AND 
Study Shows Range Anxiety is Significant
Research suggests that most of the electrified cars that will be entering the North America market over the next several years will be pure battery electrics as opposed to plug-in hybrids like the Volt.
According to California based Aerovironment 60% of the 30 electric models known to be in the pipeline globally for 2012 will be pure EVs.
Companies like Nissan who have unveiled their upcoming LEAF EV believe pure EVs will be most readily adopted. Anything other than a pure EV says Nissan’s director of product planning Mark Perry are “bridge technologies.”
GM, however, based on their experience with EV-1 believes range anxiety will be a significant barrier to adoption of EVs and is the fundamental reason they chose to develop the Voltec extended range architecture.
“We think, in the future, (battery-only) will have a place,” says Tony Posawatz, vehicle line director for the Chevrolet Volt EREV. “The experience of range anxiety is real.” Posawatz is actually credited with coining the term which is defined as the combination of limited range and fear of being stranded.
So who is right?
A study performed by Aerovironment provides some clues.
In 2007 Aerovironment installed a fast charging station in Tokyo to support a group of 93 mile range EVs that made up a test fleet operated by the Tokyo Electric Power Co.
They found that drivers very rarely ventured far from the charging station, and when the EVs were returned to the base all were generally at greater than 50% state of charge (SOC).
When a second further charging station was added, drivers were noted to immediately expand their driving radius. Furthermore when EVs were returned to the base all were at <50% state of charge.
The drivers actually rarely used the distant charger, they just felt more comfortable having it around.
This alteration in behavior objectively demonstrates the reality of range anxiety.
“They mostly didn’t use the second charger,” said Kristen Helsel director-EV solutions at Aerovironment. “They mostly used the first charger. The availability of the second charger made them comfortable to drive (farther).”
This study indicates that a highly developed charging infrastructure will be needed for EVs to achieve widespread penetration. Aerovironment believes consumers will need more than a million public charging stations to support 1 million EVs, Obama’s goal for the US by 2015.
Source (Ward’s Auto, subscription required)
September 6th, 2009 at 8:46 pm
Range anxiety is, I think, is very important.
But I am not surprised by the above finding. People with limited needs will probably buy more plain BEV-s. There are many out there who fit this group.
Volt will be successful just the same.
This was my original impression of the Volt. This is why this is such an important vehicle. The Volt concept is a winner.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2009 at 8:59 pm
Of course the Volt is bridge technology. A very far spanning bridge. It will take many years (20-30?) before ICE-s can be replaced with BEV.
Eventually the Volt will shed it’s ICE as the battery technology advances and new electric infrastructure develops. But that is long way off. Meanwhile the Volt concept is by far the best.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2009 at 9:13 pm
Most of the posters on this site have known this for a long time. Glad the facts are finally coming to light on the all important range anxiety issue.
With the Chevy Volt you can drive anywhere, anytime, without any worries about running out of battery power. No lifestyle change required. Just plug it in when you get home. That’s it!
And even if you can’t plug in, or you forget, or there’s a power outage – you’re still good to go with the Chevy.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2009 at 9:17 pm
Well put. I take no offense at the Volt EREV concept being called a bridge technology. Such technologies are essential to get the market to transition.
Having ridden my hybrid electric mountain bike over 30 miles today, I can tell you that I definitely packed my charger for the ride, and took comfort that I could still pedal in an emergency. Make no mistake, range forced me to carefully consider my travel plans.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2009 at 9:19 pm
LazP
I had a similiar reaction to the “bridge technology” statement. I am definitely looking at a pure BEV for a future car, but I also understand that many will not be willing participants in a car with a limited range and “slow refills”.
I hope the EREV is a success, and hope further that BEV’s will someday (my crystal ball say 5.27 years) rule the roost.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2009 at 9:21 pm
To me range anxiety means two things.
1. Most EV purchasers will have more than one car at home. They will replace one Gas car with an EV. That is a potential customer base of 60 million in the US.
2. I plan to use no more than 80% of real range of the EV. So if the real range in 100 miles, people won’t plan on using more than 80 miles. If the real range is 80 miles, they will use 65 miles, for eg.
http://evnow.wordpress.com/2009/09/02/curing-range-anxiety/
BTW, is it surprising that the company that installs fast chargers says the fast chargers are important ? Duh …
(Quote)
September 6th, 2009 at 9:35 pm
Another good point that has been brought up before is that the Chevy Volt COULD be one’s only car, because it can go anywhere, near or far, without any worries about running out of juice.
Any pure electric only vehicle would likely have to be a second car for short trips, while the real gas car waits faithfully in the garage to do the long haul jobs.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2009 at 9:37 pm
Biased? I think so.
Aerovironment, Inc.
http://www.avinc.com/ev_charging/
Range anxiety is real, but stats and studies from companies with a dog in the fight are near worthless.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2009 at 9:49 pm
Only 30% of American households have a single car. Almost 60% of the households have two or more cars. Thats why pure EVs have a larger appeal than EREVs for the time being – esp if they are costlier. I see no reason to own a gas car and a EREV.
Ideally – I’d like a EREV with about 80 miles EV only range as one car and second/third cars would be pure EVs. Nopoint hauling all the weight around for nothing .
I think 40 miles of EV range on Volt (likely real world of 30 to 35) is too small for most people i.e. once a week or so they would have to use gas. I’d like to remain gas free for all but the once a month trips.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2009 at 9:56 pm
I can’t believe a study was actually needed for it
(Quote)
September 6th, 2009 at 10:02 pm
funny , im watching the movie .. who killed the electric car .. i pull up the volt website and this is the first article i see .. a so so gloomy depiction of how .. its not so good mood towards the car .. exacally in how the initially advertised it to the general public for sale in the late 90’s .. then i see that the article is by ward automotive inc or something .. so i looked them up and theyre owed by some media corp of course and the they had been bought by a investment company … in which is a far cry from any one with an apropriate depiction of how a car should be valued … but really .. have some positivity
(Quote)
September 6th, 2009 at 10:09 pm
Yes, infrastructure is important. If there are no gas stations in the desert people won’t drive there.
It will be interesting to see how people react to a fully built charging and swap station infrastructure that has GPS info to direct the driver quickly and easily to a 2 minute charge. I’m guessing they will react exactly like current ICE drivers.
Until EVs and their infrastructure provides a convenience similar to the ICE system it will be just a niche market. The Volt gives you that… Of course at a cost but at least you have the full convenience.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2009 at 10:22 pm
As more EV’s get on the road the consensus is, “Man this is cool”. With the back burner thought being, “I need to get one”. And the third concern, “How much do they cost?”.
Many will shop and buy the lowest price pure EV car. This is a good thing in that more and more people will have the experience of driving electric and follow the same “this is cool – I’ll buy one” pattern.
But, as folks become more savvy, they will realize that extended range capability is desirable in real life situations. It then becomes a question of the pace of battery systems development. Balanced against battery / generator combination availability.
In 6 or 7 years we WILL have a light weight long range (300 mile) battery. But, it will be very expensive. EREV is the smart way to go for at least 7 years.
BTW: This week I again petitioned the State Of California EPA to consider GM EREV use for State vehicles.
=D~
(Quote)
September 6th, 2009 at 10:26 pm
“Range Anxiety” got you down?
Buy two VOLTs and call me in the morning.
You’ll sleep like a baby.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2009 at 10:28 pm
(click to show comment)
September 6th, 2009 at 10:30 pm
Chris,
Your point might be better understood if you write in English that is readable, ie. use capital letters at the beginning of sentences, periods at the end, and check your spelling. We’re accustomed to better writing on this site. Doesn’t have to be perfect, just readable.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2009 at 10:33 pm
The 40 mile EV goal was chosen after interviewing thousands of commuters. No one here says the VOLT is the perfect car for everyone, just 70% of those who commute to work on a daily basis.
Let’s say someone comes out with a 250 mile range EV. The commuting figures still haven’t changed. And when the battery technology gets that high, then somewhere down the road will be a 250 EV VOLT, probably with the ‘range extender’ as an optional equipment item.
It’s still a win-win either way.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2009 at 10:35 pm
(click to show comment)
September 6th, 2009 at 10:46 pm
(click to show comment)
September 6th, 2009 at 10:56 pm
If this “scientific” study done by this charging station provider is taken at face value, then it is proof positive that we did in fact evolve, just not as much as most think.
I mean, really, a study by a charging point provider about how essential charging points are? And their conclusion is that they are essential, just more for a placebo affect than actual charging. And they would have us believe that we need 1 for every EV on the road. Isn’t that special?
Seriously, I adamantly believe that BEVs have their place in the coming EV pradigm shift. That place is available now. Charging infrastructure and battery improvements will grow the BEVs place, but 1 charge point away from home for every vehicle? That is absurd.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2009 at 11:07 pm
They should also be petitioned to drop the 10yr battery warranty requirement electric only propulsion vehicles with range extenders. BEVs aren’t required to have it and neither should the Volt nor vehicles like it.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2009 at 11:16 pm
Right. Until both infrastructure and much more advanced battery technology prevail. EREV can be king.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2009 at 11:25 pm
Not usually, though. Over extremely long hills perhaps.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2009 at 11:27 pm
Different needs will demand different cars.
My personal needs are that for five of seven days, a BEV with a real range of 40 miles would work fine for me. But those other two days of the week, I need someting that will be able to take me at least 125 miles, most of which are highway.
So a BEV with a rated range of 100 miles, a real range of about 75 miles, simply would not work for me.
So my solution would have to be a BEV with a 200 mile rated/150 real, which at this time would be very expensive, or a Volt that will eliminate the concern.
As far as charging stations, how many of those do you really expect to see in existence by Nov, 2010, especially if you are not in one of the “major metropolitan areas”?
If/when the battery capacity is available and at a more reasonable price, I am good to go with a BEV. Until then, the Voltec platform makes the most sense.
Again, this is what I need.
You have to buy what you need…………..
(Quote)
September 6th, 2009 at 11:30 pm
3rd grade teacher
So get with the program. Encouragement and inclusive commonality will work better than didactic arrogance.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2009 at 11:33 pm
I was reading a study that concluded that in the near term aluminum and steel will see pricing converge, and in the long term carbon fiber for both body and structural work will be cheaper even than steel. Wonder how much difference that will make combined with cheaper and light weight batteries. Interesting time to be observing transportation technology, unless you spend all your time crying in your beer about everyone overlooking FC potential of course.
(Quote)
September 6th, 2009 at 11:39 pm
The Volt?
(Quote)
September 6th, 2009 at 11:45 pm
I believe they studied adding one outlying charge point per fleet of vehicles, which were initially home based in a motor pool type of arrangement with chargers, but does it matter?
(Quote)
September 6th, 2009 at 11:49 pm
There is an ad for a company that runs IQ tests at the bottom of the page asking if I am a genius or an idiot. Clearly Audi USA has answered that at no time or expense lost for me
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 12:52 am
The Volt has a 110kW motor, but this is its maximum power output. Most of the time it will not need this. Traveling on the highway at constant speed requires only 20kW of power. The ICE produces enough to sustain the battery indefinitely at this usage. From time to time you will need to accelerate and draw power faster, but this will be a very small fraction of your driving time. The ICE is charge sustaining.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:22 am
CD Jenkins Said:
September 6th, 2009 at 10:35 pm
The Volt uses more electric power than it can generate. You will run out of power (dead battery) long before the gasoline runs out.
———————————————————————
The Volt leaves a buffer in the battery. The generator should keep up for the most part and the buffer protects you from the occasional dip when usage > generation. This is the whole unique concept of the Volt where you can continue driving if you can not recharge. The ideal situation would be to recharge at some point. If you can’t Volt keeps you going. If anyone has more specific details on this please chime in!
I can see an update to my GPS – Closest Charging Stations.
Thanks. I want a new car now trying to hold out for a Volt next year in the Bay area.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:26 am
For me it would take 200mi AER to give up the good, warm feeling of having an extra 250mi of gas range backing up my battery. I also feel really good about the ability to refuel in under 5 minutes for my rare cross-country drives. The Volt gives the very best of both worlds. (I would still try to drive most days without using a single drop of gasoline.)
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:28 am
The results also show that “range anxiety” disappears very quickly when charging infrastructure becomes more common. (The more scientific phrase is “duh”)
Switch the current state of electric and gasoline infrastructure and you’d have a “GM-gas.com” filled with pro-gas foamers and anti-gas trolls.
Pro: “You can refill from your home gasoline refinery!”
Anti:” You can’t go very far on one tank. Then what? You’d need a second car – an electric one – which could recharge at any one of America’s 100,000 recharging stations, for a trip of any length”
“I’m not buying any gasoline car until they make one that goes 1,000 miles on a tank”
“Gasoline cars are for idiots. Who’d want to pay $70,000 over the life-of-vehicle where half of that is the consumable energy storage?”
“EESTOGas has secret patents pending that will get 10,000 miles per gallon. They just signed a deal with the Pentagon!”
GM: “Global Warming is a crock of shit” (…No matter what alternate universe you’re in, Bob Lutz is still a moran)
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:45 am
CDJenkins: “The Volt uses more electric power than it can generate. You will run out of power (dead battery) long before the gasoline runs out.”
I wasn’t aware the Volt generated any electric power other than maintaining state-of-charge, and only once the battery is at the “depleted” point. And running out of battery power before you consume a single drop of gasoline isn’t a bug, it’s the whole point of the design.
This statement of yours is so zen koanish it’s kind of like asking “can an airplane on a treadmill take off”. To which pilots will wonder if you ate lots of paint as a kid. “You mean wall candy?”
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 3:10 am
I would love to experience “range anxiety”. But… of course, I cant because I don’t have an electric car!
Would someone just start selling electric cars already!
(I can’t afford a Tesla)
The people doing these “studies” could be working on an assembly line MAKING EV’s.
Sorry… I’m getting impatient. Something tells me GM is not going to honor our little waiting list here and I’ll be forced to buy a Nissan Leaf, or the Hyundai. I’ll continue my wait for the Volt if I know I can have one in Nov of 2010 or early 2011, but my patience is definitely wearing thin. If they don’t honor the waiting list or take too long to roll out the Volt nation wide… I will buy whatever electric I can get my hands on first.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 3:16 am
I don’t doubt there are plenty of people who will worry when they first drive their EV, but the study seems to show it’s a placebo effect, as another commenter mentioned. Once people explore their limits and KNOW they can travel farther, they won’t have the problem anymore, as the study seems to show (they all start to discharge lower than 50%). So education seems like the cheapest way to solve the “problem” (ie. have guidelines as to how low a consumer should go in terms of battery range, make it clear EVs have reserve capacity, etc), though more chargers is probably the quickest way.
This does however sound suspiciously like FUD to me on GM’s side; they can gain a lot on the delayed success of the BEV, since they have invested so much on the EREV. Hopefully that is not their intent with the “range anxiety” term. I still feel we won’t really see the real picture of consumer acceptance until some of these cars are on the market, which hopefully happens soon.
I’m probably going to get down ranked anyways, but don’t get me wrong, I understand EREV still has an important role since BEVs obviously aren’t for everyone yet. However, I still get the feeling some EREV supporters here depend too heavily on the term “range anxiety” to justify their support. I think EREV has enough (long range with current gas stations, still usable basically everywhere, probably cheaper since using an ICE and a smaller battery, etc) that it can ride on it’s own merits rather than heavily depend on the demerits of BEVs to justify it’s existence.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 4:38 am
That’s the backup plan, which will probably be route most will go when the list is past on… ;-(
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 4:41 am
oh, but range anxiety is REAL!
PSST, don’t mention the old portable generator in the trunk idea. People here can get mad quickly!
EV’s won’t have guages to tell you when they’re low or play a chime. The tech hasn’t been invented yet, but the $40000 VOLT will be the first to have one!
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 6:20 am
LazP —> Agreed that range anxiety is important, so the question is how one responds to it. Here we like to think in terms of an ER-EV such as the Volt. That design is elegant and attractive but perhaps expensive. A simpler and cheaper way to handle range anxiety is with accurate metering of remaining charge (or energy) in a BEV so that the driver is confident of the ability to come back home.
What will drive people crazy is if the meter says you have enough charge to go 50 more miles and then the car dies after only 7 or 8. I’ve had that happen in traditional gas cars where the meter was wrong, and metering is much harder in a BEV.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 6:25 am
Even though the sponsor has a position, the study still has value and the data still is useful. What is probably the case is that we would not have heard of the outcome if the data had shown the opposite result.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 6:26 am
The study wasn’t needed for the general idea, which we all know, but it did give some numbers and percentages we didn’t know before.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 6:27 am
The return trip to the recharge base may be up hill (increased battery drain) and at night (need lights on). Has happened to me.
=D~
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 6:32 am
koz –> Agree, the 10yr battery warranty was well intended, no doubt, but right now is working against bringing the best cars to market the most quickly. In a world with improving batteries, replacing the battery in some future year is a better bet for me as a consumer than paying for replacement up front, which is the actual effect of the law.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 6:34 am
jeffhre –> your point is well taken, but it is true that I couldn’t understand the original post. With a little more structure to it, it might have said something important.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 6:35 am
Maybe in CA, but unfortunately no possible for the rest of us
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 6:37 am
jeffhre –> thanks, that makes my morning
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 6:38 am
If you have to evacuate FL in a hurricane, a 200 mile AER is meaningless.
Only rapid recharge, as you get with fossil fuels, alcohols, hydrogen or compressed air, matters. You would need your batteries / capacitors to recharge to > 80% in < 5 minutes to satisfy consumers.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 6:42 am
Volts will become available eventually, but I think you are pushing the calendar. With only 10,000 available in total until late 2011, and probably most in the later parts of 2011, Volts are going to be available mostly to those with an inside track. So unless you are the chief of staff for someone in Congress, or a TV star, or someone else with power or visibility, then you are unlikely to get one in 2010 or even in 2011, except possibly late 2011.
On the other hand, as with most new things (Nintendo Wii ?) eventually you see them stacked up and easily available.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 6:44 am
Don’t forget, Better Place is providing battery swapping stations as a rapid recharge option. It will be interesting to see how well it works.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 6:45 am
jake –> Good points. In the study cited, presumably the drivers were becoming more familiar with the car during the time it took for the 2nd charging station to be installed. So, following your line of thinking, the shift to deeper battery use may have come from that familiarity as well as the 2nd station.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 6:50 am
Actually, I think a lot of people that the study say suffer from “range anxiety” are actually “range planners”. They know their mileage and charge limit and plan accordingly. I don’t think it’s fair to say they are stressed out about it. The people who do feel anxiety should probably never have bought the BEV in the first place. These are the same airheads who don’t plan and run out of gas on the highway. Speaking of which, I have a Volt question for Lyle or maybe someone else who is knowledgable – What happens if an airhead is driving a Volt in Extended Range mode and he runs out of gas? Will the Volt allow him to temporarily revert to electric mode, for say 5 miles, so he can limp to a gas station?
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 6:58 am
I strongly recommend to
those who plan to buy a plugin hybrid or BEV that they buy a hybrid or electric bike, scooter or motor cycle first. They cost a small fraction of what a plugin hybrid or electric car costs and you would gain an immediate appreciation for the benefits and limits of these technologies.
I love the amazing torque on my electric bike, which allows me to rocket through intersections from a standing start or power up hills. I hate the 6-8 hrs of recharge time. I hate the 15 mile range of a single battery (which I only get while pedaling).
Once you’ve experienced these things first hand, they are indelible, and you will be expert in your future choices of alternative fuel / propulsion vehicle.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 7:02 am
Please learn how to spell the words you will be using to insult people with.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 7:09 am
It would be smart for GM to sell to the most high profile customers. That builds even more buzz and cache for their product.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 7:16 am
Can you qualify your statement, “60% of households have 2 or more cars?” That is hard to believe, depending on how “households” is defined.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 7:39 am
President Obama’s goal is not “1 million EVs” but rather 1 million Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs). I do not think it would be fudging too much to include BEVs since they are plug-ins and electric, but the primary type of vehicle this goal targets is the Volt, built in America by an American car company.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 7:46 am
I experience “range anxiety” all the time with my battery operated tools.
I guess as long as you plan your use and charging, then your fine.
I suggest buying a $20 battery operated drill, and give it a spin. This will cost you much less than a battery operated bike.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 7:48 am
CD please read the FAQ on this site. It provides a basic background in the EREV.
I look forward to your next informed post.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 7:52 am
Please see 3rd grade teacher. I think your single sentence contains grammatical faux pas.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 7:55 am
Yes, range anxiety is real. I am one of the 100 people in NJ that have a Mini E so I know first hand. However I have been getting much better range than Lyle so far. I’ve been driving the car 110 to 120 miles every day since I got it in June and have logged almost 7,000 miles so far. It took me about 1 month to really adjust to the fact that there really is a limit on how far you can drive. After 25 years of driving it was definitely an adjustment. But now I really don’t sweat it as much as when I first got the car because I know the limits and I plan my day’s driving. Lyle must drive like he’s in a Formula 1 car if he’s only getting 80 miles per charge, because after driving 80 miles I always have at least 25% battery charge left. That being said, I love the Volt’s ability to generate additional electric to charge the batteries for extended driving. The Mini E really couldn’t serve as my only car because of the range limit. It could though for people that lived in more urban area’s. Still, for me to consider purchasing an EV I would want at least 150 miles real world (not the manufacturers BS) worth of driving and nobody other than Tesla has brought that car to market yet. I’m really considering the Volt though. My ONLY problem is that wish it could go a little further before the gas engine kicks in. If it could go 60 or 70 miles all electric first it would be a no brainer for me because at least half my driving would be all electric. My 100 mi + day in the Volt now will have the ICE burning gas 2/3 of the time I’m driving and after driving the Mini E that will be disappointing. It’s really a great feeling knowing there are no emissions whatsoever coming out of any tailpipe while you are driving. I have been writing about my experiences in a blog if anyone is interested at minie250@blogspot.com
Tom
Mini E #250
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 8:07 am
Just from a personal safety and disaster recovery point of view, I prefer the Volt because it gives me alternatives. I can just imagine going through a Katrina-like evacuation and having to depend entirely on the power grid to get me out of town.
As long as gasoline is available, I am of the opinion that a Volt option is the best option.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 8:09 am
My understanding of the study is the same as yours. My comment about the ratio of away from home charging stations to the number of BEVs was in response to this statement:
“This study indicates that a highly developed charging infrastructure will be needed for EVs to achieve widespread penetration. Aerovironment believes consumers will need more than a million public charging stations to support 1 million EVs”
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 8:17 am
True, but a generator trailer will work fine too. Battery swap will work too for the first 10 customers or so and then 10 or so more per hour.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 8:22 am
I think even on an extremely long hill the Volt will keep going. Pikes peak might cause it to top the hill at a much lower speed, but, it will still be moving rather than stopped.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 8:25 am
True but those affect gas cars too. Short range BEVs will be in a critically low range remaining situation much more often, so it becomes more important to have an accurate gauge of KWh remaining and KWh used. The users will learn what available KWh translate to in different situations. It isn’t that complicated for someone that is motivated to know how far they can drive.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 8:30 am
They could have gamed the study in countless ways to get the results they wanted. What was told to the drivers? How many times did they use the cars? What gauges were in the cars? What size battery’s were used? Where the uses identical? If each driver drove a BEV more than once, was it the same BEV with the same capacity?etc. etc.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 8:40 am
It would be fine if GM came to the conclusion on their own that a 10yr warranty is needed to market the Volt. I would have no issue with that. The problem is that CA’s regulation is arcane. It was meant for Hybrids like the Prius that require the battery operate properly for polution reasons since these cars have a capable mechanical power sources. All the regulation does for the EREVs (or REEVS is you prefer) is make it more difficult and more expensive to bring them to market. Basically, being from Florida, I’ll be forced into a more expensive battery (~$4K more) if GM doesn’t offer a smaller battery and shorter warranty option. We don’t have mountians and we don’t have 10yr warranty regulations.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 8:46 am
Absolutely Statik…errr…Pink Tie Guy
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 8:48 am
Agreed RB.. When you think about the subject, you will realize that range anxiety is psychological. With only one charging station, vehicle owners have to plan their itinerary carefully and that thought is constantly on their mind. With two charging stations placed so that the service fleet area is covered, like one at each end of the area, that thought is alleviated and the range anxiety disappears. Of course if they were going in a direction opposite the second charging station, range anxiety would become an issue again.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 8:49 am
JEC,
You must have one of those next generation crystal balls. My (very old) crystal ball keeps coming up “answer in doubt, ask again”. No wait, that’s my “Magic 8-ball”.(g) I really think it’ll be decades before electrification plays a significant role in the US. JMO.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 8:51 am
Well said and better detailed than I seem to be capable of. My lazy bone gets in the way sometimes.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 8:54 am
Dave K
Good point. A really sophisticated GPS could take elevation and time of day into account, but it’d have to be guessing (or always programmed) for the destination. Still a hassle.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 9:03 am
IMHO, the two example are not analogous. In your case , the battery in the tools can be replaced easily. True one can realize range anxiety with a power tool is you have only one battery. I guess that you are right if just for the purpose of finding out how it feels. Having extra batteries for the tool is like the studying here mentioned: having that extra battery alleviates that feeling.
jason M. Hendler’s idea is a good one, Own an ICE for long trips, BEV for local travel, and an electric bike for shor trips to the store or park around the corner. Or even better, a VOLT for travel near and far, and an electric bike for fun.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 9:05 am
That might also work well for real headaches! lol:)
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 9:09 am
RB,
Given that the 2nd charging station wasn’t used much it’d have been an interesting study if the second one didn’t really exist. I guess the shrink in me is just wondering what the “count” would be of people who showed us and their reaction to finding it’s just a scientist with a clipboard (g).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 9:16 am
RB
I couldn’t understand it either. A little softer guidance might have helped more, but I don’t recall Chris as a frequent poster. I hope he becomes one.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 9:22 am
GM doesn’t have just “to sell to the most high profile customers”. With the price of Gen1 Volt, that will happen when they bring the car to the dealers show room.
As far as availability, if GM follows market demand, tghey may well increase their production number for the iniatial offering. They have a 70,000 production capacity at the new battery pack plant and could easily ramp up production to meet the higher demand.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 9:27 am
Jec and Jason,
Great “real world” suggestions (I too have a rechargeable drill that INEVITABLY poops out in the middle of a job).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 9:28 am
RB,
Anything is possible.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 9:31 am
EV’s won’t have gauges to tell you when they’re low or play a chime.
________________________________________________________
Wrong! Read about the many electric cars that have been built by converting existing cars and previous posts about the Volt.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 9:36 am
2 minute charge of 50 kWh battery = 1.5 MW of power, so I’m guessing you’re talking about a swap station.
EREV + renewable fuel is a great long-term solution as well as a workable technology today with fossil fuels.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 9:37 am
We all can put ourselves in the shoes of the test drivers and see ourselves reacting exactly as the study described. I am concerned that we are finally seeing the ramp up of electric cars, and if consumers are not ready for the “range anxiety” issue they will be unhappy with the product. This might translate to reduced demand and a loss of momentum in the industry. Only a small percentage of the population will have the discipline to own an electric car with 100 mile range and be totally happy.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 9:38 am
That certainly is programmable. “Percent Tank Remaining….x%” is one of the datastream items that the PCM uses in order to run tests on the EVAP system. But it isn’t a good idea to run any gas tank lower than about one-and-a-half to two gallons before empty (or when the “low fuel” icon light illuminates), because the in-tank electric fuel pump is kept cool by that remainder of gasoline volume. You can know how much the fuel pump needs by subtracting the fill up gallons from total capacity gallons listed in the owners manual if you want to know the number of gallons the fuel pump needs as when the light comes on.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 9:39 am
Good question Wolfdoctor. It would seem that it would be possible since the design of the Volt battery system allows for battery assistance when the load on the ICE generator increases such as is the case of driving up a step hill or accelerating to pass another vehicle. Whether or not GM has enabled that feature is not clear. Can someone else answer Wolfdoctor’s questiion.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 9:51 am
I was wondering if you could do a second charge during the day if you owned the Volt.
We don’t really know what will happen in the nest couple of years with battery technology. GM says that they expect battery development to bring down he cost and weight by the time Gen2 comes out. They may be able to increase the available charge and still drop the price of the battery back. They may find the need to do so with the pending BEV competition.
Thanks for your post here. We look forward to more information from you.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 9:52 am
Even if most households have more than one car range anxiety will still rear its ugly head and demand attention. The other member of the household will say you get the BEV not me. [not all households but many after the newness of the BEV wears off]
Combine that with the fact that most men will not want their wives to drive a car that could leave them stranded in a gas station parking area. Some won’t care but most will and especially if they have children.
Its the difference between saying I don’t need to make any long trips and I CAN’T MAKE ANY LONG TRIPS.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 10:03 am
We need to look upon the Volt as having a “tow truck” permanently attached to the car as a safety net relative to a pure BEV, which of course represents some extra cost relative to the a BEV and until a self sustaining BEV relative to an ICE develops, the Volt should be king provided that the trajectory of gas prices will continue upward which is expected to do so. OPEC can still however manipulate crude prices to the detriment of alternative fuels and this is a real danger to GM and the Volt especially.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 10:12 am
koz
Yeah, I noticed that too. No idea what they meant, other than to sell a heck of a lot of chargers… Maybe with the concentration of vehicles in the cities, they’d need some, but actually need more in the “wide open spaces” of flyover country to actually relieve the anxiety? Still not much sense there.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 10:23 am
Please learn how to spell the words, with which you intend to insult people.Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 10:24 am
Combine that with the fact that most men will not want their wives to drive a car that could leave them stranded in a gas station parking area. Some won’t care but most will and especially if they have children.
——————————————————-
Excellent point old man! I thought the same thing. No way I would want my wife or daughters out in a car that can run out of juice and leave them stranded!
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 10:28 am
RB and jason,
I totally agree. I’m banking on 2012 (God willing). My prediction is a wildly successful 2010, with a gradual ramp up during 2011. Then in 2012 things go exponential.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 10:35 am
Koz – Up until now I’ve discounted the idea of a generator trailer because you might as well buy a Volt with the generator built-in. If I had a 200mi BEV, however, the times I would need extra range would be rare enough that I would be willing to rent a generator trailer to do it (and enough people would feel the same that generator trailers would be available for rent).
Until then the Volt is the only EV that could serve as an ‘only car’.
I expect it will be at least 5 years before battery price/performance reaches a point where a 200mi BEV could become a viable alternative to the Volt.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 10:35 am
wolfdoctor,
I’m not to sure that a sweeping generalization about airhead consumers can be made for BEV buyers. My portable drill runs out of juice all the time, but I don’t consider the purchase to be ill-thought through. It’s a convenience to not have that cord that comes with some inconvenience occasionally (or inevitably).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 10:43 am
The market will decide BEV /EREV market share, not useless speculation.The Volt’s problem is its price. Would you expect Toyota to undercut Volt AER and price? Would a $25k BEV eat into the potential Volt market? Time will tell. Will GM be able to compete?
I don’t think it is looking too good for them.
I wish they would sell Voltec to a capital enterprise and pay at least a small portion of their debt back to the taxpayers. That would be the decent and honorable thing to do and, Voltiacs, it would be much better for the future of the Volt.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 10:46 am
I believe nearly all gasoline pumps are driven with electric motors. So, if electricity is unavailable then you may be in trouble even with a gas engine.
The good thing is that you may be able to find a station with a backup generator, so they could pump gas. Also, appreciate the fact that I could not “fillup” my battery as fast as my tank, and this could be a real issue.
The savior for most people would be that they either have a second ICE vehicle, or least a friend who would give them a ride.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 10:54 am
No doubt about it. The Volt is an interim technology (aka bridge tech) on the way to pure EV. Nissan will gain much more valuable experience leapfrogging directly to pure EV. While GM spends tremendous resources trying to figure out how to best switch back-and-forth between ICE and EV mode. I agree there will be some range anxiety in the 100-mile batteries but once the 200 and 300 mile batteries are retrofitted in a couple of years range anxiety will be gone. Also remember that the majority of EVs are not made to be your primary vehicle, hence they will be much cheaper than a Volt and serve there purpose very nicely. I like Nissan, Tesla, BMW approach. Also don’t count EEStor/Zenn out yet, they have some very good military-grade technology that will soon be released. I don’t agree with the 60 percent figure, I believe its closer to 75 percent.
Late.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 10:54 am
Tom,
Thanks for the info on the Mini-E. If there was just a spot somewhere in your day to plug in the Volt – even for an hour or two, it’d solve the problem of 2/3 gas driving for you. Having said that, you do drive more than the majority of drivers in your daily travels! Congrats on the Mini-E!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 10:57 am
VoltEnth,
Once Gen 2 or 3 incorporate V2H, the Volt will be even better in an emergency situation.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 11:10 am
Two decades is not a long time.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 11:21 am
When gas goes over $5 and stays there, electric cars will be in great demand. When (not if) that happens.
The question is: How soon will gasoline peak above $5/gal? That will determine more than anything how soon people adopt alternatives.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 11:23 am
The Volt is a niche vehicle. Not for the masses. So why is this expensive hybrid a Chevy ? It should have been a Cadillac. Nice going GM.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 11:27 am
Loboc,
I agree that $5 gas would definitely motivate people. $4 gas had people driving significantly less – myself included. As more alternatives including BEV’s I too, think that they will “fly off the lot”, but this doesn’t address range anxiety. Since a rising tide raises all boats, I think the Volt will benefit from higher gas prices too.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 11:38 am
It is amazing how quickly we’ve all become experts in EV’s so quickly and there are hardly any on the road yet!
All the current conjecture reminds a little of what was being said when the steam locomotives starting their push westward: the noise from the steam engine will cause chickens to stop laying and cows won’t make milk.
What we’re witnessing here is no less dramatic – the shift from propelling vehicles with hydrocarbons to electrons. To be sure, there will be challenges and set backs, but I think we can all see the writing on the wall.
For those that think EV’s will never achieve market penetration, take a look at this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpEnFwiqdx8
“We are living in Exponential times.”
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 11:39 am
Mine only drives like 6 miles a day. Very hard on an ICE-based vehicle. A BEV or EREV would last forever.
The oil-change guy can’t understand why I change out ‘new’ oil. Her current battery goes dead just sitting there because it’s not driven enough. (Therefore I am plugging it in anyway.)
My problem will be getting her to plug the darn thing in. You have no idea how many dead phones I have in my house. I can’t even find them because they don’t have enough charge to alert!
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 11:41 am
There are several confounding variables here that are “left up in the air” a little too much for me to immediately accept the implied conclusions.
Tokyo is heavily metropolitan, and, that infers a very strong set of proximities to acceptable purpose-destinations that are just not as much the widespread situation in North America. The study, while having some strong scientific merits on one hand, may be too limited apparently, in AER distance sample-spans, to most likely to be of wider help in understanding range anxiety and range practicality, it seems.
I think, therefore, that the suggested quick change of drivers to go further was at least in part due to the high concentration of acceptable-purpose destinations that one might expect in a highly densely structured city like Tokyo.
The test ought to be replicated in some mid-sized to large city here in the States, so that a greater set of usage details could be confirmed. This, for a more thorough understanding and functional satisfaction needed for Americans to have a “meeting of the minds as to fitness of purpose and merchantability”.
This would also greatly help to educate buyers to be able to far more clearly determine exactly what is and what is not “fine for their purposes”. I clearly believe that the Tokyo study greatly under-represents range anxiety due to the extreme commercial densities there, which allow for a far greater number of destination opportunities for these drivers, which, while perfectly fine for them, might not be as practicable for most Americans, even in our biggest cities with strong commercial densities for destination purposes.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 11:43 am
The other advantage is that ICE vehicles generally have more range between fill-ups than most of the BEVs currently planned do between charges.
I’m hoping that the Volt will have a similar range when the gas tank is full.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 11:44 am
I have a smattering of psych skill as well. The problem is that if you change *anything* even just observe, humans will modify their behavior.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 11:54 am
Households are defined in US census. The below is from wikipedia.
—
The United States Census definition similarly turns on “separate living quarters”, i.e. “those in which the occupants live and eat separately from any other persons in the building” [1]. A householder in the U.S. census is the “person (or one of the people) in whose name the housing unit is owned or rented (maintained);” if no person qualifies, any adult resident of a housing unit is a householder.
—
Even in 2000 census the % of households with 2 or more cars is 57%.
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/DTTable?_bm=y&-reg=&-ds_name=ACS_C2SS_EST_G00_&-gc_url=&-mt_name=ACS_C2SS_EST_G2000_H041&-redoLog=false&-_caller=geoselect&-geo_id=01000US&-format=&-_lang=en
A quick search will get you thousands of sources.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
There may be some gap there, old man. I can’t even imagine who wouldn’t want to drive a cool EV.
As for stranded – someone has to be extra dumb in a BEV for that to happen. Most BEVs will slow down as they run out of juice so that you can reach your charging point.
There are many who have been driving RAV 4 EV for a decade – I don’t see any complaints of getting stranded.
In anycase, in future we will all need to start changing our lifestyles and attitudes. $200 a barrel oil will ensure that.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 12:07 pm
I think a better study is number of cars in States that experience some form of winter. In these States drivers will need to heat their cars to melt snow from the windshield. As GM has learned with the EV1, battery charge gets used up quickly when used for heating. So having an ICE for this purpose is crucial to any EV or EREV. If you need an ICE for heat you might as well generate electricity with it as well.
Looking at the State Motor-Vehicle Registrations – 2007 chart,
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics/2007/mv1.cfm#foot2
it appears Northern States have 76,118,800 registered automobiles and Southern States have 59,814,130. I gave the entire States figures of California and North Carolina to the South even though parts of those states experience winter.
NPNS!
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
Loboc,
True in both psyche and physics, the act of observing does change the outcome. I was just thinking that the Faux charger could be counting people and either stop their data from then on, or include them in their own segment of data (Did they then become “anxious” re the range, or maybe just miffed at the people doing the experiment). Studying humans is always problematic – they should have used rats (g).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Cadillac will get the ‘Converj’ once the Voltec Power train has been proven in the VOLT.
Since the VOLT is turning out to be a little more luxurious on the inside than most people thought, your statement should have been, “It should have been a Buick”.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Lyle, you mentioned that your Mini EV gets like 80 miles range, instead of the supposed 100. How did you find out? Did you run it all the way down, or are you going by the display meter in the car?
Whatever range you get in an Extended-range EV is worth 1.5x the same range in an EV. If I had a pure EV rated at 100 miles range, I would never plan a use that needs more than 75 miles round-trip. There’s too much uncertainty and risk. Whereas with an ER-EV, I would milk all its range.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 12:11 pm
You funny!
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&source=hp&q=moran&aq=f&aqi=&oq=&fp=a914d81610aa54b4
You’re welcome.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 12:16 pm
You make a good point that a some people don’t seem to get when it comes to battery life. When people do run out of juice (and you know they will, just like when people run out of gas) what effect will that total depletion have on the longevity of the battery?
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 12:18 pm
So don’t be a tugboat operator? (lol). At least you got the “you’re” correct.
Try using an accepted dictionary. The urban dictionary is just an excuse for very lazy people.
You’re welcome.
Be well,
Tagamet
/and now back to our regularly scheduled program….
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
OMG. Another EE post. GM talked to EE and chose LG. Any clue there?
How about a link to this military-grade tech? Oh yeah, it’s classified.
Lockheed is just hedging their bets just in case ground-unicorn-horn-pixie-powder really exists. More likely I will win a multi-million lottery and can buy Volt #1.
Sheesh.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
Fast recharge stations will have banks of batteries that can easily deliver 1.5 MW of power, then slowly recharge from the grid (at night when there’s excess supply and the rates are low).
Can you imagine if existing gas stations refined the gasoline on demand? Of course they don’t, they use underground storage tanks.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 12:32 pm
that’s about what my wager is.. 25 years
(for pure BEV’s that is)
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Speak for yourself. Instant torque is addictive. Put the hammer down good buddy.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 12:37 pm
(click to show comment)
September 7th, 2009 at 12:42 pm
RB and Tag,
I couldn’t understand a word of it myself. Thanks for not piling on.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 12:42 pm
Doofus Alert:
Read the news recently ? Huge oil finds all over the world. We are drowning in oil. The U.S. has more oil than the rest of the world combined (more than 3 trillion barrels). Opec target is $70/barrel for the foreseeable future. This $5 gasoline is nowhere in sight. Get your head out of your nether region and get a clue. punked.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
David,
Good point re total depletion of batteries. It’s generally accepted that this shortens battery life, but I wonder if BEV’s have a buffer toward the end, so that consumers don’t end up “hurting” the battery life? I haven’t heard it mentioned, so it SEEMS like there is no buffer in current BEV’s.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 12:47 pm
Thanks Koz for catching that one!
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 12:48 pm
Loboc,
Yeah he did bring up the EE stuff. Sometimes even *I* am surprised (lol).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 12:49 pm
After seeing all the Volt monkey math on the blog it obvious that many poster have severe shortage of math skills. It is no wonder that much of you , being math challenged, have such a fixation on range anxiety. It’s not that hard to drive your volt properly. Do the math.
20 + 20 = 40
Stay within 20 miles of your charging outlet and you will have no problems. Beyond 20 miles gas her up or drive a real gas car – your choice.
Even a cave man can figure this out.
BTW, Cave Men don’t have range anxiety.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 12:54 pm
My criteria for a pure BEV:
250 mile range going 70mph in -10 degree weather for $40K or less.
I’m guessing 25 years before I see this (but I would love to be pleasantly surprised)
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
Eric E Says:
“The people doing these “studies” could be working on an assembly line MAKING EV’s.”
That is hilarious!!! Thank you Eric E. I suggest if any one gets frustrated with all of the studies that tell you exactly… nothing… think of that line.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
jeffrhe,
If you read it REALLY slowly and assume: His “period key” sticks so they are double and the word “the” could also be They or then, it starts to make sense. Not a big deal, really.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
err.. Bobbie Lutz
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Yes, it’s amazing that a study commissioned by a company that makes chargers concludes that the solution that will get us past range anxiety, toward lower carbon emissions, to the end of global warming and restarting the global economy is…installing chargers.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
What is this magic you speak of?
Car conversions for under $20,000 that give you 40-50 mile range in the city?
It’ll NEVER happen!
Spending $40,000 is the ONLY way to guarantee no range anxiety!
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
LOL
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
You don’t want to know about EEstor battlefield tech. Suffice to say that EEstor has our back behind enemy lines.
As the saying goes. If someone told you they would have to kill you. Be safe and trust the pentagon, we know what we are doing. Peace Out.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Going back to the data shown in the post, a more straightforward explanation involves familiarity rather than charging stations. We observe a change in driver behavior between Fall 2007 and Summer 2008. The article attributes that to a state of mind resulting from there being a 2nd charging station. An easier explanation is that the drivers became more familiar with their cars, and as they became more familiar and more confident they moved toward using the battery capability more fully.
That is, the result may be real but have nothing to do with the 2nd charging station. The conclusion may be that range anxiety is marked when a person first uses an electric car but diminishes as the driver becomes more experienced, and thus more confident.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
Yes, and apparently GM doesn’t understand the true value of their own creation. What is this BullScat they are giving us about only selling the Volt in cities which install charging stations and have EV lanes on their roads? Oh, and they won’t sell them to anyone who has just a regular garage without a “dedicated” circuit.
Dear GM:
Are you guys so stupid that you really want to go totally out of business? The Volt is a winning engineering design for the automotobile of the next 30 years because:
1. It needs NO new infrastructure. It can use gasoline, electricity,
or E85. Two of these are already ubiquitous in our society.
2. People already know how to plug in toasters, hair dryers, and space heaters. The Volt uses the SAME voltage and current. How complicated do you think this really is?
3. Existing electrical supply is ALREADY SUFFICIENT for over 150 million plug-in light duty vehicles provided only that they are charged at night, not in daytime.
4. Volt drivers will not have range anxiety.
5. The Volt does not need special lanes on our roads. I predict that it should work just fine on any road surface that any other passenger car can operate on. Even though I am not a GM engineer, I will stake my personal reputation on this prediction.
CUT THE CRAP GM!!!!!
Sell the Volt to anyone whose check will clear the bank. Sell enough of them that economy of scale gets you to profitability. Then turn all the other vehicles in your lineup into EREVs. BEVs just aint gonna cut it for several decades to come.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
Tag —> My guess is that by and large people will not want to cut it too close, and with accurate metering they will make a good guess, based on experience, leaving a margin for error. As long as the metering is good, we won’t see many people stopped beside the road. (Of course there’s always somebody…..)
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
LazP –> Agree that the Volt is a stronger and better design. The question is how much extra it costs. Certainly if the difference were zero or small everyone would go that direction.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
Or maybe ppl can relate to this scenario:
Running through the airport looking for a plug, so you can get enough juice to power you laptop, so you can finish your work on the next flight. Ahhh if only we had a quick-charge laptop battery (or a battery swap at the airport).
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
Not sure what #’s they used. How long were they assuming it would take to charge the vehicles?
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
Actually, rapid charging methods may eliminate the need for a larger battery. Several university labs have already demonstrated multiple methods of “greasing” electrons so that lithium batteries can charge as fast a super capacitors. Move over EEStor.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
RB,
Yep, there’s always someone (lol). Probably no more than run out of gas right now.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
Tag
That’s a really fascinating question. There also is a time element. If after having the faux charging station in place for a while one took it away, would anyone have cared, or even noticed?
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
I have no worries of range anxiety. I plan to buy a BEV just as soon as I can. It will probably have a of around 100 miles, which is about 80% more than I need everyday.
Range anxiety? None for me, thanks.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:20 pm
kdawg,
I agree. Getting a quick charge seems longer for some than others (wink). I don’t know how long their “quick charger” actually takes.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:20 pm
Tag – “My prediction is a wildly successful 2010, with a gradual ramp up during 2011. Then in 2012 things go exponential.”
A wildly successful 2010 would certainly be a mixed blessing. Far too much demand will cause the math challenged GM boosters to demand that Volt production be ramped up long before costs are brought down. If each completed unit causes a loss, a few successes like that could bankrupt a company.
Better to have the problem of having to drive costs down on a potential success, than having phase out a dog that won’t ever sell.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:20 pm
i hope you like speeding tickets
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
Great point. These “company funded studies” are completely useless marketing copy. Independent 3rd party data is needed.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
That’s what I’m banking on (literally), 2012. THe good news is that a lot more of the bugs will be worked out by then.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
I’ll certainly try that…if I ever stop laughing!!!
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
I’m pretty sure “Pink Tie Guy” was being sarcastic.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
Wonder how much difference that will make
Huge. The rule of thumb is that you lose 1/3rd of the energy to heating air, 1/3rd the energy to heating tyres, and 1/3rd to moving the vehicle and the payload. The last two, which account for 2/3rds of the energy used, are dependent on mass.
These approximations are true irrespective of the drive train. Since the driver and passenger only make up 5% or 10% of the total mass you need to move, if you can reduce the mass of the vehicle you can add range of EVs and increase the MPG for combustion engines. Overall, you probably get more savings from reducing mass than making the drive trains more efficient.
Unfortunately you don’t see a lot of movement in this area, despite the article you’ve mentioned. As a FYI there are also light steel alternatives as well.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
jeffhree and kdawg,
Amen! The pioneers take all the arrows. <– (bromide of the day)(g)
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
What bugs?
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
I suggest asking your question on “the GM site”. Greg Ciesel is pretty good at answering a lot of these types of questions. (it may already be answered in the forums)
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
jeffrhe,
I’m just showing GM how nice and analytically I look at things (g).
Keep smiling.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
GM already has more experience w/EV’s than any other car-maker. And if you remove the ICE from the Volt, you have a pure BEV. With the developement of the Volt, they are killing 2 birds with 1 stone, EREVs and BEVs.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:34 pm
Dave K,
Not to get too personal, but can CA afford to buy Volt’s as State vehicles? They are pretty close to the top of the list of bankrupt states, aren’t they? I know PA is really close (and we’re still without a formal budget)!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
I’d also like to see a poll of what the acceptable range vs charging time would be. Obviously we all would like 100 mile range in 1 minute of charging, but it would be interesting to see a graph of this.
Doesn’t Paris have a ton of public charging stations?
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
Support for your view that over time people adjust would come from the experience with the EV-1, where the vast majority of users opted to forego the battery upgrade that would have provided more range.
To your point about the second charging station being a placebo, which, when recognized would no longer be needed, it would be interesting to now remove the second charging station and see what happened. Would people revert to their original behavior, continue with the current one since they now know they don’t need to charge, or something in between (my guess)?
But I think range anxiety is real and a critical factor, which is why to my mind the EREV design is vastly superior. With a BEV, not only is there a new fear of being stranded (and new fears are disproportionally over counted), but even if you know you can get a charge there would be the dislike of the time needed (it would still be half an hour or something).
People who talk bravely about not worrying about the BEV range remind me of all those who, when the stock market is flying high, predict that when the market tanks it will be a buying opportunity and they’ll buy even more. Invariably when the market tanks they bail, usually at or near the bottom. The same will happen here. Lots of those denigrating range anxiety will be afflicted with the worst cases.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
Woof!
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:51 pm
Kdawg, is that on level ground?.. or going up hill both ways?
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
No, cavemen don’t have range anxiety, but this site seems to stir it up very often.
Maybe they think that the readers can’t read guages very well?
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:56 pm
a lot of men dont want their wives stopping at a stop-n-rob late at night to buy gas either.. very handy that thing about refueling in the safety of your garage.
A lot of woman hate (even fear) going in to a mechanic for auto repairs, they expect to be ripped off.. and BEV will need very little maintenance or repairs.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 1:58 pm
my sister-in-law has the same problem with batteries, my solution was a small solar charger on the rear deck.. it seems to do the job. The oil in her car never reaches full working temperature, not good.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 2:00 pm
I agree with you, once we have over 100,000 BEVs on the road then people’s attitudes will start to change about range anxiety.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 2:01 pm
Ohh Tagamet, you are evil!
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
I totally agree regarding the lifestyle change and I do agree oil WILL hit $200.00 a barrel. I don’t know when but it will. I think our disagreement is in the best direction to take. I firmly believe E-REV is best right now. I also believe BEV will in time be the winner, justnot yet
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 2:07 pm
That EV guy also suggested the same thing on this board.. I have been flying electric RC since 1984 so I am very well aware of range or duration anxiety.. but an electric bike would be cool also.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
Yes, I was talking about swap stations but as soon as quick-charge equals what the swap can do, today, then I’m also talking about quick-charge.
I feel the swap stations will be used until we can safely charge a battery at 1 – 2 MW with your loved ones only a few inches away. When we can prove that, the swap stations will naturally transition. Same amount of power handling ability, same locations, etc. For a while it might be able to do both (keep servicing the older swap vehicles).
Am I worried about wasted money building swap infrastructure that transitions very quickly to quick-charge? Heck no! If we get safe quick-charge capable batteries we are going to be doing great. Not having to import all that oil is going to do wonders for our balance of trade.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 2:32 pm
The flaw in your analogy is that when your portable drill runs out of juice, you’re not stuck out on the highway.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
If approximately 70% of the drivers go under 40 miles per day,the BEV’s may very well be the choice for these drivers. A New York Times article indicated that the transition to electric vehicles will happen sooner than most think. It seems that the automotive industry understands what is happening with petroleum as a fuel and is moving rapidly away from ICE vehicles.
I agree with almost everything you state except without so much incredulity. On the special lanes issue, HOV lanes are intended to cut the cost of fuel consumption due to accidents shutting down traffic in the normal lanes while encouraging owners to carry more persons in their vehicle. They get to go to their destination faster in turn for cutting down the number of vehicles on the road.
As far as selling the Volt to everyone who can cut a check, GM will probably increase production based on demand but that will be limited by parts availability by their suppliers and how well they can ramp up battery production at their new battery pack factory which they estimate at 70,000 max. Right now, they need to get the cost down in order to reduce the price. Gen 1 Volts will be expensive: GM will try to price them so that there will be buyers but Gen 1 will be sold at a loss.
The important factor is marketing surveys to determine what the potential sales of Gen 1 will be. GM’s assembly plants will have the capability to ramp up production fairly rapid as long as the machinery operate as designed. They still need to test the new equipment before doing so. If all works correctly, they will be able to increase production. I am not a GM engineer either. It would be great to know how GM can react to increased demand for the Volt; will it be based on inquiries at the dealership and how long after that increased demand can GM deliver more cars to them?
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
Hey Tag,
The BEV OEM’s could just prematurely make it go slower and slower, with less and less available acceleration, with warning chimes and lights going off faster and faster. As well, deliberately turning off the Air Conditioning, heater, and finally, (OMG) your cd player. (Horrors!!!). (lol).
It would really be amusing for a loud “scream” coming out from the speaker when the battery is at its borderline depletion-damage-in-progress level, harming longevity.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
Wolf,
But when you’re stuck out on the highway, you’re not dead either. We both just need a charge. And neither is an OMG minute.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 2:52 pm
Dan,
LOL, resistance is futile!!! You MUST charge me and SOON!! Then,
“If you ever want to see your mother again….” (g)
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
The answer is no the Volt will not allow the user to dip into the battery reserves, below the minimum SOC. So once you are in charge sustaining mode and you run out of gas, get the gas can out and start walking.
This was answered some time ago by GM.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
I like your picture of a voltmeter pointing to 1 Volt. Very cool.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 3:04 pm
The difference is that the cost of the gas tank is extremely low compared to the bank of batteries one would need. In my opinion it’s a poor use of batteries. With EREV, you use a large fraction of the battery every day. With EV’s you use a small fraction of the battery each day.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 3:07 pm
Aluminum is a great light wieght material but requires enormous amounts of electricity to manufacture. When newer light weight composites are developed and are cheaper of course it will help increase the range. However, I am wondering if the percentages of energy distribution you mention apply to ICE vehicles; the percentages for electric drive train are different. Electric propulsion is more efficient; I don’t remember the link showing the comparison – I’m thinking it was on the DOE website.
I know that GM’s Fisher Body plants have been producing light wieght parts for years. Newer stronger materials are being developed that will diminish our need for steel and aluminum. The C.A.R.S. program with approximately 700,000 vehicles being crushed will infuse a lot of scrap for the steel mills. Very little new steel is being produced from iron ore and most steel comes from scrap. As demand increases in a rapidly growing world economy, the demand will result in the price of steel increasing.
Has anyone noticed that it is easier to crush an aluminum can now-a-days?
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 3:08 pm
Sure, then if you want the capability to charge 4 cars simultaneously, you need 5-10 MW of power to each station.
EREV just makes more sense to me. Make use of existing infrastructure, then transition to renewable fuels, which will be needed for planes and ships anyway.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
I think having a BEV that you know only has a (realistic) range of 80-90 miles is a bit like being a dog that has to be on a 20 foot tie out chain when he’s outside. Especially a hunting or herding type dog. That dog may not need to leave the yard for any particular reason, but you know he wants the freedom to do so if he sees something interesting.
It’s kind of illogical, but even if people only have the occasion to make a long trip over 100 miles a couple of times a year, they’ll probably still want a car that is CAPABLE of doing it. Anytime … at the spur of the moment … and “keep on truckin” down the highway as long as they want to. Refueling quickly along the way.
That’s why I think the Volt is the ideal powertrain design until hydrogen fuel cell technology gets cheap and there’s hydrogen stations everywhere. That could be 15 years from now. The only thing holding back the Voltec powertrain cars is the damn price of the batteries, which I hear COULD be cut in half in just 5 years. That’s when you’ll see cars like the Volt skyrocket in popularity.
For the Volt range-extender, hopefully there will be some sort of retail place where you can buy some carbon-neutral algae based bio-gasoline relatively cheap in 5 years or so.
http://www.sapphireenergy.com/
Even if the algae gasoline costs $5-6 a gallon, I’d still probably buy it. People with a Volt might only have to buy 3-4 gallons per MONTH. I bet plenty of people who are trying to do their part to help the environment will do the same thing.
I’m not against BEV’s at all. I would buy a BEV for sure if it quick charged in 10 minutes and it had a range of at least 200 miles AND the price was reasonable. The BEV would also have to be proven reliable and the battery would have to last at least 120,000 miles, etc. That would probably make the Volt obsolete. I’m sure GM would be one of the first companies to have one available if this kind of BEV technology was available now.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
Yep Tag, this would be my favorite Volt accessory (V2G) and is another reason for me to wait for Gen II. Indeed something I would pay a descent premium for. My main other reason for waiting for Gen II is that since I’ve been telecommuting I’m down to less than 4000 miles per year.
I was hoping that the Volt’s inverter could be programmed to output 60Hz 240v, and ideally grid tied. We know that won’t happen for Gen I.
How different would it be in a natural disaster if a large percentage of vehicles had efficient built in 20KW to 50KW grid tie inverters that had vehicle spec emissions controls??!
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
The way I look at it is that I almost never let my gas tank go below 2 gallons remaining, which is about 50 miles range, and that is with a huge number of gas stations around where I can fill up in 5 minutes. It’s more about not wanting to be forced to go out of my way at an inconvenient time.
EREV makes sense to me now and into the future as renewable fuels become available.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
Range Anxiety is real. It mainly exists in the minds of Volt wannabe owners. Unfortunately the iPhone doesn’t have an app for that yet, sorry. However this condition may be related to another condition found in most gm-volt posters. Namely, performance anxiety in the bedroom. Siggy says Man Up you pansies and quite being scared of a real EV. Release your inner hybrid now.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 3:20 pm
You’re right, Monroe. The Volt & all EREVs (or series hybrids) will need to generate only a small fraction of power the traction motor is rated for. It’s long been my belief that many (if not most) of the numerous pure electrics announced by automakers will be followed by an EREV version. Why? Because of range anxiety as well as the fact that ICE/GEN technology is an extremely well-known art —so well known that GM and most other makers will quickly find it’s much easier to simplify & downsize it than to reduce the size & cost of Li-Ion batteries that are large enough to satisfy the pure electric buyer’s range demands.
Example: Peugeot’s new “iOn”, which is expected to have a real-world range of only about 80miles but probably cost about what the Mitsubishi iMiEV costs in Japan: $47,000! At least half of this selling price —$23,500— has to be for the battery! And the industry should be able to easily convert an electric drive train to EREV with a battery half again this size & price —$11, 750. In fact, Lotus engineering has just announced an “off-the-shelf” range extender that seems to be extremely compact, generates up to 35KW (47 HP), runs on gasoline/ethanol/menthol and weighs only about 124 Lbs complete. Think they can attract any of the 30 OEMs to buy it for a lot less than $11,750? Have a look at the link below……..
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/09/07/let-us-help-you-with-that-lotus-develops-off-the-shelf-range-ex/
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
Mark,
You make a convincing case for waiting until Gen 2 (or 3)! Just get all the vehicles to high ground (then the women and children) (g).
Congrats on the minimal mileage, I feel like I’ve driven that by March of each year.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
“U.S. has more oil then the rest of the world combined”? I would love to see a link to where you got that. If that was the case I don’t think we would be drowning in opec’s black sea.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 3:36 pm
Like I stated in a previous post, whenever the driver must be concerned about where the charging stations are, you will have range anxiety! In the study case, with two charging stations, one at each end of the fleet driving area, no range anxiety. Go in the opposite direction of the second station, range anxiety will reappear. Simply stated, when a driver must consider where they are, it becomes a problem to consider once more. With regard to the BEV range, those people who are in the group approximately 70% who drive less than 40 AER, a BEV with a range of 100 miles won’t have range anxiety unless they risk the battery totally discharging on trip outside that 100 or less mile range.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 3:42 pm
University,
That’s very interesting, can you point me to the colleges, so I can read up?
Thanks in advance.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 3:42 pm
When you have something constructive to say that adds to the collect information here, maybe, someone will start listening to you!
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
Jamie,
Congrats on the limited daily mileage!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 3:50 pm
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/reverendgaddy/moran.jpg
O RLY. I haven’t seen it spelled with two “O”s since 2002.
“I used to be with it, then they changed what it was. Now what I’m with, isn’t it and what’s it seems weird and scary. It’ll happen to yoooouuu.” /Grandpa
TagametSimpsonYou so fun-nee!
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 3:50 pm
More ER-EVs like the Volt are on the way folks. ER-EVs are “an idea who’s time has come”.
Lotus certainly thinks so. Check out Lotus’s new “range extender” engine:
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009/09/lotus-range-extender.html#more
This is what the range extender for the Volt 2.0 will probably be like. More integrated, cheaper, simpler, more durable, fewer emissions, and smaller …. yet more than capable of generating all the juice to the high performing electric motor (and battery) that’s needed.
An IC engine in Volt 2.0 like this could drop the overall price a good bit. Maybe 20%. Who knows? I wouldn’t be surprised to see this range extender engine under the hood of a future Mercedes “Blue Zero E-Cell Plus” in a few years. Mercedes is probably in catch up mode vs. GM and will need to outsource their range extender engine for their first ER-EV vehicle.
http://www.examiner.com/x-2270-NY-Autos-Examiner~y2009m9d7-MercedesBenz-BlueZero-zeroes-in-on-the-Chevy-Volt
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
I have anxiety just thinking about range anxiety. Good report.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 3:57 pm
Right on on kdawg! The Volt is two separate technologies melded into one vehicle, The science between the two methods of propulsion is completely separate. True additional consideration are needed to combine the two, but all the feedback on the separate power sources give GM what they will need to move forward in each area. They will be in a much better position to produce BEV’s. In the mean time, other OEM’s will be impeded from developing EVER unless their designs are significantly different from GM’s.
On the 60% issue, Moe Ron,I believe it is higher than 75%. Not sure I remember correctly but I believe it is around 85%.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 4:17 pm
Tag
Optimism, yes!
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
Muhammad:
I think Lyle is being real conservative with his range. I am also in the Mini E program and I drive over 100 miles a day and still haven’t depleted the battery. I communicate regularly with others in the program also and they have had similar results. There is one driver in CA that regularly drives130 miles on a single charge and has gone as far as 143 miles and the car hadn’t yet shut off. There is definitely a built in “reserve” of at least 20% of the battery strength as to not have the drivers constantly driving to deep depletion as that would shorten the life of the batteries. At a certain point, the car goes into “limp mode” and will only go about 30 miles an hour for about 10 miles to get you to somewhere to charge. I have never reached the limp mode and have driven 120+ miles on numerous occasions. That being said, I would love if the car had a generator on board like the Volt will. I think most people would feel safer knowing they had the range extender even if they hardly ever used it. My only complaint about the Volt is that I wish it would go further on battery power alone before the ICE started up. For me, 60 to 70 miles instead of 40 would make the Volt an entirely different animal. I’m still considering buying one, and may very well do so, but driving 7,000 miles the past 3 months without stopping for gas once has really spoiled me…..
Tom
http://minie250.blogspot.com
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 4:54 pm
GM wants this technology to be for the masses, and put it under the Chevrolet brand to signal that. The cost probably ended up being more than they initially expected, though.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 5:04 pm
That is in line with the experiences posted here by people that have driven BEVs. Of course we have to consider that these are not average Joe drivers but it’s not rocket science and people will quickly adjust as long as the range adequately meets their needs and expectations
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
If I had one I would purposely do it once close to home so I know where the bottom is. Probably better not knowing but that would haunt me.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
koz,
I can hear the last juice groaning from your poor battery. Tsk, tsk.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
Dead battery, dead alternator, dead fuel pump, run out of gas, broken timing belt, broken transmission, flat tire, busted radiator, faulty coolant pressure valve, broken linkage, etc, etc
Lions and tigers and bears, OH MY!!!
It’s better to have control over the failing mechanism, IMO. How do people live with the anxiety that their car can fail them a hundred ways to Sunday now? A BEV would eliminate a lot of these uncotrollable failure variables.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 5:33 pm
Guess what Tag. California is buying new vehicles.
Two months ago I saw a State truck with a “powered by natural gas” sticker on it. And California Edison is breaking in a leased fleet of Phoenix electric cars and trucks.
The reason California is hurting for income is the long list of idiotic laws on the books. Almost everyone qualifies for a welfare program of some sort. The more people who see the abuse, the more who learn how to abuse. Someone up top needs to grow some balls and shut down the entire welfare system. Just send out a one page letter stating, “The monthly payments we have been faithfully sending can not be continued”. Please log on to CalJobs.org to find work.
Example: A young couple moves in together and starts having children. They are living as “married” except for the court house paperwork and the ceremony. As each new baby arrives, the female applies for “single parent with X number of kids”. The State sees this as an automatic qualification and generates monthly checks.
My son is disabled and my wife and I both work. If I divorced my wife today, the State of California would send monthly payments for both my disabled son and for my wife being a single parent. We don’t qualify for either now as we are a “double income earning more than $20k a year”. All we need to do is divorce right now. Now how twisted is this?
There is a family living up the street. They live in a bigger, newer, and better neighborhood home than we do. They not only get the monthly payment for single parent with 4 kids. They get a “low income” housing credit. I may as well sign my yearly tax payment and walk up and ring their doorbell each April.
BTW: The Phoenix EV body is made in Korea.
=D~
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
Agreed. The place I really want to see charging (which doesn’t require Aerovironment’s product and the home is a given) is at workplaces. This would greatly benefit EREVs and BEVs. It is almost like instantly doubling the range. Yes, this mean daytime charging but 1M EVs are going to pop up on the roads instantly and many won’t need the workplace chargers. This is one area that makes a lot of sense to apply a government incentive. It could be implemented in such a way that a company will be required to offset the energy draw with corresponding energy reductions (new AC, reduced lighting loads, power controls, insulation, etc) to receive the incentive (e.g. 2x the cost for tax deduction or 40% rebate). This would be a win, win, win.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 5:37 pm
de nada
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 5:41 pm
I believe both GM and EV supporters are partially right: Range anxiety is real and EREVs are a bridge technology until recharging is very fast and convenient.
I hope that GM doesn’t lose sight of a long term approach by chasing what I believe is the best ‘interim solution’.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 5:59 pm
Dave K.
That’s a good statement of your moral fiber. I guess CA has no trouble spending money, just earning it. Sad situation that I fear is far too common – and not just in Calif.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 6:03 pm
Take a skilled team of 8 guys. Give them orange work vests. Give them a couple of pieces of heavy equipment. Tell them to rebuild a 20′ span bridge over a 4′ wide creek. Pay each of them $25 an hour for their 40 hour week.
How long will it take to rebuild this bridge?
A> 5 months
B> 7 months
C> 9 months
D> 16 months
In California the correct answer is D, “16 months”.
=D~
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 6:20 pm
those people who are in the group approximately 70% who drive less than 40 AER, a BEV with a range of 100 miles won’t have range anxiety
To support your basic point about range anxiety, note that the data doesn’t so much show that 80% of drivers go less than 40 miles a day as it does that any given driver has an 80% chance of going less than 40 miles on any given day. That’s a big difference. You can go less than 40 miles most days, but if you go 100 miles once a month, then, if your car has a range of 100 miles or less, you’ll still experience range or range anxiety issues, despite than 95% of the days you wouldn’t.
So the range anxiety vector, so to speak, would have both length as well as direction.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 6:23 pm
koz,
I could see it as an employment “perk”, but I’m not at all keen on “government incentives” (read more debt).
JMO,
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 6:58 pm
With approximately 70% drive 40 miles and under a day, many will choose the BEV for urban travel and rent an ICE or Volt like car for long trips. Or they may be two car families One ICE and one Volt. As I stated in other posts here range anxiety wont be so big an issue. The Volt design offers one solution that fits all cases and range anxiety is only one factor that the Volt addresses. The Volt will work better in extremely cold weather where the BEV battery will have difficulty functioning. Newer Technology is on the horizon that will allow cold weather functioning. When that technology results in better batteries being producing in sufficient quantities that the deficiency of the BEV will be overcome. For now the Volt gives us the best design to transition to fully electric cars.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 7:20 pm
I don’t know who wrote this, but it is important that they know the Volt is not a hybrid as the first paragraph states. It is a range extended vehicle.
Thanks,
Ricky B!
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 7:21 pm
Not a problem because when the infrastructure gets to that point (4 quick-charge bays) we will be well advanced and have enough local electrical energy storage to handle that power flow.
Oh, you don’t have to worry about driving around huge tanker trucks full of fuel to pump into underground tanks. The wires carry all the energy.
Yes, the E-REV is nice, but you still have to maintain ALL of the current fossil fuel infrastructure. Cost money, unknown price of the fuel, etc. Petroleum is on the way out as the main transportation fuel. Yes, it’s going to take a long time but it’s got to go. The sooner, the better.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 7:37 pm
Fuel doesn’t need to be fossil.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 7:40 pm
Hey nasaman,
The Lotus range extender engine looks really simplified, but also it seems exotic. Monoblock meaning that the cylinder head is part of the short block casting, eliminating the head gasket and 17 other parts.
Although if the battery pack is custom-sized for the customer, it may mean that the Lotus engine will see a relatively low number of runtime clock hours compared to a direct drive ICE.
It seems to me that the Volt range extender might have 80% less runtime on it for the 40 mile AER., compared to a similar-mileage direct drive ICE running all the time, at about 48 miles a day. Cutting out 80% of the runtime compared to direct drive ICE could have nearly the same effect on wear and tear at possibly near 80%, but not all wear characteristics might fall in line with that possibility. (Water remaining in an exhaust system in very cold weather due to short runtimes might require a stainless steel exhaust system that is less prone to wear/rustout for example.)
But with the Lotus design, I would be watching the heating characteristics around the exhaust ports and for emissions unknowns for a three cylinder engine at a sustained 3,500 rpm. I wonder also how much noise it makes at 3,500 rpm.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 7:43 pm
Laura… I believe NGMCO will do the right thing with the Volt. As the engineers tune the final design, they will see that an 8 gallon fuel tank ads more value than a 6 gallon tank. Most Volt owners will typically carry 3 or 4 gallons. But, it’s a must to be able to carry 8 on long hauls. I hope this is understood in R&D. As a comparison, the Versa and Cobalt hold 13 gallons. The Aveo holds 11.
=D~
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 7:44 pm
Brian, nearly 70% of the population drives less than or equal to 40 miles round trip per day. An AER of 100 miles would certainly be adequate for them. The money they save owning a BEV would easily allow them to rent a car for long trips. Or as I said before they may be a two car family and own one of each. These people will be entirely happy with their EV.
The more I mention this issue, I find myself seemingly favoring BEV’s. But the fact is they currently don’t address all the issues confronting the all electric vehicle. There will be those times when even 40 or 100 AER won’t be sufficient in the case of emergencies requiring long trips away from home and the like. I still believe that many people in the 40 and under category will choose the Volt. When you consider all of the factors involved in choosing to purchase a new vehicle, the Volt is a very good answer and choice. I would need a BEV that gets better than 150 miles per charge for my situation. On normal days, the 40 miles AER of the Volt is adequate for me. The ability to use it for that more than occasional trip to a distant city is something I need.
It is my firm belief that as battery performance and weight improve so can GM offer that extended AER through more powerful batteries. GM has said it will drop the price of the Volt when smaller equally powerful battery packs are available. We will probably find that when this does happen that more powerful batteries the same size as those in Gen 1 will be less expensive also. GM will then have the option of increasing the AER of the Volt.
Devices such as that proposed by EEStor are based on research done at Universities and laboratories that become the basis of future power sources whenever the technology is developed to actually produce them. These technological breakthroughs are disruptive to existing industries but they do allow advancements that have tremendous value to society. Battery technology will allow us to end pollution of our atmosphere and its effect on climate, and health.
As these increases occur the Volt will evolve into a pure EV naturally. And the need for hydrocarbon fuels will dwindle to null along with the ICE. They instead can be used for other products where its conservation now and in the coming years will be realized by the children of the future. The declining well production around the world won’t be replaced by the new found fields, and the value of petroleum will increase as products compete for that use.
The time has come to end the wasteful use of petroleum to fuel our machines!
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 8:07 pm
Evacuations in Florida are rarely 200 miles, since the state is at most 150 miles wide. Evacuating from the Keys could be tricky, but then again, start and stop traffic is where hybrids and EREV’s really shine.
Now, the downside to a plugin EV is that the power grid tends to be down for days or weeks after a major hurricane. Gas can be trucked in, but electricity is a bit more complicated.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 8:11 pm
Not to worry. They empty to 10% or so. She can handle one go.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 8:12 pm
Every time I read about Better Place I think about the sparks that I see plugging in the battery on a 3000va UPS– and that’s only about 2.4 KW at 120v.
That’s GOT to be hard on the contacts, especially when you start talking double-digit KWh battery packs.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 8:20 pm
With a one way trip to work at 16.5 freeway miles, a 40 mile total battery range is about right. Unless I need to take the off ramp for gas. Hey, wait a minute, I won’t need gas.
=D~
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 8:22 pm
Pike’s Peak is an easy climb for the Volt. You can’t drive fast on that road.
A much worse road is going West up out of Death Valley. On that road, you can drive pretty fast most of the way. It starts out below sea level, and rises to around 6000 feet over the next 16 miles. And it’s hot! Many cars have problems on this stretch of road.
We’ve done some rough math on this worst-case scenario, and found the Volt should do pretty well here. But I would still like to see GM do a real-world test going West up out of Death Valley.
Getting back to the gist of the article, I believe the combination of EREVs and bio-fuels will be a longer term solution, not a bridge. Changing the infrastructure is a BIG deal. For the next 30-50 years, most people will want a car that runs on either electricity or liquid fuels.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 8:30 pm
Thanks for the answer, Mark. With all the blogging and this fast paced website, I missed that.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 8:54 pm
There is debt and there is debt.
We can prevent fires or fight fires. I believe we’ve had to fight far too many fires lately because we didn’t use foresight and planning in the past to prevent or limit these fires.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 9:02 pm
koz,
Govt intervention is exactly why the forest fires are getting worse.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 9:10 pm
That is very debatable and it would be a long, long one. IMO, if we avert a depression at the end of the day (not nearly there yet) then more good than harm was done.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 9:12 pm
Someone inquired about AeroVironment fast charge technology.
They tested Altairnano batteries to show they can be charged in 10 minutes.
With high-surface area lithium-titanate oxide based anode material, Altairnano’s cells feature distinctive performance attributes, including fast charge/discharge rates, high round-trip efficiencies, long cycle life, safety, and ability to operate under extreme temperatures.
The battery modules utilize Altairnano’s 50Ah cell, feature a 10-minute charge and provide a cycle life up to 9,000 100% depth of discharge cycles.
http://cleantech.com/news/1242/aerovironment-shows-altairnano-10-minu
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 9:31 pm
Range Anxiety is nothing compared to Employment Anxiety.
Happy Labor Day!
Hope you are all still working in the months ahead!
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 9:41 pm
LOL!
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 9:44 pm
FACT: The U.S. has less than 3% of the world’s oil reserves.
Scooter – what are you smoking? Where can I get some?
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 9:59 pm
That is a very interesting genset: light, small, efficient, and inexpensive. That is hitting on all cylinders (my apologies for the cheesey pun). The reduced weight genset, coupled with a 12-14KWh battery could produce a very capable and cost effective EREV.
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 10:00 pm
Better Place.
It may be just me, but I do not see how anyone can just allow the constant switching of expensive batteries and feel comfortable about it. After all the battery is a major part of the car. How that can be treated like a minor disposable item!!!??? Any comments?
(Quote)
September 7th, 2009 at 10:12 pm
It would be very interesting to learn kwh/gal for 15kw and 35kw output modes. Seems like it needs a 20kw mode too.
(Quote)
September 8th, 2009 at 5:23 am
Agreed. So it is a “Bridge Technology”. Big deal. We have to start somewhere and it might as well be at a logical starting place.
I have no desire to experience range anxiety on a regular basis.
(Quote)
September 8th, 2009 at 5:29 am
Thanks Nasaman,
JC NPNS
(Quote)
September 8th, 2009 at 5:45 am
I believe that there are tens of millions of people out there who could buy a BEV without any anxiety issues. Perhaps they need a second car and use it for short commutes or for the stay-at-home spouse who uses the car to drive the kids to and from school and for shopping. Or maybe a retired person who never travels. I hope GM is working on a BEV version of the Volt or some other platform, because they may end up being surprised at the number of BEVs that get sold, especially as battery technology improves. They have to be ready.
(Quote)
September 8th, 2009 at 10:55 am
Range anxiety is real, but not fatal. Replacement for our second car, which I drove over mostly short distances, will in all likelihood be a Nissan Leaf–unless I break down and buy a beater before the fall of 2010. However, the replacement for our minivan, given my choice of ideal hypothetical, would be a Voltec powered Chevy Orlando.
(Quote)
September 8th, 2009 at 11:09 am
Amen. Simplicate and add lightness.
(Quote)
September 8th, 2009 at 11:12 am
LRGVprovolt:
True that. GM is actually a world leader in the use of composite marterials for cars. I’ll bet that there have been more Corvettes (1.5 million and counting) built than all of the other composite construction cars ever built in the world combined. Play to your strength GM!
(Quote)
September 8th, 2009 at 11:18 am
jason:
I dunno, they did that with the 1953 Corvette and it alomost killed the Corvette. The real buyers, as opposed to the Hollywood punters who got the cars, ran out of patience, the buzz died off, and they struggled to sell the 1954s to the point that the bean counters wanted to shut the whole thing down.
It’s a well known, documented, story in Corvette lore.
I don’t claim to be a marketing genius. I’m just saying that he who ignores history is doomed to repeat it.
(Quote)
September 8th, 2009 at 11:33 am
Wow, a study that finds that range anxiety is real! Sounds like a job for my favorite super hero, from the “But Wait, There’s More” (BWTM) page in Autoweek, CAPTAIN OBVIOUS.
My wife will not even discuss the idea of a BEV. Next case.
LJGTVWOTR!!