Sportscar maker Lotus has just announced its intention to get into the electric car arena. They already make the bodies for the Tesla Roadster, which are based on the Lotus Elise.
Lotus’ CEO Michael Kimberley said “Don’t be surprised to see an electric Lotus shortly, we are working on the technologies that will go behind it.”
Unlike the Tesla Roadster, and of particular note to us, Lotus plans to make the car an extended-range electric vehicle just like the Volt.
The vehicle is expected to get 300 to 400 miles of range, and may be revealed at the Geneva Auto Show in March.
One more example of the merits of the E-Flex design, imitation being the greatest form of flattery. Although don’t expect high volumes and low prices from Lotus.
Source (Financial Times)
On a related note, Toyota is reported to secretly be working on a solar-powered car. According to the Nikkei, Toyota is working on a car that will get some of its power from solar roof cells, and the rest from the solar cells on the roof of an owners home. The next generation of the vehicle has the goal of obtaining all of its power from its own roof cells.
For now we’ll have to settle for a trickle charge from optional Volt or Prius roof solar panels, both of which may be making their world debuts at the Detroit Auto Show in one week.
This entry was posted on Saturday, January 3rd, 2009 at 8:03 am and is filed under Competitors, E-REV, Features, Solar. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (8:20 am)Sounds like Toymota is trying to do the greenwashing these days.
If the car gets all of its energy from the solar panels, I’d like to know its range (3 miles? hahaha).
Nothing new here that hasn’t already been looked at by GM with the Volt. Plus we know that Toymota has publicly stated that Li-Ion batteries are not ready (maybe they have a secret deal with EEStor).
Jan 3rd, 2009 (8:23 am)Bring ‘em on, more is better! I am glad that Toyota has stated that the solar car will be primarily a solar garage, and that the solar cells on the car will be a backup source of a trickle charge. Somehow I think that the “next generation” which will use the on the cars photovoltaic cells as the primary source will be a long time coming?
Jan 3rd, 2009 (8:45 am)Why not “solar-charge” the Volt?….I think that’s a great idea!!!
Zero gasoline and Zero emissions for the 1st 40 miles!!! … “It’s the way of the future.”
Jan 3rd, 2009 (9:24 am)This makes so much sense for Lotus or any exotic car maker to do. The cost difference is much less (percentage wise) when you are talking about expensive sports cars than between a Volt and Prius and you instantly get all this free green news coverage…
Why not just license the Tesla tech – Ford did it with Toyota hybrid system – so you get it on the road in months…
Jan 3rd, 2009 (9:27 am)#1 BillR -mucho gusto
Competitive solar cell arrays have been ‘just around the corner’ for over 35 years. It’s a ‘long and winding road’ apparently.
But ironically, Lithium battery technology will unlock some of the potential of solar cell arrays since householders will be able to store some of that very expensive energy once they’ve invested over $22k just to buy the 4 kW hardware to run a typical home.(not including installation or batteries for storage)
That’s potential(no pun intended) that the Volt has beyond just being an auto, especially with a detachable extended range ICE and battery unit for home use when not needed for highways.
Many people will spend money to get free of the electric utilities even if it is not strictly economic. And it is likely that in the current confusion of greeniac wave mechanics, electric costs are going to soar.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (10:14 am)http://www.worldcarfans.com/9090102.007/lotus-electric-sports-car-in-the-works
http://209.157.64.200/focus/news/2157766/posts
http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/02/lotus-powersliding-into-the-hybrid-car-market/
Take Care
Arch
Jan 3rd, 2009 (10:21 am)It is terrific that Lotus is going to have an E-REV, and I hope it comes soon.
One of the big issues for electric cars is that the people that I talk to think of electric cars as being grandma cars, pitiful slow little things that no aggressive male college student or style-conscious female student would ever imagine being associated with. A couple of months ago I asked a woman who is a college senior if she thought she would be interested in an electric car, and she said no, they were too boxy looking. She has no idea of what electric cars will look like, in reality, but that is her perception.
GM has done itself no favor by discarding the original Volt design and linking the Volt stylistically to the very bottom of its auto lineup and making it sort of an updated Chevelle, or maybe an updated Cobalt. Lots of potential young buyers will never look at a Volt, for this reason — they would be embarrassed to tell their friends. I doubt I will look at a Volt, even though I am interested in the technology, for exactly the same reason.
