Grab our RSS Feed

AND

Volt-Lite: Bright Automotive Building an E-REV

March 11th, 2009 | Posted in: Competitors, E-REV

Those who have followed the Volt story long enough will remember that the consulting firm Rocky Mountain Institute has spun off its own start-up car company called Bright Automotive. The CEO of this fledgling automaker is John Waters, an engineer who it turns out used to work for GM on the EV-1.

Waters came out a year and a half or so ago criticizing the Volt’s design and engineering, mostly concerned about it being to heavy and therefore less economical. At that time he said “[The Volt] is a 4,000-pound vehicle. The drag coefficient is around .30. They [GM] forgot everything they learned on the EV1 so for me, it is a very discouraging concept, the fact that it is inefficient.”

Now he’s gone so far as to design a car that one might call the Volt-lite.

At this point we don’t know much about the car as hasn’t been revealed yet. That is set for May at the Electric Vehicle Symposium in Norway.

The car is expected to have a 30 mile-electric range, and powered either by lithium-ion or possibly even nickel-metal hydride batteries. There will be a 1.6 liter 4-cylinder range extender on-board that allows 400 miles of driving on a full tank of gas.

RMI is known for encouraging lightweight vehicles and has a relationship with the carbon fiber industry. “We’re not limited by leveraging steel relationships,” say Waters, referring to the Volt’s heavy steel frame. This car will be built around a lighter cheaper battery pack.

Bright hopes to build 30,000 cars it its first year and up to 50,000 cars per year by 2013.

A major problem at this point is not surprisingly financing. Bright had begun acquiring venture capital when the economy crashed, and per Waters still need $400 million in either VC funding or Department of Energy grants by June 12th in order to meet its launch date of fourth quarter 2012.

A major competitor or just another drop in the oil bucket? We may be waiting quite a while to find out.

Source (Earth2Tech) and (Mother Nature Network)

Posted by: Lyle

172 Responses to “Volt-Lite: Bright Automotive Building an E-REV”

Herm Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 6:25 am

for a car to be mass-produced economically it must be made from stamped steel. It can be done literally in seconds..

(Quote)
FME III Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 6:42 am

Trying to raise $400 million in this economy?… I don’t think so.

I’m also skeptical of their production goals. (See Tesla).

If the photo with the story is accurate, it has a profile similar to a Think Ox or something else of that ilk. It would gain a following, but the sleeker Volt will have more appeal.

Nonetheless, I wish them well. The sooner we can stop exporting billions of dolars to the Mideast, the better off we’ll all be.

(Quote)
well Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 6:49 am

Well, if a smaller electric range means a lower price, it could be a success (provided it will be available for sale).

Maybe in Europe even 25 miles/40 km could be sufficient, as distances are usually not so large.

(Quote)
NZDavid Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 6:52 am

Carbon Fiber is great stuff, but really, really, expensive.

Also, any kind of an accident and the panel concerned will have to be replaced, as it can’t be repaired.

Out of my price range. Anyway I’ve got my heart set on the Ampera now.

(Quote)
Joe Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 6:53 am

I don’t know how this x-engineer from GM thinks he can take trade secrets from his former employer and use them illegally, if in fact that’s what he plans to do. This story looks fishy!!

(Quote)
Dave B Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 6:54 am

Fine idea, but I think they need a little backing from a larger company. Perhaps a VW would be interested?

(Quote)
FME III Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 6:58 am

I just got around to reading yesterday’s post.

#47 Aaron’s comments go straight to the heart of Ltyle’s earlier post asking for feedback about how many people know about the Volt.

Folks, we got a lot of educatin’ to do….

(Quote)
vincent Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 7:15 am

As long as “lite” doesn’t not equate to a micro vehicle that your scared to get hit in if an SUV comes your way…lets have a look.
Good luck Bright. I’m wondering how any of his previous experience in GM labs and what he learned/developed is now “his” intellectual property…this should be interesting…let the games begin…

(Quote)
old man Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 7:16 am

If this car is a U.S. car company made in the U.S. and can travel at least 75 mph ev mode, has an e-rev, can go 30 miles ev city driving, and can be purchased for about $20,000.00 I would have interest in it. But only if available prior to the Volt. The 40 mile EV range is more to my likeing, 60 miles would be perfect. I would almost never need to use gas.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 7:28 am

#1 Herm Says: for a car to be mass-produced economically it must be made from stamped steel. It can be done literally in seconds..

#4 NZDavid Says: Carbon Fiber is great stuff, but really, really, expensive.
————————————————————————————–
The Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) has been working hard to increase the production efficiency and lower the cost of carbon fiber.

The picture in the article above looks exactly like their Hypercar, which appears on the Nova program “Car of the Future”. If you want to see the car with the sheet removed, the RMI section starts half-way through chapter 4:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/programs/ht/tm/3507.html?site=22&pl=wmp&rate=hi&ch=4

RMI’s point is that carbon fiber is so light, large body panels could be lifted with one finger. This means assembly workers can easily glue body panels together in seconds. The glue fuses the carbon fiber together, so its stronger than steel.

RMI is also working on unique cost effective methods for producing the carbon fiber body parts, which you can see toward the end the Nova segment above.

For anyone that’s interested in future cars, the NOVA program is a must-see. You can watch the whole program here:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/car/program.html

(Quote)
Bearclaw Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 7:31 am

about aerodynamics. Couldn’t it be a flying brick as long as it weighs significantly less, being made of carbon fiber, still get better stats?

That NOVA show “Car of the Future” is great. Especially if you like the car talk guys. They are pretty funny.

(Quote)
Steve K Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 7:33 am

These small companies may serve the purpose of testing designs that might be of interest for development by an established manufacturer. It is pessimistic but the ‘garage-startup’ model for a new car company (I know $400M can buy a big garage) just seems impossible historically. I’d love to be wrong.

(Quote)
Lunoir Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 7:36 am

#9. I agree.. On my side a 40 mile AER means I only use the range extender during week-ends. A 60 mile AER means I only need it twice a year (holiday family visits) As for a 30 miles AER means everyday i use the on board gen… If it were 60 miles AER I’d simply remove any fuel on the tank: dead weight…
NPNS

(Quote)
nuclearboy Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 7:39 am

What we need is our Govt. to get out of the way and make things easy on these types of startups. Think of the innovations that would happen. Surely we would be able to choose cool, light weight, efficient cars that would probably be simpler than the current crop from the big guys. Some would be a death trap for sure (no worse than a motorcycle) but that is the price of freedom. They buyer could decide what he wants.

In reality, the govt has so many regulations that all cars start to take on the same familiar characteristics. Unless this guy has super deap pockes, the govt. will bleed him dry and his concepts will be still born. Dealing with the Govt. and its lawyers drives up costs and delays schedules. Only the big can usually run through the gauntlet.

One bright spot is the motorcyle exception. Apparently if you take off the 4th wheel and built a trike, then many of the rules are lighted because you are classified as a motorcylce. This probably helped Aptera. I guess our govt. is keeping us safe by not allowing Aptera to put on a 4th wheel for stability.

(Quote)
Shawn Marshall Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 7:49 am

I’m not too Bright, but the future of (X)EVs seems to be all about the batteries, not the weight of the vehicle.

(Quote)
Jason M. Hendler Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 8:03 am

There’s plenty of room for competition, but his enhancement on the Volt sounds like too little too late.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 8:03 am

#11 Bearclaw Says: about aerodynamics. Couldn’t it be a flying brick as long as it weighs significantly less, being made of carbon fiber, still get better stats?
————————————————————————————–
No. At highway speeds, aerodynamics is everything. That’s why hybrids get better mileage in the city than on the highway.

Also, weight is not as much of an efficiency issue as you would think for hybrid or EV. The extra energy required to accelerate the car is mostly recovered with regenerative braking. Extra weight does increase rolling resistance, which lowers efficiency, but not as much as you would think.

What increased weight does do is increase the cost. Larger batteries, larger electric motors, larger brakes, etc. This is why most EVs have been tiny, like the iMiev. The Tesla Roadster is also a very small car.

(Quote)
statik Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 8:05 am

Gosh, just what we need…another player in the EV ‘concept and promises’ division. I’m so unexited, they can just keep the cover on that thing…don’t really care even a little bit what it looks like.

Just want to be able to buy one single EV…of anytype, from any manufacturer, that I can get serviced withing the electric range of my home.

Side note: I know it is not Volt related, but the Insight pricing is up on Honda’s website: $19,800

Of interest freight is only $670, seems decent…and according the the WSJ, they have 18,000 orders so far.

http://automobiles.honda.com/insight-hybrid/

Official press release:
http://automobiles.honda.com/insight-hybrid/events.aspx

(Quote)
RB Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 8:08 am

It’s great that a spirit of innovation still lives amidst the economic disasters of the auto industry. It will be a hard road, but I wish them well.

(Quote)
BillR Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 8:14 am

I think one of the problems any new automotive manufacturer faces today is just complying with all the codes and regulations. Safety requirements like air bags, bumper heights, child seating restraints, and more add a lot to the design process. Then add codes for headlights, taillights, etc. as well as for steering, braking, and other functions. You must also comply with emission standards. There are a lot of restrictions on your design.

Next comes the sub systems, like heating/cooling, wipers, sound system, defrost, windows and door locks, and the list goes on. Building a new car with no previous experience or supplier base appears to be a daunting task to me.

However, if a small company can find talented individuals with the right skill sets who are willing to work long hours to achieve their goal, then this could work.

However, there have been other small startup ventures that haven’t made it. Bricklin is one car company that comes to mind.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bricklin_SV-1

So to become more than a boutique car (50,000 per year puts it out of that category), Bright Automotive will need to embark on an exhaustive design process to meet all regulations, find suppliers to provide all necessary parts, and manufacture the car for a price that is competitive with the Volt.

Then from a marketing perspective, this new car must have all the safety, comfort, and convenience that the large auto manufactuers can provide, and with the financial stability that they will be around in the future to handle warranty issues and service the car. The car buying public has come to expect a great deal from their new vehicles.

All things considered, this seems like a pretty tall order to me, but I wish them luck.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 8:16 am

#12 Steve K Says: These small companies may serve the purpose of testing designs that might be of interest for development by an established manufacturer. It is pessimistic but the ‘garage-startup’ model for a new car company (I know $400M can buy a big garage) just seems impossible historically.
————————————————————————————–
Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla Motors, has echoed this. He is very happy that Tesla spurred GM to develop the Volt. He doesn’t seem to want to compete head-on with a major car company, and he is interested in licensing Tesla’s technology to a major car maker.

