Stay Tuned…
By Bob Lutz
GM Vice Chairman
I have taken the opportunity to shoot a brief video addressing some of the issues that have been cropping up here on the blog in recent weeks. This video will be posted in chapters, in the coming days, and will touch on such issues as the future of Buick, the Chevy Triplets, GM concept cars and diesel engines, among other things. And we'll try to do more of these videos in the future as time permits and circumstances dictate.
In the meantime, I have a few other notes of interest regarding the Volt development program, to follow up on Denise Gray's post of a few weeks ago.
First, the Volt (and all other vehicles that will use E-Flex) now has its very own vehicle line executive, just like all of our other vehicle development teams. The VLE for E-Flex vehicles is Frank Weber, who has a lot of pertinent experience under his belt, including a stint leading advanced concept development for Opel.
Also, we have opened a brand-new studio dedicated to the design of vehicles using E-Flex. As I've said time and again, GM is once more a design driven company, so it's only natural that design keep pace with the engineering development of the E-flex system. The studio will be led by Bob Boniface, director of advanced design. Bob led advanced design work of the Chevy Camaro Concept, Sequel Concept, and Volt. He previously led DaimlerChrysler's Advanced Product Design Studio and directed architectural design of the minivan stow-and-go seat.
Finally, we have allocated even more engineering resources to this program, and to our fuel cell program. We have assigned over 150 engineers to E-Flex development, and transitioned more than 500 fuel cell engineers from our Research and Development group to our core engineering functions. That's a step toward accelerating the production engineering of hydrogen fuel cell and electric drive vehicles.
All these moves, and everything going on behind the scenes, are strong indicators that we're serious about Volt, despite the "PR stunt" dismissals I still hear in some circles, and that we're serious about other advanced technologies intended to move the future of the automobile away from petroleum. And we'll continue to develop these technologies with as many resources as we can allocate to them, even if our attention and resources get diverted by proposed legislation that will only serve to keep America hooked on petroleum even longer.
54 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.)
I’ll be waiting for the news about the Chevrolet triplets.
Good job on charging ahead with Volt.
I do hope that in reguards Volt and other cars that you do a better job with color to enhance your better designs. Right now on Impala for example we have 4 colors that are so close to black that why don’t we just offer black. No green, no light blue, no decent tan.
ON a seperate note sad to hear about the loss of another large FWD Pontiac. The snow belt needs FWD for winter traction, not to mention the better fuel mileage over RWD.
Again good job on getting the Volt on the road.
Mike Murphy
OK Bob, show me how to put down a deposit on a Volt and I’m there. The check’s in the mail tomorrow.
Non-refundable? No problem.
It’s not coming for 3 years? I don’t like it, but I ‘ll live with it.
How’s that for a response to the PR stunt dismissals we hear in some circles?
Some guys were here from our local Chevy dealer today. I told them the same thing. I offered to let them send a deposit check up the line to show that the customers were totally serious about this.
Plenty of others have suggested this as well. I think that plenty of people would love to help you make this happen.
We look forward to the future of Buick. The Enclave is beautiful and I’ve got my fingers crossed that I will have a Velite to buy!
I’ve been curious in regards to your fuel cell program for a number of years. Something that seems amiss from it’s future viability is how efforts are being directed towards creating the infrastructure and logistics to support it and how this knowledge can be more readily available to the public in the same way ethanol was.There does not seem to be much of an effort made from a general PR perspective in regards to hydrogen technology and how it can be a realistic option. As far as many who aren’t in the know, Hydrogen seems to still be in “pipe-dream” stage.More should be done to assure the public of it’s success, especially if GM feels as strongly about the program as it freely admits in automotive circles.
I feel that this point, what you’ve shown us looks acceptable as a realistic drivetrain alternative.The Hydro_Gen program seems to be an overwhelming success.But in the long run, there needs to be some efforts made to show the reality of hydrogen being a readily produced commodity.
I look forward to what you might have to say pertaining to certain favorites amongst the handful of enthusiasts here such as Diesels, the ongoing alternative fuel research and development, as well as the possible utilization of resources from your Chinese division.
Hello Mr. Lutz,
Very happy to read that you will be commenting on the future of Buick. Please don’t doom Buick by giving it all large vehicles, in the face of the preference by a lot of the public for smaller cars, gas mileage / CAFE, etc. How about some hybrid or flex fuel Buicks – not to mention AWD, too?
Thank you,
- Christopher Popa
P.S. – Congratulations on the wonderful reception the Buick Enclave is getting!
hrmm… this volt sounds like a great thing… it also encourages living closer to the work place, i think… which in the long run also encourages less consumption of oil…
all though vehicles like this might not be for everyone… I might be interested if such a vehicle had a pricetag around a cobalt… i have no idea if this is a full size sedan or a aveo sub-compact type thing…
but a guy who owns a GMC big block dually and a 385 firebird formula… but a commuter car that doesnt need to be filled might be nice to have around… but not something i’d pay a premium for.
Sounds good, Bob. How about also the issue of the (too many) brands that stemmed from the USA Today letter a few weeks ago?
Not to be disrespectful, but I don’t think a 75-year-old man can effectively lead global product development of a major automaker. He is out of touch with today’s up and coming younger buyers. I disagree with with the decision to keep Buick an old folks’ car in the United States by continuing with its classical “timeless” design instead of developing something Japanese-like (but unique) targeted at young professionals. The dashboard plastics in the Enclave are too coarsely textured unlike the plastics used in Japanese luxury cars. The audio, climate controls and nav system in the Enclave are refined, but too GM generic. Also, the seats are the exact same as the Acadia and Outlook. The seats could have been made to look significantly different.
One more thing: Lutz has worked at all of the three major US automakers in high positions. How can he have loyalty or passion for GM (or any other automaker) when he floats around so much? Like a true sports fan, an employee must be dedicated to one company for life and must be promoted from within the company, not brought in externally. This is one of the principles that Toyota has followed, and based on the success of that company now as the world’s largest automaker, I have agree that its principles are moral and correct.
Hopefully, Bo doesn’t find out about what you are doing. He will cost reduce this project into oblivion, just as he does with everything he touches. It’s too bad – you guys should be given the leeway to deliver something really special. But it won’t happen on his watch. Why does he have such a powerful stronghold on the real cars guys at GM?. Does he have pictures or something?
Thanks for keeping us updated on the Volt, Mr. Lutz.
The excitement for this vehicle is palpable among the GM community. Many of us on Cheers and Gears are rooting for the success of this program and hope the same intensity and focus of mind that guided projects like the Solstice and Camaro from concept to fruition is being applied to the Volt. GM has the opportunity to truly change the way the world drives with an infinitely flexible powertrain wrapped in an attractive package.
But we have seen such revolutionary ideals come and go before, Mr. Lutz. The EV1, Precept, AUTOnomy have all predicated the Volt and have all – to varying degrees – ended up in the history books. I don’t speak merely for myself when I say I want to see the Volt memorialized not just in the Heritage Center, but in used car lots, in Kelly Blue Book, and – years from now – in salvage yards. That would mean the Volt has become a production success and not merely a misadventurous foray into alternative propulsion.
Thank you, and keep us updated!
-Brian
Hi, it’s good to hear good news. I currenlty drive a Pontiac with 180k miles, but I will keep driving it till the volt arrives. I would love for GM to be the answer to pollution and energy issues of the world.
P.S. My Pontiac is running solid, have only had to replace a water pump. I hope to break 300K one day.
I’m looking forward to hearing what you have to say about diesels. I rode in an Audi diesel in Great Britain and except at idle, you couldn’t tell it was diesel. We cruised at 90 MPH for thirty minutes and it felt like a gas vehicle. The new 1.9L being released in the Saab 9-3 and the 2.9L being released in the CTS in Europe sound great! I’d love to have one here in the US. With VW and Mercedes to sell diesels in the US in 2008, I’d think GM would have the technology to meet US emission requirements also. I’ve also read about Chrysler testing a diesel 300 sedan and letting journalists try it. Both the Mercedes and the Chrysler are reported to be getting 26 MPG in the city and 36 MPG on the highway. Where I live, I’d say 75% of filling stations sell diesel fuel. What’s the future of GM diesels in the US?
Great article.
Great idea to continue corporate communication on what GM’s direction is.
I’m impressed with this new wave towards informing the public where it can so we know what GM is attempting to do…
I can’t wait to see the videos!
Dear Mr. Lutz:
I emailed my Congressman and my two Senators asking them to vote down the new proposed CAFE rules. These standards seem very detrimental to the American auto industry. Also, the new Saturn Aura looks very good. I watched MotorWeek on PBS last week and they rated it as the top midsized family sedan, beating out the Honda Accord and Toyota Camry.
Respectfully,
Eric Matthew Vest
The guy down the block just bought an Enclave. It looks good on paper, but let me tell you, it is stunning in real life. As much as I bash Buicks designs and leadership, they definitely have a winner with this one.
Mr. Lutz,
Thanks so much for this post. I want to tell you and GM that I recently went on a 5 hour car ride with friends from DC to NY. We had a long discussion about cars and about CAFE legislation and the like. I am the only “car guy” of the bunch. My friends are young, college educated urban progressives. They are the folks who tend to, by default, by a Corolla when they need a new car. They each were hyped about the Volt and the E-Flex platform. They can not identify cars on the road, but knew the term E-Flex, and talked about this program as “game changing.” As I assume that this we are demographic you want to crack (you got me since I have trasded my 04 Hyundai for a Pure Solstice) I figured you should see the impact on this market. I look forward to seeing all my friends behind the wheel of a domestic vehicle.
I look forward to watching the video Bob and thanks for the update.
Who says he can’t have your cake and eat it too anymore. With the Volt for the daily driver and the Camaro for fun weekends, we will again know what cake taste like. Thanks GM and Bob! I still believe in Detroit, which more than I can say about Washington (DC).
Brilliant! Brilliant! You keep them going Bob!
Why are you worried when you can have the two-mode hybrid system in the SUV’s and the E-flex in smaller car which will be much more affordable in five years. Why would you even have a straight fuel engine vehicle ten years from now except for nostalgia. It make me wonder if you are as confident in the E-flex as you say.
I believe you are truthfully committed to E-flex. Well will be able to look back at the archive of this blog in five years and see just how well you did.
I’m glad to see that you are giving a unique design stutio for E-flex. So, does that mean there will be a family of cars? You should come up with a new Eius brand like Toyota is doing for the Prius with several models. I hate to say it but the people who will be your early adopters would normally not want to be caught riding in a Chevy – they are not very hip.
Hello Mr. Lutz. I just want to say I’m giving GM the kudos it deserves for the Volt and other Eflex designs! I mean seriously people for a company in financial turmoil, do we REALLY believe they would waste so much effort and/or resources to dupe the public? There’s no pay off. People aren’t saying, oh GM is making the Volt so let’s go and buy what cars they have now. It’s moronic. I also feel the new CAFE legislation is a big mistake and arbitrary regulations have never been a strong suit of this government. I couldn’t be happier you decided to come to GM a few years ago, Bob. Its too bad you weren’t there sooner. I always was more of a GM guy than other makes. But I was really at a loss on what to purchase after I got rid of my ‘94 Grand Prix coupe, which had TONS of problems. I would have purchased the Malibu, but it was just too ugly compared to the style, features, and looks of the Altima, so that was my eventual choice finalized by it at least being assembled in America. I think the Japanese auto companies are terrific at what they do. We can’t deny they make great products. However, they do it by protectionism and manipulation and aren’t saddled with billions in legacy costs that the unions demand. Japan has nationalized health care and retirement! Their companies don’t pay any of that. I see no “fair trade” in how Japan Inc. does business. Anyway, my current and 2nd Altima lease expires in 2010. I really like the looks of the new Malibu, so that will defintely be a choice in my shopping as is the 08 CTS(can we say HOT?!)…BUT if the Volt is a reality by my lease end then there WILL BE one in my driveway!!
No one wants to hear strange logic excuses about how CAFE is really going to increase fuel use. The Senate agreement is passed.
50% of the vehicles on the roads today are SUVs and trucks like the Silverado and Suburban or older SUVs from the 1990’s that probably get in the mid to high teens in realistic mixed driving. And they’re driven in most cases I’ve seen, as commuter cars by one man or woman with a whole lot of empty, heavy vehicle behind the front seat.
People’s commutes are for the most part fixed. And the more rural they get as they move away from the cities, the more likely they are to justify a massive SUV or quad cab HD pickup.
So I don’t buy this idea that if more Americans bought Saturn Astra hatchbacks instead of 2 Suburbans for the garage, and they commute the same distances, that fuel use would increase. That’s patently false. It’s simple logic.
And CAFE as proposed would eliminate the so-called SUV loophole that caused the RWD Station Wagon changeover to BOF SUV craze, so that convoluted logic that “low MPG cars will push people into SUVs” won’t fly either.
It’s a worn out old argument from executives who want to continue to see as much profit per vehicle as possible.
And if the USA uses so much gas that it gets dangerously dependent on the Middle East and Venezuela? Too bad, they say.
GM needs 35 miles per gallon out of its HHR and Cobalt. I hope that CAFE’s new rules pass, because right now I’d have to go to Toyota or Honda to get a decent fuel economy to horsepower ratio from any small car. And I hope that news about a new Aveo engine in China is true, it needs better MPG and VVT yesterday.
Thanks for the update Mr. Lutz. I enjoy reading your posts. Everything sounds like it’s falling into place with the E-Flex program. On a separate note, do you have any idea why the Democrats want to destroy the American auto-industry? It’s like they won’t be happy until cars are powered by nothing more than a smile and happy thoughts. Their lack of understanding when it comes to the auto industry is mind-boggling at best. I’d be interested to read what it will take for automakers (particularly GM) to meet their requirements.
Thanks, Eric
“…despite the “PR stunt” dismissals I still hear in some circles,…”
Dear Mr. Lutz,
just let them talk. They’ll be quiet as soon as the first Volt hits the road. Please, make sure, that this vehicle also will be available in Europe. Thank you.
Well, if the gov imposes higher cafe standards for automakers, why don’t impose some sort of CAFE standards for oil industry: something like: 10% of the gas station should offer alternative fuels (hydrogen, biodiesel) by a given year. Anyway this is the long term solution for the now ‘Oil’ industry, but tomorow’s ‘Alternative fuel’ industry. This, combined with a small gas tax to fund biodiesel industry, and more acceptable cafe standards for the auto industry would allow all the industries to breath easily while reducing oil consumption. Not only one industry would have to carry the burden.
Regarding Marc Totta’s comments about Bob Lutz’s age being a detriment to his success, I would argue just the opposite. He has seen it all, both good and bad, and that kind of experience is priceless. He’s not the one designing the vehicles, just insuring that a good process is in place to produce what the customer wants in a timely and cost-effective manner. As for his loyalty to GM, I would dare say there is no more loyal an employee than him, if for no other reason than, at age 75, he doesn’t need the job. He has been the fiercest defender of GM and is one of the main reasons the company is on the cusp of a dramatic turnaround.
Mr Lutz,
No disrespect intended but talk is cheap, we need to act on this stuff asap. GM already dropped the ball on the Belaire, SS concept, bangel,and countless other concepts that should have gone straight to production. Now Camaro , volt and the triplets are here and we are years away still. Step on the gas, and while your at ist we could use a minivan(from opel) and an elcamino (from Holden) in NA as well.Lambda is fantastic but its not a minivan and I have dozens of customers pissed off at GM for A) The Uplander and B) no replacement!Product product product!!!!!!!!!!
Please , please get volt (and other eflex powered GM cars) on the road now!!!
In person the new Malibu LTZ looks great Bob, I sure hope that GM can come in under the price of our competitors on this one. It will definatly be a home run if that happens, also we need to speed up the dual mode hybrid for it.
I happen to know alot of people looking for an e-flex Diesel Pickup/Suv, is their any chance GM might be working on something like this for them? We need to maintain our lead in trucks and that would definatly be one way of doing it.
It’s great to hear more and more about GM’s commitment to Fuel Cell and Electric Drive vehicles! These steps will help GM regain market share and give the automobile industry a bright future to come. I was sad to see the sale of Allison Transmission, but if the money from this sale helps advance fuel cell development, E-flex system, and diesel engines for use in GM products in the US then I’m right behind you.
To Marc Totta’s, and to add on to Tom’s statement… what makes him loyal in my humble opinion:
Lutz began his automotive career in September 1963 at GM, where he held a variety of senior positions in Europe until December 1971.
Hey bob, i’m glad to hear all of the exciting changes going on at GM. I must say that I am planning on trading in my 2006 Mazda 3 for a 2010 Chevy Volt!!! The vehicle has come at the right time, and I expect it to be a huge success. I would be so in love with the car if it kept the same or similar sheet metal to the concept, it did look amazing you have to admit.
I’m already saving some cash to put a down payment on one.
I hope you mention why the Cobalt is not getting a much needed ‘08 MCE.
I can think of plenty of things that need to be improved to makee it competitive-
telescoping steering wheel
better brakes
more rigid suspension
better seats
higher quality dash
How about putting the speedometer back on the right side where it belongs? (who’s the genius that OKed this?)
Bob,
The Car Czar at GM canÔøΩt even say ÔøΩCamaroÔøΩ correctly.
*sigh* Even my 85 year old Grandmother can pronounce it.
I doubt that anyone working on the Mustang program would dare mispronounce ÔøΩMustangÔøΩ on TV, even if it were merely on ÔøΩAutoline Detroit.ÔøΩ
To be frank, this does not bode well for you, GM, or the Camaro.
The Volt is going to be the deciding factor in GM’s future.
Get this vehicle to market (as I KNOW it will) and under $35,000 and GM has a sure fire hit on its hands.
Absolutely excited about this car, just like the rest of us at the still very early but growing http://www.ChevyVoltForum.com are.
Mr. Lutz: Will GM bring the new Corsa to the U.S. market sooner than the 2010-12 timeframe that you stated a while ago?
The new Vauxhall Corsa models recently introduced with 1.6L Gas Turbo 0-60 MPH in 6.8 sec. (22/37 MPG Euro cycle) and 1.7L Turbo-Diesel -60 MPH in 9.3 sec (37/57 MPG Euro Cycle) would be a great addition to the Pontiac lineup with minor changes to the Vauxhall grille.
Since Pontiac has the “sport” image of GM; offering the Corsa (G4?) in the U.S. Market with the manual transmissions offered in Europe will present less of a problem. GM does sell small FWD Pontiacs like the G3 (better known as the Chevy Aveo) and G2 (Matiz in other markets). To me it makes sense to combine Pontiac with Vauxhall FWD cars as it has pairing Pontiac with Holden for RWD ones, in fact GM should make a “global” division of Pontiac/Holden/Vauxhall with a full line of FWD and RWD models. Pontiac/Holden/Vauxhall could share the Tigra Convertible and Astra VXR line, the Vectra 5-door hatch and a Pontiac Montana small pickup (a Corsa based pickup sold as the Chevy Montana in some markets). The Meriva (5-passenger) and Zafira (seven passenger) VXR models may also be offered with their Turbo-charged power trains and performance tuned suspensions offering some sporty options in the CUV and small van markets..
Other exciting models that could be sold by Pontiac/Holden/Vauxhall include the Pontiac Firebird a 3 door Hatch/Coupe and Grand Am Sedan on the “Alpha” architecture.
This would greatly help GM’s image here in the U.S. and spread costs of niche models across five markets (Australia, Canada, Europe, Mexico and U.S.) while opening the possibility of offering some Holden and Vauxhall models in Latin America as Pontiacs.
The Chevy Volt plug in technology is brilliant. This technology currently seems to make more sense compared to other energy alternatives.
- Gasoline
o Benefits:
ÔÇß Current infrastructure is in place to build cars and supply gas
ÔÇß Vehicles can go 300 or 400 miles between fill ups
ÔÇß It is a liquid
o Downside:
ÔÇß Produces more greenhouse gases than hydrogen, bio fuels and ethanol, or electricity
ÔÇß It has become very expensive
ÔÇß We have to import over 50% of our oil
ÔÇß We have reached peak oil and will eventually run out
- Hydrogen
o Benefits:
ÔÇß Better for the environment than gasoline, bio fuels or electricity
ÔÇß Can be used with either internal combustion engine or fuel cell engine
ÔÇß may eventually be able to be “made on demand” in the car (electrolysis of water or combination of water and aluminum or magnesium)
o Downside:
ÔÇß It is not readily available at gas stations (no infrastructure)
ÔÇß It is not a liquid and needs to be stored in high pressure tanks
ÔÇß It will take a long time to make it cost competitive with gasoline
ÔÇß Although hydrogen can be produced from water, most of it is currently made from petroleum (see above downside to gasoline)
- Bio fuels and ethanol
o Benefits:
ÔÇß Can be made in the US and benefits farmers
ÔÇß Runs in internal combustion engines
ÔÇß Produces fewer green house gases than gasoline
ÔÇß It is a liquid
o Downside:
ÔÇß Produces more green house gases than hydrogen or electricity
ÔÇß It is not readily available at gas stations (no infrastructure)
ÔÇß Causes food prices to increase
ÔÇß The US cannot produce enough to be energy sufficient
ÔÇß Ethanol can’t be pumped through current pipelines …it needs to be transported via tanker trucks or trains.
- Volt plug in technology
o Benefits:
ÔÇß It will run for 40 miles on its batteries which is more than most Americans commute
ÔÇß It can go 550 to 700 miles between gasoline file ups
ÔÇß Equivalent electric usage costs about 1/3 than what gasoline currently costs
ÔÇß Electricity is currently available at peoples homes (no additional infrastructure is needed)
ÔÇß It runs quieter than an internal combustion engine
ÔÇß Fewer green house gases than gasoline only engines or bio fuels and ethanol
ÔÇß Lower maintenance than an internal combustion engine
ÔÇß Most electricity is made in the US from coal, nuclear, etc. resulting in lower trade deficits
ÔÇß Inflation and interest rates would come down
o Downside:
ÔÇß Produces more greenhouse gases than hydrogen
ÔÇß Current internal combustion engine manufacturing infrastructure would be have to be converted to electric
ÔÇß Oil industry sales would decline
ÔÇß People would have to plug in their cars at night
After considering the pluses and minuses of all of the energy sources currently available, the Volt plug in technology is by far the best alternative. Hydrogen is the best choice for the environment but the infrastructure and related cost currently doesn’t make it feasible. I am glad you are going to build the car. Hopefully you realize the demand for this car will be great. Americans will flock to buy this technology. You should consider using the technology in other cars as soon as possible. The US can lead the world in reducing green house gases.
One general question – what is the difference between the Volt and the EV1? Why did the EV1 fail?
However, the real purpose of this response is something that I’ve heard not a soul mention when it comes to plug in technology.
How is electricity made? Most comes from burning coal or natural gas. So, by wrapping our arms around a plug in vehicle all we would be doing is displacing the pollution from a tailpipe to a smokestack somewhere.
This is the same reason Toyota and Hyundai has been throwing down out throats as they profess “creating thousands of US jobs” when the REAL TRUTH is they haven’t created 1000’s of jobs – they’ve displaced 1000’s of jobs from Flint, MI, Oak Creek, WI, Baltimore, OH, as GM and Ford close their plants etc. and moved them to Kentucky, Texas, and Tenn. as the foreign makes open their plants.
My suggestion: continue to refine gas engines where the fuel is derived from oil since it is still the most efficient source of energy. Then in the meantime, GM could work on figuring out how to make daisies and fuzzy bunnies come out of their tailpipes just like the blind masses think V8 powered Toyotas do.
Gereon Langlitz–
You say that those of us who are skeptical about GM’s commitment (or, in my case, about GM’s ability to sustain a commitment) to the E-Flex idea will “be quiet as soon as the first Volt hits the road.” No — if they only make a few hundred the first model year, or only make them available in limited markets and only after customers jump through an array of hoops, or (worst of all) if they only offer them for lease, not outright sale, then we will be screaming bloody murder at that point! We don’t doubt that the engineers and designers can build the car; we doubt management’s sincerity about anything they say with regard to environmentally-friendly vehicles, since they are to this day hiding behind spin about their handling of the EV1 several years ago. The most recent instance of this spin (of which I’m aware) was by Mr. Lutz in his NPR interview in early June; see my comment dated June 10th, 1:59 a.m., on the FastLane post “Charging Ahead on the Volt” dated June 5th. “Past performance is no guarantee of future results,” but if they are still spinning about the EV1, why should we believe they aren’t spinning about E-Flex, hydrogen, ethanol, you name it, and/or that they won’t in the future if they aren’t now?
Jim–
I don’t see how you can claim that hydrogen is better for the environment than electricity; hydrogen requires plenty of energy to make, since it doesn’t occur free in nature at or near the surface of the earth in any significant amounts. If you are making the hydrogen via “steam reforming” of natural gas (currently the most economically viable method), you can go farther by burning a given amount of natural gas to make electricity and then running an electric vehicle on it than you can by using the generated hydrogen in a fuel-cell car. Heck, you could go farther by using the natural gas in a hybrid vehicle, and almost as far by burning it in a non-hybrid natural-gas vehicle like the Honda Civic GX, both of which would be a lot cheaper than a fuel-cell vehicle. If you are making the hydrogen from water via electrolysis, you could go three or four times as far by using a given amount of electricity in an electric vehicle than you could by using the hydrogen in a fuel-cell car. You can go ten times as far, or more, on a given amount of electricity in an electric car as you could by using the electricity to make hydrogen for an internal-combustion hydrogen vehicle! The only way hydrogen works out as more environmentally benign than electricity is if you can make the hydrogen with some exotic bioengineered algae, or if you somehow figure that hydrogen will all be made with renewable electricity while electric vehicles will charge from the grid — hard to believe.
Regarding your other downsides to electricity: “Current internal combustion engine manufacturing infrastructure would be have to be converted to electric” — this is true in spades for fuel-cell vehicle manufacturing, since after all electric motors have been manufactured for over a century and fuel cells for a few decades at most. “Oil industry sales would decline” — this is a problem? “People would have to plug in their cars at night” — I’d rather spend five seconds plugging in at night, and five seconds unplugging in the morning, instead of waiting in line at a gas station during rush hour, especially since it would make driving a lot cheaper (not to mention cleaner, even with coal in the mix).
Let’s face it. G.M. ( along with all other American auto companies ) is in a death spiral because no matter what they do Americans hate the big three! They will pay more for an Asian car or truck just on perception alone. And to be honest,G.M. concept cars will not change their minds. Remember that they read Consumer Reports and they don’t recommend buying anything besides the biggest trucks made by any of the big three! I wish I was wrong but all you have to do is read the buisness section of any newspaper and you will see the complete hatred that is being said about G.M.,Ford and Chrysler!
Bob,
I currently own a Chevy Colorado when will GM show the next generation Colorado? Also as an Ohioan born in Youngstown I urge GM to build the next generation small car in Lordstown. Lordstown has proven it has what it takes to get the job done. I believe the Volt would be great car for Lordstown to build and would back that up with a purchase if the car was built in Lordstown & I’m sure I’m not alone.
Joe Albert–
You ask what the difference is between the EV1 and the Volt. The EV1 was a battery-electric vehicle; it ran solely on electricity from the grid (or from rooftop solar panels), stored onboard in a battery pack. The Volt has batteries and can load them up with grid electricity; however, it also has an onboard internal-combustion generator that can produce electricity from gasoline (or possibly ethanol, diesel, or other fuels, depending on how GM builds out the concept). Thus it stores energy both in the battery pack and in the fuel tank; likewise, it can be “refueled” by plugging in, same as the EV1, but also by going to a gas station.
As for “why did the EV1 fail?” (and, implicitly, why wouldn’t the Volt?), GM will tell you that the EV1 was simply too “limited,” too “inconvenient,” to generate significant market demand, and that the Volt’s ability to “recharge” at a gas station removes this obstacle. Those of us who were paying attention to the EV1 during the period when it was (briefly, and with very restricted availability) offered for lease, however, will tell you that GM’s explanations to date for why the EV1 “failed” amount to high-RPM spin. See the FYI blog post titled “Who Ignored the Facts About the Electric Car?” dated June 23rd, 2006, for a prime compendium of such spin; see my comment on that post dated January 8th, 2007, 3:30 a.m., for a link to a webpage I put together with a point-by-point rebuttal of that spin.
And you say you’ve “not heard a soul” asking about whether plug-in technology simply moves pollution from a tailpipe to a smokestack; you have evidently not been reading this blog for very long, since I’ve seen this particular red herring thrown out (and rebutted) fairly recently. In fact, this is a very common criticism of electric vehicles (now including plug-in hybrids like the Volt), and has been for a long time; the first organized rebuttal I saw on the Web dated to 1995, not long after the Web itself began to blossom! For a more recent discussion, with numbers, go to the Tesla Motors website (teslamotors.com), click the “More” tab, and under that click the “White Papers” tab and read about “The 21st Century Electric Car.” (I apologize for not giving a direct link — I’ve found that this results in my comments getting stuck in the blog’s spam filters.) Tesla actually doesn’t give the EV1 enough credit in this paper; they refer to the 60-mile range of the first-generation EV1, which is actually fairly generous (the first-generation batteries were pretty weak), but they ignore the 80-mile range of the second-generation EV1 with lead-acid batteries (and refurbished first-generation models), not to mention the 120- to 160-mile range of the second-generation NiMH models.
A rebuttal consists of three main points: 1) The efficiency of the generation, transmission, and automotive use of electricity is very high in comparison with the comparable numbers for internal-combustion engine vehicles; thus you use less fuel, of whatever type, to begin with. 2) It is a whole lot easier to control emissions from a relative handful of generating plants than from hundreds of millions of tailpipes; can you afford to get a tune-up for your car every month, the way power-plant operators stay on top of their generators’ maintenance? 3) Whereas a combustion-engine vehicle gets dirtier over time as catalysts age, calibrations drift, etc., a plug-in vehicle gets cleaner over time as the electrical generation infrastructure is renovated and improved; in the long term, emissions can be done away with altogether as renewable electricity becomes a bigger part of the grid, and you can make the jump today by putting solar panels on your house’s roof (many electric-vehicle owners do that already, and Tesla in particular has partnered with solar-panel installers to make it easier for their customers).
So deriding plug-in vehicles as mere “elsewhere-emission vehicles” just doesn’t hold water. Moreover, since almost none of U.S. electricity is made by burning oil, plug-in vehicles like the Volt (or the EV1, for that matter) that have enough electric-only range to handle the typical daily commute-and-errands driving of most people can directly and immediately eliminate most or all of these people’s petroleum use. No gasoline or diesel vehicle, however “refined,” can do that; even a (non-plug-in) hybrid only makes a fractional reduction in petroleum use, though that’s better than the status quo.
NEW TO THE GAME:
I’M CURRENTLY IN THE PROCESS OF GETTING “SQUARE-ONE AUTOMOTIVE” UP AND RUNNING, AND MY LIFE LONG PASSION FOR THE AUTO INDUSTRY SPANS FORTY PLUS YEARS, SHOWING NO SIGNS OF FADING. BUT I AM A FIRST TIME BLOGGER ON THIS WEBSITE, AND IN THAT REGARD I’M STILL USING MY TRAINING WHEELS.
LET ME START BY SAYING THAT IT’S VERY GRATIFYING TO SEE GM NOW PUTTING ALL OF ITS GLOBAL ASSETS TO WORK IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW PRODUCT FOR THE DOMESTIC MARKET. THE SHANGHAI RIVIERA IS ONE STUNNING EXAMPLE, AND SO IS THE GROWING OPEL/VAUXHALL INFLUENCE OVER AT SATURN. THE NEW ANTARA/VUE IS AN ESPECIALLY GOOD EXAMPLE OF EUROPEAN PRODUCT DESIGN MAKING ITS WAY ACROSS THE ATLANTIC IN A DIRECT APPLICATION. AND I’M REALY KEEN ON THE IMPENDING ARRIVAL OF THE NEXT GENERATION OPEL VECTRA IN THE VERY NEAR FUTURE. THE DESIGN SHOWS HOW THE OPEL INSIGNIA CONCEPT IS BEING USED TO INFLUENCE THE DIRECTION OF FUTURE PRODUCT IN FAR MORE RATIONAL AND EQUALLY INTERESTING APPLICATIONS. THE WIDE RANGE OF POWERPLANTS OFFERED IN THIS VEHICLE, COUPLED WITH THE AVAILABILITY OF AWD, WILL GIVE IT AN EXCEPTIONALLY BROAD APPEAL AND CREATE UNEXPECTED COMPETITION FOR MANY OF YOUR RIVALS.
ANOTHER NEAR TERM VEHICLE THAT INTRIGUES ME IS THE DOMESTIC PLATFORM MATE FOR THE NEW CAMARO. I HAVE TO BELIEVE THAT BY THIS LATE DATE, NEARLY ALL OF THE DETAILS ARE SET IN STONE, AND JOB ONE CAN’T BE FAR OFF. I JUST HOPE THAT WHILE THE CAMARO IS SET TO DRAW IN ALL OF THE FRUSTRATED PONYCAR INTENDERS LOOKING FOR A CHEVROLET BRANDED ALTERNATIVE TO THE FORD MUSTANG, THE OTHER PRODUCT IS BEING GEARED TO SKEW MORE TOWARD THE PAN EUROPEAN INFLUENCE REPRESENTED BY THE RAPIDLY EVOLVING SATURN LINEUP. IF IT’S GOING TO RESURRECT THE FIREBIRD NAME AND ACT AS A PERFORMANCE FLAGSHIP, I HAVE TO BELIEVE THAT IT COULD BE USED TO DEMONSTRATE HOW SMALLER, LIGHTER AND MORE AGILE PERFORMANCE CARS CAN BE JUST AS ENTERTAINING TO DRIVE AND OWN AS MORE TRADITIONAL AMERICAN V8 POWERED SPORTS COUPES. AS LONG AS IT’S WELL BUILT, SOLIDLY ENGINEERED AND EXUDING LOADS OF PERSONALITY AND SELF CONFIDENCE, THIS OTHER GM SPORTSCAR SHOULD BE A HUGE HIT.
IN CLOSING, LET ME SAY THAT IT’S GOOD TO SEE ALL OF THE INNOVATION AND CREATIVITY EMBODIED IN YOUR CURRENT LINEUP, ALONG WITH GOOD VALUE, ROCK SOLID BUILD QUALITY AND AN EYE TOWARD THE FUTURE.
WHEN I FIRST SAW THE PONTIAC SOLSTICE ON THE INTERNET, I SAID THAT THE CAR REPRESENTED FULL JUSTIFICATION FOR HAVING HIRED BOB LUTZ. I WAS WRONG. SO MUCH HAS HAPPENED SINCE THEN, THAT EVEN THE INTRODUCTION OF A SEDUCTIVE LITTLE ROADSTER SEEMS ALMOST PETTY BY COMPARISON. THOUGH IT HAS CERTAINLY SOLD IN VERY MEANINGFUL NUMBERS, ALONG WITH THE SATURN SKY. AND THE INTRODUCTION OF HIGHER PERFORMANCE VERSIONS OF THESE TWO CARS SHOWS THAT THE DESIGN HAS FURTHER ROOM FOR GROWTH. I’M DAN SMITH FROM SQUARE-ONE AUTOMOTIVE.
I don’t want anybody to think that my comments were meant to just bash G.M.,on the contrary. I am one of the biggest G.M. boosters that I know of simply because I really believe that the General can beat anybody at the automotive game! It’s just frustrating to see and hear all the negative all the time. In my life I have had nothing but G.M. cars and trucks and I would stack them up against ANY manufacturer both domestic and foreign. Bob, keep up the good work and it will pay off! P.S. I just got a glimpse of the Buick Wildcat and if it gets to market I WILL get one! An AWESOME looking car to say the least!!
Mr. Lutz,
I think a cool feature to add to the Volt would be an intelligent plug-in docking station. It would have a camera and wireless communication to the Volt. When the car drove into the garage, it would sense if recharging was necessary. If so, it would have a arm that would automatically plug in the recharge cable. When recharge was complete or if someone started the car, it would unplug and move the cable away from the car. This could be sold as a option.
PS I think the Volt could be a paradigm shift for the automotive industry. I hope GM will be first to market and bring the company back to the top again. Good luck.
Electricity isn’t the future of the automobile. The current US power grid has trouble supporting tens of millions of homes and businesses. How will it support millions of electric cars and trucks on top of that, with a rising population and development just adding to energy stresses? Unless America constructs hundreds of new power plants, refineries, and cuts down the population, I don’t see it happening.
Vernon said: “When the car drove into the garage, it would sense if recharging was necessary.”
Vernon,
With an electric car, recharging would always be neccessary. Anybody who owned one would take every opportunity to top it off to ensure a full charge — especially in their own garage.
I suspect it would rapidly become second nature to plug it in every time you got home.
Nigel Gamecock
Hey Bob,
While we’re putting in our wish lists, how about a Volt for the family man? I take the train to work, but my wife takes dozens of small trips each day with kids in tow. The same goes for me in the evenings and weekends.
The Volt looks exciting, but it also looks a bit too sporty to carry home the groceries. The Volt, like the Tesla Roadster, are pipe dreams for family guys like me.
Barring accident or breakdown, I don’t plan on replacing my Saturn Vue for another 7 years. What are the chances I’ll see a plug-in station wagon by then?
André–
Like the “myth of EVs and smokestacks” repeated by Joe Albert above, the complaint that EVs would strain the utility infrastructure is a red herring that has been around for decades. Problems with the grid (supply or transport) occur during periods of peak demand; however, EVs (including plug-in hybrids) would typically be charged while parked in the garage overnight, far off-peak. Do a Google search on the words “off-peak recharging capacity”; the first link is to a DOE report that says over a hundred million plug-in vehicles could run on electricity in the U.S. without building a single new power plant, just by using generating (and transmission) capacity that sits idle overnight. Nigel Gamecock noted that you’d readily get into the habit of plugging in a battery-only electric vehicle overnight, in fact you’d have to; with the Volt, you could skip the plugging in and just run on gasoline, but with a time-of-use electrical rate (as is offered by utilities that are interested in promoting electric vehicles, among other reasons) you will find that it is much cheaper to run on utility electricity than on gasoline. Thus there is a strong economic incentive to plug in at night in your garage, and a hundred million vehicles could do so just with the grid capacity that’s already in existence.
Greg said:
Excellent point Greg. What we need more than a roadster/sports car version of the Volt is a hatchback runabout — something equally good for commuting, running to the supermarket or hardware store on Saturdays and hauling home a few bags of lawn fertilizer, plus also good for hauling the kids to Little League games and soccer practice.
Perhaps something equivalent to an electric version of the European hatchbacks, or Chrysler’s Caliber.
Best,
Gary Dikkers
I’m starting to get concerned about the weight of the new GM vehicles.
The new Outlook/Enclave/Acadia has a curb weight of 4,700 pounds in the FWD version, and has MPG ratings of 18/26. Seems like a lot of weight to carry around, but it is a somewhat larger CUV than the prior Rendezvous.
What concerns me more is the new Vue XR FWD, which tops the scales at almost 4,100 pounds, has an MPG rating of 16/23. Now, unless the Vue has been moved in the general GM scheme, I tend to think of its competitors as the Toyota RAV-4 and the Honda CR-V. The two imports weigh between 500 and 600 pounds less than the Vue, and their fuel economy is decidedly better (19/27 for the V-6 Toyota).
My 2002 Cadillac Deville, all 207 inches and 4,000 pounds of it, is rated at 17/25.
I guess what I’m driving at (no pun intended) is that my huge, heavy Cadillac is lighter than, and gets better mileage than, these two decidedly smaller Saturns which have smaller engines. I fear that that will be a turn-off to many comparison shoppers, no matter how nice the Outlook and Vue are (and they are very nice).
I used to think that only Hyundai and Kia built such heavy cars for their size, but apparently now GM has joined that club. I can only imagine what 400 fewer pounds would feel like to the Vue’s V-6…
(And to be fair, I think the Ford Edge is carrying around about 400 pounds more than it should as well.)
I have to echo the sentiment about making a Volt model for the family man (uh, person).
A sporty roadster or coupe might be “sexy,” and certainly will guarantee foot traffic at auto shows, but most people- most consumers- need the flexibility and multipurpose capabilities of a sedan, hatchback, wagon (what is an SUV or “crossover,” but an oversize, overweight, inefficient wagon?), or minivan.
My own strategy is to have a considerably-less-than-new minivan for serious weekend hauling, a slightly less-used sedan for more mundane tasks, and a vintage Vespa for fair-weather commuting.
If I had to boil it down to having just one vehicle, it would probably be a minivan, and if I could plug it in at night that would be a huge bonus.
Matt from CLT, 7/15, 6:26 PM:
Excellent point about the weights. As a Corvette road race for many years, I have learned the huge significance of weight. We even struggle to get it out of the driver!
For us weight trumps everything. It impacts acceleration, braking, cornering, let alone fuel economy. It has a major impact on reliability, as more weight clearly stresses every component in the car.
The first thing I look at in any magazine road test or auto brochure is the weight. Based upon your research, I shudder to think what the Vue “Greenline” must weigh, let alone the Volt. If the Volt gets too heavy, it will just defeat the whole purpose.
On the other hand, if the Volt can become a showcase for GM’s lightweight component expertise, particularly composites, it could be a huge halo project. Think 787 Dreamliner.
Matt from CLT:
Which remins me of gtjeff’s comment months ago about the change from composite to steel body panels on the latest Vue, and the consequent weight gain.
No doubt, that is part of the cause of the weight gain you noticed. What a regressive step, and what a shame.