On the other hand, Lotus is a different matter. Lotus has style, Lotus has performance, Lotus has sex appeal. A Lotus E-REV will be the best thing to ever hit the electric car world, unless Fisker comes through with a product sold everywhere Lotus is sold that is just as good. This world of electric cars really needs some styling leaders, so as to change perceptions of what electric cars can be. GM withdrew from that role presumably because it needed to spend less on development, or maybe it didn’t want to have a product to compete with the Camaro, so even for the welfare of the Volt we all need some other manufacturer, like Lotus, to pick it up.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (10:24 am)Demetrius, I don’t think Ford used Toyota tech, they used a tech that was close enough that Ford agreed to let Toyota use 20 Ford patents to avoid any lawsuits. Toyota got Ford’s direct injection and diesel patents, and Toyota agreed not to sue Ford for their hybrid developments. Ford never paid Toyota a penny. And the new hybrids apparently do not fall into the earlier agreement, so Ford may not be extending the agreement much longer, tho I have read articles that are kind of ambiguous. Even Wikipedia has the story.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Escape_Hybrid
Obviously not a big deal, but Ford did their own heavy lifting. Now if GM can get their house in order long enough to produce the Volt…
Jan 3rd, 2009 (10:28 am)Note to GM:
Please don’t even THINK of making changes to Volt v1.0. This should be obvious, but….. well…..
Be well,
Tag
LJGTVWOTR!! NPNS
Jan 3rd, 2009 (10:58 am)How do we get 1000 square feet of solar collectors onto the car ?
I can envision a folding array unfurling in a stationary possition to charge the battery.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (10:59 am)Now this should stir up the juices.
http://www.dailytech.com/Sea+Ice+Ends+Year+at+Same+Level+as+1979/article13834.htm
Take Care
Arch
Jan 3rd, 2009 (10:59 am)I think it is good to have all this competition jump up because it will put the pressure on GM to make the Volt even better and make sure it comes out on time!
Jan 3rd, 2009 (11:04 am)I read an article in the Press about the Toyota Solar car. The reporter was gushing about driving around in solar and noted how Toyota was the eco friendly king of the car companies. They noted how Toyota is installing solar on their factories.
Typical Japan bias. GM too is installing solar on factories. In addition, the solar powered car idea is a dream. Driving from solar only would be totally impractical and waiting for a charge would be ridiculous. If you throw in the concept of a solar garage, whats the big deal. Any electric car can use this. The Volt can and in some cases will be powered from solar.
So do a few solar panels on the roof of a car make a big difference?
Assuming
3 meters squared of 40% efficient solar panels on the car (this would seem to be a lot of coverage for a small car)
about 1400 Watts per meter squared in perfect conditions (We see more clouds than sun in the DC/MD area so my values would be less)
That works out to about 2 Horsepower on a perfect day. Not too impressive.
I may be able to save more energy by going on a diet and removing some of the junk from the trunk of the car.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (11:07 am)Completely off topic!! I have been watching Cavuto on business and a tax increase on gasoline was discussed with some saying enough to put the price of gasoline back to $4.00 a gallon. this, in my opinion is not the way to go as it would hurt the worst off the most. I would suggest a progressive tax on IMPORTED OIL. Start with a bench mark of say, $40.00 a barrel and add 10% to that price. Then for every 10% the price of imported oil goes up increase this tax another 5%. I think such a tax would have many bennifits. One of the bennifits would be to put restraints on the oil speculators. It would make domestic oil more cost effective and that would put pressure on congress to allow more drilling and the mining of oil shale, I also think it would give incentive to the producers of natural gas to drill more and to construct a pipeline to the northeast to reduce their need to use oil heat. And again it would put pressure on congress to allow the drilling for natural gas. I know the price of imported oil would still go up and down but I think we would see less of the wild price swings of the recent past. Part of this tax money could go to improve BEV and E-REV transportation and to fund more battery innovations.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (11:11 am)Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. We have all known that other companys would jump on the electric car bandwagon as soon as it seemed that someone had a practical one – GM did it!.GO VOLT!
Jan 3rd, 2009 (11:12 am)______________________________________________________
2010 will go down in autmotive history as the year of the Electric Car. Hold on for a very wild ride!
I give Tesla Motors and the GM VOLT Team much credit for igniting the Plug-In EV gold rush. I also give much credit to Lyle…his contribution has been very significant; “the Power of One”.
* Electric Cars + Nuclear Power = American Energy Independence!
______________________________________________________
Jan 3rd, 2009 (11:16 am)RE 11.
Each short term climate report is like reporting a change in the stock market every minute. Off course if you wait for the stock market closing bell you might be cooked, and I guess the same applies with global warming
Jan 3rd, 2009 (11:22 am)My Volt WILL BE SOLAR POWERED!