I think this model is true for many industries. Most of the innovation comes from small startups. The large companies then copy, license, or acquire the small startups. Most often, this is a win-win scenario for both companies.

(Quote)
CorvetteGuy Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 8:26 am

His story sounds like another car guy: John Delorean.

(Quote)
Starcast Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 8:42 am

#22
“His story sounds like another car guy: John Delorean”

LOL I hope he doesn’t try to raise money the same way.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 8:49 am

#9 old man Says: The 40 mile EV range is more to my liking, 60 miles would be perfect. I would almost never need to use gas.

#13 Lunoir Says: #9. I agree.. On my side a 40 mile AER means I only use the range extender during week-ends. A 60 mile AER means I only need it twice a year (holiday family visits)
————————————————————————————–
If 40 miles covers most of your daily driving, then a 60 mile AER wouldn’t be worth it.

With a typical driving pattern, assuming you only charge overnight:
Vehicle ……………… Gallons per year
Volt w/ 60 AER …….. 23
Volt ………………….. 37
Prius ………………… 228
30 MPG car ………… 380
20 MPG car ………… 570

So that’s 14 gallons a year saved with a 60-mile range versus the normal 40.

We know that it takes 8kWh of available battery to go 40 miles, so it would take 12kWh to go 60. The CEO of CPI says the battery packs are currently costing $1000/available kWh, so that would be $8000 for 40 miles, and $12,000 for 60 miles. A 60-mile battery pack would also weigh about 200 pounds more.

Bottom line: It’s in our nature to always want more, but if you look at it logically, extending beyond 40 miles doesn’t make any sense for a typical driver.

(Quote)
N Riley Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 8:52 am

Sounds interesting, but I would not put to much into it until it is being produced in those quantities as stated. Until then it is just talk.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 8:58 am

#18 statik Says: Side note: I know it is not Volt related, but the Insight pricing is up on Honda’s website: $19,800
————————————————————————————–
I remember you wanted to buy one of these. What is it that you like about the Insight over the Prius?

(Quote)
N Riley Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 9:04 am

#7 FME III

I agree. I went back and read the post and it goes along with what I have been hearing. You must understand that people in the media are not any more intelligent than the guy down the street or the one passing by in the truck. Plus the fact that some of them have the intent of planting doubt about a vehicle they don’t like for one reason or another. A reporter can be just as biased as any other person you might meet. Maybe more biased. To be a reporter you have to believe in something pretty good. If part of your “belief system” is made up of bias, then that could become a driving force to keep you going day to day. In today’s world I rank a lot of reporters in the same category as I do politicians. They are like birds of prey feeding off road kill. Or I could say vultures in the case of some.

A lot of educating on our hands. Yes, and it will be an up hill battle until enough Volts get out there to prove guys like this wrong.

(Quote)
David K (CT) Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 9:10 am

Dave G @ 24

If my daily work commute is 75 mile (’round trip) the savings would be 110 gals/year (204.6 vs. 94.5)…yes?

Although I may elect to charge at work and this would negate my preference for AER60.

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 9:18 am

An affordable E-REV (the Volt) got me intrigued. An affordable carbon fiber E-REV ? Tell me more…

(Quote)
tom harwick Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 9:22 am

#4 NZDavid Says: Carbon Fiber is great stuff, but really, really, expensive.
————————————————————————————–
The Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) has been working hard to increase the production efficiency and lower the cost of carbon fiber.

Everybody wants a practical energy solution that doesnt use imported oil. So far, the only one anybody has found that has been proven to work, and is economical, is nuclear power. But that is only good for stationary needs like heating and lighting. Electric cars seem to be getting close to practicality, but are still (at $30k net for a Volt) too expensive to purchase to count as economical family
transportation.

But any technology, no matter how impractical, is written up in blogs and the media with the statement “XXX Institute has been working hard to increase the production efficiency and lower the cost of carbon fiber”

You see this kind of thing for solar power, cellulosic ethanol, fool sells, fusion, and time travel. But it is not a law of nature that pouring research grants into a solution will make it practical and economically feasible.

If carbon fiber cars is really a good idea, how come this guy knows about it, but Honda, VW, Ford etc do not?

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 9:24 am

#28 David K (CT) Says: If my daily work commute is 75 mile (’round trip) the savings would be 110 gals/year (204.6 vs. 94.5)…yes?
————————————————————————————–
If your daily work commute is 75 miles (round trip) then:

a) You’re not a typical driver. Less than 10% of drivers have this kind of commute.

b) You should think about plugging in at work. As plug-ins go mainstream, if everyone charged during the day, it would wreak havoc with our electrical grid. But if we limit daytime charging to a small minority with long commutes, the grid should be able to handle it.

Is there any possibility you can plug in at work?

(Quote)
kent beuchert Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 9:28 am

Carbon fiber is never used becase it is “cpst-efficient” and we obviously know more than this joker, if he believes that weight makes a big difference for electric vehciles. We all know that t doesn’t. And we also know that the coefficient of drag for the Volt is just fine. These words are the typical misrepresentations of a company trying to attract capital. It’s rather disgraceful. And I don’t see any NiMH battery pack as being a lightweight affair. Does this guy even know the basics about batteries, or is he time-warped in the 1980’s, the time of the crappy EV-1?

(Quote)
k-dawg Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 9:28 am

I watched that Nova special when it came out on TV. Insteresting, but they need to do a followup story.

Another problem with carbon fiber (besides its cost), is that it is no where near as recycleable as steel. This is another anti-green feature. I have heard of some car companies using bio-degradeable plastics. I dont know if you can make a bio-degradeable carbon-fiber material? Any chemical engineers out there?

(Quote)
David K (CT) Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 9:30 am

Dave G @ 31 says: Is there any possibility you can plug in at work?

Yes, absolutely I can plug in at work. My company has even committed to installing a 120V outlet for me when the time comes.

I am little apprehensive concerning charging at work because it will likely cut my battery life in half.

(Quote)
Steve K Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 9:32 am

#12 Steve K Says: These small companies may serve the purpose of testing designs that might be of interest for development by an established manufacturer. It is pessimistic but the ‘garage-startup’ model for a new car company (I know $400M can buy a big garage) just seems impossible historically.
————————————————————————————–
#21 Dave G I think this model is true for many industries. Most of the innovation comes from small startups. The large companies then copy, license, or acquire the small startups. Most often, this is a win-win scenario for both companies.

I’ve worked in medical devices (among other things) and for companies from the gigantic to the microscopic. So, I have seen this in action. It’s not that large companies don’t have the people to be inventive, in fact they are usually more competent and knowledgeable than the people in the startups. It is the financial model that is different. Startups have access to venture capital that accepts a lot of risk (less now), which is not the business model for a large company. I’m not sure whether this is really the most efficient system, but it isn’t bad.

(Quote)
k-dawg Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 9:32 am

#30 Tom

And you need to throw in a conspiracy theory of how the steel industry is keeping the carbon fiber industy out of the car business, with all of its lobbying and regulations.

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 9:39 am

#30 tom harwick

Are you saying that only big companies can innovate?

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 9:43 am

#30 tom harwick Says: If carbon fiber cars is really a good idea, how come this guy knows about it, but Honda, VW, Ford etc do not?
————————————————————————————–
In my experience, once a company has become successful doing things a certain way, it becomes extremely difficult to change the mindset away from that.

That’s why so many ideas come from the small startups. It’s not that they’re smarter. It’s just that they don’t have all the mental baggage of having to do things a certain way, so they are much more motivated to prove that new ways of doing things are possible.

An excellent example of this is the Volt itself. During 2005 and early 2006, Lutz had been trying to get GM to build some type of electric car, but couldn’t get any of the other GM execs to listen to him. Then when Tesla announced the Roadster, that proved it could be done, and Lutz had the ammunition to proceed.

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 9:45 am

#33 k-dawg

I may be a ChE, but I’m lazy and I don’t know much. So, here is a link; http://eerc.ra.utk.edu/clean/xframes-AAMP.html. Research your own question.

Edit: The executive summary says carbon fiber-reinforced polymer [CFRP]appears to be the least environmentally burdensome material in 9 of the 14 impact categories evaluated, which include nonrenewable and renewable resource use, energy use, global warming, acidification, odor/aesthetics, and water quality (BOD).

(Quote)
BillR Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 9:50 am

I got the impression from the RMI discussion (see Dave G’s link at #10) that a strong, lightweight car could be more effcient and cost effective because you would have a smaller battery, smaller traction motor, etc.

Yet as far as efficiency is concerned, GM stated the following order was most important as far as AER is concerned: Aerodynamics, Auxiliary loads, Weight, Rolling resistance.

So with a light vehicle, you probably can do okay in urban settings less than 45 mph. However, at highway speeds, and especially climbing hills, we all know that more power is needed. So a small traction motor will mean compromises on the highway. Also, I am not sure how they will address the issue of auxiliary loads, but maybe there will be no cabin heating or cooling (except wear your jacket or open the windows).

Also, the Li-Ion batteries are supposedly 10% more efficient than NiMH. If the drive system from GM is also more efficient than the EV1 (less gearing, permanent magnet motor, better power electronics), then weight becomes less of an issue for the Volt as its regen efficiency is much higher.

All-in-all, I’m not sure that this new lightweight car will actually perform much better than the Volt.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 9:52 am

#34 David K (CT) Says: I am little apprehensive concerning charging at work because it will likely cut my battery life in half.
————————————————————————————–
More frequent charging will tend to cut your battery life, but I think LG and GM have allowed for the possibility of multiple charge/discharge cycles per day. If I remember correctly, LG is rating the chemistry for at least 7000 full charge/discharge cycles. In any case, GM is giving a 10-year, 150,000 mile warranty on the battery.

(Quote)
old man Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 9:52 am

#24 Dave G

Completely agree with you regarding 60 miles AER not being cost effective. My problem is the oil supply chain ripping us off at $4.00 a gallon really made my blood boil. And now I am commited to buying as little from them as is possible. I even bought a programmable thermostat and have it set to 65 degrees during the day and down to 50 degrees while I sleep. Combine that with the fact that I want to do my part to leave as green a planet as I can for my children and grandchildren.

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 9:53 am

#40 BillR

I believe it is possible to make a car that could perform better than the Volt.

