Posted by Lyle in: Competitors, Original GM-Volt Interviews, Public Opinion with 337 Comments
Share:
Last week Audi North America President Johan de Nysschen was quoted as saying the Chevy Volt was a ”car for idiots.” This led to an explosion of web controversy.
Finding this comment hard to believe, and as an ardent Volt enthusiast, I sought the truth direct from the source, and had a half hour informal conversation with Mr. de Nysschen as an interchange of ideas.
Business Case Idiotic, Not People
De Nysschen underscored the debacle of his quote by noting the tragic irony that a senior executive two weeks before the launch of his own company’s electric car would be calling people who would by them idiots.
“I don’t think the Volt is a car for idiots,” he said. He claimed the headline was a journalist’s misinterpretation, and that his point was that the Volt was “an idiotic business case,” and not how he would refer to people.
“We might as well have been taking about the Tesla,” he said. “I am not an enemy of the (Volt) concept.” But he argues that we should not think of it as a magic bullet.
He thinks the business case for an electric car is idiotic because buyers “cannot amortize their incremental fixed investment in the cost of the car to the savings in fuel consumptions.”
And for those who are willing to supplement the cost through affluence for the sake of the environment, his opinion is that benefit is not clear either.
Questions CO2 Emissions Benefit of Electric Cars
de Nysschen said that he “cares very, very deeply about the planet, what we are doing to it and how our activities of today are shaping tomorrow.”
A prominent fallacy he says is that electric cars cause zero emissions, and said he was “astonished” such “misconceptions” are even held by people in positions of power who make legislative decisions and are close-minded to other options.
He is troubled that coal-fired power plants and related efficiency losses eventually release more CO2 than burning diesel, and referred to a CARB report that says electric power cars are second only to hydrogen powered cars in terms of the well to wheel emissions because of the way US gets its power. Though he did admit that it would be a different equation if electricity were created by renewable sources.
I asked him if he was aware of the EPRI-NRDC study from 2007 that showed CO2 emissions from EVs supplied by current powerplants would be less than if those cars were gas powered. He admitted he was “not familiar with that study.”
Agrees Energy Independence Important
As he had never mentioned it, I told him what I’ve noticed about Volt fans, and told him I have a list of 50,000 people, is a common theme of a desire for energy independence; that people don’t want energy from foreign sources.
He agreed that “that is a very worthwhile argument.”
But, “getting people to understand the benefits of clean diesel is important,” he said. He argued that if 30% of new cars sold in the US were to be clean diesel (the number right now is 50% in Europe), we would save as much oil annually as we import from Saudi Arabia, which is 1.5 billion barrels of oil per year.
Thinks Other Alternatives Should Come Before EVs
He says waiting to get to the “promise land” of EVs will lead to a lot of “dirt in the atmosphere” and instead feels we should move to complementary technologies sooner, including clean diesel, new generation gas engines, and biofuels.
He admitted diesel still comes from foreign sources and won’t make us independent, but less dependent. He argues it would do so because we would “need less of it (than gas) because diesel engines are more efficient.”
To get that diesel, he explains, when a barrel of oil is cracked it can be varied to produce more diesel than gasoline by tuning the distillation process. He also says diesel engines, being more efficient, produce 25% less CO2, have “beautiful power characteristics,” and are more economical.
He points out that the US has the world’s largest resources of natural gas, and argues that we could use it to power some of the power plants, though notes it’s more expensive than coal. He suggested the government should subsidize the use of natural gas in powerplants.
He also argues the natural gas could be used to produce clean diesel in a gas to liquid process, though admits it’s still a fossil fuel and not renewable.
He suggests another good option is using ethanol, not from corn which he called “an outrage”, but from new technologies creating it from waste material. He admits this wouldn’t result in vehicles which themselves do not produce emissions.
Electric Cars
He does believe electric cars “are the solution in the long-term,” but thinks we won’t get to that point for 20 years.
If we want EVs, he says, we face potentially “staggering” investments including cleaning up coal-powered plants and generating new capacity. Simply switching to EVs right now, he says, without cleaning up power generation is just “adding more pollution to the environment.”
Though he thinks the Volt’s business case is “troublesome” it doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t go down that road, he said. In fact, he actually supported it saying “how else would we learn and get experience and expertise (in EVs),” such that “the next generation is better.”
For that reason, in fact, he admitted “Audi too is working on electric cars and on the verge of making announcement about electric cars of their own.”
He believes in particular dense urban conditions such as the US West Coast, it makes sense to have cars that produce zero emissions where they are used. Here he says he sees “a massive role” for electric cars and “cars such as the Volt.”
The Chevy Volt
Doesn’t Work For Him
Asked why he thinks it will take 20 years for EVs to take hold he said one issue is the cost of the batteries, and the other is the limited amount of energy that can be stored in them.
I pointed out that the whole point of the Volt is it has the smallest battery possible that would allow most people to drive all of their daily needs without gas, thus minimizing battery cost and maximizing electrical driving.
He claimed the information Audi has is that the range available with these batteries is that if you are in heavy stop and go traffic with max 10 mph speed you could get “a tolerable amount of range.” But he said if you are doing highway driving 30 miles each way, as he does personally, it is his opinion that “he would have to switch to the gas motor long before he gets to work,” and that “even after he gets to work the infrastructure isn’t there to charge the battery.”
He would then have to drive the car home on gas too, in which case, he says ”the whole issue becomes a little bit moot, because if he’s driving mostly on the gas, it doesn’t work for him.” He admitted “it might well work” for other people with shorter commutes and different driving conditions.
He actually said “we should not summarily dismiss the (Volt) technology.” He admits “there is a role for it.” The people that buy the car will have to be “a particular subset of the total commuting public.”
Questions Value Proposition
I asked about why he thinks the Volt doesn’t offer what it should at $40,000.
To be fair he said, “I have never obviously driven a Volt” but admits “he has always looked at the car with great interest.” He even sat in it at an auto show, and said “it’s not exactly a Cadillac.”
He considers it very similar to the Saturn Aura which he thought was a “fine GM car,” and actually said he was “sad to see Saturn’s demise.” He then said the Volt would not be a better car but cost twice as much.
What you are getting, he says, is in his circumstance is half time zero emissions, zero fuel emissions. This is why he thinks if most people did the math they would have to find another reason why they would buy the Volt, it won’t be to save money.
I argued that the first generations of new technology always have to be subsidized by the well off who may have many different reasons for buying it.
“You are right,” he said, all new technology always cost more. He noted that was why luxury cars usually lead the way with groundbreaking technology.
I asked if he believed that that Chevy Volt design doesn’t match a high end car. “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder,” he said. “I don’t find it an unattractive car.”
“Its not a premium car feel,” he said. “But it’s got a premium car price.”
I argued it may not be a value equation but that there is the $7500 tax credit to bring it to $32,500.
He says this issue is his main point, whether this government expense is “the best way to clean up the environment,” and that there might be a better way to apply those tax credits to incentivize the utility companies to clean up the power stations.
Audis’ Electric Car Plans
I asked if Audi was planning a production electric car or an EREV and he did not actually provide an answer. He said what Audi and all car companies need to do is to continue to make gas and diesel engines for “many, many years in the future,” but they have to also produce hybrid cars and plug in electrics.
I asked if he thinks the idea of driving electrically with its smooth instant torque and driving pleasure was of value. He said he thinks it is a “very interesting driving experience” and admitted he has driven Audi’s own electric car prototypes and that “it’s very different.” He thinks it will be part of the engineering challenge to still “maintain an exhilarating driving experience and not seem like driving a golf cart.”
Asked specifically if he thought the Volt was a reasonable piece of the puzzle, he said “Oh absolutely, and even a required piece of the puzzle.”
For what its worth I told him I was the de facto number one Volt fan. He said “I certainly would never want to call you an idiot.”
Finally I asked him for information about Audi’s upcoming EV. He said he would “love to” tell me, but it would remove the fanfare from Audi’s announcement in Frankfurt, “so we’ll have to wait on that one.”
This entry was posted on Tuesday, September 8th, 2009 at 6:00 am and is filed under Competitors, Original GM-Volt Interviews, Public Opinion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
-1
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:14 am)The Volt is just as premium as any of the stinking diesels Audi sells.. and way better, smooth instant torque, quiet and no fuel used for the first 30-40 miles.. I am getting used to the Volt at $40 k, obviously its not for everyone but there wont be that many Volts anyways.
Has anyone heard of the Renault Elect’Road?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elect'road
The Renault Elect’Road was the first erev sold..it begin selling in 2003 and was discontinued after 500 were sold.
It uses a manually controlled 21hp genset to extend the range of its 13kwh nimh battery pack. Electric only range is 50 miles, 60mph max speed.
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:25 am)Nice work on the follow-up, Lyle.
+11
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:27 am)Good job with the interview Lyle.
Thank you Mr. Nysschen for your opinions regarding EV, the Volt, the future of fuel, and the direction of Audi.
My belief is that the first 100,000 (or more) Volt will be sold before the paint dries. The only hurdles I see are NGMCO going with a lease format. Or if the Volt ends up overpriced by greedy middle men.
Again, thanks for your imput and good luck with your product line.
=D~
+3
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:28 am)Well i don’t think Audi sells stinking diesels. Actually let’s face it, Audi cars looks great. But i believe that fuel economy is a very important detail of a vehicle. While it’s obvious that Volt does not look like a 40k car, it will pay you back when you start using electricity. Plus it doesn’t have to be a magic bullet. You just gotta sell some Volts and the prices would go down over time, and the design of the car will probably be better too. As I said before, GM should have worked a little more on the design of Volt. Don’t get me wrong I like the car, but i just think it doesn’t look like a 40k car. Considering their claims that the performance and feel of the car are great, why was it that hard to come up with a design of a 40k car? Just the design!
+4
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:28 am)Not a very well thought out set of answers for a man in his position. His answers tend towards the uninformed.
+2
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:31 am)I dont think anyone on this site is against diesels. Alot of people have expressed a desire for a diesel range extender.
With a combination of the Volts battery and a high mpg diesel range extender running on biodiesel (Hopefully not from corn) plus our domestic supply of oil is the quickest way to getting away from foreign oil.
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:32 am)here is a better link:
http://tinyurl.com/lfmpyj
+5
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:35 am)Oh Humble pie, never tasted so good……..
The Volt is a very necessary vehicle as NONE of the other manufactures had the guts to do so, including Audi.
I’m very glad that GM with Volt is setting the pace.
Well done GM.
-2
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:46 am)Price drop over time. . . .Like what we’ve seen on the two-mode Hybrid Tahoes and Silverados?
+18
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:56 am)From the article (Well done, Lyle)
But, “getting people to understand the benefits of clean diesel is important,” he said. He argued that if 30% of new cars sold in the US were to be clean diesel (the number right now is 50% in Europe), we would save as much oil annually as we import from Saudi Arabia, which is 1.5 billion barrels of oil per year.
A smoker who cuts down from 3 packs a day to one, is still a smoker.
A drug addict who only shoots up once a day instead of 3, is still an addict.
In his argument, we may use 1.5 billions barrels less oil per year, but we are still users. We need to get off of oil, not continue to support it.
Volt is a very very good first logical step off of oil.
+8
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:00 am)I think most people assume that battery prices will fall over the next decade as interest in batteries for automotive use skyrockets.
+3
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:00 am)nuclearboy,
I got the same sense of his experience with electric vehicles being seriously limited. I’m sure Lyle could run rings around him (and did in the interview).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:02 am)Martin,
Yeas, the fellow nearly tore ligaments doing a turnaround oin his opinion!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+5
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:05 am)First, thanks to Lyle for another great interview. It’s nice to get he real story direct from the source.
Unfortunately, my opinion of Johan de Nysschen has not changed. I basically disagree with most of what he says in the interview.
If gasoline goes back to $4/gallon, the amount of gas savings over 10 years will make the Volt cost around the same as a Honda Civic. So, as it turns out, with the federal tax credit, the Volt is not expensive to own. And as the production volume goes up, costs will come way down, so the tax credit will be unnecessary in the future.
As for CO2 emissions, I also disagree, and so does Nova:
“Skeptics say that all plug-ins do is shift the pollution source from the tailpipe to the smokestack, but studies show that powering cars with electricity from today’s mix of power plants could reduce greenhouse emissions by about 40 percent. Further reductions are possible if electric power gets cleaner.”
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/programs/ht/tm/3507.html?site=22&pl=wmp&rate=hi&ch=5
About the only thing I agree with the that the future will have more bio-fuels, but for me, that only seems viable if EREVs go mainstream. Without making most of the miles driven electric, bio-fuels will start cutting into our food supply. So I see bio-fuels as a perfect solution for the range extender, but not as a replacement for all of today’s gasoline consumption.
+4
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:17 am)Rally good interview Lyle.
For the preisdent of a company to be saying the things he was saying, when in a week they are going to be introducing their own electric vehicle, just seems kind of strange. It is almost like the corporate management is not really behind the project. And it really does not sound like he has read any of the reports we have talked about here with respect to all of the unused electric generating capacity at night that can be used to charge millions of electric vehicles without increasing capacity.
Or is it that they can not come in at the $40K price of the Volt, and are tring to say that electric vehicles must cost much more, and therefore are not the path to follow.
If his round trip commute is 60 miles, then he is also out of the norm for the 78% of the drivers in the USA that have commutes of less than 40 miles. So that is the reason not to go forward???
I am sorry, but this guy just does not sound very progressinve to me.
An optomist will work through all problems to get something they truly believe in accomplished.
A pessimist will just fret about why something is not able to be done.
Which catagory do you think Mr. Johan de Nysschen fits in? I think if I owned stock in the company, I would be calling for a change of leadership……
Here is the exciting (NOT!) web site Audi has set up for their electric car…..
http://www.audiusa.com/us/brand/en/exp/progress.html#source=http://www.audiusa.com/us/brand/en/exp/progress/electricityuntamed.html?csref=inin_electricityuntamed&container=layerModal
JMHO
+4
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:21 am)No. Two-mode Hybrid Tahoes and Silverados don’t sell that much. But you already knew that, didn’t you?
The point of the Volt is that it is meant for the masses. The tax credit will help sales initially. After the first 250,000 Volts sold, I believe the costs will have come down to the point where the tax credits are unnessary.
The Prius followed a similar pattern – using tax credits at first to make it more viable. Now that the Prius tax credits have expired, the production volume and associated cost is such that the tax credits are unnessary.
+3
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:22 am)If you DO THE MATH for every car you consider of course buying a horse or a bicycle may be cheaper. SO when does a regular car ever pay you back for its cost. Answer: It never does, in fact it depreciates as fast as you can pay it off, so whats his point. For some ,driving while using no gas is all the luxury they need.
+3
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:25 am)A volt with an array of solar collectors on the garage roof (my version of the perfect car) would change his equation quite a bit.
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:26 am)Great score on the interview Lyle. There was too much wishy washy remarks on Johann’s behalf for me to take him seriously. His own Company is days away from unveiling their own EV and yet he still fights and argues how EV’s are dirtier than diesels because of coal fired power plants. He goes back and forth so many times through the interview I got dizzy reading it. I think deep down, reading between the lines, he doesn’t like the EV concept as a whole. But he is required to like it because Audi and everyone else are pursuing it. He’s a diesel guy tried and true and no amount of logic, data, studies, or statistics will change his mind about that. That’s fine, he is entitled to his opinion, no matter how narrow.
The thing GM needs to take home from this is that Mr. N. is not the only person that feels this way about the Volt and other EV’s. There are many people out there that need to understand and see for themselves why an EREV is such a great solution. The burden is on GM to show these people what the Volt can do for them, then sales and profits will eventually follow.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:31 am)That sure nails it. It never pays you back.
+2
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:35 am)What percentage of the volt’s $40,000+ price tag do you think is tied up in battery cells?
+2
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:35 am)I take it that any views other than Mr Johan de Nysschen are idiotic. Now, he’s trying to weasel his way of out his negative Volt remark.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:36 am)This transision period from fossil fuels to electric is going to be tough going for a few years and there are always going to be those who think backwards. Batteries obviously need further development as do solar panels. There is no alternative but electric so we must push on. When gasoline hits four to six dollars a gallon you will not be able to find a Chevy Volt anywhere for sale, waiting period may be two years or more.
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:38 am)Excellent remarks Rashiid. Well said.
+50
+2
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:40 am)Randy,
Well put. Similarly, retirement never “pays you back” but the luxury of having time to do whatever you want (as long as it doesn’t involve money) is incredible!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:43 am)Schmeltz,
Yep, he’s no Bob Lutz! (g). (ducks and covers)
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
-1
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:44 am)Bravo Lyle for clearing this up. Clean diesel has a place in cutting back on oil consumption and again it is something that can be bought now. They also should be designed now to run on bio-diesel.
+4
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:45 am)From the article,
He is troubled that coal-fired power plants and related efficiency losses eventually release more CO2 than burning diesel, and referred to a CARB report that says electric power cars are second only to hydrogen powered cars in terms of the well to wheel emissions because of the way US gets its power.
I am not an expert, and I don’t play one on TV.
However, it seems logical to me that is easier to control pollution at one side (coal plant) than it is on millions of cars and trucks.
It will be quicker and easier to upgrade pollution controls at one location than it will be to upgrade pollution controls on millions of cars and trucks. This argument about the power plants not being clean and this is why we shouldn’t go EV, is getting a bit old.
Personally, I would like my Volt to use E85 from cellulose for now.
+4
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:58 am)As I stated before, both he and the North American Toyota head are shrilling howling for attention for their advanced alternative fuel / propulsion techs, trying to draw attention from the spotlight on plugin hybrids and BEV’s. It is a sign of frustration that they cannot get any media attention for their products.
Johan is a fool. ICE vehicles are going to be a majority of the vehicle market share for decades, as most people will not be able to afford the first generation(s) EREV’s, BEV’s, FCV’s and PFCEV’s (plugin fuel cell electric vehicle). He has nothing to worry about, but has run his mouth anyway.
Audi would be wise to replace him ASAP.
+2
Sep 8th, 2009 (8:07 am)more than 1/3 of the cost is attributable to the batteries.. we know the raw cost to GM is $12k for the complete battery pack ($8k for the cells alone).. then you have to also include warranty cost for the pack and the cost of money to make all this happen.
+2
Sep 8th, 2009 (8:14 am)A diesel range extender is a bad idea, many people will seldom use the range extender at all.. 80% of the publics commute is under 40 miles daily. Diesels are heavy, expensive, use exotic emission controls and are maintenance prone.. why would you want to saddle a Volt with something like this when it would seldom be used?
Many people own Volkswagen diesels, ask them about maintenance cost long term.. not when the car is 2 years old.
GM did the right thing by choosing a standard engine from their stable, nothing too exotic.. heck not even a turbo.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (8:16 am)I think his days at Audi are numbered..
+2
Sep 8th, 2009 (8:21 am)Joe,
I guess you could say that he’s “RE-Volting” (groan).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+4
Sep 8th, 2009 (8:36 am)I’ve never in my life seen a finer technical interview which brought about the revelation of the most pervasive circular-logic, inconsistent marketer’s positioning, and technically-foolish and dishonest representations whereby an executive has impeached himself to the maximum extent technically-possible.
All for their own twisted marketing of a type of engine which produces carcinogenic diesel microparticulates which the lungs can not expel.
He will undoubtedly claim “I didn’t see that study” when it is his firm’s turn to be brought to answer for its more dangerous form of carcinogenic pollution, for which I believe there are not yet laws on the books here in America. (Most certainly not in Germany, the place where diesel was invented).
Once again, and in even a more gross manner, he has brought additional further discredit upon his firm which by now as we now know, consist of these corporate competitive self-deceits that are so firmly established and entrenched, only the deluded would not now recognize its own self-damages and cause rational change.
For some, overt or subvert “hints” do not work. But if gentle direct and blunt statements which are made at a whisper level that their situation has proved to be very harmful for specific reasons does not work right away, then often they may work later.
Otherwise, the clear protest of free speech can warn the public beforehand.
These interviews are imperative for us all to continue to understand how executives who make these decisions affecting our personal health and future global health refuse to do their “due diligence”. Design-entrenchment blocks them from referencing outside independent research for safety and everything else (which is their very job). And, all too often, very deliberately and/or callously disregarding or abrogating rational and clear responsibilities.
Thank you Lyle, for your exceptional work. You are quite a hero it’s clear to me and most of us here.
-2
Sep 8th, 2009 (8:54 am)The only problem with your approach it will cost an arm and a leg. And a kidney.
+3
Sep 8th, 2009 (8:56 am)Bingo Rashiid !!!
I just had a conversation last night and this is (one of) the exact arguments I used for my “formidable (Volt) opponent”…. he owns an ’08 VW Golf and loves it – he is a big German engineering guy (as am I actaully)…and this guy loves to argue….
So when I brought up this whole Johan @ Audi calling people idiots thing he, not surprisingly, totally agreed with Johan and started bashing the Volt for several reasons…and because of my time here on GM-Volt.com…I totally “nailed” this guy’s arguments…
His reasons and my responses (paraphrased of course)
1) The Volt at $40k is WAY too expensive, it isnt ecomonical —- agreed BUT aren’t all things that are in their 1st generation, how much was the first CD palyer? or the first iPod? you gotta start somewhere = NAILED HIM
2) The pollution will simply be moved from the tailpipes to the power plants it will not help the environment —- somewhat agreed but (see your comment above) = NAILED HIM
3) GM’s reliability vs. almost any other car company is terrible —- OK, niether of us are really GM guys but I know they have gotten better over the past few years BUT what are all these other car company’s track records on reliability of ELECTRICALLY driven vehicles? answer ZERO = NAILED HIM
4) I cant imagine that this Volt or any other electric car will be fun to drive —- Well, of course I would need to test drive the Volt before any final decisions are made but as far as the potential just go check out a little company called Tesla (which he only heard of but knew very little about) = NAILED HIM (sort of)
Then I gave him the main reason why the Volt is a ground-breaking technology and why we NEED this electric revolution to take hold here ….. which is to use less and less foreign oil….to which reluctantly agreed.
Sep 8th, 2009 (8:57 am)I agree, but more to the point when gas gets to $4+ diesel will be even more expensive per gallon. At least that’s the experience over the last decade or so…
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:00 am)When gasoline will hit 6-8 bucks price range the US economy will be in a free fall in such a way that Great Depression will be renamed to Little Recession. By then no one will be able to afford $40k car. Last year we got a taste of $4/gallon gas: 10% unemployment followed.
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:03 am)I’m having my garage roof painted with thin film solar and a Esstore battery pack to which I power the house and recharge my Volt!! Life is good !!! 9-8-19 see ya soon!!
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:04 am)What are you talking about, Randy? My car pays me every day. I go to work, and the only way in the US to get to work is to drive a car. There is no public transportation in suburbs. Don’t you know that?
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:05 am)i said this before, but everytime i hear about diesel, the idea that it will be better for our energy dependence is just false. i ahve seen this stat used in a few different places now and the numbers are always the same…
“About 20 gallons of gasoline and 7 gallons of diesel are produced from each barrel of crude oil. ”
source: http://genomicsgtl.energy.gov/biofuels/transportation.shtml#gallons
so if we all went to diesel, we would hit peak oil a LOT FASTER!!!!
i did more research, and i found that his “and” was meant to be an “or” in the above quote.
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:07 am)Is there a difference between “clean diesel” and the diesel that’s available now? Or is it the same thing?
+2
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:12 am)lyle, give google a chance and search for audi a1.
maybe you’ll find a hybrid concept, similiar to the volt
-2
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:14 am)Oil independence is one of those idiotic arguments. US came out strong most times exactly because they were pragmatic, not fanatic. Americans used common sense and counted pennies better than anybody else. Nowadays this becomes a rare commodity. Trendsetters are paying top buck for “feeling good”. Is dependency on China or Bolivia better tasting than on Saudis?
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:24 am)ha-ha-ha. That was funny. But not realistic in 2019. Or did you mean 3019?
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:25 am)With respect, you are mistaken, Sheltonjr.
Americans will be very difficult to sway to diesel. Most of our actual experiences sharing the road with them (and to some degree with owning them) have been far less than ideal.
Hopefully, HCCI will offer many of the benefits of diesel without much of the expense for ‘clean’ fuel, heavy engine blocks, and several other distinctly diesel disadvantages.
As for German automakers’ (not just Audi’s) vision of diesel utopia, it simply isn’t going to happen here. That’s not to say that diesel might not have a larger role in the States given plentiful, clean bio-diesel (which is an uncertain prospect at this point).
+2
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:29 am)Is being dependent on anything better than standing on ones own feet?
No.
We can generate 100% of the power we need to electrify the automobile. And we can do this without relying on any foreign country. It will just take some time. The Volt is a good first step towards that goal.
+3
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:31 am)I don’t normally post, but I had to say I find it hypocritical that the CEO of Audi can say that people will have to find a reason other than saving money to buy a Chevy Volt. If saving money was the reason people bought cars, then the Audi line of vehicles would fail miserably.
It seems to me a CEO of a company that’s concerned that there is a product that may just resonate with customers, even if the first generation of technology isn’t economically viable – people WILL buy it for other reasons. The price will come down – IMO, it’s probably the best bridge to full battery electric vehicles. If Audi believes BEV’s won’t be ready for 20 years… then the Volt has a 20-year window to capitalize. If I were him, I’d be worried about my competitor having the first-mover advantage and talk smack about it. Oh, that IS what is happening.
Brian
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:32 am)so maybe it makes more sense to spend those 7500 rebates on improving oil refinement process than subsidizing new VOLT-oys? The guy said it is possible.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:43 am)What percentage of the volt’s $40,000+ price tag do you think is tied up in battery cells?
The cost of the cells is $8K, so that would be 20%. Another $3.5K is for the electronics and other parts of the pack. The rest of the premium is for all the specialized parts you need for an EV. I’m not a big believer that cell prices will fall that quickly, but the good news is that the controller and other parts should come down very quickly.
+2
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:46 am)I still think GM should seriously look at converting the entire light truck (half tons and Tahoes) production to 2-mode drive. With volume production comes significant cost savings.
This does two things; first of all you instantly have the most fuel efficent truck fleet by a significant margin and this means that GM is well ahead of the CAFE fleet mileage requirements in one shot.
Seems like a no-brainer to me.
There is a rather silly TV show called “Mean Green Machines”, they compared the Hybrid Tahoe against a regular Silverado in several challenges, off road, towing, acceleration, etc. Performance wise it was basically a wash, but the Tahoe gets much better gas mileage.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:46 am)Yes, congrats to Lyle. He’s burnishing his journalistic credits more every day!
+3
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:50 am)Aside from the battery, the other cost issue for Volt 1.0 is the “new” parts needed for the car. Lutz noted earlier in one of his comments that GM needed more “new” things developed than they originally estimated. This apparently added $10K to the cost since he initially assumed they would use off the shelf stuff and the car should cost around $30K.
Prices for these “new” components should drop over time too as they become more standardized with EV adoption.
Future EREV designs should not cost twice as much as a similarly outfitted ICE vehicle.
If they could shave $5K off the cost of the “new” stuff and $5K off the cost of a battery we could have a $32K car instead of a $42K car.
Let’s hope they can actually do it.
-2
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:50 am)JMH: “It is a sign of frustration that they cannot get any media attention for their products.”
The poor, sad folks at Toyota will just have to console themselves with sales of over 18K Priuses per month. How tragic it is to be Toyota.
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:52 am)You’re on a roll today.
+2
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:52 am)Thanks Murray.
I had the opportunity to talk to a guy this weekend at Blackies.
If you lived near me, you would know that Blackies is a burger, hot dog joint that started in the early 1930′s.
He saw my Volt T-shirt and we started talking.
He was confusing the Volt with the Tesla, but I set him straight by explaining the Volt is way cheaper and without range anxiety.
He wasn’t familiar with range anxiety. We ended up having a nice talk. I have no clue who he is but he left well educated about the Volt.
That was a fun conversation.
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:54 am)All the government would have to do in order to improve oil refinement in the US is to remove or modify the current regulatory barriers which have prevented any new oil refineries from being built here over the past 30 – 40 years. These regulations, under the guise of environmental protection, have instead proven to be a moratorium; a legal gauntlet that no oil company has been willing to run. This is an example of how government impedes rather than assists private sector energy solutions. No regulation which results in the strangulation of an industry can be construed as “successful,” because it removes all incentive for positive change; indeed, in this case it has resulted in no change of any kind.
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:54 am)exactly.
+2
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:58 am)There are two other issues with diesels. One is that “clean diesel” is something of an oxymoron. Diesel engines are more efficient but they also emit more pollution. To reduce the emissions enough so as to meet clean air regulations you add a lot of cost to the car, as Fritz Hendersio has intimated when saying that to sell a diesel you need to sell a car and a chemical plant.
Second is that the cost of diesel is too affected by subsidies in other countries. In Europe diesel is not taxed as heavily as gasoline. In China, India, and the rest of Asia and many other parts of the world, governments limit the price of diesel. If oil spikes the governments limit the price increases, which leads to greater demand for diesel fuel. Since the amount of diesel produced from a barrel of oil is limited, what happens in a country like he USA where the price of diesel is not subsidized is that the price rise for diesel fuel is much greater than the price increase in gasoline. Basically when you have an oil crisis you don’t want a vehicle powered by a diesel engine.
Cellulostic ethanol is a better bet than diesel if for no other reason than cellulostic ethanol would be renewable and carbon neutral.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:59 am)This is one of the few times we disagree Jackson.
I’d very much like a diesel genset, my genset WILL run at least weekly and I’d like to have the efficency of a modern diesel in that mode.
MOST of the bad diesel memories are ironically GM’s fault!
The TERRIBLE converted 350 diesels in the 70′s are what MOST people in NA think of when they say bad things about diesels.
(There is no other way to put it they were TERRIBLE!)
The second bad diesel thing is there are “yahoo’s” that have the modern diesel pickups that have gone ahead and put poorly engineered ‘hop-up’ kits on their trucks that make them smoke terribly.
A properly setup modern diesel does NOT smoke like that and DOES deliver excellent economy.
Herm;
Poor quality from an automaker who has a poor quality record isn’t really all THAT surprising is it?
-5
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:02 am)Is that why Audi is making money?
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:02 am)If we never start projects like Volt (or for that matter, Audi’s BEV), they will remain 20 years away, in perpetuity.
You can’t make a cost over benefits argument for anything new. You start at the point where it’s just possible to establish a market, and grow from there. Hence, we’ve seen first Toyota and now Audi do their best to kill the seed before it can take root.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:04 am)Your point is well taken, but if you take a longer view we need to move away from oil and find more renewable sources of energy. We need increasing amounts of energy to fuel economic growth, and the simple fact is that there simply isn’t enough oil to fuel the economy for the next hundred years.
This is not a new process. When mankind started running out of wood, being practical meant finding another source of energy, not using more and more expensive wood.
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:04 am)Diesel in NA is now the same as Europe as of last year. Prior to that we had real crap that helped ‘fuel’ stories of why diesels are bad.
+2
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:05 am)The government is good at setting penalties for failing to meet a requirement (CAFE); I wonder if they could be made interested in providing a reward for exceeding it?
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:06 am)Which make the Audi NA comments even MORE bizarre!
+2
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:08 am)dagwood,
Always a ray of sunshine, aren’t you.
I wish you could…
be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:09 am)I didn’t say that diesels were bad, just that Americans would be very difficult to sway, for whatever reason (including those you that you gave).
If I could be sure of finding biodiesel at reasonable price as universally as I could find regular unleaded gasoline (or E85 even), it might almost win me over. A diesel makes a fine powerplant-style engine.
I say almost, but not quite. There is still that small amount of real estate for us to quibble over.
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:12 am)RamZ
Is it as easy to change a regular diesel vehicle over to a biodiesel as it is for a gas vehicle? I honestly don’t know.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+3
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:13 am)This will not always be the case. Work on photovoltaics isn’t standing still either.
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:15 am)I think the root has already taken hold. Nov, 2010, you will see the first crop ready for sale!!!!
OK, I promise. No more farm references to the Volt…..
+3
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:15 am)With technology progressing as it is I don’t think it’s unreasonable that in another 10 years solar could be efficent enough and priced at a point where it isn’t out of reach. In my area I’d add a wind turbine as well.
Now… jeff j lost me at EEStor, BUT I see the upcoming sodium/sulfur batteries as a real possibility for home power storage.
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:15 am)Rashiid and Murray – education one idiot at a time (lol) Great jobs! My Volt T-shirts and bumper stickers have started a LOT of discussions.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
-2
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:18 am)Geez, let it go already. So the guy doesn’t like the Volt. 3 blog posts about this now???
+3
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:23 am)I’ve said it before:
Lyle proves the “One man can make a difference in the world” statement. I hope he’s as proud of his effect as we are of him.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+8
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:23 am)“How tragic it is to be Toyota.”
Toyota wants to own the idea of the environmentally friendly automobile; they don’t want customers to think of anyone else. It isn’t a case of shooting down competing technology, it’s in building the existing brand recognition of their solution; so that any development which might compete with Toyo looks like a rip-off (regardless of the facts in any particular case).
So far, with their ‘baby-coated earth’ and ‘cars you plug in’ commercials, they appear to be accomplishing this. Toyota is out there winning hearts and minds, and leaving the bashing to pro-Toyo trolls like you.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:24 am)Correct you are, DonC.
