Grab our RSS Feed

AND

Does GM Need Toyota to Make the Volt More Affordable??

February 23rd, 2008 | Posted in: Battery, Financial, Public Opinion, Research

Motor Trend published a report summarizing some of the presentations at the Society of Automotive Engineers Hybrid Symposium in San Diego last week.

One of these was by a Dr. Menahem Anderman of Advanced Automotive Batteries, which gave a “cold-eyed view” on PHEVs. His report concluded that GM won’t be able to make the Volt affordable without Toyota.

He is reported to doubt PHEVs will be very significant players in the near future, and states that a 40-mile PHEV battery like the one in the Volt costs about $10,000, which is too high to be replaced in the vehicles serviceable lifetime, and makes the car expensive.

It was also his contention that promoting the Toyota hybrid system will do more to reduce CO2 emissions, since they are already the market leader in hybrids, claiming hybrids offer a greater efficiency jump over gas engines than PHEVs do over hybrids.

He also say lithium ion batteries futures are “too sketchy”.

It is implied he thinks that Chevy Volts wont sell in volumes due to their price, and that lithium-ion battery prices wont drop until Toyota puts them into their cars.

The conclusion is therefore, that the Volts price cant drop until Toyota sells lithium-ion battery cars in large volumes.

Do you believe this?

Source (Motortrend)

Posted by: Lyle

79 Responses to “Does GM Need Toyota to Make the Volt More Affordable??”

Dave B Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 6:18 am

He assumes everyone buys products with only the bottom line in mind. Granted, most people do, and most sales will be based on that. But I’d submit a large segment of this market will buy the Volt for other altruistic reasons.

Moreover, the production numbers we’ve heard from GM between 60-100K are enough to make a profit even if not for the first few vehicles. You need Toyota? This guy is an idiot.

(Quote)
FME Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 6:48 am

Where to begin?
1. His linkage of GM’s success to Toyota’s makes him sound like a shlll for Toyota – a company which, we all know, fell victim to not-invented-here syndrome and initially ridiculed GM’s approach.
2. His pessimism is so out of step with the growing consensus of the viability of plug-in hybrids that one has to question his intellectual honesty.
3. If he really believes what he says, let’s send him and his “can’t do” attitude to some former Soviet republic, where he will fit in much better. I would not be surprised if, when the wheel was invented, his ancestors were the ones sayiing it would never work.

(Quote)
bruce g Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 7:01 am

It just goes to show that even people with doctorates can have anxiety attacks. In real life he is a consultant, his job is to give advice.
Enough said.

(Quote)
mmcc Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 7:08 am

No, I don’t believe it.

I believe the future has promise. I believe that in 3 years I will be driving a Volt. I believe my 2 YO grandson will be learn to drive in an electric vehicle. I believe in 3 years I won’t be spending $28 to top off my gas tank (like I did yesterday) but will instead use it for a case of Heineken and the 3 or 4 bucks left over will be more than adequate to recharge my Volt for the equivelent range of the $28 in gas. That’s what I believe!

(Quote)
bruce g Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 7:10 am

Now this presentation would be interesting!

Nanophosphate Technology for PHEV, Extended-Range EV, and Other Automotive Applications
Andy Chu, Senior Scientist, A123Systems,

Perhaps GM has a copy?

(Quote)
mek Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 8:21 am

Yes we can!

(Quote)
Van Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 8:29 am

If the battery adds $10,000 to the cost of the vehicle, and it is not guaranteed for the life of the vehicle, then it does give a potential buyer pause. But I think many of us are willing to take that risk to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, reduce urban air pollution, and drive into the future of transportation.

(Quote)
Jack Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 8:37 am

GM need Toyota? That is a ridiculous question. Why are editorials making Toyota like a super dumper company. The only thing they ever contributed was the Prius and that of course ,to many editorials, makes them a super technology company. GM is fully awake today and with a bit more time, we’ll see who’s more technological advanced. GM needs Toyota like they need a hole in the head.

The Volt will change the DNA of automobiles and for that reason,people will pay a lot of money for it.It will be a hot seller!!

(Quote)
Russell J Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 8:41 am

I worry more of George Bush and company doing something behind the scenes to kill the Volt. He did kill the Energy Bill!!! Does anybody seriously think that Big Oil wants to see the Volt produced?

(Quote)
ROMI Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 9:37 am

What burns me is the quote about how hybrids provide a greater efficiency jump over gas engines than phev over hybrids. That point is irrelevant. My normal commute, as well as many others, is well below 40 miles a day and last time I checked, not using any gas is more efficient that using some. In my normal commute I don’t want to use some fuel, I want to use NO fuel.

(Quote)
NZDavid Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 9:39 am

Following that logic, Toyota could not make a go of the Prius until GM started as well.

Bruce g
# 3 Not all consultants are like him.
# 5 Yes I would love to see that report.

#7 Van
The battery will last the life of the vehicle. However, Dr. Menahem Anderman believes the battery will not pay for itself over the cars life.

#8 Jack
I totally agree with you, could not say it better myself. It is a game changer.

#9 Russell J
Yes, Shell does. They are a major funder in the 1GW Thames Wind farm. I also note B.P. is part funding a wind farm in Colorado.

In any event Toyota and GM are A) using different suppliers, and B) Toyota has already said it will use Lithium as well. Did I mention Peak Oil? Just because GM is not using his company as a supplier there is . . .

(Quote)
Statik Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 10:06 am

I think I can be fairly unbaised. I can conceed he has some relevant points, however, I think he extrapolates their effect on the Volt to far.

If the Volt can stay on target and sub 35K, I think it will do ok. I’ve said it before, but I hate this back and forth, Volt vs Prius, Prius vs Volt.

Both can be in the market at once. If only North America could support more than one family SUV at a time, now that would be progress.

(Quote)
Jim I Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 10:06 am

There will never be a railroad across the USA
Man can not fly
Man will never set foot on the moon
Personal computers are a fad, and who needs one anyway?

Give me a break…………..

This guy better wake up and take a look at the current technology. The Volt will happen. It is just a matter of time.

I’ll bet the addition that Toyota just paid to have added to his house looks really nice!

(Quote)
nasaman Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 10:08 am

I read everything I could find on Anderman’s paper after he presented it 9 days ago at the SAE conference. His presentation can be summed up in a graphic he used…..
http://www.greencarcongress.com/images/2008/02/16/anderman.png

and the best summation of the entire symposium that I found, including Anderman’s paper, is at….

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/02/to-phev-or-not.html

Interestingly, Anderman puts both plug-in & fuel cell EVs almost on a par in terms of their “Environmental & Societal Benefits” (with plug-ins slightly better than fuel cells), but he shows fuel cell EVs as having a notably higher “Negative Impact on Consumer Value” (higher cost, reduced performance) than plug-ins. No surprise.

Anderman then elaborates as to why he says “PHEVs will be a detour and not a step forward”, if:

1) Companies dilute their efforts to expand conventional HEVs and to introduce li-ion batteries into the market;

2) If governments miss the opportunity to provide incentives for conventional HEVs, “the only electrified vehicle technology that can make an impact on the environment in the next 10 years” and

3) If the PHEV is rushed to market by bypassing prudent automotive engineering design, verification, qualification and supplier management standards.

IMO, he’s absolutely right! And it seems to me GM is addressing all 3 of these caveats. Their “mild” hybrids on the Vue, Aura & Malibu, plus the new 2-mode hybrids for SUVs & trucks, certainly address #1. Regarding #2, I have no doubt they’ll lobby Congress heavily to provide buyer incentives for BOTH their conventional hybrids AND the Volt. And I’m positive GM’s leaning hard on the Chevy Volt in-house team and their suppliers to address #3.

However, the PIVOTAL question (as everyone here at gm-volt.com will agree, I believe), is how GM will address the Volt’s initial PRICING…..

As the Motor Trend article says,

[i][b]“At present, and in the near future, Dr. Anderman doubts PHEVs will be very significant players, as the price of the battery packs – $4000 in the case of a PHEV-10 (one which can travel 10 miles on its battery alone) or $10,000 for a PHEV- 40 (the Volt, for instance) – is too high for them to be economically replaced during the vehicle’s service life. At present, Dr. Anderman contends that the longevity of lithium-ion is just too sketchy.”[/b][/i]

So GM is likely to heavily subsidize the Volt’s retail pricing (as is generally believed Toyota did in the early years of the Prius) enough to keep the base model under $30,000 and a “competitively-equipped” model under $35,000 (in 2011 dollars). These price limits, plus government tax credits and/or other buyer incentives, should overcome the reluctance of many buyers to risk buying a radically-new model, and the Volt’s 1st year sales volume should have a good chance of reaching their goal of 60,000.

One more thing….. The Volt will have to have PIZAZZ —a lot of it! Basic things such as 328i-like handling (the Volt’s low c.g. & 50/50 weight distribution, coupled with Caddy CTS suspension technology should make it achievable). And such things as heat-reflecting/absorbing glass all around; “cool” interior (& exterior) LED lighting; up-scale interior materials, fit & finish; sexy & functional front/rear consoles; and a dash & instrument design “to die for”. Plus optional features like a sport suspension, up-scale navigation/audio systems and an electrochromic glass top should be offered for those buyers who want them. Then, like the lady in the current CTS television ad (one of the best car ads I’ve ever seen) says, the only question will be, “when you turn your car on, will it return the favor”?

Bob Lutz, I’d put the word out to the Volt team that the car had better not just turn buyers on like a CTS, but ELECTRIFY them!!!

(Quote)
nasaman Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 10:11 am

Here’s a the graphic Anderman used that’s LEGIBLE….

http://bioage.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/02/16/anderman.png

(Quote)
jabroni Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 10:15 am

Anderman is either a paid shill for oil companies or else he is utterly ignorant and incompetent. Take your pick…

(Quote)
Marty McFly Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 10:16 am

Maybe we should go back to the horse and buggy ?

Just drop a “no plug” 8 Kwh E-Flex power train into an Aveo and you’ll have a $17,000 car that gets better mileage than the Prius.

(Quote)
NZDavid Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 10:30 am

#14 nasaman
From the same source: Thought I had read it before.
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/02/to-phev-or-not.html

Anderman’s conclusions about the economic viability of PHEVs were vigorously questioned by Dr. Mark Duvall from EPRI (Electric Power Research Institute), who had just preceded Anderman on the dais with a presentation on the impact of PHEVs on emissions and on the utility industry.

I’m gratified to see $600/kWh cost figure. At $600/kWh there are many highly likely near-term scenarios where PHEVs can pay back. What I’m saying is that we did a cost study, we think it’s credible…and it disagrees dramatically with you…There is greater leeway to discuss this. We can’t assume the negative impact on consumer value. We have to look at entire value equation of the vehicle.
—Mark Duvall

(Quote)
nasaman Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 11:00 am

18 NZDavid

I also saw those remarks by Duvall. He’s not the only guy that’s differed with Anderman. But notice that Duvall’s number of $600/KWh lithium-ion battery cost = 600 x 16Kwh = $9,600 for a Volt battery, so Duvall & Anderman don’t disagree so much on the “notes as on the music” (i.e., on the numbers as on the words.

But Anderman’s 3 stipulations needed to avoid plug-ins becoming a “detour”, as I enumerate them in #14, are IMO all being addressed by GM. Then, as I say above, it’s just a question of whether GM will subsidize the Volt’s selling price (while still giving the car lots of “pizazz”) to keep its base price under $30,000. If not, the consensus among us here at gm-volt.com, as I see it, is that they’ll likely fall short of their 60,000 1st year sales goal.

(Quote)
Glenn Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 11:03 am

Statik 12

I realize that it’s a bit of an apples/oranges comparison, but I love the Volt vs. Prius back and forth. Now that GM is in the game, it serves to focus their attention. There’s nothing like a little competition to help you hone your product.

As much as I like the Volt, what I’m really excited about are the cars GM will be producing 10 years from now as they apply these new technologies to new models.

Make the pledge
http://www.pluginpartners.org/whatYouCanDo/onlinePetition.cfm

(Quote)
GM Volt Fan Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 11:08 am

We need to have A123 and all the other battery suppliers to just go into a FULL SPRINT to bring to market the cheapest lithium ion batteries with the best range possible. They should maybe work 3 shifts or put the engineers in other time zones around the world and link them via teleconferencing … around the clock research and development. Lots of computer and software companies are doing it these days.

Being first to market gets you big advantages over the competition. I bet Toyota is gearing up to bring a new E-REV to market pretty quick. GM better not underestimate them. They might have a secret “skunk works” E-REV already close to production for all we know.

I’m hoping A123 or other battery companies are going to surprise the hell out of everyone and come up with a battery with 100 miles of range for a cost of maybe $5000 for the battery pack by 2010.

Hopefully the economics of Silicon Valley’s “Moore’s Law” will kick in we’ll start to see maybe 150 miles for $4,000 in 2011, 200 miles for $3,000 in 2012, etc. Once it reaches 400 miles of 100% electric range for $2,000, it will be a no-brainer for even the die hard internal combustion engine fans. People will start trading in their old fashioned 100% internal combustion engine cars in droves.

The better the battery technology gets, the more electric cars are purchased … no doubt about it. That is, if GM and other car manufacturers make sure they get the rest of the car right so that it gets the excellent reviews from Motor Trend, Car and Driver, Consumer Reports, etc. GM needs to make sure they get the exterior and the interior right as well as the batteries and powertrain.

The next 5-10 years in the auto industry are going to be VERY interesting indeed. I would love to be an engineer or scientist in the auto industry these days. I’d be excited about working on these new electric cars every day. You get to feel like a pioneer like Henry Ford at the dawn of a new industry … or a scientist/engineer in the Apollo space mission to the moon.

(Quote)
GM Volt Fan Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 11:19 am

This ought to be a good conference on the latest and greatest battery technology. I hope the automotive and other high tech press has a bunch of people there to cover what’s up for the next few years. I’d love to go to Tampa and see it in person.

http://www.advancedautobat.com/AABC/index.html

(Quote)
Jason M. Hendler Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 11:51 am

The attached presentation shows that the E-REV config gives drivers more bang for their buck in reducing petroleum use:

http://fastlane.gmblogs.com/PDF/presentation-sm.pdf

Dr. Menahem Anderman is a shill for Toyota, weighting attributes in favor of the Prius, but the above presentation shows that the E-REV will have a much greater contribution to reducing petroleum usage than the Prius.

(Quote)
Dean Anderson Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 11:52 am

The Volt is going to happen, it is the next step in vehicle evolution. The hybrid was the preceeding step that indeed proved battery science could provide an efficient system of utilizing the internal combustion engine. GM,Toyota and other producers could do well to keep costs in line by cooperating on the standardization of component parts for EV’s.
Such common parts as electric AC compressors, windshield wiper motors, inverters, variable frequency controlers, power steering units and even motors and batteries will have to be standardized. Vendors have played a key role for years in auto production and I see no change.. Dr. Anderman looks like a techie out of touch with the ecconomics of automotive progression.

(Quote)
roger Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 11:53 am

The best evidence for the series hybrid is the diesel electric locomotives which proven it is more efficent to burn diesel to power electric generators which in turn power electric motors. Have you seen the CSX commerial in which they state their train can haul 1 ton of freight at 423 miles per gallon. The fuel and maintenance savings of the plug in hybrid will be about 15 cents a mile. MY current commute with a 40 mile battery pack will allow about 10,000 miles a year of electric use which puts my pay back on a $10,000 battery pack at about 7 years. Sign me up.

(Quote)
noel park Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 12:49 pm

nasaman, #14 & #19:

Thanks for a very good analysis of the technology and the economics, as always.

I think that the presenter does not grasp the visceral resistance that people have to paying high gas prices. It’s not all rational cost analysis, as GM-Volt.com followers are well aware! I was taught in business school that people hate to pay money for stuff that they do not see or get to hold in their hands. Gasoline was a prime example, and this was back when it cost about $0.60/gallon. You hold the hose and hear some gurgling, and then you pay your money (or vice versa now). Unless you spill some, you never see what you are buying. I think of that almost every time I get gas. As the price marches up, it just gets worse.

While I believe that Toyota now makes money on the Prius, they probably did lose some in the beginning. It is good to remember, however, that the “early adopter” buyers also contributed mightily to getting it going by paying well over sticker for the first few years.

Of course this was encouraged by the substantial tax credits. Here in California, it was further encouraged by letting the first 85,000 or so over 45 mpg hybrids (Toyota and Honda) drive in the HOV lanes with one occupant. Now that both of the above have expired, the law of suppy and demand has taken over, and prices have fallen dramatically, as I have commented before.

I have no doubt that a similar trajectory will take place with the Volt and its descendants. A certain percentage of “early adopters” (us, I guess) will pay the high intitial price (MBAs call it the “skimming price”) for all of the altruistic reasons mentioned above. As that initial rush slows down, the price will begin to fall.

#17, Marty McFly:

If GM can really do that, they should do it right now, in addition to the Volt. I bet that it would instantly triple or quadruple their hybrid market. Plenty of people who can’t, or won’t, afford $35,000 for a Volt would snap one of those up in a heartbeat. Or how about a Cobalt, made in USA last time I looked?

GM has a huge diversity product line, many say too diverse. A modest diversity of very high mileage hybrids would cetainly seem like a wise strategy.

(Quote)
Rob Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 12:54 pm

He is stupid. There is only one point on which he is right – there has to be large volume production of lithium batteries to lower their costs. We know that from LCD and Plasma TV experience and it is the obvious truth for the entire high tech industry. But it is irrelevant where this volume comes from . Whether it is from Toyota, Nissan, GM, VW or all of them. For some reason this guy thinks that only Toyota can increase this volume – stupidity or bias?

(Quote)
AES Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 12:59 pm

Perhaps a more neutral way of rephrasing Dr.Anderman’s argument would be to say that many manufacturers will need to embrace li-ion technology for it to become affordable. And as much as revile them, that includes Toyota.

That said, I think he’s being naive in assuming that automakers are going to be the only driving force behind economies of scale for stuff like the A123 cells. Motorola has a rather large investment in that company.

Also, just to make my biases known, I consider everything Toyota’s done to be “fake” hybrids, because ultimately all the energy that they use comes from petroleum. The Volt and Vue are going to be the first “true” hybrids because they can make use of energy from more than one source, in addition to the mere energy management systems (e.g. regen braking) offered at present.

(Quote)
Jeff M Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 1:25 pm

Roger, just a nit,… diesel electric locomotives are not “hybrids” at all, they are series electric, but because the (diesel powered) electric generator is the only source of power, there is no “hybrid” to the design.

(Quote)
Brian Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 1:35 pm

I’m fairly new to this whole idea behind plug-in vehicles. In fact, until recently I thought the idea was kind of stupid until I read all the facts (”What if I want to drive more than 40 miles! This car is pointless!”) But now I am becoming increasingly interested in the Volt.

With that being said, I have a question concerning the battery. It was mentioned in the article the batteries won’t last the life of the car or that the battery’s cost don’t justify the savings at the pump. $10,000 for a battery does seem a bit pricey. But lets say I were to buy a Volt with it’s $10,000 battery and I drove the car for 8 years and the battery started dying off and I needed a new one. By that time wouldn’t the cost of a replacement battery be significantly reduced? Or, an even better option, would the Volt’s battery be able to be replaced with a better battery than it started with (I.E. A battery with 80 mile range)?

(Quote)
Wise Golden Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 1:39 pm

The graphic says it all, however, there is a minor flaw…just a minor flaw.

That flaw being that he has no marketed EV’s or PHEV’s to base his data on. He simply guessed at what the attrobutes of these vehicles would be, and guessed at what the price would be and then plotted the guesses on a graph and made the call that nobody is going to buy them (and then presented this as fact.) It’s odd that the folks who actually know what the cars will cost and what they will do, namely GM and Toyota and Ford, are still marching forward based on their data — have they not seen the pretty graph with the arrow poining towards “better.”

Does this “study” remind anyone of some other types of “science” that are in the news lately?

(Quote)
MetrologyFirst Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 1:44 pm

I found particularily amusing the argument from the symposium summation comments that we should “have 100% HEV’s on the road first before going to PHEV’s so as not to redirect battery development focus and resources away from HEV research.”

Apparently creativity in research and mulidirectional approaches to solving our most important problems is a bad thing.

I guess our forefathers should have never gone west before the railroad was built, either. I guess all the other mountains in the world should have been climbed before we tried to tackle Everest.

I get the impression that quite a few people have too much invested to allow GM to “upset the apple cart.”

(Quote)
Jean-Charles Jacquemin Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 1:52 pm

ROMI #10

I completly agree with you, a lot of studies show that the REV’s, PHEV etc perform far better thant hybrids of the same category under practically all the different scenarii. I doubt of the quality of the advices of this consultant.

(Quote)
MetrologyFirst Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 1:55 pm

Brian,

I think you hit the nail on the head. The batteries are expensive, right now. But the prices will go down as more demand is created.

I remenber when the plasma TV’s first came out. I thought nothing was sillier than spending 8 grand for a TV. But because people did, that’s why we have <$1000 plasma TV’s today. And it doesn’t cost 8 grand to replace that first one.

