AND 
Exec Explains Why Nissan is Betting on Pure Electric Vehicles
Nissan has announced that it will be unveiling a global pure electric vehicle in Japan on August 2nd. The yet-to-be-seen 5 seat compact car will begin mass production in late 2010 and will be available in the North American market. It will have a 100 mile electric range. The image above is the mule using a Cube body, and has nothing to do with the final design. I had the chance to discuss this upcoming vehicle and strategy with Mark Perry who is Nissan’s director of product planning.
Other companies are doing gas plug-in hybrids and EREVs, but Nissan has put its money on the pure electric, why is that and what do you think of the Volt?
I only will talk about us. The whole issue on our mind is zero emissions. The only way you can achieve zero emission at the tailpipe is in a pure battery electric vehicle. You’re zero emission all the time, you don’t fall off the wagon after 12 miles or 40 miles. When you make that commitment you’re looking ahead not only to the regulatory pressure that’s coming but the consumer and environmental pressure that’s coming. To achieve zero emissions you have to do it with electrification.
Now you can still do fuel cells or plug-in battery electrics. Every manufacturer has those same two options. But fuel cells and hydrogen are a lot longer away than a vehicle you can plug into the existing electric grid.
I assume Nissan isn’t going to change its whole fleet into electric cars, so why not have a car in between? Obviously there are range limitations.
Again what you’re talking about is, he who wins in the zero emission race is he who gets his costs down and his manufacturing scale high. So how do you start, you start now. You make investments in assembly plants globally. Building hundreds of thousands of vehicles is what we’re setting out to do.
Now we’re not saying that the internal combustion engine is disappearing but long-term to achieve the 90% reduction in CO2 that all the policy makers, all the regulatory folks and the scientists are all calling for, the only way you can do it is through electrification. You cannot improve the combustion engine to achieve a 90% reduction in CO2.
There is also the rational issue and the emotional issue. The rational issue is 98% of the population drives less than 100 miles per day. That’s a fact. Volt has picked 40 because that number is 72 to 76%. So if I have 100 miles of range I’m more than covering people’s daily commuting and transportation needs and allowing them to charge overnight and become zero emission all the time.
The question always comes is this my primary or my secondary car? The answer is what’s your definition of your primary car? If your primary car is the vehilce you use every day you go back and forth to work in you do your chores and your shopping, then this is your primary car. The car you take on vacation or carry seven people or tow your boat with that’s your other car.
So you’re aiming at a very specific market with this vehicle?
Not a specific market, it’s the mass market.
What about range anxiety?
Thats a behavioral issue. People today are used to having no restraints. So you can buy as big a house as you want and spend as much money on credit cards as you want and continue to pollute and drive around in a 5000 pound vehicle with 350 miles of gasoline in your tank. Those things clearly are charging. We know from all the consumer research we have done that there are plenty of people that are looking for that alternative and want it, and are just waiting for somebody to come with a mass market affordable electric vehicle for them to drive. Not some neighborhood electric vehicle or something with 20 miles of range, but something that they can use every day. That’s what we’re looking to do.
July 14th, 2009 at 6:18 am
The pure electric vehicle, it is the way of the future. Simple, almost zero maintenance and efficient.. but yes, lots of range anxiety.
July 14th, 2009 at 6:20 am
Interesting marketing plan. Tow truck drivers around the country will develop similar marketing plans also. Such as extended flatbed trucks to carry 2 or even 3 of these vehicles back home for recharging.
I don’t think a vehicle like this will be mass market for a long time with only a ‘100′ mile range. I put 100 in quotes because Lyle’s new car is supposed to have a 100 mile range and in reality, according to him, it has about a 70 mile range.
Snarky comments about my pessimistic attitude welcome………..
July 14th, 2009 at 6:21 am
Given that real-world range of BEVs (i.e. the Mini E) is comghin in well under the car’s stated range, I think it’s pretty damn foolhardy to put all your eggs in the BEV basket.
Nissan’s view on range axiety also strikes me as very naive. I think Lyle will testify that it’s real and it won’t go away anytime soon.
But, that’s the beauty of the market. We’ll find out.
July 14th, 2009 at 6:26 am
I guess I do have to agree with his point that “range anxiety” is a behavioral issue. It is a good point. I am sure it can change but only over time and desire to want to change.
July 14th, 2009 at 6:26 am
I had a terrific laugh with “falling off the wagon at 12 to 40 miles”.
The content of the interview was very well explained. I wish Ford Motor would get someone who is that eloquent to explain what Ford is up to.
The big big BIG BIG problem with Nissan’s gamble here, is that it is going to eat them alive with very low depth of discharges, which will DEFINITELY have them replacing expensive packs FAR more often than they would ever want or conceive.
You are talking here about FAR, FAR DISTANCES which the American public is used to going in order to do just about anything outside of going to work.
Granted, going to work is what most Americans do for 5 days of the week. BEV’s may actually cause a more “provincial adaptation” for a few Americans to actually conform to the increasingly inopportune reductions in pack electric range.
*****************************************************
BUT HOW AMERICANS DRIVE, WILL EAT NISSAN ALIVE.
*****************************************************
The wise thing about EREV’s is that the pack is completely protected. Here in Austin, the last 28 days have averaged 103 degrees. Those Air Conditioners in BEV’s are going to drag down that AER by 40% to 50% when those BEV’s are stuck in 5pm traffic. That changes the game entirely for who is “right” for a BEV.
The air conditioning range reductions must be included here also for a proper representation of lowered BEV range with the Air Conditioner running on the highest setting, and with 1.5 minimum tons of cooling power, or it may not be safe.
July 14th, 2009 at 6:27 am
The famous range extending trailer:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genset_trailer
July 14th, 2009 at 6:31 am
I like it. More options for the consumer.
Wind turbines, wheel generators, solar assist, and brake regen may one day combine to provide a 300 mile range. Until then it’s range anxiety with this EV Nissan.
The Volt is ahead of it’s time in this regard.
=D~
July 14th, 2009 at 6:36 am
My take…even with improvements in batteries to extend the range for a given battery volume, range anxiety will always be a factor for some. How many is the question.
They’ll purchase based on the extended range, whatever it happens to be at the time, based on their usual use patterns…and take it to the limit every so often, or get caught away from home due to unexpected events (as happened with Lyle) with an inability to get a charge or a quick enough charge.
Perhaps once the manufacturers and others devise a reliable / affordable quick-charge infrastructure, pure BEVs will make sense for a larger share of the market.
July 14th, 2009 at 6:37 am
Not “snarky”.
You have hit the real issue. If they say it has a 100 mile range, they better mean that it will go 100 miles under any circumstances. Otherwise, the buyer will see it as a letdown and badmouth the car to everyone they talk to. And the second time they have to be towed, they will trade the car in, especially if it was the wife driving around with the kids in the car……….
Until really long range (250 miles +) battery packs become practical in both size and cost, I still think that the E-REV design makes the most sense at this time.
What is so strange is that for five out of seven days per week, this BEV car with this 100 mile range would work for me. Only then I would have to think about “this is Tuesday, so I have to use the other car”, but at 7:00 AM, that is just not what is on my mind. If that makes me lazy, so be it, but the car is supposed to work for me, not the other way around!
JMHO
NPNS
July 14th, 2009 at 6:40 am
“You cannot improve the combustion engine to achieve a 90% reduction in CO2.” Although you can’t do it with an Auto cycle engine you can do it with a diesel cycle engine. Mercedes has their Urea injection system that eliminates CO2 out of their exhaust. All it is is Cow Piss so that can’t cost too much.
I don’t want my car to have a range leash attached. I want to know that I can always make for Mexico just in case without having to stop every 100 miles!
July 14th, 2009 at 6:41 am
I agree with you… I find it strange that Mr. Perry is more concerned with an unnecessary set of environmental goals than he is with customer concerns. After all, Nissan has to sell a lot of these cars before the environmental benefits can be realized, and playing down the high price of a pure BEV, range anxiety and the vehicle’s ability to meet the customer’s needs isn’t going to increase sales.
July 14th, 2009 at 6:45 am
I think the range anxiety is secondary issue. There are lots of people (my wife) who never travel more than 70 miles per day. When our family goes for longer distance we normally are taking my car. In case family owns two cars there is always possibility of sharing.
I would stick to the automobile price issue. In my understanding the price was major braking factor for EV1
July 14th, 2009 at 6:50 am
GM Volt Google search…
Results 1 – 10 of about 3,920,000 for GM VOLT. (0.09 seconds)
=D~
July 14th, 2009 at 6:53 am
The only argument I have to this is: They need to make the range longer in the future. 100 miles for normal people is fine. Since I am abnormal, 100 miles isn’t enough.
On after thought, there is no way my wife goes anywhere near 100 miles a day. A 5-seater EV with highway capability could work out nicely for her.
We can keep my ICE car for other stuff, but hopefully even that will turn into the Volt.
Herm, you are right. Range anxiety is not a good thing and will bother people. I hope Nissan makes their EV a nice looking vehicle and not have a look like those stupid NEVs.
July 14th, 2009 at 6:54 am
I’m glad to see that there is another major auto company out there that is going to put in real effort and bring a real car to market.
I can see having a 2 car home where one is BEV and one is EREV. However I can also see having a 2 car home where both are BEV and any time you want to go on a long distance trip you just pop by the car rental agency and pick yourself up what you need.
July 14th, 2009 at 6:57 am
Yes, as Herm said, zero maintenance and efficient. As Nissan’s Mr Perry said … there are plenty of people that are looking for that alternative and want it, and are just waiting for somebody to come with a mass market affordable electric vehicle for them to drive.
If Nissan can get their BEV to market in 2010 with 100 miles range and a reasonable price, there are a lot of people around here who will be interested in it.
July 14th, 2009 at 7:00 am
(click to show comment)
July 14th, 2009 at 7:03 am
Jim I said If they say it has a 100 mile range, they better mean that it will go 100 miles under any circumstances..
It may be that accurate metering will be sufficient. The driver wants to have good knowledge of the current state-of-charge, and a good projection of how many miles are left. For many of us, 100 miles will be more than enough, but we still don’t want to be caught by surprise, whether electric or gas.
The good part with gas is that I understand the fuel gauge.
July 14th, 2009 at 7:06 am
I haven’t seen it yet…but if it is real, and it is here first, they’ve got me. It fits my mantra, “any EV, with 4 seats, that I can service inside its electric range’
July 14th, 2009 at 7:11 am
MDDave said I find it strange that Mr. Perry is more concerned with an unnecessary set of environmental goals
——————————–
Perhaps Mr Perry is thinking legal and regulatory rather than abstractly identifying with environmental goals. In particular, Mr Perry’s plans may have in mind the upcoming CAFE (really CO2) regulations. Mr Perry wants Nissan to be able to continue to sell profitable cars after 2015, and he has a good plan in mind to accomplish that.
July 14th, 2009 at 7:14 am
“Normal” commuting distances and “normal” trip lengths for doing other things seem to vary a lot by region of the country. In some places 100 miles is hardly anything, but in many other places, most destinations are much closer.
July 14th, 2009 at 7:15 am
GOOGLE FIGHT!
Chevy Volt vs Tesla Roadster …and the winner is?
http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=Chevy+Volt&word2=Tesla+Roadster
=D~
July 14th, 2009 at 7:15 am
Yep, well said.
July 14th, 2009 at 7:16 am
One other thing.
Range anxiety is not at all a behavioral issue. With the Air conditioning dragging down AER drastically when you are repeatedly stuck in 5 pm traffic, and, as I mentioned in my above post that here in Austin, we have had the last 28 days at 103 degrees of temperature,
“Houston, we have a problem”.
There you (or your spouse) are with your kids in the car and, there has been an accident ahead of you with the outside temperature at 103 degrees. Roadway heat is far higher, and imposes higher energy consumption, not to mention the massive amount of additional heat no longer being diffused and coming out of all the ICE engines surrounding the BEV, increasing wattage demand for the AC somewhat more so.
The state of charge indicator is going down toward the “empty” section of the gauge.
These are scenarios that Nissan and all other BEV manufacturers must address. All along the Southern US, record temperatures are being broken every single day.
For the last 28 days, peak temperatures (at 5 pm) have been broken in Austin. There is a responsibility of the OEM to not only address this and properly represent these factors honestly and openly, but if they do not, there could be some very strong adverse situations they may be responsible for.
We have no choice when it comes to outside temperature.
We have no choice when there is a traffic jam, or you must go somewhere in an emergency for your children.
The laws for protecting children from the high Texas heat within a closed auto are specific and strict.
These things are not behavioral.
July 14th, 2009 at 7:18 am
It looks to me that they are going after the commuter market.
July 14th, 2009 at 7:22 am
Dan, you hit the nail again. These are the types of scenarios I think of when I drive today and try to imagine what a pure electric would be like vs. an EREV like the Volt.
The person (or people) you mention above would be sweating not just from the HEAT of Austin, but from the WORRY that they are about to contribute to the traffic jam by running out of battery power.
July 14th, 2009 at 7:25 am
I think there are a lot more people out there than you give credit for that care about being emission free, that care about the environment over range anxiety.
They/we are willing to make a little sacrifice from time to time to back someone we believe in, to change now rather than ‘in the future,’ (we have said that for too long imo)…or at the very least make this their second car.
Range anxiety is not the retort to every competitor, it is not the sole defining measure of success or failure. If Nissan is out first with a ‘real’ 100MPC EV, at a decent price (35Kish) I’m pretty sure they are going to sell very well.
Personally for me, the environment, pollution, health>range anxiety…always will be. Good luck changing my mind, or anyone else who believes as I do. I’m going to support whatever gets to me first, Volt, I-MiEV, Nissan XXX, Ford, Chrysler, etc…I don’t care, then every subsequent car purchase will be the longest range BEV that makes the most sense ergonomically. (Note I said car, I don’t see any answer to ‘hauling’ issues with EVs…a EREV here (trucks/large SUVs/vans) makes a lot of sense to me)
I guess my point is that everyone is different, and right now, we just don’t know what potential buyers of EVs want, and more importantly what they will pay for, because we have nothing to go by…it would be nice if we did
July 14th, 2009 at 7:27 am
Lots of “rationalizing” by this Nissan exec. He’s got to make his case because that’s the path they chose to take.
Nissan is not a big enough company to take on an EREV project. It takes a 100 year old company with the experience (both good and bad) of GM to create a car like the Chevy Volt.
July 14th, 2009 at 7:32 am
RB, The good thing about gas is that I can fill up just about anywhere and in less than 10 minutes.
EVs will need to do the same thing eventually before they gain wide adoption.
This is my 2¢ anyway.
July 14th, 2009 at 7:36 am
I think most of us can agree, although we have virtually no options to buy a EV at the moment, (BEV or EREV), that the rating system already needs a overhaul…or at least some kind of reasonable benchmarking system put in place.
In a ‘perfect world’ I’d like to see three ratings on any electric portion of range.
A) Conservative – the car is driven a combination of city/highway as conservatively as possible
B) Normalized – the car is driven like a regular human being, at or around the speed limit, keeping pace with traffic
C) Aggressive – the car is driven like you are 5 minutes late picking your kid up from school, or late to work
(…and we need all those numbers stated in optimal conditions, and under duress hot/cold)
That way, the buyer can ‘choose’ what he/she wants to get out of it…or at the very least can get a reasonable idea of the vehicles capabilities. Driver ‘mood’ seems to put a +/- 50% on electric range…and that is just too darn wide.
July 14th, 2009 at 7:40 am
Tesla and Fisker are less than 10 years old.
I think they both have announced an EREV.
July 14th, 2009 at 7:44 am
The magic of full EV with efficient regenerative braking is that these three ratings will tend to be very similar.
July 14th, 2009 at 7:45 am
I seldom see any comments here about battery cost for BEVs vs EREVs. My reasoning is that, lacking a “genset” for backup, a range of 100 miles is clearly marginal marketing-wise for a BEV, while 40 miles for an EREV is not at all marginal! I further reason that, simply put, the 100 mile BEV’s battery —being 2 1/2 times larger— will cost at least 2 1/2 times more than a 40 mile EREV’s battery. And it will weigh 2 1/2 times more, or about 2 1/2 x 400 lbs = 1,000 lbs!
We already know (GM admits it) that the Volt’s driving dynamics are affected by its 400 lb battery, even with its optimum low-c.g. placement. Can you imagine how a 1,000 lb battery would affect the handling of a small BEV? [Remember that the Tesla roadster has an extremely-underslung body, so low to the ground that's its a challenge for many people to climb into & out of, in order to minimize the adverse handling effects of its heavy battery. And that the Tesla model S sedan, for which handling is less important, still distributes its battery across the entire underbody as near the ground as possible for the same reason.]
So I see battery cost and mass as two strikes against a marginal 100 mi BEV …..and the third strike as lack of a backup propulsion means. Nissan, you’re destined to retire your BEVs to a “niche market dugout”! …..but thanks for trying out anyway, ’cause you’ll be a good “minor league” EV player!
July 14th, 2009 at 7:49 am
Urea injection does not eliminate CO2 – it reduces NOx
And the catalyst where this takes place is quite expensive. Then you add in the injection system and a heating system to ensure the urea remains liquid at normal winter temperatures.
July 14th, 2009 at 7:49 am
Almost 500 days to go
I can see Nissan’s point – why bother spending valuable resources going for a transition technology like the Volt. Instead they have have chosen to aim straight at the end game.
100 miles may not be enough range in America (untill fast charging is commonly available), so i think that the Volt will be the biggest hit here. But in Europe i can see 100mile EV would be more than sufficiant.
Ultimately i think that both will be big sellers.
July 14th, 2009 at 7:52 am
Tesla has backed away from EREV.
July 14th, 2009 at 7:54 am
Thanks Dave G. I don’t recall hearing that before.
July 14th, 2009 at 7:55 am
not really.. as you can see in the following link, speed has the biggest effect on range if you go faster than 50mph.. thus if you keep speed below that, range is very predictable and similar as you say.
http://www.teslamotors.com/blog4/
July 14th, 2009 at 7:57 am
What I have a problem with is these terms “zero” or “pure”.
Most electricity comes from coal. And even if you got rid of coal, in order to handle the variable peak transients in electrical demand, natural gas is the only current viable solution. So we will not have a truely “zero” or “pure” solution for the next 30 years at least.
As for “most people”, I don’t believe anyone posting here represents the average consumer. The best gauge I have of “most people” is when I talk to friends and collegues, and most of them still have no idea what’s going on in this space.
July 14th, 2009 at 7:57 am
Right on! I put it this way, the barriers to widespread utilization of BEVs are (1) need specific energy of over 200 Wh/kg; (2) need cost of battery to be less than $400/kWh; and (3) need fast charging infrastructure – able to recharge at least at 60 kW so a 35 kWh charge would take 35 minutes.
July 14th, 2009 at 7:58 am
Statik, I think I would buy the car based on “C”.
What is the worst range I can expect. Then everything else is better.
So if I can have 100 mile range while being an aggressive driver, (which I no longer am) that would almost work for me.
July 14th, 2009 at 8:05 am
Dan said:
“The big big BIG BIG problem with Nissan’s gamble here, is that it is going to eat them alive with very low depth of discharges, which will DEFINITELY have them replacing expensive packs FAR more often than they would ever want or conceive”
——–
Couple problems:
You can’t comment on the depth of discharges, or pack replacements until you know what percentage of the pack Nissan is going to use…seeing how they haven’t even shown us the car, we don’t know if they plan on using 50% of the pack or 90%.
The second problem is, facts don’t back you up here. For the Volt, the range is set up to be maximized often, ie) you are going to burn the whole range very often.
Under the, ‘average American driver, only travels 25 miles per day’ mantra, on most days (even if Nissan was allowing 100% pack usage), the ‘average’ American, on the ‘average’ day would only be using 25% of it. In these studies, how often does the average American drive 100 miles? Once a month? Twice? Some will drive more of course, but the game is overall averages…as you say, some will be plowing the A/C and only getting 50 miles.
Also, this ‘range anxiety’ everyone is fearful of, also reduces any chance of a ‘deep discharge’ and puts a emotional buffer on the battery (as well as whatever precautionary percentage Nissan as put on it)…the average person is unlikely to tap the last 10-15% of the pack.
I know for sure a ‘full discharge’ is likely never going to happen…or only once, because that means you are on the side of the road….but it is going to happen in the Volt thousands of times, the 50% usage of the pack isn’t ensuring anything special over the full BEV setup, that 50% is the maximum they think they can use to have it get to end of life acceptably.
July 14th, 2009 at 8:10 am
The first time a BEV runs out of juice on the freeway, and, causes a massive traffic jam with all those other ICE vehicles just idling away making tons of extra CO2, then the argument for BEV looses a lot of steam if an owner does not keep it fully charged and perfectly-serviced at all times.
Environmental “positives” also go right out the window when a charge-depleted BEV is causing traffic jams due to a lack of EREV redundancy.
In addition, it is likely that a BEV owner will be cited by an officer immediately with a 300 dollar fine for running out of charge or, have a long term problem that should have been fixed for something like a “SERVICE BATTERY IMMEDIATELY” MIL (malfunction indicator light), causing a traffic jam.
Did you know that your PCM can turn off your Air Conditioner ON PURPOSE to force you to go get the car serviced?
This will also DEFINITELY happen when there is a BEV problem of nearly any kind. You will be without Air conditioning, which is a safety issue.
All these things are “crystal-clear” “cut and dry” industry-standard issues that all BEV OEM’s must deal with concretely, or, face serious public backlash.
Would you want to be stuck in a charge-depleted BEV on the freeway with a lot of highly agitated drivers behind you?
All these things supersede EREV-contrary argumentation.
July 14th, 2009 at 8:11 am
” I further reason that, simply put, the 100 mile BEV’s battery —being 2 1/2 times larger— will cost at least 2 1/2 times more than a 40 mile EREV’s battery. And it will weigh 2 1/2 times more, or about 2 1/2 x 400 lbs = 1,000 lbs!”
Not so Nasaman, note both the iMiev and the Volt use a 16kwh battery pack..
The Tesla Roadster uses a 53kwh pack that weighs 990lbs.
All these weight numbers change drastically with different battery types. In any case, I think that if placed low on the car (below the floorpan) all these heavy packs will be good for safety and stability. With proper suspensions these cars will feel like Go-Karts.
July 14th, 2009 at 8:12 am
From the article: Now we’re not saying that the internal combustion engine is disappearing but long-term to achieve the 90% reduction in CO2 that all the policy makers, all the regulatory folks and the scientists are all calling for, the only way you can do it is through electrification. You cannot improve the combustion engine to achieve a 90% reduction in CO2.
——————————————————————————-
The implication here is that no solution with an internal combustion engine can achieve 90% reduction in CO2, which is misleading.
Mark Perry, who is Nissan’s director of product planning, makes the point that 98% of the population drives less than 100 miles per day. This means an EREV-100 would eliminate 98% of all tailpipe emissions, and still allow people to go over 100 miles 2% of the time.
The other thing to remember is that the Volt runs on electricity, gasoline, and E85. Ethanol can’t replace 100% of our gasoline usage, but it can replace the leftover amount that an EREV-40 does not.
July 14th, 2009 at 8:13 am
It all depends on where you are. Here in Manitoba more then 98% of our electricity is renewable – mainly hydro. Our electricity is also the cheapest in North America. So please someone, anyone – bring out a reasonable EV or EREV that can stand up to our cold weather.
Something capable of pulling a 4 horse trailor would also be appreciated!
July 14th, 2009 at 8:14 am
The famous “Long Cord” argument.. its a red herring.
If you are so worried about it, install solar panels and use them to recharge your BEV.
July 14th, 2009 at 8:14 am
I believe there’s another major reason why Nissan is initially taking a BEV approach ….avoiding embarrassment, which is still a heavily-weighted factor in all Japanese decision making. Nissan’s intellectual property lawyers & patent laywers would have definitely advised its Board that GM has EREV overwhelmingly-protected with patents (hundreds if not thousands). Nissan (or anyone else) would therefore have to license the use of numerous GM patents to go with an EREV design —or face massive lawsuits. I believe Mark Perry (Nissan’s director of product planning) would have been overruled by the Nissan Board even if he had presented an EREV design, because they wanted to avoid the huge costs, risks & embarrassment of attempting to circumvent GM’s EREV patents.
July 14th, 2009 at 8:15 am
Well, the coal/natural gas is a regional issue. Some of us live in places that are nuclear, hydro, and wind, and very little coal….like myself in Ontario.
And BEVs give you the option of being ‘pure’ (well, at least as much as possible) if you really want to be (if you can access solar)
July 14th, 2009 at 8:18 am
I like what Mr. Perry says. Any hybrid has the complex problem of integrating the two power sources. The BEV’s will be a joy for us old hot rodders.
July 14th, 2009 at 8:21 am
(Intellectual property rights/fights is also a reason Elon Musk defends Tesla’s approach.)
July 14th, 2009 at 8:21 am
One big problem. It would be fun watching the AVERAGE Joe/Jane back that thing in or out of their driveway or to park it nearly anywhere. Judging by the photo, the driver would find it difficult to see the genset with the mirrors and not much of it while looking over the shoulder while backing up.
Having said that, I would still consider it with a 100 mile BEV if the total cost was a lot lower than the Volt.
July 14th, 2009 at 8:28 am
Sorry Petit but do people get tickets where you live for running out of gasoline?
July 14th, 2009 at 8:36 am
This is good news to me because I think the more players we have working to electrify the automobile, the quicker the costs will come down. Good Luck, Nissan.
Personally, I need the range above 300 miles before I would consider buying a pure EV. It’s not range anxiety, it’s pure physics – you can’t squeeze 250 miles out of a 100 mile range and I just can’t afford to have 2 cars. While I’m sure it will be perfect for many other people, I need the range extender built in the Volt.
July 14th, 2009 at 8:39 am
Most people pull off the road when they start to lose propulsion…and if traffic is stopped, it is not that hard to push a 2,500 lb car 10 feet off the road. I think most would realize to get off the road if the car is screaming less than 5 miles left.
I seriously doubt there are going to be any $300 fines at all, no more than a standard ICE on the side of the road…and it would have to be abandoned to get it.
July 14th, 2009 at 8:39 am
Reply to Jorge
I don’t think your running out of gas and getting a ticket holds water. In my many miles of driving I will make this WAG, Less than 1 in 100,000 gas powered cars run out of gas on any given day. Reason, you can easily stop a gas station and buy more in a very few min. The same can not be said for a BEV and as a result owners will end up pushing the limit and end up stranded much more often.
July 14th, 2009 at 8:43 am
Speed and auxillary influence (A/C, heat, etc) are the biggest factors to range.
July 14th, 2009 at 8:44 am
Nissan can NOT create a 100 mile range BEV for $35K, or the iMiev would be that cheap.
If an automaker isn’t offering high mileage ICE’s and hybrids nearterm, they will lose marketshare to those who do.
July 14th, 2009 at 8:48 am
Exactly, the buyer can decide on a car, confident in the minimum result he/she will achieve. As it stands, nobody believes anybody on range atm, and so far, that is the right instinct.
July 14th, 2009 at 8:48 am
(click to show comment)
July 14th, 2009 at 8:51 am
I don’t understand why you think that GM has the EREV market all to itself. GM did not invent the concept. It’s actually been around in a prototype form from various manufacturers for a number of decades. In fact diesel electric propulsion used by various vehicle types for providing locomotion works under the same principal but sans batteries. Also as you are well aware patents are only covered under in the country they are filed in and therefore could be used anywhere else in the world (but I digress). The point I want to make is that it is possible to build an EREV to compete with the Volt without infringing on any patents GM has. Also being first to market doesn’t mean success or longevity. Anybody remember AOL, Netscape and US Robotics.
July 14th, 2009 at 8:52 am
(click to show comment)
July 14th, 2009 at 8:54 am
Remember, the Chevy Volt is not a hybrid.
July 14th, 2009 at 8:57 am
Reply to old man
I was actually replying to Petit who said that people will get tickets for running out of juice in their batteries on the highway.
July 14th, 2009 at 9:01 am
What you’ve created is a here is a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy . It is any argument that claims because the solution is not “perfect” it shouldn’t be implemented. It’s very common in policy making and politics in general. A big pet peeve of mine. Yes a BEV with a lower range then an equivalent gas vehicle would be more likely to run out of fuel on the road. However, these issues are easily mitigated, just like they are for gas vehicles. ( AAA will get charger trucks. ) In addition, I imagine any fuel loss from slowed gas vehicles due to a BEV running low on charge would be offset by many BEVs occupying spaces in traffic jams caused for other reasons. The BEVs using barely any energy at all while stopped. Electrification of the automobile will result in less energy used, and less CO2 released overall. It’s not perfect, no one ever said it was.
July 14th, 2009 at 9:02 am
Its been said over and over and over again.
BEV with electricity from coal plant is still better than a gas car.
And it is easier to convert a few coal plants to wind than all the cars – so you make the car electric and then as you improve your power plant the benefit will automatically flow.
Ofcourse the Seattle utility is 100% carbon neutral. So here I’ll actually have 0 emissions on a daily basis.
July 14th, 2009 at 9:04 am
Desperately wanting some thing to be a fact does not make it a fact. I will be happy to join your bandwagon if you can show me this easy to manufacture, long range, long lasting, small, light weight, low priced battery, that can be recharged quickly and nearly anywhere.
July 14th, 2009 at 9:05 am
I agree. I’m an aggressive driver even when I don’t have to be. My concern is just getting from A to B in the fastest time possible. Sometimes there’s no reason other than my competitive urge to “win” – if that makes any sense. So yes, cars should be rated for multiple styles of driving.
July 14th, 2009 at 9:08 am
Dan these are great points. I get so mad when many days I get caught behind this clown with a Toy P who must want to brag that he gets great MPG. He takes off so slow from the light that only 1 or 2 other cars get to go. Really burns me up it backs up traffic and all of the rest of us burn far more extra gas because of this clown. I know the little Toy is slow but I have driven one it is not this slow.
Also anyone else think we need to ban cars from the Xway that can’t go at least something like 0 to 60 in less then 9 seconds. (I have no idea what the right number would be)
Cars that can’t get up to speed are a danger getting on the Xway.
July 14th, 2009 at 9:10 am
Yes if they are blocking traffic.
July 14th, 2009 at 9:12 am
Heard of BYD ?
BTW, Nissann is a large company and they are nearly 100 years old (started in 1914). Nissan is bigger than Fiat & BMW for eg. They are the world’s 7th largest.
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/2008/industries/19/index.html
July 14th, 2009 at 9:14 am
Point taken —GM certainly does NOT, or want to have, the EREV market all to itself.
And you’re right that the basic EREV concept has been around for a long time. But as a person who holds several patents I assure you an idea or a concept itself is not patentable ….only the implementation means of the concept can be patented. And you can be certain GM has filed hundreds (if not thousands) of patents with specific implementation claims that represent a formidable “Mount Everest” of rigorous barriers to anyone trying to get around them without risking horrendously-expensive infringement suits (or entering licensing agreements with GM)!
Some people/companies will elect to pursue EREV designs —Nissan & Tesla have chosen NOT to do so ….(so far).
July 14th, 2009 at 9:15 am
Yes, what I meant is the shape of the Energy required / Speed curve in those 3 circumstances may tend to be identical. (no A/C, heating, towing, etc).
July 14th, 2009 at 9:16 am
Truely sorry! My misunderstanding.
July 14th, 2009 at 9:16 am
My electric motorcycle uses 100% wind power, thanks to a subscription plan through my regional utility which both my house and work uses, from a local wind farm, so with minimal transmission losses. So yes, I’m pretty much emissions free at both the vehicle level and at the plug, right this second and every day.
You have no idea how good that feels. All those oil wars with ourt kids getting killed, that massive federal debt that’ll hold back our economy and that we’re shoveling onto our kids, grandkids and so on. That’s all your fault, not mine.
Oh, and BEV with electricity from coal plant/national mix is still less emissions than a gas car and can only get cleaner.
July 14th, 2009 at 9:17 am
It is really even worse then that. If you know your car can only go max 70 miles then how many people would go more then 50 mile or only 25 miles from home.
Mot many people use even close to 100% of the gas in the tank before they fill up. And you can fill up with gas very quickly.
to say that 98% of people go less then 100 miles, so we can just build a car with a max range of 100 miles will be good for them. Is way off base. You would need at least 150 mile range at the end of Battery life not at the start.
July 14th, 2009 at 9:19 am
The first time a more efficient gasser runs out of gas on the freeway, and, causes a massive traffic jam with all those other ICE vehicles just idling away making tons of extra CO2, then the argument for more efficient gassers loses a lot of steam if an owner does not keep it fully gassed and perfectly-serviced at all times.
You see how ridiculous your argument is?
I’m trying very hard to be very nice about this.
July 14th, 2009 at 9:22 am
Nothing against BEVs, they are simple and would be wonderful, but the are very unlikely to be the future. In the Department of Energy estimate of what percentage of vehicles would fall into what categories in 2020, BEVs came out at an effective zero percentage.
The reason for this is simply cost. A battery is very expensive to build but very inexpensive to run. A fuel tank is very inexpensive to buy but expensive to fill. Unless you are using the battery pack fully every day the cost of the pack simply becomes prohibitive. Battery costs will come down but not fast nor far enough, at least for the next 15 years or so. If and until they do, what we have is an application of the 80/20 rule where you get 80% of the benefit from the first 20% of the range, and BEVs will be for those people who are willing to pay a huge premium to live with a lot of inconvenience.
This is why the DOE thinks PHEV10s, PHEV20s, and PHEV40s will make up the bulk of electrified vehicles. IOW vehicles like the Volt, the Prius, and even the hybrid Escalade.
As for emissions, a Volt running on biofuel would be a zero emission vehicle. For that matter a Malibu running on biofuel would be a zero emission vehicle. And this is without any range anxiety. Since we have all other factors that we need we are just one scientific breakthrough — using a microbe to extract sugars from the surrounding protective molecules — away from biofuel becoming a very viable and cost effective alternative fuel source. (Note that Berkeley Labs has just found a way to have microbes turn simple sugars into jet fuel, so the applications of biofuels seem limitless).
Finally, as for maintenance, the advantage of BEVs is tempered by the fact that ICE cars don’t require much maintenance. They are largely maintenance free now. An oil change every year or so and that’s about it. If you read the cost comparisons studies this is what jumps out at you.
July 14th, 2009 at 9:22 am
Finally someone who knows how to talk to press and explain the rational well.
Ofcourse BEV with 100 miles range is not for everyone – but then there won’t be enough BEVs manufactured to sell to everyone for a long time. Not everyone world thinks and acts the same.
I’d be perfectly happy with a BEV – with 100 mile range. I hardly ever drive more than that in a day – and have NEVER driven more than that without some pre-planning. If we need to go more than 100 miles, we will take our gas car.
Every new generation of EV will have better range going forward …
Since Nissan will sell the cars first in Seattle (may be among other cities) – I’ve a good chance of buying this as my first EV.
July 14th, 2009 at 9:25 am
Ethanol is a cruel joke – we are literally burning some poor family’s food.
July 14th, 2009 at 9:25 am
Range may vary and depends mostly on driver behavior. If Lyle wants more range, he can stay off of high speed roads and reduce the pressure of his right foot on the go pedal. It really is that simple and totally within his control.
July 14th, 2009 at 9:25 am
Completely agree. I’d also say that they won’t so they won’t. Which is not to say that hybrids won’t become mainstream.
July 14th, 2009 at 9:26 am
EREV will hang on longer than many of you seem to think, at least regionally.
It is relatively easy to say “a BEV which can stand up to our cold winters” (in snow country), but it’s likely to be very difficult to do. Using stored electrical energy to generate heat is massively inefficient. I predict that an EREV of some description (even one in which the genset cannot fully replace the output of a depleted battery) will almost have to be used in the high latitudes, at least until the next major technology change comes along.
Of course, you’d still be emissions-free for around half the year.
July 14th, 2009 at 9:26 am
I don’t see any difference in the case of being stuck into traffic Jam under 103 degree between a BEV, EREV or full ICE. Energy to keep A/C turned on has to come from somewhere, batteries or fuel. If both are empty… you get stuck the same way, isn’t it?
I believe BEV vendors would need to supply some camomilla or Prozac for the worst cases in order to address all this “anxiety” properly…
July 14th, 2009 at 9:27 am
Other mini E owners report a higher range than the manufacturer claim, so I’d like to know where you get your numbers from. Range varies, mostly based on owner behavior. A BEV’s actual range relative to its rated range tells you far more about the driver’s behavior than it does about the vehicle.
July 14th, 2009 at 9:35 am
That’s why you want the soon to be mandated extra window tinting, as well as the low energy solar roof panel powered vehicle venting option.
Or move to the mountains or the oceans, where the year round climate is more moderate, or at least less hot. It used to be that humans were adaptable and could do what made sense. When did we turn into whining do-nothings?
I do agree that A/C puts a huge hit on vehicle efficiency, which is why avoiding situations and settings where it seems necessary, when possible, is to be commended as plain old horse sense.
July 14th, 2009 at 9:36 am
But America is not the world my friend. And reality looks very different in Europe an Japan…
July 14th, 2009 at 9:39 am
Ethanol certainly has some real world devestating consequences to the poor…and more importantly to me being able to buy a dozen cobs of corn out of the back of some farmer’s truck for $2.
July 14th, 2009 at 9:39 am
Dorp7:
Learn to relax during your commute. You’ll live longer (this has absolutely nothing to do with the probabilities concerning accidents vs driving style and everything to do with stress vs health).
July 14th, 2009 at 9:44 am
I made a comment in a thread up top that EREV would be the norm up North where even a small genset would be needed as a source of heat.
This same type of vehicle is likely to be the norm down South where (at 100 degrees and 100% humidity) the A/C is part of your life-support system.
Even a minimal EREV (in which the genset would not be powerful enough to fully replace a depleted battery) would get your family out of the sweltering traffic-jam scenario.
July 14th, 2009 at 9:50 am
Actually, the i-MiEV is that cheap…it is only hella expensive in Japan, where there is about 15-17K worth of subsidies.
Mitsu announced pricing for the UK of “somewhere between £20,000 and £25,000,” on May 16th, which translated to $30,000 to $37,000 (fair disclaimor, the USD got SMOKED shortly after, it works out at $32,000 to $40,000 in today’s conversion)
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/05/16/imiev-coming-to-uk-in-november-for-20-000-25-000/
Regardless, the Volt and the i-MiEV have the same size pack, so you are looking at the same raw cost there…but the i-Miev has no ICE components to add, no major engineering costs (as a BEV is a very simple thing), rides on a smaller/cheaper platform, already exists as a production car, and Mitsu has no middle man on the pack…they make them themselves.
Whatever cost/price you come up with for the Volt, the Mitsu has to be at least 5K+ cheaper on the same scale…now whether or not the Volt is better, or will be more successful that is certainly wide open for debate.
I think Nissan could easily come to market with a 35K, 100 mile electric Cube if they wanted to. Again, do they want to? I don’t know, guess we will find out soon enough (maybe Auguest 2nd?)…but they could.
July 14th, 2009 at 9:51 am
I like Nissan’s vision. This is what it takes to compete today.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:03 am
Total aside, I have no ‘angle’ here on BEV/EREC/ICE, just curious
I wonder what the draw is on a highly efficient cooling system/condusive environment in maintaining a ambient interior temperature. I know it is a ‘mother’ to get 100 degrees down to 75, but once achieved, what is it to maintain?
ie) if it is 95 degress outside, and 75 inside, how much juice to maintain that per hour in a average size sedan, with decent tinting?
July 14th, 2009 at 10:04 am
Ethanol as it stands today is not viable, in my opinion. The hope is that a way will be found to make it from cellulose; farm waste (for the most part) which does not compete with food production.
There is also the oil-from-Algae research to consider, too; the future may well be diesel (though you can’t tell that to most Americans at this time).
July 14th, 2009 at 10:04 am
gah -1 for spelling
(sorry Don, lol)
July 14th, 2009 at 10:05 am
I believe there is a strong market for this kind of car. I do not believe that it will be a “mainstream” market for the foreseeable future.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:09 am
ahah, no of course it’s an “EREV”, did I learn the lesson from the marketing dpt right?
July 14th, 2009 at 10:15 am
That wide range of outcome should then be reflected on (current) ICE MPG stickers as well (not just BEVs). No? If not, electric vehicles would be at a huge disadvantage.
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!
July 14th, 2009 at 10:15 am
Or by the time the Volt hits the market the price of gas will be so high it will be already history.
I agree on Nissan on this point, The whole story about range anxiety is legitimate while you can afford to have much more range for less money, but when there is no alternative any more, the only solution will be EV and you will have to cope with the drawbacks…
The only question is when will that happen?
July 14th, 2009 at 10:16 am
the VOLT is lighter than TESLA Reggie!!! c’mon man! research!
July 14th, 2009 at 10:19 am
Whenever I read the BEV vs EREV type of thread, I cannot help but think of the “AREV” I proposed here a long time ago.
I’ve already alluded to it above as a “minimal EREV.”
AREV would stand for:
Augmented
Range
Electric
Vehicle
Such a vehicle is basically a ’split the difference’ approach. It would have a larger battery pack and smaller engine than the Volt. I’m guessing AER in the neighborhood of 100 (78 “real”) miles.
Since there is no attempt to fully replace the power available from a depleted battery, the generator can be run, if necessary, to augment the battery’s range. Or, if you get stuck out somewhere, letting the car sit on the side of the road (or drive very slowly) would partly re-charge the pack so that you could make it to the next charging point. (In bumper-to-bumper traffic, you would be driving pretty slow anyway).
As already mentioned, the generator would be a source of heat in cold climates, and would run your AC in hot ones. Unlike the Volt, the engine rpm would not follow the load, but would run (even at a stoplight) at the most efficient speed. Unlike the Volt, the battery would do more ‘buffering,’ partially charging/discharging to greater depth than possible with current batteries.
I’d look for someone to try this at about Volt Gen III time (when batteries are smaller, lighter, less expensive and more powerful).
I think the future AREV would be a larger market segment than the current (mostly Japanese) conception of the 100 mile BEV, if it this range is still offered at that time.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:20 am
A BEV would put less stress on a battery than the Volt does, so more of the battery’s capacity can be used. A BEV Volt should get over a 60 mile range, so a 100 mile battery would only need to be about 60% larger (or 1.6 times as large). That is, if you believe the 40 mile AER for the Volt, which with the high speed limits around here I doubt I would get.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:21 am
If the overall battery capacity is the same as the Volt, I wonder how much of the battery’s state of charge will be used to squeeze out 100 miles of range? 0 to 100%, versus 30%-ish to 80%-ish? As a result, how long will it last? It seems here that Japanese manufacturers are now sacrificing longevity to reduce price, a strategy American manufacturers used years back… leading to disastrous results.
And, realistically the range will likely be closer to 70 miles according to Lyle’s real-world experiences with his 100-mile electric Mini.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:24 am
Good point.. that actual trailer had some fancy automatic wheel steering system to handle just that problem.. it did not handle like a regular trailer.
How about this?.. do not allow the trailer link to pivot and use a single castering wheel on the trailer
July 14th, 2009 at 10:27 am
Bio-fuels can be a good option when issued from second and third generation. But they are definitely not the answer to the problem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biofuel
In my opinion, the energy problem has to be solved from multiple fronts:
1. Enhance efficiency of all kind energy consuming device
2. Source energy in an eco-system friendly way
3. Teach ppl that energy is… precious
and last but not least…
4. Teach spoiled ppl to be happy with less
July 14th, 2009 at 10:27 am
Lyle, Why didn’t you ask about their partnership with Better Place? They are set to provide hundreds of thousands of vehicles for this project. Why not a mention?
My feeling is that he knows all about range anxiety but is holding his cards close to his vest.
I see it going down where the model is demonstrated in Israel, North California, Hawaii, Denmark, Australia, etc. and the U.S. is almost going to have to adopt a similar concept or be left behind. There are rumors that China is close to making a decision about joining the list of countries. If that happens, what will the U.S. do? Keep talking about hybrids? I hope not.
I would have liked to hear Mark Perry’s comments about their swap-out designs. They are in an advanced design stage at this point.
To me, 100 miles without swap-out in the U.S. is almost useless, unless there is more than one car in the garage. Can the masses afford such an expensive toy in this economy? I believe Nissan, with their extremely gifted CEO, Carlos Ghosn, is also well aware of this. Why else would he be working so closely with Shai Agassi? I’m guessing Carlos is working his engineers very hard to get these EVs ready for market, hoping his competition wastes even more time with hybrids and hydrogen.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:29 am
I dont fully agree on the huge energy hit of a BEV AC.. perhaps for the old belt driven compressors.
Insulation, thermal window tinting and an efficient variable compressor will result in lower power consumption that many people expect.
Dont forget a 5000 btu AC consumes less than 500watts.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:29 am
I find this whole electric wind farm thing a from of greenwashing.
The word “farm” evokes founds of nature and happiness. You’re not getting your electricity delivered on your own personal power lines. Realistically, the wind farm ties into the same electrical grid as coal and natural gas-fueled power plants.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:30 am
They are going after the 2 car home market.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:31 am
Funny, I drive in a similar manner in my Tacoma in the interest of better economy, and found that driving 65 (or less) on the freeway and taking off smoothly and slowly from lights and STOP signs has upped my average from 25 mpg to 32 mpg on a good old-fashioned ICE – saving me about $20/month on my gas bill. So contrary to your argument, people like me probably save you gas when you’re not slamming your gas petal to the floor as soon as the light turns green (only to waste it when you pass me minutes later to get where you’re going 10 seconds faster)… Cars that can’t get up to speed aren’t the problem – disrespectful drivers are, from the ones who pull in front of you knowingly driving 20 under the limit to the ones that are doing 10 over the limit in the slow lane to get around the “slower” traffic in the fast lane.
But as to your issue above, most BEVs will alleviate that problem due to instant torque – every EV I’ve driven, all 3 of em, have taken off much more quickly than a Pruis…, and that will only improve with time.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:32 am
You would think the EREV serial patents must have run out since the 1920s.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:32 am
Pure EV is the best. I have never heard of a Tesla owner complaining about range anxiety. It just doesn’t exist on this 220 mile range EV using cheap, proven and readily available supply of Lithium computer notebook batteries. If Nissan builds theirs with this magical 100 mile range they will induce a mild range anxiety, I would suggest 200 mile range and just eliminate the anxiety all together. Most likely done for cost reasons only. Go Nissan Go. GM makes another mistake, just call the Volt and EV-2plusGas.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:34 am
“I like what Mr. Perry says. Any hybrid has the complex problem of integrating the two power sources. ”
This is true both for hybrids & EREVS, but the important thing to realize is that “the complex problem” really only has to be solved ONCE …..future similar drive trains should only require refinements to the original design (e.g., as for the several generations of Toyota’s Prius).
July 14th, 2009 at 10:35 am
I agree. More power to them. Sorry, no pun intended.
BTW, I just heard a cool feature on NPR about Bastille Day. They said that the French are so involved with their food culture that many of their common figures of speech are related thereto.
When they are out of options, and have used up all of their resources, they say the French equivalent of:
“The greeen beans are all gone.”
When we might say “The die is cast.”, they say “The carrots are cooked.”
When somebody tells a dumb joke, or makes a silly statement (see above), they say:
“There’s a hair in the soup.”
Words to live by, LOL. All applicable somehow to GM-Volt.com, IMHO.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:36 am
I don’t pretend to know anything about electric car technology, and I certainly didn’t read all of the above comments so I apologize in advance if I’m being redundant or misinformed. Has anyone seen Who Killed the Electric Car? This technology already exists, longer than 100 mile range batteries already exist. Electric cars have already been tested by consumers, who responded with a unanimous ‘we love it.’ I find it very interesting that one of the companies promoting an electric car is called Tesla. Does anyone know who Nikola Tesla was and what outstanding developments he contributed to science and technologies?
San Francisco busses have been electrically powered for years, and SF is one of the cleanest cities in the world.
In response to zero emissions issues, has anyone looked into global warming theories beyond what corporate and mainstream news has told them? We are by far the smallest emitters of CO gasses in the world. Of course we should cut down on emissions from our cars and coal plants, that’s a given. However, we shouldn’t allow it to drive decisions about progression into greener energy developments. Especially when green energy technology already exists, and conventionally oil based transport is quickly becoming obsolete. Don’t even get me started on air travel! Think Magnetic Levetation Technologies, which have already been implemented in Japan.
There are political reasons behind a lot of stagnant ideas. I’m very curious to see what the government will do with GM now that they are in control of it. Will they have a GM electric car renaissance in the shadow of the Cap and Trade Bill?
July 14th, 2009 at 10:37 am
that’s corn ethanol, a really lousy sellout to the corn lobby. cellulistic ethanol is a whole other ballgame. Don’t bash ethanol because congre$$ sold us out.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:37 am
I agree that BEVs are much more likely to be towed than ICE cars or EREVS. Especially at the beginning when we’re still dealing with relatively low ranges, and before people adapt to how many miles = how much charge. And, unlike an ICE car, you can’t get fuel from someone else, or carry it to your car.
I also agree that while most people will have the intelligence to pull over before they run out of charge, I’m sure there will be some idiots who don’t. And they will block traffic and be road hazards.
However, I would imagine that those are (mostly) the same people who do other stupid things while driving and wind up causing accidents in other ways. There are many ICE drivers who block traffic and cause traffic jams.
Unfortunately, we can’t make cars that are idiot proof. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t have cars. SImilarly, just because some idiot will probably run out of charge in the middle of the highway, doesn’t mean we shouldn’t have BEVs.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:38 am
I think “Chevy Volt” is more likely to be searched…
“gm-volt.com” comes up as the second of about 2,660,000 for chevy volt. (0.08 seconds)
The first is Chevy’s own site at http://www.chevrolet.com/experience/fuel-solutions/electric/
July 14th, 2009 at 10:39 am
The Volt is a stopgap car. Nissan and other pure BEV jump past the stopgap, directly to the end result. Sure not everyone is ready for that step, they want the comforts they have grown accustomed to in the past. For them the Volt is a perfect option.
For those ready to embrace a pure BEV, cars like the Nissan will be perfect option. Bravo to them for their vision.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:42 am
Ah, Herm, I think that you’re a bit too optimistic about power output from state-of-the-art solar panels. The Prius has them on the roof, and all they can do is power a small circulation fan. As of July 2009, power produced from residential solar panels averaged 36.36¢ per kWh (www.solarbuzz.com/SolarPrices.htm). That’s not just a little more that what residential commercial power costs, it is WAY MORE, especially in some areas such as Manitoba noted above, or Seattle (where I live).
July 14th, 2009 at 10:43 am
what if for whatever reason, emergency or anything, your wife has to drive your BEV for a long drive….RANGE ANXIETY is primary reason for BEVs….there is no fast charge for BEV technology available yet…
July 14th, 2009 at 10:44 am
I like this rating system suggestion. This idea is an evolution of the common argument brought up against EPA window stickers and why they were revised for 2008. No one can tell you exactly what your mileage will be in the real world; the EPA numbers simply help you compare two different vehicles using a standardized test (apples to apples). I guess it would always be better to at least rate electric cars in a worse-case scenario (fast highway speeds, a/c use, heavy acceleration, temperature extremes) and then be pleasantly surprised when the car goes further than expected on a charge. Statik’s multi-scenario rating system really makes sense for EV’s. Couldn’t this technically be done on ICE cars as well? Why isn’t it already implemented today? Perhaps the additional testing takes too much time/money?
July 14th, 2009 at 10:44 am
Sometimes it is fun to consider “What if.”
What if Lithium battery specific energy is increased to 240 Wh/kg? That would mean you could put a 32 kWh battery in the Volt without increasing its current weight.
What if by doubling the specific energy, you halved the cost per kWh, thus the 32 kWh battery would not increase the cost or weight of the Volt.
What if instead of using 50% of the initial capacity, GM used 70% of the 32 kWh available, thus the operating window would be 22 kWh, enough to travel 90 miles in AER in the real world.
Now that would be a fantastic car for $34,000.
I know… what if pigs could fly…
July 14th, 2009 at 10:45 am
The 1st BEV to run out of electricity and tie up traffic will make the 5 o’clock news. The 1 millionth ICE to run out of gas and tie up the worlds most congested freeway, once again, will get dozens of annoyed stares. Welcome to the future of personal transportation.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:46 am
I like this option too. Give me 100 + miles of range and a small, light, and simple engine/ generator that can charge the battery in an emergency. Kind of like the small outboard motor on a sailboat. It won’t get you anywhere fast but it will get you home.
Running out of battery power becomes a small problem instead of a large problem. Towing is not required. Range anxiety is reduced.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:46 am
For my 5 day a week routine, I NEVER drive more than 20 miles a day. Even on the weekends I rarely drive more than 40. I could use a car like the Nissan, and never give a single thought about “range anxiety”. If you have a more unpredictable schedule or longer commutes it might be a concern but for people like me, its not even an issue. As much as people like to push the term around here to justify the Volt, range anxiety just isn’t a concern at all for many people.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:49 am
ahhh!!! 2 car mentallity… why buy BEV for a second car if you have an EREV? pure BEVs are more expensive than EREV…and why rent if you have an EREV… 50MPG in range extender mode…
for me EREV does it all…
July 14th, 2009 at 10:50 am
In the early 2000’s what was the DOE’s prediction for year 2009 hybrids, year 2010 EREV’s , and year 2013 BEV’s?
July 14th, 2009 at 10:50 am
Our kids are getting killed these days in Afghanistan. Not much oil there, the last I heard. Having said that, nothing would make me happier than NOT sending money to the mullahs, sheiks and dictators that, for some unknown reason, all won the geographical oil lottery. Oil is useful for a whole lot of good things (the Modern Marvels episode about oil was a real eye-opener), but like drugs, it also creates palaces, power, pollution and weapons.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:50 am
The Nissan BEV needs the Better Place battery swap and/or a comparable road service from AAA (in Canada that’s CAA) and until that’s in place the Volt solves the distance etc. problems and can shed the motor when the swap and fast charge infrastructure is adequate including its own roadside service program. Better Place, Coulomb and others have fast charge devices that could easily be more plentiful than roadside phones used to be on detroit freeways. Toronto canada has an agreement in place already and the Detroit/Windsor to Montreal corridor will be BEV friendly in two shakes of a lambs tail as mom used to say.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:53 am
If you know that you are going to be traveling more than 100 miles, you’d start the engine almost as soon as you hit the road; the little generator could ’stretch’ that 100 mile range perhaps as far as 200 miles, depending on the type of driving. It opens a lot more possibilities.
If the engine is designed to run constantly at one speed, it can be much lighter, cheaper and simpler than the Volt’s. It also opens the field for engines which would be difficult to throttle (a teeny-tiny turbine would be epic, but unlikely for cost reasons).
If the job of storing the energy is separated from the job of buffering engine power (and regeneration), something like an advanced energy-channel battery or ultra capacitor could allow a surprisingly tiny engine to give Volt-like results. The energy storage battery you plug in would then have a similar life as in a BEV.
(sigh). Alas, it all takes time.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:54 am
There are approximately 300 million people living in the US, at the moment. They can’t all fit in the areas with a more “moderate climate.”
And what do you suggest we do about Mexico? Or other tropical countries? They have cars too.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:56 am
Yes, any patents issued that long ago have expired ….but that has NO EFFECT on GM’s ability to file legitimate new patent/claims on their implementation of the concept! For example, torque converter automatic transmissions were patented >40 years before Saturn filed (& was awarded) more than 150 patents on its acclaimed automatic transmission employing torque conversion & planetary gears like its early predecessors had!
July 14th, 2009 at 10:57 am
Pigs can fly, but usually do so in Coach.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:58 am
Lots of arguments against a BEV.
The one in particular I see all the time, other than Range Anxiety, is “The electricity comes from a coal fired plant…”
For a BEV, there’s a give and take. Look at the emissions an ICE or even the Volt will emmit in Genset mode. Both instances run in variable speeds which means that at any given time, more often than you think, the ICE will be running in a poor efficiency range. An ICE has only one narrow rpm band of best efficiency, thanks Dan P for that tidbit. So we have “millions upon millions” (said by Carl Sagan) variable speed polluter compared to a constant speed and efficiently tuned Coal fired power plant that they now have as “Clean Burn”. So which would you rather have? You have to start somewhere right?
As for range anxiety? The dude said it best…
“Thats a behavioral issue. People today are used to having no restraints. So you can buy as big a house as you want and spend as much money on credit cards as you want and continue to pollute and drive around in a 5000 pound vehicle with 350 miles of gasoline in your tank. ”
It’s going to be a culture change. Sure many of you here have more than 50 miles one way, you make up the 10% of the sample population, but that’s why you are here in the Volt site because it CAN go beyound but on inefficient petrol. Around here where I am, I know nobody that has a commute more than 35 miles one way. In our building I think I can safely say that 100% of the people can make their commute round trip with a “Real” 100MPC BEV.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:58 am
Welcome aboard Jordan. Great to see you commenting.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:59 am
Darly Siry, the former chief marketing officer at Tesla, has said the issue was expertise. Tesla engineers understood motors and batteries, but engines and other traditional car components were a completely different beast. (If you remember they tried to get GM to help them with their transmission). I don’t think IP had much to do with Tesla’s decision.
I’d have to disagree that battery costs are never mentioned. In fact if you look at the top of this page you’ll find cost being raised in the first few threads. But yes, some people just don’t get how expensive batteries and the electronic controls cost. You’re right on pont that the real issues for BEVs are cost, cost, cost.
Weight on the other hand should not be a big issue. The Volt pack does weigh 400 pounds but a good bit of that is the housing and, equally importantly, the Volt also needs an ICE and all its accompanying components, I’d think you could triple the pack size and, using a lighter housing, still end up with about the same weight as you do in the Volt.
Note that one big advantage of a BEV is space. You get a lot of extra space in the same envelope if you lose the ICE.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:59 am
A stalled car is a stalled car. Matters not if it’s powered by gas, battery, or cow manure.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:59 am
Then the BEV100 is for you (I doubt a shorter range BEV will be seriously offered for use at highway speeds).
It wouldn’t be for me, I drive over 40 miles a day, and sometimes farther.
We need more for our transportation toolbox than a screwdriver; we need all approaches for electrification to succeed.
I don’t deny that many people will be happy with such a car, but I doubt very much that it will represent “the mainstream” as the Nissan rep seems to think.
July 14th, 2009 at 10:59 am
In that light, the EREV may be the only option for efficiency-minded single-car households, while those who are fortunate enough to be able to afford/justify two cars may opt for a BEV and something else.
BTW, Mark Perry really seems to have a realistic outlook on the role that BEVs can play, and also to what the future is going to look like.
I wonder what kind of roof-racks and trunk/hatchback/wagon options their BEV will have?
July 14th, 2009 at 10:59 am
ICE cars usually have at least a 300-350 mile range. That gives you a much larger margin of safety.
Also, if you live in one of those areas where this is likely to be a problem, I would assume that you keep your gas tank half full. That would be much more difficult with a 100 mile range BEV.
July 14th, 2009 at 11:02 am
Possiby, but I wouldn’t buy a BEV because my view is that, lacking any alternative if the car can’t reach a charging station, I would argue that a BEV battery is MORE likely to be overstressed more often than an EREV battery simply in repeated attempts over its lifetime to get to charging stations and/or avoid being stranded! I believe Lyle Dennis would attest to this concern about his MINI E.
July 14th, 2009 at 11:06 am
I think BEV range anxiety is oversold by folks who have never even driven one. I’ve had bouts of it driving an ICE though. Just to play devil’s advocate here’s a quote from Tesla’s website.
“My plan was to have a charging base at an RV park in Groveland, 40 miles from the park entrance. But Groveland is 150 miles from my home in Redwood City, just south of San Francisco, and I wasn’t entirely confident of getting even that far. So after discovering through an EV enthusiast site that there’s a convenient and publicly available outlet on the outskirts of the San Francisco Bay Area, I made a short detour to San Ramon. The San Ramon Valley Conference Center at 3301 Crow Canyon Rd. is home to a Tesla 240V/70A charger. It worked perfectly. Thank you!”
If you read between the lines this Tesla owner made a big unnecessary detour to avoid range anxiety and if you read the whole blog post he was confident enough on the way back not to repeat the detour!
( http://www.teslamotors.com/blog5/?p=68 )
July 14th, 2009 at 11:06 am
Hey, check out this BEV company “Global Green Cars” http://www.globalgreencars.com/vehicles.html
Impressive specs but I would say they may be CARB “Treadmill” tests so my bet is you only get 75% of that in real driving experience.
For $18,000.00 it’s a steal, that is if it ever get’s to market.
July 14th, 2009 at 11:06 am
All valid points, and I agree that a expected range is more like 70 miles than 100 in the case of the i-MiEV…unless you are a extreme hypermiller, of which 99% of us are not. Most ‘real world’ tests are putting it somewhere in the 70s.
July 14th, 2009 at 11:10 am
Ya know. It’s not just running out of gas that causes cars to be stranded along the road. Blown tires, dead engines, etc… So let’s take off the blinders. It’s about learned behavior. Yep, there will be those who run out of gas and those who will run out of electricity. They will learn and the next time will be more sensative to the issue. For the small minority that will continiously push the envelope…… so be it. They exist anyway and driving an ICE or BEV or EREV won’t change that.
The more players we have in this field the better off we all wil be. Embrace the change cause it’s a comin’. Long live the electric vehicle!!
July 14th, 2009 at 11:11 am
I think Statik has it right.
Zero maintenance isn’t necessarily true with EVs. When I was looking into a Zap EV, it turned out that maintenance and parts availability was a big issue when talking to local owners of those particular EVs.
While there wouldn’t be any reason for regular oil changes in an EV, there’s every reason that you’ll need to get out the grease gun every once in a while and lube the suspension, replace brake pads, replace shocks, and so forth. Avoiding oil changes, timing belts, EGRs, catalytic converters seems like a wing — butm depending on the quality of the design and manufacture, it seems like there could be plenty of unscheduled maintenance.
I personally enjoy the act of maintenance so I’m cool with crawling around with a grease gun every now and then. The problem with the Zap 3-wheelers is that I thought I’d block traffic and I probably would have had problems getting replacement parts.
July 14th, 2009 at 11:14 am
Ditto here bro. If I need to go offsite I take one of my employers fleet vehicles. Specifically the smallest one because you can park those little mofo’s anywhere.
July 14th, 2009 at 11:16 am
While I agree that corn ethanol, in particular, is a disaster, there are other sources of ethanol. I believe they’re working on producing ethanol from waste products. And algae. While I don’t see it as a permanent solution, if they solved the technical issues, it could be a great supplement for EREVs.
July 14th, 2009 at 11:17 am
Look, let’s quit pulling WAG’s out of you know where in defense of our positions. You nor anyone else knows where the cost of batteries will be in a year or ten. There is no way to know and any guess is just that, a guess.
As far as the DOE’s predictions. Geeezzz have they ever been out of the ball park on their forecasts.
And bio fueled vehicles are NOT zero emission vehicles. They have a tail pipe and generate exhaust. They are certainly a step in the right direction but are not ZERO emission.
July 14th, 2009 at 11:17 am
you never heard RANGE ANXIETY from them because its not their primary car, they bought it because they want to, not like they need it, its just a statement that ‘i’m green’…or ‘whats up with this…so cool’…’ i know somebody who bought one and never uses it for simple reason, “collection”…why not try to buy one and use and charge it everyday and get back to me and comment on ‘range anxiety’, and justify your ‘range anxiety doesn’t exist theory”….
July 14th, 2009 at 11:18 am
“I doubt very much that it will represent “the mainstream” as the Nissan rep seems to think.”
I do. I work in the City and often tackle the traffic downtown. There are many people I have just run into in conversation at lunch saying they would like a plug in electric car. There are literally thousands downtown and if you can offer to them a BEV at an affordable price, I can almost gurantee you will not be able to supply the demand. Key word is “Affordable” and I define that as at or below $25K @100MPC real, but that’s just my cheap a$$.
July 14th, 2009 at 11:20 am
Statik, you’re catching on to the battery issues. Hopefully at this point everyone here should be able to agree that a 100% DOD is not going to happen. You need 10% at the top for regen (otherwise you have to over-engineer the braking system) and 20% at the bottom (to protect the pack).
Also hopefully everyone at this point will agree that there are many wonderful technical advantages to a larger pack. One, which you’ve mentioned, is that a larger pack means fewer charge/discharge cycles. The second, which you haven’t mentioned, is that a larger pack implies a lower discharge RATE at the cell level. Cells react negatively to high discharge rates. For a given power draw, cells in a small pack will discharge at a higher rate than the same cells in a larger pack. For example, if one pack is three times larger than another, given the same power draw the cells in the smaller pack will have a discharge rate three times higher than the cells in the larger pack.
As has been mentioned, this means that increasing the size of the Volt pack by a factor of two would probably triple rather than double the range. (But for cost reasons the pack is not going to double in size).
As for range anxiety, an interesting fact is that most people who had the EV-1 eschewed the more expensive nickel metal hydride packs which had more range in favor of the cheaper lead acid battery packs which had less. But these were more educated people who had been driving a BEV so they had a very practical attitude. Most people making an expensive purchase want everything covered. It’s why people buy houses with rooms they never use (just in case every family comes home at the same time) or water heaters way too large (in case all those visiting family members want to take a shower at the same time) or buy huge SUVs (just in case the family wants to take a vacation to Lake Tahoe once every three years).
July 14th, 2009 at 11:25 am
This is why I truly believe the most important number data we need is MPG on charge sustaining mode. I read Prius actually can achieve 58 MPG… Volt has at least to reach this cap in order to be a strong concurrent.
Personally, I see the 10, 20, 40 miles range full electric mode as an extension, a plus, an option, an added-value for those who can take benefit of it.
July 14th, 2009 at 11:26 am
Speaking of a Turbine Genset….
“ETV Motors demonstrates extended-range Prius with microturbine”
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/07/13/etv-motors-demonstrates-extended-range-prius-with-microturbine/
lol…..
yeah, someone thought of it already.
July 14th, 2009 at 11:26 am
Every manufactured consumer product, electric cars included, is made from a series of compromises. Any vehicle on the road today considering economic, financial and environmental concerns and the technical evolution of both ICE and BEV vehicles is a stop gap.
If any one feels consumers have latched onto an “ideal car” then look at current NA sales numbers. Hybrids are the contrarian product – - – up to higher levels of sales than ever – - – (Not including of course the humble Malibu and a few other examples) in a market that is down overall by more than 40%. Hybrids are the exception that proves the rule in this case. With gas prices at moderating levels, the Prius is redefining if you build it they will come IMO.
The Volt with no direct competitors should have no problems selling, unless gas prices crash. And the first highway capable electrics, at a reasonable price point, should do well also.
July 14th, 2009 at 11:28 am
Circa 2000, an average car A/C tested had a COP of around 2.15, where COP = Heat Removed / Input (Compressor) Power. For a system with intake air at 86 F this translates to around 3 kW of compressor power for an averge Sedan size car. By optimizing the compressor speed based on conditions, the COP could easily be increased above 4 which would cut the power required in half. If the car is already cooled down to 75 deg and you are using recirculated air, and we assumed that the EV guys have a decently optimized system, the A/C load should only be around 1 kW if not lower, especially if the windows were tinted.
Reference: Lee, G. H., and Yoo, J. Y., Performance analysis and simulation of automobile air conditioning system, International Journal of Refrigeration, Volume 23 (2000), pages 243-254.
July 14th, 2009 at 11:28 am
Statik,
You are probably right as usual, but I will find it difficult to purchase an EV to be used for commuting or as a second “around town” car and have to pay $35,000 for it. It will be extremely difficult for most of us to squeeze out the money for the Volt in 2011, or more likely 2012. Maybe Nissan and the other EV manufacturers can get the cost down after the first year or two and get them where people can afford them. I know you will be saving on gasoline purchases, but still…..
July 14th, 2009 at 11:30 am
There are lots of factors at play here:
1) Choice of battery chemistry.
2) The Nissan would not suffer from the Volt’s design compromise of needing to keep spare capacity for when on the ICE.
3) The Nissan should be lilghter due to the lack of the ICE components. (engine, fuel tank, cooling, oil, conversion equipment, etc.)
4) Subsidies.
It is also possible that Nissan has more knowledge of their battery than GM has of their own… or perhaps they are betting that by the time they need to replace these batteries the cost will have dropped.
To be fair, if we are going to de-rate the Nissan range, then we should probably do the same for the Volt and claim it to be ~28 miles.
July 14th, 2009 at 11:31 am
As I understand it, it’s a “Series Hybrid”. Again, note the word “Hybrid”.
If that isn’t good enough, then explain exactly what a “Hybrid” is.
I define it in the world of cars as a mixed origin of propulsion energy, but that’s just me.
July 14th, 2009 at 11:36 am
you got a lot of reading to do, we have discussed and was enlightened ourselves about your technologies since the first day of this blog…
first, LEAD ACID BATTERY is not the same as the battery of today, it was tested yes, but it was not enough…
second, Electric Buses has routs and charging points…successfull..
third, your going to fast with your blahh//blahhh about new technologies man!…these are not stagnant ideas man!.. these are developing ideas!
c’mon man! you can’t just LEVITATE with Magnetic Levetation Technologies and stick it into our asses that fast…. we can’t even perfected the battery technology as of today…not to mention R&D and REGULATIONS implemented by the government… it would take years for these developing ideas/technology to be FULLY IMPLEMENTED….
i think you need to quit taking PROZAC…try VIAGRA.instead…hehehe
July 14th, 2009 at 11:38 am
Some form of truck/hauler based on EREV makes sense IMO. If you could hop in your truck go on errands or pick up bulky items that are too inconvenient or messy for a car and get 15 – 20 miles all electric, that would be huge for a lot of folks.
Then when you are hauling at capacity the generator would be available and the battery too for peak power needs.
July 14th, 2009 at 11:40 am
I think Nissan’s perspective might also be influenced by Renault, the French get nearly 100% of their electricity from carbon free sources (nuclear power).
This along with the higher population density of France and Japan the EV really makes more sense.
It will also make sense for a lot of folks here as well, but if you live outside of urban areas I’m not sure it’s the best fit at this point.
July 14th, 2009 at 11:42 am
The problem with averages for something like range is that averages are meaningless. It’s like the joke that having your feet in the oven and your head in the freezer means that “on average” the temperature is just right, or like the joke about Bill Gates walking into a bar and having the average patron becoming a millionaire. For an individual what is important is their situation, not an average which can be affected by others in completely different situations.
Other than the little old lady in Pasadena who doesn’t drive fast, the range for a vehicle like the i-Miev will not remotely be anything near 100 miles in North America (the 100 mile range is based on a Japanese cycle which is not at all relevant for NA). The rated range for the i-Miev in NA would probably be 55 miles ON AVERAGE in good conditions. For Lyle the range on his commute would probably be something around 35 miles. A driver in suburbia that doesn’t venture onto freeways might get 70 miles. High summer temperatures will reduce this range but winter temperatures will really hurt, because in very cold temperatures not only do you have axillary power draws but you also have additional drive train and rolling resistance losses. (This is why GM never sold the EV-1 in states with harsh winters, preferring to stay in CA and AZ).
July 14th, 2009 at 11:43 am
“The die is cast.” Useful for life, in manufacturing and at the craps tables!!!
No wonder Americans got so bent out of shape when China took over manufacturing
July 14th, 2009 at 11:46 am
do you know how much these BEVs cost? xway BEVs cost more than the VOLT…obviously you don’t need a single thought to figure that out…think twice about RANGE ANXIETY man, it is real…its not that we are justifying the VOLT man, based on many articles been discussed around here, i say, i was just like you before…but now VOLT does make sense…i’m believer of what advantages it would give us…
July 14th, 2009 at 11:49 am
“” I further reason that, simply put, the 100 mile BEV’s battery —being 2 1/2 times larger— will cost at least 2 1/2 times more than a 40 mile EREV’s battery. And it will weigh 2 1/2 times more, or about 2 1/2 x 400 lbs = 1,000 lbs!””
WHAT!!!!
No way bro. Even if you had 2 of the Volts batt packs it still wouldn’t be 2 1/2 times the weight nor 2 1/2 times the cost.
In a BEV, I would bet they are using at the most 75% of the batt pack instead of the 50% GM uses. That’s a more efficient use of the cells. At 75% you would probably get a 2500 cycle count
which gives you 6.8 years of theoretical life if you fully drian and charge your batt pack. If you only use 50% of it in a day then charge to full, then double the years.
July 14th, 2009 at 11:56 am
No, range will realistically vary, with users who drive the routes and ways that Lyle does getting a similiar loss of range compared to the test cycle. The test cycle is not that of a hypermiler. Some mini E owners have reported ranges higher than the test cycle.
July 14th, 2009 at 11:56 am
Man that’s one of the culture changes people need to make. So what if you have an emergency once a year? What happens is there is a 50/50 chance that you have to drive the complete opposite direction of your home. So you’re saying one needs to purchase a car based on a once a year unknown event if any?
OK, I know “it only takes that one time…”. This is why when our cars get paid off, we don’t trade it in for another one. All I have to suggest to folks is don’t trade in your car for a new one just because it’s paid off. Wait for a Volt or BEV. Then you’ll have your backup ICE vehicle. I hear people all the time saying “I cant wait till this car is paid off, I’m gonna trade it in for ?????”.
Sheesh, and you wonder why so many are in debt.
July 14th, 2009 at 11:57 am
Maybe the electrics are the way of the future but 100 miles is not nearly enough. You drive to work 20 miles and back 30 miles with some trips to the store etc and then forget to plug it in at night and you are done even with 50 miles left you are not getting out of the house. Im my opinion you need at least 250 worse case miles with 15 min charge capacity and a wide spread infrastructure of charging stations for this to work. After thinking about this and researching I come to the conslusion that EREV is the only viable alternative with the current battery chemistry. To make EVs workable for most of people we will need a totally different chemistry with improvement buy orders of magnitude over the best Li. I have no idea what it is doing to be, most likely some new generation of supercaps. My guess also that we will see first commertial SCRAM jets before 90% of cars are electric.
July 14th, 2009 at 11:58 am
And why does the media promote electric vehicles with out mentioning the resources that have been used to manufacture the car you will be buying? You save some gas for what: the 30 tons of mined Iron Or for steel, the 40 tons of or processed for precious metals required for the electronics, the 100 gallons of petroleum used to manufacture plastics/rubber, the fuel burned to refine the glass, the energy used for manufacturing, the chemicals created for paints/coatings, etc… It’s all so stupid so you can feel smug in your new hybrid. This Nissan exec states that people want to make a difference and that’s why they will buy?
I can get 44 MPG in my solstice driving the speed limit and taking the 55 MPH parkway to work. I drive 40 miles each day spending about a gallon a day or $63 a month on gas. That same Solstice is also a 300 horsepower sports car that I can take to the track or drive out of town for the weekend. My ICE is a two liter direct injection turbo-charged engine that produces 340 pounds of torque but I also have it tuned to deliver excellent mileage when I ‘m not producing positive manifold pressure. Driving the speed limit and reprogramming my computer I’ve been able to reduce my fuel usage by 35% (EPA estimate is 29MPG highway). There is no reason for me to give up my high-mileage sports car that has low emissions and only costs me $63 a month for gas. I won’t sacrifice my weekend road trips, weekend races, and an enjoyable commute with the top down for an ugly electric car. Here in Northern Utah our refineries are pumped in oil from lower Canada and not from the Middle East. Plus those 21 gallons of fuel I burn each month are still much cleaner then the industrial fall out that comes from producing 3,000 pounds of steel, glass, plastic, rubber, paint, and lithium batteries, for a new electric car.
With all that said, I might give up the performance and convertible top for the Volt but I certainly won’t double my “industrial fall-out footprint” that comes from owning an additional ICE vehicle that I need for road trips. Doesn’t that seem asinine, you own an electric car but you also own a gas vehicle for any time you need to drive further then 50 miles from your home? If anyone is going to sell a 100% electric car it better be something completely innovative like the Aptera, not something hideous like the Nissan Cube.
July 14th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
Dude that scenario can repeat itself infinately to justify why a BEV is not a good idea. It all boils down to the owners responsibility. If you can remember to put gas in your car then you can remember to plug it in at home….PERIOD. Otherwise your a real idiot.
That’s JMHO.
July 14th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
Dan,
Same thing can happen to an ICE only vehicle. If you have mechanical or electrical (battery not charged) problems on a freeway it is not going to matter much which type of vehicle you are in. You are going to cause a lot of people problems all the way from just “rubber necking” to having serious traffic accidents. I just hope the unlucky person will be able to get the disabled vehicle off the road way before it completely stops.
July 14th, 2009 at 12:02 pm
Well technically, right now these BEV’s are just as available as the Volt……lol
=op
July 14th, 2009 at 12:03 pm
wow! i can’t believe that youre perfectlly happy with 100 mile BEV and use your gas car for long drives…are you willing to spend $50k for your BEV and not dumping your gas car? instead of buying the VOLT (EREV) and eliminate your gas car for under $40k?…
and you think youre perfectly happy…
pre-planning?…duh!!… did you ever met the word “EMERGENCY” or “RANGE ANXIETY”… more research man!!
July 14th, 2009 at 12:03 pm
I was wondering, since the Volt will have a gas engine, will it need to be smogged? If so, how will they force the engine to turn on?
July 14th, 2009 at 12:05 pm
there is no competition Frank! The VOLT is an EV too, the only added feature is the built-in generator for range extension…
July 14th, 2009 at 12:07 pm
“RB, The good thing about gas is that I can fill up just about anywhere and in less than 10 minutes.”
Rashiid Amul EV’s operate under a completely different premise. You start each day with a full tank. When an affordable EV has the range that you, or someone with a much smaller commute feels comfortable with, then the thoughts of an EV purchase will start.
Unless you move or change jobs it appears you may be one of the last to be able to reasonably entertain such thoughts.
July 14th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
To call a wind farm greenwashing when compared to coal is absurd in the extreme. Based on your use of the term, any real substantial reduction in pollutants is greenwashing.
I’m glad that the word farm evokes “founds” of nature and happiness in you. That’s appropriate in the case of a wind farms.
Yes, I am getting my wind farm energy delivered on my own personal power lines. There are actually two nearby wind farms which are the closest large power sources to me and I can see the substations and distribution lines from my location.
There is no monolithic electrical grid. Different regions have different mixes of power sources, with the Pacific Northwest, for example, being dominant in renewable hydropower.
Oh, and BEV with electricity from coal and natural gas plant/national average mix is still less emissions than a gas car and can only get cleaner.
Give it up. You just got pwned.
July 14th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
I never ran out of gas on the road but often have only 10-15 miles left when I get to the station. I often forget to plug in my cell phone and laptop so I end up with dead battery.
July 14th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
They are French! What else needs to be said?
July 14th, 2009 at 12:16 pm
You heard wrong. This is hardly news.
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a713683385
http://www.amazon.com/Oil-Wars-Mary-Kaldor/dp/0745324789
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/sardi7.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1626889.stm
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article2928.html
http://www.commondreams.org/views01/1125-06.htm
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/nov2001/afgh-n20.shtml
http://www.jhcrawford.com/op-ed/oil_war.html
and thousands more….
July 14th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
A couple minor points.
“The Volt also is EXTREMELY HEAVY vehicle” As Newbie points out it is projected to weigh less than a Tesla.
“and is a MASS POLLUTER” LOLROTF! Almost any modern engine emit’s cleaner air than it injests! The Volts genset running at optimal points will be more-so.
If you are not really “No Name” the troll you COULD be!
July 14th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
give me a (10 minutes)FAST RECHARGING STATIONS for every 100 mile radius available right now! and i say EV is the way to go…
no matter how much MPC EV could have, without FAST CHARGING STATIONS, for me EV is just an NEV comparable to Electric Scooters that are available today…
lets face the fact that EV will be the next step after EREV…
from HYBRID to EREV to EV, that my friend is ‘NEWBIES THEORY OF EV EVOLUTION’…year 2050…all cars are EV, all gasoline stations are converted to 5 minute recharging stations. and I’am happily lying 6 feet under the old oak tree….tie a yellow ribbon pls…
July 14th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
Here in southern Alberta I can see the genset running a good part of the winter during driving. Even the most efficient electric heater needs a LOT of power to work well. (Hence heated seats being almost manditory.)
July 14th, 2009 at 12:25 pm
Ooops…
Just re-read my post. Sounded like I called you an idiot. Wasn’t the intent.
My bad.
July 14th, 2009 at 12:25 pm
Has your BEV been towed more often than your ICE or EREV? From what factual experience base do you draw your agreement?
I find your speculative agreements and imaginings doubtful. I suggest actual experience, such as Lyle is doing.
My views are based on my actual long term daily commuting use of my BEV (highway capable motorcycle) with an AER of 40 miles and I’ve never had my BEV towed once nor ever run out of juice. I have, though, had some of my past ICEs towed on several occasions, including once due to running out of gas (the city towed it before the tow truck arrived with the small recharge (I mean refill)) and once when a rock shattered an aluminum oil pan, all the oil leaked all over the road and the engine was permanently damaged and once when the shifting mechanism refused to work, with the truck stuck in top gear and completely unable to get going at slow speeds (unlike an electric), etc. etc. Wow, brings back a lot of unpleasant full gasser memories, thankfully replaced with only pleasant more recent electric ones.
July 14th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
Ask the average Joe on the street and they will say that they care about the environment. Most will say they are environmentalists. You can be an environmentalist by sheer ASSERTION. Very few people will say that they don’t care about the environment. The question is what is to be done about the environment. I know people who put bumper stickers on their cars proclaiming their love of the enviornment. That satifies their own requirements for being an environmentalist. Suffice it to say most environmentalists are frauds. Plain and simple. There’s no such thing as a Zero Emissions Car. The plant that generates the electricity will produce emissions. The factories that build the cars use lots of energy and thus emissions as well. This is particularily true if it is a coal fired power plant. Electrical power is fungible. The energy out on the grid can come from anywhere. 51% of the electric power generated in the US is from coal. New autos as you undoubtably know are almost pollution free nowadays. Yes there is CO2 but that was NEVER indicated as pollution until recently. CO2 is NOT a pollutant no matter what the guys in black robes say. The zero emissions environmental argument is bogus.
July 14th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
I’m glad you have the dough for a $150k tesla good for you!
The rest of us will keep our houses and buy a Volt!
I’ll do MOST of my driving electric and have the genset to get to the lake on the weekend.
July 14th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
FYI….
REPORT: Daimler sells 4% of Tesla to Middle East investment fund just two months after acquiring it
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/07/13/report-daimler-sells-4-of-tesla-to-middle-east-investment-fund/
July 14th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
Why any company would “bet” such an investment on one or the other is mystifying to me….
If it were my company I would develop EREV and simply make it an option to not have the extended range. How this is a decision to go with one option only does not merit any accolades.
Further, it’s Stupid that Ford, Chrysler and GM’s money given, loaned, gambled on by us and our government…. is not made mandatory to “pool” the funds as a joint effort between the “Big Three” to develop an E Rev and EV technology is a joke.
They all use Pistons and valves with gas now don’t they…whats the difference really.
We could have had our own batteries instead of Overseas batteries and LG making the profit.
Nissan getting money from us to compete against us…wow…guess you can’t fix Stupid….
July 14th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
The Honda N360, the car that started the now massive loss of market share for the Big 3 (er small 1/2, I mean) in Detroit to more efficient built vehicles, goes (yep, some are still around and on the interstates) 0 – 60 in 19 (yp, that’s nineteen) seconds and car maganzine reviewers at the time were impressed with its performance.
July 14th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
sorry for the typos, “ore” not “or”.
July 14th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
A 100-mile range wouldn’t fly with most anyone who has to drive their own vehicle on their commute to work in the greater NYC Metro area. Never mind that weekend driving around here can easly top 100 miles per day with all of the malls, festivals, and far-flung friends to visit. Also, getting stuck waiting at the tunnels or bridges or in traffic with the heater or air conditioner running and the radio on would shorten that 100-mile range alarmingly guickly, I’m sure.
I’d love to get a Volt because there’s no range anxiety, and I wouldn’t need to bear the expense of buying and maintaining both a “primary” car and an “other car”, I’d only need one car. The Volt’s 40-mile electric-only range would just about cover my getting to work, and the ~50 MPG I’d get on the way back would mean that I’d only use about a gallon of gas per day. Then during the summer weekends, I’d get at least the first 40 miles per day free and maybe I’d burn an additional gallon or two.
I don’t know about other people, but I use my car to go all over the area. Down the shore, up the mountains, and everywhere in-between. I need a car that can get me where I want to go, regardless of range, and that’s the Volt.
In addition, I know too many people who have lost their jobs to be cavalier about where the money I may spend on a large purchase, like that of a car, is going to go to. I want my money to stay here in the USA. I have pride in the works of my countrymen, and I will go out of my way to buy American. There’s no way I would buy the product of a foreign country when I can support the efforts of an American company that’s developing the technology to put us at the forefront of this new chapter in the history of the automobile.
July 14th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
“For Lyle the range on his commute would probably be something around 35 miles.”
…sigh, I don’t even have the energy anymore, lol.
July 14th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
I’m glad he explained it, but I don’t think it’s some sort of tortured rationalization. It sounds to me like they’re seeing some writing on the wall.
If you think that global warming or peak oil could have big effects on our lifestyle in the next decade or so, then Nissan is probably getting on the bandwagon and preparing what could be the right products for that future. It’s a hedge, of course, and we won’t know how all of this will turn out until we see the actual future and the actual products in that future.
On the other hand, if you think that global warming is a crock, and that peak oil is a non-issue, then this stuff sounds a little nuts. This is certainly a viewpoint that I can understand.
July 14th, 2009 at 12:37 pm
Just as Aptera offers an electric and a range extended. Too bad an OEM isn’t building the Aptera. I don’t know if I’ll ever seen one out of California.
July 14th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
Sigh.
Herm said recharge a BEV from installed solar panels, not necessarily a car rooftop panel. So long as the installed system is at least 3 kWh with at least twice that much on site power storage, a totally typical residential or small business ystem, I’d have absolutely no problem recharging my electric vehicle with it.
The average price per kWh is 13¢ here and it’s so cost effective that the regional utility is doing installations voluntarily.
In the case of power outages or no wind for me, I have arrangements to charge at friend’s and neighbors places that have off grid and grid tied solar systems.
Although you might get enough of a charge over a sunny day from a rooftop panel to limp to the nearest outlet, pretty much guaranteed to be closer than the nearest gas station.
July 14th, 2009 at 12:40 pm
Your right Neal, money is a big factor here.
I think most that are squeezing out 35-40 large are going to have a backup car available for long trips.
In my case (and for most) the 100 mile (or 80 mile, or 60 mile) EV would be the primary car, with the ICE as the backup. I don’t really see the 35K EV as the backup because it is a BEV.
/everyone is different though, (=
July 14th, 2009 at 12:41 pm
…and they were far from the first. My first exposure to the idea of an EREV (though not called that at the time) was a hand-built prototype using lead acid batteries and the auxiliary power turbine from a passenger airliner (about the size of an old VW Beetle engine, normally located in the tail-cone behind the rudder and elevators). This was somewhere back in the 60’s.
The reason that we don’t drive such cars today isn’t because no one could demonstrate the technology. It’s because turbines are made of expensive materials machined by exotic methods to almost unheard of precision.
So, while it would be a tremendous range-extender in theory, it’s unlikely to hit the roads en masse for cost reasons.
July 14th, 2009 at 12:42 pm
I did apologize in advance for not reading all the comments and potentially coming across as repetitive
Addressing your first point, I personally don’t know anything about battery technology, so I appreciate your input.
As for your second, isn’t part of implementing electric cars going to be creating charging points? Doesn’t it make sense that these would pop up on their own as a likely problem-solution-product reaction in lieu of gas stations?
As for your third, you misunderstood what I meant. Perhaps I wasn’t clear. I was not saying that these were stagnant ideas, on the contrary, I think that these are radical ideas that should be developed. I was saying that stagnant ideas such as widely unsubstantiated Global Warming are generally politically driven. Often, the powers that be give steam to a movement in order to drum up the political support they may need to implement certain ideas.
I think there is technology in this world already in existence that we have never even dreamed of. I think that is simultaneously exciting and scary, depending upon who uses what for what. I am well aware of laws rules and regulations as means to slow processes down, all of my above statements were not designed to be absolutes or happen !!rightfuckingnow!! I wasn’t rambling, I was merely discussing topics that I find to be points of interest, and possibly related to the subject at hand. Isn’t this a discussion? Don’t you think things are interesting?
In response to your last rather questionable remark, I’m female, not male, and I don’t take prescription drugs, and it is very rude of you to assume so. Don’t you know what happens when you assume?
July 14th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
My good friend CJS and I have agreed to disagree on this point.
I think this would best be calculated by running the battery to depletion and running the “EPA” tests as normal. (I think the Volt is going to do very well here.)
The good Captain thinks the battery should be disconnected to calculate this number.
I’m much like statik on this point, most of the driving I do (spring summer fall) will be full electric anyway so the fuel consumption on genset is not really that important. (Winter is a question mark, I assume the genset will run a lot more to keep things warm.)
July 14th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
I would like to see them state the range of the vehicle at highway speeds with four adults and with the A/C working. That would be an almost worst case scenario.
July 14th, 2009 at 12:48 pm
Talking to yourself again, Cap’n?
City-only use is not mainstream. It is potentially major, but not mainstream. A city BEV is dependent on that environment, and cannot leave it easily. It’s a big-ish niche, but no more. Ma and Pa in Pawtucket won’t give it a second’s consideration.
July 14th, 2009 at 12:48 pm
Dang!! That must be a well thought system. So now my answer is If it sells for say 20% less than the Volt I would consider it.
July 14th, 2009 at 12:53 pm
Jeffhre, I understand what you are saying.
But most people like to take trips. Most people don’t give it a thought about how many miles they need to drive when they jump into the car.
If they need gas, they stop, buy it, and continue on in under 10 minutes.
I think before EVs gain wide adoption, they need to have more range and less time charging. Even if my commute was magically reduced to 20 miles a day, I would still need an ICE vehicle of some kind. I occasionally do go over 100 miles on the weekend. When I do, it is a last minute decision.
An EV will simply not do as a primary vehicle for people like that (me).
Believe me, I want off of oil badly. I hate terrorism and the middle eastern governments who treat their people like garbage. But EVs need to be practical for a wide range of consumers, or they just won’t gain a foothold.
With the technology today, or the technology coming out in the next few years, Voltec makes the most sense to me.
Again, for what it is worth (not much), this is my 2¢.
July 14th, 2009 at 12:54 pm
DonC said:
Statik, you’re catching on to the battery issues. Hopefully at this point everyone here should be able to agree that a 100% DOD is not going to happen.
Also hopefully everyone at this point will agree that there are many wonderful technical advantages to a larger pack. One, which you’ve mentioned, is that a larger pack means fewer charge/discharge cycles. The second, which you haven’t mentioned, is that a larger pack implies a lower discharge RATE at the cell level. Cells react negatively to high discharge rates. For a given power draw, cells in a small pack will discharge at a higher rate than the same cells in a larger pack. For example, if one pack is three times larger than another, given the same power draw the cells in the smaller pack will have a discharge rate three times higher than the cells in the larger pack.
As has been mentioned, this means that increasing the size of the Volt pack by a factor of two would probably triple rather than double the range. (But for cost reasons the pack is not going to double in size).
——————-
Of these points, we are completely in agreement.
/ctrl PrtScn
July 14th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
That’s pretty simplistic EVO.
For EV’s to be accepted by the public they need to be able to be REAL CARS. Which means doing what they are told/asked without being an inconvenience.
Your solution (get off the highway) makes it very clear that EV’s are NOT truly highway capable as yet. Interestingly your argument makes an EREV look better yet!
I don’t bet Lyle is anymore a “lead foot” than is normal for most, he likely just drives like a normal person.
The car has to have the capability to keep up with the owner.
(Or that person will buy a different car.)
July 14th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
Thanks blake, that is really handy.
Thats gives me/us a good base of understanding to work from. It is still difficult to extrapolate it out in a practical sense, when everything is the ‘new hotness,’ when it comes to a application in a EV…but gives us a reference point to start from. I appreciate your post.
+1
July 14th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
Jackson, you nailed it. It has been about a year since I have slowed down and relaxed while driving. The commute is so much more peaceful and way less stressful.
July 14th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
I take it you’ve never been to the midwest?
The farms here are big and sort-of vaguely industrial — money grows on stalks here, and every kind of tool and analysis that is available is used to maximize the yield in both bushels and dollars. I’ve learned as much about economics listening to the farmers on the radio on Saturday morning as I have hanging out with my college friend who went to Wall Street.
This kind of agriculture is not like going over to your neighbor’s organic chickyard. But, hey, it’s very reassuring to look out the window and see economic security coming from those uniform genetically engineered feedcorn stalks!
The windmills fit right in and, like the corn, they wouldn’t be here if they weren’t making money. And, other than manufacturing and installing the wind turbine, I don’t see how they can be anything other than carbon-neutral.
July 14th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
They are at a huge disadvantage anyway, Tag.
The limited range is a real problem, IMO.
July 14th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
Good point on the emissions.
Silly point on estimating battery price. We know how the price of a kWh of battery has behaved during the last ten, twenty, and one hundred years. Nothing wrong with taking the curve and projecting it forward. Unless of course you want to say we can’t predict anything because there might, just might, be some new breakthrough. That might happen of course but that’s hope.
FWIW DOE has over the last ten years or so been wrong on the price of batteries — it has consistently overestimated the price declines. So if anything it’s estimate is probably biased in favor of BEVs.
Here is just one article that talks about the (lack of) price decreases for Lithium batteries. The title is something along the lines of nine years and no real price drops:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/129570-lithium-ion-batteries-9-years-of-price-stagnation
July 14th, 2009 at 12:58 pm
My immediate concern is one of handling… how much does the gen-trailer weigh? does that much weight hung way out back make the car handle in some sort of evil fashion?
July 14th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
It will take a lot of time for anything like this to happen. In this case, I think that the chicken must definitely preceed the egg: it won’t be a valid business plan until there are a significant number of plug-in vehicles on the road which can be fast-charged.
“Islands” of quick-charge availability (in major metropolitan areas, and/or airports) may appear early, but I’m thinking it will be at least a couple of decades before there are more than a smattering of (mostly demonstration) stations.
Ordinary slow-charging stations at malls and other common destinations may appear almost immediately (some have already been installed).
July 14th, 2009 at 1:05 pm
Yep. It is a “numbers game”. Nissan, and all other manufacturers, will continue selling their standard ICE vehicles as available today. They will try to “clean” them up as much as possible, but to insure successfully meeting the CAFE standards they will hope to sell a big bundle of pure EVs or other hybrid vehicles. The more EVs and hybrids they sell the better chance of off-setting the more polluting ICE only vehicles. Somewhere the “numbers” will come together to get them to the CAFE standards. If not, what does the government do? Probably not much.
July 14th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
tap tap…
shhh….
Hey, I plan on making some hitch mount gensets and/or trailer gensets. Gonna make some bucks if I can get the prices down.
So don’t tell anyone, k?
July 14th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
The Volt is the shiznit !
July 14th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
I think Lyle had a bit of range anxiety when he was loaned one for a test drive and reported on it here.
July 14th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
Statik
In addition to the 3 ratings you proposed, I hope the EV vehicle manufacturer will also provide a miles remaining per charge based on at least two factors. The first factor should be based on driver past history of how he “normally” drives (conservative, etc) that would show the miles left in the charge if he continues driving like he has in the past. The second factor should be based on maximum miles remaining in the charge if the driver drives very conservatively to get where he is going. I don’t know what the current miles remaining for the fuel supply is based on, but it should take into consideration the driver’s past history driving the vehicle. I know my Accord always tells me I can go further on the remaining gallons in a tank of gas than I feel comfortable with trying to obtain.
I am not sure I expressed my thoughts very well on this subject. I was trying to find a way to help reduce range anxiety for a driver if he knew just how many more miles it was “safe” to drive before losing power.
July 14th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
Just who are you “racing” with to be the winner to get some place first. So, what if you slow down and get there 10 seconds or 10 minutes later. Think ahead and plan your starting time to get there when you need to be there. A little foresight and planning goes a long way.
July 14th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
Our very enthusiastic and well meaning friend EVO has the tenacity to boil it all down to the basics.
Most of us are somewhat ’stuck’ to where we are living for various reasons, job, family, etc. and cannot just move someplace else. Even if we would very much like to!
You are absolutely right, MaynardKeenan. But I have been to the south of France Spain and Italy in the summer and THEY have very similar automotive cooling issues as they do in Texas in the summer. The traffic wasn’t so different there, lots of cars not too much movement.
I cannot speak for Japan, but people are much the same world over once you pull churches and governments out of the equation. Japan has as far as I know a pretty moderate climate though so are likely better suited to BEV’s than say Calgary Canada (here).
In my case it is the opposite, while I do have AC in my cars, I only run it a few weeks of the year, HEAT in the winter is the (safety) issue here. I bet folks in Sweden or Finland would look at things a lot like a Canadian like me would on this subject.
July 14th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
I am a believer in BEV myself and don’t wan’t to retract from your post but coal plants like oil or nuclear use steam to propel the generator. The fuel is used to produce steam. There is no constant speed or tunning involved.
July 14th, 2009 at 1:24 pm
Nissan makes the best cars and they are more American than GM. I am sure their EVs will be awesome. Can’t wait to pick one up.
July 14th, 2009 at 1:25 pm
Hi Dave,
Wind turbines and wheel generators? Can you please clarify what you mean when you use these terms?
Solar and regen are pretty well clear, and yes, beneficial. But if you mean what I think you do, about the other two, they can’t possibly help. TANSTAAFL applies — perpetual motion devices don’t work.
July 14th, 2009 at 1:27 pm
I sure would not want to tow that thing around and try to back it up all the time. I don’t care if it would be cheaper than the Volt. No sale from this old boy.
July 14th, 2009 at 1:27 pm
The ICEAge is over, Embrace the VoltAge.
The ICEAge is over, Embrace the VoltAge.
The ICEAge is over, Embrace the VoltAge.
The ICEAge is over, Embrace the VoltAge.
July 14th, 2009 at 1:28 pm
For the record, industrially-produced urea is made synthetically from Ammonia and CO2. No need to follow the cows around with a funnel… thankfully!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urea#Industrial_methods
July 14th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
That is exactly why a rating system stating miles per charge for different “styles” of driving might be helpful in choosing an EV. You could see the worst case and the best case for miles per charge. Most of us would probably fall into the middle rating and would feel more knowledgeable about the remaining miles left per charge.
July 14th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
Very true, but how many of us are willing to change our driving habits now to save a few gallons of gas per tank? For myself, I would look for an EV that would give me the mileage per charge I require based on the lowest rating. That way, if I drove more conservatively than worst case, which I would nearly always do, I could always expect to get to and from where I want to go and still have some charge left.
July 14th, 2009 at 1:34 pm
An interesting concept!
Thanks for the food-for-thought Jackson!
July 14th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
I think the last paragraph of the article containing the sentence “Those things clearly are charging.” should read “Those things clearly are changing.”
Nissan may actually help the Volt by creating an economy of scale sooner than the Volt alone. Mark Perry is correct, there is a market for a pure EV. It existed with the first EV1 test group, and they all miss their cars. Even with the range anxiety.
July 14th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
Some reviewers have gotten 70 mpg with the Prius yet EPA is still 50. Should the Volt then have to attain at least that also? Like Herm once said Tesla’s roadster “can” get over 400 miles per charge – but it will never be on the sticker.
July 14th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
Algae can be used to produce Ethanol directly, as well. The process needn’t conclude as diesel. See http://www.algenol.com for at least one example.
The process has some neat secondary benefits, too. Use of desert rather than arable land, minimal water needs, etc.
July 14th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
I totally agree with the role of range anxiety. I was including the Volt as an electric vehicle though.
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!
July 14th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
What you suggest is possible I bet.
With the price of cells dropping dramatically it’s quite possible that our GM friends have such a battery in the test lab as we speak.
I’m going to buy a Volt anyway, but an 80-90 mile AER would be GREAT!
July 14th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
Sorry Laura, didn’t scroll down to here until I posted above about Algenol (http://www.algenol.com), but you’re right.
July 14th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
That 10% at the top for regen also protects the pack.
July 14th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
Nissan is reciting a “zero-emissions” slogan to cover up the fact that they don’t want to take on the expense of developing a range-extender architecture similar to the Volt. Their TRUE rationale is that they believe battery technology will advance in a few years to the point that the range extender will not be needed. If this premise is correct, in a few years they will have a much less expensive product than the Volt, with almost no range anxiety, ergo, they will capture the market. But if they’re wrong, they will miss out on the bulk of the market.
Personally, I doubt that batteries will improve all that much beyond where they are today. Look at all the years invested into that problem, e.g., for computers and iPods. Batteries may be approaching an energy density limit. If so, the Volt, not Nissan, will be the winner. Let’s see which way it goes.
July 14th, 2009 at 1:50 pm
Glad to be able to contribute. Since the compressor won’t be run by a belt and can be run at various speeds, the A/C should be much better optimized to deal with current conditions. Although the added electronics, battery pack, and electric motor will require cooling as well, they provide less of a heat load (that must be overcome by the a/c) to the cabin than a current ICE. All reasons why the automakers should be able to drastically reduce the a/c required power.
My company has been able to increase the efficiency of the Boeing 787 by moving to an electrically driven a/c system and I expect that Nissan/GM/Mitsu/etc. will also reap the same benefits.
July 14th, 2009 at 1:50 pm
Range anxiety is magnified by the impossibly lengthy ‘fill ‘er up’ time frame of a pure electric. Until recharging time can be reduced down to 15 minutes or less, full electrics won’t get much past cult status for a long while.
July 14th, 2009 at 1:52 pm
Very good plan – you’ll make a fortune. Can you adapt it for home use also?
100 mile BEV will have a big market if cost is OK. Voltiacs are reacting emotionally.
I could use a Volt and a BEV if Volt mpg in depleted mode is good. Else I’d just opt for high mpg ICE.
July 14th, 2009 at 1:55 pm
Range anxiety is not at all a behavioral issue. With the Air conditioning dragging down AER drastically when you are repeatedly stuck in 5 pm traffic, and, as I mentioned in my above post that here in Austin, we have had the last 28 days at 103 degrees of temperature…
_______________________________
If you turn on the warning flashers, lower the ac, go to limp home mode, drive on the right lane, drink plenty of bottled water, sing camp songs all the way home and don’t have a mental breakdown over how tragic things could have been. Then you might conclude that any other reaction would be “just behavioral,” and a bunch neurotic worrying about things that just didn’t happen.
July 14th, 2009 at 1:55 pm
CJS,
Well said and some fantastic points.
The catch is 100 miles with the heater/AC running, they get that and it could be the ‘other’ car.
As a consultant most of my days are somewhat unplanned. I can drive as little as 30km (just to the office and back) but a phone call has added 300+ km to a days driving. (The client’s site wasn’t exactly close to my office.)
For me it’s EREV or full gas/diesel.
MissusMuddy ‘might’ get away with a REAL 100 mile (160km) range electric. (Some of the running the kids to places evenings push the daily total driving well over 100 km.)
Were I away and she needed to use the electric for that run it ‘could’ get close to running flat. She wouldn’t like that at all.
Of course we have the Land Rover (4.0 litre V8) as a backup to an electric if the battery was too low…
July 14th, 2009 at 1:56 pm
I don’t have an ICE or any car, for that matter. I’ve rented them, but I’ve never had one towed. Probably because when the gas gauge hits “half full,” I instantly start looking for a gas station. This will not be an option with an BEV.
That said, if I did buy a BEV, it’s unlikely that I would be towed. Mainly becuase I’m hypersenstive about it, and I wouldn’t use more than half of its range except in an absolute emergency. (Which is why I want 300 miles “real world” range.) Anyone who pays attention will be unlikely to be towed.
However, I am a firm believer that if there’s a possibiliy of someone doing something stupid–there are people who will do it. And since the range is a lot lower in an BEV and you can’t refill as easily, my guess is that it will happen more often than in an ICE or EREV. (At least in terms of running out of fuel.) That said, I don’t think it’s a big deal. Or a reason not to buy or use an BEV is you think you can use one. Just make sure you don’t run out of range.
By the way, what is the range on your EV, if you don’t mind my asking?
July 14th, 2009 at 2:01 pm
Doesn’t burning biofuels still produce emissions, CO2, etc.?
July 14th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
I liked the post from Luke a lot. Some tiny quibbles:
Suspension lube – ya, probably a little more often than once every 15,000 miles as you’ll be going out of your way to find new scenic routes with lower speed fun twisties. You’ll find that the huge smile wearing electric motorcyclists have discovered them before you. That should add about $6 every couple of years if you squeeze it in yourself.
http://shop.oreillyauto.com/Maintenance/MaintenanceSuspensionLube.aspx
Shocks – don’t see why, as that’s a question of matching the shock choice to the vehicle weight and handling characteristics. Are you saying that you think GM will use flimsier shocks for the vehicle weight/handling for the Volt than they do on their other vehicles? If so, why do you think that?
Brake pads – nope, thanks to regenerative braking, you’ll be replacing those less often.
So forth – like what? Most the parts in common will full gassers will need the same amount of maintenance (or less, like with regenerative brakes) and most of the rest of the parts related to electric drive will be absolutely no maintenance obviously. One moving part with no mechanical friction.
oil changes, timing belts, EGRs, catalytic converters – what are those? Oh yeah, you’ve still got’em if you have en ER-EV, as well as the unsightly tailpipe and don’t get me started on exhaust systems after a few winters worth of corrosive salts.
Full hybrids (GM’s excepted) have had less maintenence than their full gasser counterparts well documented and they’re much more complicated than BEVs.
So, I conclude that they’ll be plenty of unscheduled maintenance only if GM does subpar design, parts spec, quality control and manufacturing in a perfect storm of badness (on a dour note, rouge waves are now known to be more common than previously thought).
My biggest worry with electrics had been for dealers and their service departments and the after market biz profits. Then it struck me, electric is a huge new market for the savvy dealer and after market parts stores. Think consumer electronics, apps and upgrades (performance and otherwise). The economy from folks doing electric right is going to be HUGE, once penetration and word of mouth happens. Let’s not let greed fail us now.
July 14th, 2009 at 2:06 pm
Why would I let you get away with that while I’m trying to sell the same people AREVs?
July 14th, 2009 at 2:09 pm
I believe that was given as option one. The more choices the better as far as Mr. Market is concerned
July 14th, 2009 at 2:09 pm
>> I know… what if pigs could fly…
Don’t beat yourself up. What you’ve described is very likely to happen.
It’s just gonna take several years… several very loooooong-feeling years.
July 14th, 2009 at 2:12 pm
Be sure to build them so they don’t mess up the airflow…
July 14th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
For the chronically un-cool (which includes myself, alas):
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=shiznit
Warning! Explicit language. Definition #6 probably comes closest to the intent.
July 14th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
100 mile range… what does this really mean?
This means, realistically, I wont drive further than 40 miles to anywhere. If i can’t plug in, round trip would be 80 miles. I dont trust the 100 mile range, even then, I would still want a little comfort buffer.
I dont know if I could live with a car that I can only drive in a 40 mile radius of my home.
July 14th, 2009 at 2:17 pm
So does that mean you’re going with the Citroen C1 ev’ie, along with CaptainJackSparrow?
4 seater EV, 4 wheels no less
60 mph, so highway capable (but please keep it off the interstates for additional fun and range)
60 to 75 mile range (make that 42 to 52 miles if you drive like Lyle)
Here’s the best part, less than $26,000.
Standard: ABS brakes, electric windows, Radio CD with MP3 input, central locking, 3 or 5 door models, airbags, safety features and safety engineering.
Order yours online today for shipment to your door.
http://www.theelectriccarcorporation.co.uk/
Launched in April:
http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2009/04/29/458863.html
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009/04/c1-evie-20090430.html
http://allworldcars.com/wordpress/?p=12553
Let the gasser-centric monkeywrench throwing begin….
Before you dis about weak, funny, little french cars, etc., here’s their supercar:
http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/citroen-confirm-2-million-gt-supercar/
The “Citroën GT will use a version of the company’s coming diesel-hybrid drivetrain.”
July 14th, 2009 at 2:20 pm
awesome price too!!! and you will be needing a second car for long drive… sounds American to me….meaning ‘wasteful’…
July 14th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
Exactly.
July 14th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
amen bro…
July 14th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
These people at Nissan are either the most stupid or completely BRILLIANT at what they are planning to do! Trying to satisfy the 98% of the population that drives 40 miles or less is going to leave that 2% awfully mad!
Only time and buyers will tell…
GO EV !!!
July 14th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
Oops, by “founds” I meant “sounds”.
You are lucky to have wind farms nearby. Most people do not. I envision that most wind farms simply hook into the grid. Having a private power grid is expensive. It’s like having competing private water systems… everybody is basically selling you the same product, so why have 2 or 3 separate companies pipes in the ground instead of just one?
How much are you paying per kWh for your power? In British Columbia, Canada which is mostly hydroelectric I believe, it’s about 7 cents.
July 14th, 2009 at 2:28 pm
In other news of the day …. It sounds like Exxon is actually getting into the algae fuel business in a big way. Wow.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/business/energy-environment/14fuel.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&em
Hmmm …. could it be that Craig Venter at Synthetic Genomics really DOES have a huge breakthrough in algae based biofuels? I would bet that he does. Craig Venter is the same guy that helped “sequence the DNA genome” several years ago. They say he’s a certified genius kind of guy. If anyone can figure out how to make “biogasoline” with algae in the most efficient, cost effective way it’s a guy like him. He can do all sorts of genetic engineering to make algae into tiny, super productive biofuel factories.
http://www.syntheticgenomics.com/
I would love to be able to buy some algae based “biogasoline” in my local area for my Volt in 2012 or so. From what I’ve been reading, this algae “biogasoline” could really freak out the fat cat Middle East oil shieks in the next 10 years or so.
July 14th, 2009 at 2:30 pm
The idea is that since plants or algae absorbed CO2 in order to grow in the first place, the net effect is a wash: “Carbon Neutral.”
Of course, this doesn’t necessarily account for energy used to harvest the crop, process it into fuel, deliver it to gas stations (etc).
July 14th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
Vegasguy, your the man!… i never thought of that…hmmmm… great question by the way… i hope Lyle answer this question…
July 14th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
In heavy traffic, rubberneckers slow down to see what the heck it going on. So even cars stopped at the side of the freeway will cause traffic problems.
Heck, I even remember one time when a traffic crew was putting a sign up on the other side of the freeway, and people on my side were slowing down to watch.
July 14th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
Great. So use your current vehicle until it totally falls apart (for many manufactuers, that’s just after the new car smell (is it really fom pig bladders?) wears off). Then buy a new electric when you buy new and you’ll be ahead of the game.
The media promotes vehicles in general without mentioning the resources that have been used to manufacture the car you will be buying. Like it or not, auto-vehicles are a part of modern culture, a major basis for global manufacturing, trade and patterns of civilization. Of course, more efficient, less non-renewable (or recylable) resource intensive manufacturing is better than the enviroenment. That’s a different topic than the merits of vehicles using efficient electric drive or some thing less sensical.
Thanks for muddling all the issues together. What is this, national FUD day?
July 14th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
The problem with coming up with realistic “numbers” is that they
1) Cannot take into account all possibilities
-or-
2) There is a subjective take on which of the many possible “numbers” is used
3) People don’t like numbers, anyway.
Why not come up with some kind of plot, or graph? If a standard format is used, it would still make comparison possible (in an analog, less precise but more human sort of way).
July 14th, 2009 at 2:34 pm
There are many people who say that they care about the environment, but don’t know what belongs in a recycling or compost bin. I see it at work all the time.
July 14th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Heh!
Of Course the Volt is a stopgap!
But until “Mr Fusion” is readily available it’ll have to do.
I think Voltec drive is the first chance to have a widely accepted electric drive car.
July 14th, 2009 at 2:39 pm
nobody ask you to give up anything… if your ICE works for you… stick on it, like i do for now, until i can manage to finance my VOLT by myself in the future… lets face it…we can’t eliminate CO2 footprint immediately, it will take years and years to just reduce it, gas stations will stay for a couple of decades more before totally vanished… all i need right now is too put rechargeable battery with my existing ICE to work together as soon as possible and that the VOLT is the answer of my prayer.
July 14th, 2009 at 2:39 pm
OK, gotcha.
How will this work regarding emission standards in states such as California? If its biofuel, will they let you belch out more because its more carbon neutral?
July 14th, 2009 at 2:40 pm
So whatever works with today’s prices (small market) can only get cheaper with bigger markets in the future, with improvement certain and the speed of improvement to be determined. What horrible news for electric drive haters.
John Petersen has tried to talk up his investment position advanced lead acid batteries for the last year through spreading FUD about lithium resources and chemistries. It’s a poor strategy, as the markets can and will happily use anything and everything that actually works.
Sorry, you cited a known biased source with incentives to underestimate the price declines. Perhaps reality will be somewhere in between?
July 14th, 2009 at 2:41 pm
Heh!
Then my Volt will be well charged because I’m freakin anal about plugging in the phone(s) at night. (I end up plugging in MissusRovers phone most of the time!)
July 14th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
Interesting question!
The running theory is that there will be a ‘maintenance’ mode for the genset. It is unknown whether that will accessible by the owner.
July 14th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
I know you will ignore this, Jim I, but here goes:
So the next time you are a gas station with a low gas tank, just stand in front of a pump and declare “the car is supposed to work for me, not the other way around” as you plan to with EVs and then drive off again without filling your tank and see how you get with that attitude repeated. The name for what you describe in your thinking is cognitive dissonance. You are planning to apply a standard to EVs that you fail to follow in your current use of ICEs.
July 14th, 2009 at 2:48 pm
I’m sure he realizes better place muddies the waters and conceptually elicits a lot of negative reactions. People don’t want to think about infrastructure because it’s a frustration that is out of their hands. Although electrical outlets are vastly more common than gas stations the iffyness of an unfamiliar outlet precludes any consideration of it’s use, before the long wait of the standard 120 plug even comes into play.
Electrical outlets are simply way more common than gas pumps. But consider stopping at Joe’s closed gas station at 2 AM. In your ICE the police may ask why are you here and you say “I’m looking for one that’s open.”
In your BEV you find a weather capped, GFI protected exterior wall outlet and you juice up until the police arrive and say, why are you stealing Joe’s electricity. You answer, “Uh oh.”
In your BEV every where there are structures with human activity there will be a place for a slow charge. But the fact that you have to convince someone to let you have it makes charging opportunities seem rarer than gas pumps. It’s the old mom told me not to talk to strangers thing. If they say yes you can charge it, will you have to listen to a 40 minute lecture on how stupid electric cars are because the range is too short?
If there is an area wide outage like Lyle faced in his Mini E then you are stuck. But if you were out of gas the pumps won’t be working either.
I think Better Place would be a complete annoyance to just about everyone except someone whose charge gauge was giving them a lot of anxiety. Then knowing there was a charge station that could charge as fast as their OEM allowed or the rare battery swap for the few that would sign up, would get the reaction OMG that’s great, just what I needed (to counter my stupid failure to properly plan).
July 14th, 2009 at 2:48 pm
Right.
Because no prospective vehicle buyers could possibly have any environmental or any other concerns. You never want to show a customer that you might share their concerns or have your product be part of the solution to those concerns. Oh wait, don’t they teach the opposite of that attitude in Marketing 00000001?
July 14th, 2009 at 2:50 pm
It’s gonna have to be accesable by any “Pat Q Public”.OR Only SMOG Techs. Whch do you think they will grant?
lol….
Good Q though, I asked that a few months ago and nobody really knows.