It will take time but we need
better solar collection and better ways of making ethanol from cellulose. Garbage in this country is clearly a renewable source
More hydro electric plants.
We have a huge coast line. Perhaps tidal energy can help.
Wind energy can assist us even if it is not reliable.
For the short term, coal plants are getting cleaner and we have plenty of natural gas. I don’t really want to support fossil fuels, but at least they are ours.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:28 am)Jackson,
Well said. We could also change some of the 17 or so different State formulations of gas, while we’re at it.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:29 am)Muddy,
I didn’t know that. Thanks.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:32 am)lh_newbie,
Very well put and welcome to the forum posters. Warning: It can get to be habit forming.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:34 am)Very disappointing link. I got bored waiting for something significant. GM is the only OEM that is completely honest about the electric vehilcle; they clearly state their intention to move away from ICE driven vehicles to electric propulsion vehicles. Audi has a market and will try to maintain it. Looks like their website for their electric car lacks information about it; they are probably scrambling to find anything they can to file it. It is so comical! I agree they need a change in leadership. This guy is a clown!
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:35 am)Excellent interview Lyle.
I have to say Nysschen was also excellent and also has very good points.
Audi has some superb engineering.
Diesel is a good road to be on and prior to my diesel experience I didn’t know just how good they are either. I suspect many, many other American drivers do not have the first hand experience to have a proper opinion….yet.
Today’s Diesels are cleaner than gas engines. They are too quiet to know if it’s a Diesel. I can’t tell you how many times people said “Hey your putting Diesel in there” when I filled my V10 Touareg.
The engine lasts far longer than Gas burners. Is far more efficient and get much better mileage.
We all know as does GM that the well off will be the early adopters. Nothing new here….and the next generations will be affordable. With the rate of new electric entries it looks sooner tan later.
GM is on the right track but still needs a kick in the buttox when they waste time with styling like the Buick plug in that was just a train wreck of style….
Build the Buick Rivera Concept, Converj and pull your head from you know where GM.
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:38 am)Lyle, Great Job!
De Nysschen, it’s raining. Switching trees to stand under (gas vs diesel) and you will still get soaked eventually.
On E85 you are only using 15% gasoline. The rest is domestically produced renewable alcohol. We need to be pushing the fact that decreasing GASOLINE use is the goal. My Volt will have synthetic oil in the crankcase as well. (Lyle, that’d be a good question for GM. Are they using synthetic oil and lube?)
There are 7 public E85 stations within 30 miles of my house. Not that I’ll be using any liquid fuel.
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:38 am)Sort of with you there….giving this guy too much “pub”
which could very well be the whole adgenda here from the start…if so…job well done (I doubt it though).
at the same time, Lyle gives us so much to talk (read) about …ya cant blame him for going after this story with such vigor…kudos to you again Lyle.
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:41 am)The removal of sulfur from diesel fuel is also why it’s now so much more expensive than gasoline. This diesel cleanup was done so that “clean diesels” could be imported to (or created in) NA. The fuel isn’t actually any cleaner when burned in existing diesels, at least that’s my understanding.
So far, I’m not aware that ‘clean diesels’ have been offered for sale here. So, the only meaningful result is that over-the-road truckers now pay more to deliver our goods; passing that cost along to the struggling economy.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:41 am)So, what are we expected to believe? He still seems to indicate that anyone purchasing a Volt would not be doing the right thing for their economic well-being and for the environment. But, of course, if we purchase any Audi vehicle, well, that is a different story. I don’t know if I trust anything he says. I get an oily sensation from this guy. IMO.
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:41 am)My problem with so-called clean diesel is there’s no end game that moves us away from fossil fuels. You can’t run a diesel powered vehicle using clean renewable energy, unless algae biodiesel ever hits it’s stride and that’s not a bet I’m willing to take today. Increasingly, I’m not sold on any biofuels, and it’s possible they’re even worse than fossil fuels.
PHEVs and E-REVs lead to EVs. The hugely improved maintenance record for EVs (no exhaust systems, no cooling systems, no ignition systems, improved brake life through regenerative braking) compared to the best of diesels methinks isn’t being considered by diesel aficionados and diesel makers, and there’s more than a small carbon footprint made by the manufacturing process.
EVs might not be a panacea today, but they can get there.
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:43 am)RVD:
I dunno, somehow they survive it in Europe. In fact, I heard last week that their economies are recovering faster than ours.
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:48 am)I have to agree. This interview is a very impressive “get” on the part of Dr. Dennis, but I really couldn’t care less what Herr Nysschen thinks or says. Next case.
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:52 am)There is some early cause for concern where exhaust from Ethanol is concerned (more research needs to be done), but Biodiesel actually burns more cleanly than the petroleum-based product (and without the on board ‘clean diesel’ chemistry set).
I think personal transportation will eventually be all or mostly electric, but big trucks will continue to use some form of liquid fuel for the foreseeable future.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:58 am)Interesting talk about the cost of the batt pack on the total cost of the car in a few posts. Let’s all remember that when considering the cost of the batt pack you MUST consider the cost of the controll power electronics of the BMS and it’s software all in the cost. Just shooting the brezeze of the cost of the cells means nothing because the the cells are worthless without a power BMS and it’s management software as well as the interface to the main computer.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:58 am)While I don’t particularly like this guy, hasn’t it already been established that the age of the dirty, smelly diesel is gone?
If BMW managed to do it, I’m sure Audi did.
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:00 am)Is it still GM’s policy of adding the cost of a replacement battery to the Volt’s cost? If so, another $8,000 of the $40,000 is for potentially replacing the battery before the warranty expires. I have not heard if GM has dropped this additional battery cost or not.
+2
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:00 am)Tag, the Volt will make retirement so much sweeter!
Besides that, when the price comes down and the Volt is affordable to the masses, it will prove to be a money saver. And make the purchase of solar panels for the house a good investment.
We all need our cars to get to work or where-ever we need to go. So it is a necessity. The question is how much does it cost to own, operate, and maintain it!
The Volt may end up more of an initial expense but over the long haul, it will pay back the owner in multiple ways. We need to think about the cost to each of us by the effects the burning fossil fuels: effect on our environment, to our health; to our economic well-being; to our safety (leads to war); and unnecessary dependence on foreign countries for our daily needs. The money the flows out of this country, estimated at 7 trillion dollars over ten years at the height of gasoline prices in the last year, would enable us to solve most of our domestic problems.
I am one of those retired individuals and surely appreciate your sense of humor on ‘ retirement never “pays you back” ‘ and as you said that incredible freedom it brings is wonderfully incredible ! As long as I can afford it.
Happy trails to you ’til me meet again.
+2
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:03 am)Our government does not have much experience in rewarding companies or individuals. I would not bet on any kind of reward. More likely they would see it as a justification for making the requirements much more stringent. IMO.
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:04 am)Funny, this “Chevy Volt is a car for idiots” story made the best advertisement for the Volt as possible.
At my work, I heard people talking about “Audi president called some GM car a car for idiots; what is so special in that car?”.
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:06 am)I agree. Maybe this will enable Lyle to be invited to drive the Audi EV before its release to the public. Never hurts to hope for such an event. It would give us all a better picture of where Audi is headed.
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:08 am)LRGVProVolt,
Amen and congrats on your retirement as well. I’m still looking forward to a lot of “firsts” – one of which is buying a new vehicle! I’ve never understood why people complain about having “time on their hands”. It’s one of the best things I’ve ever had on my hands (g).
Be well and enjoy,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:08 am)Tag,
If you are using properly converted and filtered biodiesel (not raw veggie oil, there is a process to convert it… google or bing it) it requires the removal of the cap on the car and the fuel being poured in.
The diesel engine was INVENTED to run on veggie oil in the first place.
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:11 am)Muddy,
Well THAT’S a conversion that will never catch on – where is the payoff??? (obviously just kidding).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:13 am)They must like the smell of diesel in Europe. He probably gets high on it. Give me a Volt so that I don’t have to smell noxious fumes while i”m stuck in a traffic jam caused by an accident currently caused by an ICE vehicle or driver!
-2
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:13 am)He is out of touch. He just doesn’t get the fact that we don’t need to burn more coal or build more coal plants to power a whole fleet of EVs.
He really cares about the environment? Is that why he produces huge, over-powered vehicles that reek of waste? How condescending could he be? Douche Bag.
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:14 am)Jackson,
The Cummins diesel in the new dodge pickups is ‘bluetec’ certified as are the diesels sold in NA from MB, VW, and BMW. They use a urea injection system in the exhaust to clean the output.
As I understand it the system works well.
But at that point we pretty much run out of diesels available here, sad really.
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:18 am)Loboc, synthetic oil is still oil, it just has been ‘enhanced’.
It’s good stuff without a doubt, but it’s still oil, make no mistake.
+6
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:24 am)That depends on whether or not they can get enough lanthanum to actually make those 18k Priuses.
And then there’s the risk that people won’t be interested in the Prius once they hear about a superior technology that’s actually on the road…
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:25 am)Sheltonjr,
To my knowledge Bio-Diesel is not made from corn. Ethanol is made from corn destined to be feed grain for farm animals. What is left of the corn product after the ethanol is extracted is still used as animal feedstock. Corn intended for human consumption is a different strain of corn and is not used for ethanol purposes. Farmers increased corn production for ethanol purposes and the amount available for human consumption did not significantly change. Futures trading did have an affect on the price of all corn products. But, my main point is that Bio-Diesel does not come from corn products at this time. Mostly soybeans and cooking grease account for most of the Bio-Diesel production.
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:26 am)They could tighten the restrictions for everyone. And the company who already exceeded those standards would be at an instant advantage.
But I really think that converting their entire truck fleet would cost too much.
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:29 am)It’s the once bitten twice shy syndrome without a doubt.
Americans got bitten BAD in the 70′s.
And now you have rich ‘rednecks’ with badly ‘hopped up’ pickups choking you. I can see how this perception has come about.
It’s an uphill battle without a doubt.
I need to replace my wife’s Subaru next year and I’d LOVE to keep AWD. An A4 with a small diesel would be very tempting to me. (And about the same expected price as the Volt that I won’t likely be able to get my hands on.) I’m now hearing BMW is NOT planning to bring the 320d (x) to NA. sigh…
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:32 am)Herm
You might have also mentioned that diesel does not age as well as gasoline in cooler climates. Even Bio-Diesel needs an additive to maintain its liquidity during really cold periods. If I were to chose a fuel for long term storage, it would not be diesel. Both gasoline and diesel can be treated to last longer in storage and in cold weather.
+2
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:34 am)Exactly my point…the new Diesels do not smell. Gas engines stink by comparison.
+3
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:35 am)He is troubled that coal-fired power plants and related efficiency losses eventually release more CO2 than burning diesel
This is a ridiculous claim. First of all, it’s just plain wrong on its face. Yes generating electricity from coal produces significant pollution and CO2. But even in this extreme case, the increased efficiency of an EV drive train means that EVs will “produce half the emissions of gasoline powered automobiles”. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_car#Carbon_dioxide_emissions
Moreover, it’s completely and impossibly wrong if you look at the question from an economic standpoint. Here you start from the fact that electricity, unlike gasoline or diesel, cannot be stored. If not used it goes to ground. The second salient fact, which is frequently ignored, is that at most times of the day and for most of the year electrical baseline generation exceeds demand. So most of the time a good bit of the electricity we generate is wasted rather than used.
This means that to the extent that EVs use surplus electricity they do not increase any form of pollution one iota. Charged at night or other times of day when baseline generation exceeds demand, not only are they truly zero emission vehicles from well to wheel, but they impose no other costs on society. In effect the societal costs for powering EVs, until such time as baseline generation has to be increased, is effectively zero, and all the electricity consumed becomes what in economics is called “social surplus”.
From this perspective, until there are tens of millions of EVs on the road, if EVs are charged in an intelligent way then the increase in pollution will be zero or very close to zero. In any case the additional pollution attributable to EVs will be far less than that generated by diesel vehicles.
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:37 am)You got that right Captain.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:41 am)MuddyRoverRob
I am one of those that had an Olds Diesel and I hated it. To many reasons to list so I will give just one.IT WAS GUTLESS, you could not spin tires on gravel.
But I would consider diesel now if it could deliver quite a bit more than a gas range extender.
+2
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:42 am)LRGVProVolt,
You obviously have not been near a new diesel.
Actually maybe you were, but just didn’t notice… they are very quiet and don’t smell these days.
I spent 5 weeks in Europe a few years back I drove a number of diesels, they were powerful, quiet and frugal on fuel. I’d like one.
Only old cars were at all noisy or smoky.
(Mostly old Benz’s that just wouldn’t die.)
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:45 am)You make some good points, but I would like to make some other points. Ethanol is not as good a fuel as a good quality bio-diesel. Assuming both are produced from renewable products and are food reducing neutral, I vote for bio-diesel. I agree the cost of a diesel engine and the added weight is a negative, but with bio-diesel many of the maintenance problems are not as severe and problematic. Bio-diesel does not lose its power versus regular diesel as does ethanol versus gasoline. Bio-diesel generally equals or betters regular diesel in fuel mileage. Bio-diesel engines run quieter, cooler and cleaner than regular diesel engines. Bio-diesel has so many advantages over regular diesel whereas ethanol only has one clear advantage – it is from renewable sources. The same for bio-diesel (primarily soybeans and cooking grease with algae starting to come into play). These are just some of my thoughts on the subject. But all in all, either is preferred over the original gasoline or regular diesel. If they could solve the loss of power and mileage from ethanol, it would be a different story.
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:46 am)Regarding the studies comparing emissions between gas-powered engines and coal fired power plants, perhaps someone here has done a bit of research already that I was about to undertake:
The argument that a shift to electric cars would simply move emissions from the tailpipe to the coal-fired power plant seems like it is missing a huge chunk of information. Are these studies considering the energy it takes to remove oil from the ground, transport it to the refinery, refine, deliver to gas stations around the region, and THEN finally burn in an ICE? Likewise, do the studies consider the effort it takes to mine and transport coal? Or do they only consider the emissions from burning fuel in an ICE vs. burning coal at a power plant?
Even if all a switch to electric vehicles accomplishes is moving the emissions to hundreds of centralized locations instead of millions of mobile locations (which we all know to be untrue), it still is a vital step in resolving an issue.
Thanks!
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:46 am)The problem with CAFE standards is that in the absence of higher gasoline prices they tend to lower the cost of driving. Since the number of miles people drive is not fixed but variable, the miles driven go up as the cost of driving each mile goes down. Hence the savings attributable to CAFE tend to be canceled out by people driving more miles.
Definitely an unintended consequence supporting LauraM’s campaign for a gas tax.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:50 am)Making a diesel genset that meets clean air standards would probably add another $5K to the price of the Volt. Way too hefty a price to pay for something that won’t be used that frequently.
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:56 am)Where I live ethanol made from brewery waste costs a buck a gallon. Unfortunately there are exactly two ethanol stations in the metro area. That’s two more ethanol stations than hydrogen stations but still not exactly a lot, especially when you think that the DOE is funding the installation of 1000 fast charging stations.
FWIW coal is the worst alternative from an environmental standpoint. This is just from memory, but I believe that a coal plant produces as much radioactive waste as a nuclear plant. Coal is nasty stuff though it does have the benefit of being our nasty stuff.
+3
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:56 am)The Saudi Arabian government is one of the most repressive regimes on the planet. They surpress their own citizens. They fund terrorists and spread hatred all over the world. Including Europe. And the higher the price of oil, the more repressive and aggressive they become.
I’m not happy with the Chinese or Bolivian governments. But almost anyone’s better than Saudi Arabia. At least IMHO.
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:57 am)— He thinks the business case for an electric car is idiotic because buyers “cannot amortize their incremental fixed investment in the cost of the car to the savings in fuel consumptions.” —
Excuse my rant but AHH i’m sick of hearing this one!
A vehicle’s REAL cost, regardless of its power source, is the cost of the vehicle at purchase, minus the 5 or 10 year (or however many years old you choose to sell at) residual value. Also subtract all usage costs during that time, weather it be cost of electricity or cost of oil changes and fuel.
My weakness is the fact that i haven’t been to the future to see the value of a 3, 4, 5, or however old, Volt; but most of the intelligence that i can muster up within myself says E-REV’s and EV’s will have a more dependable and longer life than ICE cars for so many different reasons, and thus a greater residual value, and thus a lower ACTUAL cost than the tired short sighted statement of “You’ll never make up the cost difference in gas!!!!!!”
+5
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:58 am)It has been my experience in dealing with upper management that they do not eat crow very well.
However, I think Mr. Nysschen shoud have held off on his interview with Lyle for at least a day and brought in or teleconferenced with Audi experts on BEV and E-REV type vehicles. There is no excuse for the president of a major car company to be so ill informed regarding a potential strong competitor.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:59 am)Why would it cost too much?
