Comments on: From the Collapse of the Auto Industry Shall Rise the Electric Car

By: Loboc

Loboc — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 14:25:34 +0000

I disagree with the premise that the collapse of some auto companies has caused the rise of the electric car. There is no cause-effect here. The decision to buy electric (or any alternative fuel) car is partially based on the volatile price of oil. If oil stays cheap, alternatives won’t sell.

The Volt is a political cross-over to keep the dealerships happy. With the complexity of a gas engine on top of an electric platform, the maintenance is higher than a pure gas platform. Dealers make their profit on financing and maintenance, not initial sales. GM cannot survive without dealers (sales). Do the math.

Coolness sells $40k cars, price is irrelevant. Nicely-equipped Tahoes and Silverados (and F150s and Rams) are around 40k as well. All this B.S. about Volt having to be 30k to sell is just that, Basically Speculation.

All that said, I still want a Volt!

By: Lev

Lev — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 06:49:44 +0000

# 12. I B Smart

I think it’s important to point out that power plants are more efficient at converting oil to electricity than gasoline engines are when it’s used for propulsion. So, while electric vehicles don’t eliminate foreign oil dependence, they certainly reduce it, which is a step in the right direction.

The next step would be our movement to achieve oil-independent sources of energy on a national scale, as has been suggested by people above.

By: koz

koz — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 23:41:26 +0000

RB #94

Glad to see some engagement of this topic, although I’m a little surprised there wasn’t more interest from others in this discussion. There is so much banter about Lutz inacurate tech details, old data, and complete swags that I figured some discussion centered around real current info would be worthwhile.

My analysis assumed 33% average BSFC for the ICE and 40 miles AER from 8KWh out of the battery. I also assumed losses downstream from the generator and battery are equivalent except for the generator energy that is routed through the battery (assumed to be 15%). My assumption that I’m most concerned about is 95% efficiency for the generator. Your guess at 25% total efficiency from fuel to delivered output may be accurate but it is not relevent to this analysis.

By: melee

melee — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 22:07:59 +0000

Economic problems leading to “alternative energy” and electric cars? Insane. Both are more expensive than the conventional alternative, and generally you don’t sell more-expensive stuff when there’s less money running around.

Technological improvement leading to a better way to do things? Of course. High oil prices? You bet. Government meddling in the maket? Maybe. Post-recession boom? Sure. Recession? Crazy. Just a bunch of unrealistic rhetoric.

By: Andy Crossett

Andy Crossett — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 21:27:51 +0000

The government interest in GM and Chrysler adds up to just a couple months of the cost of remaining in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I think the billions spent here are worth it.
Now if the government starts buying Green fleet vehicles from GM Ford and Chrysler, then the economies of scale of electric vehicle infrastructure can be jump started.

Then the excess capacity of auto makers can be redeployed to a world class rail system in most populated areas of the country!