Here’s my house http://www.netzeroenergy.org
I have two years to get my house about 1600KWh below net zero to truely power my Volt (for 8000 miles) on solar power. I think that I’m currently off by about 500KWh for this year including heating load.
And I will have a bet with Toyota,… I bet that I will be driving a solar powered Volt (powered from my roof), before (long long long before) they have a solar powered car running 40 miles per charge from cells on the car!
Jan 3rd, 2009 (11:31 am)#10 Dr.Science and #13 Nuclearboy.
Yes you can Solar-Charge the Volt…Not from the roof of the Volt but from your 2000 watt “Solar-Garage”…..In Western New York add a 2kW Wind Turbine for winter.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (11:34 am)Hey, Toyota, I wonder which will be first, nuclear powered cars or self solor powered cars.
With nuclear (fission) even if you were allowed to have a reactor in a car it would be suicide, because without several feet of concrete (or lead) you would have a mobile neutron machine (which would kill you real fast).
With solar you would need to cover every last square inch with thin film solar paint/cells, and have near 100% efficient cells (current about 13% state of art thin film), and live somewhere sunny, and park in the sun, to get 8KWh. But if you can do that, then you have the technology to solve all our power generation problems too.
Sounds like wishful thinking or green wash.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (11:36 am)Lyle,
It will be interesting to see what Lotus actually announces. Right now we just have a few sentences from Mike Kimberley that are quoted by John Reed of the FT. Have you contacted Lotus to get their comment or official statement on this?
Having been in the business, there is often a large gap between what is reported and what is really the case. The thing I wonder is how they would package a full genset and sufficiently large battery pack in the eagle platform (much less the elise) to get any reasonable EV range. You’ve seen the volume of battery pack required to get 40 Miles in the Volt.
There is no question in my mind that Lotus is going to get into the EV game. I wasn’t surprised at all. I can’t imagine they can sit there and watch hundreds of Teslas go down the line and not want to get in the game directly.
The question I still have is what specifically they plan to offer and how it is engineered.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (11:38 am)Thought I’d share a story that was in the Austin American-Statesman this morning regarding the Volt.
http://www.statesman.com/life/content/life/stories/cars/01/03/0103volt.html
Jan 3rd, 2009 (11:39 am)How long until Elon will sue them?
Jan 3rd, 2009 (11:46 am)@OhmExcited I don’t think that is an option, for obvious reasons
Jan 3rd, 2009 (12:15 pm)Too bad they are making it extended range with all that extra complexity and weight. Thats why the Tesla is so great, it sticks to its mission of a pure EV.
I don’t get range extenders. Its not like gas powered cars have them, when you run out you run out. Same for an EV car. You just plan your range accordingly.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (12:22 pm)I wish Toyota talked about the actual solar power numbers they are planning on using. Now we are going to get 100 posts from people saying how it’s impossible. Good grief.
Let’s set things straight. If you put a good amount of solar panels on your car and live in Texas you might get around 5 – 6 miles worth of driving per day. Current solar technology is just not going to give you much more driving range. However, the best part about solar is the extra functionality it will provide. From advanced security to always-on Internet to remote commands to venting the interior on a hot day.
I’m for SOTS (Solar On The Surface) but realize it’s limitations for providing motion energy. I’m going to wait to see what Toyota has in mind.
In the future if we do perfect thin-film solar cells that give very high efficiencies and you cover the entire surface of the car (including the glass) then you just might be able to provide a good portion of your driving, depending on where you live and how far you drive. Until then, we should concentrate on the extra functionality, not the driving.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (12:26 pm)I thought GM was going to announce the battery contest winners in ’08. Did I miss something?
Jan 3rd, 2009 (12:56 pm)Darryl Siry #24,
“@OhmExcited I don’t think that is an option, for obvious reasons”
IOW, don’t sue the hand that feeds you
Boy, it sure would be interesting to have a recent insiders opinion on the likelihood of a Tesla Model S delivering in 2011, especially given all of the uncertain factors up in the air right now.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (1:03 pm)It may be important to note that GM did not invent the concept that the E-Flex system is based off of.
I remember reading an article in Pop Sci back in 2006 talking about how hybrids ‘get it backwards’. It basically described how a vehicle, propelled by only electricity primarily from batteries, should have a generator on-board to extend it’s range.
There will likely be many similar vehicles. Until and unless we come up with energy storage and generation that is fast (charging) and/or portable, with an infrastructure to deliver it, we’ll see EREVs.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (1:31 pm)The more the merrier! It’s GREAT to have all this competition!
