Update: EnerDel’s Chairman on the Cost of the Th!nk Lithium-ion Battery Pack
One of the unknowns in determining how much the Volt or any electric car should cost, is determining the automaker’s cost for the lithium-ion battery.
A number that has been put forth by experts in the field is $1000 per kWh installed in liquid-cooled pack. If this were true, the Volts’ pack would cost $16,000. Bob Lutz and others are bullish on the idea that prices will drop over time as these batteries are brought to scale.
As a follow-up to some of the comments from my interview with EnerDel’s Chairman Charles Gassenheimer, I asked him how much the Th!nk pack would cost. He was actually quite open:
Do you have any follow up statement on costs of your 28 kWh Th!nk pack?
Think plans to sell the vehicle for $30 to $35 k. Approximately half that cost is the battery. If they were to lease the battery then the car could cost $15 - $17k and the leasing company would purchase the battery from EnerDel and lease it to the customer.
Thus if we do the math, it looks like EnerDel is willing to sell packs at scale for from $535 to $600 per kWh. If Compact Power/LG and Conti/A123 are willing to give GM the same deal, then the Volt’s packs should cost from $8500 to $9600. Of course we dont know these numbers, and EnderDel contends that they offer low prices amongst their competitors.
Popularity: 5%
(8 votes, average: 4.38 out of 5) 
Loading ...
July 5th, 2008 at 8:39 am
Seems rather expensive for an econo-box.
July 5th, 2008 at 8:42 am
Indeed. I’d pay the extra $5000+ for the Volt’s roomier interior and more substantial cargo space (though in a perfect world I would get a Volt-like sport wagon instead).
July 5th, 2008 at 8:56 am
Holman, from WSJ, well reading this just got the idea for his next editorial. LOL $35,000 Th!nk, hmmmmm……
July 5th, 2008 at 9:05 am
wow, that is pricey. The Volt will still be a winner at this stage and there is no reason to think Enerdel is any different in pricing from any of the other major suppliers. Add in the Series factor of the Volt and the “oh crap” factor of the ICE backup…
I am still bothered by the fact that despite the huge promise there isn’t venture capital flooding into battery start ups and production scaling.
July 5th, 2008 at 9:12 am
#4
I think the VC crowd went towards ethanol, big time. It is puzzling though, as you say.
PS they are in A123
July 5th, 2008 at 9:27 am
Venture capital, and capital in general is flooding towards installing wind turbines. You get ROI faster, with less money put at risk, than any other green tech out there. I imagine that after a few years of printing money with wind turbines, money might then flow into batteries and other green tech, but at the moment, too many institutions are cash starved, and need the infusion of liquidity that wind turbines create.
July 5th, 2008 at 9:31 am
From the article: “it looks like EnerDel is willing to sell packs at scale for from $535 to $600 per kWh. If Compact Power/LG and Conti/A123 are willing to give GM the same deal, then the Volt’s packs should cost from $8500 to $9600.”
Lyle,
Thanks for going after this. It’s an important issue for the cost of the Volt.
As another data point, Tesla leaked that they pay $22,000 for their Roadster battery pack. This pack stores 53KWh of energy. So Tesla is paying $415 per KWh. If GM got the same deal as Tesla, they would pay only $6640 for the Volt’s battery pack. Why does Tesla seem to get such a better deal than GM?
July 5th, 2008 at 9:31 am
#2 Jake
…in that perfect world, you’d have the Flextreme (that’d be sport wagon enough for me)
July 5th, 2008 at 9:49 am
#8 Firefly,
Count me in for a Saturn Flextreme also! I’m guessing a production version of the Flextreme in the U.S. would have:
1) a gas engine
2) a single rear door hatch
3) additional cargo space instead of Segway compartments.
4) 35-40 miles all electric range
This would be the perfect car for me.
July 5th, 2008 at 9:54 am
#7, Dave G,
Tesla uses commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) batteries that are made in quantities of billions for laptops and other devices, so the cost of the cells are already commoditized. The price for their pack is still high, because they have to wire them together and provide cooling to prevent thermal runaway.
July 5th, 2008 at 9:55 am
Haiku for Volt Price
Often the smoke blows
I feel it here like a test
Way up my backside
Volt will be priced as far up as they can get and counting on a gov subsidy. We are just all playing a very old game with GM…
July 5th, 2008 at 10:06 am
Amazing how history repeats….
Back in the 70’s the Fed’s decide to change the national speed limit to 55mph. Now, here we go again, and they are pushing to lower the national speed limit.
We are so reactive to problems, when with just a little foresight, we would have realized that this day was coming. I really thought this day would come in the 90’s, but it has arrived.
Oil is a non-rewable resource, we (USA) have only a small percent of this resource, it will run out. We are consuming this resource at a break neck speed. We are just now entering the curve of supply = demand. The next part of the curve is going to be ugly! When demand exceeds supply, we start talking about war and all it’s ugly ramifications. The old 1990’s model predicted entering the curve in about 2030-2040, but the increased demand from China and Asia are pushing this date up. If demand increases be 7% a year, then within 10 years we will would need to DOUBLE our supply. This cannot happed, so you see the problem.
If you think gas is expensive now, just wait a year or two (maybe sooner), and it will not only be expensive but you will be sitting in lines to get it. Government rationing will become reality, and we will be going to war with more countries as we struggle to feed our oil machines. But of course war is a HUGE consumer of energy, which will push the rationing of fuel even harder, as we need to feed our military machines. This will be the time when we start to really feel the pain that our ancestors felt during WWI, when they actually felt the impact of war. Today, we support our troops (some do), and the war (again, some do, others don’t), but we really sacrifice little in the ways of inconvience.
So, here we are, 2008, and we are just now developing alternative methods, to reduce our dependencies on oil. In my opinion this is MUCH to late, and unfortunately this will result in more than just high gas and inconvenience’s….
You can say “better late, than never”, but that’s the easy out. We continued building bigger and less efficient vehicles though the 80’s and 90’s, and 2000’s. We knew this was coming, but we stuck our heads in the sand and just grinned as we drove down the road (alone of course) in our gas guzzling SUV’s. We have no one to blame but ourselves.
The world is going to change dramatically in the next decade. I hope for the best, but I prepare for the worst (don’t ask what I am doing, you will just laugh…at least today you would)
Happy day after the 4th of July! I hope we can say the same in the coming years.
July 5th, 2008 at 10:15 am
Leasing the battery SUCKS!
So, now I get to pay for my car forever. I pay $16,000 for the car, and then “lease” the battery for $150/month. So, If I keep this car for 12 years I pay 150*12*12 = $21,600, plus original $16,000 for a TOTAL of $37,600!
Nope. Won’t do it. Also, now the battery leaser has the power (no pun intended) to increase lease rates or even recall my battery!
Not a good idea. At least the Volt lets me just buy the damn thing and be done with it.
July 5th, 2008 at 10:19 am
#10 Jason M. Hendler,
Yes - all true.
But GM also has some volume to work with. GM is planning 10,000 Volts in the first year. The Volt’s battery pack delivers around 300 volts, so there must be at least 100 individual Li/Ion cells per pack. This means GM is already over a million cells in the first year alone, and 5 times that in the next year. I would think that’s enough to get some kind of quantity discount.
I suspect that #11 Biodieseljeep is correct, and that GM is playing games with the price and hoping for government rebates.
July 5th, 2008 at 10:26 am
#7 Dave G
Tesla’s battery pack uses 6831 off-the-shelf li-ion cylindrical cells;the same type of cells that are used in laptops and cellphones. The battery pack is designed prevent thermal events that has occurred with this type of cell. This approach requires complexity in mechanical design but it provides early market entry, a competitive price and also solves any availability issues, e.g., no need to to have a secondary supplier.
However, these off-the-shelf cells can provide only a 500 cycles of charge/discharge, with limitations on depth of discharge. At a range of 220 mile, 500 cycles is equivalent to just over 100,000 miles of battery life, provided not all cycles are deep discharge. These cells may also have issues with calendar life, After all, they were designed for laptops and cellphones, which are obsolete after a couple of years.
Now, consider the stringent requirements of a PHEV battery:
o Inherent thermal stability
o Prismatic cells for ease of cooling and packaging
o Several thousand discharge cycles; a laptop battery would only last 2 business years (500 days) in a PHEV
o 15 years of calendar life
o High power capability, which laptop cells do not have unless you have a lot of them, e.g., the 6831 cells in a Tesla.
Barring the unlikely event that the Volt’s battery supplier initially price the battery packs down the learning curve, the Volt’s battery pack will be more expensive on a per kWh basis than that of the Tesla. However, the Volts’ high volume production, simple battery packaging and inexpensive battery chemistry should quickly drive its battery costs well under that of Tesla.
July 5th, 2008 at 10:37 am
#12 JEC,
Unfortunately, I believe you are correct.
We won’t have a choice between offshore drilling and alternative fuels. We will end up doing both, and it will still be too little too late. Things are going to get ugly for a while.
Here’s what I believe the U.S. should do now:
1) a federal mandate that all new cars be flex-fuel capable within a short time.
2) federal rebates for plug-in hybrids based on battery KWh.
3) lifting the federal ban on offshore drilling.
4) a temporary lowering of federal emissions standards for high mileage European cars, particularly those made by GM and Ford.
The longer we wait to do these things, the worse things will get.
July 5th, 2008 at 10:41 am
I did a little reading on the Smart Car and it was stated that A123 is their battey supplier and GE is investing in A123. A123 does not have thermal runaway problems because of the patented nano technology used in their manufacture. They also far outlast lithium polymere cells, but it is too early to tell just by how much.
GE manufactures BIG locomotives that use engines driving generators and electric motors driving each wheel. I bet they know a little something about writing software for such applications.
July 5th, 2008 at 10:51 am
#15 NorthernPiker,
Yes - all true.
But GM will buy at least 1 million Li/Ion cells for the Volt’s first year alone, and 5 times that in the next year, which should be enough for quantitly discounts. See post #14 for details.
I suspect that #11 Biodieseljeep is correct, and that GM is playing games with the price and hoping for government rebates.
July 5th, 2008 at 10:51 am
I disagree about lifting the ban on offshore drilling. It will take six years to make a difference and then it would only be a tempory fix. We need to stop using oil for transportation. We will need it for other things. Also with the oil companies record it is far too risky allowing them to drill offshore. Eventually we will have the technology to do it safely.
July 5th, 2008 at 10:57 am
#17 Len says: “GE manufactures BIG locomotives that use engines driving generators and electric motors driving each wheel. I bet they know a little something about writing software for such applications.”
Series hybrid locomotives have been around for a long time, so I would bet they use old technology.
If you want to know more about the issues that software has to deal with for induction motors in EVs, check this out:
http://www.teslamotors.com/blog4/?p=45
July 5th, 2008 at 11:09 am
The motors they use are big AC motors and they worry about things like traction on each wheel. The want to apply maximum power, but with no wheel slip.
You can also buy water cooled induction motors and controllers from Siemans, complete with regenerative braking. Here is a link to a car conversion done quite some time ago using everything talked about here including super caps.
http://www.metricmind.com/ac_honda/motor.htm
July 5th, 2008 at 11:11 am
In a recent investor meeting. Altair commented to an investor that with large scale production they could easily reach $300-$400/KWH battery packs. Making a 28k pack between $8400 and $11200. Though they were referring to a 35kwh which would be $10500 at $300/KWH. The Volt 16KWH battery would then cost between $4800 and $6400. If this were the case GM could sell the volt at a profit.
July 5th, 2008 at 11:26 am
Still way to much ‘what ifs’ to get a solid price here:
Lyles quote: Car $15-17K, selling price $30-35 (inluding battery, no lease).
Scenario A: Selling price $30,000, car $17,000 pack=$13,000
Scenario B: Selling price $35,000, car $15,000 pack=$20,000
Cost per pack/Volt extrapolation
Scenario A: 28kWh/13K=$464/kW, Volt pack = $7,400
Scenario B: 28kWh/20K=$714/kW, Volt pack = $11,400
I think we can be assured GM is getting a better price than ‘Joe no-name’ automaker, but better price of what cost is still a mistery.
I really don’t see how a “30-35K” Th!nk City can compete against a $25K i-Miev (100mile range 20kWh pack). Forgot the price advantage…just think about the difference in getting it fixed between the two.
Also I think getting to approximate cost of the Volt back, it is easy to work the numbers off of Mitsu, as they are a major auto, with mass production in mind.
The i-Miev car portion is $15-17K (if we assume the same standard as the Th!nk), then their 20kWh pack is costing between 10K and 8K or $400/kWh to $500/kwH. Extrapolated Volt price on the i-Miev model would be $6,400 to $8,000.
Thoughts?
July 5th, 2008 at 11:29 am
We could make a stand to GM right here, right now that this is unacceptable and boycott the Volt? But then again we don’t really know the price of the Volt do we.
July 5th, 2008 at 11:45 am
23 Statik:
can you buy an i-Miev yet?
just applying your own logic against you
sorry. You can’t use the i-Miev pricing as gospel to dissect the Volt and Th!nk pricing.
July 5th, 2008 at 11:48 am
Prediction —The Japanese will come up with a way to make the lithium-ion battery for 1/2 or 14/ the cost and produce an EV that will sell for $22,000 -$24,000 and run 40 miles on a charge and GM will be still trying to sell the VOLT for $45,000.
July 5th, 2008 at 11:55 am
35k, lol. With no range extender, just wait another year for the Volt for the same price and u will get a safer, roomier, and more entertaining vehicle. : )
July 5th, 2008 at 11:57 am
#11 Biodieseljeep:
Well I have to agree, but it’s not only GM who plays this game. Every car maker with a hot new model does it. Early plasma TVs? Early I-phones? The list goes on forever. It is a basic precept of marketing, taught in every business school in the world. You set a high price for “early adopters” who just have to have the latest and the greatest, and then taper the price down to balance with the demand. We are just going to have to deal with it. We can pay the early high price, wait until it goes down to something we can stand, or buy something else. The Beat?
#13 JEC:
Well how much a year are we paying for gas? It’s sort of the same thing as leasing a battery, when you think about it. The question is, what is the life cycle cost of the car? If we are paying $500/month for gas, a $150/month battery lease starts to look pretty good. Everybody just has to figure out their financial and psychic (oil independence, environmental, etc.) bottom line.
July 5th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
#26 Rockyroad says: “Prediction —The Japanese will come up with a way to make the lithium-ion battery for 1/2 or 1/4 the cost and produce an EV that will sell for $22,000 -$24,000 and run 40 miles on a charge”
Let’s hope so. The more competition the better.
But to date no Japanese car company has announced plans for a plug-in hybrid with all electric range. There are a few BEV concept cars. Toyota will also have a plug-in Prius, but that will always require gasoline for accelerating and highway driving.
I suspect that Japanese car makers will trail GM in this area for 5 years or more. The Japanese mindset seems to be more tuned to evolutionary innovation. Toyota has even stated this publicly.
The Volt is a revolutionary design, which is something the Japanese seem less inclined to do right now. The Japanese are still talking about miles per gallon (MPG), while GM is talking about all electric range (AER).
Again, I hope I’m wrong, and the Volt gets some serious competition.
July 5th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
#23 Statik,
$6,400 to $8,000 sounds about right for the Volt’s battery pack.
It could even be less. Remember that selling 10 thousand Volts in the first year equates to at least 1 million Li/Ion cells, so there is some initial volume for GM to bargain with.
July 5th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
Think! is going to have an uphill battle selling what is essentially a very small commuter car w/ no range extender for that price. What’s more the vehicle is going to have to meet us safety standards and by that time it’s possible that the price could be higher. I pulled the quote below from their website and in Europe it will sell for $31K with a battery/insurance lease of another $300+ per month.
“The MSRP has not been finalized in the US however it is estimated the TH!NK city will go on sale in Europe at around $31,388 USD. In addition, TH!NK will offer a “mobility pack” to consumers for about $314 USD per month that will cover leasing the battery pack, car insurance and electricity. ”
http://www.think.no/think/content/view/full/616
July 5th, 2008 at 12:30 pm
#19 Len “I disagree about lifting the ban on offshore drilling. It will take six years to make a difference and then it would only be a tempory fix. We need to stop using oil for transportation. We will need it for other things. Also with the oil companies record it is far too risky allowing them to drill offshore. Eventually we will have the technology to do it safely.”
I TOTALLY disagree. I have lived in Louisiana all my life and there are freaking oilrigs and well heads (thousands) all across our coastal waters here. I don’t recall there ever being any oil spills from these rigs.
Let me explain something about offshore oilrigs that some of you may not know. PLEASE READ!!! After an oilrig no longer is producing oil it is required by law to be removed within a certain time frame. To remove the oilrig the oil companies have to spend millions of dollars. The rigs legs are severed well below the mudline.
All of the oil rig structure has to be barged into the ports to be cut up and disposed of. Well this is a horrible horrible thing. So much so that the State of Louisiana enacted a law that allows the oil companies to reduce their cost by leaving much of the oilrig in designated artificial reef areas.
It is a win win situation. The oil companies cut their cost and artificial reefs are established. The only reason that this law was passed is because the OUTDOORSMAN OF OUR STATE WHERE MAD THAT THE STATE WAS MAKEING THE OIL COMPANIES REMOVER THESE RIGS!!!!
Point is IFoffshore oilrigs were bad for the enviroment then the fisherman wouldn’t have been so pissed off that they actually got a law passed to allow the oilrigs to not be totally removed. Liabilty reasons prevent the state from taking over the rigs as is being that they are above water. Which is what the fisherman would truely want.
An oilrig is a hard structure in an otherwise desolate area which produces on a per acre basis very little life. Throw up and oil rig and immediately barnacles and corals and other things start growing on the steel. Soon you have an artifical as well as natural reef that extends from the sea floor all the way to the surface. The makes the rigs even more productive in many ways than naturally occuring reefs and almost always in places that a natural reef can’t exist because of the depth of the water.
Louisiana with most of the offshore oilplatforms is the second biggest producer of seafood of all the states despite all the oilrigs, and Alaska is #1 only because of its size.
I have pictures of offshore oilrigs taken at sunset that make great desktop backgrounds. To use an offshore oilrig is not an ugly sight but instead something beautiful. I look at the desktop oilrig and can think of nothing but fishing. A lot of good memories come from those rigs and I hope to add another good memory in about a week when I go and catch a limit of speckled trout (25 per person) at the Mardi Gras rigs out of Theriot. Yes we even name the most popular oilrigs. Cognac, Lena, green monstor are a couple of other offshore oilrigs that have been given their own names.
I will post a picture of the Mardi Gras rig with me and some speckled trout after I go fishing there next time I am off with some good weather.
July 5th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
Omegaman,
Well put. How much oil was spilled during Katrina? Zip.
Len,
Listen to Omegaman.
We need to be doing EVERYTHING, including nuclear, solar, coal, wind and offshore drilling, but the “we” I’m referring to does not include our govt. They just need to get out of the way.
Be well,
Tag
July 5th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
28 noel park
I agree that paying for either a battery lease or for gas is equivalent.
Sometimes when I look at a cube, I only see a surface. Thanks for turning the cube. : )
July 5th, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Rockyroad
“Prediction —The Japanese will come up with a way to make the lithium-ion battery for 1/2 or 14/ the cost and produce an EV that will sell for $22,000 -$24,000 and run 40 miles on a charge and GM will be still trying to sell the VOLT for $45,000.”
******************************************************
Oh! Those Japanese are so smart! It looks to me you don’t really know how Japan does business. I’m old enough to have lived through some of their unfair trade practices. It’s not that they are so smart, it’s that we are so lenient. Read a little history of how they do business.
http://www.uwsa.com/issues/trade/japanyes.html
*****************************************************************
July 5th, 2008 at 1:11 pm
I believe we are still grossly underestimating the looming energy crisis.
World oil has peaked. World population is increasing. Technology has increased worldwide wealth to the point where most people on the planet can afford a car, particularly within the last 10 years. World demand for oil will continue to rise, and world oil output will stay about the same. Gasoline prices continue to rise.
The ban on offshore drilling will be lifted. It’s not a question of if, but rather a question of when. Given that it will take at least 6 years to get oil from these sites, we might as well start now.
But unfortunately, this will not be enough. The U.S. holds only 5% of worldwide oil reserves. All of the cheap oil - the oil that’s easy to get out of the ground - is in other places, mostly in the Persian Gulf.
In my mind, the only viable solution is cars like the Volt. Cars that run on electricity, E85, or gasoline. A combination of bio-fuels and all electric range would drastically reduce world demand.
So I believe the best thing we can do is urge our politicians to tie alternative fuel legislation to offshore drilling. In other words, you tell the oil companies that if they want offshore drilling, they have to give something in return. Something like a mandate that all new cars are flex-fuel capable, and federal rebates for plug-ins. Maybe then the oil companies will realize they are in an end-game situation, and start diversifying their assets into alternative fuels.
July 5th, 2008 at 2:01 pm
The end of oil for gasoline doesn’t mean an end to oil companies or oil.
July 5th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
#32 omegaman66
Right on, Bro! Since our fishermen depleted fisheries to sate our demands, we can replace the ocean plains with artificial fish farms. Nature doesn’t need ocean plains anyway.
Along those lines, let’s go with more billboards along open stretches of highway. Billboards will provide animal habitats. Who needs open spaces? We can engineer more and more sustainability as demands require.
July 5th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
#25 Morgan
“23 Statik: Can you buy an i-Miev yet? Just applying your own logic against you sorry. You can’t use the i-Miev pricing as gospel to dissect the Volt and Th!nk pricing.”
Actually, yes. If you happen to be at the Tokyo Electric Power Co. in Japan (part of the fleet testing program). Cost 2,550,000 yen, in todays US dollars (Yen @ 106.84) thats $23,867. Thats still not exactly retail to the consumer…but I think gives a pretty good ‘max ceiling’ on the battery pack cost. (That is however for the 16kWh pack…not the 20)
July 5th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
HEADS UP! Toyota is accelerating development of battery technology to leap-frog Li-ion chemistry. Here’s a complete write-up of Toyota’s alt. energy technology plans:
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/07/toyota-outlines.html
“Electricity. Despite the attraction of electricity as a power source for transportation, a number of issues remain, Takimoto said, including the energy density of the batteries; infrastructure issues (such as recharging facilities); and the greenhouse gas output from thermal power generation.
Toyota is targeting “revolutionary” energy storage systems. Click to enlarge.
Although Toyota plans to accelerate its development of small electric commuting vehicles, it is focusing on the development of next-generation batteries with greater energy densities than offered by current lithium-ion systems before ordinary vehicles can become EVs. The company is establishing a battery research department “to accelerate R&D on these new revolutionary batteries”. Examples of such batteries adduced in the presentation include solid-state lithium, and metal-air batteries, with the potential for a “Sakichi” battery.”
Essentially, what Toyota is saying is that they will go with Li-ion for the plug-in Prius and some small city EV’s, but they consider Li-ion to lack the energy density for mass-scale cost-effective EV’s.
July 5th, 2008 at 3:07 pm
It’s my belief that if/when Li battery costs decline to $100/Kwh, it will be the end of the ICE age.
Where’s EEstor ?
July 5th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
The only innovative thing Toyota has ever produce is the Prius. Now they think Toyota will dominate the world. Lets get real!
July 5th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
I am pretty sure Toyota has spies (aka informants) on the payroll that work in key position throughout GM and Ford organization. You must assume they know every move GM will make BEFORE it becomes public knowledge. You can bet your bottom dollar they have plans to smack the General upside the head within the next few months. I suspect it will be covert ops that disrupt supply lines. Yes, this is corporate warfare !
July 5th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
omegaman66@32
He was wrong …. but only by grossly underestimating the time it would take for lifting the offshore drilling ban to matter.
Assume we lift the ban today (not true but let’s go with it).
First it takes a while to put a lease together. You have to do Environmental Assessments as well as Environmental Impact Statements. They take studies which don’t show up overnight. And the government has to put together the parcels that will be sold. Then the industry has to have time to do their preliminary work to decide what parcels to bid on.
Give that at least five and more likely ten years.
Then you have to explore. Right now the ships needed for exploration are booked for the next seven years. In ten years they’ll probably be booked for at least another ten.
So ten years until you can explore.
Now you have to actually drill and start production. That doesn’t happen overnight either.
Basically “Drill Here Drill Now” is a mindless slogan. “Drill Here Drill 2040″ would be more accurate.
Rather than continuing to fund our terrorist enemies by swilling their gas while we wait for for a few meaningless drops of oil from offshore rigs, we’re better off rediscovering the American spirit, buying VOLTs, and kicking the oil habit.
Go GM. Go USA. Screw Saudi Arabia and its friend Newt Gingrich.
July 5th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
That was a pretty nasty spill off Santa Barbara, which is why the off shore drilling ban was enacted. Florida has a huge tourist industry that could be ruined with a spill like that.
There are four companies that have leases off the Florida Panhandle, one Australian, one Italian, Shell Offshore and Anadarko E&P Co. I wonder how much of that oil will actually show up as gas here in the US.
The advocates of off shore drilling sound more like addicts. Next they will be advocating going to war over oil. I wonder how much oil we are consuming in Iraq and Afganistan? That and pumping oil into the ground as the Stratigic Naval Oil Reserve can’t be helping the price of gas.
I could support some of the new technology breeder reactors that produce a fraction of the waste the old reactors did. I think we are about to see a lot of alternate energy production take off with the prices of energy where they are. I think you can forget seeing gas under $4 a gallon again. Get used to it.
I want a Volt, but am resigned to getting a second generation one. No way I can afford the first ones. If something else comes along while I’m waiting that catches my eye and is a plug in …
July 5th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
#41 Brine Pool McFly,
ICE age! LOL. I like it.
Seriously though, I believe the ICE age will continue for some time, and plug-in hybrids with increasing amounts of all electric range will be the norm.
There’s one issue with with pure BEVs that people seem to miss: What happens when I space out and forget to plug it in at night? With an E-REV, I just pay and pollute a little more, but I still get to where I’m going.
Given my typical state of mind when I pull in the driveway, I’m far more likely to forget to plug in every night than forget to go to the gas station once a week.
July 5th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
#42 Joe:
I agree, Toyota is mainly a copycat innovator, very similar to Microsoft. They take other people’s ideas and after about three tries they finally get it right. But they also have had a lot of help from American sheep. Remember this is the same company that took a pimped-out Toyota, put a gold nameplate on it, doubled the price, and sold it to gullible americans and made a bundle. Only in America. So they are also a very good marketing company, just like Micro$oft.
July 5th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
You know from what I hear it is hard to quit cold turkey, but I think it is in our best interests. We need to be off of oil now!
Go GM! Go Volt! Goodbye Gas.
July 5th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
#40 pauln,
Thanks for the info on Toyota’s battery plans. Unfortunately, I think they have missed the target. They seem to be focusing on pure BEVs and electrical recharging stations.
Remember - with flex-fuel serial hybrids, we will have the capability to completely eliminate oil use for cars, with very little change to our current power grid and filling station infrastructure.
July 5th, 2008 at 3:52 pm
Dave #46
They make robotic battery-powered vacuum cleaners that can automatically seek the nearest plug to re-charge themselves when their go-juice is running out.
There is no reason why they can’t make a fully electric car search out the nearest outlet on its own. I believe once EVs reach critical mass (say 20% marketshare) then you will see charging stations popup on highways all across this country, just wait and see.
July 5th, 2008 at 3:54 pm
#45 Len:
Addicts? Not me. I can quit any time I want to!
#46 Dave G:
Space out and forget to plug in? Don’t look now, but i think that you and I must be related.
Not to worry, I have a high tech solution. My wife drives 95 Impala SS which fits in the garage with about 3″ to spare. We have a tennis ball hanging on a string from the rafters which hits the windshield at just the right spot so that you 1) don’t bash a hole in the drywall at the front of the car, and 2) don’t roll the roll up door down onto the trunk. And yes, there is a bit of tape on the WS which hits the tennis ball when you are positioned side to side so that you can open the door.
I am just going to replace the tennis ball with the volt plug. When that whacks the WS, I trust that it will jolt me awake enough to remind me to plug in. If that doesn’t work, maybe we can make some money with our aftermarket warning system with a big idiot light on the dash and some sort of electronic trigger box hooked to the garage door opener, or some such.
July 5th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
Dave G #46
Plugging in your vehicle in the winter is the way of life in the northern climates. In extremely cold climates around the Great Lakes, you either plug in or have hard starting in the morning and wait for the coolant to warm up for fifteen minutes so your defrost works. But I agree somewhat, we’ll often see plug in extensions flapping in the breeze by drivers who forget to unplug in the morning. That’s happened to me more than once.
Brad #48
A gradual withdrawal is best for the ecoonmy. Why suffer unnecessarily ? Besides it’ll be quite a while before there’s enough EVs to service America.
July 5th, 2008 at 4:04 pm
Dave G. #46
“There’s one issue with with pure BEVs that people seem to miss: What happens when I space out and forget to plug it in at night? With an E-REV, I just pay and pollute a little more, but I still get to where I’m going.”
*** *** ***
I believe you’re right that RE ICEs will be around for quite some time, not just because of range anxiety, but for fail safe operation. Eventually though we’ll have rapid recharge in as little at 15 minutes which just about anyone should be able to live with.
July 5th, 2008 at 4:06 pm
re #31 Grizzly, after doing the calculations I too am a little surprised. Mainly by the “mobility pack” price. If you average 11K miles a year in Europe and your average gas mileage is 40 mpg (for an equivalent small car) then you need gas to cost $13 a gal to equate to Th!nk’s $300 a month for the battery with electricity included. At the moment gas prices are going up between $2-3 dollars a year. In Europe starting at $9 a gal right now we’ll get there in around 18 months. In the US though it will take around 3.5 years - assuming gas prices don’t increase even faster.
You can see why most companies are selling their EVs in Europe before the US. Its still going to be early adopters even in Europe that go for this right now. But it won’t be long until its a better economic choice than gas for everyone.
July 5th, 2008 at 4:06 pm
Dave G # 9,
I’ll take the Flextreme you propose! If I could add a trailer hitch that can tow 1000lbs so that I can make a trip to the hardware store with my 350lb 4×8 utility trailer to pick up a couple of sheets of drywall and some potting soil… Well, with that vehicle, I’d be mystified as to why any normal person would ever drive anything else! And I could use the hitch to hold a bike rack the rest of the time — a bike would be much more practical and cost effective than a Segway.
(The AER with the trailer doesn’t matter — the store is close by, and it’s not something that I do every day. I’d just rather not void my warranty or alter the structure of the vehicle in order to to attach the hitch.)
But asking for a a Flextreme with trailer hitch may be too much. I’d be happy with a sedan, just so long as the purchase-price is reasonable.
July 5th, 2008 at 4:15 pm
#48 brad,
Cold turkey is hell. Forget about recession, we would have another DEPRESSION!
Besides, people wouldn’t accept it. Once something works well, as ICEs have until now, it’s nearly impossible to get people to just switch to something else overnight.
Here’s the fastest way to get the masses to accept a new paradigm:
1) Offer a new product that works the same way the old product did, plus has a new way of doing things.
2) If the new way is better, most people will rapidly convert to using the new way, but many people will resist change and stay with the old way for a long time.
3) After around 10 years, manufacturers will start to phase out the old way of doing things.
Here’s an example. Computer CD burners have been mainstream for the last 10 years, but Floppy Disk drives were included in most new computers until very recently.
So I think cars like the Volt are the perfect way to quickly transition the masses from gasoline to electricity.
The only problem is that, unlike computers, the infrastructure of liquid fuel filling stations has taken 80 years to build, so this isn’t going to change any time soon. But the Volt already has the solution for this. Converting a filling station pump from gasoline to E85 is relatively easy. So just like the transition model above, drivers and filling station owners will transition from gasoline to E85.
July 5th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
Another possible event looming on the horizon:
Let’s say the EV catches on, and maybe 10 percent of vehicles on the road are Electric. They are seen everywhere and mass EV envy is sweeping the nation…
Here come the Environmental Wackos: All Gas Stations will instantly become open season, it will soon become unsafe to go near a gas station. Your only salvation will be to ditch that gas guzzling monster and get a nice shiny new electric for your families’ safety.
Yes, something like this can happen. It already happens to affluent people who buy energy wasting homes in ski resorts, they are being burned out of their homes.
July 5th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
” while we wait for for a few meaningless drops of oil from offshore rigs, we’re better off rediscovering the American spirit, buying VOLTs, and kicking the oil habit. ”
Just because I think we should have already been drilling offshore and in Alaska where nobody ever goes doesn’t mean I (or we) don’t think that we should move forward with alternate energy.
I know that it is going to be many years before new offshore drilling lease start producing us some oil. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do it. I know even if we could start producing all that oil today that the price of oil wouldn’t be significantly reduced. World demand will eat up any future oil WE can produce domestically.
I do know that right now the price of oil is shooting through the roof and that it is not reversable. Yet we still should drill.
I am an enviromentalist… I am a conservationist… I also know that the liberal far left are the ones that have prevented the opening of these areas to exploration. If these areas had been opened years ago it wouldn’t be 10 years down the road before we would see the oil. 10 years from now when people are discussing this same issue the libs will be saying no reason to drill it will be another 10 years before we see any of that oil. Ummm… note to anyone that will listen. 10 years from now, WILL eventually get here.
Oh and are you talking about an oil spill that accured in 1969!!! Or the one a couple of months ago that was estimated at about 4 barrels???
July 5th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
Marcus #54
I agree that this vehicle is more viable in Europe than in the US. The interesting part is that the $31K price tag is not lock stock and barrel, you’ve then got to lease the battery. I don’t think that will work in the US.
July 5th, 2008 at 5:16 pm
As far as trying to convince people to go electric… forget that, it is not an issue. Currently there a more people wanting to be early adoptors than there are cars to adopt. The price of gas has and will continue to FORCE people off of gas.
So don’t sweat the electric resistance it is a non-issue. Actually you will be praying for more people to be scared of electric cars just so your wait on the waiting list isn’t 18 months.
July 5th, 2008 at 5:20 pm
#57 Tipping Point,
Yes, a few environmental wackos will get nasty, but I think a far more common and effective method for E-REV enthusiasts is simple peer pressure. Once gas guzzling SUV owners realize that many people view their vehicle unfavorably, the status symbol will be lost, so they will buy something more fuel efficient.
An analogy to this is fur coats. Back in the 80s, there were animal rights activists that would spray red paint on people’s fur coats. Then women who owned, or desired to own, a fur coat started asking people what they thought of this, and to their shock, many found that their peers viewed fur coats as somewhat offensive, but hadn’t said anything about it.
So now, most women don’t use fur coats as their status symbol. Some women still wear furs, but far less than 25 years ago. Instead, today we have high priced purses with letters written all over them as the preferred status symbol.
Mark my words: there will be some new status symbol green car. And by the way, the Prius isn’t it. The Tesla Roadster works as a status symbol, but it’s too expensive for the average status seeker. There will be something in the $45K to $60K range.
July 5th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
If the Think retails for $35K then it’s DOA, desperate consumer or no desperate consumer. The idea that I could get a Volt, a car that can satisfy all my transporation needs and pay almost the same as this “I-don’t want-to-be-seen-in-this-thing-Think” leads me to proclaim the Volt as the bargain of the auto world. Leasing batteries is for those who shouldn’t be trying to buy these cars in the first place - the EV version of no-interest mortgages.
July 5th, 2008 at 5:38 pm
#58 omegaman66 says: “Just because I think we should have already been drilling offshore and in Alaska … doesn’t mean I (or we) don’t think that we should move forward with alternate energy.”
I feel the same way. It’s not an either-or situation. We will need both offshore drilling and alternative fuels.
In fact, I believe we should tie the two together. For example, let’s say there was a bill in Congress that provided for all of the following:
1) a federal mandate that all new cars be flex-fuel capable within a short time.
2) federal rebates for plug-in hybrids based on battery KWh.
3) lifting the federal ban on offshore drilling.
4) a temporary lowering of federal emissions standards for high mileage European cars, particularly those made by GM and Ford.
This would be an all-or-nothing compromise package deal. With current oil prices, I think a lot of people could get behind this type of legislation.
July 5th, 2008 at 6:13 pm
I CALLED IT!!! To quote myself from post #61 of the wsj hit piece article:
“The tests i read about the new Large Format LiFe cells has the retail costs down to $0.80/Wh……i wouldn’t be surpised if by 2010, they’ll build a Volt stack + controller for under $10K which meets the criterian and then some.”
I went on to say: “I am a seller of A123 winning the volt contract by the way. ”
Why? Their costs are too high, (priced closer to $2/kwh from what i can gather.) And their chemistry is too new to be reliably tested by 2010. Lets see if my second prediction bears out.
Since I’m on a roll, hows about more predictions:
1) If an ICE passenger car along the lines of a malibu can be priced in the low $20s, and then we add 10K for the battery pack, an 5k for the E-drive, then we get to the high $30s for volume volt pricing. Now the first year won’t be volume. So year one will likely be $40k. With year 2 and beyond $35k, and falling.
2) GM will file for bankruptcy protection some time in 2009… (i think i’m joining the Statik camp here…)
–
# DA
July 5th, 2008 at 6:38 pm
What will happen when oil cost go to $500 a barrel, caused by severe shortage.
1. Will the Airline industry be able to continue business as we know it today? Could jet fuel be made synthetically?
2. Would the Cruise Ship industry need to upgrade to nuclear powered propulsion?
3. Do Jet Engine manufactures like GE lose business?
4. Airplane manufactures like (Boeing, Airbus, Lockheed…) lose business?
5. Can Gasoline production and transportation (Exxon Mobil, Hess, Shell) be cost efficient?
6. Do ICE manufacturers like (Honda) lose a big chunk of business?
7. Can farmers produce the same amount of output with limited supply of fuel?
8. Will people pay outrageous amounts of money for fuel reformulated from Coal by refineries?
We face enormous amounts of disruption, if we can’t reduce our current rate of oil consumption. IMO the industries who stand to hurt the most from oil shortages should financially support changes that promise the largest drop in oil consumption. It is in their best interest that these companies help fund automotive EV battery manufacturing infrastructure growth.
July 5th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
#64 #DA says: “1) If an ICE passenger car along the lines of a malibu can be priced in the low $20s, … then we get to the high $30s for volume volt pricing.”
The Volt is actually based on the newer version of the Chevy Cobalt platform. Base sticker for the Cobalt is $15,070. See here for details:
http://www.chevrolet.com/cobalt/
July 5th, 2008 at 6:43 pm
How can a company file bankruptcy with an asset of over 500 billion? All GM has to do is sell some of it surplus plants.
July 5th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
#65 Nelson,
Yes, things will get increasingly ugly. The ban on offshore drilling will be lifted. It’s just a question of when.
July 5th, 2008 at 7:04 pm
omegaman66@58
When you’re in a war you need to stay focused. You do not want to allow yourself to be distracted by projects that, while perhaps worthwhile, are basically irrelevant.
Offshore drilling is completely irrerlevant to the price of oil. The amounts there are so inconsequential that, at best, they might drop the price of gas one or two cents thirty or forty years from now. (This is official DOE conclusion). IOW worrying about or wasting time on offshore drilling is a good way to avoid doing something that will actually make a difference.
The Volt (and its progeny) are something that can make a difference. Here’s why:
Oil prices are set by supply and demand. (Forget the “it’s all the speculators” BS, it’s a left wing/Steve Forbes fantasy). Right now demand has slightly outstripped supply. Since demand is in the short run inelastic, price has to rise a great deal in order to effect a relatively small decrease in demand. (Econ 101)
In addition, oil producers believe that prices will be higher in the near future. Since oil reserves are not infinite, oil producers have an incentive to hold back production now in order to sell their reserves in the future. In this regard note that experts have observed that oil production has been flat. Now some enviro types suggest that this is because we’re running out of oil, but in fact the flattening supply curve is most likely due to producers deciding to keep supply in the ground for higher prices in the future. (Econ 101)
If we start using the Volt for purposes of demand destruction the equation changes remarkably. All the factors working against us now start working in our favor. First is that if we significantly cut our demand for oil the price will have to drop by a great deal in order to make up for any (even relatively small) loss of demand (for the same reasons price has to rise by a great deal in order to accomodate a small increase in demand). Second is that, the day the Saudis and Iranians beleive we are going to end our addiction to their oil, more supply will be forthcoming since it will be more profitable for them to sell it earlier than later. And of course with more supply the price will drop further.
The facts are obvious. The tiny amounts of oil we can get from offshore drilling in thirty years (not ten as you keep saying) won’t matter one whit to price and won’t do anything whatsoever to stop our insane practice of funding radical Islamic terrorism by sending monstous amounts of our cash to Saudi Arabia and Iran. Since I don’t think we have thirty years to waste I’m in favor of doing something about it NOW.
One choice would be to get distracted by shills for the oil companies who are willing to sell out their country for personal profit and spend time advocating for offshore oil drilling. That is in the oil companies interests, since they greatly benefit from higher prices, and it’s in the interests of politicians who are getting paid by the oil companies, since they get very fat campaign contributions. But it’s not a very good choice if you want to put your country first. If you want to put your country first then the obvious choice is to advocate for policies — tax credits, rebates, whatever — that will make the Volt and its progeny hugely successful. In the end the choice is yours to make and I hope you will stand up and be counted.
Go GM. Go Volt. Go USA.
July 5th, 2008 at 7:40 pm
# 57 Tipping Point
One person’s “wacko” could be another person’s hero. In his day, George Washigton was considered a wacko by some. To me, it is crazy to pursue a petroleum-based solution to our current environmental/economic/social situation. I think the Earth has finite capacity to sustain us….not that I participate in illegal activities. But, I understand the motivation. Having lived in a ski resort, I know there are many people that prefer nature’s sublime beauty to some rich a$$hole’s mountain castle. It really isn’t the mountain way to grandly destroy the mountain so that you can, on a whim, go to one of your many homes. The rich shouldn’t flaunt their wealth - it makes them a target.
It seems “wacko” to point fingers without understanding both sides of the argument. There are wackos on both ends of the spectrum. Ther is reason and sense in the middle.
July 5th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
#69 DonC,
Let’s say you’re right, and offshore drilling wouldn’t provide enough additional oil supply lower prices. If this is true, then it’s a big bluff, and the oil companies probably wouldn’t set up that many new offshore rigs (if any).
In this case, why not call their bluff? In fact, why not up the ante before we call. Specifically, if we had a bill in Congress tied all of the following together:
1) a federal mandate that all new cars be flex-fuel capable within a short time.
2) federal rebates for plug-in hybrids based on battery KWh.
3) lifting the federal ban on offshore drilling.
4) a temporary lowering of federal emissions standards for high mileage European cars, particularly those made by GM and Ford.
then it would be pretty tough for oil companies to shoot this down, since it gives them what they have been asking for.
July 5th, 2008 at 8:16 pm
I think there is another glitch in what is going on. Back in the 70s oil companies came through our area offering big money for oil leases on our farms. Most of us signed up. There was big oil discovered just 50 miles north of us in the 30s. Five years later they came through and canceled the leases because they said that new government regulations made it impossible to drill in our area. I have no idea what happened but something sure did. Heck I live in rural IL not CA. Who cares what happens to us. LOL
Take Care
Arch
July 5th, 2008 at 8:25 pm
Dave G@71
That’s a reasonable point. And if the supply of political capital was infinite your suggestion would be a good one. I’m not opposed to offhore drilling. I’m opposed to diverting political capital from things that matter to things that don’t. (BTW I am right on the impact of offshore drilling. I’m just repeating the official estimates).
My concern is that we waste time on offhsore drilling and then don’t do anything, or very little, about the Volt. It’s like immigration where the idea is that border security and amnesty can be done together, but somehow the amnesty is given and nothing happens with border security. Why? Because there is a powerful special interest group on one side and only the public intetrest on the other. And guess what politicians respond to?
The oil companies are an extremely powerful special interest. Once they get what they want the country’s interests won’t be addressed. In assessing the good of the country, keep in mind that the interests of the oil companies’ directly conflict with that of the country’s. The oil companies want the price of oil to stay high because they make a percentage of every barrel. Higher prices mean higher profits and bigger bonuses. For the country higher prices mean a slower growing economy and more funding for terrorists who want to attack us. There is no common interest here.
But the bottom line is that even if offshore drilling would only give the oil companies more profit, I’d be more than happy to support it if (and only if) the politicians move on the oil demand destruction front. Not before.
July 5th, 2008 at 8:41 pm
#58 Omegaman66
“Just because I think we should have already been drilling offshore and in Alaska where nobody ever goes doesn’t mean I (or we) don’t think that we should move forward with alternate energy.”
There are 2 sides to this argument. One side wants to develop alternative forms of energy, and promote conservation, but don’t do anything that would add to our domestic oil product