Compact Power’s CEO Wants to Lease You Your Volt’s Batteries

19 Responses to “Compact Power’s CEO Wants to Lease You Your Volt’s Batteries”

1. 
   
   kent beuchert Says:
   July 23rd, 2007 at 10:04 pm

   Since GM has indicated that the VOLT would sell for less than $30,000 and that price obviously includes the batteries, then I see no reason for leasing the batteries seperately. Actually, the better alternative along these lines would probably be to finance the batteries over 15 years (their lifespan) and the rest of the vehicle over 5. As for me, I think the “under $30K” price is fine.

2. 
   
   kent beuchert Says:
   July 23rd, 2007 at 10:08 pm

   What delay is this guy referring to? GM never said the car would be ready before 2010 and they still seem on schedule for that date. And nothing was ever mentioned about price being a stumblng block either.

3. 
   
   H. Hulseman Says:
   July 23rd, 2007 at 10:57 pm

   Why would anyone want to but an electrtic car and not own the battery. The car can’t function without it.

   A better suggestion would be to lease the entire car. If the battery problem is that bad it seems to me the entire project is doomed to fail.

4. 
   
   Brian Says:
   July 23rd, 2007 at 11:12 pm

   The only reason I can see to lease the batteries is if you could swap for newer, better batteries every two years or something. That could work if they could recycle or reuse the old battery pack.

5. 
   
   ug Says:
   July 24th, 2007 at 2:58 am

   This sounds fishy to me. The big deal about next-gen Lithium batteries is their supposed longevity. It shouldn’t be necessary to constantly refresh them every few years. I think GM should just take a loss on the batteries for the sake of ramping up economy of scale. They can’t just saddle this onto the consumer and expect it to take off.

6. 
   
   RxTx Says:
   July 24th, 2007 at 5:41 am

   Well GM produce a pure electric car (EV1) with over 100mile range. The batteries are ready now in 2007 - it is OTHER factors delaying the launch.

7. 
   
   Tim Says:
   July 24th, 2007 at 10:22 am

   This Pre-Ignition Catalytic Converter PICC . http://www.amazing2u.com/dei1 seems to be based on the GEET system. This system turns fuel into gas plasma before injecting it into the combustion chamber. Instead of 20% efficiency by spraying in liquid, they are getting 80% efficiency by injecting plasma so that all the available fuel can be combusted. Here is a quote from the Q&A on their website: “Our experience on properly modified engines, ranged from 2.5x mileage to 3.5x mileage using gasoline only. 20 mpg becomes 50 mpg to 70 mpg (an average of 3x or 60 mpg). We also discovered that a 50/50 mixture of gas and water worked great. We got super power at that mix. If you use half water, you use half as much gas. Thus 50 mpg becomes 100 mpg and 70 mpg becomes 140 mpg, etc.” This is a game changer if it’s true.

8. 
   
   Matt986 Says:
   July 24th, 2007 at 11:21 am

   I think what Patil is getting at is that he may think the battery packs will not come down to an ‘economical’ price soon enough, and might keep the price of the Volt too high for the average consumer.

9. 
   
   Steven B Says:
   July 24th, 2007 at 11:53 am

   I just know this: After learning the details of what happened to the EV1, the whole lease program best be optional. I really want a Volt, and am willing to pony up probably an unreasonable amount of money to get it. I don’t want to lease a Volt, or any car, and especially not in a way where I’ll become concerned that GM will give fodder to conspiracy theorists, or alternatively just conspire, by refusing to renew my lease and taking my Volt away to have it crushed. I got sick when I watched “Who Killed the Electric Car?” Just hearing this idea makes me worried about being victimized.

10. 
    
    Steve F Says:
    July 24th, 2007 at 11:58 am

    In the past I have been person that buys a car and keeps it for many years. With a new technology car like the Volt I may prefer leasing the whole car. Reason is that I know that the battery technology will continue to improve. Sure each model year will have increase battery energy with smaller size and weight. As for leasing battery vs car, it depends on if GM provide solution (technical and financial) that makes replacing the battery easy or not.

11. 
    
    kent beuchert Says:
    July 24th, 2007 at 1:38 pm

    GM initially was aimed at a 2010 launch. That is still obviously going to be met. Patil must be referring to why this car wasn’t begun 2 years ago, rather than a year ago. I don’t think Patil realizes that people out there are willing to pay more for electric propulsion or how much people want to avoid gasoline. It’s an emotional thing, not based on sheer economics, although economics will favor the plug-in
    as the owner keeps the car over the years.
    Patil isn’t aware of customer sentiment, I don’t believe. I wish he had thrown out dollar numbers when he’s talking about battery costs. If GM brings the car in at the price they indicated , less than $30K,
    the car won’t have any problem selling, I
    don’t care what the battery costs are.

12. 
    
    kent beuchert Says:
    July 24th, 2007 at 1:57 pm

    Patil’s concerns about battery costs simply reinforces my conviction that all-electrics are not yet economically viable except in rather oddball low volume niches - very pricey sports models like the $100K Tesla, or those neighborhood-bound $10K
    25 MPH super golf carts. The economics of battery costs dictate the plug-in as the only viable electric propulsion technology
    for now.
    We all wish for all-electrics, but a 40 mile range plug-in can accomplish almost as much as an all-electric in terms of per mile costs and environmental costs and acheiving oil indepedendence. When you realize that free (or small fee) electrical outlets for employees, shopping mall customers, theater and restaurant and grocery store customers will sprout up and considerably extend that 40 mile range battery range to easily double that figure (or more), it’s obvious to me that that
    40 mile range is misleading - it will be far greater than that and allow far more than the 78% segment of the driving public
    (estimated by GM) who can manage to perform all daily driving chores for their typical day without using any gasoline. When the EV-1 was around, quite a few offices provided free electricity for their employees. With a plug-in outlet only costing a business around 12 cents an hour (national average) to attract and reward a customer for shopping there, it doesn’t take any brains to foresee that these outlets will start popping up everywhere. It’s such a cheap and obvious way to attract plug-in customers. Competitive pressures will very quickly force all businesses to do it.

13. 
    
    Matt986 Says:
    July 24th, 2007 at 2:43 pm

    Kent, calling the 40 mile range ‘misleading’, because employers and businesses MIGHT offer plug ins is misleading itself.

    Consider an ICE powered car. Say, for instance, one can go 400 miles on a tank of gas. Does the presence of gas stations mean that range is misleading?

    In the case of an EV, regardless of how many plugin stations are publicly available, you can still only go ~40 miles on a single charge.

    Also don’t confuse ‘12 cents per hour’ with 12 cents per ‘kilowatt hour’. They are not quite the same terms.

14. 
    
    kent beuchert Says:
    July 24th, 2007 at 5:40 pm

    Matt 986, the 40 mile range refers to the
    distance that can be travelled without need for gasoline, using only electricity from the grid. That range WILL definitiely be
    greater because there is NO doubt about the future availability of recharge opportunities available to the plug-in driver. We’re talking grid supplied electric only range here, which isn’t at all equivalent to that gas station range extender you refer to.
    I don’t know why your confused about 12 cents per hour - that is approximately what commercial rate electricity would cost per
    hour to feed a 120 volt 15 amp circuit,
    which would be , presumably, the standard,
    supplying 1.8 kWhr per hour (12 cents worth, national average at commercial rate), equivalent to a range of roughly 7 miles for a 3200 lb vehicle like the VOLT.
    I assumed VOLT readers are aware that the only plug mentioned so so for the VOLT is the 120 volt variety. And a 120 volt circuit is typically 15 amps. If the VOLT
    will accept 120 V, 20 amp (and I really don’t see any reason it couldn’t, or 240 Volt,40 amp either) then all those numbers obviously become inflated - more cents per hour cost to the owner of the outlet and more kWhrs pumped into the car during that hour.
    Anyone who thinks that such outlets won’t appear in public commercial parking spaces
    simply isn’t thinking logically. It’s
    guaranteed to occur.

15. 
    
    Matt986 Says:
    July 24th, 2007 at 6:52 pm

    Kent, still, regardless of how many ‘free’ or ‘public’ charging stations there are, you can still only drive ~40 miles in the Volt before either 1. the generator kicks in, or 2. you stop and plug in for several hours to recharge.

    Option #2 isn’t going to be perceived by many people to be ‘range extending’, especially if they have to leave the vehicle plugged in for several hours.

    Keep in mind, something’s ‘range’ is how far it can go without having to be refueled. Plugging in and recharging equates to being refueled.

    I do understand what you’re getting at - lots of places to plug in means you’ll be able to get more mileage out of electric only if you’re driving to/from places with plugins. I just don’t consider this ‘extending the range’ of the vehicle.

    As far as these plugs being ‘guaranteed’ to appear, maybe someday, but ‘guaranteed’ isn’t something anyone can really say.

    Who knows? Maybe someone figures out cold fusion 10 years from now, negating the need to plug anything in anymore!

16. 
    
    AES Says:
    July 24th, 2007 at 10:11 pm

    Just some quick numbers to put things into perspective.

    The individual battery cells that A123 makes hold about 7.59 Watt-hours, and they cost (for the general public) about $20 a pop. To make a 16kWh Volt battery pack using these cells would require about 2,108 cells - at a cost of over $42,000.

    Now granted, A123 is going to be using larger format cells for their candidate Volt pack, but it’s the same fundamental technology. So the lease-or-not-to-lease question I think really comes down to how much lower OEM prices are going to be.

    I don’t have exact specs on CPI’s cells, so I can’t make a direct comparison.

17. 
    
    Dave Says:
    July 25th, 2007 at 7:28 am

    Anyone notice the press release from Toyota about their new Plug-in HEV?

    http://www.greencarcongress.com/2007/07/toyota-announce.html#more

    8 mile all electric range isn’t so hot, but it’s far closer to reality than the Volt.

    Dave

18. 
    
    Matt986 Says:
    July 25th, 2007 at 1:07 pm

    Dave,

    I’d rather have one of these: http://money.cnn.com/2007/07/24/autos/porsche_hybrid/index.htm?cnn=yes

    It would look great in the driveway next to my Boxster!

19. 
    
    Hoang Says:
    July 30th, 2007 at 2:52 pm

    For those of you who really believe that GM can make the Volt under 30K in 2010, here is your future’s configuration option of your Volt and this is my most optimistic view:

    “Standand” Volt: $29,500, 18-25 miles/electric only *

    Safety Pack: $3,000, sided and head airbags.

    Convenience Pack: $2,950, AC, CD player, power window and steering wheel.

    Power Pack: $6,500, increase electric range to 30-40 miles *

    Limited Version: $18,000, has all options above plus GPS, bluethooth, chrome wheel, heated miror and seat…

    —————————–

    * Note: actual electric range may vary. It depends on your driving habit and how much weight of passenger/lugguage you carry in your car.

    If what I envisioned is true, in 2010, I’d rather buy the Toyota Yaris at $12,000. At least the power steering is standard!

Leave a Reply