Comments on: New Interview with Chevy Volt Chief Engineer Nick Zielinksi: Part I

By: atdwxpj nwczvxo

atdwxpj nwczvxo — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 02:56:16 +0000

gcxdarith plfvcx gcoki admhkoijf znbwxps qmdzfwa mrkpi

By: Ismael Livingston

Ismael Livingston — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 22:05:42 +0000

supercabinet picturesque harebrained monarchomachist swath eucharist unfibbing manlessness
Treasures from the Writings of Jacob Boehme
http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/javaopensource/jive/

By: Byron

Byron — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 20:50:39 +0000

Thanks Lyle for the site. Went to the Seattle Auto Show this weekend. GM had a fuel cell and the new Camero but no Volt. Suppose to be 30 fuel cells on the road in CA and Wash DC., the only place they can refuel them. When ask when available the best answer was three to five years. No fuel stations for the cell. Same answer for the Volt. My take on this has always been when the big oil companys control the fuel weather battery, hydrogen, or what ever, it will happen. Big money will all so dictate when we will get these. Today it was annouced GM took a 39 billion dollar loss. Oil hit close to $98,00 a barrel and gas reported at $3.23 a gallon in this state. Maybe time to rethink the SUV’s. I saw a Toyota Prius suppose to get 30 miles between charges being test drove on the Internet, when ask when available, they didn’t know. A local Co has a conversion for the Prius all ready available for $9000.00 so it can be done. Looked at everything from the Bentley’s to Kia’s and the Prius won hands down for gas milege, room and customer satisfaction so far if your just looking for transportation and not a muscle car. The Old’s turned 217000 and waiting. 3.8 V6, half city, half hwy 24mpg last 14 gallons. Thats a 1986, 98 4door Broughn.

By: Dave Smith

Dave Smith — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 22:31:17 +0000

The camera and audio work were awful. Tighter shot needed, away from the windows if possible (wash out), lapel mic or wireless hand held for the interviewer. Camera mounted mics are almost useless.

We’re not talking a lot of money here – mostly technique.

I have to agree with may others here. This needs a transcript. I could not hear the interviewee.

By: Robert Ackerlind

Robert Ackerlind — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 08:24:16 +0000

phev’s were “ready” over a hundred years ago. take your electric car, add a ice motor and you have no range issues. Porshe raced a phev with hub motors. we don’t have to wait for any “science”. there are only two reserves of lithium in the world for real economy of scale. Peru and China. give us our nimh batteries that are ready now and we have no global warming problem or foreign fuel wars either. the second generation ev1 had a nimh batteriy. expose chevron’s patent scandal as a dangerous monoply that is profiting from unfair practices. let inovation progress. lets talk facts and stop debating “opinions” and “theater”. do not make the volt “have the ICE run for the start of the trip” does Kyle work for chevron?

By: Kyle

Kyle — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 05:49:35 +0000

voltman asks, “Why does it need to know how far you are planning to travel? It drives until the batteries are at a specific level (30% was mentioned) then it turns on the generator to power the car. Same thing, every day.”
Well, of course, you are correct – it certainly could operate in the manner you described – same thing every day. It probably will, since we haven’t seen anything to the contrary and it would take effort to optimize the system, and (worse yet) they might not even get credit for it from the EPA if they did. Nevertheless, I will claim that there are advantages to doing so. Note that we expect that the car will be more efficient in city driving using the battery than on the highway using battery (as per Lyle’s question in the interview). Also, note that 1 kWh in the battery generated by the range extender will typically expend more net CO2 than 1 kWh from the power company. I was being somewhat flippant when I said that one need only know how far one is going. Ideally, one would know a lot more. Consider if the car had GPS and new that you were going to Grandma’s, which is 350 miles away, she’s deep in a city, and that you are starting off your trip near the freeway. In that case, I’m pretty sure that the least carbon impact trip will be NOT to drive the first 30+ miles on battery only at which point the ICE kicks in when the battery is at 30%. Instead, I think a more optimized route planner would have the ICE run for the start of the trip and then run the final city miles on the battery.

By: Scott

Scott — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 05:48:48 +0000

Kyle, I couldn’t agree more. I’m sick and tired of paying for $3/gal. gasoline. I’ll be ready for a new car about the time this thing comes out. Later.

By: Kyle

Kyle — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 05:35:37 +0000

We can only hope that GM will continue to see the light and follow through on the vision that inspired the Volt. The sad truth is that we have seen terrible mis-steps in the past. There was a time when Roger Smith, then CEO of GM, said that the EV1 was to be a big thing. Times changed, people changed, and forces within the company itself moved against that vision. Now, of course, they view the decision to kill the EV1 as a mistake (as Rick Wagoner has acknowledged). Could the same happen to the Volt down the road? Yes, but I doubt it. There has finally been a sea change in the national debate and people, by in large, have a vague understanding that oil and carbon are a problem. The EV1 and the people that got it through GM were ahead of their time. I believe that the Volt is not a stunt and it will be the harbinger of great things to come. Lets hope GM gets it done sooner than later, for its sake and ours.

By: Lyle

Lyle — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 22:52:34 +0000

Whatever any who are cynical in spirit may believe, you are certainly welcome to your opinion. Nothing in life is ever guaranteed.

I can tell you firsthand, though, GM is dead serious about making this car, not only because of the tremendous advertising, and monumentally putting their neck on the line, but also because the resources and people are there.

The people I interview are genuine engineers with tremendous reputations and would not play a part in some fictitious billion dollar theater, for what?

Not to mention the billions of dollars A123, CPI and the like stand to make selling batteries. Can GM really be pulling the wool over their eyes too?

In the end only time will tell. The Rav4 EV crowd seem angry, but in time, they will come around.

Anyway everyone is welcome and appreciated here.

By: D.J.

D.J. — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 22:36:42 +0000

I have to agree with Robert Ackerlind. I believe it only makes GM “look good” and it will never be released. It is purely PR. They continue to push the date further away. GM should have never sold their battery patents to Chevron. Besides, they make more money on their full-size trucks and suv’s.