IMO, we need the VOLT ASAP. That , if anything, will drive the development and acceptance of the approach. After all, 30-35K for a car is not unrealistic (not to mention the possible tax credits). The beauty of the Volt is that the fuel choices are ours to make. And no range restrictions. Elegant solution.

(Quote)
nasaman Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 2:01 pm

28 AES

You’re absolutely right when you say “…. I consider everything Toyota’s done to be “fake” hybrids, because ultimately all the energy that they use comes from petroleum. The Volt and Vue are going to be the first “true” hybrids because they can make use of energy from more than one source, in addition to the mere energy management systems (e.g. regen braking) offered at present.”

This could be another reason GM distances the Volt and the (plug-in) Vue from existing hybrids, even their own, by insisting they be called E-REVs.

(Quote)
Demetrius Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 2:07 pm

I think that the auto industry is intensely out-of-sinc with where consumers are and will be WRT gas prices. I spend 80 dollars a week on gas and that is not going to go down. This is not funny anymore – consumers will gravitate to whatever will alleviate this burden.

We want our cake and eat it too – the E Flex system can do just that.

I spend more on feeding my car than on feeding my family… This can’t continue.

(Quote)
Jean-Charles Jacquemin Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 2:23 pm

Well speaking of batteries and their lifetime, it may be interesting for some of us to investigate the joint-venture between Bolloré (French) and Pininfarina (Italy).

It seems they will announce in Geneva the production of an electric car with a range of 200 km, a quicker charge, seating 4, an “emergency charge” of 5 minutes to be able to do 25 kms and with a max. speed of 130 km/h.

Price (at first it will be leased 500€/month) unkown but it seems it will announced in Geneva.
There are a lot of French speaking sites to consult, and I found this less complete and accurate in English :
http://www.evworld.com/news.cfm?newsid=17532&url=http://www.convertingmagazine.com/article/CA6533020.html

(Quote)
Jean-Charles Jacquemin Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 2:28 pm

Sorry, for the previous link, this one is more accurate :
http://www.evworld.com/news.cfm?newsid=17010

(Quote)
GXT Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 3:34 pm

His conclusions seem fairly obvious.

Even the most fervent Volt supporters on this board believe that mass production of the battery is the key to the volt becoming cost competitive.

Even GM admits that the Volt is going to be 30K+. Toyota is already selling $20K Prius’ 3 years ahead of the Volt’s introduction. Honda has committed to even less expensive hybrids.

It seems fairly obvious that there is nothing but a tiny niche market for a $30-35K volt in comparison to a $15-20K hybrid.

For that reason the Volt becoming more than a niche product relies on an external factor that the Volt will be unable to deliver. It isn’t likely GM (net worth -$38,000,000,000) will be paying for it. It might be the US government (but what are the odds they will exclude hybrids?). It is more likely to be a li-ion hybrid that does the trick. And that means Toyota/Honda.

(Quote)
Grizzly Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 3:46 pm

I think this guy Anderman has already posted on this site and it wouldn’t surprise me if his handle is GXT.

Nasaman #35

You are correct about EREV. There was quite some discussion about this some time ago, and how important it was that GM not let the public be confused about what the Volt was.

I’d have thought that rather than go to these lengths to try to discredit the volt that Toyota would be trying harder to convince the public that the Volt is “just another hybrid” that is late to the game. Seems they’re convinced that won’t work.

(Quote)
David L Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 3:48 pm

As manufacturing technologies improve and volumes, the cost of large lithium ion batteries will fall dramatically. Why? Because in virtually every electronic component manufactured since the first transistor radio – manufacturing and material costs decrease dramatically once a “critical mass” of the product reaches the market.

For example, look at LCD monitors and televisions. Four years ago I purchased a 17″ LCD monitor (1280 x 1024) for $600. Now I can purchase a 19″ equivalent for $150. The same materials are being used, the same technologies are leveraged – it’s just the cost to manufacture and getting the product to market that has decreased. Quality has alos gone way up. A few years ago, a 38: LCD TV with 720 x 480 resolution cost over $3000. Now you can get the same size with 1920 x 1080 resolution for as low as $1000.

The same decreases in cost will also apply to lithium ion batteries. If production ramps up quickly, they will be 50% cheaper in 2010 than they are now. In 2015, they will be about 20% of the current cost.

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 4:39 pm

>> look at LCD monitors and televisions…

You missed a vital factor.

The old market was abandoned entirely.

Not producing the CRT anymore is what made a massive difference. They committed to the new monitor & televison technologies as a complete replacement. That follow through resulted in massive price drops.

Something similar must happen for hybrids too. Toyota is racing to switch over 10 percent of their annual product. GM will be struggling to hit 1 percent. Ford & Honda will contribute some as well. All that barely dents the overall worldwide vehicle production.

In other words, its going to take a whole lot longer than you think… and all the negative talk about FULL hybrids here is impairing that progress. Slowing battery demand by insisting SERIES hybrids are the only worthwhile investment is counter-productive.

Look at what is needed and how soon. Was the success of the new television market achieved by people waiting for the 50-inch 1080p LCD? No, of course not. Yet, that’s what people are claiming should be done here by dismissing all other choices except Volt.

(Quote)
BlackSun Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 5:01 pm

Battery development is moving forward by leaps and bounds. With the addition of supercaps and bat/supercap hybrids, it looks like increases in power density will soon approach an exponential curve, making either the range of the battery far higher, or the $10,000 figure far lower by the time the Volt is released.

Also, anybody want to take a wild guess as to what gas prices will be in 2011? I’d be extremely surprised if they hadn’t hit $5.00/gallon and rising in the US by then. This changes the cost analysis radically.

HEV’s and PHEV’s will be in very high demand. As Lou Grinzo says, they’ll be selling ‘em as fast as they can screw ‘em together.

(Quote)
noel park Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 5:02 pm

42 john1701a:

This week’s Autoweek reports on Subaru Legacies and Outbacks to be available in the US in 2009 with a 4 cyl boxer diesel. 49 mpg on diesel. I bet they sell a few of those.

As you say, it will take awhile. Meanwhile, the whole conventional fleet has to drastically improve in mileage. Marty Mc Fly at #17 suggested a hybrid Aveo. Amen. Or how about somethiong even simpler, the rumored Cobalt with the 1.4 turbo. That can be parts binned right now. Dare we hope for a 6 speed automatic for my wife who is past driving stick in LA? How about taking some weight out? GM (Corvette) is the world automotive composites leader.

Or how about some even higher mileage Opels/Saturns? They have models in Europe that get 40 mpg+ right now. Ask Jean-Charles Jacquemin.

Come on GM. Lead, follow, or get out of the way.

BTW, Jean-Charles, I bet if Pininfarina designs the electric car it will have a killer cool factor. They have designed some of the most beautiful cars in the world.

(Quote)
Marty McFly Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 5:07 pm

noel park #26

If the cost of a 16KWH battery is such a stepping stone as Mr. Anderman would surmise then, a logical solution would be to incorporate half the battery (at half the cost) into a diesel/electric type vehicle ie: The Plug Free Cobalt.

Then again, since Mr. Anderman’s hypothesis is flawed due to the inevitable decrease in battery KWH cost over time, this discussion is really moot.

Death to Oil ; >)

(Quote)
MetrologyFirst Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 5:19 pm

john1701a,

I have to differ with you. There is no one here, I believe, who claims the Volt ver 1.0 is the perfect solution. It is certainly a step in the right direction and should eventually develop into a more powerful solution, but you have to start somewhere. I personally think that parallel hybrid designs like the Prius are not the best solution. But, they have their place; even GM needs them throughout their product line to meet the coming CAFE standards. They are an interim quick fix, IMO. Like others have said, they still need oil to move.

Battery technology is the new frontier. Our way of life in the future will depend on this, from homes to cars. The better analogy for your argument would be to wait and not produce the Volt until batteries can deliver 300-400 mile ranges. THAT would be rediculous.

I think, actually, GM is moving quickly towards making the commitment that electric propulsion is the future. Problem is no one else wants to make the same commitment.

If other manufacturers want to dis the Volt technology and keep working on parallel hybrids, be my guest. I’m sure that once GM does the heavy lifting and proves the design, the others will scurry to follow. Someone has to shovel the walkway ( a little current NE humor). I just hope they get the credit for it, in the end.

(Quote)
Grizzly Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 5:28 pm

Not that just about every aspect of Anderman’s argument is flawed, I would argue that effectively for 80% of commuters, there is a bigger difference between E-REV and any of Toyota’s hybrids in CO2 than there is between a regular ICE vehicle and any of Toyota’s hybrids.

I noticed he makes the mistake of lumping the Volt in with PHEVs, which is not the case because the Volt is NOT a PHEV. Another reason GM is justified in distinguishing EREV from any HEV or PHEV.

(Quote)
omegaman66 Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 5:36 pm

Dr. Menahem Anderman is sort of right on a lot of points but his conclusion is wrong because things change… the volt is NOT the end of the line just the beginning.

Initially the volt can only be made in limited numbers due to limited batteries. So the higher cost (~35K) is not going to be a stumbling block. THINGS CHANGE battery cost will likely drop and production will increase. Opening the way for cheaper li-cars AND trucks.

Initially the cost WILL be cost prohibitive for most when cheaper alternatives such as cars that get very high milage are avaliable for say half the price. But THINGS CHANGE over time there will be many vehicle produced by many companies including gm/chevy that will have 30 mile batteries… or 60 mile batteries… jump to 100 mile batteries with no range extender(to reduce cost)… trucks… suv’s… crossovers… all sorts of battery sizes and auto types.

Toyota, Nissan etc etc are not going to roll over and let ONLY gm make these cars. I image Toyota will be right there in it with all the rest and Toyota has a history of inexpensive/high quality vehicles. I assume that will continue to be the case… but THINGS CHANGE… Change or die.

(Quote)
kent beuchert Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 5:51 pm

We’ve already heard from A123 System leaders concering li ion prices – they have consistently said that their batteries will be price competitive with even NiMH batteries after mass production is in full swing. I assume these people know more about their battery costs than what’s his name. LG also talked of much lower costs, certainly nowhere near the quoted $10,000. The idea this guy has that somehow Toyota’s actions will have some effect on GM’s battery prices is simply bizarre. He also misstates the reality when he claims that a plug-in’s MPG will not be as great an effect as a hybrid over regular gas cars. Do the math using DOT commuter stats and you’ll see that a Volt commuter fleet will average 275 MPG if no recharging is possible at the workplace (impossible) and if only 1/3rd have the opportunity to recharge (although not all of this third
will need to), the Volt commuter fleet will average 397 MPG. The math is quite simple, but apparently beyond the capabilities of this battery “expert.” Other types of driving (second car, retiree, etc) will differ, but the overwhelming effect of commuter driving results
will make any claims that a regular hybrid can compete with a plug-in of 40 mile range or more totally nonsensical. With 1/3rd rechaging capabilities, the VOLT can easily beat the Prius’ best mileage claims by 10 to 1. That’s not close.

(Quote)
David L Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 6:20 pm

#42 john1701a wrote:
>> look at LCD monitors and televisions…
You missed a vital factor. The old market was abandoned entirely.

Yes, CRT’s were abandoned for plasma and LCD displays as they were a superior product and they consumed less power. (Kinda like REVs and PHEVs over the conventional ICE. ) When LCD’s were introduced – they cost a lot more than a similar sized CRT. Now the LCD’s cost less than the same sized CRT. I expect within 10 years the same will be true for REV over ICE vehicles.

(Quote)
Mark Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 6:32 pm

I think the Volt needs to be more affordable period. If either a partnership or competition from Toyota is needed to lower the price on the Volt, I’m all for it.

(Quote)
Jimmy Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 7:28 pm

I wonder if GXT is Dr. Menahem Anderman. They seem to share the same views. I believe they are both mistaken.

There will be a lot of demand for the Volt. I have spent about $35,000 for each of the last two cars I have owned. The Volt is going to cost around $35,000 so I will not be spending any more than I already have been. The Volt offers other benefits …I will spend less on gas. Less gas usage means lower trade deficits, less pollution, energy independence, etc.

There are a lot of people who feel strongly about reducing gas consumption for a varity of reasons and don’t mind paying a little more to do so.

(Quote)
Szyszek Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 8:12 pm

It seems that I am in the minority but I agree with GXT (and no, I am not Dr. Menahem Anderman). I got really excited about the Volt when Bob Lutz said it will be affordable (well below $30k). But since GM raised the price to $35k, I have to agree with Dr. Menahem Anderman that the Volt will be a niche vehicle. It does not matter if the battery will pay for itself over the life of the car. Entry luxury cars start a $30k, $35k is well is not even entry luxury, it is well above that. I cannot afford a luxury car and an average person cannot afford one either. The only reason Prius succeeded is because it was priced right. Go back to the time the Prius was introduced and try to sell it for $35k. Sorry, no go. So I have to agree with Dr. Anderman – GM needs Toyota, who will design a cheaper car and is willing and able to subsidize it like the Prius. My prediction: Volt will sell 20k copies the first year and then 10k -15k after that. It will be a halo car for GM and a niche vehicle, not a game changer.

(Quote)
Grizzly Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 8:45 pm

Szyszek #53

The only reason the Prius sold for what it did is that not only did Toyota take a loss on every copy for who knows how many years, but other than the tranny/flywheel and electric motor, it was basically off the shelf parts. We’re also talking about a car that not only doesn’t perform, but gets worse mileage(highway at least) than some regular ICE cars that are up to 10 years older, like the Geo Metro.

Initial reception for the Prius and hybrids in general was lukewarm to say the least. I don’t expect the same for the Volt, not only is the technology more challenging and expensive, it’s also more viable over the long run.

In short, I disagree that it will be a niche car, and CAFE almost guarantees it won’t. This will be the beginning of a certain game changer. While GM may not meet their 60K goal the first year, the price will certainly come down for Gen2,3 etc. I will agree that GM will need to lower the price, nevertheless once these things hit the streets there will be no turning back .

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 8:52 pm

It’s becoming quite apparent that many here have no idea what a FULL hybrid is or how it operates.

No wonder there is so much trouble with a topic like this.

(Quote)
hercule Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 9:04 pm

Who are some of you people??

At my local Toyota dealer (Jim Coleman Toyota, all prices on the web and my parents like their service), the cheapest Prius is 23,909 and the average Prius is about 26,000 dollars. Its EPA estimated highway mileage is 45 mpg.

If I buy a Volt in 2011 for 35,000, and the Prius price does not go up at all, it will cost 9,000 more. I drive roughly 35 miles each way to work. Even if I can’t plug in at work, that means 40 miles electric, 30 miles gas. If the volt is also 45 mpg, then I would use 3.3 gallons of gas a week versus 7.7 gallons for the Prius. I probably drive no more than 45 miles on the weekend (normally), so that is one more gallon of gas for the Prius, but none for the volt. Over 52 weeks a year, a volt would use 280 or so less gallons. At 12-14 cents a kilowatt hour, the electricity would cost around 500 dollars for the volt.

Those extra 280 gallons of gas would cost 900 dollars at my local gas station price of 3.22 a gallon, resulting in a net savings of 400 dollars a year on the volt.

So I can have a volt, instead of a Prius for a premium of 5,000 dollars, assuming the volt is 35,000 with no rebate or tax advantage, and gas does not get any more expensive and I keep the car for 10 years (My malibu is 9 years old now, and I am hoping it will last until I can get a volt).

If gas goes up to 5 dollars a gallon, then the annual savings will be 900 a year, which means they will be equal in 10 year cost (barring repairs). If gas is more than 5 dollars a gallon, the volt will be a deal.

I bet that, like the tesla, the prius and the Wii, the volt will be really hard to buy the first year due to consumer competition.

(Quote)
Wise Golden Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 9:08 pm

Niche car – I doubt that. I went car shopping with my neighbor today. He finally settled on a CTS at $44k, loaded. There are so many cars above $30k, it would make your head spin. Some very hot cars like the Camery and the Accord routinely come in at $30k.

If GM builds a car with a high level of design beauty, a nice interior with lots of standard options – they will get high numbers with the Volt at $35K. Obviously, they will get better numbers at $30K, but keep in mind that an Aura, or a Malibu are $28K. For some folks, the Volt will operate free of oil, saving thousands per year.

For some, like me, I will buy the car regardless of a ROI because I’m sick of consuming foreign oil. Others, who are committed to the environment will do the same for their own reason. Corporations will buy them as a green gesture, if not a business decision.

The Prius didn’t make sense in the beginning, but it manages to sell 150k each year

(Quote)
Microbatman Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 9:24 pm

Wow!!!
If I get a Phd can I put MY OPINIONS on an X-Y axis to make them look like scientific measurable facts?

I am only college educated and we had to put words to our opinioins.

He says the battery is not Good enough!!!

Maybe we should ask Dr Goodenough if they are good enough.

(Quote)
DaveT Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 11:01 pm

Let’s look at the two factors: initial purchase price and battery replacement
a) People pay $2000 for a Nav or factory DVD system alone in their car/SUV. Paying $4000-$8000 extra for a PHEV to cover the battery costs (neglecting any offsetting component savings) is viable for a breakthough product like the Volt. I’ve heard of analysis that show that the Prius even with its truly excellent fuel efficiency may not have a positive ROI on a purely financial basis… but vehicle purchases are far from purely ROI based.
b) Battery replacement: I’m not convinced that the life will be a major problem after these particular chemistry Lithium batteries are engineered for this application. I’ve heard from the CEO of Valence and and personally talked to Dr John Goodenough, inventor of the Lithium battery and a professor at the University of Texas at Austin.. and I’m still optimistic. People were nervous about the Prius NiHM and they figured out a way to make them reliable.. not one of the many Prius owners I know has had problems with the Prius batteries.
On top of this, , does Dr. Menahem Anderman understand that there might be a substantial secondary market for used Volt batteries for stationary applications?
Putting PHEVs anywhere near the same category as Fuel Cell Vehicles in terms of negative costs to consumers is ridiculous. There is no hydrogen refueling infrastructure, fuel cells cost $1m, and the FCV well-to-wheels isn’t as beneficial as one for a PHEV.
The batteries can be engineered to meet performance, cost, and durability requirements over time…and the incremental purchase price will be appropriate to introduce the technology, achieve scale economies, and eventually drive the the costs/prices.

(Quote)
MetrologyFirst Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 11:17 pm

It is impossible to predict the future of the gasoline infrastructure. I think it can be widely accepted that the current situation is more tenuous than ever before for reasons that have been pointed out many times.

The Volt has challenges, for sure. But so does the alternative. The gasoline situation is analogous to walking through a live minefield. We could go on for a long time without disruption, but eventually we will have crisis of some sort. We each have to ask ourselves if we are prepared for the possibility of uncontrolled prices. Are you?

The Volt driver’s analogy is walking through the same minefield, but the mines won’t explode. Doesn’t matter if we step on one. We have a gas free option.

(Quote)
Mike G. Says:
February 24th, 2008 at 1:24 am

It is not relative if the volt is a niche vehicle for the first year two after production starts. They will not be making HUGE numbers of them at first. If it is a niche vehicle it will be so ONLY because of they design and the cost. After the initial release you will start seeing more and more vehicles of all sorts designed on the e-flex. Then if you want a truck you get a truck, if you want an suv then you get an suv… no more niche.

Battery production for a few years is likely to be the limiting factor in how fast the eflex design is spread to other makes and models.

(Quote)
Jeff J Says:
February 24th, 2008 at 1:40 am

math doesn’t lie!!
I own a SUV ford , I drive avg. 45 miles a day mostly stop and go thats 16,425 a year avg fuel 16 mpg 1,026 gallons @ todays price of 3.29 = $3372.25 yearly gas cost. At $5.00gal.= $ 5,130 yr cost
Volt price 35,000- $3000 tax credit = 32,000, gas yearly cost $50 (I have elec. plug @ work) total cost over 10 years $32,500
Ford SUV explorer $25900 + $3372.25yr gas , total cost over 10yr $59,622.50
I think a $10000 dollar battery is a GREAT PRICE every 10yrs. saves me$27,000 before I replace the Battery and $17,000 after.
But come on folks A123 will sign a deal with GM and 1 or 2 other players making 400,000 batterys yearly and the price will drop in half . IMO

(Quote)
NZDavid Says:
February 24th, 2008 at 4:07 am

It looks like Shell & T Boon Pickens are getting ready for the Volt, and all the other EV’s to come. It’s a sign, I’m sure of it!

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/23/business/23wind.html?em&ex=1203915600&en=6c53d1373b6e4cc3&ei=5087

“Shell and the TXU Corporation are planning to build a 3,000-megawatt wind farm north of here in the Texas Panhandle, leapfrogging two FPL Energy Texas wind farms to become the biggest in the world.

Not to be outdone, Mr. Pickens is planning his own 150,000-acre Panhandle wind farm of 4,000 megawatts that would be even larger and cost him $10 billion.

“I like wind because it’s renewable and it’s clean and you know you are not going to be dealing with a production decline curve,” Mr. Pickens said. “Decline curves finally wore me out in the oil business.””

(Quote)
Texas Says:
February 24th, 2008 at 6:14 am

That’s a beautiful article and it’s in Texas! Puts a tear in my eye. Hey, everything is big in Texas.

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
February 24th, 2008 at 8:04 am

How come none of the calculations here ever include interest paid?

Most people take out a loan when purchasing a new vehicle. No mention of that extra cost originating from the plug-in premium is disingenuous. If you want people to take your effort seriously, you shouldn’t do that. For that matter, you shouldn’t do a 2011 comparison using the 2003 design of Prius either. Yet, we see that being done all the time too.

Credibility is lost when that occurs. You are harming the chance of mainstream acceptance. Take this advice to heart; otherwise, it could become a regret later. The antagonists thrive on stuff like that.

(Quote)
Steve_in_CA Says:
February 24th, 2008 at 10:34 am

Perhaps a simple bit of reality should be considered instead of hopes, dreams, what-ifs, etc. Simply stated, the life cycle of ANY battery is completely depenent on the amount it is RECHARGED. It is not a time based life cycle such as “life of the car” or “replace in 7 years” proposition. All rechargeable batteries suffer the same fate of degradation based on how many times you put it through a charge cycle. Some technologies are better than others but the same general physical realities exist in all. As for the cost of a new battery, I wouldn’t base that assumption simply on production capacity or number of units sold. Look instead to the cost of MATERIALS…which leads to how much is produced NOW…to how much DEMAND will there be…which leads to SPECULATION…which leads to PROFIT SEEKERS…which leads us right back to where we are with the price of oil. Unfortunately. (

(Quote)
John Says:
February 24th, 2008 at 11:43 am

66Steve ;
Read every reply and was glad to see yours at the end , saved me some typing.
Let ‘ s hope Firefly Energy gives us some diversification at least .

(Quote)
Jeff J Says:
February 24th, 2008 at 11:58 am

john1701a,
Sorry I pay in cash , but your right most people have to have loans , But only a fool takes out a loan more than three years on any car . So add $6100 plus interest rate over three yr payout and add that back to Volt 10 yr cost , you still make out like a bandit.
Saving $27,000 to $17,000 every ten year is great , Sticking it to OPEC priceless!!!!!!!

(Quote)
jkh2000 Says:
February 24th, 2008 at 12:12 pm

GM does not need any other car company to promote and build the Volt at a profitable level. They need to make it one of the most produced and sold cars out there and the volume of batteries will bring the cost down. All car companies need to be like Toyota and Honda and tell the big oil companies to shove it. GM had a fine electric car, but cancelled the leases and destroyed them. It had an odor of a bucket of excrement and reminded me of big oil money.

(Quote)
Koz Says:
February 24th, 2008 at 3:43 pm

In some respects some of Dr. Alderman’s “opinions” and data are reasonable based on excerpts from the Green Car Congress post:

PHEVs are a detour and not a step forward, Anderman said, if:

1) For the sake of the PHEV, car and battery companies dilute their efforts to expand conventional HEVs and to introduce li-ion batteries into the market;

2) If governments miss the opportunity to provide incentives for conventional HEVs, “the only electrified vehicle technology that can make an impact on the environment in the next 10 years” and

3) If the PHEV is rushed to market by bypassing prudent automotive engineering design, verification, qualification and supplier management standards.

4.) $600/kwh as today’s battery cost seems accurate IMO. But, as many have noted this just does not convincingly translate into Dr. Alderman’s conclusions.

I just can’t see how to reasonably jump from these concerns to the conclusion that plug-ins offer no net near term value. Looking at his four main points:
1&2) On a per vehical basis plug-ins will make a tremendous difference. Meaningful global impact is not not a technical limitation but rather a production and cost limitation. The greater risk is to not push the development of plugins now and thus delaying their entry into all market segments. Yes, HEV development will push some technonolgies that will benefit plug-ins but only in some areas. Much of the development for HEVs (e.g. optimizing full power ICE and hybrid transmissions) holds little or no long term benefit. To me, a far greater danger is in pushing resources away from primary electric drivetrains and non-combusting (in vehicle) energy solutions.
3.) True, but this is the case for any new technology including HEVs. Managing these risks are what the car manufacturers due for each new platform or drivetrain. Beyond the battery risks, how is Mr. Anderman’s opinion meritous? Personally, I’ll trust GM’s opinion on this matter. As long as they adequately warranty the Volt, I’m good.
4.) Well, this is really the crux of the matter. If the cost is too high and cannot be reasonably expected to fall to acceptable levels, then opinions 1) & 2) become more valid. But, even at his estimate of $600/kwh is the cost too high? Plugin costs have been adressed many, many times, but here goes again with a simplified (perhaps over-simplified) analysis:
-$10,000 for Volt battery
-$2,500 for HEV battery
-100,000 e-miles for 8yr life of battery (note: 20% below GM target)
-Range extended MPG = HEV MPG
-Ave $4.35/gallon for next 8yr, cost adjusted for inflation based on $3.12/g today 12% annual increase in gas price and 4% inflation
-$0.107/kwh for next 8yr electric cost with cost of electricity rise = inflation
-Maintenance cost for Volt = HEV & ICE only (many would argue Volt will be less but maybe not true for v1.0)

Total cost for e-miles = $2140
Total cost for 45MPG car = $9667

So, for those with a 40+ mile commute and 40 more e-miles per week this is basically a breakeven proposition given the assumptions above. Now factor in the performance, noise, pollution, reduced gas, etc advantages that many customers will value. Naysayers may not recognize these advantages. They also may not like assuming increases in gas prices, but they should be looking at those charts of empirical data that show historic gas prices, Li battery prices, and oil demand/supply curves. These curves are much more meaningful than Mr. Anderman’s “opinion chart”. It is hard to understand how a PhD in chemistry and with battery experience could draw the conclusion that Plugins have no near term value much less be concerned about negative impacts of their development.

The only rational argument he makes that could possibly add validity to his opinion was presented in the Green Car Congress post:
“The lithium-ion battery market, by contrast, is much more volatile, and still faces a technology shake-out in terms of cathode and anode chemistries, cell design and packaging, manufacturing, safety and cost.”
Where was Nimh 2 1/2 years before the first Prius was sold? Also, in case I’m missing something, will someone please advise if Li doesn’t own (and hasn’t for some time) the high power rechargable battery market. I realize that every application has different requirements, but which applications that favor high energy density have Li been applied to where they haven’t proven their merit? As long as at least one Li battery chemistry meets GM’s specs, what is the downside to chemistry diversity across the whole Li market?

It is a crying shame that journals, such as Motor Trend, don’t ask more probing questions nor do some research to provide more content and context to their articles.

Take a look at Mr. Alderman’s affiliates/sponsors page:
http://www.advancedautobat.com/affiliates.html

(Quote)
Dave T Says:
February 24th, 2008 at 4:03 pm

There is an old adage in the battery business; there are liars, damn liars, and battery manufacturers. Maybe this is why Dr. Anderman is so skeptical. I would assume that GM has their own battery experts (unless they were totally purged by the short sighted zealots that killed the EV1). This is a new hot field of research with a lot of money to be made, so will attract the brightest minds and unfortunately the stock scammers too.

Does anybody know the origin of the adage; there are liars, damn liars, and battery manufacturers? I know Thomas Edison had some choice words about battery manufacturers and greed, but I’m not sure if he started the liars saying.

(Quote)
Marcos Says:
February 24th, 2008 at 7:09 pm

Based on what I read, Dr. Menahem Anderman does not understand much about automotive batteries.

He does not seem to be familiar with the EV-95 NiMH battery, manufactured by PEVE in Japan in the late 90’s – early 2000’s and able to provide RAV4 EV owners with well over 100,000 miles with zero maintenance. I repeat: zero. Of the 800+ RAV4 EVs on the road today there are less than 5 owners that have experienced battery pack problems. Toyota have gracefully serviced most of these owners while the pack was in warranty.

Some Toyota RAV4 EV owners are reaching 150K miles with their original battery pack and little to no noticeable range decrease, 5 years later (the last RAV4’s were produced in early 2003) .

I wonder why these batteries are not used in cars all over the world today! It seems someone is suppressing them.

(Quote)
Ron Says:
February 25th, 2008 at 10:51 am

If buying a vehicle was based purely on the bottom line ROI, I suspect that every person reading this post would be driving something different than what is actually sitting in their driveway. For example: 3 years ago I decided that my current pickup truck was inadequate for the towing/hauling duties that I asked it to perform. I needed to pull a Bobcat tractor 12-20 miles 4-6 times per year for business purposes. The Chevy 1500 truck I had at the time was rated to tow 7K and the trailer/tractor combination weighed in closer to 9K. The half-ton truck accomplished the task, but it certainly wasn’t setting any land speed records doing it. Based PURELY on financial analysis, the question of “Should I buy a more capable truck?” would be answered “No” because the truck I had DID accomplish the task at hand. That didn’t stop me from going down to my local Chevy dealer and trading up for a brand new diesel powered 2500 truck that can tow the Bobcat like it’s not even back there. Did I need a more capable truck? no. Since I was buying a new truck, did I need the diesel power? no. Since I decided to get a more capable truck, did it need to be a NEW truck? no. I made a lot of decisions based on WANTS and DESIRES not on financial analysis and the bottom line. My new diesel truck is 2 years old now and only has 11,000 miles on it. I know most people would consider that to be an absolute waste of a heavy duty diesel pickup to have less than 100K after 2 years, but it’s what I wanted so it’s what I bought. My money, my decision. The more practical (ie. cost-benefit) way to pull my trailer 4-6 times per year would be to not own a pickup at all and just borrow my buddy’s F-250 and bring it back with a full tank of diesel each time.

Buying the Volt will be the same thing. I’m sure there will be thousands of people waving cash without ever doing a cost/benefit analysis or a ROI spreadsheet to know when they will “break even” over buying a normal gas powered car.

(Quote)
Jean-Charles Jacquemin Says:
February 25th, 2008 at 11:10 am

Ron #73

I did the computation with a 12 $/gallon gas price (here in Belgium we are near 9$/per gallon today) ,the price I anticipate we will reach in less than two years. And for this price of the gas gallon and the anticipated Volt price, I will without regret trade my Opel Astra with its mileage of more or less 42 mpg for a Volt.

(Quote)
Richard Poor Says:
February 27th, 2008 at 10:09 am

There are multitudes of bubbas that will spend $10,000 on a high performance, outboard boat engine just to go fishing! The electric drag racing Killacycle.com crew uses heat guns to enhance the performance of their Lithium batteries before making a run. They do not seemed concerned about thermal runaway. Finally, if one keeps a car with a $10,000 battery ten years and purchases electricity at the equivalent of $0.25/gallon, the cost of the battery over ten years is of no consequence or might represent a net savings if gasoline goes >$4/gallon. At $102/barrel for oil and maybe higher, this is a definite possibility.

(Quote)
james a lewton Says:
February 29th, 2008 at 5:08 pm

my 1974 volkswagen hybrid got 75 mpg on a gallon of gas just using 11-lead acid batteries and a heavy duty-delco alternator powereded by a polaris-snowbile wankel engine turning 21,000 rpm and cost $ 6,000 DOLLARS DURING THE 1974 OIL EMBARGO.
2-2-2008 WHO NEEDS LITHIUM ION BATTTERIES.

(Quote)
Adam Says:
April 8th, 2008 at 1:57 am

Right.
I drive an F150 but I’m thinking to get an H2 and then a tank, then a jet and then a tanker.. and when I am completely bored with it I will ram the oil filled tanker to the CA coast and spill 2mill gal into the ocean.. I DO IT BECAUSE I CAN, MY MONEY NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS…
Is it really? Is this right? Is there a limit?

(Quote)
Joe Says:
April 8th, 2008 at 6:43 am

I hate to call names but this Dr. Menahem Anderman is a complete idiot.I just like to call an ace an ace. He’s so absurd that I find defending GM would be a waste of time. What I find amusing is that he’s a doctor, but then on the other hand, we see idiots with a PHD everyday on TV.
GM keep-up the good work!!!

(Quote)
Joe Says:
April 8th, 2008 at 7:21 am

Comparing the Volt with the Prius is an insult to the Volt. Too much exaggeration and glory is given to the Prius. The Volt will be a much more technologically advance car over the ICE powered Prius. Toyota is really getting flattered over these comparisons. Somehow they would like to steal the glory of the Volt, and this Dr. Menahem Anderman report is a way of doing it. One has to wonder, why would anyone write such a bias report? Money???

(Quote)

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts

Hacked e-mails reveal global-warming fraud? November 20, 2009
This is how open minded liberals operate. "And, perhaps most reprehensibly," Delingpole writes, "a long series of communications discussing how best... […]
BigCityCat
Is the Volt Engine Direct Injected? November 20, 2009
I recently read that the Cruze's engine will be DI. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevy_Cruze#Chevrolet_Cruze Obviously the Cruze's engine will... […]
omnimoeish
First Reports of the Chevy Volt's Charge-Sustaining (Generator) Mode Operation November 20, 2009
The first two journalists' reports of what it's like to drive the Chevy Volt while in generator mode operation have been published. 1) New York... […]
admin
Florida giving $5000 rebate to convert Prius to plug-in November 20, 2009
- Probably Hymotion - $10,400 standard price - $5000 state rebate - $1000 additional federal incentives - $4,400 final cost. Hurry because their... […]
Texas
New York Times CSM story November 20, 2009
Link to the New York Times story of November 19, 2009 about a test ride of the Volt in charge sustaining... […]
srschrier
New video: Volt drive in Detroit November 19, 2009
November 19, 2009 Detroit Free Press story with video featuring a Volt drive with Andrew Farah in... […]
srschrier
New Video: Volt Corrosion Testing November 18, 2009
From GM VoltAge, the Volt's corrosion... […]
srschrier

Does GM Need Toyota to Make the Volt More Affordable??

79 Responses to “Does GM Need Toyota to Make the Volt More Affordable??”

Leave a Reply

Recent Posts

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts