Grab our RSS Feed

AND

GM Orders Enough Hitachi Lithium-ion Cells for 100,000 Hybrid Cars

July 3rd, 2009 | Posted in: Battery, Hybrid

Most people here know that GM has contracted with LG Chem to supply large format lithium-ion cells for the Chevy Volt in an agreement that goes out until 2015.

As we have learned from discussions with GM’s battery people, the company continues to work with multiple battery suppliers and is always looking for new cell technology to test.

In early 2008, GM announced that they had committed to purchasing lithium-ion cells from Hitachi Vehicle Energy Ltd., a subsidiary of Tokyo-based Hitachi Ltd. The Japanese company has recently developed very high power density cells that would be particularly good for hybrid applications, where large amounts of energy storage isn’t needed, just the ability to withdraw energy quickly in high power requiring conditions.

GM will be using these cells in their next-generation BAS+ mild hybrid systems that are expected to deliver 20% efficient improvement over the current system, and provide three times the power.

The systems works by providing engine off at stops, brief electric-only propulsion, and a more powerful electric motor to enhance engine efficiency.

By the end of June, GM had sold 8,349 hybrid vehicles in 2009. Besides the Volt, they obviously have big plans for them in the future.

According to Reuters, the company has placed an order with Hitachi for enough lithium-ion cells to build 100,000 hybrid cars beginning next year. Each vehicle uses from 30 to 50 cells.

GM sources indicate that this order is for multiple years of production and on a global scale, but nonetheless confirms GM’s belief that gas prices will rise and that consumers will continue to show growing interest in fuel efficient vehicles.

Source (Reuters)

Posted by: Lyle

145 Responses to “GM Orders Enough Hitachi Lithium-ion Cells for 100,000 Hybrid Cars”

Herm Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:48 am

These probably will have a lower cost that the nimh cells presently being used.. each lithium cell has almost 3 times the voltage so you could use 1/3 the number of cells.. potentially much cheaper. These new Hitachi cells would also work on a lower cost 10 mile range Volt I believe.

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009/05/hitachi-power-cell-20090519.html
RB Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:52 am

What vehicles will use these batteries? “Next generation BAS+” is which ones? It does not seem likely that any of the present offerings will build enough units to require this many batteries. And, who is this contract with? The old GM is in bankruptcy, and New GM does not yet exist. Strange things are happening.
+1 RB Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:58 am

this order is for multiple years of production and on a global scale
Maybe for 100 years? (smile)
Herm Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:05 am

I dont know wich models, but GM originally planned to revamp the BAS and 2-mode hybrid line by 2010 (Malibus, pickup trucks etc).. that probably has been pushed back but placing an order for batteries is a strong hint. Demand may be strong if gas continues to go up.
+3 Joe Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:06 am

GM is going on the assumption that gas prices will continue to rise, which it will, but maybe by not much as we think in the near future. Has anyone ever thought that maybe the Middle East may purposely keep the price down so none of these hybrids can take a foothold? The Arabs already make too much money from their oil and there is no reason why they could not keep the price down for that reason.
Detfan Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:08 am

The batteries will go into the Malibu. I would suspect the Buick LaCrosse would get then too in its 4 cyl. It’s unclear what “3 times the power” will do. Te original batteries in the 2008 Malibu and Aura increased city and highway mileage by 2 MPG. In 2009, with the Malibu and Aura highway mileage increasing to 33 MPG, the hybrid version increased city mileage by 4 MPG and HWY by 1 MPG. So if you triple the gain from 2008 version, you’d be at 28 city and 39 HWY. If you triple 2009’s version you’d be at 32 City and 36 HWY.

It would be nice to be able to match the Fusion, that is for sure!!
+6 BillR Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:15 am

This link provides more info on the BAS+ system and verifies 100,000 units per year are planned.

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/03/04/geneva-08-gm-announces-new-second-generation-mild-hybrid-syste/
Jim I Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:17 am

Or maybe they have plans to produce a NEW GM version of the Saturn Vue PHEV as a Chevy or a Buick that will get a 10 mile AER.

That, along with a Volt, would be perfect for our needs and cut our gasoline consumption to almost zero.
statik Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:24 am

Well the math is wrong, so either GM has lost its mind or there is a alternative reason for this kind of depth.
—-

GM has sold 8,349 (of which over 4,000 of these sales are from the now discontinued ‘mildbrids’ Chevrolet Malibu, Saturn Aura and Vue hybrids)…so that leaves about 4,000, max.

GM has ordered enough for 100,000 “for lithium-ion batteries for 100,000 hybrid autos that General Motors plans to sell from next year…”

So if your selling maybe a adjusted 8,000 units per/ year (and I assume they already have a supplier/inventory for those), and your now 0 for 15 (?) marketing and selling hybrids, you decide to place a order for enough to build 100K packs? On top of that, all your R&D has been cut/idled the last 10 months…so what exactly have you got coming that can eat up that many cells?

I’m not even going to suggest what I am thinking. But clearly something is afoot. The only other option is that it is just a GM/Hitachi PR spin on a total contract volume over a elongated period of time (multiple years). It may be the article that is warping it to seem like GM is going to get 100,000 packs dumped on their front lawn next year, when it is actually staggered.
Jason M. Hendler Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:29 am

This, more than anything else, should prove to people that GM is positioned to move many, many E-REV’s …
+1 old man Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:29 am

Just a WAG, but possibly GM has learned a few things from all the Volt R&D that can be applied to mild hybreds. All right I am the eternal optomist.
BillR Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:37 am

Statik,

See the latest video at media.gm.com

http://gmtv.feedroom.com/

GM sees crossovers as a big market. I expect these batteries will be used for these vehicles. The Equinox with the 2.4L DI gets 22/32 mpg. Add this BAS+, and that could equate to 28/34 for a small SUV!

This article on a Saab concept with the 1.4L turbo (think Cruze) and the BAS+ was rated 48 mpg.

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/geneva-08-previe-saab-9-x-biohybrid-concept/

So it seems that GM has a plan to offer low cost hybrids (BAS+), mid range (2-mode) and high end (Voltec) solutions to fuel economy.
Dan Petit Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:53 am

One thing I teach all of my shop owners.

The quality of your business relationships is the biggest controllable aspect for success for your business,
whereupon your business

**concludes significant and direct contracting**

with other quality businesses to ensure their commitment to you, no matter how large or small.

The more quality business relationships GM concludes, the greater the chances that all phases of business can be expanded with that quality.

Have a productive day.
Dan.
Herm Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:58 am

“3 times the power” means that they are increasing the power of the original BAS from 5kw to 15kw (from 7hp to 20hp). That will use a decently sized 20hp motor to provide electric assist, perhaps even enough power for hwy cruising.. the original BAS was very mild at only 7hp of assist, no wonder it really did not do much for gas economy.

Perhaps it would have been more effective in a tiny car ( sub 2000lbs) but a Malibu is fairly large.. you can probably get out and push harder

Dan, do these cars suffer from belt failures?
Joe Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:08 am

To me it means GM has something up their sleeve. With the relief GM has gotten, GM will make decisions with a clearer head.
+1 Herm Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:08 am

or it could provide GM political cover in case they cancel the Volt after disappointing sales in the second year?.. here I go channeling Statik
-1 sudhaman Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:09 am

yesterday i saw this news in the BBC and i couldnt understand. ITS better for GM to work with eestor ultracapacitors rather than lithium ion. that makes lot of sense and it can reduce dependence on foreign batteries
Van Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:15 am

Thanks Herm, I had been struggling to understand this thread. So the new BAS will feature a mild hybrid design sort of like the Honda and have a lithium battery. If the 20% improvement is over the total (say 25 MPG) then we get 5 vice 2 MPG improvement. Since the 2 MPG improvement did not sell (to much cost for too little improvement) if new BAS costs less than the old it might sell, which apparently is the plan considering the 100,000 vehicle contract.
Kung Pow Chicken Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:16 am

It’s about damn time. Superior Japanese technology to the rescue. GM is NOT a battery company and I think they finally are beginning to realize this. The leaders in battery tech are all in asia and will remain here for sum time. Good move GM, maybe, just maybe you are getting smarter.
+1 RB Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:20 am

After Prius/Volt comes eestor … as the world turns (smile).
carcus1 Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:24 am

As mentioned by others, I too would guess that GM securing their battery position for the BAS+.

Pink tie said in 2008:
“While Mr. Lutz conceded the system won’t get the 30% to 35% mileage boost that other hybrid systems get, he said it would be better than the 12% to 15% benefit in GM’s current BAS system.”

What are we talking here? Maybe 20% or even 25%? That could put the Malibu Hybrid with the BAS+ in the low 30’s mpg combined. If they can keep the price down in the $23kish range it would probably sell in volume.

The big question here would be the cost to upgrade from stock ICE to BAS+.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120457521368908461.html
+2 RB Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:24 am

Rather than EREV, maybe it is a move by GM to increase mpg modestly with a relatively simple system, until they can get moving again and figure out what they really want to do.

BAS+ does not seem to offer the possibility of a big improvement, but maybe it can give 10-20% as an interim measure. Don’t spend much, don’t get much, but at least something is happening.
zipdrive Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:27 am

That was a great link, Bill. Did you happen to see the third video in there about how GM has now closed the quality gap?

There is no longer any difference in quality between foreign cars an domestics brands.

GO CHEVY!

GO VOLT!
Herm Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:28 am

correction: BAS could never do all electric highway cruising, but it may provide assist even at highway speeds.

The Honda motor is 13hp, halfway in-between the old and new BAS.. the same concept except that Honda uses a thin pancake motor instead of a belt driven system.
+1 Herm Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:29 am

EEScam
Dan Petit Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:30 am

Postscript:

Insufficient respect for your potential quality contractor (large or small), who is potentially your business partner, assures your business relationships to become failures. ALL OF THEM.

What is insufficient respect?

Expecting free work/favors to be done for your business where no written contract/invoice that is inclusive of proper, reasonable, and appropriate funding being involved.

I have seen this happen primarily where one of the contracting parties is, sadly, dysfunctional from something like drinking or meth.
(I never return there). Large Automotive Service-related Corporations as an entity, tend to functionally resemble heavy drinkers that “can never make decisive conclusions” on smaller efficient scales.
This is often their own pathway for self-destruction of their own product lines, and, sometimes, all of those product lines all at once as they loose their control completely over the vast array of new technologies.
“For lack of a nail…………”
Dan,
+2 Yojimbo Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:30 am

Go Hitachi. Go LG. Way to power up those American Cars.
Now if GM would just start making some Voltec cars and trucks in Korea and China we will be good to go.
Adrian Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:31 am

…to very rich people who rather have a Volt than a BMW/Caddy/Benz. GM won’t move that many cars for ~5 years when costs fall to a MSRP of 30k.

Just saying…
+5 Nathan Algren Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:34 am

They may have to ramp up production overseas if Voltec technology catches on. U.S production is very limited and the Volt and other EVs will have more appeal in Europe and Asia for sure. Americans are very slow to adopt new car technologies, most don’t even know what a Volt is.
+6 Anacreon 4021 Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:42 am

That’s a shocking number, especially since GM executives don’t expect Volt sales to be more than 60,000 per year beyond 2012. GM must think Americans want more mild hybrids before taking a chance on a full hybrid like the Volt. Very interesting.
+1 Dan Petit Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:42 am

EESTOR, a small company about 7 miles from me, is not ready yet.
It seems to me they won’t be ready for a final product for many years.

We can’t wait for EESTOR, because the new green electric motoring public does not have enough long-term information on the reliability and safety of their product to even begin to trust their inclusion into our transportation needs for very many years.

It has taken me 3 years to become comfortable with the A123 chemistry (and working with their “developer pack” which I bought from them directly, 3 years ago), and, from the many news releases from A123 as well as independent and GM sources. I am extremely technical in comprehending these physical attributes of that battery, but it properly took that long for me, as at least it should for you.

EESTOR is not just a little bit scary at this point, due to the unknowns needed to be proven over time. And, even then, I do not want to be in a position that I only have to deal with only one companies’ patent if that patent is going to be used, from my perspective, as a financial weapon to make my Voltec vehicle no longer feasibly repairable at 175,000 miles.
Auto’s here in the dry south do not have the rust out problems like elsewhere, so, we can choose to re-invest into our well-maintained vehicles at these very high mileages.

This is why I like MIT (A123 chemistry) a lot. MIT refused to sell exclusive rights to their chemistry to anyone, just so that there could not be a monopoly causing a “brick wall” against Voltec (or other) development.
Dan.
+3 carcus1 Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:44 am

On BAS+, mpg, fuel price, and car price.

I would say the marketing “sweet spot” could very well be just above 30 mpg right now. Though most of us on this website want to see mpg numbers much higher (or no gas at all), the truth is that most car shoppers have to deal with compromise. Even at $4 gas (which is probably the highest number that most shoppers will plan for), a 30 mpg car is enough insurance to protect the family budget — as opposed to a 14 mpg SUV that’s a budget killer.

If BAS+ only adds a couple thousand to the purchase price and improves mpg to clear the 30 mpg hurdle for mid size sedans and crossover SUV’s, then it’s a choice that would make a good compromise for a large chunk of the market.
MDDave Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:45 am

This has occurred to me also. As alternative fuels begin to threaten the dominance of oil, oil is almost guaranteed to come down in price. Even OPEC isn’t immune to the pressures of supply and demand; they aren’t going to keep supply so low–and prices so high–that they put themselves out of business.

Also, consider how much profit there is in a gallon of gas. All you have to do is look at the record profits of the oil refiners and distributors, as well as the ridiculous wealth that many of the oil exporting countries have amassed, and you can see that their profit makes up a significant amount of the cost to the consumer. If faced with serious competition from alternative energy sources, those companies and countries could reduce their profits and still make a considerable amount of money. Some might even be able to loose money for a short time if that’s what it took to beat back a new and surging alternative energy market.

The one advantage that alternative energy supplies have is that they are renewable or their reserves are enormous, while the amount of oil that can be dug from the ground is finite. Although that is one aspect of supply that the oil industry doesn’t control, there is still a massive amount of oil out there and more to be discovered. Enough that oil will most likely dominate for several decades or more, so hoping that peak oil is going to solve the problems of oil’s dominance any time soon is probably not realistic.

The bottom line is that the price of oil is artificially high right now, and any assumption that it will continue to increase in the future is based—at least partly—on the idea that there will be no competition (or other economic factors) to knock the price down. If the dominance of oil were truly threatened by reduced demand caused by alternative energy sources, I wouldn’t’ be surprised to see the price of oil fall through the floor to a level that no alternative energy source could compete with. How many people will pay a premium for an electric car if gas is $l.00 a gallon or less?
+3 Green Damn Youth Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:54 am

I thought LG was an exclusive distributor for GM battery tech. This will not go over well with the Korean Government.
-7 ThombDBhomb Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:56 am

Maybe GM can “flip” those batteries to other automakers.
+1 MarkinWI Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:57 am

“In What Vehicles” is the million dollar question. We’ve been getting hints for a few months that there will be some changes in the vehicle line-up. First Detroit’s agreement with Obama on new CAFE standards. Then Fritz’s vague comments about new models that will blow our socks off. Next, they kill off production of the current Malibu and VUE hybrids. Now, a concrete order, although in quantites that seem low if meant for “global” consumption, and for an uncertain number of years. Is that 100,000 per year Lyle, or 100,000 for the whole contract?
+1 Jacko Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:08 am

That order is Off The Wall !

A Thriller of an order.

More GM More…
+2 Denny Crane Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:17 am

It sure pays to be a lawyer for Chrysler or GM these days. These guys are getting rich. I mean super RICH. The feds are doling out tens of million$ per month to these lawyers. Their personal bank accounts are overflowing. And this will last for years, at least 10 years for GM lawyers who are scheduled to receive hundreds of millions of your taxpayer dollars. America is a great great country. I love this country.
+1 Rob Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:27 am

Stray thought/conjecture: A couple of GM vehicles are going to be getting BAS+ as standard equipment. Remember that much tougher CAFE requirements are coming quickly (among other things, the E85 loophole that lets flexfuel trucks count as 80mpg vehicles is being closed), and the Volt probably isn’t going to have high enough volumes to offset the 50% of GM’s business that is light trucks…

Maybe it’s better to lose a little money on 100,000 cars a year to retain the ability to sell several million trucks (which would be a very “Old GM” sort of thing to do.)
+2 CS Guy Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:30 am

If GM was smart they’d look into the psychology of their car sales staff at all those dealers across the country as well as the buyers.

Salespeople look for a hook to get you to buy one product over another and keep pounding that nail until a simple minded prospect gives in. The tactic they have used to sell GM cars so far goes like this: you could buy that hybrid over there but it’s like 2 grand MORE than this model over here – but it’s the same car – so don’t you think you should get the cheaper one? Ok, let’s sign the papers on that NON-HYBRID model. Thank you Mr. Customer (then under their breath “dumb_a_s_s”).

This partly accounts for the pitiful numbers of hybrid sales. Also to blame is the crap “mild” hybrid that doesn’t much help the gas mileage. With (for instance) 25 MPG versus 24 MPG but with a $2k or $3k price difference a customer would have to really, really want the hybrid and the numbers show that very few GM buyers do so far. 10% MPG improvement is, I believe, nothing in the buyers mind if it comes with such a high price penalty – it does not add enough to the value equation.

BAS+ is supposed to increase mileage by 20%. That may carry some weight. With that, here’s a scenario. If you have 2 cars on the lot, straight ICE and hybrid, and the ICE getting 34 MPG we add 20% to get the BAS+ hybrids mileage = 40.8 MPG. Now that’s a difference, at least psychologically. We’re going from the “thirties” to the “forties” and that is the way people are going to think about it.

So, GM needs to exert a little more control over how the salespeople are pitching/selling these vehicles. And there should be signage all over the dealership that clearly explains the technology and its benefits. This tackles both problems.

Of course, GM could just take my idea and put Voltec in all its vehicles but it’s clear to me that they lack the vision to do that right now.

- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – -
=D~~NO PLUG=NO SALE!
Electric cars + Nuclear Power 40% + Geothermal/Hydro 10% + Solar and Wind 50% + (Coal/Gas/Fossil Fuels 0%) = American Energy Independence and Environment Protection
+2 sheet4brains Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:31 am

These batteries will be going to the European and Asia markets. Under no circumstance can GM sell that many hybrids in the USA.

Sorry, but all these batteries will stay overseas fellas.
+2 Rick W Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:34 am

I am sure these new advanced batteries are earmarked for the European market. The USA will be quite happy with their existing NiMH batteries. These would be massive overkill for the American market.
+2 Van Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:44 am

Sounds right. Perhaps its the technology for GM to meet the new Cafe regulations as well.
-2 Nelson Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:54 am

GM better have ordered 100,000 plugs to go into those hybrids as well or they’ll be sitting on dealer lots like their SUV’s.

GM Please remember.
NPNS = NO PLUG NO SALE
+2 Mike-o-Matic Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:55 am

<<< Zing! >>>
Thomas Gilling Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:13 am

The old GM will come out of bankcrupsy one day and the new GM will come in October-November timeframe. Patience is a virtue.
Mike D Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:22 am

10 years from now electric cars won’t require premium $$$, gas would have to be alot less than $1.00 a gallon in 10 years for it to actually cost less to buy gas vs charging. Then there’s all the oil changes. Electric is the future IMHO, regardless
Noel Park Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:23 am

Note the excellent link provided by BillR at #6. I think that it answers a lot of these questions.

I have been very critical of the BAS, for all of the reasons cited by so many of you above. Still, if you think about one of these mated to a 1.4 turbo in a Cruze, hopefully with a 6 speed automatic, something really good might happen.

Or how about a BAS Spark? Remember when the Metro used to be rated at 50 mpg, the highest mileage car in the U.S. at the time?

Automobile magazine did a test of the BAS Malibu several months ago. They noted that the mileage increase was weak, but the tax credit just about paid for the cost of the option. They also begged GM to use the 6 speed automatic in place of the “antiquated” 4 speed. The Malibu I-4 with the BAS got almost exactly the same mileage as the Malibu with the optional 6 speed, if memory serves.
Tagamet Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:24 am

How did you determine how much the Govt is paying lawyers?
Be wealthy,
Tagamet
NPNS
DonC Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:31 am

Ditto Van’s comment.
-4 DonC Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:39 am

Q: How did you determine how much the Govt is paying lawyers?
A: Take what the service is worth and multiply by 6pi.

For bankers it’s a much much much larger number ….

More seriously, he does have a point. Even after the new GM emerges there will be the old GM which will still be in bankruptcy. As with Chrysler, these proceedings will be full employment acts for the bankruptcy bar. There will still be a substantial number of assets remaining in the bankruptcy, and the lawyers will spend enormous amounts of time arguing over all kinds of things. Not to mention endless conferences. Thankfully the government won’t be paying for this though.
+1 CDAVIS Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:43 am

______________________________________________________
Does it make sense to replace the BAS power train with a Volt Basic power train?

As some other commenters have suggested, those Hitachi batteries are likely scheduled to be used for the BAS Hybrid power train.

I’m not excited about the “improved” BAS power train. The improved BAS system still incorporates a Rube Goldbergish mechanical system of belts and belt tensioners (two of them!) to link the electric motor to the ICE. Mechanical belt tensioners have a strong history of being THE weak link in any mechanical system that they are designed into.

The Prius PSD (Power Split Device) was developed by Toyota ~17 years ago specifically to to eliminate the need of unreliable belts and belt tensioners.

A few post threads back, I made a proposal that GM consider doing away with the standard ICE power train for future GM subcompacts and instead use a “Volt Basic” power train. I hereby propose that GM consider the same thing with regards to the BAS power train; KILL the BAS power train and instead utilize a Volt Basic power train.

But what would GM the do with those Hitachi batteries scheduled for 100,000 BAS Hybrid cars? Answer: Use them in a lower capacity t-battery to power Volt Basic power trains.

Below is a repost of my prior comment post proposing a Volt Basic.

(just substitute the words “standard ICE” with “BAS”):
—

REPOST………………….

Kill the standard ICE power train…don’t make it an option.

Power Train Options:
1) Voltec Basic (small battery)
2) Voltec Plug-In (large battery)

Design all new future GM compact cars to have the Voltec power train whereas the upgrade option for those cars is “Plug-In” (a higher capacity t-battery).

Voltec Basic (small battery):
A Voltec Basic power train would be the exact power train platform as the Voltec Chevy Volt power train but with a much smaller battery (just large enough to serve as a buffer). Therefore a Voltec Basic would always be running in Range Extension mode and have no plug. A Voltec Basic power train would still be capable of the very high Chevy Volt RE mpg (~48mpg ) which is better than if being powere by a standard ICE setup. Because battery capaicty is the major cost of a Voltec Plug-In, the much small battery capacity of the Voltec Basic would be much lower in cost.

Voltec Plug-In (large battery):
The Voltec Plug-In would only be different from the Voltec Basic in battery size and plug. For production efficiency, economy of scale benefits, and the benefit of a consumer being able to later upgrade from a Voltec Basic to a Voltec Plug-In, the Voltec power train would be identical except for the storage capacity of the t-battery. Make it possible for a guy with Voltec Basic to visit the dealership and easily upgrade to a Voltec Plug-In simply by removing the smaller capacity t-battery and replacing it with the larger capacity t-battery.

The above approach has other benefits:

1) Excellent PR for GM

2) CAFÉ friendly

3) Because of economy of scale, the Voltec Plug-In will be quicker come down in cost.

4) Better engineering/development efficiencies because a car model won’t have to both support Voltec & old-school standard ICE.

5) It better opens the door for a future VOLTEC BEV power train option. It’s just a matter of time before battery capacity and battery cost improves to the point that it will make sense for GM to offer a higher capacity t-battery that allows consumers the ability to go 150+ miles BEV. This will open the door for GM to offer a Voltec BEV as a power train option; the exact same Voltec power train sans ICE RE.

6) The Voltec Basic / Voltec Plug-In approach is very KISS and allows GM to better consolidate and focus its resources to survive the profound challenges that automakers will soon face in the quickly evolving Electric Car Revolution.
-1 tom gray Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:43 am

I assume GM has an out clause in their contract, should some new, revolutionary new energy storage technology come along in the interim, such as EEStor, etc that would make the Hitachi cells (and hybrids in general) obsolete.
+1 Tagamet Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:45 am

Very good article, BillR. Thanks.
The curve showing exactly when the electric is powering is especially interesting. Now if it just had a plug….(I know a plug doesn’t fit that tech, but it’s the principle).
Be well
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!***************NPNS
+3 Luke Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:50 am

Disclaimer: The following message was written by a peevish geek.

Voltage != Power

Peeve: I really wish the people who try to market cordless power tools would stop trying to convince me that more voltage means more power. More voltage could possibly mean more power, but it’s only half the story. The volt is a unit of force, an amp is a unit of flow, and the watt is the unit of power.

DC Watts = Voltage * Amps

AC Power is slightly more complicated because of the power factor (where some devices give power back to the source as the current alternates), but if you’re trying to figure out how hot your wire will get, multiplying measured-volts times measured-amps will get you there.
+3 Zack Lee Wright Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:52 am

Sorry to inform you but GM has set aside at least $1.2 billion of taxpayer dollars to fund the lawyers. They are indeed going to be quite wealthy after they make a mini career on this. Only in America.]
-2 DonC Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:52 am

“The only other option is that it is just a GM/Hitachi PR spin on a total contract volume over a elongated period of time (multiple years).”

Seems fairly clear that this is exactly what the article says. An order for 100K units starting in 2010. That’s a fairly standard way of announcing these things.
Tagamet Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:53 am

Thanks, DonC,
As long as they don’t take Pi out to 14 decimal places…. As Shakespeare said “The first thing we do is kill all the lawyers” (was that Henry 8th?).
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!
Zack Lee Wright Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:57 am

Your brain is fixated on series-hybrid. The fact of the matter is that the parallel-hybrid will be the sales leader for GM for many years before (or if) Voltec actually becomes an option that consumers are willing to pay extra for. Tighten up those screws buddy ro.
Zack Lee Wright Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:59 am

Hitachi cells will never become obsolete, they are future proof. We are talking HITACHI here, not some American company. Please adjust your screws, some appear loose.
CDAVIS Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:02 am

_____________________________________________________
Zack Said:
“….Tighten up those screws buddy…”
—-
Funny…that is exactly what another poster (was that you?) said last time I suggested the Volt Basic idea.

Good ideas are often initially labeled screwy…
____________________________________________________
DonC Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:07 am

I think most of that very large number is primarily for the 363 sale. Remember that the debtor in possession has to pay, as an administrative expense, the attorneys fees for all creditor committees, and most of those committees will go away after the 363 sale. Only in bankruptcy …

But you are right that bankruptcy generates eye-popping legal fees. This is in fact a major reason why it’s important to get out of bankruptcy as quickly as possible and why some (including me) preferred a restructuring outside of the bankruptcy. It seems silly to reduce the pie by so much by arguing about the size of the slices. Lawyers are very effective at doing this because they are quite good at arguing and very poor at solving.
DonC Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:09 am

Very nice article. You’re on a roll today!
guido Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:19 am

Is that you, Tito ?
Dale Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:20 am

CS guy – you are right , but don’t forget the emotional part of buying a car. When a straight ICE in the LTZ trim level sits next to a Hybrid the buyer is going to want the nice looking car with all of the amenities. GM has never figured this out. They only offer Hybrid models in low end trim levels.

Just give me voltec in the new Equinox – I will take 30 miles before the ice kicks in and my family will be driving pure electric 95% of the time
-2 statik Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:20 am

I know that is how it works, but I don’t think it is clear, as a matter of fact it is already being misrepresented at several media outlets:

Here is a example from autoblog yesterday:

“Hitachi will be supplying the batteries for General Motor’s second-generation mild hybrid system that debuts late next year for 2011 model year vehicles. GM has placed an order for enough cells to support 100,000 hybrid vehicles a year”

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/07/02/hitachi-to-multiply-lithium-battery-production-by-a-factor-of-70/

That really isn’t what this deal is according to your interpretation (and how I see it likely being myself), it is 100K over the life of the contract term (whatever that is). If GM was intending to produce/sell 100,000 vehicles per year, starting late next year (as autoblog interprets the release), they would have to order the whole 100,000 up front, as production would be 8K/month, and lead time has to be at least 9 months for something like this.

I’m not disagreeing with you at all…I’m just saying it is a little obtuse on the facts.

…they might as well announce a contract for 10 million batteries if it is open ended like that, with no specific ‘hard’ orders to actually be produced at a set time, it has about the same value to us.
+1 statik Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:34 am

Funny Herm
—-

Serious note though…ongoing production levels once GM is at full capacity and the initial 50,000-60,000 (?) of orders/stock has been filled is a still very big question to me (and likely GM as well).

I’ve said this before, but you can see it playing out as a big question mark even here on the site. We probably have 5 times the readership here at GM-Volt compared to last year, but after rocketing to 40K last august, the ‘waiting list’ has only moved 8,000 since…and that is just writing your name down, not a deposit.

I personally, originally thought there was a decent size demand for premium EV vehicles. Maybe that was a product of my intense desire to buy one, that I applied that emotion to others, and that may not be reality. In this economic environment…and with the number of players ‘apparently’ now coming to market, I’m becoming less confident.

I’m not saying that as if it is fact, or even a likely outcome…it is just that is in the back of my mind now whenever we talk about the ‘future’. (And I don’t perceive that as just a Volt/GM issure, but for everyone in the segment…at least under we can get these cars costs structures under control)
+1 TEXMEX Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:58 am

CDAVIS,
Your idea is indeed screwy BIG TIME!

I started writing a comment saying it was ridiculous but after reading your idea a second time it began to make good sense to me.

But, there is no way GM would step outside of the box that far and do something as radical as you are proposing. Quick strategy change is not possible for a large organization like GM irrespective of if close analysis of your Volt Basic idea made a strong business case.

Adopting the series hybrid system represents sun-setting the long standing legacy of mechanically linking the ICE to the wheels. Don’t underestimate the human psychological dynamic in mind shift that entails. Removing that ICE mechanical linkage requires a physiological jump that old guard car execs and many seasoned engineers would have to make if GM were to adopt your “Volt Basic” idea.

It may take GM 5-10 years playing with the Chevy Volt on a production basis before GM gets comfortable in doing anything near as radical as you are proposing.
statik Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:07 pm

How can you say that about EEStor? They are clearly the future, all other technologies should be abandoned!

BTW…since you are close by to Austin (if not in it), are they still working out of that strip mall between the Yoga Wellness Center and insurance office (or was it a doctor’s office..I can’t remember know)? (not kidding)

(=
+1 statik Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:11 pm

LG is only exclusive on the Volt…through 2015.
CDAVIS Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:11 pm

____________________________________________________
You make a good point regarding the pshchological mind shift envolved. I had not thougt of it in that context before…thanks.
____________________________________________________
Zach Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:29 pm

“but if you’re trying to figure out how hot your wire will get, multiplying measured-volts times measured-amps will get you there.”

If you’re trying to figure out how hot your wire is going to get, shouldn’t you use the foruma for joules? Muiltiplying volt and amps together gives you the wattage, as previously mentioned in your statement.

In engineering, it goes P=IE, where P = power = watts, I = current = amps, E = difference in potential = volts.
Zach Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:32 pm

Essentially GM ordered 3M-5M lithium ion cells, as it’s reported that each vehicle will typically require between 30-50 cells.

As far as I know, it’s all speculation past that point.
Herm Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:36 pm

but note that if you can make a battery pack with fewer cells it will be cheaper and more reliable.. a nimh pack would need a lot more cells to reach the same voltage.
T Woods Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:36 pm

You know that GM is having problems when they have to sell one of their Golf Courses !
I was unaware that GM even owned golf courses. There is just so much wrong with this corporation on so many levels.
Charlie H. Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:39 pm

Not a bad or screwy idea but that small battery is still going to run a $few K, so the vehicle that results is going to be fairly expensive.

It would get way better city economy but probably wouldn’t do much for highway economy, which is usually the higher and more interesting number (there’s also the psychological, “how far can I drive this thing” question resolved by highway ratings).

The double-conversion of electrical energy may not be as efficient as direct drive of the powertrain. Also the smaller battery will probably have to be more deeply discharged to maintain performance, so its life may be compromised.

If you think about it, this could have been done any time since NiMHs became cheap enough to build the Prius but, so far, everyone has declined to do it. I’ve got to believe every automotive engineer in the country and world (they’re not stupid) has worked this out on paper and decided they can’t make it work at the required price/performance levels.

Complicating things, in terms of finances, where would they build it? The Malibu BAS can, perhaps, be built on a regular line. It might be too expensive to build, perhaps it requires a dedicated line or expensive refit.
RB Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:41 pm

As we have learned from discussions with GM’s battery people, the company continues to work with multiple battery suppliers and is always looking for new cell technology to test.
—————————————————————–

Do we ever hear of any results from these tests?

Or maybe the process of testing is itself so meritorius that the results have become unnecessary, just …. testing….testing….testing
RB Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:44 pm

Patience is indeed a virtue (wish I had more of it).
However, the contract is said to exist today, not at some future time.
Unni Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:46 pm

I too agree Gas will be cheap in market after electric takes off,

The problem is electric/hybrids need to take off for that.
Second govt will make taxes over gas prices to keep it up so electric goes good

Gas will be still selling because all developing or underdeveloped nations will be still using gas and the other sectors than personal transport will be using gas.

Third electricity generation also needed to be scaled up ( this also takes time ). So for next 10 – 15 years there will be milking on gas.

On BAS+ – i think it will be a waste of money because strong hybrids offers better fuel economy than these ( i wont buy a green washed one )
Charlie H. Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:49 pm

The highway mileage won’t change much; the improvement in the Malibu BAS is largely due to underbody airflow improvement. Highway fuel economy is largely dictated by drag. They’d have to build a smaller cross-section, more aero Malibu to get a significant improvement.

Look at the Honda… tiny engine, very aero, smaller cross-section, well integrated IMA with tricks beyond BAS and they manage very low 40’s. The Malibu can’t downsize the engine and get improved performance and they can’t switch to an Atkinson, as they need more power.

GM’s best bet is to adapt the DI engine from the Equinox into more vehicles. The engine is inherently more efficient and has lower internal friction than a V6. Probably good for a 2mpg boost at nearly negligible cost. Another useful trick might be to find a way to do VCM on a 4-cylinder engine. That might be good for another 1-2mpg on the highway. Also, use the underbody airflow improvements and the 6-speed auto across the entire line.

Plain vanilla ICE vehicles are going to dominate for several more years, at least. There’s room for GM to make money by beating Toyota in conventional cars. Then look for the best opportunities to introduce higher tech powertrains where they will sell. The GMT900 hybrids are perfect examples of higher tech powertrains introduced where they will not sell. GM can’t afford any more of that.
ThombDBhomb Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:52 pm

My comment #17 is at -5 and decreasing. I wonder if it was too flippant?
Enos Strate Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:55 pm

There are more holes in that story than in a doughnut shop.