The tooling to build the 2-mode variant already exists.
They have already completed the shortbox crewcab model and the Tahoe versions.
All they would have to do in those models is put the Captain Jack interior in and sell them as ‘entry level’ work trucks.
Done.
They DO need to work on the longbox (8 foot bed) variant to be seen as a real work truck, but I can’t imagine there is all that much more engineering to be done there beyond that in the crewcab.
To make this move WOULD take some guts there is no doubt, but as long as they can sell at a profit at $25k the gas saving will sell them as fast as they can make them.
The monthly operating costs of a work truck include the payment AND the fuel costs. Show saving a couple hundred bucks a month on fuel and the trucks will move.
This might just move ME away from my beloved Land Rover as the camper hauler.
And yes give GM a big advantage.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (12:08 pm)The interviewer (Lyle) does seem more informed than the interviewee. But De Nysschen did make some interesting points. It still sounds to me that he is downplaying the Volt because Audi’s offerings are lacking in the areas the Volt competes.
Quote: “He claimed the information Audi has is that the range available with these batteries is that if you are in heavy stop and go traffic with max 10 mph speed you could get “a tolerable amount of range.” But he said if you are doing highway driving 30 miles each way, as he does personally, it is his opinion that “he would have to switch to the gas motor long before he gets to work,” and that “even after he gets to work the infrastructure isn’t there to charge the battery.”
So when Audi’s EV is revealed it will be interesting to see what range is claimed based on the KWh size of the batteries and their SOC range.
My understanding of his comment is that on the highway (US not German autobahn) he is implying the range for 8KWh is about 25 miles if not less or about 320Wh per mile or 3.125 miles per KWh.
It will also be interesting to see the price of Audi’s EV– oh yeh, they are just unveiling a concept not an actual product so no price available. How many years behind GM does that make them?
Sep 8th, 2009 (12:11 pm)Nice link Carcus1. The next thread should be a lot of fun!
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (12:15 pm)old man,
You definately had the worst example (possibly ever) of the diesel engine.
I once had a horrible hamburger at a fast food place, the lettuce was brown, it was burnt and the bun was hard. But you know, I’ve had really GOOD burgers at other places, it didn’t turn me against all burgers for all time.
The Golf TDI diesel I rented in Paris would ‘squeek’ the tires on dry roads in 3 gears… Quiet, lots of go and incredible economy… 650 km over two days on half a tank of diesel.
It completely sold my wife and I on modern diesels
Sep 8th, 2009 (12:19 pm)You got that right. Next one should be a biggie.
Sep 8th, 2009 (12:24 pm)Most stations switch to winter diesel as the weather turns, my local Shell certainly does.
No fuel is really good for long term storage!
But there are stabilizers for both gas and diesel fuels if your useage patterns require it, mine don’t.
Sep 8th, 2009 (12:26 pm)Right on.
Canola being the main cooking oil.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (12:28 pm)DonC,
A buck a gallon is really cheap hootch! Can you bring your own wooden barrel?
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Sep 8th, 2009 (12:30 pm)Only blended synthetic has ‘real’ oil in it. Pure synthetic is made from non-oil stocks.
“Synthetic oil is a lubricant consisting of chemical compounds which are artificially made (synthesized) from compounds other than crude oil (petroleum). ”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_oil
The Germans were making and using synthetic oil, lubes, and fuels during WWII because they could not get petroleum. And now the knuckleheads are touting diesel as the win. Go figure.
+2
Sep 8th, 2009 (12:37 pm)I certainly understand the once bitten twice shy issue.
My turbodiesel powered Volkswagen Jetta TDI had a wonderful engine. I won’t be buying a Volkswagen again — it wasn’t the engine’s fault, it was ZF’s fault for building an unrepairable transmission, and Volkswagen’s fault for using it.
Driving a modern diesel is a very pleasant experience. The engine sounds a little lazy (because it runs at a lower RPM than a gas engine doing a similar job), but it’ll really buckle down and pull. And it does it smoothly and quietly, even it it sounds more ping-ey and less put-ey than a gasoline engine.
In other words, I’d love to buy another diesel car, but it won’t be coming from VAG. It’ll have to be built by Honda, or some other manufacturer with a reputation for boring dependability. But I don’t do much long-distance driving these days, so a hybrid or electric-ish car is a much better match for a large number of short low-speed trips than my diesel.
Sep 8th, 2009 (12:40 pm)Don C.
Well put.
We often forget that it is non-peak electricity we are talking about.
If electric vehicles become such a burden on the grid that we need more power plants, we should be so lucky.
Sep 8th, 2009 (12:41 pm)Good job Lyle.
I think Johan’s heart is in the right place but he’s a little misguided (and kind of old school). I think he needs to broaden his horizons a bit. Hopefully your 30minute conversation with him helped with that.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (12:43 pm)DonC,
You can’t seriously think that it costs GM that much ($5k) more to put a different model engine per unit into a car?
They already have existing euro-certified turbo diesels that ‘could’ be transplanted into the Volt/Ampera chassis without much difficulty. They would likely bolt right up to the generator.
I truly believe the real hold up is the leftover bias against diesels in NA.
I think they WILL land in the car in Gen 2.
Sep 8th, 2009 (12:44 pm)Europe has public transportation. They do not drive as much as we do here. In fact, most do not even have a car, or there is exactly one car per family used occasionally. They live in cities, not suburbs. Population density is much higher. They work close to where they live. In short, Europe could survive $8 gasoline because they are essentially immune.
Sep 8th, 2009 (12:44 pm)I agree. I think having electricity be the final mechanism that makes the wheels move is the best approach. Now, how you create that electricity can vary over time, coming from several sources. In the end, when cheap renewably electricity is available, our cars will be ready.
Sep 8th, 2009 (12:49 pm)Don C,
You and I are on the same page.
But I didn’t know a coal plant produced radioactive waste.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (12:50 pm)That’s gelling, not aging.
Speculation: I’d bet that the summer diesel you’re referring to will be fine — next spring.
Fact: As you probably know, fuel sellers change the formulation of diesel based on the local season in any particular part of the country. So, whenever fall happens for you, they switch over to the cold-weather formulation which gels at a lower temperature, but also delivers slightly worse MPG. This can be kind of a PITA if you’re a TDI-wielding hypermiler who can drive halfway up the east coast on one tank of fuel — you could probably fill up on Charleston, South Carolina diesel where it’s spring, and then drive to Pittsburg PA where it’s still winter… Starting the car the next morning might be challenging.
Then again, my diesel-powered vehicle had an evaporative emissions control system(fact), which probably does a lot to keep fuel from going stale(speculation).
Fact: Also, biodiesel is much more susceptible to gelling than dino-diesel. Some biodiesel mixes can gel as high as 50 degrees F. That’s not a great situation if you’re a purist and want your car to be as vegan as you are. The quality of biodiesel can vary widely, and the Volkswagen TDI engines require a fairly high-quality fuel — so it’s important to get the right stuff for it. I had every intention of running biodiesel in my Jetta, but I could only buy B5, which has less biodiesel in it than conventional gasoline has Ethanol — the constraints on my life at the time just didn’t allow me to do the biodiesel thing right.
Sep 8th, 2009 (12:52 pm)Based on battery progress for the last 100 years I would estimate 10% improvement in 10 years. What is troublesome is how easy nowadays to fool people. Most here have little or zero knowledge in math, physics, chemistry. So they read PR stunts and believe, swapping science for SciFi.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (12:54 pm)Well we had better get to work on immunizing ourselves, because it’s coming. A lot sooner than many of us think, IMHO.
-4
Sep 8th, 2009 (12:56 pm)What is bizarre? The guy said obvious things: it is plain stupid to pay Cadillac price for a Corolla car. Very simple to comprehend IMO.
Sep 8th, 2009 (12:57 pm)Yeah, “Any ink is good ink”, LOL. Thanks Johan.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (1:00 pm)If people bought cars based upon the “business case”, everybody would drive a Hyundai Rios or a Chevy Aveo, and there would be no Audi. I know that others have said this over and over, but it bears repeating again.
Sep 8th, 2009 (1:04 pm)Nonsense. Electricity is not wasted, it is simply not generated. When consumption is low during the night turbines are simply shutdown. Which means less pollution. “Goes to ground”, jeez, when do get this crap from? Did you attend any Physics classes at all?
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (1:06 pm)Using Mr. Nysschen logic, diesel’s business case in Europe can also be labelled “idiotic” except for government intervention. European countries tax the living daylights out of standard gasoline and have relatively low tax for diesel. This makes it a lot easier to “amortize their incremental fixed investment in the cost of the car to the savings in fuel consumptions.” In general, high fuel cost is the driver that pushes efficiency in Europe. It takes a lot of miles to financially justify a diesel engine in the USA.
+2
Sep 8th, 2009 (1:08 pm)I’m hardly an expert, but it seems to me be that, given current technology, we should use natural gas wherever we can. Not coal. It’s not perfect, but we have the reserves, and it’s a lot cleaner than coal. It’s more expensive than coal, but it’s cheaper than cleaning up coal.
Ideally, we could take care of all of our needs with wind, solar, biofuels, and geothermal. Etc. But we need a bridge fuel in the meantime. And natural gas seems to be the best thing available right now.
Sep 8th, 2009 (1:10 pm)I calculated once energy losses for electricity transport vs oil pipe over thousands of miles. Oil pipe benefits are enormous. Waste is order of magnitude smaller. That is the main reason why oil / natural gas are always transported to the final destination, and only then converted to electricity.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (1:13 pm)Exactly. We’re working on making clean electricity cheaper and more widespread. And to take full advantage of that, we need electric cars. It’s not like we’re can switch fleets overnight. If we want a significant portion of our fleet to be electric in 20 years, we need to start right now.
Sep 8th, 2009 (1:16 pm)Must be…’cause it disappeared!!! Hehe.
Sep 8th, 2009 (1:20 pm)Assuming you are right there then the ten year point from now will be about the time where costs and returns will start to make real sense, because it’s getting close now.
As I see it if the ‘low temp’ sodium sulfur batteries hit the ‘shelves’ by then they will be a cost effective storage medium. Otherwise Li-ion packs will have dropped a lot more in cost by then.
The combination of a solar ‘base load’ array and a wind turbine the catch extra power when it’s available should support most homes requirements if sized properly.
There IS a payback period without a doubt and although currently that period is still too long for most people to implement a system every price drop makes that time period shorter.
I see it as very possible that my Volt will charge fully off grid by the time I get it. I do have the advantage of being in a fairly windy place so turbines have pretty decent ‘uptime’ here.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (1:23 pm)The ‘long tailpipe’ angle being played when they are about to rollout a BEV…
Keep up RVD… It’s a fast room.
Sep 8th, 2009 (1:29 pm)LauraM
Like a lot of the renewables, fossil based natural gas has to be “piped” from the source to the users. This brings up the same issues as with solar and wind farms, doesn’t it?
Just wondering.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (1:30 pm)Hello.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (1:36 pm)It’s not just about MONEY. It’s about a fun to drive, silent, instant torque, no gas using, energy independent, screw the oil companies, slap in the face to greed!
Oh yeah…and good for the environment. The coal burning logic is entirely faulty. The ENTIRE northwestern US uses 95% hydroelectric power for the utilities. That equals ZERO emissions. The rest of the US utility grid will only get cleaner.
Some people can’t see a great thing when it slaps them in the face…
What a moron.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (1:41 pm)The Corolla is an E-REV? If not then the Volt has more value in common with the Cadillac.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (1:42 pm)Absolutely!
Hence why even though Johan comes across as a bit of a tool I’d be interested in an A4 with a 2.0 diesel and quattro.
Sep 8th, 2009 (1:47 pm)I can’t seem to post anything today. Moderation. Hmmm … What am I doing wrong? My links or what?
Sep 8th, 2009 (1:47 pm)Read this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Load_following_power_plant
It depends on the type of power plant.
Sep 8th, 2009 (1:50 pm)I stand corrected.
Sep 8th, 2009 (1:52 pm)LauraM
The really exciting point (to me) is that this plugin movement has been building for years, and is now only a matter of months away! We’ll see SO many companies providing SO many options, it just makes me giggle. That reminds me, I still miss statik (g).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (2:00 pm)RVD,
The parallel with Europe falls apart when you consider the distances traveled here in the USA. We have pockets of population that is just as dense, but hundreds of miles between them.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Sep 8th, 2009 (2:13 pm)Muddy,
In a very left handed way the impending increase in the cost of electricity here in PA will actually shorten the time it’ll take to recoup the cost of installing panels. No appreciable wind available on my site, so solar is pretty much “it”. Technically, I’m over the Marcellus gas deposit, but I doubt that my neighbors would approve of the drilling. Solar I think they could live with.
RVD (above) talks like battery progress has been linear when it’s becoming exponential.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+2
Sep 8th, 2009 (2:18 pm)Muddy,
LOL, the whole place seems well-tuned today – except for a few sour notes. Rashiid is particularly sharp, as you mentioned.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Sep 8th, 2009 (2:18 pm)Yeah, what link? I scrolled back up until I’m getting a headache, and I can’t find it. Can you post it again? My curiosity is killing me, LOL.
Sep 8th, 2009 (2:22 pm)Maybe the Audi satellite is jamming your transmissions.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (2:24 pm)You get my vote for the most generous comment of the day.
Sep 8th, 2009 (2:27 pm)Loboc,
Where in the country are you that you have so much E85 available??? You’re really blessed. 15% gas and 85% renewable, only straight electrons are better. I know it effects the range a bit, but you’ll go a LONG way on a Volt tank of E85 and use 15% the gas. Wow.
Congrats,
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Sep 8th, 2009 (2:31 pm)I’m probably not the right person to answer this, but solar and wind farms don’t use pipes. Oil and natural gas do. But I don’t think we would need to build new pipes for new powerplants. I believe the infrastructure is largely already in place. We’d probably need to build new plants and a few extra pipes, but I don’t think it would require a major new investment. I haven’t heard anything about it either way, so I’m assuming if it did need a major new investment, I would have heard.
As far as I understand it, natural gas has three major advantages over solar and wind. First, it’s much cheaper given current technologies. Second, you can burn it anytime you want–so you don’t have the storage problems you currently have with solar and wind. Third, you can build the plant wherever you want, so you don’t have to transmit the energy over long distances.
Of course, all of the above issues will hopefully be mitigated and even eliminated as the technology progress. But, I believe that, right, now natural gas is our best solution.
Sep 8th, 2009 (2:45 pm)LauraM
I know electrons don’t need actual PIPES, that’s why the word was in quotes. The power lines from solar and wind farms are their “pipes” that need to traverse significant distances – just as natural gas does. I’m with you though on the hope that technology will step up with some solutions.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Sep 8th, 2009 (2:47 pm)It is just about money, when its out of your price range. Unfortunately price is the #1 factor in a car purchase, everything else is secondary.
If you have $10 in your pocket and something costs $20, all the features in the world don’t matter.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (2:51 pm)It’s definitely exciting. It gives me hope for the future, and not too many things do that.
I miss statik too. He could explain whatever’s going on with Opel, which IMHO makes a big difference one way or the other to GM’s future.
Sep 8th, 2009 (2:54 pm)Presumably it would cost GM more in production costs than they can currently pass onto the cosumer. Yes. Mass production brings costs down, but I doubt it brings them down enough or I’m sure they would have done it already. But, to be fair, I don’t know the numbers.
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:02 pm)Ditto here bro…
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:03 pm)Aloha!
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:04 pm)oh oh…..
mee too, I wanna see!!
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:21 pm)Oh…I didn’t get the connection. sorry….Like I said above, I think it’s much less of an issue for natural gas than it is for solar and wind. You don’t have to pipe natural gas. It’s just more efficeint. You can transport it by truck if you want to.
There was an interesting article on the coal vs. natural gas issue in the New York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/07/business/07gas.html?scp=2&sq=natural%20gas&st=cse
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:21 pm)Biz case? Buying a car is a guranteed depreciation/loss when you drive it off the lot. This is the biz of the consumer losing money on the product. You’ll never gain from it unless it’s a collectors item that you’ll never drive. But once you drive it, it’all down hill from there……
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:24 pm)Hey Tag at 2:45pm.
Electrons don’t actually travel very far at all. What happens is that incoming electrons to a wire, for instance, essentially kick electrons out the other end of it so to speak.
Just like that desktop amusing ball bearing dynamic swing, where the ball bearings are there to transmit the swinging force from one end ball bearing to the other end ball bearing with all the ones in the center not moving very much at all. (Although I remember reading that electrons actually might travel something like an inch per year around the valence bands of the conductor’s atoms/molecules).
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:26 pm)It’s possible that they simply haven’t thought of this, but also likely costs are an issue.
Still, I think that if they put their minds and resources to it they could achive this.
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:27 pm)Muddy
I think there are two reasons GM does not convert all the truck fleet to 2-mode. One is the extra cost the buyer has to be willing to spend to gain 25% fuel savings or there about. Secondly the competitor to the truck line is Ford’s lineup primarily with some competition being from Dodge. The cost disadvantage versus Ford and Dodge (not even counting Toyota, Nissan and Honda) would give the others an unfair price advantage at this time. If GM can get the cost of the 2-mode down by 50% or close to it and get the fuel savings up to 35 – 40% they may, MAY have a shot at convincing buyers to purchase a Chevrolet or GMC truck over a Ford, Dodge, Toyota, Nissan or Honda. It is tough enough now to pick up a sale against the competition as it is. Add a few thousand more in cost and you can just about forget the sale.
I really hope GM can do something to get a clear advantage over the competition. Two ways to do that is the same as it has always been. Build better and less expensive vehicles that offer the buyer what they need over what the competition does. Adding more cost is going the wrong way without some real justifications for the increase.
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:29 pm)Moderation…you know how that is.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:32 pm)Howdy!
+2
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:32 pm)This is a tough issue to measure in any form of metrics. To calculate the emmisions of a coal power plant is easy. To calculate a million ICE cars is another problem. This is a moving target. How many ICE cars out ther even meet the SMOG requirements? How many are ULEV/LEV? Did they re-tune their ride bakc to the non CARB approved tweaks in their car for street dragging after passing SMOG tests? Too many uncontrolled variables.
In a nutshell, a well tuned/burning coal plant should emmit less than 1 million ICE cars.
I’m too dumb/drunk to do the math.
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:35 pm)But I don’t drink to a moderation……
Just in excexxsss.
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:37 pm)That’s the “Hole” theory/principle.
Typically described in semiconductores for electron flow.
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:38 pm)Google f!$ker k@rmas fuel mile@ge
-2
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:41 pm)There is a difference in transporting NG and electrons. More than 30 percent of electricity is LOST during transmission via wires + transformers. Much less NG is lost during transmission via PIPE. The U.S. has massive gas pipelines that cover the entire nation since at least the 1970s. The biggest problem with Wind is nobody wants it in their back yard so they build them far away from city limits and therefore have to spend millions on new transmission wires.
-1
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:43 pm)Hey Doofus, many cars actually appreciate over time. Your math skills are questionable. Some antiques are worth a fortune and still run. Check eBay, plenty of appreciated cars.
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:44 pm)no one knows..
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:44 pm)Lemme elaborate a little more…
Take a tube big enough to put 15 tennis balls in it.
Now pretend the tube is a copper conductor and the balls are electrons. Insert all the balls into the tube till it’s full end to end. Now just sitting there, there is no current flow. When you need current to flow or need electrons to flow insert another tennis ball in and from the other end one will pop out, that’s current flow in general. So in principle, the current put in from the starting point is really not the one that came out, but for all intents and purposes it’s the current/electron you needed to get flowing.
-4
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:46 pm)The Volt and Solar are very expensive technology today. Neither can be justified strickly on a cost basis. Most people buying the Volt will be more about Image and not substance. You will see.
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:49 pm)How’s your *****?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U65_0TlycIw&feature=related
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:51 pm)LauraM and others,
I agree natural gas is a good fuel for power plants and the distribution network is there or is readily adaptable to being so. Solar and wind power are good choices but the distribution lines are not in place to get the power from the “plants” to where it can be distributed. Getting those distribution lines require purchasing “rights of way” over some hotly contested areas. Resistance comes not only from the environmental groups not wanting power lines crossing “sensitive” lands but also from land and home owners who don’t want the distribution lines in their back yards. Solar and wind may have a better chance if we can develop local generation stations serving suburban neighborhoods and supplement them with home installed solar and wind generators. If you do this you eliminate the “cross country” power lines. The neighborhood lines could all be under ground and link up to existing power lines and sub-stations found all around modern towns and cities.
-2
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:53 pm)This guy is not so stupid after all. I think everybody was just having a typical knee-jerk reaction.
/
-3
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:53 pm)When you ALREADY sell 18K of the world’s most fuel efficient cars per month and no one else comes close, you DO own the idea of the environmentally friendly automobile.
It has nothing to do with “pro-Toyo trolls,” it has to do with the current reality of the marketplace.
Toyota took a huge risk, one that GM declined to pursue and even scoffed at even as that risk was paying off, and has built a highly fuel-efficient and modestly profitable automobile. That’s quite a feat. People, reasonably enough, admire Toyota for this.
GM has two types of hybrids on the market, now, and both are miserable failures. GM’s management is so talented that GM went bankrupt. GM’s history isn’t a help, it’s a hindrance. And it’s a reason to be skeptical of their chances in making money on the Volt.
-1
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:55 pm)Doofus filter activated.
-1
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:56 pm)reported.
-2
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:56 pm)is the Volt going to need lanthanum? And Wiki suggests that Lanthanum isn’t difficult to obtain (did you mean to refer to a different rare earth?).
As for the future, we’ll see. However, I wouldn’t bet on a horse that had a record of straight losses against the same field. Would you?
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:58 pm)I don’t have one of those dektop ball kenetic transfer thingy. I have one of these…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqzVwuNKPmc
Carcus1 sent it to me. He said it needed some WD40 or some DuraLube or somethin.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!!!
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:59 pm)a coal burning plant produces 100 times more radiation than an equivalent nuclear plant.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste
Sep 8th, 2009 (3:59 pm)Electrical theory demonstration?
Tennis ball launcher
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyy6zDRToRw&feature=related
related: guy I used to work with had a story about as a youngster he built a tennis ball cannon (butane fueled) and tried it out on his brother from across the street. Knocked his bro on his a$$ and left a permanent burning tennis ball impression on his bro’s white t-shirt.
That, I would like to have seen.
+2
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:01 pm)electricity lost during long distance transmission is at most 7%, and that can be improved.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:01 pm)I completely agree with you, LauraM. Saudi Arabia also funds Islamic schools all over the U.S., Europe and many other areas of the world that are teaching hate. Their one goal is to slowly immigrate Muslim people into other countries and advance the teaching and training of Islamic groups to spread the religion. Once the population density of Muslims reaches a critical stage, they will effectively be able to control that countries’ response to world activities. Eventual control of the government apparatus follows as the society is overwhelmed with strife and religious fervor. It is a policy of “rot from within” and can be seen working very well in modern day Europe. The same process is at work in the U.S.. Just not at the same levels as Europe at this time. But the process has been started and is increasing each year as more schools open and the student population matures and goes out to the “mainstream”. The only thing that might defeat them in the U.S. is that our society has a corrupting influence on young people today and it may not be possible to completely turn young Muslims into the kind of society killers the Saudis are aiming for.
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:06 pm)If you lube it up, please don’t send it back.
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:06 pm)It “costs too much” because the NiMH traction battery for such a large vehicle is, necessarily, large. Then, the two-mode transmission is extremely complex. Even in mass quantity, it’s still a beast to put together (cost estimate for the transmission runs $10K per). Increases in volume probably wouldn’t take more than 10% off that.
GM would end up with a truck fleet that cost 20% more than Ford’s fleet. Even with improved fuel economy, that would be a tough sell.
To improve the fuel economy of their fleet cost-effectively, win buyers and MAKE MONEY, GM should leverage the tech that they DO have that is cost-effective; VCM. Ford and Dodge don’t have it. GM’s VCM is particularly appropriate for their large vehicles. It would very likely give them a 2mpg bump across the line in highway and maybe even city fuel economy (the deep, dark secret of the two-mode hybrids is that much of the highway improvement is down to the engine).
Then, there’s aerodynamics. GM doesn’t improve them much because they think that “tough looking” trucks with lousy fuel economy sell better than trucks with good fuel economy and aerodynamic looks.
Has anyone looked at the new Terrain? They used all their “big tough truck” design cues in that thing and the result is pretty bad, the size of the vehicle can’t support those styling details. But GM’s sure that’s what they buyers want.
And, maybe they’re right. Fuel prices aren’t high enough (for long enough) to really change buying behavior. And when they do go high enough, long enough, it then takes GM (or Ford or whomever) three years to adapt. UNLESS they get out in front and take a risk.
As happened with the Prius.
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:08 pm)http://compare.autodata.gm.ca/compare/frameset.asp?comps=CAB90DOT11CB0&comps=CAB90FOT11GC0&comps=CAB90CHT278A0&YearComp=B90&BrandComp=CH&SuperMakeIDComp=Silverado&MakeIDComp=10345&ModelIDComp=CAB90CHT278A0&compVeh1=CAB90DOT11CB0&compVeh2=CAB90FOT11GC0&compVeh3=CAB90CHT278A0&Year=B90&BrandID=CH&MakeID=10740&SuperMakeID=Silverado+1500+Hybrid&BaseAcode=CAB90CHT362A0&Lang=en&ModelID=&Internal=N&adv=&dealer=&ds=&dc=&includeGMNavs=True&DeleteAcode=&Type=&returnToUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gm.ca%2Fgm%2Fenglish%2Fvehicles%2Fchevrolet%2F
Sorry for the brutally big link.
(if you can’t see it here are the highlights)
The Hybrid Silverado gets 10.5 litres/100km.
The regular Silverado gets 15.4 litres/100km
Ford F150 15.7 litres/100km
Dodge Ram 16.2 litres/100km
I’d say that’s pretty significant. I didn’t run it through a calulator, but 15.4 – 10.5 leaves a 4.9litre/100km improvement, right?
That’s enough to run a small car!
So the hybrid uses 2/3 as much fuel as the standard trucks and can still haul the load.
I ask WHY NOT?
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:10 pm)Oh OK. I think it’s on deck. I got modded on the post also.
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:11 pm)removing the sulfur from diesel fuel did make the cost go up, mostly due to scarcity rather than technical reasons. It also reduced the available energy of the fuel.. previous diesel users experienced a drop in mileage.
Sulfur destroys the catalytic converters used in the new “clean diesel” engines.. thus it had to be removed before diesel cars were again allowed to be sold in the US.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:13 pm)Ha!
Lyle, you should have called him on Audi’s LED headlamps for ~$7000 bucks on the upcoming R8! Talk about the early adopters paying for the technology! Not to mention not being able to amortize the costs of your purchase through fuel savings.
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/05/30/audi-r8-gets-first-full-led-headlamps/
Frankly, I think $40k for a whole electric car stands up pretty well against $7k for just the HEADLAMPS!
(Still, LED headlamps?! How cool is that! I want some… after the price comes down a bit.
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:17 pm)Hmmm….
Butane you said?
Sounds like a fun science project for my son and I. Just gotta send the wife to getter nails did for a while and we’ll try it…..lol.
Try taping/gluing a bottle of Diet Coke to a skateboard and drill a 1/8 inch hole in the lid/cap and do the Mento’s thing……lol.
But do it in an emty parking lot. I’ll video tape it next time.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:17 pm)Doofus Alert:
Eurotrash diesels cannot pass American emissions and safety standards. You are hereby issued an official Dumbass Award Of The Day.
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:17 pm)The Chinese are going to regulate the export of Neodymium and Lanthanum. This only effects Toyota with their permanent magnet DC motor technology (neodymium) and Ni-Mh batteries (lanthanum), The Volt uses AC motors with little or no neodymium needs, and Li-Ion batteries with little need for Lanthanum.
But Toyota can just re-design its Prius and all other of fits hybrids Technology,to new AC motors and power electronics and convert to better Li-Ion batteries, So in the long run it won’t matter much, But Toyota has an unplanned expenditure for redesign to make. The longest and most costly of which would be the redesign of the power electronics modules. But that is not impossible to do.
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:18 pm)Now Dan… don’t be confusing things with little details like facts…
-2
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:19 pm)It’s Only about the money.
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:19 pm)I think it’s more about land requirements than about no one wanting it in their backyard. Yes–there’s definitely a not-in-my-backyard element here. But the major problem, IMHO, is that a solar plant and or a wind generator is going to require a lot more land space than a natural gas or coal plant. And land is expensive. Especially land in cities.
Hopefully, that’s another problem that technology can fix.
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:25 pm)Ray of sunshine? No. I’m trying very hard to see the world as it is, rather than as I’d like it to be. And some days, it’s dark and rainy, not sunny at all.
Lutz should be fired. I don’t know why more regulars on this site don’t agree.
It was reported on this very site that Lutz batted the Volt idea around with Lauckner for a very short time and then winged the cost estimate and came up at least $15K short. He also failed to recognize many of the technical challenges. However, GM is a top-down organization, so what the Vice-Chair wants, the Vice-Chair gets… whether it makes sense or no.
The Prius, by way of contrast, came about because Toyota’s top execs challenged the engineering team to FIND A WAY. And gave them some stretch goals and stepped back and let the engineering team figure out how to meet the goals, while the top execs kept their mouths shut about what was being planned.
The result was a radically different and very fuel efficient car available for a relatively reasonable price… a marketing win, with no black eye because they had to back-pedal on cost and/or availability. The modest tax credit, when applied, brought the cost of the car down very close to a base Camry or a well-equipped Corolla, unlike the Volt situation where an obscene tax credit brings the cost of the car down to much more than a Camry XLE or twice the price of a decently equipped Corolla.
The two-mode fiasco is very similar to the Volt program. GM’s top brass made a decision that engineering couldn’t resolve at a reasonable price and ended up pitching a $51/55K vehicle (RWD/AWD pricing) to people who couldn’t care less about fuel economy and who, if they did decide they cared, could easily respond by buying something smaller and cheaper than a base GMT-900 and saving money two ways. Top-down decision-making with Lutz again at the wheel.
BAS was a similar fiasco. Top-down development led to a vehicle with a high option price but almost no detectable fuel savings.
With one of these failing decisions already languishing on the market and the other close to market release and disaster, but having learned nothing from either process, Lutz went through the same top-down, “my way or the highway” product development cycle with the Volt.
Now, the one thing that Lutz has done differently is to limit the Volt numbers so severely that the gizmo will, in all likelikhood, “sell out.” He has finally realized he can’t take this thing up against the Prius and he’s not going to try; he’s sticking with 10K in 2011 so as to save face.
But 10K… for “the world’s largest automaker?” These are boutique numbers more suited to a Tesla/Lotus production arrangement. Who’s going to be impressed that GM can “compete successfully” against Silicon Valley neophytes without any real plant? Not me!
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:26 pm)I’ve said it before, so I’ll bore you all again (as I always must whenever anyone invokes Sodium/Sulfur batteries
).
Enough battery volume, strategically placed, can revolutionize the power grid even if overall generating capacity is never increased. The volume of battery storage required for the revolution would seem improbable at the moment, but Sodium Sulfur has the potential to ramp up in ways that Lithium Ion does not.
Instead of using expensive “peak power” generation, off-peak power could be delivered to local batteries during the night to carry the higher loads during the day. This move could get most oil-powered plants off the grid by itself.
It requires less new power-carrying capacity as well, since the lines could be sized for constant power levels, not the greatest peak level it would have to sustain. Our current high-tension line infrastructure could go twice as far into the future without being enlarged.
This requires not only ‘house’ batteries, but sub-station batteries, city-center repository batteries, batteries at generation sites, businesses and more.
It would turn the whole grid into a kind of “Volt.”
It would also be made to order for inconstant but green sources of energy such as wind turbines.
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:26 pm)______________________________________________________
From Lyle’s Article:
…he [Johan de Nysschen’s] thinks the business case for an electric car is idiotic…
——————
Someone please help me out here…
Did I read Lyle’s blog article correctly? ….
That according to Mr. de Nysschen (the President of Audi), Audi is at the upcoming Frankfurt show (with anticipated fanfare that Mr. de Nysschen does not want to remove) going to announce Audi’s own version of the Electric Car which Mr. de Nysschen has in advanced of the show declared represents an “idiotic business case” ?______________________________________________________
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:32 pm)The cost can be as much as 1/2. Perhaps 1/3 for the original battery ands packaging and a balance to estimate the cost for a second warranty battery that may be needed to get 150,000 miles for the CARB regulation.
That extra cost could go away tomorrow if CARBite idiots treated the EREV battery like they treat the batteries in BEVs, like the Tesla or Leaf and removed the 150,000 mile life requirement. They impose no life requirement for BEV type batteries,and if you have one regulation of life expectancy you should do the same for BEVs.
So if you wanted to cut the price by $8000 to $12,000 dollars tomorrow, simply abolish that CARB regulation, or reduce its length, to whatever is a practical life expectancy of a Li-Ion battery, say 125,000 miles. or 10 years driving.
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:32 pm)250,000 Volts sold ? That was a good one, i almost busted my gut. Now that I had more time to think about it, that is just not a realistic number. You may be psychotic. See help immediately. Volt fever leads to pig flu. Be careful.
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:32 pm)Jackson,
Never boring to hear about new technology! Is there a good site that has reliable info on this form of storage? I’d like to study up.
Thanks in advance,
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:33 pm)From the article: “(de Nysshen) says this issue is his main point, whether this government expense is “the best way to clean up the environment,” and that there might be a better way to apply those tax credits to incentivize the utility companies to clean up the power stations.”
Too true. From a public policy perspective, supporting 10K Volts, which will reduce CO2 emissions (vs a Prius) by perhaps 10-15% per year, is a pointless and wasteful exercise.
$7500 tax credits applied to homes to improve insulation or install solar heat/hot water could be used to start driving down use of natural gas, coal-fired electricity or home heating oil in the near term.
And those $7500 tax credits, when used to retrofit old homes or boost the energy efficiency of new ones, are more nearly permanent; lasting the life of a house, vs the life of a car. How many homes built in the 60′s are still standing (like mine)? Almost all of them! How many cars from the 1960s are still on the road today? Almost none of them!
-1
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:35 pm)Major Doofus Alert:
Gas will never be above $4 during the Volt’s lifetime. Get a grip and then get a clue.
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:35 pm)every modern car spends a lot of money on the software, but the Volt has a lot of unique parts that are expensive all by themselves:
1. battery is $12k
2. battery warranty ??
3. the transaxle unit with the differential, the traction motor and the generator , plus the two inverters, lets say about $5k
4. the cost of the money for all these extra bits.. lets say 20%
total is $20k not even including battery warranty.
The Volt is based on a Cruze, and that car will sell for about $18k similarly equipped but missing the transmission and starter.. lets say that will reduce the cost about $2k
Thus the total cost so far is $20k + $16k = $36k
and we are not including the cost of the battery warranty. I guess this extra $20k should drop in half in the coming years with mass production and tech improvements.
BTW I have no idea what the cost of money for the auto industry is, I’m guessing low at 20% but perhaps an expert could chime in.
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:37 pm)He may well outlast Obama.
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:42 pm)They eventually will do so.
Probably when the second generation of the dual mode hybrid drive starts appearing, post 2011. Most of these BoF SUVS are going stretched Lambda CUVs, and the reduced weight, combined with the second generation, cheaper dual mode hybrid, and HCCI operation for the ICE, will combine to push the mileages up into the mid-high 20s or low 30s.
-8
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:44 pm)Your a complete idiot. There is not one single Tesla owner complaining about Range Anxiety. This is a problem that you and your ilk are perpetrating to push your agenda. I am sure you pointed out that the Volt will be the biggest polluting EV in history. I thought so. You have the pungent odor of GM sheep.
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:45 pm)RVD is correct, electricity is never wasted.. there are no gigantic banks of resistors glowing red when people across the US shut off their TV after the Tonight Show ends.
Keeping the electricity supply stable as the demand changes is no easy task, and many expensive measures are used to stabilize the power grid.. that is why you dont want more than 20% of your power being generated by wind, it is too intermittent.
Hydro and natural gas turbines can react quickly, nuclear and coal plants are very slow to react.. those last two are run at 100% 24 hours a day.
-7
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:46 pm)I am sure you enjoyed “nailing him”. Next time try and keep your pornographic activity to yourself.
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:47 pm)Hmmm …. I wonder what Johan thinks about the success of the 2010 Toyota Prius so far? Is he against “power split hybrids” (like the Prius) that get 48-50 mpg? Along with upcoming “series hybrids” (like the Volt) that get 100+ mpg?
I suspect he’s just concerned about the electrification of the automobile IN GENERAL. Why? Because Audi invested a lot of money their “clean diesel” technology. Simple as that. He’s HARDLY concerned about GM failing with the Volt. He just wants auto enthusiasts like us to look at HIS company’s products. It sure looks like he’s concerned about his clean diesel technology vs. the latest and greatest hybrids and upcoming ER-EV vehicles.
Johan shouldn’t feel TOO bad about “clean diesel”. If they make the clean diesel engines efficient enough and small enough, MAYBE they could still be used in some future ER-EVs as range extenders … like the BMW “Vision” concept car.
It’ll be just another “range extender” engine though. It will have to compete against other ER-EV range extenders like the new one that Lotus is developing. Lotus’ range extender will run on regular gasoline, E85, or methanol … algae bio-gasoline too.
Another glaring issue is the price of diesel in America. Why buy a clean diesel car when you could just buy a 48-50 mpg Toyota Prius and use gasoline that’s the same or cheaper than diesel fuel? Johan should be much more concerned about Toyota in 2009 than the Chevy Volt in 2011.
The Volt probably won’t sell but maybe 40,000 in 2011 (who knows, it could be more). By the way, 40,000 Volts in 2011 will HARDLY have much of an impact on America’s grid in 2011. It would be like plugging in 40,000 new plasma TVs or dryers in people’s homes. No big deal.
If he hasn’t already done so, Johan should read the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) / Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) report that Lyle mentions. He probably HAS read it but he doesn’t want to acknowledge it. Because he wants everyone to like his company’s “clean diesel” technology of course.
ER-EVs shouldn’t be much of a concern for the electric utility companies until well into the next decade … 2018 or so … and only in ISOLATED localities like say Silicon Valley, CA where electric cars will probably be popular.
-1
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:54 pm)Diesels are still too Loud and they Smell (not as bad as GM Sheep). I drove the new Blue Tech Mercedes and it confirmed these beliefs.
AVOID DIESELS AT ALL COSTS.
Diesel is more expensive than gasoline in the USA. The only reason is cheaper than gas in Europa is because those countries add huge taxes to the gasoline. Diesels are not suitable for family transportation. Period. End of Sentence.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:55 pm)a lot is dependent on the average speed.. in stop and go city driving you will not go very fast, thus your range will be high.. on the highway we suspect many drivers will get about 32 miles of range based on the average speed most people drive. Curiously you will get better range with a traffic jam on the highway also.
GM has stated (several times) that the Volt will have 40 miles range on the highway, using the EPA Hwy Cycle.. but note that the average speed on that cycle is 48mph.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:56 pm)The problem with Volt will be near zero residual value. Let me explain why.
1. There are people here who believe that battery technology is improving exponentially, like computers. What is the residual value of your 5y old PC? Zilch, actually, it is negative, because you have to pay to discard it.
2. More realistically, battery tech is linear. Lets neglect it. More essential is battery capacity loss. How much of it will be left in 5-10 years? Laptop batteries lose 50% in 1-2 years easily. Lets say Volt battery is much better. But how much? Look at capacity: GM puts in 16kWh out of which only 50% will be available during the lifetime. Why? Because there is warranty issue. If warranty is 10years, that means battery should have 50% of capacity. In other words, battery will be useless in 10 years and its cost is 50% of total vehicle cost. And I think you end up paying a significant disposal fee.
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:58 pm)Hmmm …. I wonder what Johan thinks about the the 2010 Toyota Prius so far? Is he against “power split hybrids” (like the Prius) that get 48-50 mpg? Along with upcoming “series hybrids” (like the Volt) that get 100+ mpg?
I suspect he’s just concerned about the electrification of the automobile IN GENERAL. Why? Because Audi invested a lot of money their “clean diesel” technology. Simple as that. He’s HARDLY concerned about GM failing with the Volt. He just wants auto enthusiasts like us to look at HIS company’s products. It’s obvious that he’s HIGHLY concerned about his clean diesel technology vs. the latest and greatest hybrids and upcoming ER-EV vehicles.
Sep 8th, 2009 (4:58 pm)Right on Bro.
+3
Sep 8th, 2009 (5:08 pm)dagwood55,
What matters is how the Volt and similar cars will sell 4-8 years from now. 230 MPG is no joke, and once people realize that plugging in every night is less hassle than going to the gas station every week, EREV sales should take off.
At that point, Toyota will be forced to start building EREVs, or perhaps synergy drive cars with much larger batteries and electric motors – capable of accelerating on the highway in pure electric mode. Either way, it will be a new design. The size of the battery changes everything.
Sep 8th, 2009 (5:09 pm)I suggest you check your “facts”. 95%, uh?
how about some REAL facts:
http://www.nwhydro.org/resources/northwest_hydro_generation.htm
Hydroelectric in NW US is 40%, not 95%. In the US it is only 6.5%.
Who is the “moron” now?
+3
Sep 8th, 2009 (5:12 pm)I don’t know if the Volt needs lanthanum or what its rare earth metal issues are compared to the Prius. I did find an article stating it uses much less, but I don’t know how reliable it is.
I do know that the prius uses more rare earth metals than anything else. And Toyota’s worried about securing its supply. The two major ones seem to be Lanthanum and Neodymium.
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE57U02B20090831
As far as betting on a horse that has a record of straight losses–you could say the same thing about Nintendo before they came out with the wii. Or even Apple before they came out with the ipod. Disruptive technologies rarely come from the current industry leader.
And GM’s hardly a horse with a record of straight losses. They are still the market leader in the US–the world’s largest auto market. They are doing extremely well in China. They were doing very well in Russia and Latin America. They build great trucks. And the Camaro is the hottest car on the market right now. I’m not saying they were well managed, or made all the right choices, but what ultimately drove them into bankruptcy was their legacy costs, the unexpectedly high prices of gasoline, and the current economic situation. That has nothing to do with their ability to produce a game-changer like the Volt.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (5:17 pm)stas peterson,
Right. Toyota is already looking at Lithium batteries, and I would be surprised if they aren’t working with Induction electric motors as well.
But the real issue is the size of the battery. That changes the whole design of the car. To make it crash-safe and last for 10 years, the battery has to be low and centered. That changes the chassis, suspension, brakes, cooling, – its basically a do-over from a design standpoint.
Sep 8th, 2009 (5:19 pm)I for one, am against making our air dirtier.
Even the “clean ” diesels for America, T2B5 diesels, that are 90 times cleaner than the phony “clean” diesels they sell in Europe, are still the DIRTIEST cars that you can buy in California and also in most of the USA, They are also heavy, and have a chemical plant needed to clean them up to the pretty dirty, but allowable T2B5 American “clean” status.
It is much easier and better to run HCCI mode in a lighter, advanced ICE engine and get the same efficiency and mileage improvements of a diesel in a lighter cleaner, ICE engine that is achieving cleaner than T2B2 cleanliness. These will start showing up within a few years, and both Mr. Weber and Mr. Lutz have said they are particularly suited to an EREV extender.
Anyone who has seen my posts, knows that I have a lot of undisguised disdain for the CARBite idiots, and their impossible costly schedules and stupid CO2 proposals.
But in the case of the diesel regulations, I wholeheartedly agree with them. Dr. McCracken who I have derisively called “Dr. Quack Quack”, wants to tighten diesel regulation to the equivalent of where new-car gasoline autos de-facto deliveries are, which is now well below T2B2, approaching PZEV, and I heartily agree. We have worked too hard to cleanup our air, and its not a good idea to give up those gains, unnecessarily.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (5:19 pm)If the corrupting influence of our society makes it impossible to turn young Muslims into killers, is that bad?
Sep 8th, 2009 (5:22 pm)me too, but note its not the charge sustaining mpg
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (5:23 pm)Boone:
That’s what they said about the early adopters of the Prius.
Sep 8th, 2009 (5:24 pm)warranty is over at 10 years, but the battery is far from useless at that time.. its just the warranty.
Sep 8th, 2009 (5:25 pm)Thug:
Actually, that would be great. But don’t bet the farm on it.
Sep 8th, 2009 (5:25 pm)Well Said!!
Build those 34 perfected new Nukes in the US pipeline to power our coming electric cars.
And we won’t even have to get involved in to the stupidity of AGW concerns either.
Sep 8th, 2009 (5:28 pm)It’s my understanding that your contention that we “won’t have to burn more coal” is wrong. We will certainly burn more coal as PHEV’s start increasing the demand load at night (coal and nuclear supply almost all the electricity at night). We won’t need to build new coal power plants because the existing fleet has enough excess capacity at night to supply the extra demand load that PHEV’s represent–even if every car in the country were a PHEV.
Nevertheless, carbon dioxide emissions will fall by 40% if we were to convert to coal-based electricity in PHEV’s. Why is that? Because a modern coal-fired power plant can reach efficiencies of as much as 50%. A gasoline engine tops out at 35% (probably 25% in most cases). Therefore we’re getting more energy for a given amount of fuel. Unfortunately, coal produces a lot more CO2 than gasoline when it is burned, so the end result is about 40% savings in CO2 emissions. Mercury, NOX, SOX and PM (particulate matter) emissions are all much more dramatically reduced. Additionally, concentrating NOX and SOX at a single source, rather than distributing them evenly throughout a city (the way that tailpipes do) is environmentally advantageous.
And then there’s the fact that coal produces only about half of the electricity in the U.S. Replacing tailpipe emissions with nuke or hydro-sourced electricity is a 100% carbon win. And even natural gas sourced electricity produce 70% less CO2 than a tailpipe would. At the very least, it’s safe to say that replacing the current ICE fleet in America with PHEV’s would reduce CO2 emissions from the transportation sector by 50%. And that’s not even taking into account the spectacular amount of petroleum import reduction that would happen (and resulting decreases in our trade deficit and current account deficit).
Electrifying the personal transportation market–even with “imperfect” solutions like the EREV–would be the cheapest, easiest and most externally advantageous method of reducing carbon emissions in the next two decades, while making North America significantly less reliant on energy imports. Seems like a no-brainer to me.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (5:31 pm)Thanks! It has its up and downs but generally good. I can’t wait to get back to owning a Made in the USA car.
Sep 8th, 2009 (5:33 pm)I agree. But I just wanted to ask why you wanted to thermally pollute by building a solar array. There is nothing as polluting or as effective as a global warmer thousands of times worse than CO2? Or didn’t you know?
Sep 8th, 2009 (5:37 pm)I wouldn’t use the two in the same sentence. Oppps, I have already …oh well.
Sep 8th, 2009 (5:38 pm)I agree that fundamentalist radical Islam is real. And it’s a threat. And we ignore it at our own peril. And, absolutely, Saudi Arabia funds schools and other programs that attempts to radicalize Muslim populations in Europe and in the United States. And, they are indubitably successful some of the time.
But they’re not doing it because they hope to control these radicalized groups. They couldn’t if they tried. They’re doing it because it helps them maintain control over their own populace, and keep the oil wealth to themselves. In Iraq some civilians in an area with oil are demanding their share of the oil wealth.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/06/world/middleeast/06iraqoil.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=iraq%20oil&st=cse
That, IMHO, is the Saudi royal family’s biggest fear. This way, they oppress their own civilians, and they get those civilians to blame their problems on us. They fund those schools abroad in order to placate the imams, who then help keep them keep their own citizens under control.
Also, not all Muslim immigrants are fundamentalists. Most of them are moderates. They come to Europe and the US for the same reason people have always immigrated. They’re hoping for the opportunity to make a better life for themselves and their families.
And the US is good at “corrupting” youth? Better than Europe? I’m not sure how you define corruption, but if it stops young Muslims from being willing to blow themselves up–I think that’s a good thing.
+2
Sep 8th, 2009 (5:39 pm)Totally agree. In my view he sounded pretty ignorant for one in such high position.. The average contributor on this side has a much better understanding of the electrification issue than does he. Diesel is not a good solution here in this country.. It would just create an additional problem for the refineries. There is a limit in balancing various distillates in the refinery further adding to the cost of both gasoline and diesel.(Bio-diesel is a different issue.) Comparing pollution problems from automobiles vs. electric generation plants is a foolish environmental argument. (hundreds of millions of cars vs. a limited number of power plants.)
I do give him credit for willing to face the music after his earlier mistakes referring to the pro-electrification community the way he did.
Gasoline is the best range extender for the Volt. It is the least disruptive as a transitional fuel for electrification.
Sep 8th, 2009 (5:41 pm)Also, as long as we’re talking about how polluting coal plants are (and they really are) keep in mind that we have yet to envision the crazy ideas people are going to come up with to make our power supply infrastructure greener and cheaper.
I especially love this one, adding solar thermal to a coal plant!
http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_13219443?source=rss
It basically produces just as much power from a solar thermal array as building a whole solar plant but at a super cheap cost since all the rest of the steam generators and turbines are already there. Xcel was indicating that the solar array portion produced power competitive with the cost of coal*. Admittedly, it’s just a small pilot program and you still have a coal plant, but you have to start somewhere.
(*Note for the real sticklers out there that the solar array doesn’t actually produce water hot enough to produce power from a high temp coal fired turbine, but it preheats the water with a corresponding reduction in coal fired energy equal to the amount of power that could be produced from a solar plant with equivalent array area).
Sep 8th, 2009 (5:41 pm)I doubt that Oil prices get that high in the UuS, unless Clueless gets an Oil tax passed.
Within, a decade due to the Volt and its competitors, ending the growth of Oil demand, and actually collapsing the market, the Oil Sheikhs and Oil Commissars will be begging for somebody, anybody, to PULLEEEZE buy their oil, at any price…
Sep 8th, 2009 (5:43 pm)The Volt probably won’t sell but maybe 40,000 in 2011 (who knows, it could be more). That’s about all I hear GM is CAPABLE of manufacturing I hear. By the way, 40,000 Volts in 2011 will HARDLY have much of an impact on America’s grid in 2011. It would be like plugging in 40,000 new plasma TVs or 40,000 dryers in people’s homes. No big deal.
If he hasn’t already done so, Johan should read the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) / Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) report that Lyle mentions.
http://www.nrdc.org/energy/plugin.pdf
He probably HAS read it but he doesn’t want to acknowledge it. Because he wants everyone to like his company’s “clean diesel” technology of course.
ER-EVs shouldn’t be much of a concern for the electric utility companies until well into the next decade … 2018 or so … and probably only in certain localities like Silicon Valley, Hollywood, or the NYC suburbs where electric cars will probably be popular. You’ll probably see a lot of people in Washington DC getting a Volt too. Lots of people in DC are advocates for energy independence and clean energy like we are.
Sep 8th, 2009 (5:46 pm)Nuddy,
Did you know that ol’ Henry Ford expected his new fangled car to be fueled by farm grown alcohol? He did
But he was no fool. He was surprised that gasoline took off, but he quickly re-calibrated the Tin Lizzy to run on gasoline, just fine..
+3
Sep 8th, 2009 (5:55 pm)All that would be fine if Toyota hadn’t spent some time in recent years specifically criticizing EVs and ErEVs, based on obviously bad information.
As long as they stick to building and selling good vehicles, and don’t spread misinformation, I’m perfectly happy with them.
Sep 8th, 2009 (5:59 pm)According to the supplier, $5,600 is for the cells, and $8K is for the complete pack.
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:00 pm)Dallas. 7 CNG stations in same range as well
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:02 pm)The Jevon’s effect isn’t nearly that large. Maybe 30%. So, only a small part of the savings is offset by increased driving.
On the other hand, a gas tax certainly would be a good idea.
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:09 pm)Muddy
But suppose it was your first burger and it took 2 years to get it down. [thats humor, I hope] But like I said, I would try diesel again if it was cost effective.
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:16 pm)With enough Volts on the road, we can get above 20% of power from wind – just use dynamic power pricing as a signal to regulate charging.
Volts would charge when the wind is strong and power is cheap, stop charging when the wind was weak.
Think of 220M ErEVs out there, soaking up the variance in wind supply.
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:18 pm)It’s hard to know what the percentage would be since the “Shadow Effect” — what the savings are spent on — is added to the “Rebound Effect”.
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:19 pm)You have a cite to this?
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:22 pm)Bummer. My comment #43 about the $7000 Audi LED headlamps is still awaiting moderation.
That kind of price point starts to make $40k for an entire electric car price look pretty good and make their president look a little silly. I would love to see the business case where $7000 LED headlamps pay for themselves from power savings.
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:23 pm)Herm
I read the info at the site you mentioned and fail to see any reason for fear. To compare the coal plant to neclear plant with the same generating power tells you the plant is not dangerous. I fact the site states that living near a nuclear plant gives you a 1 in a billion chance of health problems and if you live within .6 miles of the coal plant your chances go up to 1 in ten million.
I am NOT pro coal and I am definitly against fear mongering.
Before you blast me read the article.
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:23 pm)Yes I took and passed college physics.
If the nuke runs 100% of the time, how do they regulate what hits the grid? If they shut down turbines, that heat has to go somewhere. You can’t just turn a nuke off and on like a light switch.
Same with hydro and wind. The water and air still flow even if you are not extracting the energy.
The point is that off-peak, there is huge unused capacity available.
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:30 pm)TEST PROCEDURES AND BENCHMARKING Blended-Type and EV-Capable Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles
http://automotive.converanet.com/cvn10/cachedhtml?hl=keywords&kw=s%3Acpr.CCF9C&cacheid=ds1-va:p:1001t:5094425817112:ab6fdac2737d27e3:4912e3d2&scopeid=defLink
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:35 pm)As you intimate, the big advantage for ethanol is cost. Any gas engine can be manufactured to use ethanol for $150 while diesel engines, as you mentioned, are considerably more expensive. You’re right again that ethanol is less energy dense, but it actually has a higher octane rating than gasoline so it can deliver more power (that’s more or less not relevant now because the engines are tuned for lower octane gas).
On which is a better fuel, ultimately that will depend on which is more cost effective. FWIW Exxon is investing in oilgae, or oil from algae, which can have the same molecular structure as gasoline, diesel, or jet fuel. My personal vote goes to whatever works.
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:36 pm)dagwood,
We’ll put you down as a “No”.
Be dark then,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:38 pm)Again, your missing his gravatar. If your going to be a effective troll, at least do the work.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:44 pm)GM has said that diesel engines that meet the next generation Clean Air Standards will be too expensive. If it costs $2k more for a diesel engine that meets current pollution standards, yeah, $5k to meet the next generation standards doesn’t seem too out of line. As for other negatives, see:
http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/18/another-side-of-the-clean-diesel-story/?hp
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:47 pm)Lutz is no Patton.
“Never tell people how to do things.
Tell them what to do and they will surprise you with their ingenuity.”
George S. Patton (1885 – 1945)
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:50 pm)Warning! Warning! Fake statik Alert!!
Sep 8th, 2009 (6:53 pm)Troll Detector:
It’s a busy day under the bridge. Thanks for the fake statik alert. Note that it continues below. I agreed with Lyle’s free speech approach to trolls, but I might make an exception in the case of statik imposters.
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:02 pm)Are we getting comments twice now? Something strange really is going on.
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:04 pm)Who cares what the taxes are on Europa?
That’s a moon of Jupiter. I doubt there are that many cars there.
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:08 pm)Nonsense. Electricity is not wasted,
You’re simply wrong, and I have no idea why the myth that electrical power is matched to demand persists, despite the fact that it should be quite obvious that it’s not. As k-dawg has pointed out, it depends on the type of plant. I specifically referred to baseline power, which is power created by base load power plants. Per the definition:
Base load power plants operate continuously at maximum output. They only shut down to perform maintenance or if something breaks. They produce electricity at the lowest cost of any type of power plant. Base load power plants include coal, fuel oil, nuclear, geothermal, hydroelectric, biomass and combined cycle natural gas plants.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Load_following_power_plant#Base_load_power_plants
Baseline power frequently exceeds demand, and, when it does, all the surplus electricity goes to ground. Not sure what part of operate continuously at maximum output is so hard to understand.
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:15 pm)if you are in heavy stop and go traffic with max 10 mph speed you could get “a tolerable amount of range.”
Maybe he shouldn’t have done the Lyle interview. This is another instance that gets you wondering what his qualifications are. You’d expect anyone half as knowledgeable as he claims to be would know that because of drive train losses at low speeds a car will get better mileage at 20 MPH than it will between 0-10 MPH.
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:16 pm)yeah, right
let’s say it is still 50% after 10y (and I am VERY optimistic here).
Out of remained 8kWh if only 50% is available you got your 4kWh.
How much you could drive it for? 20 miles? How big slice of US population will be covered by this range, 10%? Nobody will buy your Volt after 10 years.
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:35 pm)That is one long boring document. Search for ‘Volt’ though..
“..your mileage may vary – from 50 MPG (driving long distances, or you forgot to charge) to infinity (no fuel consumed makes an undefined MPG level).”
To infinity.. and beyond!
-1
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:38 pm)From reading this the main point that I got was “Gee, this guy has no clue.” He is really uneducated on much that has to do with the volt and seems to be way too disconnected from the target audience of who would actually be purchasing a vehicle like this.
Perhaps one relevant piece of insight GM could take would be to have a higher end Volt package available. Make it more luxurious, I know there are lots of people who would pay an extra $3000 – $5000 for some of the top end features.
His idea for the tax credits really makes me shake my head. Oh lets give multi-million dollar companies more tax credits.
He also fails to realize the Volt wasn’t made for someone like him.
He comments about what it would be like if 30% of the vehicles were diesel, but can’t seem to fathom what it would be like if 30% were Volts.
I am all for more diesels, but no car manufacturer seems to want to make affordable diesel cars for the US (except Volkswagen and their Jetta) either so I don’t know what this guy has against an expensive Volt.
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:51 pm)There is an excellent book on Saudi Arabia called “Inside the Kingdom” by Carmen Bin Laden, sister of the evil terrorist. She escaped the repressive Saudi Arabia and lived to tell her story. It is fascinating. Rarely do you get an insiders view of that country. All information is tightly controlled.
Here is An Amazon link to the book:
http://www.amazon.com/Inside-Kingdom-Life-Saudi-Arabia/dp/0446694886/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1252457162&sr=8-1
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:55 pm)Hey DaveP,
Was that “each” for $7,000?
How about if someone rear-ended a car in front of those $7,000 (each?) LED headlamps, wouldn’t that tend to make the collision insurance go up not just a little bit?
What about when the clear lenses go foggy-translucent, and, they fail some sort of inspection? Or, they just get pulverized from Wintertime road sand and salt, and get looking really badly?
Sounds like that price cold be an “insurance cash cow” for them.
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:56 pm)Your instincts are confirmed to be absolutely correct. It is indeed easier to clean a stationary large electric generator plant than a million tiny moving ones.
But I have seen erroneous posts here about “wasting electricity” and comments that we can provide all the electricity we need with our present power plants, or no we can’t.
I apologize if the balance of this post is is pedantic,for many, but i will explain again to try tomake it absolutely clear for those who don’t have a technical background, what is going on, and is meant by these statements.
First off we never generate “waste electricity” at night, or at any other time, either.
The electric generators generate only as much as the collective electric demand also called the “load” is. All the time. The Plants are “load followers” just like you car’s engine is a load follower. If your car’s engine generated full extra power, all the time, than it would just continue to speed up, your car. And it doesn’t. You regulate that by reducing the pressure on the accelerator and in reality feed less gas to the car’s engine, until it is stable where you want it to be. Just because your car’s engine could speed your car to its top speed of say 135 miles per hour, if you don’t want to go that fast, so you don’t supply enough gas to get up that high, by backing off the gas pedal. In that condition that you seek, say steady 65 mph, you are not burning as much gas as it would take to go 135 mph. You regulate that by not having the accelerator all the way to the floor.
The EXACT same thing happens at an electric generation plant. During the day they sometimes have to run the electric generator’s engine at full speed to generate as much electricity as they can at so-called “peak” hours. Other times they can back off the accelerator, just like you do in your car, and burn less fuel to provide the amount of generated electricity that everyone collectively wants. If they supply too little, the voltage drops, and the lights dim, and we can have a “brownout”. If they supply too much, the voltage climbs, lights brighten and burn out sooner, circuits overheat, fuses burnout, and circuit breakers trip. We can have what is called a “bright-out”.
So the operator of the electric generator’s engine has to “drive” his generator’s engine just like you do to “drive” your car. This could be tiresome constantly checking his meter to see he is producing exactly the electricity desired by seeing if the voltage required is maintained, like you do watching the speedometer. But like you, he also has a “cruise control” that does that automatically, when engaged. But it works just like your cruise control does. if you come to a hill, the cruise control, or you, depress the accelerator a bit, and give it more gas. If you are going downhill, you give it less the gas, let off the accelerator a bit, and so does your cruise control, when engaged.
The electric generator’s engine cruise control does the same.
Late at night the big fancy high horsepower electric generator’s engine is not using all the power it could to generate electricity because no one wants it. if we charged your Volt at night, the electric generator cruise control would recognize a slightly higher demand for electricity, and feed more fuel to the generator’s engine to make more electricity, to satisfy your battery charging demand. But the important thing to understand is the generator’s engine had to use more fuel to do so.
So when the Electric Power research Institute, the EPRI, says there is enough electric generation plant to supply a whole national fleet of electrical cars wanting to be charged at night, without building another new plant, they are correct. But you would have to provide more fuel to those existing generator’s engines to do so.
Many of you do not seem to understand that.
And now the analogy breaks down a little, Sometimes during the “peak” time of the day the regular electric generator and its engine are running at full speed and it not enough, to generate the amount of electricity everyone collectively wants. If you were in your car and you came to a steep hill, you would slowdown, even with the accelerator floored, giving it all the gas it could take. When the electric utility can’t do anything else, you get a dimming of the lights, as the voltage meter drops, and a “brownout” may be coming.
But if we weren’t talking about your car but say you were driving train, with two locomotives on it, you could start up the second locomotive that was turned off an have it help the first running locomotive and both together, could help pull the train, up a grade, The electric utility has such provisions. They keep their old, inefficient and sometimes unreliable, and dirty emissions plants around for just such emergencies, or perhaps they have a special less efficient plant for just that purpose. They start them up and have them begin to generate electricity to help to meet the load. They call these special plants “Peaking Plants” and the regular electric generator is a “Base-load Plant” but that is only terminology, that you may have heard and wondered about, otherwise its unimportant. But the cheapest and probably cleanest electricity that a utility can make, is from their “Base-Load Plants, so they want to use them all the time, if they can.
If we had a national fleet of electric cars, we might have to turn on some of the older, more inefficient, maybe more polluting plants to get all electricity that is demanded. But we certainly would have to burn more fuel to generate electricity than we did without electric cars.
Th USA needs and is buying 35 new, improved and perfected, nuclear electric plants to add to the 100 that we have running today. These current “base-load” nuclear generators generate 20 percent of our regular “base load generated ” electricity, The new larger nuclear plants are scheduled to start being completed around 2016-2018 and they will let the electric utilities turnoff and keep off the oldest, dirtiest, plants. Which just happen to be coal burning plants that were “grandfathered in” and allowed to continue to run with few emissions controls.
Having electric cars will provide the revenues to the electric companies to pay for these new nuclear plants and more besides, It will also allow some of them to decide they don’t need this old dirty coal plant, even as a standby, and to scrap it, and to pollute no more.
So a disproportionate amount of the inefficient, dirty, old, polluting electric generation plants will be scrapped and that will help clean our air, even more.
So there is an EXTRA benefit to the coming of the electric car; in getting cleaner electric generation and extra bit of cleaner air, too.
Sep 8th, 2009 (7:59 pm)Boone,
The Prius is about image too. I know an actor in Hollywood. He asked me for advice on a car. I recommended some. I even told him about the Volt. He said “No, I need to create an image when I show up somewhere. I really need a Prius.”
Well, he didn’t buy the Prius, and I hope he waits for the Volt.
Sep 8th, 2009 (8:06 pm)[...] Volt’s biggest fans, Lyle Dennis, over at GM-Volt and gave a much more in-depth discussion about what is [...]
Sep 8th, 2009 (8:08 pm)Mr Johan de Nysschen makes some good points that I wasn’t aware of. But his point about waiting 20 years until ele3ctrification comes of age is wrong. If we wait 20 years we’ll still be 20 years behind.
For instance before WW2 the passenger airliners were primitive. But the development of planes like the B bombers seemed to accelerate the development of the passenger liners that showed up in the 50s and 60s.
I think the same case scenario applies to the electric vehicle.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (8:09 pm)And now there’s this to lighten up your day:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFCSXr6qnv4
Sep 8th, 2009 (8:54 pm)I don’t know of one place to find information about the battery-supported grid I like to expound. NGK (the Japanese power company) developed a very large Sodium Sulfur battery intended to provide grid backup several years ago, and their ability to produce shippable units has been increasing since then. These batteries are starting to appear around the world in pilot projects of varying scales:
http://www.chinafcb.org/chinafcb_en/news/webinfo/2009/07/1247532772675786.htm
Here in the US, there is a project specifically aimed at ironing out the intermittent power from a wind turbine (new article with larger scope mentions Xcel power’s project, can’t find old):
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&refer=home&sid=abv9kUMdZueY
The basics of conventional Sodium Sulfur batteries and their variants can be found at Wikipedia (note: I haven’t read this article recently, it may have been changed to reflect the most recent developments):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium-sulfur_battery
Up to now, we have been talking about “ordinary” high-temperature Sodium Sulfur technology at 300 – 500 degrees Celsius. A new breakthrough may allow much cheaper versions to operate at below the melting point of the materials (yet another article I haven’t read because I can’t find the one I’m thinking of):
http://solar.coolerplanet.com/News/8070901-ceramatec-develops-24-hour-solar-energy-storage-battery.aspx
As you can maybe tell, much of this field is rapidly evolving, and links one once found easily are no longer up, or at least not within page one of a google search. It can actually be quite frustrating to keep track of.
Google is your friend, I would recommend that you start with the Wikipedia overview and branch out. Happy hunting!
Sep 8th, 2009 (8:56 pm)The extra weight would also knock off some AER.
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:08 pm)The battery will have some value as home solar array storage devices, or failing anything else, a recycle value (to help displace all that Lithium we have to import from South America, lol). By the time the original Volt is 10 years old, someone is going to be interested in hacking newer better batteries into them — remember, there aren’t going to be that many Gen Is.
Later Volts will have later batteries, and nothing we can say now about the Gen I version may be all that applicable to it’s residual value.
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:11 pm)We’re running pretty much parallel courses. I googled it and ran a few threads from there to recent articles. Seems like a refridgerator size battery would cost about $2K and store a heck of a lot of juice. I couldn’t find out how it’s to *remain* heated to ~90-100C though (operating temps). I also couldn’t catch a *weight* figure. If its 2K now, at bleeding edge status, it should be significantly lower if they can scale up to market numbers.
Please keep me posted.
Thanks,
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:16 pm)They have plenty of pollution on Io without any cars.
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:30 pm)I could be wrong here, but I don’t think trucking natural in to utility scale plants is a cost effective solution. Also, I don’t think utility scale solar and wind are at such a cost disadvantage to NG in the more hosptable locals. The major cost disadvantage is versus coal.
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:32 pm)Plus, we have plenty of lithium reserves and can build batteries.
+1
Sep 8th, 2009 (9:43 pm)I’m sticking with my contention that we won’t have to burn anymore coal.
1) Thermal plants do not happily ramp. Thus, those coal and nuclear plants are still hot at night. The EVs will take what they get and even make the plants more efficient.
2) EVs will bring massive amounts of electrical energy storage to smooth out supply and demand gaps throughout the whole day. Remember that we now ramp up NG plants to satisfy peak. What if we use some of that EV energy that was stored the previous night?
3) With EVs comes the smart grid. Things will just be much more efficient and thus, less energy will be burned.
4) Hello renewable energy. Companies like Better Place plan to install the equivalent amount of renewables as their EV’s use.
5) The global warming nuts will be successful in getting less coal burned.
So, No more coal needs to be burned, nor will be. There you go, five reasons why EVs help the renewable revolution and reduce the need to burn that nasty coal.
Note: not related is that fact that peak oil might just hit us so hard that we are forced to burn whatever we have to fill the gap, anyway we can. If that depletion happens faster that we can add renewables (which is very likely) then we are going to burn more coal. Not because of the EVs but dispite them!
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:31 pm)RVD,
You need to switch rackets. The one you are using has a few holes in it.
/Watching the US Open has me thinking in tennis terms.
/Wave to Statik
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:34 pm)Perhaps he takes a helo to work and doesn’t realize how many people commute in stop-n-go traffic.
-2
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:48 pm)Pardon me? 230mpg IS a bad joke. If the Volt manages the speculated 50mpg in charge-sustaining mode, my use would lead to about 80mpg, tops.
And “Toyota will be forced…?” Not hardly. When batteries are at the price they like, Toyota TAKES ADVANTAGE of their drivetrain to upgrade to PHEV. They’ll probably further economize by returning to an even better version of the 1.5L engine from the previous generation.
What “changes everything” isn’t the size of the battery, so much as the COST.
And, let’s remember, people here often talk about “economies of scale” bringing down the cost of the Volt. News bulletin… Toyota’s already there. Their PHEV will share almost all the components of the current car. Different battery and parameters in the charge software. Nothing more… good to go. Build it on the same line as the current 50K units/month vehicle.
-3
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:51 pm)Toyota pointed out that the vehicle wasn’t economically viable(*), due to the cost of the battery. There is no “misinformation” in that. This was and is entirely true and has not changed.
What has changed is marketing support from Uncle Sam. That money is also available to Toyota. Think about that.
(*) – except in quantities of, say, 10K/year. Quantities that are OK for Tesla and its ilk but a bad joke for one of Detroit’s “Big Three” or The Automaker Formerly Known as The World’s Largest Automaker.
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:51 pm)Wiki says Lanthanum is also available in Peru, in fact, I think that was listed as the major source.
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:53 pm)LauraM writes, “They are still the market leader in the US–the world’s largest auto market.”
That is old information. China is now bigger. GM has a significant presence but hardly has the kind of domination that they had in the US, once upon a time. I was there this summer… You don’t actually see a lot of GM cars on the roads, you see all kinds of cars, none stand out.
And what ultimately drove them into BK was bad management. And, except for Wagoner, the entire team is still there. Compare and contrast with Ford, which suffers from the same burdens and is still on its feet.
Sep 8th, 2009 (10:57 pm)That’s the idea!
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:01 pm)GM Volt Fan writes, “I wonder what Johan thinks about the success of the 2010 Toyota Prius so far?”
I don’t know what he thinks, either. But it’s clearly a success, so he can’t say much negative about it without seeming to be an idiot, now, can he?
Since the Volt doesn’t have a successful track record and the three current leaders in the hybrid race (Ford, Honda and Toyota) don’t see a Volt as being relevant… de Nysschen is in good company.
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:10 pm)Sorry I haven’t written in a while…just got back from Iraq. I never saw a single hybrid anywhere in the Middle East, they don’t seem too concerned with it!
And I’m really not up with this new blog format…weird.
I would LOVE to see a diesel version of the Volt in Gen2. It seems the torque could easily be a good match for the specified charge-sustaining increments, and would allow for the use of biodiesel. (maybe – I know the CleanDiesel Jettas have filter issues) I’m sure many of the Volt-type drivers would love to try that, if not just me.
Sep 8th, 2009 (11:54 pm)[...] To do just that, de Nysschen spoke with one of the Volt’s biggest fans, Lyle Dennis, over at GM-Volt and gave a much more in-depth discussion about what is idiotic about the Volt and what [...]
Sep 9th, 2009 (12:27 am)China overtook the US a few months ago. But if the US economy recovers, we’ll probably be back at number 1. Market wise. Of course, anything can happen….
And of course, they don’t dominate in China the way they used to dominate the US market! They had 60% of the US market. No one can claim that kind of thing anymore. Except maybe Toyota in Japan. But they are doing very well there. Better than Toyota.
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/08/10/toyota-raises-production-forecast-by-3-losing-ground-to-gm/
As far as Ford–they weren’t as big as GM was, and they had a slightly better contract, so their legacy costs weren’t as overwhelming. But more importantly, they mortgaged the entire company when credit was easy, and took out an enormous amount of debt. The jury is still out as to whether or not they’ll be able to roll it over and avoid their own trip through bankruptcy court–with or without government intervention.
Sep 9th, 2009 (12:28 am)What???
All energy eventually winds up as heat. A car moves through the air causing turbulence and warms the air, The tires flex and warm the road. Friction causes heat. Light bounces around your room and warms the walls. What solar panels do is divert this process so instead of the sunlight being immediately turned to heat, some is turned into electricity. The electricity is used to do some work that then produces the heat. Zero thermal pollution, just delayed conversion to heat.
Sep 9th, 2009 (12:36 am)Natural gas prices fluctuate, which is one of its big disadvantages. Right now, I believe that it is a lot cheaper than renewables. In fact, at the current price, I think it’s even cost competitive with coal. But during the run-up in gasoline in 2008, it was more expensive.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124710043333415571.html
Hopefully, as we develop the US natural gas reserves, the price will go down and stay down until the costs of solar and wind come down, and we figure out a way around the storage problem.
Sep 9th, 2009 (5:26 am)Nope, the 230 MPG EPA rating is no joke. Electric cars really do replace gasoline, and that’s what counts. Get used to the idea.
As for cost, GM has now admitted the Volt’s battery pack only costs $8000, which is what the current battery pack manufacturer (CPI) has said all along. So GM is now blaming the $40K price on the cost of other components besides the battery. I suspect GM is trying to cash in on early Volt adopters, especially since they are so cash-strapped. By the way, CPI also says the packs should cost $2000-$4000 in the next 5-10 years, so expect EREV prices to fall sharply during that time.
And yes, a 400 pound battery back changes everything. Remember that the Hymotion Prius upgrades don’t come from Toyota, so they don’t guarantee crash safety of battery longevity. To do a PHEV-40 properly, you have to locate the battery low and centered, which changes the whole chassis.
Sep 9th, 2009 (6:02 am)[...] To do just that, de Nysschen spoke with one of the Volt’s biggest fans, Lyle Dennis, over at GM-Volt and gave a much more in-depth discussion about what is idiotic about the Volt and what [...]
Sep 9th, 2009 (9:45 am)I kept trying to figure out why my posts were getting “moderated”. Maybe because they were too long? The links? I tried to make them smaller, took out the links and change the wording a little. Then later on, the “moderator” allowed the original post. That’s what caused the duplicate posts.
I don’t understand how the “moderator” thing works at all. Some rules would be nice.
Sep 9th, 2009 (10:19 am)Good points, all. I agree. GM needs to push itself into the front of the herd and lead or be left behind in the dust created by those going before it. I never liked to bring up the rear on anything except my scout detail in Vietnam. That was always an interesting position to be in. Of course I liked the point position also. Out in front of the line checking out the terrain and such. GM can decide to be part of the herd or be the leader of the herd. It is up to them. Lead, follow or get out of the way. IMO.
Sep 9th, 2009 (10:21 am)I agree with your voting preference. Whatever works best and does not bankrupt us.
Sep 9th, 2009 (10:26 am)No one should want to give up gains made in air quality. At the same time we need not get paranoid in regulations that may or may not help clean our air but would cost so much as to make it nearly impossible for the average person to purchase fuel for his vehicles and homes. Many technologies must come together to accomplish our goals. No one wants the kind of air that exists in many parts of California to be in their “neck of the woods”. I most certainly don’t. While Mississippi’s air is much cleaner and thereby clearer than many areas, I would like it to be even cleaner and clearer. We must all work towards a brighter future.
Sep 9th, 2009 (10:32 am)Bad in one way and not bad in another. No intelligent, peaceful person who loves freedom (of religion, association or how you might define freedom) wants the kinds of schools the Saudis are funding to exist in any country. I can not understand how we can just sit by and allow those types of schools to be constructed and populated in this country. I am opposed to any school, organization or person who teaches hate. Whether that school, organization or person represents Islam, Christ or any other religious beliefs. Or non-religious beliefs. Hate should not have a place in our communities.
+1
Sep 9th, 2009 (11:23 am)1) Toyota has said a great deal more than that – anyone have the time to dig it up?
2) The Prius lost money for the first 5 years of production, so for Toyota to criticize the Volt for high startup costs is just embarrassing (for Toyota).)
Sep 9th, 2009 (11:27 am)The CEO from CPI (the company that builds the Volt packs today) says the pack will cost $1,000 per effective KWH, which is the same as $500 per actual KWH, and $8,000 per pack.
That includes the cost of the pack, with electronic controls. The cost of the cells alone would be about $350 per KWH.
I like to say that ErEVs don’t require rocket science, just old-fashioned engineering for optimization and integration. Well, I was amused to note that the CEO from CPI quoted above has a PhD in Aerospace Engineering, so he’s literally a rocket scientist.
Sep 9th, 2009 (3:56 pm)No, not each. (Unless you have to replace one, of course
The article I cited in my #43 post (which is now available, above) lists the option at 3590 Pounds, but the Audi press release lists the LED headlamp option at 3590 Euros. Either way, those are some expensive headlights. And the funniest part is that the first thing listed as an advantage in Audi’s press release (reprinted in the article) is their lower energy consumption! Which goes to making Audi’s president look really silly, I’d say. Clearly Audi doesn’t believe that anything that saves a bit of energy has to justify itself through the cost of energy savings alone, which is what their president is implying, if not stating explicitly.
Sep 10th, 2009 (6:01 am)Thank you for your kind words.
Sep 10th, 2009 (9:23 am)AND THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE! This is the most logical put together statement on the next generation car power system. 40k for a non-premium car is the whole point many of us have been making since the first MSRP hints were posted. The Volt isn’t a bad car, GM is screwing up the marketing. This should have been a Buick or Caddy and set at a price to make them money.
GM and all those betting on the $7500 government gift better watch out. The government can’t pay it’s bills right now and if you see a makeover in Congress in 2010 you could see the $7500 wealth redistribution disappear.
He got the power plants issue too. There is no way to fill the power need of electric cars without dozens of new coal power plants. Making diesel the environmentally friendly fuel of choice (outside of hydrogen) and it is a whole lot cheaper and you will see a return on your investment. There is also the small fact that the manufacturing process to make batteries is horribly destructive and environmentally poor for the areas this occurs.
Sep 10th, 2009 (9:27 am)Tax credits for cars are silly when the government can’t pay its bills. If the car can’t stand on its own then too bad. Neither the car companies nor us should let our government give money away it doesn’t have. The government shouldn’t have the power to make such King-like decisions.
The point is the Volt should make a profit. To make a profit it should be a premium Caddy not a lowly Chevy.
The grid can’t handle 30% of the fleet being Volts.
Sep 10th, 2009 (9:29 am)Those lights are for a luxury car… A premium car like what the Volt should be… you know, to make money.
Sep 10th, 2009 (9:32 am)But coal is cheap and we have a lot of it. As dirty as it might be, you can clean it up pretty good. Not that current plants have much of an affect anyway.
Until the debt goes down and jobs return, build the coal plants. Outside of nuclear we have nothing that can replace them anyway. The only thing close is the solar tower, and that is really only good for sunny areas.
Sep 10th, 2009 (9:34 am)Gasoline engines smell too. You are just used to it. Diesels are the best fossil fuel based power source we have. Do you get money back from a gasoline lobbyist group? Good grief.
Sep 10th, 2009 (9:36 am)He said he liked the Volt but the $$$ makes it a premium car and the Volt isn’t a premium car. GM shouldn’t act like a government run company (not caring about losing money) and make cars that make a profit.
Sep 10th, 2009 (9:37 am)a voice of reason. Good post.
Sep 10th, 2009 (9:39 am)He made some very good points that many here just don’t want to acknowledge. My pet peeve on the Volt, since I like the tech and engineering, is that it is being sold at a profit loss for at least 5 years. What kind of company does that? Companies that won;t exist much longer do.
Sep 10th, 2009 (9:42 am)The rest of country has to use coal. That and nuclear are the only serious power suppliers for 44-46 states. Wind is a dream, solar towers only work in the SW, and everything else in many many years away.
Sep 10th, 2009 (9:44 am)Diesel was allows the better fuel. American car makers can’t make an automobile diesel engine. Europe is socialistic-fascist-statist so of course their governments are stupid and highly controlling. The fact is diesel is better, we just are used to gasoline.
Sep 10th, 2009 (9:49 am)Look, he main point was the Volt does not make financial sense. It is sold at a profit loss and will be for years. Unlike gaming consoles where the profit is made with the games themselves, GM has no profit plan with the Volt except for sometime in the future. They could have easily sold the car for a profit as a Caddy… which was what he said.
GM is the stupid one here folks. The CHEVY Volt could have easily arrived in 2014 when it could have made money. Good thing Americans are giving tax money to a government run company that doesn’t mind losing MORE $$$. It fits in real well with the post office and Amtrak.
Sep 10th, 2009 (1:15 pm)Yes, realistically, we are going to be using a lot of coal in our near future, as we do currently. The pragmatists amongst us are trying to figure out how to lessen that use with strategies that are attractively priced. I mean, adding solar thermal troughs to a coal plant? I never would have thought of that but it seems obvious in retrospect. Let’s hope it turns out to be as cheap and effective as Xcel hopes it will be. If so, then it could have a big impact since companies would adopt it because of a benefit to the bottom line, rather than in spite of a negative impact to the bottom line. That kind of positive financial reinforcement works pretty well in general.
Sep 11th, 2009 (2:33 pm)I detect a hint of jealousy. EVs have to start somewhere.
Sep 12th, 2009 (12:16 am)BMW didn’t make diesel smell better. The amount of sulfur allowed in diesel fuel was reduced in 2008, all diesel available in the US now is “low sulfur”, this is why diesel doesn’t stink now.
“Clean Diesel” is another problem, diesels, at least small diesel powered cars aren’t available in some states. California has stricter emissions laws which most small diesel cars can’t meet. I’m not sure if there are any 50-state clean diesel cars available, but the last I read, most companies were developing diesels that would use urea injected into the exhaust to meet the emissions in California.
Sep 17th, 2009 (3:50 am)wow, people are just plain stubborn.
Tahoe hybrid???
I will agree the other gm hybrids are a joke…
I take it that Toyota never has any problems nor any recalls right???
LOL
anyways
GM will be #1 again—–1-3 years—They have been heading in the right direction for about 4 years now.
Lets stop this usa bashing and just get a long. Remember when you buy a imported car the profits still go overseas……………… yes I know many are built in the states