1) The amount of funding was reasonable for the size of the firms doing the research to improve their concepts. I think 2x the funding would have been welcome, but 10x would have been wasteful or problematic, at this time.

2) The various lithium chemistries (LTO, LMO, NMn, etc..) all have great potential when used on either the anode or the cathode. I think the Gov did a reasonable job spreading the cash among the contenders. Not all the small players and universities got direct funding from this particular source. They still may find R&D dollars.

3) NiCd and NiMH are competant chemistries. But they will not be competitive with Li for PHEV applications. NiMH is quite capable of satisfying charge-sustaining HEV’s for years to come. But for PHEV’s, it’s a matter of volumetric energy density (Wh/Liter) which drives the battery selection. Cost, Lifetime, and Mass come in close after that. Also remember that when a chemistry is tuned for “energy” it trades-off “power” capabilty.. and vice versa. Li-ion has proven to be quite high performance, and very high cycle life.

4) 20% penetration of PHEV’s by 2017 (10 years) is an aggressive goal. We will see the first major PHEV’s appear by 2010 with incentives attached. In the mean time we can choose Plug-In retrofits and EV’s.

5) The true cost of gasoline is >$5.50/gal. If we actually put that on the pumps, things would move along quite a bit quicker.

Respectfully,
Herman Wiegman

To start with your last point first(wishing all the power to any other car company making a PHEV out of NiMh) that sums up my point: They won’t HAVE any power because they won’t be allowed to use the NiMh – unless sombody at GM can answer the question asked and tell us that they are allowed to use NiMh of any size they want?

I fully accept that Li-ion has improved energy density over Ni-Mh and while true, it is a separate matter which does not answer Doug’s justified and searching questions – ie the questions actually asked.

GM must think we’re just lazy or stupid when we don’t persist in demanding an answer but instead accept another 5 year wait on the basis of Li-ion’s higher energy density which we knew about in the first place, when there is a very real chance (however small) that it will not be fit for purpose.

In fact it’s pretty insulting that they tried to fob you and Doug off with just that argument. It isn’t even an argument. If we just walk away accepting it then we are lazy and stupid and deserve more of the same nothing we have ultimately had from GM in the past. NiMh exists, works and can obviously meet the needs of PHEV: If you put a 600cc motorbike engine under the RAV4 EV’s hood you would have an NiMh PHEV with over twice the Volt’s range right NOW. People are driving around using less elegant towed versions of just this RIGHT NOW.

So the question again is WHY are all of these engineers pinning their hopes and (without consultation) our hopes on the uncertainty of Li-ion in this application? engineers are a cautious lot. Are you seriusly telling me that nobody out there sees any merit in starting with what works a while developing improved versions for the future in parallel?

Anyway I guess I’m wasting my time – the release year is set, the production line apparently has an address and the battery chemistry has been chosen even though it is completely unproven. Provided the scientists can produce some batteries to put in it, all will be well. I’ll buy first the car if itever arrives, but you won’t catch me buying any shares in the company withthat kind of carefree approach to R&D. I guess I’ll just fall into line with the rest of the lemmings and hope Li-ion works too!

Don’t get me wrong – I am excited by the Volt and I really want it to happen. If I sound confrontational I don’t mean to: I’m just baffled and frustrated that in a world which needs many EVs YESTERDAY (let alone tomorow) we have so few people prepared to question the conventional ‘wisdom’.

Meanwhile I’m off to lick the contacts on my pre-historic 60 mile NiCads!

Keep up the good work – I’m on your side!

Their answer was simply that Li-ion has much higher energy and power density. They show some beautiful powerpoint graphs demonstrating that, email me if you want to see them. Li-ion can power greater acceleration and ranges for less added weight.

At this point I accept GMs decision and that of many engineers in other auto companies, and national laboratories.

If any car company still wants to make a PHEV out of NiMh, all the power to them, but it looks like it wont be GM.

Lyle, as you seem to have a sort of ‘hot-line’ to various members of the Volt project for the purposes of this site, will you put the following questions forward, and PERSIST in doing so until answers are given:

1) Is Chevron/Cobasys not allowing the use of NiMh packs above a certain size? Yes or no answer from GM please

2) Is Chevron/Cobasys charging an artificially high price to prevent use of NiMh above a ceratian size? Yes or no answer from GM please.

3) If the answer to questions 1 and 2 is “no” then show us the precise data is using to support it’s stsament that NiMh is unfit for purpose, when the eveidence we all have before us is completely contrary to that.

We ALL deserve to have these questions fully answered before we applaud either the administration that puts a few pennies into battery research that is not required, or the car company that tells us “tomorrow”. We were here 10 yars ago when GM used government money in its EV research. They had the cars and they had the batteries. Can we buy either today? Were we EVER given the chance to? Fine, let the market drive the NEXT battery technology along, but let the market OPERATE and that means let NiMh be BUILT in ANY size pack.

If the US givernment wants to make itself useful what about a federal class action against Chevron to FORCE (in the national interest) permission for any OEM manufacturer to build NiMh in any size it wants? They can invade a country in the national interest so why can’t they force early expiration of a patent?
Today’s NiMh would give nearly 200 mile pure EVs, so the Volt could be built tomorrow.

Does anybody out there think it is unreasonable to require proper answers to the NiMh questions? If not surely we can collectively bear weight to get them answered?

Then and only then we all return to the really pressing matters such as the noise it’s going to make!

Lyle, will you undertake to help us get those answers?