How GM is Making Electric Vehicles Relevant
Note: This post was originally published on the Web site Gas2.0 - Will Stewart, blog editor
By Frank Weber
Global Electric Vehicle Development Executive
A couple weeks ago, I had the opportunity to speak at EVS 24 in Norway about extended-range electric vehicles (E-REVs). Attendees and presenters were some of the brightest minds from around the world working to make electric vehicles an everyday reality, but frankly, I sensed many of those minds think electric vehicle development is better suited to small, entrepreneurial companies, some with little or no automotive experience. There seems to be in the minds of many some sort of inherent conflict between being a large, traditional automaker and the ability to develop cars of the future.
I couldn’t disagree more with that sentiment, and GM is on a mission to prove it.
Developing electric vehicles is no longer a nice little “green” story; it’s absolutely crucial if we are to alleviate our dependence on petroleum. Electric vehicles aren’t simply for niche markets; they are the future of a sustainable global automotive industry.
There are nearly 1 billion vehicles using petroleum on the road today. If we are going to make a difference in reducing our dependence on petroleum, GM and other automakers must offer large volume production solutions. Hand-built vehicles may capture the imagination of some, but we need millions of cars to truly address this global issue.
At GM, we have a level of product research, testing and development as well as a supplier network that is unmatched. When you consider the very real distribution, volume and quality issues some of the smaller start-ups have experienced, it’s hard for me to see how they are better equipped than us to deliver the volumes necessary for real change.
But the real key to making electric vehicles a success is to make them relevant for consumers.
Customers expect more out of their vehicles than ever before, so a relevant EV must be capable of being your primary vehicle. Although it would be nice to have a commuter car for the daily drive to work, a family hauler for recreational activities and a roadster to go cruising whenever the urge strikes, very few people have their own fleet of purpose-built vehicles – nor should they for environmental reasons!
We realize that some people can get by with just one of these choices, but we’d rather you didn’t have to settle.
Our vehicles are an extension of our independence. No matter how far the route, whether it’s 10 miles or 1,000 miles, we depend on our vehicle to get us there. An EV must give drivers the confidence and peace of mind that they won’t be stranded when the battery charge is depleted, and GM’s Voltec propulsion system solves this psychological problem of range anxiety.
When the battery’s energy is depleted from driving in pure electric mode, the engine generator produces electricity to extend the Volt’s driving range to more than 300 total miles. And if you don’t have access to public charging or time to wait on a recharge, all you have to do is fill-up with fuel and continue driving electrically. The beauty of an E-REV is you have that choice without sacrifice because the engine generator provides the flexibility. E-REVs become an enabler to making electric vehicles affordable because they aren’t dependent on anything else – all your equipment is on-board.
With the Voltec system, the 16 kWh battery pack will accommodate the driving needs of 80 percent of American drivers, whereas other battery electric vehicles have a battery 2-3 times the size of the Volt’s. Smaller battery size equals significantly less cost, and that translates to greater affordability for the masses.
In addition, the Volt is being engineered globally for large volume production and will share components with other vehicles in GM’s portfolio. Leveraging the shared components among the entire vehicle portfolio and among our other extended-range electric vehicles like the Opel Ampera will provide the important and necessary economies of scale to reduce cost even further. We’re even engineering and manufacturing the battery packs ourselves in-house to maximize their efficiency.
All these factors make it possible for us to easily ramp up for mass production.
If our experience with the EV1 taught us anything, it’s that customers love driving electric so much that they want to be able to plug-in wherever they go, and with both 120v and 240v capability, they will. We’ve also gone to great lengths to standardize the vehicle receptacle in North America so plug-in vehicles don’t end up like laptops and cell phones with different charging cords for each manufacturer.
And what would an electric vehicle be if it wasn’t fun-to-drive? An appliance, that’s what. With its instantaneous torque, the Volt will take many six-cylinder vehicles off the line, and can go 0-60 mph in under 9 seconds. And even though most of us should never drive this fast, it has a top speed of 100 mph.
I firmly believe electrically-driven vehicles are the way of the future because they have the ability to displace petroleum and eliminate emissions with no sacrifice in performance, size or features. But in order to be truly relevant, an EV must be available to regular people at a reasonable price – not just to celebrities. At a time when our industry is undoubtedly struggling, we’re backing that commitment by allocating the necessary company resources to start putting the Volt in driveways by the end of 2010.
While I admire the technological prowess and tenacity of the smaller start-up companies, GM is better equipped to deliver electric vehicles in large volume globally. After all, we have been bringing relevant vehicles to consumers for more than a century.
I look forward to reading your thoughts.
49 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 really don’t understand the compromises being made with the Volt. Granted, it will be the first vehicle of its kind but some things just don’t make sense to me.
Why a gasoline generator? You’ve got a small engine running at a constant speed for peak efficiency. Why not use a small diesel instead of a gas engine. The higher energy density of the fuel means the vehicle’s range would be greater and since it is just a generator for an electric car it wouldn’t alter the driving characteristics. Granted a diesel would be slightly heavier but that could be offset by the next suggestion.
Why so many batteries? If I were to buy this car I would never plug it in. I have been, until recently, a city dweller and I’ve lived at apartments with no electrical charge provision in the garages. I’m in a small house now but there are no electrical outlets outside and I’m renting so I can’t just go add one. For me, the 40 mile electric only range is useless as the vehicle would essentially always be running the gas engine to charge the batteries. I suspect a large number of people are in the same boat. Cut the batteries down to a quarter or eigth of what you’re proposing and save the weight for a more efficient diesel generator. It’d be much more useful.
Why is it Front Wheel Drive? You’re developing a platform for a car which, as you say, has to do everything. There’s no need for a physical drive conection from the generator to the drive wheels. Why not have the generator up front, the batteries down the centerline of the vehicle where the driveshaft would generally be, and the electric drive in the back of the vehicle driving the rear wheels? If you’d done that the core platform could be adapted to more purposes, including that roadster. (I’ve got an MX-5 as my sole vehicle: commuter, long distance tourer/hauler, and sunny day toy. It does everything I need, except haul kayaks and I have a big truck tor the 5% of the time I need to do that or move or whatever.)
Frank:
I always enjoy reading your comments about the Volt. Thank you for all of the blood, sweat, and tears you are putting in to make this car a success!!!
I fully support the idea of E-REV, but concerned the life span of its battery under normal driving conditions. Hopefully you guys can still deliver a reliable products under 40K (before tax incentive) next year, also hope you guys can furthur reduce the cost to 30K before 2015.
Toyota is a serious competitor, I admire their technology and business astuteness. Hopefully GM can learn from its past!
Good luck!
The EPA determined that hydraulic hybrids have a power density of 7 to 10 higher than Li batteries, why hasn’t GM jumped on this? I understand the EREV concept but most Americans don’t like tiny Ecoboxes. This type of system would work great on SUV’s, trucks and minivans; and with a payback in 1 to 3 years [versus 7 to 10 with standard battery hybrid]. Why are you ignoring it?
http://www.epa.gov/oms/technology/420f04024.pdf
Its a shame that GM is not already leading the pack. The EV1 was a huge success that GM pulled the plug on. I cannot and will never trust GM to provide me with a vehicle. They proved that their will is greater than their customers. Shame on GM.
“Why not use a small diesel instead of a gas engine…”
John, maybe you are overlooking one important factor. Diesel is sold in different qualities for winter and the warmer seasons. At least over here in Europe that’s the case and I guess in the USA it’s not much different. So, if anybody fills up a Chevy Volt with Diesel, let’s say in late summer, and mainly is driving on electricity (i.e. rarely uses up Diesel fuel), it could happen, that there’s still a large amount of Diesel in the tank, which is inappropriate for operation at low winter temperatures.
On the other hand, gasoline could get stale in the tank after a couple of months, so I wouldn’t regard it as “perfect”, either. Maybe LPG would make sense, since the tank is small and the system doesn’t cause much additional weight. To my knowledge LPG doesn’t get stale…
I wonder how much better fuel mileage the Tahoe hybrid would get by using a voltec setup…
How goes the development of smooth onset of the gas generator?
Will the engine start while the car is in motion or wait until one is at rest and the battery level approaches 30%?
Is there a gear box or will you rely on a tall final drive for higher speeds?
Does anyone at GM foresee cost and volume lines crossing at some point, such that any money is earned from Volt?
I apologize for all the pointed questions.
Bret, If the EV1 was a “huge success” as you state then GM would have kept building it. But GM is in the buisness to make a profit and there wasn’t enough buyers to justify it. So before you state your hatred for GM at least get your facts straight! I for one hope and believe that GM has a winner here and the time has come for the EREV that GM is developing! I say keep up the good work GM and show all the GM haters that they are WRONG!!
Mr Weber,
What is the status of engineering “reverse current flow” into the Volt? Will we have the option of using the Volt’s huge battery as an emergency household power supply during disruptions (hurricanes, blizzards, etc.) of the national power grid? Can we also use the Volt’s supplemental internal combustion engine as an emergency electrical supply in the same conditions?
Building that capability into the Volt and using it as a marketing selling point seems obvious, but you and everyone else at GM also seem quiet about why it won’t be an offered feature. Can you explain your thinking?
Hello everyone.
We have a great experience here at Brasil with flex-fuel engines. We can use from E100 to pure gasoline in the same car, and, considering Volt is to have a 1.0 liter engine for a generator, I guess we could provide the expertise on producing these engines (cars with 1.0 liter engine are almost 50% of the market here). When it is cold, fill up with gas. Warmer climate, fill with E100 and have one tenth of the emissions a gas engine would normally have.
Maybe is time to go back in time, and learn from the pioneers at car invention. Mr. Benz created an electric car with a engine producing energy from alcohol (not really sure which kind of alcohol he used back in the late 19th century), and with four electric motors, one for each wheel. That was before Ford assembled his first car! Putting toghether the four engines with, i.e., the Quattro tech, we could have a car with almost every technology available for better driving, in any wheather condition.
Can you imagine a AWD eletric car with emissions problems taken close to zero. Wouldn´t that be great?
Of course I don´t think anyone has not thought about that, and probably the costs of such a car would be pohibitive, but it could be a nice solution for next gen cars. =]
Brett would you please explain to me how the EV1 was such a HUGE success when enough coustomers were not interested in driving them. (Did you lease an EV1?) GM was loosing millions of dollars but at the same time gaining unsurmontable amounts of data. That collected data has been the building blocks to the new engineered GM VOLT. And don’t forget GM was not the only automotive company that stopped production on an EV. You’re other comment about “leading the pack” needs further explanation also. GM has more vehicles that get over 30 mpg then any other car company. GM leads the pack in full size pick up and SUV fuel ratings. GM vehicles with their project driveway has driven and collected more miles using hydrogen fuel cell technology then any other car company. And I could probably safely say GM has more E85 fuel capable vehicles on the road today then any other car company. Giving their coustomers a choice. I might be bias because I am a GM engineer, but to me I’d say we are leading the pack. And with the introduction of the 2010 Chevy Volt and all the Voltech programs in the very near future I’d have to say we’ll be way ahead of the pack very soon.
Best Regards
IAGM
It looks from different blogs the major concern in volt is the extended ranger performance ( noise ).
In some blog there were some postings on suggestion on other engines ( ex: http://www.rotapower.info/ – as they claim better fuel efficiency than diesel, less noise, less moving parts, less fuel conception , vibration , less size etc .If these claims holds true then you can have a 70 mpg cruze also with out even hybrid technologies)
So the question is are you considering a new engine for volt or even licensing engines to get better results
Second one is “Is only sound is only concern in extended range mode”
.
With the currant Gov funding I think now is the time to take back the police and taxi market, with a large voltec sedan, Cadillac could get a Limo version. Millions of Americans would get to see, ride in, and depend on GM electric driven vehicals without having to invest in the technology themselves, this would build trust in the consumer, and experience and improvements for GM and it’s voltec product. Livery is perhaps the toughest duty cycle out there and the public knows this, I have the Idea of GM keeping Hummer brand and building a dedicated Hummer Cab with 58 Checker Styling, you could even market these as GMC, annyway with Gov and University help these Cabs would develop voltec into the “Proven World Leader” in electric propultion and could be used to advertise the whole enterprise. As for the Limo, and the Converge for that matter, it would be nice to see Hollywood’s finest tooling around in Cadillacs agane for a change.
To I AM GM: Well said. I really think that GM will show all the naysayers that an American auto company can and already is leading the pack! I’ll never understand some peoples logic but if they don’t even have their facts straight their opinions really mean nothing! Just as I AM GM stated GM DOES have more models that get 30 or more MPG! I have an’05 Pontiac G/P with a V-6 and I get 29 MPG at 70 mph and 31 at 50! I also have an ‘09 Chevy Cobalt and I’m getting 34 MPG at 70 mph! And when the VOLT gets to dealerships I will be first in line to get one!! As GM has said, if you drive 40 miles to work both ways you’ll never even use gas! And even if you use the engine you will get MPG’s in the triple digits! Sounds good to me!!
Jmaximus,
Hydraulic hybrid also requires a high pressure tank and a low pressure reservoir tank. The high pressure tank can be quite heavy due to that it needs to hold fluid at high pressure. Plus, do not forget you also have hundred pounds of fluid you are carrying inside the tanks. The hydraulic hybrid does have higher power density, but I think the Li-Ion battery still wins in energy density area. There are ways to increase the energy density by increasing the pressure, and it drives up the cost and weight as well.
The article below is a good starter on what applications hydraulic hybrid has advantage over electric hybrid…. in short, mostly on heavy duty vehicle with frequent stops and short duration between stops. For lighter vehicle, except for postal delivery truck, I don’t think hydraulic hybrid will show as much fuel economy improvement over gas electric hybrid.
http://www.designnews.com/article/1152-Hydraulic_Powertrains_Propel_These_Hybrid_Trucks.php
“And even though most of us should never drive this fast, it has a top speed of 100 mph.”
Whoa! Am I the only one that sees the absurdity of you saying, “Most of us should never drive that fast,” and then continue on to brag about the car’s top speed? In fact, there is no place in the U.S. where one could legally drive a Volt 100 mph. And if someone did drive it that fast, what would happen to the “up to 40 miles” range on a single charge? Aerodynamic drag at 100 mph is four times as high as drag at 50 mph. The range on a single charge would be very low at 100 mph. I think you should retract any mention of the top speed of the Volt.
And when you say, “…most of us should never drive this fast…” who are the few elites you think should be able to drive that fast? There must be a few, or you would have said, “We shouldn’t drive this fast, but…”
“GM has more vehicles that get over 30 mpg then any other car company.”
But, of those cars that get more than 30 mpg, how many are actually distinctly different cars, rather than the same car wearing a different badge?
Mr. Weber,
What can you tell us about how robust the Volt’s battery case is? Will it be able to survive a high-speed, head-on crash without rupturing and scattering its contents?
If a battery case does rupture and scatter the contents, will that represent any special hazards to first responders? Will first responders need any special training to handle a lithium fire? (Lithium is an alkali metal from Group One of the periodic table ~~ the same group as sodium and potassium, and reacts violently when exposed to water.)
Semi-trailers trucks carrying lithium batteries must display a HAZMAT placard to warn first responders in event of accident. Will the Volt also need to display a HAZMAT placard as a warning to first responders? (You may not know the answer, but can you check with GM’s lawyers and risk assurance staff and see what they say?)
Now that Bob Lutz advocates the gov’ts “auto task force” I think that Ford is the last vestige of hope for American car companies.
I tried so hard to stick with GM (have had five new GM vehicles) and I’m not saying I won’t buy another GM, but it must be designed here and manufactured here in the U.S.
With so much of GM’s future riding on the success of the Volt, where exactly is the lithium for the batteries coming from? There aren’t very many lithium production facilities in the world, and, in fact, there was a recent global shortage of lithium carbonate for medical applications.
Have you recently bought several lithium mines?
A supplier level company has ALREADY taken a H2 HUMMER and installed essentially the electric equivalent of a Volt and reported the same 40 mile all-electric range of the Volt, which got me really thinking – why do we need so much battery to be able to go that first 40 miles on battery alone, when we can go 360 more (or more) with the small support engine providing direct electrical generation? Skip straight to hybrid mode, save mass, dollars, fuel. Some extra battery is desired ofr acceleration mode – but not nearly as muany cells as the Volt has. I agree that small diesel power is better suited to steady-state power generation than is gasoline fueled engine. A fuel/electric will be most efficient when the engine runs at a fixed rpm. What is the Kw power output of the onboard generator in a Volt? Is it sufficient that we could use our cars as standby power generators during outages? Could we conceivably return power to the grid instead of drawing from it?
One intriguing aspect of EREVs, moving forward, is the possibility of using types of engines for the range extender which otherwise couldn’t be considered; such as small turbines, free-piston engines, nutating engines, etc. Today’s engines must produce useful power over a much wider range of speeds in a typical car, a generator can operate efficiently over a much narrower range.
GM is handling the 16kwh battery pack very carefully; not allowing it to completely charge or discharge. 16kwh might normally be expected to provide a range closer to 80 miles in a vehicle of this size, but it’s service life would be more than halved. Having to shell out thousands for a new battery 4-5 years after vehicle purchase would not be a pleasant ownership experience for a mainstream car buyer.
Vehicle-scale Li-ion battery research has recently shown great improvements in both energy density and longevity, and I predict that the future of EREV will be even more promising; particularly in the areas of cost, performance and longevity.
“There aren’t very many lithium production facilities in the world, and, in fact, there was a recent global shortage of lithium carbonate for medical applications.”
Beaugrand,
Most of the world’s lithium comes from Chile, Argentine, and Bolivia, with about 40% of the world’s supply in Bolivia. Your concern about the supply of lithium is legitimate, and is actually shared by many respected analysts and economists. Wouldn’t it be ironic if OPEC were replaced by the Organization of Lithium Exporting Countries?
GM’s silence on the potential problem with the world’s lithium supply means they are either unaware of it, or as you suggest, they may be playing their cards close to the vest and have already secretly bought up several lithium mines cornering the market. The road to GM’s salvation may not be the Volt, but instead controlling the world’s lithium supplies.
“The EV1 was a huge success that GM pulled the plug on. I cannot and will never trust GM to provide me with a vehicle. They proved that their will is greater than their customers. Shame on GM.”
Actually the EV1 was an expessive flop in the market. It was a great technical acheivement but it was ahead of its time and very impractical from a cost and flexibility standpoint. That’s why it was cancelled.
I love how this entry takes shots at those who are claiming Tesla is best equipped to lead the auto industry into the 21st century. $100k roadsters with 200 miles of range are not the way of the future. Funny how so many are calling the Volt unaffordable when the much loved Tesla is selling a $100k sports car through a limited network of dealerships. While the rich and famous can afford a Tesla and are willing to wait months for a car the general public wants cheaper vehicles that can readily be purchased at a dealership. Tesla’s much hyped sedan can’t even be built until they get funding for a factory and is years away.
Most of these questions have been answered over at http://www.gm-volt.com.
1. No diesel engine because one of the main markets for the Volt will be the state of California – which is the 6th largest economy in the world if taken as a separate country. And it is illegal to sell cars with diesel engines in California.
2. The platform is front wheel drive because it will be shared with cars that have no batteries, and front wheel drive cars are cheaper to produce for engine-based cars.
3. Gasoline does not get stale if it is in a sealed container with no air leakage or water penetration. The Volts gas tank will be sealed int his manner, meaning the gas will be “fresh enough” for 6 months minimum and probably longer.
4. The engine will start while the car is in motion. GM are attempting to make the starting of the engine 100% unnoticeable from a noise/vibration perspective, but are not there yet.
5. Reverse flow has been looked at and will probably come in rev 2 or 3 but not in this first rev of the Volt.
6. Flex fuel with ethanol works n Brazil because you make it from low cost resources. In the US we make it from food stock such as corn, which is far more expensive. So flex fuel is no cheaper than gasoline (and thats with a govt subsidy already!), and actually contributes more pollution in the end based on the processing to get the corn into ethanol and then shipped.
7. The battery has been tested in crashes and drops and is in fact very safe. Much safer than your gas tank – put it that way!
Jackson,
I’ve often wondered why doesn’t GM build a series-hybrid car, where a small on-board, constant RPM engine turns a generator that in-turn powers electric traction motors at the wheels. The small ICE could be tuned to be very efficient over a small RPM range, and would need no complicated mechanical connection through a transmission, differential, etc., just cables to carry electricity from the generator to the drive wheels.
It would need a small battery to act as a buffer during acceleration and moving from a start, but without needing to haul around constantly the weight of a very large Li-ion battery, and a mechanical drive train, would be lighter and very efficient, and should get very high fuel mileage — perhaps in the 60’s or 70’s.
GM did have experience with series-hybrids from the days when they built diesel-electric locomotives. (In fact, GM’s Electro-Motive Diesel was dominant in the diesel locomotive market until the sold it off in 2005.) It’s too bad that instead of selling Electro-Motive, they didn’t use that technology in their cars.
“The battery has been tested in crashes and drops and is in fact very safe. Much safer than your gas tank – put it that way!”
Why can’t I find that information on this — the official GM blog/website, instead of having to look at http://www.gm-volt.com? Can you point me to the story there that talks about crash tests of the battery case?
What about HAZMAT labels for the Volt? Have they addressed that on gm-volt.com?
“But, of those cars that get more than 30 mpg, how many are actually distinctly different cars, rather than the same car wearing a different badge?”
That is irrelevant. Each nameplate represents a separate choice for consumers. Besides, platform sharing is common in the industry. When you look at the total number of nameplates that get over 30mpg on the highway GM has the lead- period.
Billy Joe Halston,
Gasoline tanker trucks are required to have hazmat stickers. Petroleum storage tanks are required to have hazmat stickers, yet your car is not even though it’s hauling around gas. I think the same will happen for the Volt. Plus, why are you even asking this question here. That is a regulatory question that the NHTSA or someone would handle. Try asking them.
Also regarding the strength of the battery. Will it break if you go head on with a dump truck at a relative speed of 140MPH? Probably. But so will your cars gas tank. Will it be able to survive a typical accident? Probably. There are a lot of regulations about safety that will apply to the battery as well. Nothing is perfect, but I’m sure they aren’t going to put something out there that explodes when you tap the bumper of the guy in front of you. Also, gas tends to burn pretty easily when it leaks out of it’s container. Why don’t you complain about that. As for handling a lithium fire, last time I checked fire won’t happen without Oxygen, and CO2 does a pretty good job of displacing O2, just like it does for any other fire.
Regarding the Lithium supply – my only comment is, everyone who’s pushing for hybrids and then attacking them for using lithium should really either quit pushing hybrids or come up with their own better technology (within the same price range).
Kyle,
Ever heard of Police officers? When on a high speed chase (or just catching a speeder) they routinely get to 100MPH.
“…we’re backing that commitment by allocating the necessary company resources to start putting the Volt in driveways by the end of 2010.”
You say, “…putting the Volt in driveways…” Is that finally a tacit admission that the Volt isn’t really meant for apartment dwellers, but only for homeowners with garages and driveways and therefore a handy place into which to plug their cars to charge the batteries?
Thanks for all of the feedback and questions. I’ll do my best to answer some of them:
Norman – We’ve already begun work on the second generation Volt with the primary focus on reducing the overall cost of the vehicle. We still think the 40 mile target is key, but we think we can do it for less in the next generation.
Brett – The EV1 may have been discontinued, but many of the EV1 team members and technologies remain. Our history with electric vehicles is why we’ve been so bullish about the Volt.
John Cuyle/Gereon – A diesel engine does not make sense in an E-REV, since we run the flex-fuel engine around the best point on the fuel map, i.e., very efficiently. The advantages of going to a diesel combustion engine are rather small. In addition, you have noise, emission and cost challenges that would recommend not using a diesel engine.
Mitch – The range-extender will seamlessly turn on when the battery is depleted regardless of the vehicle’s speed. Just like any other new technologies like plasma TVs and cell phones, costs tend to be high in early generations. However, we’re confident our costs will decrease over time as volumes and technological advances increase the performance and capabilities of the key components. Also, there is no gearbox required to achieve the Volt’s top speed of 100 mph.
Hank – The first generation Volt will not have “reverse flow” capability. We may consider this for the second generation, but our current focus is launching the vehicle in November 2010.
Beaugrand/Andrew Bazalgette – Based on what we know, there are more than 4 million metric tons of known, usable lithium metal reserves in existence globally. I’d also like to note, the Volt’s battery is extremely recoverable and recyclable after the vehicle end of life, i.e., reusable for other storage applications, and lithium itself is not toxic.
Thanks again to all for your comments.
To those who have questions:
Hello, I highly encourage you to go to gm-volt.com which is an independent website ran by a neuroloist in NY, who happens to be a avid Volt entusiast. There you will find ALL of your answers to questions like why not use diesel, turbine, LPG, etc fuel; how/when will gas generator kick in; and so much more. It took me about 3-4 days to fully explore the site & read through all the articles, but it was well worth it.
Again, it’s GM-VOLT.COM.
I posted this in one of my discussion groups, I think it’s relevant here:
“I’m fairly certain that an electric vehicle that can carry 800-900 lbs of people and luggage (the normal capacity range for a 4-5 passenger medium size car) a distance of 200 miles at 70-80 mph over medium-hilly terrain and sell for under $25,000 would easily sell in the range of 10,000 units per year, this year, probably a lot more. There might be a slightly smaller market for a 2-seater BEV with the same range and capacities at the same or lower price.
“Car companies really aren’t stupid, and they know this, however:
“1.) Is there manufacturing capacity for that many batteries?
“2.) Is there manufacturing capacity for that many electric motors, controllers, etc?
“3.) Is there manufacturing capacity for that many “alternative” vehicles?
“I’m not talking about a few dozen vehicles put together with scrounged or swap meet parts. To make a real difference in converting from ICE to BEV we would need to put a significant number of EVs, on the road, tens of thousands a year or more. At present IIRC there are about 8.5 million NEW vehicles sold in the US annually (down from 11 million a year just a couple years ago?), about 5% of the fleet is replaced annually, there is I believe around 245 million vehicles (~139 million cars, ~6-7 million motorcycles, 99 million “light trucks” (4-wheel 2 axle “other vehicles”) on the road?
“I think the Chevy Volt could make a difference, but it seems to me it’s overpriced for the mass market by 50%; maybe the problem is they couldn’t make enough if it was priced lower.”
I think if you ignore the “economy” market you may lose those customers forever, as they will be buying “foreign” Hybrids and BEVs and PHEVs and ER-EVs from other (mostly Asian) car companies, who will then “upscale” their offerings as the customer base ages and becomes more secure financially.
Remember upstart Honda in the 1970s?
Dear Mr. Weber,
maybe you misunderstood my comment somehow. I also was NOT proposing to installing a Diesel engine in the Volt as a range extender, but rather offering an optional LPG conversion for the European market at least, what finally would make the operation of the Volt even more inexpensive. If I am not mistaken, a flex-fuel capable engine can burn LPG as well. In the meanwhile, in Germany alone, there are more than 5`000 LPG pumps, making that fuel easily available everywhere in this country. So this would be highly enticing in my opinion. At the moment LPG is about 55% cheaper than gasoline over here and in some other European countries, like the Netherlands, it’s even a difference of about 65%… Thanks for paying attention.
GM should be concerned about making a profit and not on embarking on science projects. The media has given GM no credit for its extraordinary efforts. GM’s rivals take profits out of the U.S. and the media doesn’t hold them accountable.
Even though I feel that GM is a little behind on the electric business, I still think that the Volt is a great idea, and I hope that it is a great success. The problem I see is that GM will have a bit too much competition from another manufacturer, this one from Norway. Th!nk North America is the branch on this side of the Atlantic, but if you go to http://www.think.no, I think that you will see why I am a bit skeptical about the Volt. The Th!nk City is a smaller car with “2+2″ seating. It gets over 100 miles per charge, and has a top speed of a little over 60 mph. The price for the American edition is said to be at a goal of $20,000 or less. If this smaller company can do that well with their range, still do okay for most driving applications, and sell the car for under $20,000, I think that GM might want to do some more thinking on their part.
Tim said: “Also regarding the strength of the battery. Will it break if you go head on with a dump truck at a relative speed of 140MPH? Probably. But so will your cars gas tank. Also, gas tends to burn pretty easily when it leaks out of it’s container.”
Tim,
Yes, gasoline is also dangerous. But, and this is a huge but, first responders have had decades of experience dealing with gasoline fires at the scene of car crashes. All first response teams have the experience and equipment for dealing with gasoline.
A lithium fire, or the contents of a lithium battery scattered around a crash scene, are horses of a different color. How many first responders have had experience dealing with a crash or fire involving lithium? How many first responders have been trained to deal with a lithium “situation?”
Who will provide the training of how to handle a lithium fire? Who will provide the training of how to clean up an area “salted” by the contents of a lithium battery? If a first response team finds a crash involves lithium and they have had no training or equipment for handling lithium fires, will they need to call in a special lithium-trained and equipped team? How will a first response team even know a crash involves lithium if the cars with lithium batteries aren’t placarded as such?
Has GM done an environmental impact study (EIS) of the effects of putting tens of thousands of cars on the road equipped with lithium batteries? Have GM’s legal department looked at any possible liability issues of putting tons and tons of lithium on the road?
“Ever heard of Police officers? When on a high speed chase (or just catching a speeder) they routinely get to 100MPH.”
Tim,
Does that mean you expect GM to market a “police interceptor” version of the Volt? Somehow, I can’t see state troopers prowling our Interstate highways in their Volts.
Perhaps the police departments in Aspen, Telluride, or Boulder, CO; or maybe in Eugene, OR; but that’s about it, and I think those PDs all have policies against high-speed chases. Instead, they let the old reliable two-way radio do the chasing.
I think GM is a loosing cause. The chevy Volt nice car but how many people can pay 40,000.00 think about it guys. And that Lutz guy he is just making GM look terrible. You guys really should think about getting rid of him. In my opionion Lutz is an old out dated moron. Please get rid of him. Your company will benefit.
Frank, you seemed to obnubilate my point. I don’t want to drive a small car like the Volt, I like Pickup trucks and SUV’s. The hydraulic hybrid would work for this market, Ford had planned to put it on an F-150 but changed their mind. Hydraulic is cheaper and more durable than Li batteries, which need imported materials to make. Stanard battery hybrids don’t save fuel on hwy either BTW, and yes I do realize the Volt is next generation. I like being able to pick up a load of dirt or sod, something you will never able to do with a car like the Volt.
[...] wrote a piece titled: “How GM is Making Electric Vehicles Relevant” (cross-posted on GM’s Fastlane Blog — you can read the highlights below). I’d love to hear your thoughts on this in the [...]
GM is on the right track. It is best to utilize available resources supported by a smart energy infrastructure. Hybrids and electric vehicles cost less when you consider the entire life cycle of the car from fuel efficiency, tax benefits, and resale value. Fuel-efficient cars will always receive favorable tax treatment. The Government will tax heavy vehicles, tax excessive polluters and tax cars with unnecessary horsepower to raise money for road repairs. It makes no sense to burn foreign fuel in your American car. If you chant ‘Buy American’ then fight for American based fuels in your GM. I feel it is important to use American made energy. Those who say there is no market for electric cars do not understand marketing. What If GM offered a gasoline powered SUV and they leased it in two cities only. What if GM said it was priced too high for you to buy. It would fail. That is what they did with the GM EV-1. The GM EV-1 was crushed, never sold in the late 1990s and used 100% American made electricity. Go GM.
Kyle,
Why wouldn’t police forces use Volts? Someone here commented on how they thought police forces SHOULD use them for patrol. Right now, cop cars have huge V8 engines that don’t see much work 99% of the time. Why have that engine, when you can use a Volt that will use much less fuel? Yet, will be able to catch speeders when required (granted 0-60 in 9 seconds isn’t super fast, but the Crown Vics are not fast either).
Billy Joe Halston,
First off, if a first responder can’t tell that the car was a Volt, then I’m not sure if I want them giving me first aid. All it takes is one look, and it’s pretty obvious. And also, why is it GM problem if first responders don’t have the training? Did Henry Ford personally go out and teach people how to fight gasoline fires when he was producing the Model T?
At least there is some logical thinking at these posts….I’ve found some total inane thinking when talking about ANYTHING that is American! And I for one am sick of idiots who think they know more than an engineer who has spent most of his/her life working on this new promising way to keep us not dependant on foreign oil!! Again I say “Go for the brass ring GM” This company has earned it, instead of being ridiculed for being FIRST to market with an ALL electric car!! Keep up the good work and show everyone that they are Wrong!!!!!
“First off, if a first responder can’t tell that the car was a Volt, then I’m not sure if I want them giving me first aid. All it takes is one look, and it’s pretty obvious.”
You really think so? How many first responder teams are there in the country? How many Volts are on the highway?
Right now, the only Volt anyone has seen on the road is really a mule in a Cruze (or Cobalt or Malibu) body. There will be a definite learning curve until all first responders know what Volts are and learn to recognize them.
And when a team arrives at a crushed or flattened car at a crash scene, identification of any kind of car can be difficult. Try running a Civic and Volt together head-on at high speed, and then tell me which is which after the crash. Having a HAZMAT placard on the car won’t be foolproof either, but at least it will give arriving responders a clue.
And even if they can tell one of the cars was a Volt, what guidance should they use in fighting the fire and cleaning up the crash site? If they haven’t been trained, where do they go to find how to handle the crash?
“Again I say “Go for the brass ring GM” This company has earned it, instead of being ridiculed for being FIRST to market with an ALL electric car!! Keep up the good work and show everyone that they are Wrong!!!!!” (from David)
David,
The Th!nk City is already available in Norway, so technically the Volt will not be the first all electric vehicle on the market. Th!nk will try to get it here as soon as the factory(ies) are ready. But I do agree that GM shouldn’t be ridiculed so much, and that they have worked hard to bring the Volt to us, the customers. I hope that GM will become a thriving business again.
I don’t get all the GM bashing and armchair-engineering going on here.
GM is not stupid. They know how to build and market cars. Anybody can hand-build and sell 300 cars. GM builds that many by just flipping the switch on a single line for a few hours.
Be patient. Going from show-car to prototype to production to sold in only 4 years is amazing!
BTW, GM sells a $100k car. It’s called a Corvette. They sell a bunch of them.
Frank Weber said, “There are nearly 1 billion vehicles using petroleum on the road today. If we are going to make a difference in reducing our dependence on petroleum, GM and other automakers must offer large volume production solutions. Hand-built vehicles may capture the imagination of some, but we need millions of cars to truly address this global issue.”
Hurray!! This has been CalCars’ point of view since before we did the first Prius conversion in 2004 specifically to stimulate grassroots demand for PHEVs by very publicly demonstrating their value and technological readiness. We said all along that we need mass production, and that the auto manufacturers can do the best job. But at the time, all the manufacturers were saying that no one would want to plug in their car, and that “the batteries aren’t ready” anyway. We are thrilled by Frank’s statements on behalf of GM, especially since other automakers are still sitting on the fence.
CalCars is now looking at the ‘nearly 1 billion’ existing petroleum vehicles already on the roads that are using over 250 billion gallons of fuel annually and are not going away soon. To even begin making a really significant impact on this fuel consumption and carbon footprint within the next two decades (by 2030) two things are essential:
1. Plug-in vehicles must penetrate new vehicle manufacture MUCH faster than the hybrid penetration rate of only 1% after 10 years (1997-2007). To accomplish that, consumers and governments must keep up the electrification pressure, incentives, etc. for automotive manufacturers.
2. We must come up with ways to partially (into PHEVs) or fully (into BEVs) electrify the most gas guzzling of our existing vehicles en masse (we’re talking millions and millions of conversions). We soon hope to prove that with mass production many vehicles from pickup truck size on up can be converted into PHEVs at half their replacement cost, with a resultant decrease in overall cost of ownership. Such retrofitting could even be a way for auto manufacturers and their dealers, hurting for new sales in this economy, to make additional money from vehicles they already sold. In contrast, the energy cost of early disposal and replacement of these existing vehicles makes doing so environmentally effective only when the replacement vehicle has at least double the fuel efficiency of the vehicle being scrapped.
Please check out our new campaign, technical details, etc. at http://www.calcars.org.