Let’s see who starts winning the race this year & why; ie. cost, style, function, etc.
GO ALL EV !
Jan 3rd, 2009 (1:31 pm)#14 old man Says: “I would suggest a progressive tax on IMPORTED OIL. Start with a bench mark of say, $40.00 a barrel and add 10% to that price. Then for every 10% the price of imported oil goes up increase this tax another 5%.”
————————————————————————————–
I have also suggested a a variable tax on foreign oil, more commonly referred to an an import tariff, but progressing in the opposite direction.
My idea is to set a minimum price on oil of $65/barrel. If oil prices fall below that, raise import tariffs just enough to meet the $65 minimum. Note that $65 / barrel is about the price where new sources of domestic oil become viable. It’s also the price where bio-fuels become viable.
My point is that as oil prices go up, the need to tax oil to promote alternative sources of energy goes down, so taxes should actually be lowered when oil prices go up. Setting a minimum price seems like an obvious way to do this.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (1:34 pm)#18 Mark Bartosik .
Thank you for that link. I love your electric bill.
Mark, can I ask this question?
After all your rebates, what was your out-of-pocket cost?
Jan 3rd, 2009 (1:50 pm)#22 Joy,
Thanks for that Volt article. But I don’t recall hearing two things before.
1) An electrical cord will spool out of the car like it does from your vacuum cleaner.
2) GM says a full recharge from a 120-volt receptacle will take about eight hours.
For some reason, I thought it was 6 hours to fully recharge.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (1:57 pm)#27 Ed asks “I thought GM was going to announce the battery contest winners in ‘08. Did I miss something?”
====================================
There’s still no battery contract, so far as I know.
They are too busy getting Camaro out the door
Jan 3rd, 2009 (2:10 pm)#25 Larry Says: “Thats why the Tesla is so great, it sticks to its mission of a pure EV.
I don’t get range extenders. Its not like gas powered cars have them, when you run out you run out. Same for an EV car. You just plan your range accordingly.”
————————————————————————————–
I’m just the opposite. I don’t get why people crave pure EVs. I think range extended vehicles are the best solution for the foreseeable future, for many reasons:
1) Liquid fuels have the highest energy density, much higher than any battery, including EEStor. So for longer distance travel, a pure EV may actually be heavier.
2) Using existing methods, Ethanol from non-food sources can replace 35% of our gasoline use:
http://www.coskata.com/EthanolFeedstockPotential.asp
Range extended EVs replace around 80% of our gas usage. Add these together and you have 115% – more than enough to completely replace gasoline.
3) Planning your range doesn’t always work. Life doesn’t always go according to plan. For example, let’s say your brother lives 200 miles away, and you get a call at 11pm that he is in the emergency room. You want to be with him, but the rental car place that’s within your range is closed. There are many other examples like this. There’s a reason people have range anxiety.
4) A network of fast-charging electric filling stations will cost trillions of dollars to build, and perhaps 50 years to completely make it’s way into rural areas. Why spend all that time and money to replace our infrastructure, when ethanol can completely replace gasoline for long distance driving? Converting an existing gas pump to ethanol or E85 is trivial compared to adding an electric charging station. Remember that in order to fast-charge, you’ll need lot’s of batteries at the charging station. You’ll also need a place to put those batteries that’s out of the elements and doesn’t get very hot or cold. Underground would be best, but an above ground structure might work as long as it’s close to the charging ports, since longer charging cables would introduce significant power losses for the electrical current required in fast-charging.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (2:13 pm)RE Rashid #18
Don’t forget, my heating bill is zero too!
The total cost was substantial and actually hard to calculate because I paid multiple contractors to do work (like tear off old roof).
I have a cost calculator for simple solar panel based systems:
http://www.netzeroenergy.org/solar_cost_calculator.php
LIPA is my local utility.
I have a simple panel based system on the rear on a flat roof (4.8KW), about $10K or $11K out of pocket. This will pay for itself.
The front system is about 9KW (but faces WWS), and was more like $50K. I’m only guessing $50K after rebates etc., because I used more than one contractor, and should I subtract the cost of a new roof? Should I subtract the cost of tearing off the old roof? Should I subtract the cost of a second electrical service (LIPA only allowed 10KW per residential service at the time). But it looks sooo good, and will likely out last me. I think that I spent over $1K on stainless steel fasteners alone for the integrated roof. The tiles are by http://www.openenergycorp.com
Jan 3rd, 2009 (2:26 pm)Mark Bartosik #36
Thank you for the feedback. I love your house.
I see why it is difficult for you to calculate the out-of-pocket expense.
Unfortunately, I put new shingles on my house back in 2004. I never gave it a thought to go solar. Very poor planning on my part, for sure.
I have been talking to my boiler guy (also my friend for years) about geothermal. I am considering do this.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (2:28 pm)First Fisker, then Chrysler, then Mercedes, now Lotus. Everyone is seeing the power of the extended range configuration as a transitional platform from the internal combustion engine to the BEV (Battery Electric Vehicle) and PFCV (plug-in fuel cell vehicle).
I am happy all these companies will be helping the world transition, and building the Tier 1 and lower supplier base to achieve it.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (2:46 pm)Imitation is the highest compliment the Volt can recieve. Makes me very happy.
However, it makes me absolutely crazy to hear people comparing Volt styling to that of the Lotus. Seriously, think for 2 secs about the price differences before writing a post like that poster #7, etc.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (2:54 pm)http://climateprogress.org/2009/01/03/is-toyota-developing-a-purely-solar-powered-car-or-is-this-a-story-lost-in-translation/#more-4566
Lost in translation ?
Jan 3rd, 2009 (3:13 pm)Keep the first model year Volt as simple as possible. No solar panels on the first model. And keep the price under 35k.
It’s no secret that there is an optional solar blanket which can be unfurled next to the Volt to provide battery boost. Perhaps during family outings, camping trips, and lake trips.
GM needs to focus on reliability, user friendliness, and high Consumer Report grades concerning overall quality and basic functions of the first year Volt. These being handling, seat comfort, interior styling, braking distance, front and rear visibility, and ergonomic functionality.
GM should pre-write the CR article and ensure the car passes spec.
Example: My first impression of the Volt is the roomy interior. The controls are well placed and easy to understand. Front and rear seat headroom is ample and the leather seats provide good lumbar support. One touch of the “on” button and the futuristic dash displayed the charge level of the battery in large easy to read numerals. I didn’t need to press any additional buttons or switches as the Volt defaults to “economy” mode on each restart. The front and rear visibility from the driver seat is better than most fossil fuel vehicles I have tested. I touched the “gas” pedal and was immediately greeted with a larger than expected torque surge from the nearly silent 150 HP electric main drive motor. The ride was smooth and providing good feedback when cornering. The overall weight distribution of the Volt is sports car-like. And the brakes are responsive and effective. Similar to the high dollar German Autobahn burners. To conclude: GM has done what few believed they could. A good looking sedan that provides previously unheard of efficiency. My only regret of this week-long test is that I will have to give it back. The Volt is available in 8 colors with 24 interior color schemes.
=D~
Jan 3rd, 2009 (3:45 pm)#4 Demetrius says,
This makes so much sense for Lotus or any exotic car maker to do. The cost difference is much less (percentage wise) when you are talking about expensive sports cars than between a Volt and Prius and you instantly get all this free green news coverage…
————-
No worries here, Demetrius. Lotus makes cars for the rich. The rich just want the status symbol and they can easily afford whatever price Lotus wants to charge. I don’t think Lotus will lose any money.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (4:04 pm)#40 nataraj,
That makes the most sense to me. Thanks.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (4:33 pm)#26 Texas says “Now we are going to get 100 posts from people saying how it’s impossible. Good grief.”
OK. I won’t be the 101st. However, the thin film solar idea is probably not a good one. Regular panels are about 14% efficient. High efficiency panels are about 28% efficient. And thin film panels are about 10% efficient.
Let’s assume the car’s surface might be ten square meters (probably a stretch). Because of the flat roof and shadowed areas the capacity factor won’t be more than 5% even in a sunny climate like SoCal. That would mean your car might produce 10 * 0.05 * 0.1 * 1000 * 24 = 1200 Wh/day. Not going to get you very far. (You can do the numbers for the roof panels to see how well they’d work).
Jan 3rd, 2009 (4:46 pm)I’ve been gone for a week, did anybody miss me?
NO PLUG NO SALE, LJGTVWOTR,DBAGCMEMEV, (my house)=D~~~(my volt)
Jan 3rd, 2009 (4:48 pm)RE Rashiid Amul #37
Unfortunately, I put new shingles on my house back in 2004. I never gave it a thought to go solar. Very poor planning on my part, for sure.
==========
No problems if you have 20 years left on the shingles, that’s when to put solar panels on top of the singles (on standoffs). Solar panels are much cheaper to install than solar tiles anyway. The panels will protect the shingles a bit, and thus the shingles will last longer.
Indeed a few utilities require a nearly new shingle roof to qualify for rebate. There is no point in putting panels over old worn shingles that will need replacing in a few years.
Only thing is that panels don’t look as nice as my solar tiles. But they can still look good. A friend of mine just put a new roof on last month and will put solar panels on this month.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (4:58 pm)Mark Bartosik – Thanks for the link! What a project. I’d love to have my home be self-sufficient, but I’m slowly working on the low-hanging fruit. My house was built in 1950, when energy was assumed to eventually be “too cheap to meter”, so it’s hugely inefficient.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (5:02 pm)Solar powered cars I find a particularly looney notion. The amount of surface area on a car is so tiny that it would take days to absorb enough electricty to go very afr. And how many people park their cars in the sun? And a better question: who would want to park their car in the sun? And calling a car solar powered because one can provide the electricty from a solar roof (exactly where? – Are you supposed to carry your roof to work with you?) is particularly nutty. With that kind of logic, anything that uses electricity can be called “solar powered.” And my condo doesn’t have a roof.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (5:15 pm)Solar powered cars are not so far fetched…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_car_racing
Hey! Doesn’t Toyota sponsor the North American Solar Challenge?
Jan 3rd, 2009 (5:32 pm)Kent #48
I have a Solar-Powered golf cart, a Solar-Powered car and a Solar-Powered refrigator with lots of Solar-Cooled Beer in it. If you’re ever in Springwater N.Y. stop in and after I take you for a Solar-Powered ride we can enjoy a Solar-Cooled beer while we sit on the porch and watch all the gasoline-powered cars and trucks go by.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (6:33 pm)#39 ccombs said “However, it makes me absolutely crazy to hear people comparing Volt styling to that of the Lotus. Seriously, think for 2 secs about the price differences before writing a post like that poster #7, etc.”
————————————————
That is exactly why it is so important that Lotus or a similar high-end company come out with an E-REV design. Such a design has to be given some credibiity by cars with sizzle and sex appeal, or a large segment of the car-buying population will not give them a 2nd look.
The Volt is going to be a twin of the low-end Cruze. That is, it will look fine, but its appeal based on styling will be low. That will not matter to the many people who are interested in the Plug-in drive-train as the Volt’s main strength, but that group is only a tiny fraction of the auto-buying public.
There are many other people who are not going to give the Volt a 2nd look because they believe, even if wrongly, that electric cars as a group are low-end grandma cars — dowdy looks and poor performance. There is nothing about the way the Volt looks that is going to change their mind. They are not going to go into the Chevy dealership to see the Volt as it looks now— just too low end.
GM has given up leadership in this area. I don’t know why they did, but I assume it was to make introducing the Volt cost less. The consequence is that the success of E-REV cars in the important part of the market of people in their 20s and early 30s really is dependent now on some other manufacturer, such as Lotus, giving this kind of car some sizzle.
None of the above says that the Volt and any car from Lotus will cost the same, or should cost the same.
Putting this a different way, not many people went to the London or Paris fashion shows, and not many people will buy original designer dresses (or suits or evening clothes). But they create an atmosphere, and millions of people will buy clothes that follow the same lines as the high-end introductions. The E-REV market needs that same kind of leadership.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (6:34 pm)Dick G#50
Wow, suddenly watching gas powered vehicles seems so… so old fashioned!
Jan 3rd, 2009 (6:40 pm)Daryl Siry
You are a very diplomatic guy, and you seem to assume, as A. Greenspan did, that folks will act rationally in their own ultimate self interests.
Aren’t the Tesla’s bodies made in France?
Jan 3rd, 2009 (6:48 pm)#17 Mark says in regard to Arch’s link “Each short term climate report is like reporting a change in the stock market every minute.”
————————————————————————
There is 30 years of data in the chart shown in the link.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (7:13 pm)#11 Arch
Why do that to us? Can’t we keep this blog somewhat on the topic of automobiles?
If you really want to comment on Arch’s link, please do so at the actual article.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (10:17 pm)#47 Lurtz
Yep, I know the feeling. My house (in the picture) was build circa 1960, which was of course only 10 years closer to the day when energy would be too cheap to meter
The biggest bang for the buck with most houses is air sealing, and making any crawl spaces ventilated to the interior.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (10:21 pm)RE #54
well my point was that saying what has happened in past three to six months (a season) is like a market report every minute. The story as I read it referred to the last season of ice. However, as you point out, 30 years of data to show a trend is a whole different story, maybe I just skimmed it too quickly.
Jan 3rd, 2009 (10:56 pm)54 RB
I have been playing this energy game since 74. The one thing I have learned is that people have made up their mind how it should be played. Little can be said to change their minds. Now add $4 gas and a few more will listen. Its sort of like a lot of things. People make up their minds and live there for most of their lives. Takes a REAL big kick in the butt to change their views. JMHO
Take Care
Arch
Jan 3rd, 2009 (11:10 pm)55Thom
#11 Arch
If you really want to comment on Arch’s link, please do so at the actual article.
Well I sure do not understand this post. I posted the story I did not comment on it. Gould you please explain?
Arch
Jan 3rd, 2009 (11:30 pm)57 Mark
Take a mighty big person to say what you just said. THANKS!
Take Care
Arch
Jan 3rd, 2009 (11:36 pm)Wow a Lotus EV. It is way cool. However I will not be able to afford one. Any way I hope GM makes a cheap knock off. My Fiero was dimensionally the same as a Ferrari F40, It was cheaper to insure and would get better mileage.
Now if the range extender was removable…
Jan 3rd, 2009 (11:49 pm)Dale Vince’s Electric Sports Car – Video Update – 01/01/09
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/01/dale-vince-electric-car.php?daylife=1
=D~
Jan 4th, 2009 (12:19 am)#59 Arch
I think your intro (“Now this should stir up the juices…”) says it all. Why would you want to, out of nowhere, stir up the juices? I mean, Lyle was talking about Lotus and solar Toyotas. Without any segue, you come up with sea ice. Tres troll?
Posting a climate change link, then claiming innocence seems disingenuous. You’ve been around long enough to know how climate change discussions go around here.
Jan 4th, 2009 (12:42 am)#63thom
I never claimed ANY innocence! I am sick and tired of all the climate change crap. I do not think it is happening. I know some of you like to keep the juices below the boiling point. I DO NOT! When the pot is boiling the real smells come off the pot.
Arch
Jan 4th, 2009 (1:32 am)Simple
Toyota steals everything they find they can steal
One word
GM sun racer
http://www.speedace.info/sunraycer_general_motors.htm
Toyota is a fake PR machine.
Jan 4th, 2009 (5:08 am)#64 Arch,
Climate change is getting to be like religion. Either you believe in it or you don’t. Arguing about it doesn’t help anyone.
Jan 4th, 2009 (5:42 am)Dude, for people who live in Nevada, So Cal, Arizona etc., it would be sick to have a Volt with a solar panel on top. You would charge it at home, and drive it to work, it would be charged at the end of the day. Success stories like that will be in the news and people will jump all over it. Depending on the commute distance, it might not even need to be charged at home.
Jan 4th, 2009 (7:11 am)I’m delighted to see that Lotus plans to produce an E-REV! This adds impetus to GM’s approach to electrifying vehicles ….and this time it’s from a respected European car maker of high-performance roadsters and racers.
Hey, GM! Why not follow Lotus’ lead and offer a 2-seat roadster with a scaled-up version of the Volt drive-train in a package similar to the present Saturn Sky? If it were comparable in performance to an E-REV Lotus but positioned well below the ZR-1 in price it should sell like hotcakes!
On a different subject, yet related because the E-REV decision at GM will prove to be a very wise one in the long run, is an excellent recent article about Rick Wagoner in the NY Times……
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/03/opinion/03holstein.html?_r=1&th&emc=th
It will be very interesting to see what announcements/concepts are announced at the Detroit Auto Show in about a week!
Jan 4th, 2009 (8:24 am)hi nasaman #68,
Hey, I already asked GM to make the E-REV Cruze truck. The electric Sky can wait. Humph!
=D~
Jan 4th, 2009 (10:53 am)#67 omnimoeish Says: “Dude, for people who live in Nevada, So Cal, Arizona etc., it would be sick to have a Volt with a solar panel on top. You would charge it at home, and drive it to work, it would be charged at the end of the day. Success stories like that will be in the news and people will jump all over it. Depending on the commute distance, it might not even need to be charged at home.”
————————————————————————————–
Solar power is great, but there’s this thing called reality. Solar panels require a large surface area tilted up 30 degrees and facing south to be effective. If your home has a roof that slopes toward the south, solar panels can work.
But solar panels are expensive. This is because of the huge amount of energy it takes to purify and grow silicon crystals. Most solar panels take 2 years or more for energy break even (i.e. to produce the same amount of energy used to manufacture them).
Adding solar cells on cars has many more issues:
1) There’s not enough surface area on a car to power it, not even close.
2) The surface of a car is not aimed 30% toward the south horizon.
3) People like to park in the shade on hot days.
4) Crystalline silicon does not bend or flex. It’s brittle. Other types of photo-voltaics do bend and flex, but they are much less efficient.
Rather than adding solar panels to a car, a better solution would be for employers and home owners to install solar panels on buildings.
Perhaps the best solution is for public utilities to use solar thermal:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_Energy_Generating_Systems
This has been working great for last 20 years. It’s much cheaper than solar cells, and more efficient. The cost per kWh is very competitive. Natural gas is used to fill in when it’s not sunny, but 90% of the electricity produced is from solar. To me, this seems like the perfect solution to satisfy peak electric demand during the day, and would be great for the areas you mention (Nevada, So Cal, Arizona etc.). The solar power tower designs use a similar concept:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_tower
For the life of me, I can’t understand why they haven’t built more of these. It seems like a no-brainer…
Jan 4th, 2009 (10:58 am)I do believe in climate change.
I have no idea what to believe for the reason why it is happening.
Jan 4th, 2009 (1:09 pm)#64 Arch
Thanks for making my point and admitting that you were trolling.
PDNFTT
Jan 4th, 2009 (1:13 pm)#70 Dave G
As I said in #49, solar cars exist. They have gone across continents at decent speeds. They may be specialized vehicles at present, but so was the Wright brothers flying machine at Kitty Hawk. You know how that took off. Don’t be so quick to pooh pooh solar cars.
Jan 4th, 2009 (4:17 pm)David G #71
The reason that no one build these damn thermally polluting, and albedo-altering, producing genuine AGW 100 of times as powerful as GHG, is because they don’t make the least bit of economic sense.
Solar is inefficient, terribly inefficient. Would you want to buy power from an Utility that charges 50 cents per KWH when someone else charges you 5 cents per KWH? Are you ready to pay $1000 per month for your electric bill if you presently pay $100 per month?
Only committed Gian religious Enviro-Crusaders, who don’t and can’t think rationally do. And can force or elect their own Utility commissions to build such economic pink elephants. And only at the margin, usually as “demonstration projects”. Projects that once built, and the PR photos taken and distributed; commission politicians speeches and press conferences made; promptly are mothballed and dragged out for annual “photo shoots” for the covers of the Utilities financial statement as “Greenwash”.
In the vernacular, they Suck. And they will always Suck.
Next question?
Jan 5th, 2009 (11:06 am)GM already built a solar powered car in 1998 called the Sunraycer. It won the race in Australia.
Jan 5th, 2009 (12:37 pm)With Lotus getting into the E-REV business it is another milestone towards electrifying our automobiles. Lotus will sell towards the high end like Tesla. The lower end will be served by GM, Ford and others.
Jan 5th, 2009 (1:28 pm)#69 DaveK:
Amen!
Jan 5th, 2009 (1:37 pm)#11 (and subsequent notes), Arch, You WERE trolling, dropping your triumphant tidbit right out of the blue.
And you troll poorly; that article is a half-truth. GLOBAL sea ice hasn’t changed much (although it is clearly trending down). Antarctica, as has been pointed out MANY times, is fairly stable (possibly benefitting from increased precipitation). The problem rests in the Arctic Ocean, where loss of sea ice decreases the Earth’s albedo, which leads to further warming. For the second year in a row, our sea ice extent at the end of the year is extremely low, compared to the average of the observed record.
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/index.html
I notice Asher refers to the NSIDC but does not link to it. That would be easily done, wouldn’t it? I’d guess he prefers you not get the full picture but instead wants you to rely on what he has cherry-picked for you. Some people, especially those politically motivated to deride legitimate scientific effort, can be counted on to do that.
Jan 5th, 2009 (2:23 pm)I hope it’s basically the Zap-X (Lotus APX body) with a range extender. I’d really love to have ~600hp and AWD (wheel motors) with a third row of jump seats. I’d heard that Lotus had actually built and demonstrated prototypes in Malaysia (where their owners are) so it might very well be possible although I’d never seen any evidence (like photos or video) on the web.
And Lotus is kind of pricey, but it’s not crazy expensive. Back in the dot-com boom, the Elise was in the mid 30′s and there were tons of them around here because it was one of the cheaper, er, flamboyant cars you could get. These days they’re in the upper 40′s, though, so they’ve kind of moved up in price. I blame the Boxter for that.
Jun 25th, 2009 (1:16 pm)Lets see. We build a quarter million Volts a year and some whacko sets off an EMP generator someplace in California.
Volt electronics could get fried. Can you say 40 thousand dollar paperweight?
Nov 24th, 2009 (4:12 am)Information like the one you cited here will be very useful to me! I will place a link to this page on my blog. I am sure enough my visitors will find that very utilizable.