trouble so far. Only in cold seasons there shouldn’t be too little gasoline in the tank because of the possibility of condensed water, which might accumulate in a nearly empty tank.
BTW, I am sure, GM won’t use the Chevy Tahoe’s tank for the Volt.
I applaud GM for seriously showing a plug-in concept. I really think they need to accelerate development however. The development schedule that I heard about pushes a production plug-in model too far out. (Whether it looks like the Volt or more like a traditional economy car is irrelevant.) Toyota is sure to get there first if GM waits until 2012 or whatever. Then GM will be playing catch-up again. I think they must try and beat Toyota on this one. Can they?
I am certainly not interested in Toyota bashing, however, here is an interesting link regarding the words “Toyota” and “recalls” used in the same sentence:
http://money.cnn.com/2007/01/19/autos/bc.toyota.recall.reut/index.htm?cnn=yes
As you can see, Toyota has put a positive PR spin on this, in a sense, stating that Toyota has “vowed to step up its quality efforts after a rise in vehicle recalls “.
Just FYI.
Thanks,
Chris Hayne
“Do you people really think that Lutz and the rest of the GM folk that post here are less informed about the state of their business than you are?”
Base on their performance I’d have to say yes !
The questions about A/C,power steering etc shows that most americans are not willing to give up anything to save fuel.
Sundown, January 18, 9:55 PM:
GM lost over $10 billion last year, and its market share continued to decline. So, clearly, they are doing a great job of reading the market and responding to its demands.
Why would they want any input from the great unwashed as to what they might be looking to buy, right?
Keep it coming bloggers, you are doing a great job. GM ignores you at its peril.
Note “Turning to greener wheels”. page B-1, Los Angeles Times, January 19, 2007.
Sub-headline:
“‘It sends the right message.’ Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, explaining why so many lawmakers have chosen hybrids as their oficial state cars.”
Sub-headline:
“With Nunez at the forefront, more state legislators choose hybrids as official vehicles. They’re statement cars now, an image consultant says.”
Lead photo caption:
“The Assembly’s hybrid pioneer was Gloria Negrete McLeod, above in her Toyota Prius. In 2000 she persuaded officials to bend leasing rules to allow foreign hybrids.”
The quicker GM gets this to market the better. Mid cycle or even mid year battery upgrades are totally acceptable until the “right” battery is developed. You can see that they are driving the vehicle right now, even if it is a mock up or prototype people would be ready today to purchase it imo. They could even do an inexpensive upgrade for current owners with incentives at point of purchase and discounts for the next generation batteries . The potential money the consumer would save on fuel may counter the “cost ” of the newer batteries if they choose to do so. I say green light it and make sure it is 5 star crash worthy as well!
GM could build a NiMH VOLT today, there’s no need to wait for phony “research”.
The Toyota RAV4-EV runs on nickel-metal-hydride batteries that last longer than the life of the vehicle.
Toyota, for six months in 2002, offered the last 328 RAV4-EV to the general public.
They were snapped up, and all (except one that was rear-ended) remain on the road today, faultlessly driving up to 80 mph for up to 120 miles on a charge. Many EV drivers make their own electric; EVs are so efficient even a small solar system can pay for daily driving with excess electric production.
The batteries used by these RAV4-EV, by Honda, Ford and even GM, are Nickel-Metal-Hydride (”NiMH”), which were certified as lasting longer than the life of the vehicle.
They have adequate power, and balance the cost of the batteries with the high value of recovering the valuable nickel metal used in making them, after their long career of perhaps 200,000 miles of care-free, oil-free driving might be done.
GM has mixed motives, at best, in announcing their serial plug-in hybrid.
GM is to be praised for settling on the serial configuration, similar to a diesel-electric locomotive, where the only source of traction power is the electric motor. The small gas engine is used only occasionally, and only to generate electric for long trips or if the batteries are low. The serial hybrid allows many solar homeowners to drive essentially “oil-free” for the daily grind, only occasionally relying upon gas or diesel, and makes electric traction power practical for everyone.
But GM, if it were serious, could build the serial plug-in hybrid today, using existing NiMH batteries.
The existing RAV4-EV, using NiMH, are instant serial-hybrid EVs if a small under-the-hood or trailer-mounted 1000 CC generator is added. Usually, for the first 120 miles, this small SUV would rely on its battery store of off-peak electric power; normally, that would be enough for the day’s driving. On the few occasions that the EV were used for long trips, or if the driver forgot to charge the batteries, the gas generator would fire up. Because the electric motor direct drive train is so efficient, the electric from a 40 hp generator is enough to keep this SUV at 80 mph all day.
The key problem with the GM announcement is that GM relies not on NiMH, but on uncertain “research” into other battery chemistries. Even worse, this “research” is handed to Chevron Oil, which has absolutely no interest in allowing cars to be powered by electric from the wall or from solar electric systems. Chevron being involved means that they will ignore NiMH, and postpone things for another generation — or more — if we let them.
There are no technical hurdles, no research needed; all that’s needed is an honest interest in making the serial plug-in hybrid, which is proven, practical, and, essentially, here now with the 328 privately-owned Toyota RAV4-EV (over 900 RAV4-EV if fleet RAV4-EV are included).
The very real Electric cars, thanks to Toyota’s selling those 328 RAV4-EV, drive essentially oil-free, relying upon off-peak power paid for by on-peak production of critically needed daytime power.
“…GM awarded development contracts to…Chevron Corp…for lithium-ion batteries…GM executives know that many will interpret the Volt prototype as a public-relations exercise…”
So GM, with the aid of Chevron, seems determined to kill the Electric car all over again.
There are many solar-EV (”PV-EV”) homes which would welcome you for a test drive in a RAV4-EV and demonstration of solar rooftop power.
For example, we powered two RAV4-EV last year, and still donated $89 in excess electric power to SCE
Is it just me, or does everyone focus on the extremes in this argument? You’ve got the haters in the posts who are still ticked off that GM canceled the EV-1 (a car that had absolutely zero chance of becoming a mass production vehicle and therefore a viable option for GM or the American public). These posters firmly believe that GM wants nothing more than to pullute the earth with Hummers that have chainsaws attached to the grill to cut down all of the trees as they go. These posters seem to forget that GM was the only car company that got into the all-electric game completely on it’s own. They also seem to forget that GM makes plenty of small fuel efficient cars like the Cobalt and 4 cylinder versions of the Malibu and a multitude of other vehicles. They will also have more vehicles available with hybrid drivetrains than any other automaker by the end of 2008.
On the other side, you’ve got the diehard GM purists who believe that this vehicle is the greatest thing since sliced bread. They swear that they’ll buy one just as soon as it comes out, and that this is the vehicle that will put GM back on top. They ignore the fact that the vast majority of GM sales still come from large SUVs and pickup trucks, and that GM is not far enough along in it’s recovery to truly take a flyer on mass-producing a vehicle that will probably be out of the price-range of most Americans. Given the level of technology involved in the Volt (much of which hasn’t been developed to the mass-production stage yet), it will probably never be able to come in at less than 35-40k, and that’s looking through rose colored glasses. Thee EV1 was so expensive that GM had to do heavily subsidized leases, and they could never make a business case for it without the subsidies.
Instead of these extremes, I propose a middle ground: let’s recognize the Volt for what it is and put it in perspective. The Volt is a concept car that is the next evolution of the hybrid drivetrain that has been introduced over the last 5 years. Rather than the batteries assisting and the engine doing the bulk of the work like the hybrids of today, the Volt has the batteries doing the bulk of the work and the engine providing the assistance when needed. This is a key point, and is very important as it places a great deal more emphasis and strain on a completely untested drivetrain: namely a fully electrical driveline. In hybrid systems, the electric motors provide assistance and minimal propulsion. However, in a fully electric vehicle the speeds and forces involved will be much greater. The motors will need to be able to take a heavier load and will therefore likely be much heavier than the motors used in today’s hybrids. The batteries will also face more strain as a much higher voltage level and current flow will be required to completely power all aspects of the vehicle. I’m not an electrical engineer, so I won’t even try to guess at things like range, heat, operating thresholds, and system degredation, but just think about your laptops at home. What happens to the battery as the laptop ages? you get 4 hours of worktime when it’s fully charged new. After a couple of years and a lot of use, you now only get 2 hours when fully charged. It’s a pain in the butt in a laptop, but what happens when you’re 2 miles from home and you forgot to fill the gas tank?
There are a lot of issues to resolve before this kind of technology can ever truly become mainstream. I applaud GM for pointing the way, and I give a standing ovation if they make the commitment to build it. However, I’d rather see the money invested in upgraded hybrid drivetrains being standard on all trucks and SUVs that GM produces so that even these traditional gas guzzlers can get 25-35 mile per gallon in the city or on the highway. I would also like to see a new line of clean-diesel engines being offered to compliment this hybrid drivetrain, thereby increasing mileage even more. Every vehicle GM offers a gas engine in should be a flex-fuel vehicle as well. Give owners the option to run on the fuel of their choice and focus on providing more hybrid options as standard equipment. This is the road to the future that the Volt concept promises, and I for one, hope that GM, Toyota, Honda, and all of the other automakers deliver these vehicles for the public to buy.
Beth: The media, bloggers and the prospective buyers who have sent GM a mountain of mail since the Volt was unveiled have stated clearly “Build it, and build it NOW”.
For once GM needs to take immediate action while the buzz is at it’s maximum not when it is “safe”. GM must find a way to get the E-flex drivetrain on the market – today.
The upcoming Saturn Astra would be a great place to start since it is available in 2,3,4 & 5 door versions as well as a wagon. The Delta 2 platform is also the basis for the Zafira. GM could use the Volt front styling with the panoramic windshield to give a futuristic look. This car should be displayed as a “production” model by the LA autoshow at the end of 2007.
As many have suggested use the EV-1 batteries, this design has been improved since the EV-1 and is a proven technology. The actual buyers of the Volt in 2009 (hopefully) will be made up of over 50% “Early adopters” and will understand the limitations of the older battery design. Using a proven battery will allow more focus on any problems in other areas of the drivetrain.
Many things can happen in 2 years and GM can update the battery pack when better batteries are available and most buyers would be willing to pay a reasonable price for the increased range.
This will provide positive feedback and increase demand for the Volt.
The improvement in public image GM would realize from a program like this would be well worth the cost and will deliver results years before a conventional ad campaign and cost the same or less.
I would be very interested in being involved in a “test” program like GM is doing with the Equinox hydrogen fuel cell vehicle. I hope the E-85 capability will remain a permanent part of the gasoline powered Volt with a bio-diesel powertrain for the second generation.
Beth: I am sincere about being a being involved in a “test” program for the Volt, and I did apply to be an evaluator for the EV-1 program but was not selected.
You should explain how much of the technology developed for the EV-1 is being used by other electric vehicle manufacturers and how much of it will be used in the Volt.
Hope to see a Volt at the local Chevy dealer in 2009.
Can someone please explain how this is a green technology???? This car would use more energy than a conventional car holding everything constant besides for exchanging the electric motors and gas generator for a gasoline engine.
I have seen 150 mpg quoted as the potential gas mileage for the Volt, however that is not an accurate representation of the energy consumption and could not be compared apples to apples to other cars. The Volt is powered by electricity, which is not an energy source. That electricity comes from the on-board gas generator and the electricity grid which predominately uses coal as an energy source, which is not taken into account in the 150mpg.
In economic terms this would be like a company reporting profits of 2 million dollars but not subtracting the 1 million dollars of expenses. The real profits would only be 1 million, but 2 million was reported.
The reason this is not a solution that is good for the environment is because the overall efficiency of the car would be lower than a conventional car, and thereby would use more energy and would cause more pollution and green house gases to be emitted.
Electricity from the grid is about 30% efficient (conservative), then there are losses in the charging of the battery, assume 95% efficient, then there are losses in the motor turning the wheels, assume 95% efficient .
30 * 0.95 * 0.95 = 27%
This gives us an overall efficiency of 27%
Now a gas engine is roughly 30% efficient, which makes this a better choice for the environment because it uses less energy and therefore emits less green house gas emissions.
Diesel engines can be up to 50% efficient, which makes it a better choice than both. This is why roughly half of the cars in Europe have been and are diesel powered.
The plug in hybrid would be good technology if the electricity would be produced from a renewable source, but currently it is not and it will not be for quite some time.
In short this technology is being misrepresented and is not a solution to our environmental problems. This technology would reduce our dependence on foreign oil, but it does not address our environmental problems.
I think GM should be honest about this and stop spreading the misinformation and disinformation.
I am pleased to have read and heard the positive press for General Motors’ Detroit Auto Show premieres–especially the Volt. I think the whole principle behind the Volt’s tech innovation is exciting, even if its application to the real-world would have to be viewed with skepticism.
Beth Lowery speaks to the common sense outcome for an alternative fuel solution. It is unlikely America will follow Brazil is becoming a bio-fuel nation, unless it drastically changed the country’s agricultural layout and devoted a good percentage of land to farming. Hydrogen development is still very early with almost no infrastructure in place. The US power grid could never support tens of millions of electrically powered vehicles in active use. Only by diversifying our energy sources in transportation can we truly reduce our dependence on crude oil.
I would love to see more eco-friendly prototypes in the future. I hope the Sequel and the Volt show real commitment to the development of energy efficiency on the part of GM. In the meantime, I’d be pleased to see a Saturn Aura Green Line every bit as good as the Toyota Camry Hybrid. I think that would be a good start.
Hi Gary,
you had been asking for the future prices of Lithium, as soon as there’s a significantly higher demand. Today I found a release from the University of Vienna. There’s told about Lithium-reserves, within the earth’s mantle alone, which should last several hundred-thousand years. In addition, there would be another estimated 1.000 billion tons of Lithium-reserves in the Oceans.
For that reason I do believe, the prices for Lithium will be adjusted by the market in a reasonable way.
I think a good way to do that would be a visual aid in the dealerships. Something like a stack of pennies showing how much it electricity it costs to drive a Volt 40 miles, and how much that equivalent energy would cost in gasoline.
“Diesel engines can be up to 50% efficient, which makes it a better choice than both. This is why roughly half of the cars in Europe have been and are diesel powered.” – Franc
Hi Franc,
do you also know that NO2, coming out of the Diesel’s waste, contributes to cancer? There’s a study from the University of Athens, which tells about a strong relation between NO2 and a higher mortality. Diesel is not green at all, even more since it’s still a fossil fuel. Over here in Europe they’re totally blind, regarding this issue.
I haven’t been a GM buyer in a long time because I was burned too many times, but the Volt could bring me back. I have a short commute and would be glad to plug the car in at night.
You’ll need to give it a really good warranty to get people like me back, but I’m sure you can do it if you want to.
I also don’t see why Toyota couldn’t just change the software on the Prius so that it could be charged with a power cord. The effect would be almost as good and they’d have a similar product with a good track record. Yes it would burn a little bit of gas, but not much.
Jump on this soon – I can’t believe Toyota hasn’t noticed the buzz that the Volt has generated and it would be nice to see GM take the lead.
Gereon Langlitz said,
Gereon,
Thank you, that’s useful information, although the question still remains how expensive it will be to extract lithium in massive quantities.
It is a very reactive metal; is not found in a free state in nature; and bonds tightly with other elements.
Gereon also said,
Long ago Herr Doktor Fritz Haber discovered there are also virtually unlimited amounts of gold in the oceans, but the cost to extract that gold is prohibitive.
Unfortunately, lithium is also a hazardous material:
Lithium possesses a dangerous fire and explosion risk when exposed to water, acids or oxidizing agents. It reacts exothermically with nitrogen in moist air at high temperatures. In solution lithium is toxic and targets the central nervous system.
GM will have to ensure there is no likelihood of any lithium or its compounds escaping from the battery pack in event of a collision. It’s not an insurmountable task, but it is a consideration, and solving that will add to the cost — as well as create potential liability issues.
Tschuss,
Gary Dikkers
I was flabbergasted when I heard about the Volt. Is this Chevy? The one’s who buried the EV-1? I tell you what – you build it and I will come. I currently own two vehicles. One is a ‘69 Suburban, and the other is an ‘06 Prius. I would love to buy an American car with plug-in technology.
Chevy is to be commended – that is, if this isn’t just a pr stunt. You build it and I will buy – let’s get out in front for a change, like the good old days!
If GM released a five-door plug-in hybrid Astra I’d defy my wife, go $30,000 into debt, and walk the whole way to my nearest Saturn dealer just to get one.
And if it had a turbo diesel I’d be in such a hurry I’d forget my coat.
This volt Car is a joke. The EV1 second Gen could go about 80 to 120 miles with the new Nickel metal hydride batteries, this car can only go 40 the utmost minimum of what commuters use today. You could get a full charge in approx 3hours and thirty minutes not a crazy 6 hours. And this car is using lithium ion batteries! Shows what Chevron Corps research has done. The EV1 could go up hills and its air conditioning system was utterly beautiful no problems. Sure the volt looks amazing sure it has great features. But only imagine what a sophisticated and well developed battery system and a generator could be like. The good looks of this car combined with those great traits. Well It could probably go for 1500 miles.
To sundown. In response to your comment it seems that Lutz does not seem to know what’s going on since GM is losing market share to foreign imports.
Hi, first of all kudos for a great concept car. I’m quite interested in the chevvy volt from a technological & production point of view, and would like to ask some questions.
What voltage rails will the volt, and the eflex system be running? Will the e-flex platform ratify the new 42v standard? It would seem to me that a car that runs nearly completely with electricity would surely struggle using only 12v rails.
So GM is getting the ball rolling with the electric drive train, what about the other mechanical and hydraulic systems? Will they be adopted as they were in the skateboard platform? Drive by wire, steer by wire and brake by wire systems would offer numerous implementation advantages in an electric system as well as environmental benefits, for example; brake fluid is no longer needed if a brake by wire system is adopted, solving environmental issues of brake fluid disposal.
GM’s Skateboard platform was also designed with intention of being cutting edge and all electric, have they abandoned this platform in favour of e-flex? can we expect to see the skateboard platform marketed within the next half decade?
The Volt is a great idea, but at the same time it’s taken away some limelight from the Sequel, i’m worried that the sequel will go the way of the hy-wire and autonomy, just another concept car with little or no production intent.
Production wise, how serious is GM with these platforms? My greatest fear on the topic, is that in 2008 GM will unveil thier next electric vehicle platform, and the volt, like the sequel becomes another proof of concept car that’ll never become mainstream. It seems as though as something approaches production intent something new comes out and GM says “oh.. lets run with this then” but in the meantime the years drift by and nothing is on the market.
Development and research in technology is wonderful, but without any promise of these vehicles hitting the production lines, they’re just proof of concepts.
People don’t want concepts without promise of deliverance.
Thank you very much for your time
John Lien
Great concept!
Reminds me of Porsche’s World’s First Hybrid at 83% efficiency. He ran a petrol turbine that made electricity stored in an accumulator for the FWD electric in wheel motors, circa 1900.
The rest of the world’s 700,000,000+ vehicles are only about 15-20% efficient. That is for every 10 gallons of gas you pay for, only 1 or 2 turn your wheels…
Unless you buy a Prius or VOLT. The Prius came out of the gate at 32% efficiency and then jumped up to 37%.
Where does the Volt stand in terms of vehicle efficiency?
I am enthusiastic about the volt-concept. Beautifully that GM on the wishes of the people hears and brings after the EV1 again an electro vehicle. Here GM hit fully in the black, the resonance at the market was very big and positive. And an image improvement is guaranteed perceptible. I wish GM a long breath and the obstinacy, to pass through this project.
Bob Lutz always says Gm does not shy away from the truth then whats the truth with the Volt? NiMh batteries have been used and proven to work in the EV1. They get about 100 miles per charge. Good enough for most folks daily commute. So I do not see the battery arguement holding any water. If you want people to understand what you are looking for you better stop talking in generals and start talking about the specifics cause I saw the video of the check offered to buy out the EV-1’s which makes your credibility suspect at best.
How does this statement sound committed to anything but oil?
Hyrdrogen has TONS of delivery problems and isnt even the near future. Diesel FlexFuel etc is OIL..
But we do not believe that electric cars are the only answer. We believe there are a number of solutions to ending our dependence on oil, and we are working on many of them simultaneously, including hydrogen fuel cells, clean diesel, FlexFuel and hybrids.
Electric cars are currently the best and ONLY way to go.
1) there is a distribution system in place
2) You can make one today if you want to. Many people on the Internet including HIGH school kids have built them.
3) This greatly reduces our dependancy on oils since plants dont run on oil.
4) Isolating the environmental problems to about 3000 power plants rather than having them located in millions of cars is a problem we as a country can solve.
The fact is large power companies can be made eviornmentally friendly faster and more cost effectively through fed grants and research than any other type of energy source.
Lets look at Hydrogen? Is there any way to deliver it in the near future? How is it made? Its a very wasteful process. How about Diesel? Thats going back to oil and has a lot of polutants that seem to cause cancer as one Ship yard town in Ca has found out.
Corn.. doesnt solve the polution and you can not grow enough of it to feed all the cars on the road.
Whats left? Electricity…
Or a Hyrbid system like the Volt. Where is it? Its being held back. You think after making the EV1 GM cant deliver the Volt? CMon..
Gereon,
I do understand that NOx is a problem with diesel engines, as it is with the combustion of any hydrocarbon (fossil fuels). The Volt’s main energy source is electricity, which in USA is by in large produced by burning coal.
So my point was that this does get us away from the problem of fossil fuels, and the added losses in the transmision of the electricity is why it does not make sense to power cars with electricity from the grid. Not to mention that the grid could not handle the extra load of the electric cars. I think the best features of the Volt are the regenerative braking and modular design, but I would not call the plug in feature green since it will cause more greenhouse gas emissions compared to a fuel efficient diesel such as the VW Lupo.
Franc
Hi Gary,
this report from the University of Vienna especially referred to the use of Lithium for the production of Tritium, which is required for nuclear fusion. As I did interpret this explanation, these amounts of Lithium are considered as actually available for energy production. I have no idea, what procedures will be applied in the future to extract Lithium and how much these might cost. But at the moment I think, despite of certain risks, we can’t do without it. As you know, Lithium-Ion-Batteries provide the highest energetic density, which is most important to PHEV’s, Hybrids, etc.
Here’s the original release from the University of Vienna.
http://www.ai.tuwien.ac.at/int/SPRACHEN/deutsch/kernfusion.pdf
BTW, they also promote biomass, wind, tides and other alternative sources for the solution of our energy-issues.
Unfortunately I only found this release in German language, but maybe you get it translated somehow, what might be worth it.
Just a few thoughts, The batteries only needs to go for twenty-five miles before the engine kicks in. This would cover ninty-five percent of all daily driving and reduce the cost of the batteries getting it to market faster. It would also keep the gas from going bad. Also have two tanks one that is large and the other being very small. Have the large tank bleed into the small one to keep the fuel fresh. The reduced batteries will reduce the milage but keep the engine fresh and keep the fuel rotated. You could still get 70 to 80 MPG and have a long haul driver at the same time. The vehicle would be a perfect E85 car and could be scaled from a sports car to a family sedan. The nice part would be as batteries get better the cars get better! You can always switch the batteries to the next generation and have a car with a ten year life, reasonable cost and the great looks of the Volt.
Franc, I have to disagree with most of your comments regarding the environmental impact of plug-ins.
1) Firstly, and most importantly, oil is finite. While I Like diesels they are not a long-term solution.
2) Many people fail to recognize the large amount of energy required to extract, transport, refine and locally distribute oil/gas. This will only get worse as all the cheap and easy to reach oil is depleted. This in effect makes the 30% efficiency of ICE technology appear to be very optimistic.
3) You make a sweeping generalization that the efficiency of the grid is 30%. While it is as low as this in some areas it is a lot better in others (up to 60%). Increased use of local power generation will improve the efficiency in the future.
4) Not everywhere uses coal. For example, most of my local power comes from hydro.
5) I have read at least 4 reports stating that there is plenty of off peak capacity for charging plug-ins (many millions of cars). Some of these reports where from utility companies who should know about their excess capacity. Plus today, a large amount of energy is wasted by operating plants off peak at lower than optimum effciency and even dumping excess capacity. This problem will be even more severe in the future with clean coal plants (somewhat of an oxymoron) that cannot be throttled back easily.
6) Using electricity gives us great flexibility in how we generate the power e.g. Nuclear, coal, wind, tidal, geothermal or solar. For example, plug-ins are a good match for wind power generation where most output is often generated at off peak times.
7) Another great benefit is that air pollution would be moved away from densely populated areas thus increasing the quality of air people breath in on a daily basis.
I think plug-in’s promise to be a big step forward, assuming the technical challenges regarding storage can be solved.
Looks nice. With my driving habits I’d probably just plug it in when geting home at night, topping it off regardless of its need for the extra charge. Kind of like brushing your teeth before going to bed, mindless and automatic. Currently, I drive a GM electric vehicle as a second car. GM’s partnership with US Electricar in the early 1990’s produced an electric based on a Chevy S10 truck chassis. Yes, they’re still around and driven productively. Its drivetrain was the precursor to the EV1’s, so GM does have some track record for building a durable electric. Here’s hoping you’ll do the same with the Volt.
The driveline of the Volt is quite fascinating to me. I’ve long wondered why the japanese car makers insisted on the added weight and complexity of a traditional driveline in their hybrids. Using the engine as only a generator is a good move. It’ll still run periodically, especially when the vehicles electrical demand is high (at night, in the rain, with the stereo playing, wipers going, headlights on, A/C on etc.) So I don’t really think there would be a worry about the piston rings rusting in the cylinders or oil starvation as was posted above by someone else.
That said, I wonder what this system would do to the fuel milage of a large sedan like the Impala. If a big car like that can get far better rel world milage than Toyotas comparativly tiny Prius, then GM will truely have bragging rights.
Hi Franc,
of course you are right, the use of PHEV’s mustn’t lead to a shift of emissions from traffic to power plants. For that reason it’s absolutely imperative that electricity companies (all over the world) turn to such energy sources like solar power, wind, tides, biomass, geothermal resources etc., and, maybe, in the distant future, nuclear fusion.
What I don’t understand, especially regarding the USA, is the lack of infrastructure, and consequently vehicles, which run on gases (LPG or CNG). For example, as I already mentioned so often at this blog, my wife and me are using LPG on our Aveo and Alero. Both vehicles are less polluting by far than any VW Lupo Diesel! The emission of harmful substances is down about 80% in comparison to the use of gasoline.
Does anyone know the status of the law which produced the $3500 tax credit for the first 65,000 Prius (Priuses?)?
I understood that the amount of the credit was based on the difference in EPA rated mileage between the hybrid and the equivalent conventional car (Camry?).
If that is so, and if the law is still in effect, what would be the difference between the Volt and, I guess, the Malibu? I bet it would be close to the $6000 tax credit one of you suggested for the Volt.
If the President and Speaker Pelosi want to seriously address the global warming issue, what better way than to extend this powerful incentive to the Volt?
Gereon
Are NG cars widely available in Germany, they are not here in the USA. I picked the Lupo because I knew this car is available to buy now in Europe at least. Over the past few years the NG market has been even more volatile than the oil market, which may make it much more expensive. I believe that NG in the USA is scarce, and we are starting to import more and more of it, being a gas it must be supercooled to become and stay in liquid form, making the transport long distances in waterways very expensive. My guess is that there is supply problem with it here, so that is why they have not been developed more, not that there is not a supply problem in Germany with your friendly neighbors to the north and all. I advocate renewable energy as the only viable long term solution, all energy (except nuclear) on the earth is derived from the sun, so why not just use it directly instead of waiting millions of years for geology to make it a fossil fuel.
Paul here are my responses
1) Oil is finite; however it is not important when we will run out of oil. The important event will be when world wide oil production will peak, which will happen much sooner and most estimates project that the latest this will happen is 2020, review Peak Oil theory if you are not familiar with it (search for Hubbert Curve). I have not disputed that plug-in hybrids would lower our demand on oil because they would; however they would not address greenhouse gas emissions in the short term.
2) Very true but, it also takes a lot of energy to mine and transport coal, probably less than oil but I called it even for simplicity. So I did not account for that because I assumed that it cancels out, not a completely fair comparison.
3) I would like to know your source because my understanding is that coal rankine cycles are on the order of 35% percent efficient.
4) In the USA, the latest data from the EIA shows that electricity production comes from as follows: 52% coal, 16% natural gas, 3% oil, 7% hydro, 1% other renewables and 21% nuclear. While some regions of the country do have a lot of hydro, overall the vast majority of electricity comes from fossil fuels.
5) From my understanding most of the extra capacity is natural gas because it is cheaper to install (first cost), however it is much more expensive to run because NG is much scarcer. This is why large industrial users are charged for the demand (greatest energy use in a ¬Ω or 1 hour period throughout the year) and for consumption (kwh)
6) YES!!!! We need to use renewables; they are the long term solution. Plug-in technology is a step in the right direction for the long term, but renewables must be developed first. I am advocating diesels because it is technology that is available right now, and in my opinion may be the best short term solution besides conservation.
7) This is true, but just because it’s not in your backyard does not mean it is not going to affect someone else’s, hence States have started suing other States for pollution they created.
Plug-ins could be promising if they are coupled with electricity that is produced from renewables, but with only 8% coming from renewables in USA, we are a long way off until that happens. Anyways my real message has been missed, which was that the figure of 150 mpg was misleading and not honest because it did not include the energy the car consumed in the form of electricity. Electricity is assumed to be a clean form of energy, but most people do not seem to understand that most of the energy sources that electricity comes from are not clean. I have read that on extended trips the car would get 50mpg with the generator running, this is impressive but can be matched and beat with currently available diesels.
Plug-ins short term solution for reducing oil consumption – yes
Short term solution for reducing green house gas emissions – no
Long term solution – maybe if they are coupled with renewables, GM should market these cars with solar and/or wind systems for the home, use their lobbying power to increase tax breaks for such things and open a whole new market to themselves.
What I don’t understand, especially regarding the USA, is the lack of infrastructure, and consequently vehicles, which run on gases (LPG or CNG).
That’s a good question Gereon, and there is no good answer. LPG and CNG are definitely alternatives with many advantages.
Some taxicabs and truck fleets in large cities use LPG or CNG, and it is common for industrial forklifts and tugs to use LPG.
But anyone who planned a cross-country trip with an LPG or CNG vehicle would have to have good knowledge of fueling points, and do careful route planning to keep from getting stuck in the middle of nowhere.
I suppose the core of the problem is that our LPG and CNG industry don’t have the large voting base that has motivated our Corn Belt politicians to assist the ethanol industry and corn farmers with mandates, subsidies, tax credits, and protective tariffs even though corn ethanol is neither a green nor renewable fuel.
All too often in the USA politics trumps science and common sense.
Best,
Gary Dikkers
I think that GM should definitely manufacture an E-Flex system, but on a car that would be more suited for a “battery concept” car.
The Volt should be produced right away with an internal combustion engine (be it small, but spunky) because the design is a big hit!
Hi Gary,
Hi Franc,
first of all, thank you very much for your response.
Maybe CNG is scarce in the US, but if I am not wrong, there are considerable amounts of Butane and Propane in your country. The mixture (commonly 60/40) is sold as LPG. Referring to my information these gases are just side-products from crude oil- or natural gas processing. Propane, for example, comes along with the cracking of Hydrogen-chains (crude oil).
In Italy alone there are about 2 million cars running on LPG. The density of LPG-pumps gets higher and higher in Germany. And even, if you don’t find an adequate gas-station, you won’t have to stay at the sideline, since these cars are BiFuel-Vehicles. If your gas-tank is empty, the system automatically switches to gasoline, without any interruption!
I agree with you, the reason might be certain politics, that there’s no corresponding infrastructure in the USA.
BTW, the Lupo was phased out in the meanwhile. I think the basic reason was the vehicle’s high price.
I want this car!!
)
If you build it-I will buy it!
I’m so happy to see GM being innovative. First the Solstice with the best Pontiac design in YEARS and NOW THIS!!! I’m so excited to see some American know-how again! Please, Build it! I want to buy a Volt.
Thanks for listening.
No more $140 monthly gas bill YEAH!!!!!
Positive step in the right direction. Nano Tech Lithium battery is the way to go. I do see the Naysayers trying to compare the Nano battery to the OLD outdated Laptop type battery. Comparing a Lithium Laptop Battery or any non Nano Tech battery to a Nano Battery is like comparing a Leyden Jar to a Lead Acid Battery. Do your research or better buy a Nano Lithium battery and “Play” with one such as I have! They don’t suffer Thermal Runnaway, they will survive a Great amount of blunt trama, you can run the things Smokin’ Hot without degrading them, you can ram in massive amounts of current in them in a very short time as well as pull current from them at an astounding level!
These batteries are still in their infancy, but they ARE ready for Prime time!
As far as the Volt concept? Price will be the determining factor if the public will accept it. If they are not Competitive with the Prius, or the other Hybrids, even with it’s plug in ability, it will not sell well. PRICE, PRICE, PRICE! 40 miles on the battery pack is a bit anemic. I expect the range to increase as the Production run expands. 60 to 80 miles is a bit more comfortable. I like the idea of the on board generator charging the battery while one is at work, or stopping in the store, ect. GREAT IDEA! A Diesel generator would probably increase the overall fuel milage considerably and higher numbers would assist in selling the product.
Overall I am believe this vehicle or a variant will be built by GM. This type of Plug in Hybrid is a good stepping stone to the Fuelcell Direction. In order to become the 1000 Pound Gorillia in the market GM MUST market this vehicle quickly and at a competitive price. There is no doubt Toyota, Honda, and the other foreign manufactures are eying this design and will steal GM’s thunder if they falter. Whoever bolts out of the starting gate with this innovation and keeps the increased performance on track will be the winner! I, being a FORD driver for many years can only applaud GM for their Boldness, and I would purchase this product when offered as long as it is affordable! Again, Good Luck GM!
I cannot say anything but POSITIVE Comments about the newest Generation of these Nano Lithium Batteries that GM is incorporating in the Volt. I have been experimenting with these batteries for about a year really intentionally abusing them and they just keep coming back for more! These batteries are robust and very safe. I would feel safe to have them in a vehicle. Additionally I would imagine the Volt battery pack would be even more robust than the individual Cylinder type batteries that currently are available. With the proper packaging I can see these things totally “Bullet Proof”
A suggestion about the battery configuration: Since these Batteries would be fairly expensive, if the battery pack was constructed in a Modular form meaning that if the onboard computer sensed an individual battery module had become defective, the pack could be easily accessed, opened and the defective individual battery unit could be isolated,removed, and replaced in a timely fashion as well as in an inexpensive manner. One would expect if the battery pack contained a hundred or more individual battery units, some could fail. Having to remove, replace the entire 400 pound assembly along as removing all the accessory cables would be a major undertaking and would only complicate ownership. I am aware that for a period of time there would be a warrenty, on the packs, but with the rated discharge cycles suggested on these battery packs, they could last in the vehicle for 10 years or more! It would be pretty expensive to have to remove and replace the entire assembly out of warrenty just because one or two individual batteries failed. I do know the design is a bit complicated but please try to keep the engineering simple enough that repairs can be done in a timely manner without having to dissamble several thousand dollars of hardware to replace a buck and a half resistor. Over engineering the design and making it too complicated to replace parts, without special tools or a Degree from MIT will scare the “Gearheads” away.
Dear Beth,
After owning a Chevy Vega and the infamous 1979 diesel pick-up, I have not considered Chevy. In both cases, Chevy made a bad product and failed to back it up.
But I would forgive Chevy if they came out with the Volt. Frankly, I think this is way past due, and I don’t understand the delay. Electric cars are already made by others, why does Chevy need so long to develop it?
I thought Chevy was actually coming out with the car, now I find it is just a concept car. That means this is all just talk.
Thomas Garrod
I’m not an expert on topics related to the Chevrolet Volt. I have read that the internal combustion engine used for back-up power in the Volt is referred to as an “ICE”. I understand it is an ICE – internal combustion engine, but I think it should be called formally “APU”. That way it is referred to as an -Auxillary Power Unit- and it could be something other than an internal combustion engine. Thanks.