(Quote)
rob Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 9:53 am

A lighter vehicle needs less power to accelerate, which means a smaller and lighter motor, power electronics and battery. Which cost less. And a smaller ICE, which also costs less. And lighter suspension, brakes, wheels, tires. The savings multiply…

The automakers haven’t played with CF because they are incredibly risk-averse. They have huge investments -billions – in steel stamping equipment and tooling. With CF that equipment is suddenly worthless.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 10:03 am

#32 kent beuchert Says: Carbon fiber is never used because it is “cost-efficient” and we obviously know more than this joker, if he believes that weight makes a big difference for electric vehicles. We all know that t doesn’t.
————————————————————————————–
While it’s true that lower weight doesn’t make a big difference in EV efficiency, lowering the weight could reduce the battery size, which could lower costs.

Carbon fiber is expensive because it is labor intensive to build. I don’t believe the raw materials of carbon fiber are expensive. If someone could find a way to mass produce carbon fiber cheaply, it would change everything.

To be clear, I’m not a huge fan of the Rocky Mountain Institute, but some of their ideas are intriguing.

(Quote)
DaV8or Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 10:12 am

Trade high tech battery for lighter frame and body… Hmmmm. Less range and it will still cost the same. Carbon fiber is ridiculously slow to manufacture. When you’re building cars at the rate of Tesla, that’s fine, you can keep up, but mass production? They would have to invent mass production techniques that don’t exist at this time and that costs money, lots of money.

Trust me, GM’s not dumb. They know about carbon fiber, and aluminum and titanium and fiberglass and all kinds of materials. They also know what it takes to apply these things to mass production. I think this guy Waters forgot some lessons of the EV-1 too, it cost way too much to build and make a profit.

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 10:14 am

Shawn Marshall 15

The heavier the car the bigger the battery. A breakthrough in lowering the weight economically results in the same performance increases as a breakthrough in battery development. Hence the Tesla roadster has an aluminum frame and carbon fiber body – tossing out he economical part in exchange for lower weight..

(Quote)
kent beuchert Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 10:24 am

A side note – I’ve run across the “Rocky Mountain Institute” before in the form of writings by its “chief scientist” Amory Lovins (they never bother to mention which scientific discipline old Amory came from).
I would guess it was from Scientology. His anti-nuclear arguments are embarrassingly inept and usually quite obsolete, referring to nuclear prehistoric times for his anti-nuclear evidence. And nothing is ever quatified, his arguments being mostly specious afairs in favor of crappy wind power, whose many deficiencies and high costs
completely escape his investigative abilities, such as they are.
The arguents here with their inaccuracies about EV vehicle weight and “inefficiencies” are right in line with everything I know about this strange “institute” in Colorado : the arguments are totally invalid.
It also misses several key points : any Volt contender wil have to go up against BYD as well. Even if this non-existent vehicle could best the Volt, it would still have BYD to compete against. And lose. The only efficiency that this RMI auto will surely have is the ability to avoid UAW labor rates and hire from a free and competitve (and consumer friendly) labor market. THAT would be their advantage against the Volt.

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 10:27 am

ThombDbhomb 37

You could rephrase that as only big or established companies are self sustaining, dividend paying, rock solid retirement plan supporting profit making entities.

If you’re an engineer there and you want to retire and send kids to college why rock the boat with new risk. Just keep believing that the world is changing just slow enough that you can retire comfortably on your same career trajectory. Take a few three day seminars in Cleveland every few years to keep up and be home on the weekends to see the kids pony league games, everything will be OK. Don’t rock the boat, and if some new changes become important someone else will take care of it, it’s not your job. Besides you’re the best a what you do and your companies the biggest, what could go wrong?

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 10:28 am

#46 DaV8or

“GM’s not dumb”

That must be why GM is in such good shape.

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 10:31 am

Kent 48

You’re absolutely right, new ideas are always going to be flaky and weird until they clean your clock and take your lunch and the board calls you on the carpet saying why didn’t you think of that.

(Quote)
DonC Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 10:36 am

Bright Automotive is not a pie-in-the-sky start up. They have good expertise and an interesting business plan. That plan calls for their vehicles to compete in the light industrial sector which means, among other things, that the vehicle under wraps will not compete with the Volt in any way, shape or form. It’s probably a van. So statik has another reason not to be interested.

Should be exciting to see what they bring out. Since the government has seen fit to fund the Detroit automakers to the tune of billions it seems reasonable to loan these guys millions, especially given that Bright is one of the few companies concentrating on the business sector. That sector holds great promise for electrification since the cost advantages of electrification will be much clearer to businesses than to the average consumer, who is much more attuned to acquisition costs than to operating costs. (Which is why we see a lot of not very well thought out complaints about the price of the Volt on this board).

(Quote)
noel park Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 10:37 am

#47 jeffhre:

I agree. I have often quoted the great Clarence “Kelly” Johnson, of the famous Lockheed “Skunk Works”, on his famous maxim of high performance aircraft development:

“Simplicate and add lightness.”

Smaller, lighter, and better aero is all good. But 2012 is not. I can’t wait around for this to happen.

(Quote)
Linda Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 10:38 am

“leveraging steel relationships” says it all, I bet all the big companies are held back by many such relationships in addition to the unions holding them back, this is why electric cars will come from small independents, that will be phase one, then these small companies will merge or get acquired by the bigger ones, think big fish eating smaller fish, some of the good ones will get baught by none car minded investor groups which will delute the product, perhaps to the point where the best products won’t win, but the ones with best “packaging” and advertisement will, think Betamax vs VHS, history repeating

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 10:43 am

#46 DaV8or

I can (and have) purchased a reasonably-priced carbon fiber bicycle. Those bicycle people got it going on (e.g., the Wright brothers). I think they are mass producing carbon fiber products.

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 10:44 am

old man #42 “I even bought a programmable thermostat and have it set to 65 degrees during the day and down to 50 degrees while I sleep.”

I’m glad to hear that, I wish more folks would make the investment. I’ve been advocating it since you were a young man!

(Quote)
DonC Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 10:46 am

#17 Dave G, #40 BillR says “GM stated the following order was most important as far as AER is concerned: Aerodynamics, Auxiliary loads, Weight, Rolling resistance.”

What is interesting about this quote, and also your comments, is that drive train losses are being left out. That’s interesting since those losses can have a greater impace on AER than either aero drag or weight\rolling resistance. You can see this from Tesla’s range chart.

http://www.teslamotors.com/blog4/

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 10:48 am

Noel Park

Funny you should say that, I’m about 500 yards from the spot where people camp out to see amazing objects flying out of todays Skunkworks!

IF you can’t wait theres always Aptera.

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 10:49 am

Carbon fiber is not the end-all. Take a look at this (carbon-nanotube “glue” for carbon fiber):

http://nextbigfuture.com/2009/03/carbon-nanostitching-makes.html

Will nanotube-based (as opposed to carbon-fiber-based) materials be far behind? Nanotubes potentially would be much stronger and lighter than carbon fibers.

Who wants to spend billions scaling up carbon fiber with the possible spectre of it’s obsolescence on the horizon?

My guess is that wide scale application of carbon nanotube-derived materials will have to wait for bulk material nano-fabrication techniques to be developed (maybe long enough to move ahead with automated layup/weaving technology for carbon-fiber, but then again maybe not).

(Quote)
Frank D Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 10:49 am

I’m glad another entrepreneur is competing in the electrification of the auto. I hope his company has access to the funds available from the Department of Energy as the Big Three do. This will only make better choices for the rest of us.

(Quote)
D. Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 10:50 am

In a conventional ice auto, aren’t about half a car’s total lifetimeco2 emissions released during fabrication? something like that. So smaller, lighter makes sense.

(Quote)
GLV Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 10:51 am

Reading the posts on mass-producing carbon fiber for the automobile industry got me curious…so, I Googled it…it would appear that the Japanese are already looking into this…and the Japanese Government is already ponying up the cash…the article predicts that by the mid-2010’s, mass-produced carbon fiber panels will be available for the automotive industry…in Japan. Looks like one more example of how America and American manufacturing are being left in the dust. I just wish our country would pull its head out of its arse and start taking the lead again.

Here’s the link to the article if you’re interested… http://www.motorauthority.com/report-japanese-firms-developing-carbon-fiber-for-mass-production.html

(Quote)
RB Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 10:52 am

WSJ reports today (in part):
AT&T Inc. said it will spend up to $565 million over 10 years on alternative-fuel vehicles for its corporate fleet, a move aimed at cutting costs while promoting cleaner transportation fuels.

The Dallas-based telecommunications provider will purchase 8,000 vehicles that run on compressed natural gas for its fleet of installation and repair vans and replace about 7,100 passenger cars with hybrid models. The company will deploy 800 new CNG and hybrid electric vehicles in 2009.
————
The initial purchase will be a little too early for the Volt, but if they follow the pattern of 10% every year for a while, Volts might be considered. (From ATT’s viewpoint, I don’t thinkt here is any cost saving, so it’s all about PR, I think. Volt will be even better.)

(Quote)
old man Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 10:54 am

#56 Jeffhre

WOW! you got to be REALLY OLD!

I also reccomend it to all. They are not that costly and actually pay for themselves in less than one winter. I get in bed while the house is still at 65 degrees and after I am covered the 50 degree setting is no problem.

We need electric cars and need to employ all that we can to keep the planet healthy for our children.

(Quote)
D. Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 10:57 am

interesting article arguing for renewables , but not rejecting nuclear energy complement outright.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2009/feb/20/george-monbiot-nuclear-climate

(Quote)
stas peterson Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 10:58 am

Gee this is so typical of Amory Lovins and his Rocky Mountain Institute.

It was his billion dollar B2 bomber body skins to save a few pounds of weight, that drove the price of the PGNV government designed hybrids to a million bucks per copy. And consigned them to the irrelevant dust bin of history.

This mass murderer shoud be in jail for starving several million Chinese peasants to death, with his cockamamie idea for backyard blast furnaces, and not free and trying to grift some more money from his worshiping loony friends in n the Clueless Ones government.

But knowing the fools in newly installed positions of power, he will probably succeed. Al Gore is …

(Quote)
RichardG Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 11:01 am

Interesting article about Ford’s Hybrids:

http://motorauthority.com/ford-builds-100000th-hybrid-suv-reaffirms-electric-future.html

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 11:02 am

Old Man #64

Well, I started really young!

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 11:03 am

On a side note; I just tried to lift myself up by my bootstraps. I did not get off the ground. I think I hurt my back.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 11:07 am

#42 old man Says: My problem is the oil supply chain ripping us off at $4.00 a gallon really made my blood boil… Combine that with the fact that I want to do my part to leave as green a planet as I can for my children and grandchildren.
————————————————————————————–
Yes, we all have emotional motivations for the things we want, and that’s a good thing! But when it comes to figuring out the best way to actually get what we want, then emotions just get in the way.