Don’t forget Buddy Ro, when at the golf course always wears two pairs of pants.

Because you nevers knows when you might get a hole-in-one !
+1 Dave G Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:56 pm

Luke,

if you’re trying to figure out how hot your wire will get, multiplying measured-volts times measured-amps will NOT get you there.

In fact, it doen’t matter how high the voltage is, it’s just the current that determines how hot the wire will get. Specifically, the formula for wire power loss is P=I²R, where P is in Watts, I is in Amps, and R is in Ohms.

Bottom line: The thickness of the copper in the wire determines the maximum current (at any voltage). The thickness of the insulation around the copper wire determines the maximum voltage.

When people actually get around to figuring out the kind of cable required to fast-charge an SUV with a 200-mile range in 10 minutes, these kinds of details will become important…
-1 CDAVIS Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:57 pm

______________________________________________________
Statik Said:
“the ‘waiting list’ has only moved 8,000 since…and that is just writing your name down, not a deposit”
—–

I wonder how much of the list’s rate of growth slowing down can be attributed to the fact that Lyle’s list has far surpassed GM’s first year Volt production volume coupled with the fact that GM has given no indication that I know of that they may consider somehow giving some type of first-in-line advantage to those on the list.

I’m personally amazed that nearly 50K people have signed up on Lyle’s list. That is a huge accomplishment. Getting people to register their names on anything online is always an uphill battle (including mailing/subscription lists).

For those that have not seen it yet, the list analytics are interesting:
http://gm-volt.com/wait-list-data/
______________________________________________________
+2 CS Guy Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:00 pm

CDAVIS, your idea is a great idea. It might be too good an idea for GM right now. But it is an excellent idea. Putting Voltec Basic (gotta call it something else tho – Voltec “Preferred” maybe ) with 10 mile or 5 mile AER and max torque right off the starting line would make GM an industry leader. Again.

But GM also must include the trucks, even full sized pickups and heavy duty work trucks in this as well, making theirs the highest mileage vehicle line in the world. Why GM could even meet the much more stringent mpg standards that China has imposed on its auto industry!

Imagine, a Chevy Silverado with crew cab and the highest towing capacity in the industry that also gets better gas mileage than any other truck for sale in America. Or China.
Unni Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:00 pm

I wonder BAS+ will have a low speed EV mode (this is the part ICE is most inefficient ) because it can make 30/36 to a 36/36 mpg. Regenerative breaks and initial EV mode can improve city mileage a lot :
sparks Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:16 pm

From another engineer: Dave G has got it right, and if I’m reading Zach correctly, he may have it right too. Using Dave’s method, you would measure the resistance R from end-to-end of the wire, and then I-squared R would be the total power dissipated by the wire. Using Zach’s method you would measure the voltage drop across the wire while in use, and multiply that by the current. But in either case, if you really want to know how hot the wire will get, one more calculation will be needed, specifically, how much power per unit length this amounts to. In fact, at this point it’s a problem in thermodynamics, which isn’t my field (I’m an EE) and they may actually need to take into account the circumference of the wire so you can get the power per unit surface area, as well as the thermal conductivity of the insulation, to ultimately translate the answer into heat rise. The Volt engineers are doing thousands of calculations like this, probably mostly using standard lookup tables, and if they leave anything to chance they know they will get canned!
+2 Dave G Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:17 pm

Joe Says: “Has anyone ever thought that maybe the Middle East may purposely keep the price down so none of these hybrids can take a foothold? ”

You mean like they did in the 80’s to kill Ethanol, and again in the late 90’s to kill the ZEV mandate?

This is why I keep coming back to setting a minimum price for oil. For example, if the U.S. said that the minimum price for oil was $65/barrel, and anything under that would be taxed to get back to $65, then oil exporters could no longer kill our alternative energy initiatives by lowering prices…

And by the way, when people realise that alternative energy can’t get killed by cheap oil, private investors will take alternative energy seriously, and things will start happening MUCH faster.
+1 JEC Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:26 pm

March 32nd?

I was wondering if anyone would notice/put it together, and you-who-should-not-be-named, got it! Nice.

=====================================
Back to the topic at hand. So, what is the shelf life of Li cells? If GM really placed an order, and even though we know they won’t get a butt load of cells at one time, they still need to have a “real” plan to use them.

100,000 over how long GM? And what happens when battery techhnolgy leaps and now your left with a commitment to buy all these old school cells?
RB Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:31 pm

There has to be a relation between Volt numbers sold and its price.
Here’s my guess for price and volume, after the initial group of early adopters (us) have our orders filled and customers become “ordinary people”

@$40,000 each number sold is 4K per year, on-going
@$30,000 each number sold is 60K per year, on-going
@$20,000 each number sold is 200K per year, on-going

That is, unless the economy gets much better fast, I think that at $40K the Volt won’t make it, while at $20K it will be a huge success. Presumable reality will be somewhere in between, but where?
RB Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:35 pm

It may not meet the new CAFE (CO2) requirement; has to be close to 40.
RB Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:36 pm

Q: How did you determine how much the Govt is paying lawyers?
A: Take what the service is worth and multiply by 6pi.
===============

Really funny; thanks.
GXT Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:53 pm

I did not see the video… but whenever I hear Ford or GM mention quality I feel compelled to point out that:

QUALITY != RELIABILITY

Ford especially seems to be playing on hope that a consumer will not recognize the difference.

Quality = The suspension feels a bit jarring to me.
Reliability = My engine failed.

Quality you should be able to get a feel for quite quickly and should steer you away from buying the vehicle (unless the price is right). Reliability is what takes away your $$$ and free time as you try to keep this POS running
Herm Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:10 pm

Batteries are just too expensive (for now) to do what you propose.. hybridization has its uses.

GM could implement it without using belts, just attach the motor/generator/starter in place of a regular starter.. but permanently engaged to the flywheel.. the flywheel teeth may have to be beefed up a bit and lubrication would have to be addressed. This would be a simple way to do it as long as you can find room for a bigger device replacing a starter.

I am also leery of belts.
CDAVIS Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:27 pm

______________________________________________________
The battery would not be that much bigger for a Volt Basic vs a BAS Hybrid.

Therefore, the battery cost delta between a Volt Basic vs. a BAS Hybrid battery would not be that large. The added battery cost would be recovered by the manufacturing, inventory, engineering, parts inventory, vehicle inventory/transport, and general organizational economy of scale enjoyed by utilizing a common Volt Basic / Volt Plug-In platform.
______________________________________________________
carcus1 Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:33 pm

The devil made you do it.

/ I’ve always been a fan of flip jokes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NO3G_mlBxJg&feature=related
old man Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:00 pm

Thanks for the gm-volt.com wait lis data!!!
Nelson Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:19 pm

Your idea makes me think.

I wonder what’s heavier?

The difference in weight of the T shape Volt battery vs. two Hitachi Lithium-ion Cells.

Or

The difference in weight between a full 7 gl. tank of gas vs. a full 20 gl. tank of gas.

A cars performance should always be measured by the correct mix of power, weight and COD.

NPNS!
+1 Nelson Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:26 pm

If GM made battery test results public, I think other (Toyota, Ford….) manufactures would be grateful.

NPNS!
-1 Michael Robinson Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:41 pm

What is wrong with nickel metal hydride batteries anyways?

They work beautifully in the GM Sequel fuel cell vehicle.

The advantage of Nickel metal hydride is that the materials
to make these batteries are more readily available than Lithium.

Notice that 100,000 isn’t a million and isn’t significant. If battery
electric is the answer, why doesn’t GM go all out BEV? The
answer is, there are cost problems, material problems,
power density problems, and perhaps societal perception problems
as well. I think it will be far easier for GM to use NiMH batteries
with fuel cells and get people comfortable with hydrogen than it
will be to build a battery electric vehicle that makes sense from
every conceivable angle. There is the range angle, the CO2 abatement angle (the grid needs to be cleaned up), the reliability angle (there isn’t much data on hybrids let alone large Lithium ION batteries), the infrastructure angle (both fuel cell and BEVs lose on this one ), the refueling time angle (fuel cell wins and BEV loses),
last there’s the societal perception angle (the public fears hydrogen
where fear of a Lithium fire is far less prevalent than it probably should be.)

When GM says, “we believe we can build a million BEVs or EREVs with at least a 40 mile all electric range,” only then will I have any faith in the idea that battery electric is part of the future of transportation. GM has to do more than say that hybrids and battery electric vehicles are worth it for these types of vehicles
to be worth it. Just build them if you have so much faith that this
is the way to go GM. Talk is both cheap and pointless. There are
170,000 gas stations in the U.S. roughly that serve probably on
average a 1000 cars a day. How many cars is that math people?
It’s more than 100k, that’s for sure.

Cost is a major issue, what can LG Chem physically make Lithium ION large format batteries for? How about nickel metal hydride batteries? Cheaper, not just better, batteries are needed. For fuel cell cars, cheaper fuel cells and hydrogen tanks are needed. The fuel cells are getting cheaper as the amount of platinum in them drops to what the typical gasoline car has in it’s catalytic converter
already. The Obama administration believes that BEVs and EREVs are an answer today, but they aren’t. Batteries lack the power density necessary to make them competitive for the price with gasoline powered cars. Even hybrids cost a lot of money for the benefit they provide. I’d rather pay a premium for a fuel cell car than a battery electric car. At least a fuel cell car, if the carbon footprint of the hydrogen is low, is essentially a zero emissions vehicle.
DonC Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:53 pm

It is vague, that’s for sure. It’s like the “40 mile range” versus the “up to 40 mile range”. One weasel word can make a world of difference. In any case, it seems like Hitachi is ramping up production. it’s just not very clear what this means for GM.
DonC Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 5:01 pm

Statik, I’m not sure that price matters much for the sign-up list since it doesn’t cost anything to sign up. If it did then price for sure would be a factor. But since it’s really cost free I’m not sure how reliable an indicator it is. It’s easy to say you’ll slap down $40K until you have to do it!

I think it’s more a function of gas prices than anything. If gas prices go back up to where they were last summer I think you’ll see the list expand very quickly. In part I’m saying this because the sign-up lists for all EVs seem to have followed the price of gas down. That doesn’t mean of course that the price of the Volt won’t effect the sales numbers. There is that thing called the law of supply and demand ….
Dan Petit Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 5:22 pm

Hey statik,

I really do wish for their breakthrough. I am not at all opposed to any breakthrough whatsoever, no matter who has it.

The answer is a respectful yes. They are still working out of that strip mall store front. I live inside Austin, and, as one of the things in Austin that us Austinites respect very well, it is for the needed business privacy that bright engineers must always have in order for them to do their research in peace and quiet.

Especially for success, their privacy must always be maintained for them at this local level. Also especially-true for those on a potentially significant forefront like that for those who work at EESTOR .

We must understand that a phenomenal and incredibly-vast amount of energy is proposed to be stored into their product.

We can not be so optimistically-forward-thinking so as to work up a perceived need or demand which might accidentally cause an overbearing amount of pressure on safety regulators, for example.

I would not judge them for the size of their location. Ironically, if they were some large corporation, there might not have been that tenaciousness to relentlessly research, which is often the cause of great invention, (not allowable at a large corporate setting sometimes).

I do not think at all that they are unqualified. It is just that the pathway that must have us moving forward for our Voltec vehicles must, in the 5 year future interim, go via what is currently available for us/GM.

It is all simply the productivity-definitions of the next 2 years, then the next 5 years, then the next 7 years, as opposed to the generalized concept of “future”.

Business plans, as you know, are financially-accountable, not just for the above time frames, which must each run as a parallel universe (if you will), but month to month, and week to week concurrent-considerations as to those terms, as practically-defined by multiple pathways regarding various “futures”.
Dan.
Dan Petit Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 5:29 pm

I think the entire market for increasing the number of everything that reduces carbon will have plenty of customers.
Dan.
+2 JEC Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 5:52 pm

Oh, Hi Michael. Have not heard your rant for quite some time….welcome back.

“I’d rather pay a premium for a fuel cell car than a battery electric car. ”

Go ahead and take the dive. Let me know how that works out for ya’.
Herm Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:11 pm

“What is wrong with nickel metal hydride batteries anyways?”

heavy, twice as heavy as lithium..

“The advantage of Nickel metal hydride is that the materials
to make these batteries are more readily available than Lithium.”

Lithium is so common in salt flats that no one bothers mining or recycling it, there are vast deposits in mines…it is more common than lead and you know there is no shortage of that for batteries. It is the 11th most common mineral dissolved in sea water.

http://gas2.org/2008/10/13/lithium-counterpoint-no-shortage-for-electric-cars/
+1 Poppy Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:21 pm

Lithium ROCKS !
Good to hear that it is in great abundance.
I use Lithium to calm my nerves and to prevent Alzheimer’s disease.
I may have to go mining and get me a large load on the cheap.
Yeah Baby !
-1 Michael Robinson Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:23 pm

First off, wanting a hydrogen car and saying so is not a rant. Second off, it isn’t fair to say that there is Lithium in the ocean if there is no practical way to retrieve it. Third off, the current Lithium mining methods are very harmful to the environment.

One of the best arguments for fuel cell cars is that their weaknesses are the opposite of what you have in BEVs. BEVs do not do long range well, as you increase the size of the battery you need heavier springs and a heavier frame. Fuel cells on the other hand exhibit impressive fuel economy and are light. The problem with fuel cells is that they are not good for delivering bursts of energy, but a small nickel metal hydride battery can do that just fine.
Small batteries are great, larger batteries not so great.

Hydrogen can come from natural gas reformation and that is easier on the environment than producing and burning gasoline or diesel.

GM can produce a fuel cell now that is small enough to fit in a compact car. The size of the fuel cell Honda had in 1997 compared to the V Flow system cell of 2006, there are magnitudes of difference. Think 60kw to 100kw. Platinum use in fuel cells is falling off rapidly thanks to nanotech.
+1 JEC Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:42 pm

“First off, wanting a hydrogen car and saying so is not a rant.”
====================================================
Yes it is.

Definition of RANT:
To speak or write in an angry or violent manner; rave.
v.tr.
To utter or express with violence or extravagance: a dictator who ranted his vitriol onto a captive audience.
n.
1. Violent or extravagant speech or writing.
2. A speech or piece of writing that incites anger or violence

You incite my anger and cause me to become violent, therefore as defined within my world, it is a RANT!

And what about that “Forth off…”, I always liked that one the best…
Hulk Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:50 pm

Please don’t make me angry. ;-(
RB Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:56 pm

From the Reuters article, it appears that the contract was made by the old gm. Perhaps New GM will take it forward. Perhaps not.
RB Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:57 pm

Or prices may be lowered by new supply from Iraq, or new supply from the ocean off South America.
RB Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:02 pm

Lyle’s post says 3 times the power.
Dave K. Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:07 pm

Estimating future Volt sales is not about what executives think. It’s about actual performance and dependability.

If the Volt turns out to be solid and dependable, GM will need to manufacture as many copies as the production line will support.

I am not at all interested in a transmission assisted gasoline burning hybrid car of any kind. This includes the Fusion, Prius, Malibu, and the rest.

=D~
Dan Petit Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:17 pm

Many OEM’s use “Just-in-time” delivery systems so that they do not have to warehouse and inventory a lot.

Also, smart OEM’s have upgrade clauses in their contracts that provide many many options to swap new tech into production commitments.

GM contractors have all these neat things in mind when doing business, and, I am really happy to see them expanding their business relationships further like this.
Dan.
+2 JEC Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:17 pm

Michael,

Give this a read. You may be enlightened!

http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-hydrogen-hoax

If you skip to the bottom, you get the real solution (I really believe this is the only way to become independent of OPEC)

Real Energy Solution

The problem, however, is not simply economic but political, and the reality check on politicians is not always so swift or so reliable. The longer we buy into the hydrogen hoax, the longer we will avoid developing an energy policy that truly serves America’s interests—economic, environmental, and geopolitical. Fortunately, on this front, there is good news, if only we have the will to be serious. Ethanol and methanol are practical liquid fuels that can be handled by the existing fuel distribution infrastructure and produced at prices roughly competitive with gasoline. During 2006, for example, methanol was selling at unsubsidized prices as low as $0.80 per gallon, equivalent on an energy basis to gasoline at $1.50 per gallon. As a path toward energy security, methanol is also extremely attractive, since it can be made from any kind of biomass, coal, natural gas, or municipal waste—resources plentiful in the United States and many other non-OPEC nations. Unfortunately, however, the vast majority of cars on the road cannot use it.

What is needed is government action to break the vertical monopoly on the automobile fuel supply currently held by the petroleum cartel. This could most efficiently be done simply by mandating that all new cars—whether of foreign or domestic manufacture—sold in the United States be “flex-fueled.” Such cars, which can run on any mixture of alcohol or gasoline, are currently being produced in the United States for little more (typically an extra $100 to $200) than the same vehicles in non-flex-fueled form. But they only command about 3 percent of the market, because there are so few high-alcohol gas pumps to serve them. Conversely, the reason why there are few high-alcohol pumps is because there are not enough flex-fuel cars on the road to warrant them. If you own a fuel station with three pumps, you are not going to waste one distributing a type of fuel that only 3 percent of cars can use.

Yet within three years of a flex-fuel mandate, there would be at least 50 million cars on the road in the United States capable of using high-alcohol fuel, and at least an equal number overseas. This would be a sufficient market to create a widespread network of high-alcohol fuel pumps. Moreover, this dramatically increased demand for alcohol fuels would greatly exceed the supply capacity of American corn-ethanol producers, which means that we could drop our current tariffs against Latin American sugar-ethanol. A similar circumstance would pertain in Europe and Japan, enabling the elimination of their protectionist measures against Third World agricultural imports. This would solve the problem of trade barriers against farm products that scuttled the recent Doha round of international trade talks, thus benefiting rich and poor nations alike.

By simply exposing the oil cartel to competition from such alternative fuel sources, we could impose a powerful constraint on its ability to run up prices. Combined with an unrelenting tariff policy favoring alcohol over imported oil, we could destroy OPEC completely, and effectively redirect over $600 billion per year that is now going to the treasury of terrorism to the global agricultural and mining sectors. Instead of sending our money to the Islamists to spread fanatical ideology, we could give our business to the world’s farmers, coal miners, and other people who actually work for a living. Instead of selling off blocks of stock in Western media companies to Saudi princes, we could be selling tractors to Honduras. Instead of funding terrorism, we could be using our energy dollars to finance world development. That’s what a serious energy policy would look like.
+1 old man Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:36 pm

GREAT LINK
Dan Petit Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:39 pm

I think lots of posters honestly mean well. It is just that it is difficult to converse with very very very long posts. I’m guilty of that as well, but I’m working to get more and more concise. (Less gets across more). Although getting detailed in order to lead up to only one or several (3 max) points is what I’m shooting for. I’m just really thankful that there is this site that I can share information with others the way I can, (although sometimes at quite a very long length).

Thanks to all.

Dan.
+1 JEC Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:48 pm

Dan,
If your referring to my post about concerning Hydrogen, I do apologize. I usually avoid pasting in a lot of information, but I really think that everyone should read the entire article I linked to.

This guy make 100% sense to me. I wish we could elect him to the head of the dept of energy, and let him set some real policies.

Here’s the link again:
http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-hydrogen-hoax

It is a very long article, and it does get somewhat technical and some would say boring, but I guarantee you will be better informed after reading it.

Have a great 4th!
CDAVIS Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:49 pm

______________________________________________________
I like that idea….”open source” the data…make it avail online to all…but that may be way too progressive for GM.
______________________________________________________
Texas Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:52 pm

No reason? How about peak oil? Please go to YouTube and check out a few good videos on the topic. Will only take about 20 minutes to open your eyes.
RB Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:00 pm

Yes, I agree.
It would be a radical step for GM.
Right now that’s what the need — radical steps.
+2 Larry R Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:03 pm

A bunch of people blame OPEC for the crazy price of oil.
The truth is its WALL STREET.
Hedging the barrel of crude against the dollar.
Investors have nothing to make money on so lets dump a lot of
money in oil futures to jack up the price.
Crude oil needs to be regulated by the government to keep
the price honest.
The greedy bastards at wall street need a tight leach!

We have to build batteries and electric cars here to keep the money and jobs in the USA.
KentT Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:23 pm

This bit of news makes a lot of sense with the new fuel economy standard. There is no way a full size pickup truck is going to achieve 30mpg without becoming a hybrid vehicle. The two-mode hybrid system with a more powerful battery makes perfect sense for the public (and businesses) to be able to buy full size pickups and vans.

Despite all the GM bashers GM knows what it takes to make millions of cars and trucks that will have to meet government regulations. For example they nearly cornered the market and took over an African country over platinum when it became clear that the catalytic converter was the only answer to meet the then air pollution control requirement. Securing Li-ion batteries is just more of the same for the 21st century.
Herm Says:
July 4th, 2009 at 2:40 am

“Second off, it isn’t fair to say that there is Lithium in the ocean if there is no practical way to retrieve it. ”

There is no practical way to retrieve lithium from seawater because it is so CHEAP to just scoop it up from salt playas, the stuff is so plentiful no one will bother for a long long time.

“Third off, the current Lithium mining methods are very harmful to the environment.”

Oh please!, you dont even know how plentiful it is let alone where its mined from.. you are just making this stuff up.
GeorgeB Says:
July 4th, 2009 at 5:20 am

I think the size of the battery order makes sense. First, assume that a percentage of the the cells (maybe 10% ?) will be defective right out of the factory. Then assume that another 10% will be wrecked in the manufacturing process ( nothing EVER runs smoothly in a start up manufacturing process).

Now we’re down to enough cells for 80,000 cars. Remember that Bob Lutz initially said thah the cost of two batteries would be built in to the cost of the car. This makes sense from a “worst case” scenario….assume that there are huge recalls for manufacturing problems with the packs, such as defective contacts or cracked housings. GM would be responsible for replacement units, which would be changed out under warranty. That means 40,000 vehicles whcih would be about right for years one and two.

Always remember that ANY new project costs twice as much and takes twice as long as you inititially figured!!!
koz Says:
July 4th, 2009 at 6:04 am

This contract illustrates yet another reason why GM is better in the battery pack manufacturing business and not cell production. HEV and PHEV need high specific power cells, EREV need good specific power wih good specific energy, and BEV need high specific energy. Of coure they all could use high power with high energy and low cost but batteries just don’t work that way.

We could argue all day about whether GM’s decision to build the packs and outsource the cells was a strategic choice they made or their finacial situation forced them into it. I wish it were solely a strategic decision but it was probably some of both. Either way, it is the best decision IMO. All 3 types of energy storage will develop rapidly and differently to meet the growing market. Being able to pick the “best of breed” in each segment at the time production conracts are let is a no-brainer, IMO.
koz Says:
July 4th, 2009 at 6:15 am

Is this meant to be ironic or complementary?
Herm Says:
July 4th, 2009 at 6:25 am

Per GM, it will have a low speed EV mode.

http://www.autobloggreen.com/photos/gm-next-gen-mild-hybrid-system-1/670194/
koz Says:
July 4th, 2009 at 7:00 am

Happy 4th to all!

It’s great to be able to think and express freely, especially for Tag. Imagine an iron fisted Statik squashing his opposition 7/4/2010 Volt proeuction date.
GM Volt Fan Says:
July 4th, 2009 at 7:46 am

Hmmm …. I wonder what kind of tires the standard 2011 Volt is going to have? GM ought to get the best all around tires as far as rolling resistance, noise, wet/dry traction and tread life.

For now, the Michelin X Radial and the Goodyear Assurance TripleTred look pretty good according to what I have read.

However, I read about a new kind of tire today that GM ought to highly consider …. the Yokohama dB Super E-spec. This new tire is actually made using orange peel oil. It is supposed to have 20% improved “rolling resistance” performance. That could mean more all electric miles. Plus, the sticky orange oil ought to allow it to have good grip on turns. It’s supposed to have special features to keep the tire noise minimized too.

http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2009/07/01/467854.html

http://www.yokohamatire.com/tires/e-spec.aspx
Dan Petit Says:
July 4th, 2009 at 8:03 am

JEC,
No, not at all. Your posts are nicely concise.
However, there was an article linked here a few weeks ago about
Hydrogen being so horribly difficult to manage, handle, make safe, goes right through metal and makes it brittle, and on and on. I know I am going to get his name wrong, but I think his name was Robert Zubrin or some name like that.
Mr. Zubrin (I think his name is) concretely-reaffirms my view that pure hydrogen is so unwieldy as an energy source all up and down a proposed distribution line, as well as for it’s extremely inefficient use (just the electricity to compress it would take you 8 miles in your Volt!!!), it is clear to me that our human fascination for hydrogen comes from hydrogen or helium in lighter-than-air balloons.

Of course, The Hindenburg comes to mind for me every time hydrogen is highly-optimistically brought up here.

From a technicians’ viewpoint, not a one of the 403 advanced systems techs that I have taught here in Austin would ever have anything to do with any system that had either hydrogen in it, or compressed natural gas in it. You would be at the complete mercy of three different entities, with no independent servicing facility to be highly competitive for you just around the block.

CNG requires a special license anyway, as presumably would hydrogen need. You would absolutely be locked into the nastiest set of costs-of-ownership for either of these.

CNG, while installed into some 2,000 Honda Civics (those poor hard-working folks at Honda apparently were coerced to do that by highly demanding CNG interests in my technical opinion), GNG in an impure substance where the supplier can not assure purities, nor can refine out impurities. There seems to be the reason that Honda only sells to commercial entities is that those CNG Civics only have a warranty of “NINETY DAYS AND NINETY NIGHTS”.
So, they need not worry at all if trace sulfur ruins the catalytic converter “out of the 90 day warranty”.

Happy Independence Day. Save up for your Volt down payment.

Dan.
Red HHR Says:
July 4th, 2009 at 8:13 am

Happy 4th to all!

When does Lyle get to drive the latest Volt mule? Yehaa!
How about a comparison of the Volt to the Camaro???
That would be fun, in a dollars and cents way. The Camaro has whooped the Mustang so GM may survive to bring out the Volt.
Dan Petit Says:
July 4th, 2009 at 8:29 am

That’s really true, Nathan, about most Americans not knowing about Voltec. I squarely blame non-PBS media. They are financially swallowed-up by foofy-goofy product advertisers, and, I would like more people who know about Voltec to ask for more Voltec news stories.

Relentlessly and very kindly requesting stories (and them comfortably doing so) is what it will take for media to begin to know more about it. They worry about appearing like fools, but, we all need to provide them with kind explanations of what Voltec is, while clearly avoiding any
“Forward-looking” statements that are just not going to relate to Voltec.

If someone does that (uses “Forward-looking-statements, those statements sound like someone is a “crack-pot” to them), then credibility for Voltec is greatly reduced and media become confused and tired because technologies are generally too difficult for them to factually-research. (Forward-looking-statements, ie hydrogen, send them on an unacceptable “wild goose chase”, and then, they will drop your request for more stories).
Dan.
statik Says:
July 4th, 2009 at 10:47 am

This reminds me, I actually meant to comment on Hitachi themselves. This is a massive capacity upgrade for them. We are not only talking 100K for GM, but 6x that for other suppliers.

I’m pretty sure the only produced about 1/2 million cells last year, and this release says they are going up to 35 million? (50-60 a pack x 700K).

/good news for the ‘bigger picture’
statik Says:
July 4th, 2009 at 10:56 am

Sorry, that is actually kind of what I meant. The list is stagnant, and it costs nothing to sign up. I realize there is no committment from GM, and there is likely not going to be, but it is no skin off your teeth to sign up.

I’m pretty sure that everyone that is ‘hot’ for a Volt, and has the internet, has seen and hit up that list…and there doesn’t seem to be a lot of ‘new fish’ coming into the pool.

/thats all I meant
statik Says:
July 4th, 2009 at 10:59 am

Just a yes would have been fine, hehe.

(=
statik Says:
July 4th, 2009 at 11:05 am

#30 JEC said:

March 32nd?

I was wondering if anyone would notice/put it together, and you-who-should-not-be-named, got it! Nice.
=================

…even more obscure referencing it here on this thread JEC, hehe. Your like a snake in the grass. We should start our own special clicke.
statik Says:
July 4th, 2009 at 11:08 am

Michael Robinson,

Just so you know, I gave you a +1, I confess that whenever I see your name I smile now. Go on with your fabulous h******* self.

/have a good one
GM Volt Fan Says:
July 4th, 2009 at 11:15 am

I should have googled my own question about what tires are going to be on the 2011 Volt. It’s officially going to be the “Goodyear Assurance Fuel Max” tires. That’s cool with me. It’s a good American company. I’ve been happy with the performance of Goodyear tires on my cars. America needs all the good jobs it can get.

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009/02/chevy-volt-to-r.html

These tires will have a 27% improvement in rolling resistance performance. Tires are important with electric cars like the Volt you know. These tires will improve the Volt’s highway cruising mileage by 4%. Every little bit helps.

http://www.goodyeartires.com/goodyeartireselector/display_tire.jsp?prodline=Assurance+Fuel+Max&mrktarea=Passenger#technology

Gasoline will be something that Volt owners will only have to think about once every 7-8 weeks or so probably … unless you are going on a long trip. The Middle East oil sheik fatcats and Big Oil aren’t going to like this.
Luke Says:
July 4th, 2009 at 11:52 am

Thanks for the correction!

My bad about the temperature of the wire! It’s easy little sloppy about that when I’m hooking up power tools to the wall-socket, where voltage is more-or-less fixed…

If I’m going to be pedantic, I’d better get it completely correct.
Jackson Says:
July 4th, 2009 at 5:24 pm

Regardless of current or expected supplies of oil, we don’t need to wait until the last drop is gone to start thinking about alternatives, and we are.

What we’ve seen recently (last summer) is how little it takes to make the price of oil suddenly double as supply more than halves.

What am I doing? This is an old thread!
-1 Michael Robinson Says:
July 4th, 2009 at 9:20 pm

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/01/30/beyond-peak-oil-are-we-facing-peak-lithium/

Most Lithium comes from salt lakes which are lined with toxic PVC plastic. Lithium is an alkali metal that is highly toxic. Breathing Lithium dust can cause pulmonary edema and death. If it’s true that 50% of the world’s current Lithium reserves are in Bolivia or Chile, that could make these South American countries the new OPEC. Retrieving Lithium from sea water is impractical, so forget about that idea. Lithium mining can absorb an excessive amount of a region’s drinking water.

Now then: tin, nickel, zinc, etcetera are much safer to mine and much more abundant than Lithium.

Sadly, most Lithium ION batteries last about 3 years and then get thrown out. GM wants us to believe that it has invented a Lithium ION battery that will last 10 years… Yeah right. In Europe, 25% of the Lithium batteries that are produced MUST be recycled. Mine to
wheels, Lithium is very harmful to the environment if it has to travel half way around the world to become part of a battery.

Need I mention that Lithium being highly reactive tends to be chemically bonded to other elements?

Drinking water shortages are real and exist today all over the world.
A mining process that is water intensive which pollutes water will only exacerbate this issue. China, Bolivia, and Chile are the major sources of Lithium right now with Brazil potentially being another source. Lithium ION batteries themselves may not be toxic, but the mining procedures that are used to recover Lithium are. The more recycling of batteries that happens, the less mining that is
needed. Currently in the U.S., battery recycling is not commonplace at all. There is some Lithium mining in the U.S., but
the bulk of the mining happens in China and South America. This
is why LG Chem is a Chinese company.

A green automobile is one that doesn’t pollute the air which is made from locally available materials so that you don’t have to excessively pollute the air building it.
Michael Robinson Says:
July 4th, 2009 at 9:45 pm

http://peakenergy.blogspot.com/2009/01/more-on-peak-lithium.html

http://www.evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=1180

Lithium is too expensive as it is with the North Dakota source drying up after 40 years of mining. There is spudomene apparently in Canada, Australia, and Bolivia, but that mineral has to be processed with caustic chemicals to extract pure Lithium Carbonate. Commiting to 100,000 large format Lithium ION batteries will not dent the car market much. There are 170k gas stations in the U.S. alone serving probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 170+ million cars and trucks. To scale up EV
production in order to address peak OIL, Lithium is not the answer.
At the rate fuel cell technology is coming down in cost and getting better, fuel cell cars are the way to go.

To extract Lithium from sea water, you are talking 70 parts per billion concentration. Those are very low concentrations. It
makes more sense to electrolyze sea water for hydrogen and
use the hydrogen for PEM fuel cells. Sea water by the way is easier to electrolyze than fresh water. The seawater can be electrolyzed by solar, nuclear, or wind powered ships.

Fortunately, the advancement of the Volt gas/electric hybrid will further electric drive where the battery can be replaced with a fuel cell and a hydrogen source once the technology becomes practical.
I firmly believe in six years time that the automakers will be able to
say, fuel cells are practical and they are the best option for replacing the internal combustion engine.
omegaman66 Says:
July 4th, 2009 at 10:33 pm

Just saying. You aren’t going to roll back hybrids and ev’s with low oil prices. You can slow advancement but that is all. Technology and the cost of ev’s or other technology will march forward. The only question is how fast.

I look forward to the lowering of gas prices due to electric vehicles making an impact. That has yet to happen but will hopefully before to long.

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts

Volt Test Drive by Vancouver EV Association February 8, 2010
VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA -- General Motors issued a very special invitation to the Vancouver Electric Vehicle Association last week to drive the... […]
WopOnTour
gasoline cars are like smoking . . . . February 8, 2010
interesting article, better presenting what I've had a hard time putting into words (which is why HE's a writer and I'M... […]
prowler
A common European strategy for electric vehicles February 8, 2010
I coudn't resist to cut and paste the next excerpt : Link :... […]
Jean-Charles Jacquemin
Run flat option or standard? February 8, 2010
I suspect that run flats might be standard because they get rid of the space and weight taken by a spare tire and may result in less fatal accidents... […]
1nk
Engine Thermal Management in a Series Hybrid February 8, 2010
I've just recently discovered how different the environments under which a conventional (even parallel hybrid) ICE and series hybrid ICE are... […]
XGC75
electric car with wind generator February 7, 2010
My design of ELECTRIC CAR WITH WIND GENERATOR: http://velkovelkov.blogspot.com/ I think this conception is original and realistic. The low position... […]
Velko Velkov
Please provide complete home solar systems. February 6, 2010
Please provide both a volt charging solar system and a complete whole house solar system that takes the user completely off the grid and stays on... […]
1nk

GM Orders Enough Hitachi Lithium-ion Cells for 100,000 Hybrid Cars

145 Responses to “GM Orders Enough Hitachi Lithium-ion Cells for 100,000 Hybrid Cars”

Recent Posts

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts