Building the Plug-In Hybrid: The Battery Challenge
By Beth Lowery
Vice President, GM Environment and Energy
In January, GM caused great excitement when we revealed the Chevrolet Volt, our plug-in electric hybrid concept vehicle. Since that time, we have received many questions about the car, particularly relating to the challenges of battery technology.
Today, I led a discussion before 100 members of the media and bloggers who joined in person and by webcast. The battery briefing: (1) introduced GM’s new battery team and summarized where we’ve been — GM learned from its past work with the EV1 and lead acid batteries; (2) where we are — GM has evolved to nickel metal hydride batteries in vehicles like the current Saturn Vue Green Line; and (3) where we’re going — to make a production-worthy car, the vehicle must meet a potential car buyer’s expectations in terms of performance, cost, safety and reliability — and the battery is an integral part of that process.
Joining me were leaders from technology partners like Johnson Control-Saft, A123 Systems and Cobasys. Each spoke about the challenges in developing a lithium ion battery that is safe, low cost and as efficient and long-lasting as possible. Each is looking at refining materials and improving battery chemistry to develop a product that will be used in GM’s future vehicles.
Whatever the battery looks like, it will need to perform in all situations — from quick acceleration to climbing steep hills. The energy storage needed to give the vehicle its range is equivalent to the power needed to run a laptop continuously for weeks. Lithium ion is the best solution to provide the energy and packaging profile demanded by these vehicles.
These efforts are all part of GM’s commitment, as first laid out by Rick Wagoner at the L.A. Auto Show to develop more diverse, more secure and cleaner energy pathways.
Finally, for those of you who are wondering, “What about GM’s hydrogen fuel cell program? Is it dead?” No, absolutely not. GM’s battery program in no way diminishes GM’s commitment to developing hydrogen fuel cell technology. The fuel cell program remains on track, with 100 fuel-cell powered Chevrolet Equinoxes hitting the streets later this year as part of our Project Driveway test fleet.
Through these efforts, GM continues to address the bigger issues of the environment, national security, dependence on foreign oil, technological leadership and new, diverse pathways for the future of transportation.
- Posted in Cars & Trucks
Rick Lupori
Ms. Lowery: A very good update on what GM is doing on the challenge of developing E-Flex batteries.
I have done some research on the partners GM has selected for battery technology and they all seem to be on track to develop the needed technology in the near future.
They also appear capable of producing quality batteries in the quantity required.
It is also encouraging to hear the fuel cell program is still moving forward.
Keep up the good work and please keep us informed.
Schmeltz
Ms. Lowery:
Just wanted to compliment you and your team for an excellent job on the Volt concept and your continued progress on the battery technology necessary to make the Volt a reality. Please continue to keep us informed as you have been on the progress of this technology. I can’t remember when there has been so much buzz and anticipation in the auto industry for a car concept. Keep up the good work!
Corto
Here here for the Kudos.
Please keep up the good work. It cannot be stressed enough that we are running out of time to save our planet, the only one we have, if some have forgotten. GM will never allot to many resources on this crucial issue. Bravo !
noel park
Buzz and anticipation are great. Actual products are better
They say that “Rust never sleeps”. If you listen closely, you can almost hear the mavens over at you-know-who (multiple) beavering away on these same concepts. If they beat you to the market, you will lose a lot of the halo effect.
In the meantime, how ever long that is, note the comments of Rick, 3/11/07, 5:23 PM and Paul, 3/12/07, 4:42 PM, responding to “Changing Perceptions” below.
Gereon Langlitz (Germany)
I just would like to join the comment from Rick Lupori. There’s nothing to add.
Aaron Curiel
If you build it they will come, I know I will. I am planning on holding off on buying another car in 2009 because of the potential release of the 2010 Volt. I love the name the styling and especially the gas mileage!!! I will not be left behind in this round of car buying.
EricR
After reading about the Tesla Roadster and the Volt, I am very excited about the prospect of a plug-in vehicle, and particularly excited about the prospect of a plug-in supplemented by an electric generator. It would seem to me, though, that having an approximate 40 mile battery-only driving range would mean extremely frequent full charge/discharge cycles than if the batteries had a much higher driving range. In other words, if the average commute is 40 miles round trip, the batteries would be practically fully discharged every day. If the batteries had a 100 mile range, they would only be approx. 40% discharged per day. Assuming a nightly recharge, the 40 mile LiOn batteries would be stressed much more than the 100 mile LiOn batteries. Considering today’s battery technology, the 40 mile LiOns would degrade too fast.
I could be completely wrong in my understanding, and if so I apologize. But if I am near the mark, it would seem me that eeking out greater mileage would reduce the degradation on the LiOns. I could imagine, though, a sexy 2+2 coupe as the ideal entry-point for this technology- the second/commuter/fun car rather than the primary family vehicle (like the Fiero was intended, except with back seats for emergency kid-hauling, and more fun performance).
- Eric R.
O.jeff
Dear Ms. Lowery,
Thanks for keeping us up to date directly through this blog as well as through your contacts in the media and blogs.
I decided some months ago that I will not purchase a new vehicle until I can buy one that is “green and independent.” “Green and independent” is the shortest phrase I’ve heard that summarizes my goals: a vehicle that is mostly non-polluting, can help solve global warming, and can reduce our dependence on foreign oil. It just seems like we have to move in this direction with our personal transportation. The potential consequences of not moving in this direction are just too high.
It must be a very exciting program for the engineers working on it. I guess there are relatively few automotive engineers alive today who have worked on a program that could indeed redefine the way we think about cars. I wish I could help!
Good luck in your work and I hope for great success. We are all depending on you!
Felix Kramer
Thanks, Ms. Lowery and the whole team for the work so far — and for opening up GM’s development processes for comments. Reporters at this briefing asked a lot of probing questions. See GM’s Media Briefing on PHEVs Offers Major Opportunity for a summary.
Here’s what The California Cars Initiative (long-time advocates for plug-in hybrids) concluded:
In creating a development program that requires a 150,000-mile battery now, GM may be making the perfect the enemy of the good. Validating the full lifetime of batteries takes a long time — it could be the challenge that delays the introduction of a vehicle that might otherwise be ready sooner. GM can’t imagine the first PHEV batteries as a “maintenance part.” Why not? Tires and other major components get replaced — and they’re warranted separately from cars.
All PHEV advocates want car-makers to be sure to get everything right on safety, durability and performance. Then, for large demonstration fleets, CalCars has proposed starting with “good enough” 75,000-mile batteries plus a third-party warranty to remove the risk factors from both buyers and sellers. And planners at electric utilities have said they would consider buying used batteries for secondary stationery applications.
If GM and other car-makers can partner with government regulators, legislators and utilities, we’ll be we’re on our way to more rapid commercialization of PHEVs. The first large demonstration fleets will give car-makers market research from drivers and help them “get PHEVs right” by improving other aspects of the car. And while they get ready for volume production, with the rapid changes in the energy storage industry, they may have even better battery choices in as little as two years.
– Felix Kramer, Founder, CalCars.org
noel park
Mr. Felix Kramer is dead right.
“Making the perfect the enemy of the good” is a common and tragic mistake.
Or, a very clever stalling tactic.
edvard
“GM can’t imagine the first PHEV batteries as a “maintenance part.” Why not? Tires and other major components get replaced — and they’re warranted separately from cars.
All PHEV advocates want car-makers to be sure to get everything right on safety, durability and performance. Then, for large demonstration fleets, CalCars has proposed starting with “good enough” 75,000-mile…..”
Again- what many people on the environmentalist bandwagon forget to configure into the equation is the fact that practicality, maintenance, and reliability are just as important as developing new technologies. I am not at all in favor of releasing half-baked ideas, or ones that are ” good enough”.
For example,I saw a TV special regarding a ” 100 MPG Prius” In fact, it might have been a Calcars project. Sounded great until your realized that the car was actually getting an initial 10 miles of gas-free electrical propulsion with nothing more than a trunk full off lead acid batteries. I would hardly call that progress especially given the fact that hundreds of pounds of lead cannot possibly be that terrific for the environment.
I would much rather see a car that simply works. People want simplicity. They want a car that they simply sit in, turn the key, and go. If we all loved dismantling things on the weekends ( I being one of them), then we could all build our own little electrical miracles on wheels.
But the reality is that a car like the Volt must be built for the masses and be counted on to perform flawlessly for sometimes over 10 years at a time.Worries over batteries must be eliminated from the equation.
I for one applaud GM’s efforts on spending the adequate time needed to provide such a car in practical form to as many people as possible- environmentalists and soccer moms alike.
In the end, the more people are willing to accept cars such as these, the better off we will all be.
joe l
I think you are on the right track. With $3 gas coming again this spring and summer, the gas guzzlers are in for another hit.
Cheap gas I believe will never come again, the refiners are seeing to that.
A good sign for New England Irving Oil is planning on building the first new refinery in North America in 30 years.
Drew
I am glad to see GM concentrating its effort on forwarding battery technology. It would have been easy for GM to showcase a hydrogen or electric car and then discard it for museum use. The Volt project is a good sign. I hope GM and the world’s other automakers, in conjunction with fuel providers, make an honest effort in hydrogen development-skeptics be damned. GM and Ford should, in the meantime, encourage production and distribution of biofuels in the USA. Ethanol and bio-diesel are available with an infrastructure in place. Only through a diversified energy plan can the United States become energy independent and Earth be clean.
jnaggs
there is little doubt that the advances in battery technology will be applied in most if not all future powertrains. all cars can benefit from regen-braking and that means that even in future hybrid fuel cell vehicles, batteries will play a major roll. any investment in batteries will almost surely pay itself off many times over the next 50+ years.
Tim Meyer
The Volt is the car I have beeen looking for, can’t come soon enough. It cannot be stressed enough that energy is national security. GM has the right idea. I just hope Lithum Ion is the best answer for the battery. Segmented Nickel Hydrogen Batteries in limited testing have shown superior qualities in depth of discharge, charge and discharge rates and nearly unlimited cycle life.
kert
Anyone care to explain why GM was able to produce a working , four-seat Series Hybrid prototype, based on EV1 in 1998, but the Volt is still not a working prototype ?
Look up the EV1 series hybrid on wikipedia. How and why is Volt different from what was done then ? Why arent you using the EV1 hybrid powertrain to at least run the Volt show car ?
Bob Tasa
Look up the EV1 series hybrid on wikipedia. How and why is Volt different from what was done then ? Why arent you using the EV1 hybrid powertrain to at least run the Volt show car ?
Everyday I ask myself the same question.
Hey if it could run for 100 miles (as the EV1 did on the Nimh batteries)
why cant they get this to work again? Is it just a matter of final cost?
That has NEVER been addressed by GM here or anywhere.
As far as LiIon Seems like another battery maker can already do what you are asking and YET you stay with the oil back Cobasys?
Hmmmm….
Just doesnt seem right.
jnaggs
the ev1 series hybrid has nothing to do with a electric car with a fuel powered range extender.
“Why arent you using the EV1 hybrid powertrain to at least run the Volt show car ?”
why didnt they power the spaceshuttle with v2 rockets? the reasons are too long to list. powertrains are not like lego peices, what works well for a lightweight 2 seater will not work at all for a 4-5 passenger family car.
Aaron
Would have loved to see the Volt (or Camaro, Malibu, CTS…etc.) at the Minneapolis Autoshow. Apparently we are not considered a viable market…
ted
In response to why the Volt show car doesn’t use the EV-1 powertrain, critics would then say the Volt was just a rehash of the scrapped EV-1 ! GM just can’t win in these situations. Let the designers work out the details of the Volt, and release it when the design, the powertrain, and the batteries are stable. Just do it in a timely manner.
Tim
Felix is absolutely correct!! The race is on.
E-Flex is what we all need and we need it NOW. Perfection is a goal that can never be reached. Work on perfecting fit & finish while you give us less expensive and available “good enough” batteries for now. We can always upgrade them with the new tech if or when it becomes available. A biodiesel or better yet, a 100% VegOil APU would be even more perfect.
I have owned many GM cars & light trucks over the years and I dearly love them. My Park Ave is getting older and I know that the next car I buy will be a PHEV-40. I hope it will it be a Volt! Please keep as much of the styling as you can. Have you considered an E-Flex Camaro convertible? Wind in your hair with intermittent or NO motor noise. What a ride! H2 is a waste of time and money!
evden eve nakliyat
Yup, I’ve seen those heat maps and they’re fun to look at. I’ve wondered how the data gets stored though; there’s a trade-off of granularity of the data vs. storage space..
Chris P.
I’m sorry, GM, but this just seems like another smoke-and-mirrors type situation. I feel like many of the other posters feel. If the EV1 could go, what, 75-150 miles with the nickel-metal hydride batteries, then why do we have to wait for the lithium ion batteries to go 40 miles? Like someone I know said, it would be much better to produce the Volt using the best batteries currently available, and have a shorter electric-only range, and update to the better batteries when they become available, then it is to sit here and tell us to wait. And while you make us wait, Toyota sells Priuses like hotcakes.
My family is loyal to GM. But we would like our next car to be a hybrid, preferably a plug-in hybrid, or possibly even electric only. We are hoping this Volt is available by the time we begin to shop.
Which brings me to a final point: Why is there no Prius/Civic Hybrid competitor available at GM? We aren’t looking for a midsize sedan like the Aura or an SUV like the Vue. Why is there no small car hybrid, like a Cobalt? A small car would be the logical starting point for a hybrid, especially if you want to appeal to people who want to get the ultimate mpgs, not just get a few extra on their gas-sucking SUV.
You guys, along with Ford, are really dropping the ball here. Everyone knows ethanol isn’t an answer because the corn it comes from can’t meet demand. Get us a compact-car hybrid! I hope you guys listen, because I would love to buy a GM hybrid as my next car.
kert
what works well for a lightweight 2 seater will not work at all for a 4-5 passenger family car.
Yes, you did not do your research. EV1 Series Hybrid _WAS_ a 4-seater.
Before spouting nonsense like “series hybrid has nothing to do with EV-with a range extender” .. at least get your basic facts right.
D
I believe there is a diverse market for a light EV truck, from young men, small business, commercial etc. For example look at the Phoenix Motorcars SUT, we’ll see how that does. Want to bring the Canyon/Colorado to the top, have an EV option and the 2.9 diesel announced for the European CTS if possible. People want utility but will take it in a small truck package if it proves overwhelmingly advantageous in economy. The truck market Prius perhaps? Packaging has got to be easier in a truck. If you build it, they will come!
Edward Hayes
This is unprecedented.
GM’s openness about its future technology and a frank discussions with the media, the supplies and even bloggers of all people. This is just amazing.
It is something I always wondered about. Now I am not saying you can’t have secrets, that is ludicrous. But when GM showed the Solstice some five or six years ago. Where is the explosion of Solstice twins from the competition? They had plenty of time to respond to the design and/or copy. But they didn’t, they couldn’t, they wouldn’t. Perhaps because it was a Pontiac or a GM and they underestimated it. At the same time there is the Porsche Panamera, the 4 door sports car and the Chrysler Imperial, these two vehicles will be the the cars for the end of the decade, no doubt. Still, there will be no Panamera or Imperial clones.
The point is this. While GM is sharing it’s future energy efforts and having an open discussion it does not seem to be compromising its technological secrets, nor does it seem to have a ripple effect through the industry. Nope, does not seem to be any flurry of new activity from other automakers as far as large new investitures in battery technology and production ramp ups. The opposite is true, they seem to want to help you.
The opposite is true, the shared thoughts and team effort almost brings an air of shared destiny and community enrichment. I like that. And I would be glad if GM could discuss and be frank about some of its plans with respect to design as well.
The first time we see some designs is six months before it hits showrooms and that is fine, but you aught to let a design or two out from your 100 or so you have in development so that we can share our thoughts and input, because once it’s job 1 as Ford calls it, it’s too late.
So let’s just see the next Buick sedan and I am going to share some of my thoughts just to help you, you know make sure you are going in the right direction.
I’ll give you a hint, if it does not look like the Velite or Efigy, if it’s not a dead ringer, go back to the drawing board and let’s get it right.
My heart bleeds for great design. I love the new design competitions and I love the concepts and the execution, but ask yourselves these things.
Are we going fast enough?
And are we pushing the design envelope enough?
I picture the perfect GM lineup in the future and I dream for you and with you.
A future G8 that can for design go toe to toe with a Porsche Panamera.
The next Buick is as distinct and groundbreaking, as the Holden FJ Efigy.
The next GM family sedan harks back to the real sedans of the first half of the 20th century, with a high roof, belt line and seating position that did not need a crossover upgrade.
The 20’s through the 50’s was truly the golden era for the family sedan. I was there but I miss it. Hay, I got an idea, let’s bring it back.
A Hummer H3T.
A bigger HHR that harks back to the Buick ‘41 Estate wagon.
How about new dreams like that Chevy TLC, you know the PYT from Paris.
In short?
You dream dreams like this with technology and design, then your only competition becomes yourself and the dream that you can create and inspire.
And as always, I am glad I can share my thoughts with you.
Ken
“the ev1 series hybrid has nothing to do with a electric car with a fuel powered range extender.”
This is one of the most ignorant statements I have ever read in my life.
The EV1 series hybrid is most certainly similar to the Volt and there is utterly no reason for GM to re-invent the wheel.
Come on GM, slap NiMH batteries into the Volt chassis and deliver us a product.
Jim
I think there are way too many GM employees responding to this blog. The issue is really simple.
“Why arent you using the EV1 hybrid powertrain to at least run the Volt show car ?” Because GM doesn’t want to. It is apparent that they are stalling as long as they can. Just look at all the whining they are doing in front of Congress right now.
Deliver the car GM!!! When you do I’ll buy it. It’s really as simple as that. And I will simply keep my current used car until you do. Well that’s assuming you don’t continue to stall.
And stop whining….
noel park
Tim, 3/17, 6:27 PM:
Amen!
John C
If the EV1 could go, what, 75-150 miles with the nickel-metal hydride batteries, then why do we have to wait for the lithium ion batteries to go 40 miles?
http://clubs.ccsu.edu/recorder/editorial/editorial_item.asp?NewsID=188
Check this link out to see why the cleaner and more enviromentally friendly lith. ion batteries are worth the wait.
noel park
Jim, 2/19, 10:32 AM:
Amen to you too brother!
Preach on guys!
noel park
Nothing new since 3/12?
Gary Dikkers
John C said:
John,
Yes, the nickel extraction industry is environmentally dirty and energy intensive. In fact, it is easy to find numerous references saying that the energy embedded in nickel-metal hydride batteries during extraction and processing means a hybrid car actually saves no energy.
But what makes you think lithium extraction is better? Lithium is a highly reactive metal that is never found in a free state in nature. It too requires energy intensive extraction, and though I haven’t seen any studies of how much energy is embedded in lithium during extraction, it may not be any better than nickel.
The unfortunate truth is that there is no free lunch. Nickel extraction has drawbacks, and I suspect lithium extraction on a large scale will be little better.
I do know most lithium now comes from Chile and Argentina, and when the source of any commodity is concentrated (as with oil in the Middle East), it always opens the door to the possibility of a cartel to control its price and availability.
The thought of a major company such as GM turning out hundreds of thousands of cars with lithium-ion batteries must be making lithium speculators and commodity brokers drool.
Regards,
Gary Dikkers
Ryan Gubicza
Hey whats up this whole thing about the battery. Teslas got theres why dont you have one?
stephen
great idea, only one small problem this will actually cause more pollution in the long run. How? most of the U.S. electricity is produced my burning coal and by “plugging in” these cars ur going to cause more strain on the system which in term will force the electric companies to burn more coal to meet the demand. another problem is that ur still using a GAS powered engine to help create more electricity when ur on the go. What u should do is put in a small 2 cylinder turbo diesels that runs purely on ethanol and only runs to replenish the batteries when they are down to about 25% charge forcing u to use the “plug in” feature alot more. Its basically the same technology diesel locomotives use but instead of putting in a large engine to make power u only need a small 2 cylinder that runs periodically to replenish the batteries in combination with the “plug in” feature as the diesel will bear no load of actually moving the car only the electric motor which means the diesel engine can run a peek efficiency when its in use.
I think if u can first get the contry to power itself with nuclear power instead of coal and replace the gas engine of the hybrid with a diesel that runs on pure ethanol the significant decrease in pollution will actually be worth the time and money into creating a near zero emmission society that is actually obtainable instead of these miserable little attempts already in use or being developed.
Doug Korthof
A challenge to GM: why not use NiMH!
Prove the numbers, try to show why NiMH won’t work, while it is running every day in our Toyota RAV4-EV!
NiMH is cheaper than Lithium both in up-front cost and much cheaper in life-cycle cost. NiMH is the standard EV battery.
DrivingTheFuture.com/#Challenge
economist
Stephen,
How sad that you are posting incorrect information that has been trounced thousands of times. All of my responses can be checked by research.
1)
“Great idea, only one small problem this will actually cause more pollution in the long run.”
This is simply not true. See below.
2)
” How? most of the U.S. electricity is produced my burning coal”
Incorrect. Different locations in the United States use different mixes of power sources, which can and do include hydro, solar and wind. Coal is not a majority source, nationally. Also, cleaning occurs much more efficiently, due to economies of scale, at a few large locations that at millions of individual cars.
3)
“and by “plugging in” these cars ur going to cause more strain on the system which in term will force the electric companies to burn more coal to meet the demand.”
Completely incorrect. First, a recent peer-reviewed professional study found that the national electricity grid has enough capacity without additional production right now if 80% of the population bought and stated to use plug in cars tomorrow. As most people work during the day and would charge their car at night, electric plug in cars would even out electricity demand over the current daily peaks and valleys and make life easier for electric utilities. With vehicle to grid plug in cars, overall electricity use would go down, not up.
4)
“another problem is that ur still using a GAS powered engine to help create more electricity when ur on the go.”
That’s a choice, not a problem. Hopefully, GM will also offer a pure electric version as well for you to avoid this choice if you don’t like the flexibility (and complexity and cost)that a hybrid offers.
5)Er, you’ve pretty much described below what GM said E-Flex is all about, but perhaps might want to run a diesel engine with diesel gas (say biodiesel)? Ethanol has been fairly well exploded as a short term gimmick, although not as well as the hydrogen scam.
“What u should do is put in a small 2 cylinder turbo diesels that runs purely on ethanol and only runs to replenish the batteries when they are down to about 25% charge forcing u to use the “plug in” feature alot more. Its basically the same technology diesel locomotives use but instead of putting in a large engine to make power u only need a small 2 cylinder that runs periodically to replenish the batteries in combination with the “plug in” feature as the diesel will bear no load of actually moving the car only the electric motor which means the diesel engine can run a peek efficiency when its in use.”
6)
“I think if u can first get the contry to power itself with nuclear power instead of coal and replace the gas engine of the hybrid with a diesel that runs on pure ethanol the significant decrease in pollution will actually be worth the time and money into creating a near zero emmission society that is actually obtainable instead of these miserable little attempts already in use or being developed.”
Electric energy can come from many sources, with batteries as an omnivorous carrier. I’ll take the miserable little attempts over nothing any day. I’d like to buy an electric car, not limited to 25 mph, that I can plug in and I want it NOW. Anyone want to build me one? One step at a time.
CM
With good battery management, NiMH batteries have a very long life and could be used for plugin vehicles. NiMH may appear cheaper than LiIon, but on a price per Kwh stored are similar, and the price of nickle is rising while LiIon prices are dropping.
Toyota is a decade ahead of GM in hybrid development, and is likely to bring a “pluggable” to market sooner as well. I wonder if GM will ever be able to catch up.
I find it ironic that GM canceled their EV program shortly after LiIon batteries went into commeercial production. Now Tesla Motors will own the EV market that could have been dominated by GM.
GM has wasted far too much time and money on hydrogen. Hydrogen cars will never come to market - H2 is too bulky, fuel cells are too expensive, batteries are cheaper and “electric fuel” is 1/5th the cost of hydrogen!
Schmeltz
Many people question GM for not returning to NiMH batteries. If NiMH is the recommendation of so many, than why hasn’t Tesla adopted them for their car? Why has Toyota just announced replacing NiMH batteries with Lithium Ion batteries for their next Prius?
It appears to me that the Lithium Ion batteries hold better promise for the purposes of EV’s and that these manufacturers have recognized that. Why continue to waste time and resources on something that is inferior to another technology?
Let GM be cautious and methodical with this and take the time to get it right.
P. Callahan
The battery problem can be fixed by using lithium ion batteries to load stabilize lower discharge rate batteries like nickel cadmium or sintered plate nickel iron (very recycleable).
Use the lithium ion batteries to supply acceleration surges and something more rational than lithiun ion batteries for “bulk storage”, as it were. Obviously a small capacity fuel cell would work for “bulk storage” as well as a charging engine. A fuel cell producing something like 5 - 10 KW output is about right. An 8 - 15 hp Stirling cycle engine would not be too big or heavy either.
So many of the replies to this post evince much too much television and too little critical thinking. It is a never ending wonder.
economist
Do I smell the usual frantic backpedaling of GM? You’ve taken a no-brainer (BEV) and are trying your best to make it unworkable. Instead of wasting your time failing in the future, why don’t you just start making electric vehicles using good enough current technologies and succeed in the present? You have to become competent before you can compete with others.
Paul
This is a little pie-in-the-sky, but unlike petroleum, which requires tectonic forces to create, we can mine lithium from space materials. Near-Earth-Asteroids and the Moon are full of minerals like lithium (for batteries) and silicon (for solar panels).
And the best part is that we won’t have to destroy part of our ecosystem to get at it.
economist
Gary and Paul:
Lithium in this context is an energy carrier, not an energy source. The only traders drooling are the usual, the ones looking for uncritical thinkers (er, investors) to rook in the short run. After about 20 years of market penetration, you should start to see a pretty homeostasis. That’s good news for electric cars, their drivers and manufacturers.
Gary Dikkers
Economist said,
Yes, lithium batteries would be an energy carrier and not an energy source. But that doesn’t mean we can throw the law of supply and demand out the window.
If GM and several other major car companies plan to put hundreds of thousands (maybe millions) of cars on the road, all with lithium batteries that might weigh as much as 600 lbs per car, that is going to take a tremendous amount of lithium.
If there remain only a few sources of lithium as there are now (primarily Chile and Argentina), the suppliers and commodity brokers that control that source will be sitting in the catbird seat as major automakers and their battery suppliers bid up the price of the available lithium
Lithium battery technology may prove sweet, but the logistics of lithium also has to be capable of allowing us to take advantage of that technology.
It would indeed be ironic if we break the shackles of the oil cartel (OPEC) only to be subject to another cartel controlling the lithium market.
Cordially,
Gary Dikkers
Luke
Gary,
At least it’s a different set of shackles — and it’s much easier to just start building a different kind of battery if there’s a problem. NiMH and LiON aren’t the only battery chemistries available. Plus, once I have my battery pack, I don’t have to buy a new one every week. So, if someone doesn’t want to do business the way the US does, we can switch technologies and start doing business with their friendly nighbor — no need to bomb anyone.
To everyone else who’s talking about out the NiMH betteries that were used in the protoype… It seems like that you all were failing to consider two factors: weight and cost. The consumer rechargable AA NiMH batteries that I have (a different market, I know) that I have cost about $2.50 per 1.5V cell, and weigh about twice as much as a disposable battery. My person guess (unsubstantiated in every way) is that the batteries in the Volt prototype probably cost about $80,000. Does anyone have a real number?
Les Hunter
Let G.M. do it;s own research to get the best electric car possible. use nuclear to generate electricity use nuclear to run trains just like submarines.
STANLEY DUYCK
Saving my money for a volt
My cavalier will need replacing about 2009 or 10
If gm cant get the car on the market by then I may have to consider a toyota.I see more and more of the prius on the road every day.Our gas prices are awful here.
I live in oregon
gas prices are bad here all the time.Today the price at the station across the road hit 3.39.Cant wait to use electricity.My cavalier gets 30 mpg or I would be suffering .
Chris
I am all for a series driven hybrid, with a simple 3-4 stroke engine - powering a a generator. Overall - the generator should provide a very efficient use of diesel or gasoline as torque and load should be constant - and even maximizable depending on the power needed for the eletric engines. Note I said engines - direct drive off all 4 wheels would be best - with computer controlled tuning of each wheel. No transmission to speak of. The volt is a good step in the right direction - but why make it a rehash of what exists today - and why rely on the batteries to be the conduit for all the power? Has anyone thought of using the technology without batteries? Not completely freeing of combustables - but should produce much more efficient vehicles until the batteries and safety concerns with batteries catch up.