I want the U.S. to stop importing oil, for many emotionally based reasons:
• so I feel safer from terrorist attacks
• so that the U.S. has more wealth and influence
• to leave as green a planet as I can for my children
• to stick it to big oil and their obscene record profits

But when I look at the problem of foreign oil, it’s clear to me that plug-ins alone won’t solve it, not even by half. Long distance heavy duty travel by air, land, and sea will require liquid fuels. So if we’re serious about being energy independent, it will require bio-fuels from non-food sources.

When it comes to ethanol, the problem is that companies have been using corn for the last 30 years, so it’s really hard to change the mindset here. University research has also been bogged down trying to find the perfect genetically engineered microbes to enable fermentation from cellulose in a single step.

But then a startup like Coskata comes along and says forget corn, forget bio-engineered fermentation, we can do cellulosic gasification for $1/gallon. Nobody with the entrenched mindset believes them, so they have to build a large scale plant to prove it, which should be running this year.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-9928810-54.html
Again, the start-ups prove everyone else wrong.

(Quote)
BillR Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 11:10 am

#43 Thom,

“I believe it is possible to make a car that could perform better than the Volt.”

I believe it is possible, but will it be as practical and user friendly. Personally, I like AC when it’s hot and heat when it’s cold, and I like to maintain 70 mph on the highway, even when climbing a hill. If you are an Injunear, then you know we live in a world of design tradeoffs, and you can’t have a small traction motor, but yet expect to maintain 70 mph with a full car going uphill.

#46 DaV8or,

“Trust me, GM’s not dumb. They know about carbon fiber, and aluminum and titanium and fiberglass and all kinds of materials. They also know what it takes to apply these things to mass production.”

I agree. The base Corvette has a steel frame, but the Z06 and ZR1 versions have an aluminum frame. Some parts of the ZR1 have carbon fiber panels. GM’s racing Corvettes have even more of these materials.

They have used these materials, and I’m sure know their cost. That’s why they are only used in “high-end” vehicles where they can recover the cost.

GM has an immense technological know-how. However, due to legacy costs, high overhead, spiking oil prices, and now the financial crisis, everything has come together to create the perfect storm for GM.

(Quote)
statik Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 11:16 am

#126 Dave G said:

I remember you wanted to buy one of these. What is it that you like about the Insight over the Prius?
=========================
Well, this would be the ‘wife’s car’ so I like the fact it is cheap, lol. I also like the fact that most people are getting much better than advertised numbers in ‘eco’ mode…which is refreshing.

I have a $500 deposit on one…but I have to be honest, I didn’t think we would see the new Prius until the fall, and that it would take awhile to get one…the new economy is making that second part of the equation moot.

If the Prius announces pricing (and it is decent…like within 3-4K of the Insight), and I only have to wait a extra month or two, I probably walk from my deposit.

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 11:19 am

GLV

Thank you for the link to the article.

That’s a real insight. “The Japanese government will provide close to $20 million over the next five years for the project, and the University of Tokyo is also taking part”. Astounding, only investing $20 million to kick our – - – - – on industrial process for the next 50 years. And Nissan/Honda deny they are involved. If GM took that approach with the Volt they could have avoided a lot of criticism/competition.

(Quote)
Frank D Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 11:20 am

A good interview on CNBC with Bright Automotive and Tesla
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1001327013&play=1

(Quote)
Kurt Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 11:20 am

#10 – Dave G. – great post

I have much faith in Amory Lovins and the RMI. And I’ve posted on here before about the economies of CFRP when applied to an E-REV. It’s all about slashing battery cost. Nothing else technologically has to change, but all your other components can be lighter too.
Everyone reading on here is doing so because they have faith in new technology. And while it looks like the Volt is going to be first, best yet, etc. I don’t think we should rule out any start-ups, especially from RMI, whose idea came decades before GM’s, stresses efficiency, and whose development plans are always holistic and centered around an end-cost business model.
On another note – why haven’t more auto companies looked into lithium polymer? Seems to be doing well these days…

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 11:28 am

Kurt 75

Takes a lot more to be successful at mass producing cars than a cluster of good ideas. Time will tell. Maybe licensing some technology to suppliers or OEM’s would work too.

(Quote)
old man Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 11:29 am

I agree with all who state that start ups are the most innovative. They have the advantage to see that an idea is not working and turn on a dime in another direction. another advantage is that we listen to ideas from all and can accept that someone else has a better idea. Teamwork is real in a start up but very hard for a large company to pull off.

(Quote)
stas peterson Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 11:41 am

Disregarding Amory Lovins and his irrelevance, to manufacturing anything; he wil never builda damn thing. But he will get to dip into the government’s honey pot, knowing the fools put in charge,and that si the whole purpaose of this charade.

I see where the true believers here are already talking up his idee fixe for carbon fiber auto bodies. He milked the government for millions on his previous PGNV carbon fiber scam, and is trying it again.

I just ask y’all, can they recycle carbon fiber? I thought sustainability was one of your trendy new religion’s dogmatic tenets. Short answer is, NO! Not a chance.

There is no way known to recycle any carbon fiber materials. You see there is a teeny, tiny problem. You must heat it, to dissociate the glues. When you heat it, you make cancerous Dioxins, that are truly hazardous waste, however.

But they can burn it, in carefully built incinerators, that most greenies oppose building, to make CO2 and control the dioxins released, which cause Cancer, can be burnt up as well. All it takes is money, and LOTs and LOTs of fossil fuels as the fire must be intense. The Clueless One clowns can rebuild America constructing Dioxin incinerators for carbon fiber auto bodies. Do you have any idea how many must and can be built to eliminate some 16 million auto bodies per year, added to the national waste pile ?

(Quote)
Brain Dead Monkey Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 11:42 am

I agree. The Volt is much too heavy and not aerodynamic enough. Should have more aluminum and/or titanium in the chassis. GM is probably just trying to save some bucks and please the union (aka steelworkers).

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 11:42 am

#71 BillR

RMI’s small traction motor was an assumption. RMI has not stated the size of their traction motor. I don’t think we should dismiss RMI’s proposed E-REV until we know more.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 11:45 am

#48 kent beuchert Says: I’ve run across the “Rocky Mountain Institute” before in the form of writings by its “chief scientist” Amory Lovins (they never bother to mention which scientific discipline old Amory came from). I would guess it was from Scientology.
————————————————————————————–
From the NOVA future car program transcript here:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/programs/ht/tm/3507.html?site=22&pl=wmp&rate=hi&ch=4

AMORY LOVINS: I’m a recovering experimental physicist. And I’d been thinking about the physics of cars and why are they so inefficient…

Again, I’m not a huge fan of RMI, but some of their stuff is interesting, so I wouldn’t write them off.

(Quote)
Butch Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 11:46 am

Given the choice, I’d much rather support and buy a car from an American startup like this, over GM. GM has just too much bailout baggage now for me to feel good about ever buying from them.

I just hope Bright can get the car out in the quantities they are predicting. I will be very interested to see the reveal.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 11:54 am

#55 ThombDbhomb Says: I can (and have) purchased a reasonably-priced carbon fiber bicycle… I think they are mass producing carbon fiber products.
————————————————————————————–
Yes, carbon-fiber tubes are also being used increasingly in other products, like camera tripods. So it appears that simple shapes like tubes are already being produced more cheaply, which reinforces that the raw materials for carbon fiber are not terribly expensive.

But more complicated shapes like body panels are still very expensive, unless these guys at Bright Automotive have a new secret to break that model.

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 11:56 am

stas peterson,

What about grinding up the CF into pellets, shooting the pellets into molds with UV resistant resin and making lawn chairs?

(Quote)
stas peterson Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 11:57 am

i still want to know more about the weight/fuel savings possible in substituting the new Spark 1.2 liter 78 KW all alloy engine for the 1.4 liter iron block Family 0, engines currently planned for the Volt 1.0.

Do you think the weight loss in the genset might exceed 100 pounds; and the fuel efficiency might improve by another 5-10% when the engine is running, conventionally? or that it will improve 35-40% incorporating HCCI operation?

There was llittle mentioned in the release information at the Geneva auto show,about the new Spark engines. It said it was a new “family” of 1.0 and 1.2 liter all-alloy 16v I4 DOHC engines. It did not mention whether it has VVT and DI as well. I assume the Spark all-alloy engine is DI, as well as VVT, as modern designs would, but that was not specified. GM has been known to develop so-called “High Value”, ie cheap, engines before, that soon must be scrapped for competitve reasons . They could be doing so again. I also assume that it was designed with eventual HCCI operation in mind, but this is also an assumption.

Does anyone know much more about this new engine family? Do you think that GM would construct a new Factory in Flint to manufacture the old Family 0 engines, when it could construct that facility to produce the new Spark engines instead?

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 12:05 pm

Well, i’m no physicist but If I had the choice to carry a 50lb backpack 1 mile or a 25lb backpack 1 mile guess which one I would be able to carry more efficiently?

Like I have been saying from day one, there’s too much crap engineered into the car. A basic car is all that is needed, see my cut & paste requests below…

Just build my Volt Dangit!!!

No Power Windows
No Power Adjust Seats
No Power Side view mirrors
No Power Sunroof (Actually No Sunroof at all)
No Power Door Locks
No Power Trunk lock
No Radio (Remember that fiasco? – Get an iPod)
No Heated Seats
No OnStar!!!
No ICE
No Generator
All equals at least minus 650lbs for this already 4000lb vehicle thus MAYBE an additional 8-10 miles AER.

Make the garbage I listed as an “Upgrade” for those who want these creature comforts.

Standard Features:
AC
Heater
Defogger Front/Rear

Back to Basics Boys!

I’ll take my Volt with No Generator, No ICE, ShAkEn not StirreD…

(Quote)
rob Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 12:11 pm

Daveg – google fiberforge. It’s rmi’s CF development spinoff. Posting from my phone, so sorry for not including a link.

They’re measuring part cycle times in minutes with completely automated layup and forming.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 12:13 pm

#78 stas peterson Says: There is no way known to recycle any carbon fiber materials. When you heat it, you make cancerous Dioxins, that are truly hazardous waste…
————————————————————————————–
Good point. I never thought about the issues of recycling CF.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 12:16 pm

#84 jeffhre Says: (regarding the recycling of carbon fiber) What about grinding up the CF into pellets, shooting the pellets into molds with UV resistant resin and making lawn chairs?
————————————————————————————–
Hey, I need some lawn chairs. I’ll take one of those!

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 12:20 pm

The next material to be recycled: carbon fiber?

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/09/06/the-next-material-to-be-recycled-carbon-fiber/

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 12:22 pm

#78 stas peterson Says: “There is no way known to recycle any carbon fiber materials. When you heat it, you make cancerous Dioxins, that are truly hazardous waste…”

Stas often offers opinions, but his reliability seems questionable. With just a little effort, I found that there is a known way to recycle any carbon fiber materials.

see http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/recycled-carbon-fiber-tasty-less-filling/

That link says, “The exact chemical process is complex/boring, but the [carbon fiber] is shredded and subjected to pyrolysis. The fibers are then isolated and combed. The finished product is sub-aviation quality, but a lot cheaper. For cars, recycled CF may be used for interior parts, gas pumps, body parts or exterior mirrors. “

(Quote)
DaV8or Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 12:28 pm

ThombDbhomb #50 Says:

“That must be why GM is in such good shape.”

You tell me what auto company is in good shape. I’ll tell you. Hyundai, Kia and Subaru. That’s it. Everybody else is headed the way of GM and will be, if not already, asking their respective governments for a bail out. The Korean companies are up because they build cheap, low tech cars and are offering an innovative sales pitch during tough times. Subaru is a fluke. Sales of only one model is saving the company. Their new larger, heavier SUV.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 12:28 pm

Well….
The inevitable has occured. My wife’s car went into the shop for work and the parts we’re not availble till this Friday(Not a US mfgrd car). So we got a rental. They gave us a Prius. My wife drove it home, city street driving, and said it’s a nice car and she liked it. Today she drove it to work, freeway driving, and when she got to work called me and said “I want my car back, this car has no guts….”.

That was expected with her lead foot. When we picked up the car the rental guy showed us the previous driver got 42mpg. That’s pretty good and my guess is they “featherfooted” the drive. I will believe my wifes measured mpg rate at the end of the week. I’ll keep you posted.
I think that johnXXX guys website he gets on average about 44mpg and a yearly 47mpg.

Also, for the hell of it I googled some parts for her car, the hood for a carbon fiber. Non CF was $180, CF was $579. Strange thing is, nobody gives a weight comparison or Delta.

(Quote)
DaV8or Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 12:33 pm

ThombDbhomb #55 Says:

“I can (and have) purchased a reasonably-priced carbon fiber bicycle. Those bicycle people got it going on (e.g., the Wright brothers). I think they are mass producing carbon fiber products.”

You tell me which is cheaper and easier to build, your “reasonably priced” carbon fiber bike, or the same bike made out of steel? How cheap can they build a steel bike now? The bike analogy proves my point. Don’t even go there.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 12:37 pm

More GM news….
GM light duty 4.5L diesel V8 on indefinite hold, probably dead

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/03/11/gm-light-duty-4-5l-diesel-v8-on-indefinite-hold-probably-dead/

(Quote)
noel park Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 12:52 pm

#58 jeffhre:

If you can divulge it, where’s that? Palmdale? Edwards? Nellis? Area 51 (hehehe)? Or are you sitting at the bar at the “Little Alie-Inn”?

The old Skunk Works in Burbank is the site of a mall now. They have cutout models of a P38, an SR-71, a U-2 and a Constellation mounted on tall poles so you can see them from the I-5 as you zoom past. Pretty sad, IMHO.

Alas, I have about as much confidence that I’ll ever see the Aptera in any quantity as I do in the Bright.

#95 CaptJackSparrow:

Thanks for the link. How sad.

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 12:54 pm

DaV8or

Toyota to Ford: 100,000 hybrids? That’s cute. We’ve sold a million in the U.S. ( http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/03/11/toyota-to-ford-100-000-hybrids-thats-cute-weve-sold-a-milli/ )

Technology goes from exotic to common? Does it have to come from Japan or can US manufacturers think outside of a 36 month window?

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 12:58 pm

#92 DaV8or

We were discussing GM and carbon fiber. Your point (see #46); GM is too smart to pursue carbon fiber. My point; it is possible that GM might make a mistake or two. Many people think GM went awry for awhile. Yes, auto manufacturers are not in good shape. Finances aside, product offerings suggest that GM has not been far ahead of other auto manufacturers’ offerings.

#94 DaV8or
It is easy and cheap to build a crap bike out of steel. I’m sure you can go to Walmart and get one. For someone looking at a mid-level performing bicycle, carbon fiber and steel frames are competitively priced.

2009 Bianchi Vigorelli (steel) road bike w/Ultegra and 105 components $1,749.00

2009 Specialized Roubaix Compact (carbon fiber)road bike w/105 components $1900

I went there. Why not? It seems relevant to the discussion.

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 1:04 pm

Noel Park

I like that mall, I took my son there for lunch a few months ago but the chain restaurant we ate at was horrible. To answer your question with no further delay. Sierra Hwy and Avenue N in Palmdale has a spot where folks just linger a while until they see something interesting flying west .Back in the day it was funny to see carbon fiber birds fly out that the Pentagon swore up and down didn’t exist!

Hey is the fella from WI really your son?

(Quote)
noel park Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 1:10 pm

#99 jeffhre:

No, he’s not my son. At least not that I know of, LOL. He’s just teasing.

I worked in Boron for awhile, and we race at Willow Springs once in awhile. A number of times I have almost crashed while driving down the 14 craning my neck at whatever just climbed out of there.

(Quote)
stas peterson Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 1:11 pm

#91 Thonb

I specified that the comment about recycling carbon Fiber based on my personal and ruinessly expensive business attempts to recycle scrap rubber. Our factory since closed, used advanced pyrolysis to decompose scrap rubber tires, and we did look at recycling other organic wastes. So I unfortunately know intimately of what I speak with regard to recycling and closing sustainability loops.

Unlike many other eco -loons who merely cluck and bray and do nothing, my firm actually attempted to close the recycling problem on a present environmental nightmare. Like others, we failed economically, although the process did work, technically.

But Carbon fiber recycling is ten times as difficult. We had very extensive controlled pyrolysis and stack emissions controls to rival most, but there was no was no way that we were certifiable as a hazardous waste incinerator/decomposer.

Amory Lovins, unlike myself, is not an Engineer or a Physicist. He was born with a silver spoon up his backside, and has no scientific credentials whatever,althoufgh he fasinons himself as a self educated Natural Philosopher. A diletante using his family’s money and whatever he could grift from typical know nothing Socialist and Marxists idealogues, like Carter and Mao Tsetung, he has murdered millions of Chinese with his daffy ideas about “small is beautiful” and Backyard Blast Furnances, that he convinced Mao to order the peasants to construc, in their “Great Leap Forward” to nowhere. They produced no useable steel, and lots of slag instead of the food the peasants would have grown. When winter came they starved to death in the millions.

Amory simply went back to the Rockies and his and Chablis and Brie parties with the wealthy no-nothing loons and idealogues.

Now that they are back in power, he has emerged to grift as much as he can from the government’s coffers. It is surprising that he he is actually recycling his old scam, but it worked then, and judging from ther reaction on these pages the true beleivers can be sold the same Brooklyn Bridge once again.

(Quote)
noel park Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 1:18 pm

My 2 cents on CF. There is a reason why it is rapidly completely replacing aluminum in military and civilian aircraft alike. The cost to weight ratio works in those applications. For the same reason every top line racing car in the world has CF tub and bodywork, the technology having trickled down from aircraft. That’s leaving aside technology/cost (LOL) controlled series such as NASCAR.

All in good time it will trickle down to street cars, as aluminum is doing now. In civilian aircraft, it is all about fuel consumption. When fuel goes back up over $4/gallon, the same issues will drive it in cars. Wait for it.

(Quote)
Barry L Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 1:19 pm

“The Korean companies are up because they build cheap, low tech cars and are offering an innovative sales pitch during tough times.”

I had to laugh when I read this. Hyundais aren’t low tech or “cheap” in quality. That’s why they are able to offer industry beating 10 year warrenties. My wife has had a Santa Fe for 7 years without one problem. I’d put it up against GM in quality any day of the week

Have you seen the new Genesis Coupe coming out? Its beating cars like the Infinity G37 and Lexus in early tests and getting rave reviews.

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FirstDrives/articleId=137955

Anyone thinking Koren stuff is low quality or low tech is just 5 years behind the times. I wouldn’t be suprised if Hyundai was the biggest car company in the world in a decade.

(Quote)
ccombs Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 1:20 pm

I can understand the criticisms of the Volt, but they are obviously coming from a guy who worked too long on R&D for very expensive cars like the EV-1. I say thank goodness that the car has a steel frame and a good-but-not-otherworldly Cd. Let GM build a corvette or something with carbon fiber and a .15 Cd, right now they need a car designed for mass production. I understand where he is coming from, and hopefully in the future GM can introduce those efficiency measures on its standard cars. Right now, what I want is cheap, mass-produced, EREVs.

Just my 两分钱。

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 1:26 pm

Noel Park 102

I was gonna post that! Thanks for saying it better and saving me some typing. Good examples.

(Quote)
Timaaayyy!!! Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 1:27 pm

The era of plentiful, cheap high-risk capital is over for now. Dreamers and schemers will have to stay in their garages.

Now, if this guy can come up with a cheap way to produce and use carbon-fiber, he can open his door and come out.

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 1:29 pm

#101 stas peterson

Thank you for admitting that there is a known way to recycle CF. There is hope for you yet. I wish you luck in future business endeavors. While you had trouble using advanced pyrolysis profitably, maybe others will succeed. I’m not saying others are better than you. I’m saying that implementations and timing is everything.

Your first and third paragraphs seemed rational. The other paragraphs suggest a bit of bitterness. Watch that “idealogue” name calling. It might come back to bite you.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 1:30 pm

@ccombs 104

Well said.
Ditto here.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 1:34 pm

I see these carbon fiber hooded rice cars all over the place. Same with other American cars, Mustang, Corevette’s, Chargers. Where they get the $$$ do dump into their cars I’ll never know or maybe best I don’t. And I live in the Ghetto slums.

(Quote)
David K (CT) Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 1:37 pm

Barry L @ 103 says…

“Anyone thinking Koren stuff is low quality or low tech is just 5 years behind the times. I wouldn’t be suprised if Hyundai was the biggest car company in the world in a decade.”
——————————————————————————–
I have to agree. We bought my wife’s Elantra 5 years ago for $10k (left over at dealer cost…she was an office manger for a Hyundai at the time). She loves the little car and I am of course thankful for that.

The mileage is very close to 100k with absolute no problems. I expect it to go at least another 100k.

Of course my GMC Sierra to be a much higher quality vehicle, but it costs three times the cost of the Hyundai.

(Quote)
Zach Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 1:37 pm

Sure the Volt is built with steel, rather than carbon fiber…. but isn’t carbon fiber MUCH more expensive? The Volt is supposed to be an economical electric, not a Tesla.

I’d like to see Mr. Waters’s prices for if it were built the same time as the Volt. I can only see his setup being cheaper if he is *NOT* using the UAW… but even then, I doubt it’ll be much cheaper.

I kinda take that back now that I look more into it. I believe steel is something like $2/lb, and carbon fiber is like 5-8/lb. It would make sense to have carbon fiber.

(Quote)
N Riley Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 1:40 pm

#78 stas peterson

Well, yes you can recycle carbon-fiber material. It can be shredded down to small bits and used as a type of mulch. Other than that I don’t know of any other. And I was being “funny” about the mulch part. More has to be learned and studied about any new technology and I am sure it will. We should not reject anything out of hand.

(Quote)
GM Volt Fan Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 1:41 pm

Wow. If you think that battery technology is NOT improving quickly enough you would be mistaken. When lots of money and brainpower gets focused on a particular technology, things start happening faster than “the experts” originally predict.

Check this out: http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=215801893

“By fabricating nanoscale grooves atop traditional lithium iron phosphate material, battery cells could be recharged up to 36 times faster (as little as 10 SECONDS) instead of six minutes or more per cell.”

“The improved batteries also release energy more quickly, meaning they also could be used to boost ACCELERATION in electric and hybrid cars at rates comparable to gasoline-powered engines.”

“Tests so far show that the nanoscale surface treatment for lithium iron phosphate is as DURABLE as the bulk material, allowing repeated quick charging and discharging without degradation.”

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-03/miot-mbm030909.php

Folks, we really are at the beginning of a HUGE wave of innovation with electric cars. There is no doubt that electric cars are coming soon to a dealership near you …. LOTS of them … hopefully millions.

Cars of all shapes and sizes. Cars with all the performance and range you can afford. Hopefully, we are going to have NO COMPROMISE electric cars that do just about EVERYTHING that today’s gasoline powered cars can do. Super fast recharging, good all electric range, good acceleration, good hauling capacity, etc. It makes you want to get into a time machine so you can see the cars of 2015 or so.

(Quote)
N Riley Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 1:42 pm

#79 Brain Dead Monkey

“I agree. The Volt is much too heavy and not aerodynamic enough. Should have more aluminum and/or titanium in the chassis. GM is probably just trying to save some bucks and please the union (aka steelworkers).”
——————-

OK. I see where you got the name.

(Quote)
N Riley Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 1:46 pm

#81 Dave G

“Again, I’m not a huge fan of RMI, but some of their stuff is interesting, so I wouldn’t write them off.”
————————–

I have found RMI interesting also. But, I don’t remember any useful products coming out of it. I have followed them from TV documentaries, magazine and web articles for a number of years. Maybe something will shake loose one day.

(Quote)
N Riley Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 1:48 pm

#84 jeffrhe

“What about grinding up the CF into pellets, shooting the pellets into molds with UV resistant resin and making lawn chairs?”
——————–

That is a lot of lawn chairs per year.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 1:48 pm

#104 ccombs Says: Right now, what I want is cheap, mass-produced, EREVs..
————————————————————————————–
Yes, well said.

(Quote)
N Riley Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 1:51 pm

#86 CaptJackSparrow

“Well, i’m no physicist but If I had the choice to carry a 50lb backpack 1 mile or a 25lb backpack 1 mile guess which one I would be able to carry more efficiently?”
———————

Well, without being too smarty-assed, it all depends on how the two packs were packaged. If you know what I mean.

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 1:53 pm

GM Volt Fan #113

Wow imagine charging your cell phone, laptop, Ipod etc in 30 seconds. Good post, thanks for the link.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 1:56 pm

#113 From the EETimes article: “The improved batteries also release energy more quickly, meaning they also could be used to boost ACCELERATION in electric and hybrid cars at rates comparable to gasoline-powered engines.”
————————————————————————————–
Where has this writer for EETimes been for the last 3 years? Battery electric acceleration far surpasses gasoline-powered engines. Tesla and KillaCycle have proven this beyond any doubt.

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 1:58 pm

N Riley

Just a quick example, I was also thinking of light weight architectural panels for high-rise buildings, lightweight formable non structural panels for vehicles, vessels and crafts and other common stuff.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 1:58 pm

@N Riley 118

“Well, without being too smarty-assed, it all depends on how the two packs were packaged. If you know what I mean.”

OK, let me rephrase that…
A 24 pack of MGD or a 48 pack of MGD?

Off to lunch now for chicken wings and a Beer at H( . Y . ) ters…

(Quote)
carcus1 Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 2:08 pm

#101 stas peterson,

“….he has murdered millions of Chinese with his daffy ideas about “small is beautiful” and Backyard Blast Furnances, that he convinced Mao to order the peasants to construc, in their “Great Leap Forward” to nowhere.”
_____________________________________________________

The “great leap forward” was in 1958, when Amory Lovins was 11 years old.

(It may be time to back up off that keyboard and go check your blood sugar.)

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 2:09 pm

CaptJackSparrow 122 “Off to lunch now for chicken wings and a Beer at H( . Y . ) ters…”

Where you from…there’s no “H( . Y . ) ters” in the hood.

All else being equal I would think carrying a 25 lb load over a 50 lb would be a no brainer. I gave a heavy bag to my son when he was two and he handed it back saying no I’ll take that one, pointing to a bag that held nothing but a T-shirt.

(Quote)
GM Volt Fan Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 2:09 pm

120. Dave G.

It looks like maybe more people will actually be able to afford super fast electric cars like this Shelby electric car in the next 5-10 years or so. It goes 0-60 mph in about 2.78 seconds and has a top speed of 200+ mph. That’s so damn fast you might need a “G-suit” like the fighter pilots have.

http://thefutureofthings.com/pod/6586/shelby-ultimate-aero-electric-car.html

Here’s another article about this new battery technology from MIT scientists.

http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/41686/181/

I think this might be a big news story. They say this technology could be on the market in just a couple of years. I’m sure Big Oil and the Middle East OPEC oil sheiks are NOT too happy about this.

“The end result is the possibility of creating SMALLER, LIGHTER BATTERIES (because less material is used to generate the same amount of electricity). And by being able to recharge them in seconds, a quick trip to a local communal “power station” will provide a full-up recharge in the same amount of time it takes to get a cup of coffee.”

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 2:15 pm

carcus1 123 “The “great leap forward” was in 1958, when Amory Lovins was 11 years old.”

Lovins was obviously a precocious and VERY DANGEROUS child genius!

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 2:25 pm

GM Volt Fan 125

I don’t see the part about less materials being used coming to fruition unless smaller batteries are used in vehicles as when deploying these breakthroughs, it will only take a moment to fill up. If this was the case then a charging infrastructure to replace gas stations would be needed IMO. You would then plug in a cord the size of a fire hose to your EV battery and in a few minutes be on your way. Could work if renewables were used to charge up your site using supercaps, or a flywheel, or your own substation to receive grid electricity. Who knows what will happen with new innovations? Have to keep in mind the difference between energy density and power with battery technology. More power doesn’t take away the need for storage (density).

(Quote)
Unni Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 2:39 pm

#103, i have to agree with you because Hyundai is doing very good now.

I still remember back home in India , we have Maruti ( now Suzuki) ruling time, Hyndai came in and they started with Santro which is a small call and got a good share of market and forced Maruti to make cars like Swift which has done well in recession also ( yep they posted some 6 -10% increase of sales in recession ).

GM has to go through a lot extra : Japaneese , Korean and hearing Chinese and Indian ones are also on the way. Game is getting tougher and If GM has to come out they have to have great products ( not “good enough” which they make now ).

Even its wise to look for M&A for good EV players and market them with the mass production and network muscle. This is because lot of the new players will die due to lack of funds/marketing issues. Its better to catch better ones , feed and milk them (Note for management : Please don’t catch a bull, feed and try to milk – again you need to go and ask money, If its a bull make sure you are trying to use it as a work bull than preserve it for miking ).

(Quote)
noel park Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 2:41 pm

#104 ccombs, #108 CaptJackSparrow, #117 Dave G:

Me too, actually.

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 2:42 pm

GM Volt Fan

Perhaps this technology could allow Li Ion cell sizes to be larger, making car battery packs easier and cheaper to mass produce.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 2:46 pm

#122 CaptJackSparrow Says: OK, let me rephrase that…
A 24 pack of MGD or a 48 pack of MGD?
————————————————————————————–
Motivation is the key…

(Quote)
GLV Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 2:50 pm

jeffhre @ 126 said: “Lovins was obviously a precocious and VERY DANGEROUS child genius!”

Brings new meaning to the phrase, “Come over here and give me some Lovins…” Doesn’t it…lol.

(Quote)
Linda Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 3:07 pm

Battery breakthrough promises phone, car revolution

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5irTIYH7D3rtf50YhkIDYlm_lpVcw

Current batteries made of lithium iron phosphate (LiFePO4) are good at storing large amounts of electricity but stumble at releasing it.

They are better at dispensing the power in a steady flow than at discharging it or gaining it in a sudden burst.

As a result, electric cars perform best when travelling along the motorway at a constant speed rather than when they are accelerating, and their batteries take hours to recharge when they run down.

Until now, the finger of blame has pointed at charged lithium atoms. These ions, along with electrons, move too sluggishly through the battery material before arriving at the terminal to deliver their charge — or so it was thought.

But a pair of materials experts at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) say the problem lies not with the ions but rather at how the ions gain access to nano-scale tunnels that riddle the material and transport the electrons to their destination.

Their solution was a lithium phosphate coating that, like a system of feeder roads, nudges the ions towards the tunnels. The ions then zip instantly down the tunnel entrance and to the terminal.

A small cellphone battery can be recharged in just 10 seconds thanks to the improved ion flow, they report in the British journal Nature.

In theory, a large battery that would be used to power a plug-in hybrid electric car could be recharged in just five minutes, compared to up to six or eight hours at present. But this would only be possible if a beefed-up electricity supply were available.

(Quote)
Dan Petit Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 3:08 pm

I seriously doubt the Volt will end up at 4,000 pounds. Compared to the Malibu, add 375 pounds for the battery, subtract 175 pounds less the transmission, subtract an estimated 250 pounds of stuff that me and CaptnJack would not want on it as unnecessary accessories for us frugal types, and I would estimate it to be close to what a Malibu weighs before anyone is really really trying to cut weight, and, GM will get to that soon enough if necessary.
So, just another commentary which does not reflect the relentless efforts of a real set of projects having been underway for two years now.
Emphasizing “REAL”, as in
having real people ….
driving real Volt….
in real traffic….
with really really great test results.
Dan Petit Austin TX.

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 3:14 pm

#134 Dan Petit
Yes, we want something real…and real soon. However, it is still fun to talk about what is on the horizon.

(Quote)
Texas Tea Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 3:15 pm

Black Gold is trading at $42.88 at 3:39pm EST today.

Looks like the Volt can survive at these prices, barely.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 3:16 pm

#134 Dan Petit Says: I seriously doubt the Volt will end up at 4,000 pounds. Compared to the Malibu, add 375 pounds for the battery, subtract 175 pounds less the transmission, …
————————————————————————————–
Chevy Volt Curb Weight Around 3520 Pounds
http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/21/chevy-volt-curb-weight-around-3520-pounds/

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 3:22 pm

Texas Tea

Black Gold is trading at $42.88 at 3:39pm EST today.

The economy is crushed, stocks decimated, jobs disappearing and oil still moves up a bit, scary when I think about possible future energy prices. Look at the recessions since the 70’s and it appears to me that they were preceded by oil price shocks. Just a random thought related to getting off overseas oil.

NPNS

(Quote)
Jeremy Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 3:31 pm

hmmm. I don’t know about not being able to repair carbon fiber. I’ve patched up a friends painted carbon fiber hood with fiberglass and good epoxy resin. It worked out just fine. Now if it’s an important structural piece that’s a different story, but painted paneling it should be fine.

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 3:34 pm

Cosmic Log: Building a better Battery

Current 1st page, upper left center, headline on MSNBC news website ( http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/03/11/1831393.aspx )

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 3:39 pm

#133 From the linked article: Current batteries made of lithium iron phosphate (LiFePO4) are good at storing large amounts of electricity but stumble at releasing it… As a result, electric cars perform best when traveling along the motorway at a constant speed rather than when they are accelerating, and their batteries take hours to recharge when they run down.
————————————————————————————–
Where is all this dis-information coming from?

Yes, the Volt’s battery chemistry is optimized for energy storage and not instantaneous power, but by the time you add enough cells in parallel to get up to 40 miles of all-electric range, you have well over 150 horsepower available from the battery. No problem there.

Yes, the Volt takes 6.5 hours to charge, but that has nothing to do with the battery. It has to do with the amount of power available from common home circuits and extension cords. The current Volt battery can charge an order of magnitude faster than that. But as plug-ins go mainstream, daytime charging will wreak havoc on our electrical grid, so fast charging doesn’t make sense anyway.

The charge/discharge rates available with the current battery technology is more than adequate EREVs.

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 3:48 pm

From the article -”Ceder and Kang found a way to cook the surface of the LiFePO4 material into a glassy structure that let the ions move around quickly, as if they were traveling on a beltway that bypassed surface streets. That sped the ions toward the tunnels and increased the charge/discharge rate by a factor of about 100. The researchers built a small test battery in the lab that usually needed six minutes for a full charge or discharge. When the material was tweaked, that time was cut to 10 or 20 seconds.

Further tests showed that the tweaked material doesn’t degrade as much as unprocessed materials during repeated chargings and dischargings. ”

Sounds kind of like a LiFePO with a better cap…a superior cap…a, ahhh supercap!

More -

A PLUS FOR PLUG-INS
Kang said the technology would be well-suited for the bigger batteries used in plug-in hybrid electric vehicles.

“We think the plug-in hybrid is more proper for our material, because the material is quite stable and it discharges quickly, and you can achieve faster acceleration of the car,” he said.

The catch for that application is that you wouldn’t be able to pour in electrical power as quickly as you’d want to from your outlets at home. “Home does not have that kind of power,” Kang said. “We need more power. … The point is, with the battery, there’s no limitation. The limitation comes from an external source.”

The ideal situation would be to have a network of high-power electric charging stations, which would allow you to juice up your electric vehicle on the road much as people fuel up their gas guzzlers today. Ceder and Kang estimate that an 180-kilowatt power source could give a full charge to the typical plug-in car’s 15-kilowatt-hour battery in five minutes.
Breaking news that may apply to all of us here-ya gotta love it.

(Quote)
N Riley Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 4:10 pm

Good news all. I hope to see more good battery news in the days to come. Must be a lot of people, some of them even smart, working on battery development.

(Quote)
GM Volt Fan Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 4:23 pm

Yi Cui from Stanford who Lyle interviewed on this blog (http://gm-volt.com/2007/12/21/gm-voltcom-interview-with-dr-cui-inventor-of-silicon-nanowire-lithium-ion-battery-breakthrough/ ) weighs in on the new MIT lithium ion technology announced today:

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=better-battery-lithium-ion-cell-gets-supercharged

“The results have impressed some battery experts. “I think this work is a really exciting breakthrough with clear commercial applications,” says Yi Cui, an assistant professor of materials science and engineering at Stanford University.”

I definitely like this:

“Two companies have already licensed the technology, according to Kang. Researchers are not sure how much these batteries will cost when they hit the market, but Kang says they should be REASONABLY PRICED, given that it should be relatively CHEAP to produce them.”

“A123 Systems” has a co-founder who used to be an MIT professor. I bet A123 has licensed this new technology and is already testing automotive batteries with it. I hope GM is still working closely with A123 even though LG Chem got the battery contract for Volt 1.0. A123 is based in Massachusetts, so the next Volt version just might have a battery that was invented, developed and manufactured right here in the USA.

(Quote)
Dan Petit Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 4:29 pm

MIT is onto apparently another breakthrough. See BBC News, “Battery that charges in seconds”.
The focus is on the way that Li Ion battery production methods have “tunnels” which the ions must align up with before being able to “pass through” as a charge/discharge rate capability. Apparently, with minor alterations to current production methods, MIT has discovered a way to make “beltways” to funnel ions into/out-of the cell in far quicker time, (via computer modeling) while also allowing for a reduction in excess materials (weight) ELIMINATING DEGREDATION.
Dan Petit Austin TX

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 4:40 pm

The recent MIT “battery breakthrough” was supported by US government funds. Anyone want to complain about that?…oh crap, I got political….sorry.

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 5:01 pm

#110 David K (CT)

Hyundai Elantra? The Prius is better; see

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIDpCT1tOqE

(Quote)
The Grump Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 5:03 pm

I was going to post something, but honestly, this article isn’t worth posting about. Another piece of vaporware under an auto-shaped sheet – so what ? P T Barnum had it right – to paraphrase, there’s a Concept Volt sucker, a Fuel-cell sucker, a EEStor sucker, a Co2 emissions sucker, a Cold fusion sucker, an ENVI (Chrysler) sucker, and now a Rocky Mountain Institute sucker born every minute.
—————————————————————–
I don’t even believe in the Volt, really. I won’t believe it until I see a Volt for sale. Wagner has suckered me in quite a few times since 2006 with the Volt project. Keeping my hopes up just hurts too much – especially after the Concept Volt died. Godd*mn Wagner !!! May he rot in hell, stewing in his own natural juices.

I live in the wrong state – I need to move to Missouri – the “Show Me” state. Hopefully, the ladies at Hooters will take their state motto to heart, and “Show Me” more, lol.

(Quote)
DaV8or Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 5:06 pm

Barry L #103 and others like him-
“I had to laugh when I read this. Hyundais aren’t low tech or “cheap” in quality. That’s why they are able to offer industry beating 10 year warrenties. My wife has had a Santa Fe for 7 years without one problem. I’d put it up against GM in quality any day of the week”

My appologies to the Hyundai owners out there. I never meant my statement to be about quality and I typed too fast I guess. What I meant was the Koreans make low cost cars that are a superior value to others. My guess is that this is why you bought the Sante Fe, not because it was particularly the best SUV out there, but because it was the best for the money. In other words, the best value. I am well aware of Hyundai’s excellent quality reputaion that they have worked hard on over the years, however it is the great consumer value of Hyundais that is their sales success, not any sort of technological advances.

(Quote)
DonC Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 5:07 pm

#72 statik

There is a test drive report on the Insight at the NY Times web site. I’d post a link but it keeps getting deleted. You can find it by going to the Auto section and then looking for the test drive section at the bottom right.

The bottom line was that the reviewer thought other than styling, handling, performance, and safety, it was a fine car.

Seems that if you have to go with an outdated PHEV system the new Prius is the far better option.

PS: I’m usually a Honda fan because they’ve really stuck with their knitting so this verdict on the Insight is a disappointment for me.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 5:07 pm

#133 From the linked article: Current batteries made of lithium iron phosphate (LiFePO4) are good at storing large amounts of electricity but stumble at releasing it… As a result, electric cars perform best when traveling along the motorway at a constant speed rather than when they are accelerating, and their batteries take hours to recharge when they run down.

What a crock of shlt!
Lion bat’s, say a 200AH 3.7V, have ratings of 400A (2C) to 2000A (10C) for [http://www.thunder-sky.com/pdf/2008926101921.pdf]
And that’s for a cheap battery that is very common in the DIY Electric market.

Someone may have gotten theirs figures backwards in the sense that “Charge” current/sink is far slower than discharge. Charge is at best 1C but most commonly .5C rates.
Discharge rates go to 1C, 2C and 4C up to a pulse of 10C for an X amount of seconds. More than enough for fast acceleration. Look up “White Zombie” and the A123 bat’s he used.

Either someone was misinformed in the article or is a complete idiot.

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 5:13 pm

# 151

Not a good depiction of what happens in EV’s but some of the posts before 133 covered that.

Don C @150

That’s really disappointing, I thought Toy Motors would have their ducks in a row safety-wise.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 5:17 pm

A lot of concerns on how fast you can charge your plugin.

First thing we need to identify is what is the fastest rate of charge the Volts battery can take? It’s an amperage rating or C rating of the 400V 40AH battery pack.

Anyone know offhand? I know if you can use a 220VAC house socket it’s at least 30A @ 220VAC OR at least 16.666A @ 400VDC.

(Quote)
DaV8or Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 5:18 pm

ThombDbhomb # 98-
“It is easy and cheap to build a crap bike out of steel. I’m sure you can go to Walmart and get one. For someone looking at a mid-level performing bicycle, carbon fiber and steel frames are competitively priced.”

We were talking about the cost of mass producing things out of carbon fiber vs. steel. You just made my point for me. Steel can be very in expensive way to build. You can make and sell a steel bike for $250 and make a profit. Can you do the same with carbon fiber? My original point was that it would be dumb for GM to build the Volt out of exotic materials As Mr. Waters suggests and plans to build his car, because it will end up costing way too much for the avarage consumer. If you’re building Teslas or Fiskers or whatever, fine, go for it, but if you’re building cars that you hope ordinary car buyers will be able or willing to afford, stick with steel.

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 5:32 pm

#154 DaV8or

I know it sounds good to say I made your point for you. But I didn’t. If you want to buy a car with a Yugo level of quality, you can do it. You can buy a Huffy if you want. But don’t expect it to be a reliable, trouble-free commuter, let alone exercise bike. For the average bike in a bike shop, the thing regular cyclists ride, the price difference between carbon fiber and steel isn’t that great. So, I’ll say it again, the cost of mass producing mid-range bicycles out of carbon fiber vs. steel isn’t that great.

I think there might be potential for materials science advancements to trickle down to the real world. Maybe not tomorrow, but in-roads are being made.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 5:32 pm

@jeffhre 152
“Not a good depiction of what happens in EV’s but some of the posts before 133 covered that.”

That’s where you’re wrong. The one cell I mentioned is the median basis of what large Lithium Ion battery packs are comprized of, “Prismatic Cells”. Some use many medium cells in a series parallel config much like the volt and some use just a long series string. All packs are designed using the C rating for discharge rate of constant and pulse rate for performance and range. BMS electronics are designed to maintain cell balance to maintain the “Health” of the group of cells. DC to DC converters maintain other 12V funtionalities and the 400A/600A/1000A Controller manages your power to the AC or DC motor as well as some built in “two way” functions for regen braking.

You obviuosly have a “Misdepiction” of what happens in EV’s.

(Quote)
statik Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 5:56 pm

#150 DonC said:

(in response to #72 statik)

There is a test drive report on the Insight at the NY Times web site. I’d post a link but it keeps getting deleted. You can find it by going to the Auto section and then looking for the test drive section at the bottom right.

The bottom line was that the reviewer thought other than styling, handling, performance, and safety, it was a fine car.

Seems that if you have to go with an outdated PHEV system the new Prius is the far better option.

PS: I’m usually a Honda fan because they’ve really stuck with their knitting so this verdict on the Insight is a disappointment for me.
—————————

I checked the test drive report…I had not seen that one, thanks.

I’m looking for a car now to soon-ish’ so nothing can really be ‘outdated,’ when the alternatives are not available. This will be the “wife’s” car, so this choice in no way affects my future EV purchase. (=

(Quote)
Arch Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 6:03 pm

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/motoring/news/article.cfm?c_id=9&objectid=10561144

Take Care
Arch

(Quote)
wwskinn3 Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 6:40 pm

If we are looking at size and weight then how about putting an electric motor and battery in a “Smart Car” for local commuting. I have no idea how much mileage you could get but it should be high. Any guesses?

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 6:44 pm

@wwskinn3 159

About 120 – 150 Miles
http://www.hybridtechnologies.com/products/cars/dash

(Quote)
BillR Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 7:02 pm

Stas Peterson #66, #78, #101

“This mass murderer shoud be in jail for starving several million Chinese peasants to death…”

“Disregarding Amory Lovins and his irrelevance, to manufacturing anything; he wil never builda damn thing.”

“Amory Lovins, unlike myself, is not an Engineer or a Physicist. He was born with a silver spoon up his backside, and has no scientific credentials whatever,althoufgh he fasinons himself as a self educated Natural Philosopher.”
—————————————-
So my question is, how do you really feel about this guy?

Let me add that “Texas”, who posts quite frequently in the Forum section, thinks highly of this guy. However, once when discussing nuclear power, Texas provided a link to Amory’s testimony in front of a congressional committee. It was the most uninformed, rheotric filled, double talk, and non-solution type speech I have seen in a long time.

He talked about how more CAPACITY globally in wind and solar was added last year than nuclear (probably only a few nukes commissioned that year) and that distributed generation was more relevant (he never mentioned the energy source for “distributed generation”). He basically said there was no need for nuclear power.

He never once mentioned total MWH’s consumed, shrinking reserve margins, electrical load growth, retiring of older assets (power plants), or any other relative issue for providing a stable and reliable electrical grid.

I think his entire answer was in summation, use less power, rely on renewables and more natural gas fired plants, and all the factors that point to not only more costly power, but also one that will have volatile pricing, since the bulk of it probably will come from natural gas.

So although I am unfamiliar with his Chinese connection, I will agree he does not demonstrate the kind of intelligence and know-how to actually solve problems, rather he just likes to talk about them.

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 7:11 pm

CaptJackSparrow 156

Whoa, hold your horses. I was actually agreeing with you when I meant to say the scientist in the article had a “misdepiction” of EV battery function. See my post in 130.

(Quote)
noel park Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 7:17 pm

#159 wwskinn3:

I believe that Smart has announced that they will be building an electric version sometime relatively soon. And a PHEV version thereafter. I almost think that Dr. Dennis has reported on this at the allcarselectric.com blog at some point.

(Quote)
noel park Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 7:28 pm

#159 wwskinn:

Check out smartcarofamerica.com for a start. A quick Yahoo search will turn up several other sources.

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 7:52 pm

Tesla has a battery deal with Daimler and it has been speculated that they will be batteries for the Smart, or they will get the Smart contract at some point. ( http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123187253507878007.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Noel Park # 163, “I almost think that Dr. Dennis has reported on this at the allcarselectric.com blog at some point.”

Does Lyle ever have time to sleep. He must do everything a lot faster than I can for sure.

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 8:07 pm

Static

Hope you’re feeling better. Did you see this article about why Mark to Market was allowed to define an unlimited downside for bank shareholders called “Buffett’s Unmentionable Bank Solution” wsj.com ( http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123672700679188601.html ) Hint reasoning is not financial or technical but political.

(Quote)
statik Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 10:19 pm

#163 noel park said:

(in response to #159 wwskinn3)

I believe that Smart has announced that they will be building an electric version sometime relatively soon. And a PHEV version thereafter. I almost think that Dr. Dennis has reported on this at the allcarselectric.com blog at some point.
————————–
Yes, they have a electric fleet already in circulation fleet testing in Europe, and have said they are going ahead with production. I have actually seen a couple of them running here in Canada as well (they did some testing here as well over a year ago).

(Quote)
statik Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 10:28 pm

#166 jeffhre said:

Static

Hope you’re feeling better. Did you see this article about why Mark to Market was allowed to define an unlimited downside for bank shareholders called “Buffett’s Unmentionable Bank Solution” wsj.com ( http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123672700679188601.html ) Hint reasoning is not financial or technical but political.
=======================

I didn’t see that article…thanks for the link. I will say that CNBC has been playing the tar out of that Buffet interview, has felt like watching the same news reel over and over again.

I’m not really feeling it of late, feels like disappointment coming (after rally tuesday, lol). I bought a couple dozen put contracts on SPY today actually (SPY Mar put (strike 73) @ $2.25), to try and pick up a quick buck and get out ASAP tomorrow morning.

/we’ll see
//I am felling better now though…thanks

(Quote)
statik Says:
March 12th, 2009 at 9:06 am

#168 statik (me) said:

didn’t see that article…thanks for the link. I will say that CNBC has been playing the tar out of that Buffet interview, has felt like watching the same news reel over and over again.

I’m not really feeling it of late, feels like disappointment coming (after rally tuesday, lol). I bought a couple dozen put contracts on SPY today actually (SPY Mar put (strike 73) @ $2.25), to try and pick up a quick buck and get out ASAP tomorrow morning.
=============================

I’d like to take this moment (late in the thread, so as not to upset the balance of the force) to say the market did open down…and I closed my position out a few minutes ago at a average price of $2.67 (for a net change of about 20% overnight)…huzzah!

(Quote)
Sasparilla Says:
March 12th, 2009 at 1:11 pm

I wish these guys the best of luck and genuinely would like them to succeed.

If someone could demonstrate economic carbon fiber use and give us another choice in the PHEV market, then more power to them. The fact they’ve got someone familiar with the EV1 (electric vehicle produced previously) at the top of the program is a plus.

(Quote)
stas peterson Says:
March 13th, 2009 at 7:34 pm

carcus1,

Amory Lovins was born November 13 1947. He was there for not 11 years old in 1979, as you computed.

But maybe you earned your mathematics degree at the same non existent education institution that awarded Amory Lovins his degrees in Physics…

(Quote)
Reel$$ Says:
March 13th, 2009 at 7:56 pm

“per Waters still need $400 million in either VC funding or Department of Energy grants by June 12th…”

Yeah. Me too.

But we love the movies.

(Quote)

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts

New video: Volt drive in Detroit November 19, 2009
November 19, 2009 Detroit Free Press story with video featuring a Volt drive with Andrew Farah in... […]
srschrier
New Video: Volt Corrosion Testing November 18, 2009
From GM VoltAge, the Volt's corrosion... […]
srschrier
Th!nk picks Indiana for U.S. factory November 18, 2009
Th!nk picks Indiana for U.S. factory: _Link_ (http://www.allcarselectric.com/blog/1038564_thnk-picks-indiana-for-u-s-factory) […]
Jason M. Hendler
FIRST ALL-ELECTRIC APTERA 2e PUSHED BACK TO 2010 November 18, 2009
FIRST ALL-ELECTRIC APTERA 2e PUSHED BACK TO 2010: _Link_... […]
Jason M. Hendler
Any news about the NiMH battery? November 18, 2009
Now that there are new owners of the patent, is there any indication that they will allow its use for electric cars? Like many others, I believe that... […]
Desertstraw
energy requirments of modern electric vehicles November 18, 2009
does anyone know any credible sources of information concerning the electricity requirements of modern electric vehicles per mile of travel and the... […]
crubkings
30% reduction November 18, 2009
The Belgian governement decided that if you buy a car with less then 60g/km emmision you get a 15% tax reduction and you can write it off for 100% if... […]
filiep

Volt-Lite: Bright Automotive Building an E-REV

172 Responses to “Volt-Lite: Bright Automotive Building an E-REV”

Leave a Reply

Recent Posts

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts