Grab our RSS Feed

AND

New Electric Car Concepts: From the Meek Twizy to the Mighty e-Tron

September 16th, 2009 | Posted in: BEV, Competitors, Hybrid

The electric car universe has expanded dramatically an in some unexpected ways since the Chevy Volt concept was first unveiled in January 07.

This year’s Frankfurt Auto Show in Germany has brought with it several new electric car concepts that demonstrate the range of expression cars that do not run on gas can display.

Audi

At one end of the extreme we have the Audi e-tron. This is a 2-seat performance car based on the current gas-powered R8. It uses 4 electric motors, one at each wheel which together develop 313 horsepower and a fearsome 3319 foot-pounds of torque ( compare that to the Volt’s 295 ft-lb). This configuration allows the car to go from 0 to 60 in 4.8 seconds but also from 37 to 75 mph in 4.1 seconds.

The car has a 52 kwh lithium-ion battery pack of which 42.4 kwh is useable, that will deliver 154 miles of range. At 230 V, charge time is from 6 to 8 hours.

Audi noted the value of the supercar’s mind boggling torque:

The e-tron is able to freely distribute the powerful torque of its four electric motors to the wheels as required. This so-called torque vectoring allows for dazzling dynamics and an undreamed-of level of agility and precision when cornering.

Audi also makes it clear they do not believe electric cars are ready for prime-time. announcing “there is still a lot of work to do before electric cars are ready for volume production.”

Though the Volt debuted as a show car concept shell without inner workings, apparently this car is the real deal. According to Audi President Johan de Nysschen, “the show car itself is a running prototype.”

How would you like to test drive that?

At the other end we have two odd little birds that are paired with more mainstream big brothers.

Volkswagen

The Volkswagen L1, as its name implies, is a one-liter hybrid car that uses a 0.8 L 2 cylinder diesel engine mated to a 10 kw electric motor and a lithium ion battery that is not grid-chargeable. It delivers 40 hp and 0 to 60 time is 14.3 seconds. Torque here is 100 nm.

Of course this concept isn’t new, VW’s first iteration was shown in 2002. The main goal of the car is extreme fuel economy, and according to Volkswagen, that will be 170 MPG.

Volkswagen also displayed its mainstream upcoming BEV called the E-Up!, that they are calling “the Beetle of the 21st Century”

The E-Up! will not arrive into production until 2013 and then is only intended for use in city environments. Volkswagen thinks vehicular electrification wont fully take hold until 2020.

The car has 3+1 seating and is powered by a 60 kw motor that propels it from 0 to 60 in 11.3 seconds. The 18 kwh total lithium-ion battery will allow 100 miles of range fully charged, with charging taking up to 5 hours on 230V.

The car also gets a 1.4 square meter solar panel on the roof that will supply electricity to the drivetrain while in operation or turn a cooling fan when parked in the sunlight.

Renault

Finally Renault introduced four new electric car concepts.

One of them is the rather bizarre Twizy ZE which is similar to an enclosed motorcycle with four oddly-shaped wheels that appear square. It has a 15 kw motor with a top speed of 47 mph and the two occupants sit in tandem. It is said to have the performance characteristics of a 125cc motorbike.

Renault also unveiled the Fluence sedan which will be the electric car that will be used in Israel for Better Place battery swapping. It is a stylish and reasonable sedan that has a 95 hp (70 kw) motor and a 99 mile range. Though it can be charged in 5 hours at 230 V, it has the option of a 3-minute “Quickdrop” at a Better Place station.

No matter what your preference, it is clear that electricity is taking the automotive market by storm. Concepts are taking very wide artistic liberties now as a automakers explore the boundaries of pure electric and hybrid electric vehicles.

There is no stopping it now, gasoline is dying a slow death.

Posted by: Lyle

222 Responses to “New Electric Car Concepts: From the Meek Twizy to the Mighty e-Tron”

+17 Sheltonjr Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 6:19 am

Still dont see one that is better than the Volt

(Quote)
+9 Rashiid Amul Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 6:27 am

The Audi and the Renault Fluence sedan look nice.

The Twizy ZE reminds me of something a teeny bopper would drive.

Volkswagen L1 is ugly.

What is encouraging is that there are so many now.
Remember when we could count these vehicles on one hand?
Or better yet, one finger?

(Quote)
+5 Herm Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 6:28 am

Does it have to better?.. how about just different?

see the this thread on our forum, big day for Project Better Place:

http://www.gm-volt.com/forum/showthread.php?p=30203

see this cool video:

http://blog.betterplace.com/2009/09/dispatch-from-frankfurt-part-i/

(Quote)
+1 Herm Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 6:30 am

The square wheels on the Twizy is going to make for a bumpy ride

“Renault also unveiled the Fluence sedan which will be the electric car that will be used in Israel for Better Place battery swapping. It is a stylish and reasonable sedan that has a 95 hp (70 kw) motor and a 99 mile range. Though it can be charged in 5 hours at 230 V, it has the option of a 3-minute “Quickdrop” at a Better Place station.”

Lyle, there is also a 20 minute charge solution:

http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS87996+15-Sep-2009+BW20090915

“The battery can be completely re-charged via a standard charge (between four and
eight hours) or an immediate solution (under five minutes) in the form of the
‘Quickdrop’ – or battery switch technology – which enables vehicles to switch
their batteries in less time than it takes to top off an ICE (internal
combustion engine) car with petrol. Renault and Better Place collaborated on
developing this innovative technology solution for enabling the vehicle to
quickly release a depleted battery for a fully charged battery in a matter of
minutes. A third option – quick charge – is able to recharge the battery to 80%
state of charge in 20 minutes. “

(Quote)
+3 Jason Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 6:32 am

I think the range of design options is encouraging. The L1 looks an awful lot like the EV1. The Audi boasts ridiculous hp but it reminds of a glorified kit car. These cars show that GM does have a leg up on the competition. This competition is nipping at the heals though.

Living in Missouri makes me an unlikely candidate for a Volt 1.0 so as much as I want to wait for a Volt; I’ll likely have to buy from a competitor. The optimist inside hopes the competition will result in a steep price drop and EESTOR will prove true. The pragmatist inside is making me think I’m doomed to get a plugin Prius. I agree with NPNS so I’m hoping my 2006 Accord will last me ’til I can have access to a robust electric drive.

(Quote)
+2 Jason Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 6:43 am

I remember when I actually considered BUYING a GEM e4 or other NEV. Thank God I avoided that temptation.

(Quote)
-1 Jason Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 6:49 am

I think the Renault idea in Israel is a great concept. It keeps people in the refueling business at work. It also allows for “on demand” recharge. The elimination of range anxiety blows the cap off this thing. We need this concept in America. The only problem is establishing the whole one size fits all battery. I have a feeling market dominance will take a very long time on this one.

(Quote)
+1 Rashiid Amul Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 6:53 am

I never saw the NEVs as workable.
With a top speed of 25 mph, I found them extremely limiting.

(Quote)
+1 koz Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 6:54 am

Still no “Joule” concept?

(Quote)
RB Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 6:57 am

And what word do we have from gm legal today?

Or have I violated some rule of theirs by putting the forbidden letters in my question? Should I avert my eyes when I pass by a dealership? Wouldn’t want any unauthorized peeking

(Quote)
Rashiid Amul Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 7:04 am

RB, what are you talking about?

Or are you just in a weird mood?

(Quote)
+1 sgilson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 7:04 am

Gas is feeling the pressure at this point. Look how many current hybrids are on the road and the gas savings those machines are providing. The introduction of cars like the Volt and all Electrics will decrease our appetite for gas slowly at first, than at some point it will be like a double black diamond ski hill….steeeeeeep.

(Quote)
RB Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 7:22 am

They are fun to look at.
Still, they are just more concept cars.
Volt fans know well that concept and production are barely related, if at all. Is there anything about the Volt concept that still holds true? Not appearance, not range, not price, not charging system, ….

(Quote)
RB Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 7:23 am

Rashiid –> Just still recovering from yesterday’s comment from gm legal on the improper “waiting list.” “Weird mood” yes, regarding that. I don’t mean my comment to be serious.

(Quote)
ClarksonCote Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 7:23 am

Lyle and all,

Have you seen this electric motorcycle yet? One of the best looking by far. Unfortunately it’s just shy of $70k.

http://www.ridemission.com/mission-one-superbike/the-bike/

150mph, and 150mpc (miles per charge)

(Quote)
kdawg Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 7:26 am

And now, as we like to do here, let’s speculate on the prices of all of these cars. Well, I shouldnt call them all cars. Some are NEV’s.

Audi = $150K
L1 = $35K
E-up = $45K
Twizzy = $20K (who knows, reminds me of the Puma)
Fluence = $55K

(Quote)
tom Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 7:38 am

Electrification of the Automobile.
Natural Gas for Buses and Semi’s.
Homes that heat with Fuel Oil need to convert to Electric, Geothermal whatever.

Then instead of sending 500 billion a year overseas to buy oil we need to use that to pay for more Wind, Solar, Hydro, Geothermal and GRID investments.

I have no idea why healthcare is OBAMAs main focus now. I suppose it must be important to the people that got him elected. Perhaps all the nice cushy jobs he can appoint people in all the new bureaucracies he wants to create.

How about just more credits for building out renewable energies and improved GRID. Then in 20 years when our kids are paying high taxes to pay down the debt OBAMA and Bush saddles them with, at least they can have cheap electricty to power their homes and autos.

(Quote)
Rashiid Amul Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 7:43 am

RB, I missed the GM legal comment. How the he11 can an informal “waiting list” be improper? I will have to go check this out.

I didn’t take your first comment seriously, but thanks for explaining.

(Quote)
jason M. Hendler Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 7:43 am

Why wouldn’t Volkswagen just put batteries in their own Beetle and call it a 21st century Beetle?

(Quote)
Rashiid Amul Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 7:45 am

Tom,
I can tell you that here in Connecticut, if a house has electric heat, you might as well tell people it is filled with asbestos and lead paint.

(Quote)
Jeff Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 7:48 am

The pragmatist inside is making me think I’m doomed to get a plugin Prius.
———————————————————————–

This could become all too true if GM fails to distribute properly and ramp up for demand. The Ebay concept sounds like a good idea. The smaller battery size of the plugin Prius (PIP) makes volume production more possible. Also since the PIP can “play off” the regular Prius…it is like a ZR1 Prius. It gets people in the showroom and the regular Prius just becomes another car that people buy instead.

Also, the PIP using tech that is proven in 1 million plus vehicles does not hurt none either. While I have faith in the Volt tech, it is still talk until volume actually gets in the hands of consumers.

(Quote)
Jason M. Hendler Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 7:52 am

I do have to salute Renault / Nissan for their scattershot approach of both vehicle configurations and business models. Sometimes its wise to admit that you aren’t sure which way the market will break, and cover all your bets.

(Quote)
+1 Lawrence Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 7:54 am

Well, I heard pretty often that heating a house with electricity is far from being efficient.

But a very very good start would be to think about to enhance houses heat isolation. So much energy are lost due to inefficient house / building constructions in terms of thermal isolation.

Here, in the country I live, there is a construction standard conformance called Minergie and derivated (www.minergie.ch). Building a house “Minergie” or likewise conformant enables you to save a lot of energy in terms of heating.

(Quote)
tom Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 8:02 am

I don’t believe in telling people what to do. They don’t have to replace fuel oil with electric, they can replace it with whatever they want. They can go chop down trees and burn those for all I care or burn coal.

But the importing of Oil has to stop for many reasons (stop outflow of money/trade deficit, stop supporting our enemies, stop the continued risk to our markets with period price shocks whenever there is a mideast war or when the peak oil shoe falls). This is just a requirement for the future sustainability of our way of life.

But the cost of fuel oil going up in a few years will force that on its own. Same with Diesel. But it takes longer to electrify the automobile so its a good thing all this has been set in motion.

I also think the switch will happen a lot faster than even the optimists realize. And plug in hybrids like the prius will help with demand to have workplaces provide charging stations during the day. Though during peak air conditioning season I would think they would want the ability to turn off those chargers during the afternoon.

(Quote)
Nick D Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 8:02 am

Thats what i was wondering – I have seen a few converted to electric and it just makes sense.

(Quote)
+2 blakem Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 8:03 am

There never was a plan for a “one size fits all battery.” PBP has always planned and designed their battery stations for multiple sizes of batteries. Building a car and a station to handle various battery swaps of various batteries sizes is a straightforward engineering exercise and much easier than trying to get various auto companies to commit to a standard battery pack configuration.

(Quote)
old man Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 8:06 am

sgilson

I am in total agreement with you and I will venture to say the double black diamond ski hill is less than 20 years away, possibly as few as 12-15 years.

(Quote)
PeteVE Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 8:08 am

read my post # ten below. the price point is another reason why i like the Zoe Z.E. it is surely less than the beautiful Fluence and so i thought it would be around $40k.

(Quote)
RB Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 8:13 am

Rashiid –I agree with you, it is unreal. But now we are “wanting” not “waiting”, per legal advice. When you read yesterday’s post by Lyle, together with the million or so related comments posted thereafter [ well not quite that many ] you’ll know where it came from.

(Quote)
+1 Jason M. Hendler Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 8:15 am

The Volt alone will reduce the typical driver’s fuel consumption by 80% per the LA driving schedule. Since most vehicles are replaced every 8 years, we could see a significant drop in about 10 years.

(Quote)
David K (CT) Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 8:20 am

Yes, even with electricity being 100% efficient we would still pay nearly three times the cost to heat using electricity than with using oil.

http://www.hearth.com/econtent/index.php/articles/fuel_cost_comparison_calculator/?id=47_0_1_0_M7

This is at today’s (9-16-09) prices.

Oil = $2.26/gal.
Elect. = $0.20/kWh (electricity has doubled in price in the last 8 years)

Personally, I installed a wood pellet insert into our fireplace last year, in light of last years skyrocketing oil prices, but TODAY it is just a little more expensive to heat with wood pellets than with oil.

Wood pellets = $270.00/ton

I need a wind turbine!

(Quote)
ziv Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 8:22 am

Electric heat pumps are incredibly efficient, both cooling and heating, if the temperature doesn’t go below 40 degrees too frequently. In the Carolinas, Georgia and northern Florida heat pumps are great. North of the mason dixon line, not so much.

(Quote)
rick Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 8:28 am

The more, the merrier! Keep ‘em coming.

(Quote)
-1 tom Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 8:42 am

The Commerce Department said Wednesday the deficit in the current account dropped to $98.8 billion in the April-June quarter. That represented 2.8 percent of the total economy as measured by the gross domestic product, the smallest percentage since the first quarter of 1991.

If we didn’t import OIL we’d have a SURPLUS!!!
This should be job #1 for OBAMA, but I guess it doesn’t create enough bureaucracies and false economy jobs to deal with our nations #1 problem.

(Quote)
+1 Dan Petit Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 8:49 am

When any OEM tells us that they think
“Electric drive is not ready yet until [future year here]“,
it is a confession to the public as to how far behind GM that OEM really is. So, just utilizing arithmetic logic, (from when we were all in the first grade), most are about 3 to 4 years behind GM.
What it comes down to is how many of these “competing (sic)” “electric-bluffs” can be produced with high quality, safety, and longevity designed in. (The hard research GM has been performing at a blistering rate for the last 5 years, with ***hundreds*** of engineers collaborating, not just probably a dozen or so.) (”Competitive/comparative” writers especially must keep that in mind.) Questions of safety come up next:

Boastful torque numbers from hub motors must incorporate all the marketers’ “thickest” “OUGHTA/SHOULDA’s” if you bring up the questions of safely applying the torque in all conditions.
Power and torque statements made whilst beating ones’ chest like a jungle gorilla impresses no-one but the most highly power-insane motoring magazine writers who hope to at some time in the future garner the advertising dollars of whomever. (”We’ll certainly help you [spend your advertising money].”)
Why?
The inter-dynamic physics work for all this power bravado must yield a practicable vehicle that is safe to drive for the owner as well as all the other vehicles on the road around them, especially on low-traction and inconsistent and irregular-traction surfaces. Otherwise, counting very optimistically upon many a subroutine whereby “a miracle occurs” “we hope no-one gets killed” (same thing as the “oughta/shoulda’s”), for Audi “marketers” up high (at least in the managerial “chain”), fools no-one excepting Audi, as they continue to “believe their own stuff”.
Reason? If you want only to drive in a straight line on a dry drag strip, go for it (it’s your life you risk).
When you are talking about four hub motors and gross torque that can be easily applied anywhere and especially ***anyhow***, you had just better be the most extremely careful driver for uneven-traction and low/4-wheel inconsitent traction surfaces for when software becomes corrupted or surge-impaired.

For hub motor software, no-one really has adequate previous experience writing, testing, proving, enhancing, and on and on for five to six years of field testing in the most irregular and inconsistent traction conditions, snow, ice, mud, rain, puddles, greasy wet pavement at stop lights when it had not rained in 4 months, sand, low tire tread, and on and on. (Run-on sentence required).

These conditions CAN NOT be all handled by the same software. Enormous work must be done for safety, and, it is not acceptable to just count on recalls for “consumer field experimentation” with lives lost firstly before there is a decision up top in arrogant board rooms (so legally well protected, and prone to self-corruption) to _resume_ safety research for software for hub motors safe traction applications.
Corrupted software processes happen all the time in vehicles all around you, but decades of research for safety defaults keep everyone safe. NONE of that applies when you are talking about 4 hub motors. They will have to start from scratch with all that controlling software, and, as arrogant as I see Audi management is, I would not drive near one in the rain (or at any other time) if they ever could make it “work”, IMO.

(Quote)
+1 tom Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 8:51 am

And for those folks that just don’t get it. Yes for many years it was arguably worthwhile importing cheap energy to run our economy, it might have been worth all those wars and dead people (world war 2 was fought mostly over oil, Japan needed it, Germany needed it).

But there isn’t an argument for it any more. It isn’t cheap. It is only going to get more expensive and then run out. It is time to invest in an economy powered by renewables.

Yes for 20 years electricity will be more expensive, then the prices will drop. Just like current Nuclear power plants are extremely cheap to operate after they’ve already been build and the bonds paid off.

The issue is the future of our country.

(Quote)
+3 lh_newbie Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 8:55 am

Maybe as the electric car matures, we’ll have modular battery packs – with a battery pack actually consisting of several smaller sub-packs. Maybe 5KW each? That way, a longer range BEV only vehicle may have 15 of these packs and a EREV may only need 4. That sort of design would certainly support more flexibility and an easier method of supporting a “battery station”. It certainly makes swapping batteries easier, since larger packs will weigh so much it will not be an easy task if the battery is just one, large package.

(Quote)
+1 Schmeltz Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 8:55 am

My various thoughts…

Audi Etron: Awesome car. Too bad Audi won’t be able to make a business case out of it—you know since electric cars are for idiots and all. (sarcasm mode off).

VW L1: Too small and likely too expensive to be a sales win. Carbon fiber isn’t cheap unfortunately. The E-Up! has a much better chance at life than this car does.

VW E-Up!: Loathe the name. VW just can’t seem to be able to give cars good names anymore. Seriously. The car itself seems to be barking up the right tree although what is up with the 3+1 seating? Right direction but some weird things thrown in for dubious benefits.

Renault Twizy: Loathe the name. Interesting concept though. Personal transportation like this may soon have a place in society. Like the idea—just dislike the name.

Renault Fluence: My personal favorite of the show. The looks and total package is a winner in my eyes. If you are a person that lives in BetterPlace land like Isreal or Denmark where these will be sold, then the 100 mile range shouldn’t be a problem. IMO, Nissan should make this car in the U.S. instead of the Leaf.

Frankfurt Show: Refreshing to see a car show without the doom and gloom hanging overhead. Hoping for better/happier L.A. and Detroit shows coming up.

As far as the EV’s and hybrids at the show, there’s shaping up to be a lot of competition for the Volt, I just didn’t see anything that would top it—yet.

(Quote)
Herm Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 8:58 am

The Fluenze will be similar to a fully equipped Megane, the gas version.. so about $25-30k including a lot of VAT taxes plus battery lease under $100 a month.

(Quote)
Eliica4u Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:02 am

How bout this OLD but new electric car.

Electric Lithium-Ion battery Car (aka Eliica) was initially developed in 2003 (like way before Volt was even a concept).

Specs:

0-60mph less than 4 seconds
0-100mph less than 7 seconds
Top Speed: 200 mph
Range: 200 miles

Price: if you have to ask then you cannot afford

It look so purdy too.

http://jalopnik.com/5120911/eliica-eight+wheeled-electric-car-heading-to-production-because-the-tesla-isnt-fast-enough

(Quote)
+7 MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:04 am

Although I’m not a big fan of the ’swap’ concept, your modular approach makes a lot of sence to me.

(Quote)
+1 CorvetteGuy Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:06 am

Audi e-Tron = Tesla Killer

Volkswagen L1 = Saturn EV-1 version 2.0

Volkswagen E-Up! = Nice design. What’s the price?

Renault Twizy ZE = Barbie trades in her Pink Corvette for this?

Renault Fluence = “Quickdrop” is my thoughts of owning one.

Was there a Cadillac Converj there? Why not?

(Quote)
+14 Dave G Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:13 am

I guess I’m picky. I want a car that:
• runs on electricity or gas.
• has at least 30 miles of all-electric range.
• by all-electric, I mean the ICE isn’t required for acceleration or highway speeds.
• is built by a major car maker with a large network of dealerships.
• is real – with an announced production date.

So far, the Volt is the only thing I can find that meets all of this.

Am I missing something?

(Quote)
+4 MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:15 am

“Is there anything about the Volt concept that still holds true?”

—————————————-

Well there is the fully electric drive with a gas powered genset.
Isn’t THAT the main point of the Volt anyway? Using less gas?

Wrapping the production car in a body that is actually good to live with is what it is. The ’show car’ Volt was striking but would have been a terrible car for everyday living.

If the Volt is to have the slightest chance of being the new every family “Chevy” then it has to do what people need done without compromise and it has to be priced right.

I believe the priced right part will come with Gen 2.
Along with 5 seats

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:15 am

Let’s give it a letter. You know, like AA AAA C and D.

Here’s an idea, let’s call it a “V” battery …

Now what made me think of “V”?

(Quote)
Takes2ToTango Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:18 am

Here is the car that George Clooney drives in Italy (well he owns one just like it).

Watch this little electric car SPANK the Tesla Roadster in a Drag Race.

http://jalopnik.com/5101963/tesla-schooled-by-tango-in-electric-car-drag-race?autoplay=true

(Quote)
+2 Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:19 am

It looks like PBP (or Renault) is looking for backup options to the original battery-swap idea, including home charging. How long before someone notices that the emperor is naked, and battery-swap gets dumped altogether?

(Quote)
LRGVProVolt Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:20 am

Perhapes the other cars designs are “just more concept cars” but the Renault Fluence was introduced on September 2 of this year. they will come out with the electric version in 2011. “The Fluence will start off using conventional drivertrains, but two years after introduction, it will go electric. Renault EVP Patrick Pelata told a summit in Paris that when the electric Fluence launches in 2011 the company expects to start with 20-40,000 units.”

http://green.autoblog.com/2008/10/03/renault-to-launch-fluence-sedan-in-2009-electric-version-in-201/

This car is destined for Isreal and in no way is it conceptual. Sorry to be so hard on you RB. The times are very interesting: what we once though was science fiction or just something we’ll never see in our lifetime can suddenly be reality. Like my grandfather who never thought he would see the day man would land on the moon; fortunately, he lived long enough to be pleasantly surprised.

Some of the other designs can be considered conceptual. Probably not the Audi e-tron oe the E-Up. As for the others, the likelihood is that around 2015 these other designs may become real. Technology is moving forward in a number of fields where science has discovered new materials that make what we once thought to be science fiction a reality.

Happy trails to you ’til we meet again!

(Quote)
Lawrence Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:21 am

True, what I meant about electric heating was “pure” electric heating, as such you find in most houses in France, for example.

Heat Pumps are very efficient (water-water). But again, having a clean and efficient heating system running in an non or badly isolated house makes no sense. Isolating houses properly has a very big value in terms of energy economicity.

(Quote)
+2 Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:22 am

Yes, gasoline will die a slow death. A slow, slow, slo-o-o-o-w death.

(Quote)
N Riley Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:23 am

Interesting concepts, yes. I would be surprised if they make it to production in their present form. The Volt surely did not. To some of us to our sorrow. These offerings do help move the bar more towards electric vehicles although I don’t think you can say as Lyle stated: “it is clear that electricity is taking the automotive market by storm.” Exploring the possibilities, yes. Good report Lyle.

(Quote)
-1 Larry McFall Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:24 am

You got my attention on the VW E-Up. I just might have to wait for this vehicle instead of the Volt. The NEW GM keeps backing up and if the price can’t be reasonable, I’m gone.

You can have the great US Auto Unions in charge but they will ensure that the products are fielded at a high cost to the consumers. I am sure that the Unions are planning on thier survival technics which will include getting, more and more benifits for the employees so they will be needed.

As a former benefactor of GM’s generosity with a primary prodding by the Unions, those benefits are all but gone. We got used to too much for far to long.

(Quote)
+1 Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:24 am

‘Volkswagen also displayed its mainstream upcoming BEV called the E-Up!, that they are calling “the Beetle of the 21st Century”’

Judging from the picture, it must be Ringo.

ba-dump bump.

(Quote)
Jon Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:27 am

Electric makes a lot of sense for heating smaller houses – I just finished a complete rehab of a rental, and I debated gas vs. electric in the house. I went with all electric even though the gas line was there and ready. The cost of electric heat through the winter is slightly more than gas, BUT once you factor in the $22 or so meter fee you have to pay every month just to have a gas meter on your house, it is a no brainer to run all electric on a well insulated, smaller home. The side benefits are less piping to run for the gas line and exhaust, lower ownership cost of the unit, and the safety factor of not having gas. My renter shares the utility bills with me because I am curious, and the useage validates that electric heat was the way to go here.

Keep in mind that gas furunaces waste some heat – older ones are very inefficient, new ones are 96%. Every cent of electricity you buy for electric heat goes into heating, it is always 100% efficient.

(Quote)
ToyCar4u Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:29 am

Toy Car company plans to build Full Size Electric Car.

Wow, it looks like everybody is getting in the EV game. (are you listening Tonka and Hot Wheels ?)

http://jalopnik.com/5360647/new-trabant-determined-to-kill-electric-car-industry-before-it-starts?skyline=true&s=x

(Quote)
+1 EVO Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:29 am

MRR

My power pack is swappable. It’s a pure option to do so, not a requirement, so I’m curious why you are against consumers having more choices.

Just because you have a power pack that can be swapped doesn’t mean that you have to swap it.

(Quote)
+10 LauraM Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:32 am

I agree. I’m glad that people who want a pure BEV will be able to get one. We’ll all benefit from the cleaner air and reduced gasoline use.

But personally? I want a plug-in hybrid that lets me do most of my daily driving with electricity, but can still use gasoline for longer trips. And I want it to be built by a major manufacturer. And the Volt is still the only car (concept or otherwise) that meets those requirements.

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:33 am

I haven’t gone to the Audi site to see, but “four motors” needn’t be hub motors; each could be attached to it’s wheel via a short shaft. This would protect the motor from vibration and other factors such as water and temperature extremes. It would also be more likely to produce the power they claim.

The real expenses here (in addition to the motors, of whatever kind) is the four channels of controller they need to run them all at different speeds (for “traction vectoring”), and of course, the 52kwh battery.

The real issue with Audi is that they must be more motivated to stick with their diesel expertise, and are probably just getting some attention on the coat-tails of others’ more genuine interest in the technology.

Of course, if they want to hand-build the dozen or so a year that would sell at the cost they’d have to charge for it, that’s another matter. This would also challenge Tesla for the dubious title of “Top Performance Electric,” and could have a ‘halo’ effect among slightly less-well-heeled speed freaks for their top-of-the-line diesel cars.

(Quote)
LRGVProVolt Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:34 am

Many individuals that own a NEV would disagree with you. At the time they became available they were based on limited technology but owners found them a great substitute for the gasoline guzzler they used for longer trips. They are inexpensive and fun substitutes perfectly usable for urban travel. With urban developers planning new cities where everything that anyone would want to do is close to home often within walking distance, the NEV becomes practical.

The top speed was regulated by law; they can be made to travel at higher speeds by just reprogramming the electric drive. IMHO, you will see them sold to people that want to have two or more vehicles in the family. They are far less expensive than a Volt will ever be. As for me, I would have a Volt for serious travel and a NEV for trips close to home.

Happy travels to you ’til we meet again.

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:38 am

Fisker may be about to announce an EREV for “under $39,000.”

Captain Jack posted this link in yesterday’s thread:

http://earth2tech.com/2009/09/15/ray-lane-fisker-to-make-major-announcement-about-39k-plug-in-hybrid/

This, and a so far unshown Hyundai concept may offer the biggest competition to Volt.

(Quote)
+1 MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:39 am

Dan,

As much as you are GM’s #1 fan (you are VERY consistant in this!)

I’m not sure that Audi’s work should be so easily dismissed.
This is a showcar, therefore it’s ’showy’… it IS based on their ’supercar’ afterall.

Are they behind in getting a production car to the showrooms?
That is very likely.

Does Audi know AWD? That is a definate yes.

As a ‘Northerner’ (Calgary, Canada) I know the value of 4WD/AWD for winter and have experienced it’s use first hand with my Subaru and Land Rover.

Audi’s do very well in the winter. (An A4 was my first choice when I ended up buying the Subaru, cost being the winning factor.)

An AWD Gen 2 Volt would be cool and very interesting to a lot of us.

(Quote)
+2 LauraM Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:39 am

The plug-in Prius is only supposed to be ready for the general consumer in 2012. And they’ll probably start with Japan. (Where they have exclusive access to very rich subsidies.)

My guess is that you’ll be able to buy a gen 2 Volt before you’ll be able to buy a plug-in Prius.

(Quote)
+2 DonC Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:42 am

There is no stopping it now, gasoline is dying a slow death.

I’d love for Lyle to be right but, given that what we have currently for the most part are concept cars or limited production or introduction dates into the future, it appears, to paraphrase Mark Twain, the death of gasoline may be greatly exaggerated.

This is going to be a long process, not made easier by gasoline being priced at very modest levels at the moment. In the short term cars with higher MPG will have the most impact. In the medium and longer term I’d still bet on biofuels. Only in the long term will EVs make a big impact, and only then if we see some breakthroughs in battery technology. And these substitutions will only occur if gas spikes. At $2/gallon not much is going to happen.

(Quote)
CorvetteGuy Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:43 am

Jackson\

I think you’re right. Picture a Jaguar-style suspension, but instead of the disc brakes in the center, you have the electric motors connected by a short shaft to the wheels/brake hubs in a conventional manner.

(Quote)
tom Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:44 am

Jon, Thats good info!

The other factor is electric rates vary across the country.

And of course this comes into play charging our 2012 Volts.
Sure hoping I’ll get an overnight discount.

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:48 am

Tire dealers would love to see that thing pull into one of their bays.

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:51 am

I’ve heard that the pellets can be hard to find, regardless of cost.

(Quote)
+1 Herm Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:52 am

Did you see the video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kU7I90AooOE&feature=player_embedded

GM should do something like this, very nice educational ad.

(Quote)
+1 Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:53 am

Add geothermal, and an electric heat pump can beat almost anything out there, even further North.

(Quote)
Texas Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:55 am

Jackson, BP had these charging options from day one. If you listen to any of Shai’s speeches, he always says that charging at home and at the office are two most important and primary charge spots. Maybe research a bit before you criticize?

Also, IF they can get the quick-charging down to a few minutes and IF they can do it very safely and IF they can build an effective quick-charge station and IF those batteries are affordable then yes, they might not even need to build swap-stations in some countries. How many years away is that? Who knows! That’s the point and if they want to start today they need to start building out those swap-stations. No big deal, they can always transition those stations to quick-charge when the technology is ready in 5 -10 or more years. It changes nothing. You still need a great battery, still need slow-charging spots and you still need a place to get a charge quickly.

(Quote)
+2 MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:55 am

EVO,

It’s an infrastructure issue not a technical one in my mind.

In a ‘confined area’ like the small country of Israel these “Better Place” swap stations could possibly work. They REALLY can’t drive very far without leaving the country.

But I think the cost to put ’swap stations’ every 50-ish miles across the North American prairies would be beyond impossible to pay for.

If the Volt 2.0 were to go to a ’standardized’ pack of “V” cells (thank you Jackson!) I would have no problem with that.

I STILL see me charging overnight at home and using the genset as the battery pack runs down. The ADVANTAGE to the “V” cell idea is that I could “upgrade” to “Duracells”!

Possibly T-pack 2.0 could accept multiple V-cells as it’s ’storage media’ (OK, I HAD to throw in a geekism…)

(Quote)
+1 Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:56 am

Hopefully, the concept Converj will show up at one of the next US-based shows.

(Quote)
LauraM Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:57 am

Gasoline maybe. But oil has lots of other uses. Even if we manage to replace it completely it as a source of energy (which I doubt), there are still petrochemicals.

Oil is actually a pretty amazing substance. They use it to produce synthetic fibers, fertilizer, plastic, rubber, medicine. Etc. They even use it for dry cleaning! (I used to take my clothes to an organic dry cleaners until I found out that their organic chemical was actually an oil derivative.)

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:57 am

Interesting that so many concepts involve leasing of the battery (I’m thinking primarily of the LEAF and now, the Flatulence, Affluence, or whatever the Renault is called.

(Quote)
+1 Greg Simpson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:59 am

Just as long as they drop that scheme before the “Ohm” and “Oersted”!

(Quote)
Herm Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:59 am

I read it was 100k for both Israel and Denmark?

It is a very interesting car, Nissan/Renault seem to be edging towards not making the battery swap exclusive to PBP. This should allay fears of the resale value of these cars when the battery dies.

The Volts used resale value is a big question IMO.

Perhaps we will get competition and a bunch of recharge points will pop up everywhere.. just make sure the charging cord is locked in place.

(Quote)
David K (CT) Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:59 am

“I’ve heard that the pellets can be hard to find, regardless of cost.”

================================================

They were last fall, but they are now in abundant supply.

Last fall EVERYBODY was installing pellet stove here in the NE (for obvious reasons)…me included.

The supply was limited because the demand was so high and also because the home building market was down (less lumber needed and hence less saw dust for pellets).

Unfortunately the price for the pellets is still higher than I think it should be.

Before the skyrocketing price of oil last year, pellets were much cheaper…free market supply and demand at work, I reckon.

(Quote)
Herm Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:03 am

Home charging was always the intended main charging methodr PBP, then street charging and finally battery swap.

The whole thing regarding the battery swap is to relax range anxiety.. people will seldom use it and not too many will be built.. also its not necessarily expensive to build the swap stations, since the batteries can be charged in 20 minutes not many have to kept in stock.. I can see a small drivethru in the back of a gas station dedicated for battery swapping. It could even be done manually if the labor is cheap enough.

(Quote)
LRGVProVolt Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:05 am

I am hopeful that GM surveys and “Want Lists” like the one here on GM-Volt.com will urge them to up the intended production. When people turn up at the dealer showroom, GM will turn up production for sure. Modern vehicle manufacturing plants of today can increase output easily; provided that the Volt production line is operating correctly from the get-go. It may be that GM lowered the Volt MSRP based on the “Want List” here in the hope that the current indicated price would encourage more buyers to step forward.

Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.

(Quote)
LRGVProVolt Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:07 am

That will come in the future as people begin to understand electricity in technical terms. For now KISS!

Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:09 am

Very true, Laura; and don’t forget heating oil, and jet fuel.

I doubt we will ever get completely off of petroleum, for every purpose. With a lot of hard work and a little luck, we may one day be able to stop importing it.

(Quote)
LRGVProVolt Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:11 am

Waiting implies that GM has been taking orders for the Volt and possibly down payments. Just a serious comment for now. You know how lawyers are.:)

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:15 am

Lots and lots of “IFs” there, Texas.

Frankly, my chief criticism is that the proposed automated swap-stations will turn out to be too complex and/or expensive to reliably support more than one vehicle type, or battery; but the concept is being used as a rallying point for something actually less revolutionary.

If it advances auto-electrification it may be a good thing in the long run, but has the potential to leave people feeling “lied to.”

(Quote)
+2 nasaman Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:16 am

Don, I completely agree —sadly, it will be several decades before the electrification of cars makes a really significant difference in our addiction to oil here in the US. Why? Primarily because too many powerful politicians want to exploit added domestic production from offshore drilling, Arctic National Wildlife Refuge drilling, etc. And although Europe’s politicians have long supported high taxes on petrol (which keeps the price 2 1/2 – 3 times what Americans pay and the demand for smaller, more efficient cars much higher than here) US politicians view similar high taxes on gas as political suicide.

That said, I nevertheless see the plethora of electric cars introduced at Frankfort as largely a rush to get in the “green game” and little else. However, Europeans will indeed be more willing to become first adopters of hybrids & EVs …..if only because they know the cost of petrol will continue to remain very high. So Frankfort was the logical place for the EU’s automakers to show their “good green intentions”. It truly amazes me what the Volt has started!

(Quote)
+2 MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:16 am

Although I’m sure you are right that in certain limited placed the NEV concept could ‘fly’ I certainly don’t live in one of those places.

I’m surrounded by freeways and to get out of my neighborhood a car needs highway speed capability.

Yes, I ‘could’ use a NEV to go to one of the grocery stores we use, but I find it pretty difficult to justify another car and it’s insurance and maintenance for 2 or 3 short trips a week.

I fail to see the logic in ’saving’ 1 or 2 litres of gas in my ‘regular’ car for the ‘world impact of buying yet ANOTHER car.

The usual responce to this is something along the lines of ‘move closer to work’, well I have had 5 or 6 different employers since I bought this house. Moving and uprooting the kids each time is simply not practical.

Again… a win for the Volt!

(Quote)
+2 LauraM Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:20 am

That’s not true. We also have a non-oil trade deficit. Yes, we need to find a way to replace oil as an energy source. But that won’t solve the problem by itself. Yes. The non-oil trade deficit is trending in the right direction. But there’s no assurance that if the economy fully recovers the trade deficit won’t recover right along with it.

http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/economicsunbound/archives/2009/08/a_good_news_sta.html

If we really want to eliminate the trade deficit we need to a)replace oil, and b)form a manufacturing policy to encourage companies to do their manufacturing here. Fixing health care is part of that. A minor part. But a necessary one.

There was a really interesting article in business week on how we can reverse the decline in manufacturing. To me, this is the most important issue facing the American economy today.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_38/b4147046115750.htm

(Quote)
+1 Noel Park Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:22 am

Sheltonjr:

Amen. You have said it all in comment #!. +1

(Quote)
+1 LRGVProVolt Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:24 am

The day the Volt goes on sale and production is increased above the anticipated 10,000 (which GM would be crazy to not increase considering the demand), you will see the tide begin. It will be one huge wave crashing down and the result will have a huge impact on the whole world.

The electric vehicle is a disruptive technology that many industries will have to consider in their plans for the impending future. Fortunately, the EREV concept lessens the impact upon existing industry as the ICE is gradually fazed out. The Electrical Supply industries will only need to ramp up sales while other automotive products industries will need to change: their survival will depend on how fast they can change their product lines.

Competition will be fierce. And new opportunities will arise for investment and new jobs. GM’s Volt was and is the right road to success for the company and the nation.

Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.

P.S. Did everyone notice that GM has begun to hire back employees. This is a positive sign that the economic situation is getting better.

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:26 am

Didn’t statik predict this?

Of course, I think he meant a bit further on than this, and not a negative early example which could set auto electrification back by a decade. (Jalopnik is less than thrilled by the prospect of an electric Trabant).

PS: Take a look at some of the comments –!

(Quote)
kdawg Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:31 am

I’ll guess aerodynamics and battery/motor arrangement optimization.

(Quote)
Noel Park Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:32 am

sgilson:

Maybe, but the price of gas is up 20% in the lat month according to this morning’s news. $3+/gallon in LA and climbing.

Jackson:

For sure.

(Quote)
+1 kdawg Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:35 am

The name didn’t change, and it’s still a Chevy
(FWIW, i like the style changes)

(Quote)
tom Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:36 am

Hi LauraM;

I didn’t want to get outside of the scope of Electric cars which need electricity to power them.

But I have to address your comment that this health care plan would ‘encourage companies to manufacture here’. I don’t think anything that is being considered in Health Care would help manufacturing much.

The best thing we can do to help manufacturing in our country is get rid of false economy jobs. That is the albatross on all productive endeavors in this country. I could go on for hours on this, but regarding health care, government has already screwed it up, they are just trying to screw it up more. They are doing the opposite of what would help. They need to get rid of requirement of employers to provide health care and any tax incentives to that effect. They should replace the tax breaks health care enjoys with employers and use the same money to give everyone a credit that can be used for purchasing family/individual catastrophic health insurance.

(Quote)
MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:36 am

That’s how I see it too, although I bet it’s more likely to see it with a limited slip or torsen differential and a single large motor at the input.

Electric motors are expensive and differentals although not cheap cost a lot less than a second motor.

(Quote)
+3 Sam Y Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:39 am

Hey DonC, yup, gasoline will die a slow slow death. But coupled with the energy security, environment issues, etc., I’m sure the EVs will make head-way not only in the long-term but medium-term as well. I live in the oil capital of Canada–Alberta. Honestly man, as soon as I have enough money made & can support myself & family in an area with higher cost of living (Vancouver or its burbs come to mind), I’m skipping outta AB. This is not somewhere I want my kids to grow up…at least not with oil-driven bureaucrats in charge with their head in oil companies’ arse. We & our kids will pay for this crap we’re doing to where we live dearly…if you account for habitat loss, leaching of toxic ponds, increasingly crazy AB Environment Ministry’s way of managing our water supply, this is the last place in Canada where I wanna live when I’m older.

With regards to gas prices though, I don’t think you’ll see $2/gallon much longer; I don’t care how much touted ‘oil sands’ are to the rest of the world, it’s too friggin’ energy & water intensive (10 barrels of H2O I think) to produce a barrel of oil this way. I say give it 5-6 years & we’ll see not a just spike in price but permanent increase (a plateau, if you will) in prices…the demand for oil is growing not at a steady rate but at exponential rate due to emerging economies like China & India, while we in NA (in general trends) are still clamoring for more. I know people will point to some reduction in gas usage quite recently, but I don’t think that will hold up if we examine the trend say in 4-5 years.

In light of all of this, I’d say in medium term, say 10-15 yrs, we’ll see a great head-way being made in EV field.

(Quote)
+1 Jim I Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:42 am

Dave G:

It is good to have repeated every now and then what we “old-timers” on this site have been saying for several years now…..

I couldn’t agree more with what you have said!

NPNS

#1196 on Lyle’s list – I refust to call it a Want List……

(Quote)
+1 kdawg Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:42 am

Now you’ve done it. Wait till EVO sees your post.

(Quote)
Mark Bartosik Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:47 am

Just use electricity but to drive a ground source heat pump, an efficiency of 400% is not uncommon (more like 3.x after various overheads), this is possible because heat pumps move rather than generate heat.

It is really not a smart idea to use electric resistance heating in the north east.

Better still use waste heat from power stations rather than dumping into rivers and killing the fish.

(Quote)
+2 Jim I Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:47 am

Rashiid:

I don’t know if I would call the VW L1 ugly…. I actually kind of like it.

For most people that travel alone back and forth to work, it could be an OK vehicle.

But it is way underpowered!!! That thing would get blown off the road by a semi going 75 MPH on the interstate. And that would be a bad thing…..

(Quote)
LauraM Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:48 am

I hadn’t seen it. Thanks! It is a great ad, although I’m pretty skeptical of better place in general.

But, personally, I don’t think that GM should be doing a major advertising blitz right now for a car that’s still a year away from production. They need to focus on the cars they have out right now. At least, IMHO.

I agree that something like this would be perfect. But in October 2010. Not now.

(Quote)
PeteVE Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:50 am

i posted about the Zoe ZE and it isn’t here now? not sure why it got deleted. try again but only talk about Zoe.

there is another concept that renault is showing the this auto show…the zoe ze.

it is a nice concept. even though it is a bev and thus have a different market somewhat, i think price and size wise, it would be in the same ball park as our beloved volt.

http://www.carbodydesign.com/archive/2009/09/16-renault-zoe-ze-concept/

(Quote)
LauraM Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:50 am

Can’t we use natural gas for heating?

(Quote)
LRGVProVolt Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:53 am

Many municipalities are installing solar arrays on the roof of their vehicle parking structures from which they charge the electric vehicles they are testing for various EV manufactures. IMHO, you will see many home owners installing solar arrays on their homes: their are green industry home builders that are now offering solar as an option. As city officials see the advantages of solar and the neat fit it has with the conversion to EV’s in their vehicle pool, they will also make it available to the populous. Addressing the problem of overload on the electric grid during the day, is a huge problem for the change-over to electric vehicles that is being addressed by the power companies and the administration. Here in Texas, the legislature has moved forward to address this problem. “Significant progress has been made with Senate Bill 20 (SB 20), which laid the groundwork for large transmission lines in order to accommodate present wind industry needs and to further accelerate the use of wind power in the state.”

http://www.seco.cpa.state.tx.us/re_wind-transmission.htm

Texas is unique in that the state regulates the electric power industry: it is a model for other states which only come under federal regulation. What is needed is a government sponsored project like Eisenhowers highway project to provide for the transmission of electricity from the many wind farms that are being built and planned. Wind energy is indeed a viable source of energy and it has already attracted many foreign companies to move production facilities to the United States creating new jobs here in the U.S. that will contribute to our getting away from spending so much on foreign oil. To keep nearly $700,000,000 dollars in the U.S. can go a long way to diminish the national deficit while increasing employment here by investing in these new industries and the products they support like the Volt. The investment by the government in infrastructure for renewing the grid should be one of the primary goals of the administration.

Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:54 am

I like the VW products. They seem more of a viable affordable commuter. The last Renault might be good to.
Are these all just “Concepts”? I know the sleek VW L1 is. It has been for many years.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:55 am

So what ever happened to the “Tango” George Clooney has? What happened to the company? I recall the price tag was close to 80K for one quite a while back.

(Quote)
+1 Mike-o-Matic Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:56 am

I want a X-ray powered car named the “Roentgen.” Is that too much to ask?

Ooo, or a nuclear-powered one called the “Chevrolet Curie.”

(Quote)
+1 Noel Park Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 11:03 am

Jackson:

LOL. Literally.

(Quote)
+1 LauraM Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 11:03 am

There was a concept Converj at the New York Auto show. It’s a great-looking car.

(Quote)
+1 Dave G Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 11:04 am

I’m very skeptical about battery swapping. There will probably 100 different types of batteries. The economics just don’t make sense.

Also, with EREVs, you can fill up on ethanol for the occaisional longer trip, and still be zero emmissions net. That makes a whole lot more sense to me than adding millions of charging stations.

Why not use the infrastrucutre we already have?

(Quote)
MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 11:09 am

/Joke mode on

It’s a VW TDI engine… chip it and burn the tires off!

/Joke mode off

It’s quite possible that it could be a good commuter car for some folks.

(Quote)
LRGVProVolt Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 11:12 am

You need a wind turbine or SOLAR ARRAYS installed on your roof. New home construction techniques insulate homes much better now. Could it be that you can improve the insulation on your home. Conservation of energy is a big issue: up North heating is required; down here in the hot climate, air conditioning is required. Therefore, conservation is tantamount to reducing the use of oil and for now sealing those air leaks in our homes is essential. If oil pricing spikes again, many will be subject to cold days and nights during the winter, as happened in 2008. For now you can use wood pellets if the price of oil gets to high but what will happen if everyone converts over to that fuel? You get the idea, I’m sure. Your ingenuity in using wood pellets is to be applauded. But we all need to think about conservation now before the oil price does spike again.

Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.

(Quote)
MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 11:15 am

My next home will have Geothermal heating.
Oooh, heated floors… nice!

(Quote)
+1 Jim I Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 11:22 am

I am just glad GM stuck with the Volt program.

14 months to go………………

NPNS

# 1196 on Lyle’s List

(Quote)
+2 Rashiid Amul Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 11:44 am

RB,
I just read yesterday’s post. Unbelievable.
I honestly would have thought the GM lawyers would have something
much more important to worry about. However, if GM’s lawyers are worried about GM-Volt.com, is just shows how big Lyle has become.

Congratulations, Lyle. Once again, well done.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 11:47 am

I second that!

(Quote)
LRGVProVolt Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 11:57 am

Go to the T. Boone Pickens website to see what the administration is doing about this problem.

http://www.push.pickensplan.com/

Pickens has meet with administration official, congress, and industry, and a concerted effort is moving forward to address this The #1 problem. From the issue of renewing our electric grid, utilizing fuel sources that are native to America such as natural gas, geothermal, wind and solar, these energy sources are being examined in detail and are being considered as means to end our dependence on foreign oil.

The bureaucracies, you refer to,need to be reinforced so that they can effectively enforce the laws that were created to protect the citizens of this nation. To long have I watch the dismantling of the nations executive branches, like the EPA, the Consumer Protection Agency, and others, to our detriment while big business reaps in the profits while polluting the atmosphere and increasing our health costs.

As for false economy jobs, look to the foreign companies that produce wind turbine components; they are moving to the U.S., creating jobs here in the states. These are only a few examples; give it time and you will see the unemployment figure drop. And this influx of new actively in the newly created industries will prepare the U.S. for the future. An end to dependence on imported oil and the building of a new infrastructure based on an electric economy.

I AGREE WITH YOU WHOLE-HEARTED.

“If we didn’t import OIL we’d have a SURPLUS!!!”

In August alone, we imported 355 million barrels of oil; that equals ” $25.2 billion sent overseas”: added to our deficit!

Pickens in his video states that Congress will be considering the Natural Gas Act, H.R. 1835 and Senate Bill 1408 in October and that “we can solve the problem in five years”, if they pass the act. It is up for vote in October!

Listen to his video about what China is doing to lock up petroleum. China is spending 30 Billion a year, an amount equal to Exxon Mobiles budget, and they are ready to spend more to insure that China gets all the oil they need. Watch for the next oil price spike; it’s just around the corner.

Look on the PickensPlan website for more of what this administration is gong about accomplishing the goal of ending foreign oil dependency.

Slow down , make the morning last! The economy is improving! If, by the end of the year, we all don’t see how it all is improving, I’ll eat my words.

Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.

(Quote)
+1 GM Volt Fan Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 11:59 am

Here’s another bit of news from the Frankfurt Auto Show in Germany … the “2010 Ford Focus ECOnetic Start-Stop”:

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009/09/focus-econetic-20090916.html#more

Move over Toyota Prius, you have SERIOUS competition from Ford on the way when it comes to fuel efficiency. 52.3 mpg CITY, 69.2 mpg HIGHWAY, 61.9 COMBINED.

Wow. Ford has high reliability and quality ratings from Consumer Reports and JD Power and auto magazines. Ford will probably sell a bunch of these.

Fat cat oil sheiks and Big Oil should be concerned too. Cars like these will be affordable. There will soon be millions of them on the roads. Lots less of this product called “gasoline” will be needed in the near future. Don’t you feel SOOO sorry for them.

(Quote)
kdawg Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 12:06 pm

In the video link, i like the missing tooth EV smile

One thing i noticed what that when he plugged in the public charge station, there was no lock. So someone could unplug him (or possibly steal his electricity).

(Quote)
+3 kdawg Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 12:14 pm

I want all the options. Home charging, work charging, magnetic resonance charging, swap stations, a solar panel, BEV’s, EREV’s, Lithium Ion, EEstor, super capacitors, etc. Let them all fight it out and let the chips fall where they may. Some ideas may be bad some may be good, but the best part is that there’s options.

(Quote)
+1 CorvetteGuy Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 12:33 pm

I just had a fun thought!

With a seperate motor-brake-wheel combination at each corner of the car, they must be computer controlled based on the description… and with the near-instantaneous transition from forward to reverse of an electric motor, it seems very possible to do a “180-Degree-Bat-Turn” with a pre-programmed push of a button. This would cause the right wheels to spin forward and the left wheels to spin backwards — just like a tank but without the treads — it would only take like 3/10ths of a second to spin the car around. You could even do it from a standing still position. How cool would that be?!!!!

All you would need after that is a black cowl and a cape!

(Quote)
+2 Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 12:33 pm

“Like my grandfather who never thought he would see the day man would land on the moon; fortunately, he lived long enough to be pleasantly surprised.”

My grandfather never saw a car until he was a teenager. He lived just long enough to see coverage of the Apollo 11 landing. My dad said he was still able to understand what was happening, but didn’t think he believed it.

I often wonder what unbelievable thing we may live long enough to see? Somehow, I think electric cars would be the least of it.

(Quote)
+1 Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 12:35 pm

Antimatter powered: The Corvette Gamma-Ray.

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 12:37 pm

I dunno, is there enough? Maybe. There are lots of other things to compete with fuel oil, I just meant current use. Jet fuel will be more difficult to replace.

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 12:46 pm

“All you would need after that is a black cowl and a cape!”

… and a neck brace!

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 12:47 pm

Perhaps the “Tango” went “Uniform.”

(Quote)
Noel Park Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 12:59 pm

Jim I:

I love the look of the L1. The real form follows function. If it was a GM product, i would buy one in a heartbeat.

(Quote)
LauraM Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 1:00 pm

In other news, GM apparently now has more than one hit car. The Chevy Equinox, Buick LaCrosse, Cadillac SRX, and the Camaro are all really doing really well. One dealer said they all sell within 48 hours of hitting the lots!

GM is actually talking about boosting production due to high demand.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125305886067314043.html#mod=WSJ_hps_LEFTWhatsNews

(Quote)
Texas Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 1:08 pm

You mean like having HD-DVD and Blu-ray options? As this example proves, too many options can be a bad thing that keeps adoption low and slow. Sometimes we should just agree on one standard so we can fix a crisis. A few thousand EVs is not going to fix the problem. We need hundreds of millions of them, possibly in less than a decade or we are going to suffer tremendously. I guess we will just have to wait for that kick in the head before having all those options will feel like having 10 generals in a room all wanting their “option” to be used.

(Quote)
Noel Park Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 1:10 pm

Jackson:

You’re on a roll today for sure. I heard a Kaiser Family foundation psa on the radio this AM to the effect that laughter is good for your health. It reduces stress and supposedly releases some sort of healthy body chemicals.

Keep ‘em coming.

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 1:13 pm

The issue at the moment is the volatility of oil costs, based on plausible disruptions ($4+ as a result of Katrina hitting the refineries, gas lines as a result of the OPEC embargoes). Add widespread distrust of “big oil,” speculator games and spectre of enforced carbon-limiting legislation, and there’s plenty of cause for limiting petroleum use; even if the real shortages don’t become evident in the near future.

There is a chance that oil prices will drop further before they start to rebound.

(Quote)
Texas Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 1:14 pm

“If it advances auto-electrification it may be a good thing in the long run, but has the potential to leave people feeling “lied to.””

How so? I don’t feel lied to. If they lie, they will not get customers and go bankrupt. Not good for Shai the wonder boy.

If you look at the swap platform it’s basically a flat base that can hold just about anything. I think people will have to wait until next year to see the whole thing working before they start to say, “Ah! I get it!”

(Quote)
+1 Luke Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 1:15 pm

I’m likely to invest in an aftermarket battery. So, if I upgrade my battery to one that works better for me, swapping it might make me loose my investment.

OTOH, I’m not opposed to other people using battery-swap stations, but the whole thing makes me nervous. What if I get a bad one? Or what if have a good battery and loose it?

(Quote)
+1 Noel Park Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 1:15 pm

Very cool. It would almost sell me a Ford. Europe only though, I guess because of the diesel. Come on GM, let’s have something equivalent for the Cruze and/or Spark, and sell them HERE.

(Quote)
LauraM Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 1:18 pm

The US has large natural gas reserves. So much so some people are advocating cars that run on CNG (compressed natural gas.) And we already use it for heating.

http://www.adn.com/money/industries/oil/story/836557.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/18/business/energy-environment/18gas.html

I agree about jet fuel. But, like you said, the more uses we find replacements for the better.

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 1:18 pm

Speaking of Buick, my uncle just got an Enclave. Anyone into SUVs should go take a look at one, they’re awesome. I think this is the first SUV to ever make my tongue hang out, so to speak. Fuel economy isn’t great (though it may be, as SUVs go, so I would never buy one).

(Quote)
+1 sgilson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 1:18 pm

I burn corn to heat our house. It is a furnace, so it is plummed into the return side of our central system. It works good, and WAS until last year incredibly inexpensive to fuel, but after last year it caught up to my natural gas bill and actually more expensive with transportation costs. I like buying corn because I keep money in my local farmers pocket.

(Quote)
DonC Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 1:31 pm

I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment. But that’s not a good thing. Looked at in a broader context, the Voltec system is a clever solution not so much to the failure of combustion engines as to the failure of batteries. If batteries had a longer life, cost even as little as 1/3 as much, and delivered as little as 2X the power, then EREV wouldn’t be necessary and EVs would be a viable alternative to combustion engines.

While the Volt is a great design it represents battery development failure, which is quite sad. Having to put a combustion engine into a car adds mass, makes it more far more complex and expensive to maintain, and cuts down on the storage space.

(Quote)
MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 1:32 pm

+1 Jackson!

Heh heh.. he said Gamma ray…

(Quote)
+1 David K (CT) Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 1:36 pm

I was told, when I bought the stove, that I could also burn corn.

The corn is a lot more costly here in the NE, but ya never know…at least I have the option.

The pellets, I’m told, actually burn almost as clean as our oil furnace (absolutely no –visually detectable– smoke out of the chimney) and it’s a by-product in the wood industry so it’s not like they’re chopping trees just for my pellets. It does take a little extra work (lugging around the 40 lb. bags), but the less dependent on oil I am the better I feel.

(Quote)
MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 1:38 pm

Calling Jim Rockford!

(Quote)
flysolo Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 1:42 pm

“The Volts used resale value is a big question IMO”

GM can solve That by leasing the battery, but I would rather own mine!

(Quote)
GM Volt Fan Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 1:44 pm

I think all of those cars will be hits for GM. I particularly like the Equinox and the LaCrosse. I bet GM sells LOTS of Equinoxes based on the reviews I’d seen. I’d like the Camaro too if I was still in high school. That’s a chick magnet kind of car. Gets you attention in the high parking lot from people. GM needs a strong competitor to take on Ford’s Mustangs. Like they always have …. since the 1960s.

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 2:11 pm

Fuel oil is used for heating in many places where a delivery infrastructure (like Natural Gas lines) don’t exist. A truck pulls up every Fall and pumps a hundred or so gallons into a tank in your basement, or back yard.

Propane is more commonly used in the South, where again a truck pulls up and fills a pressure tank in your backyard.

Propane =/= Methane, it’s a different molecule. I know LNG is shipped to gas companies where no direct pipeline exists, but I don’t know how safe/economic this would be for individual users.

In this specific case, it may be less a matter of overall supply and more one of inadequate delivery infrastructure.

In order to use LNG to power a jetliner, you would need to find a new home for the fuel tanks. Kerosene, as a liquid, can easily be stored in the wings. Pressurized gas, on the other hand, needs a high-strength, low-surface-area tank (such as a sphere or hemisphere-capped cylinder), which would have to be located in the fuselage; competing with seats and cargo. New aircraft concepts, such as the ’spanloader’ flying-wing-derived cargo carrier, or the Boeng blended-wing-body may be able to find space for such a tank, so maybe NG can help there, after all.

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 2:16 pm

Is this literally some form of corn, or corn-cob-and-stalk-derived pellets (similar to the sawdust derived pellets)?

(Quote)
David K (CT) Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 2:28 pm

I believe its pellets made/derived from corn-cob-stalk type thing…really not sure what the process is. I’ve never seen any, except pictures (looks just like the wood pellets).

I’ve been told that the corn pellets have more ash content than the wood pellets, so the maintenance / cleaning of the stove would be more frequent and intensive. Using the wood pellets I need to clean the stove once per week, without fail, or it won’t run efficiently.

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 2:28 pm

I’m here all week. Try the Veal!

(Quote)
Noel Park Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 2:29 pm

Sam Y:

Thanks for the perspective from Alberta. +1

As to paying for what we’re doing to the places we live, I think that the rest of us are just as guilty as folks in Alberta. And I totally agree that there will be a reckoning someday.

All the best to you and your family.

(Quote)
Noel Park Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 2:32 pm

Jay Leno ain’t in it, LOL.

(Quote)
Noel Park Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 2:38 pm

There’s an interesting piece on allcarselectric.com about Aptera trying to get itself classified as a car rather than a motorcycle, thus qualifying for gov’t development loans.

I could get interested in an Aptera as a commuter vehicle. They are leading the way in low weight, low Cd, and range. A lot more than any of these Frankfurt BEVs, IMHO. If we can loan big bucks to Tesla, Fisker, Nissan, et al, why not Aptera?

(Quote)
N Riley Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 2:38 pm

Jim, you would think the battery weight would give the L1 more stability so that it could take an 18-wheeler wheezing by at 75 mph. Don’t you think?

(Quote)
+1 Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 2:39 pm

IN MY OPINION, there will always be a place for a car which generates, as well as stores electrical energy.

I’m not saying that this on-board generator will always be a liquid-fueled internal combustion engine, mind you; there are lots of possibilities already imagined, and no doubt many more which haven’t been.

Consider something hypothetical like a methanol fuel cell / Lithium Ion EREV, for example. The fuel cell would have few (if any) moving parts, be much more efficient than the ICE (as well as much smaller and lighter), but would allow quick refilling of a high-energy-density liquid fuel.

Methanol probably wouldn’t be all that easy to find at first, but this needn’t be the crippling problem as, say, hydrogen scarcity for a pure fuel cell car; you’d have a battery you could plug in at home (and hopefully other places) which would make the fuel cell an occasional-use item.

Getting out on the extreme edge of hypothetical, imagine some kind of nuclear battery / lithium ion battery EREV. Such a small nuke would produce power at a more or less constant rate, which would be matched to driving requirements via the Li/Ion pack. Such a car would continuously charge the pack, even at night. No, I’m certainly not going to hold my breath waiting for such a thing to be invented, just pointing out that an EREV architecture can mitigate many of the limitations posed by possible energy schemes which otherwise couldn’t be considered.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 2:45 pm

Moved post…

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 2:46 pm

Ummm…
They all stil use Gas as the primary source so the “Big Oil” is now a happier camper.

(Quote)
MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 2:46 pm

Jackson, you forgot my favourite… “Mr Fusion”!

Otherwise you are right on.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 2:47 pm

It took 2 didn’t it..

(Quote)
+3 Keith Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 2:48 pm

I will give you my thoughts as to why swap stations are a bad idea.
Swap stations will have to purchase the batteries so their overhead will be very high as those batteries are not cheap to buy .
What I see as happening is that you will be able to charge up your car at home for $2.00 but if you go to charge up your car from a Better Place business it will cost you $20.00 . Those business have to recoup their investments and make money , after all they are a business , not a non profit organization dedicated to clean air .
Do you get the picture now ?

A full battery from home charging $2.00
A full battery from better Place $20.00 (swapped)
Same amount of power .

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 2:54 pm

Thanks for the info, Dave K and sgilson!

I have seen a handful of inserts and stoves for sale down here, but don’t know anyone who uses one (our heating season down South is much, much shorter than our air conditioning season).

(Quote)
+1 MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 2:59 pm

Most small farms/remote places here in western canada have a big propane tank outside the house and the truck comes and fills it much like the oil truck would.

When it gets cold they will put a 100 watt lightbulb in the cover over the valve, it adds enough heat to get the gas moving even in extreme cold.

The jetliner is a whole other set of issues…

‘maybe’ bio-jet fuel? (Algae flavored)

Jet fuel is basically just diesel with additives to keep it from gelling. (Next time you drive by an aircraft service area notice the unusal number of VW diesels in the parking lot… they run GREAT on the jet fuel ‘pulled’ from the fuel trucks when checking for water in the fuel.)

(Quote)
+2 EVO Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 3:00 pm

The more choices, the better, as far as I’m concerned. I’ve always said that.

Unsuprisingly, I know all about the nicely done Mission Motors motorcycle, which was also at the TTXGP. It’s like the Tesla Roadster was in 2006, in that it offers high performance and mainstream high end vehicle looks for a high price and looks to be still one or two years from mass production and widespread sales.

While you’re at it, you could also mention the GPR-S, out of Oakland, and the Brammo Enertia, coming to a Best Buy near you soon. both nice bikes, but more focused on looks and less on overall performance than what I chose. I did a lot of research before I bit the bullet and a key feauture thaht sold me on Zero Motorcycles was that they are available right this second and they are now all over the world, though I’ve yet to run across another one in my town.

I’m still over the moon happy with my old school late model kitted Zero X motorcycle, which gives me super high performance (torque / weight) that ‘ll beat almost any four wheeled full gasser off the line, in an inexpensive, highway capable (oddly, the town street speed limits here are not 150 mph) package that you can order on line right this second for home delivery.

I encourage folks to get whichever flavor of EV (HEV, PHEV, ER-EV, BEV, etc., # wheels) suits your wallet and preferences, as one more EV of any type on the roads supports faster adoption of all of them.

(Quote)
+2 Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 3:04 pm

This kind of economy applies to “fast charge” stations as well; in this case, for the giant storage capacity (Sodium/Sulfur batteries in tractor-trailer size form-factor perhaps), interfacing infrastructure, staff (etc).

What you’re actually paying for is convenience. Is a grocery item cheaper at Wal-Mart, or a Kwik-E-Mart?

IMO, the “fast charge” station sounds more do-able than a network of battery swap stations, but neither thing is likely to achieve broad appeal quickly.

Whether people will pay for the convenience is the kind of question only the marketplace can answer … and the marketplace won’t get involved until a significantly large fraction of all cars on the road can be recharged/battery-swapped.

(Quote)
MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 3:12 pm

Dave G, this is definately a huge issue however I like “newbies” standard ’sub cell’ idea.

And Jackson’s calling it a V-cell!

It would STILL require industry buy-in but might just be easier to get past the hurdles since everyone wins with a standard.

I can see it now… The new nissan leaf… $24999… requires 20 V-cell batteries not included

(Quote)
+2 jeffhre Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 3:18 pm

My analysis shows that we will need electrified passenger cars just to sustain a functional economy that isn’t swung into recessions induced by oil price shocks every 4 or 5 years. Oil companies will not be able to keep up with demand once the recession ends and the BRIC’s resume their double digit growth patterns.

Looking back over the last four decades burst bubbles seemed to be the cause of recessions, but massive run ups in energy prices went hand in hand with the crashes ending each bulls run.

Side note: I was reaching for a napkin to finish this analysis, but with the napkin being too far away to serve as an analytical tool to flesh out and record my analysis, I’ll just stick with this SWAG. Unless Statik tears it down and then I might put some effort into it.

(Quote)
Herm Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 3:19 pm

Obviously you would not swap a battery that you owned.. you would only swap a battery that you got thru a service such as Project Better Place.

You could jump in and out of the plan, but you would have to remove your battery when you use theirs.

PBP sells you “miles” just like you would buy minutes for your cell phone, that service would allow free usage of charging points all over town and in your garage plus it would allow you to use the battery swapping service station.. with this service you never own the battery or pay for its upgrade or repair as it ages. It is estimated the plan will be cheaper than buying gas and it will cost you about $100 a month. This probably will work in places like Israel, Japan or Europe, where gas is very expensive.

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 3:22 pm

L-1 = $57K

Twizzy =$31K

E-up = $48K

(Quote)
+1 Herm Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 3:25 pm

Most people will not use the 20 minute fast charge or battery swap service very often.. they will just plug it in at home but its nice to have the option. The video really does a good job explaining how it works.

The business plan for Project Better Place depends on people not using the swapping station often, I’m guessing.

Most people will charge at home and perhaps use the swap service a couple of times a year.

The stations could also do power leveling for the electric utility company, this may be profitable all on its own.. and also a way to keep using degraded packs after they are no good for cars.

(Quote)
MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 3:25 pm

Although that is true Captain, they use a lot less gas than the current offerings so it’s at least a move in the right direction.

(Quote)
+1 LauraM Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 3:30 pm

What don’t you like about Ford? I’m just asking because, well, you seem to care about built in America, and Ford is the American car company that’s in the best shape. I’ve noticed that some GM buyers will buy an import before a Ford and vice versa, and I don’t get it.

Am I missing something?

(Quote)
+1 Jackson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 3:35 pm

Interesting about the light bulb in the valve, I wouldn’t have thought you could have Propane in the sub-arctic. Better hope Canada doesn’t ban incandescent bulbs like Germany, or you guys will be in the market for some specialty heating devices.

Jet fuel from algae is a far more likely scenario than mine. If they can, you know, make that whole algae to bio-oil thing work (this would be great for more than jetliners; ocean going vessels, trains, and over the road trucks would all benefit).

(Quote)
Herm Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 3:37 pm

DonC is right, but he is also too negative.. the batteries have recently just become reliable and cheap enough to do this. EREVs are transitionary until batteries improve.. my WAS guess is 10 years.

After that my favorite genset is a methanol or wet ethanol fuel cell.. and I’m sure gas stations will sell you sealed gallons of the stuff.. you wont need much since your car has a 300 mile all electric range anyways.. and wireless power transfer could change this debate very quickly.

Please dont tell me nimh or lead-acid are practical for BEV, too heavy and the SOC is even worse than what GM is planning to use on the Volt.

(Quote)
Herm Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 3:43 pm

You may have no choice and have to purchase one when the original one dies.. hopefully it will not be $2k in labor just to replace the battery. I think purchasing an “extended warranty” on the battery will be a popular option.

(Quote)
Herm Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 3:48 pm

How much would it really cost to hire a teenager to man the battery swapping station?.. it would be a hell of nice job for $10-$15 an hour..
I bet he wont be too busy so he could do double duty, run the gas pumps and check your oil also

Leave the damn robots for the japanese.

(Quote)
RB Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 3:54 pm

LRGV—-> I’ll be happy for these and other concepts to become real and hope that they do [But for now they are concepts.]

(Quote)
Herm Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 3:55 pm

I suspect Toyota will make the plug-in Prius an option.. bump up the cost not too much ($4k) to compete with the Fusion/Volt and then make the Yaris hybrid their low cost competitor with the Insight.

Its easy for them to swap the options on the Prius around, if they can make enough lithium packs for it.. I suspect nimh battery supplies are a bottleneck for them now.

(Quote)
RB Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 3:57 pm

Rashiid –> Yes, I fully agree, the attention is a tribute to Lyle

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 3:59 pm

Have you driven a Ford lately?

Let me give you a run down on my 2002 Ford Explorer Limited.
All services were done for whatever it needed so keep this in mind. The warranty expired….
Rear AC compressor and pump died – $800.00
Transmission needed rebuilding – $3200.00
Power window master door console died – $180.00
Right rear passenger power window just dropped – $375.00 (Windows Needed new rails too)
Ignition key hole ring busted off – $120.00
Transmission need rebulidng AGAIN after 2 yrs from the first rebuild – quoted $3200.00
And the straw that broke my azz….
The valve cover gaskets on both sides ov the “V” block spewed oil over the exhaust manifold – quoted $1900.00

I hated that muthaf$%^& car. I will never buy a Ford again.
That is of course my sole experience so take it for what it’s worth. I was diligent on all services required.
Needless to say I no longer have tha muthaf$%^& thing.

(Quote)
RB Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 4:01 pm

The bigger corporations such as gm have lobbyists and naturally do not want the four-wheel rule changed to allow more competitors for a fixed sum of money. They argue that large but still limited development funds will have more impact if they go to volume producers. I can see both sides.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 4:01 pm

That’s true. Now the poor Prince can anly afford the Rolls Royce standard edition instead of the “Limitted” edition Gold package.

(Quote)
Herm Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 4:03 pm

There are some theoretical batteries that have higher energy density than kerosene.. so even in aviation you may see electrics taking over.

Airliners would need to be charged fast, they dont spend too much time sitting around unused.

Airplane people are very conservative, we will probably see jetliners running on synthetic kerosene way before we see them flying on electric power.

Careful on using jetfuel on modern diesels, make sure its very low sulfur or you will kill the catalytic and particle filters very quickly.

(Quote)
sgilson Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 4:11 pm

It’s actually shelled corn. It looks like candy corn. It burns very hot. My unit is a 70000btu machine. There are some corn furnaces that are in the 150000 btu range, but those are popular mostly in the midwest like Iowa. Corn is real cheap out there. I pay about $6.00 per bushel. A bushel is 55 pounds. I can keep our 3200 square foot home comfortable on 2 bushels per day. We only burn 2 bushels per 24 hours during the weekend and about a bushel during the week.

(Quote)
Herm Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 4:12 pm

and a barf bag

actually the quattro tech works a bit like this, they control torque and apply the brakes to each wheel automatically..

Me?.. all this fancy stuff makes me nervous, I dont even like electric windows.

(Quote)
Herm Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 4:16 pm

the world will be flooded with small electric cars like this, all made in Asia and quite inexpensive..

(Quote)
+1 Noel Park Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 4:20 pm

RB:

I hear you. I’m always saying that I wouldn’t buy a Tesla or a Fisker, largely because of the historically horrible infant mortality rate of startup car companies.

I could see my self making an exception for the Aptera though, because it is just so !@#$% elegant, IMHO. I mean, can you imagine the stir you would create, going down the street in one of those? Plus, the AER is enough to be actually useful, and the price looks like it will be at least possible for me. As opposed to the Tesla or the Fisker, which are totally out of the question.

(Quote)
old man Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 4:21 pm

MRR

I to am skeptical of battery swapping. I remember the video of the battery being installed in the Volt and after that HEAVY, STRONG box was bolted in there was no way to look at the battery compartment and say weak link during a crash test.

I fear a quick change battery will be a weak link in a crash test.

However I am not saying stop research or even setting up swap stations in countrys where they will pass a front or side impact test.

(Quote)
+1 Noel Park Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 4:25 pm

LauraM:

Our business is tied to aftermarket parts and service support for GM cars, so I don’t feel comfortable driving anything else. I don’t have anything personal against Fords. Some of my best friends drive Fords, hehehe.

I would a lot rather people bought Fords than imports or captive cars built here by offshore owned companies.

(Quote)
DonC Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 4:26 pm

Laura is just recognizing that American manufacturing companies with plants located in the US are undoubtedly put at a disadvantage vis-a-vis companies which have plants in countries with a health care system.

The evidence is so overwhelming on this particular point it’s not an arguable. There are great studies looking at growth rates of different sets of industries within the US — those which provide health care and those which do not — and looking at the growth rates of the same industries in the US and Canada. The bottom line is that if you want jobs in higher paying industries then you need to relieve that industry of providing health benefits that others don’t.

I do agree that some form of the Wyden-Bennet plan (now there is a bi-partisan bill – http://wyden.senate.gov/issues/Legislation/Healthy_Americans_Act.cfm), which seems to be what you are suggesting, would be preferable, but the reality is that the heath care industry doesn’t like this alternative and it has enough political clout to kill it.

(Quote)
Noel Park Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 4:32 pm

Bottom line? sheltonjr said it all in the first comment. In fact, I don’t see anything here that I like as well as the Volt. +1 for GM.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 4:38 pm

So how the hell did this Twizy thing pass from idea/conceptual concept to a physical concept?
What is this? Barbies Golf cart at her flowerchild resort?

(Quote)
DonC Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 4:41 pm

We also have a non-oil trade deficit

Yes, Laura, the entire trade imbalance is a huge problem. The root of the problem is that Asian countries have a savings rate which is too high. Since domestic demand is too low, in order to have economic growth they need to export to markets with lower savings rate. This isn’t good for either the Asian exporters or the importers — primarily the US since the Asian countries effectively block each other’s exports. We end up with too many goods and not enough jobs, while they end up with too many US dollars. Or put another way, we end up with the asset inflation and financial meltdowns and they end up with a basket case of an economy — aka Japan.

Of some interest – though highly speculative – is that some anthropologists have suggested that the preference for male children plays a pivotal role in forcing the savings rate higher. If true then things will definitely get much worse since modern medicine effectively gives families the means to ensure their children are sons rather than daughters.

(Quote)
DonC Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 4:44 pm

I think Arch put a geothermal system in place. If he’s around maybe he can weigh in.

I know a couple of people who installed a geothermal system but I’d worry about maintenance. If there is a problem with the pipes, how do you figure out where it is and how much trouble is it to fix?

(Quote)
Herm Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 5:40 pm

We will probably end up with methanol, it is poisonous so no one will be tempted to drink it.. it is easily made and consumes much less energy than distilling ethanol.

Direct coal-to-methanol conversion is a very practical process.. as long as you dont need purity and can tolerate a mix of different alcohols. The SOFC wont care about the mix.

(Quote)
EVO Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 5:44 pm

Texas

You are confusing standards, such as the SAE J1772 standard for charging plugs, and options, such as the many different ways to use charging plugs, different uses that are all compatible with the SAE J1772 standard.

Electric drive is the standard. How it’s used in each vehicle and how to interact with its energy carriers are the options.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 5:50 pm

An EV/EREV battery is not just a simple power source like a AA battery. There is a lot of software running in the battery, plus various fault tolerance circuits, thermal management, etc., etc.. This all has to be tightly integrated with the other subsystems in the car. For example, the electric motor controller (a.k.a. inverter) software is probably tuned to a particular type of battery chemistry for optimal efficiency, performance, and longevity.

And don’t forget about cooling. This affects battery longevity the most. For example, the Volt’s battery is liquid cooled, with a radiator and water pump. How do you swap that?

I doubt anyone at project better place has done a detailed study on these types of issues. It seems more like people have this dream, and reality just gets in the way, so people ignore it.

(Quote)
Noel Park Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 5:55 pm

You go Trabi!!

(Quote)
Noel Park Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 5:59 pm

Twizy, Trabi, Audi, LOL. There must be something in the air or the water in Frankfurt. Or maybe they’re just drinking too much of that fine German beer. Schnapps? Gewurztraminer? All of the above?

Is there a H(.)(.)ters in Frankfurt Captain?

(Quote)
-1 Dave G Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 6:12 pm

Instead of pure BEVs, charging posts, and swapping stations – I have a different vision:
EREVs and Ethanol.

There’s a lot of misinformation about ethanol:

Ethanol Myth #1: It takes around 1 gallon of oil to produce 1 gallon of Ethanol.
Reality: This is only for Corn Ethanol. Other sources of Ethanol use little or no fossil fuels.

Ethanol Myth #2: Ethanol will never be cost effective without subsidies.
Reality: Raw Ethanol can be produced for around $1/gallon without subsidies. After adding costs for refining, distribution, and markup, Ethanol can be profitable at around $2.50 / gallon. This corresponds to oil prices at around $65/barrel.

Ethanol Myth #3: Ethanol will affect our food supply.
Reality: Again, only true for Corn Ethanol. Energy crops can grow in areas that are not viable for raising food crops. Ethanol can also be made from Crop Residue, Municipal Waste, and Forest/Mill biomass.
http://www.coskata.com/EthanolFeedstockPotential.asp

Ethanol Myth #4: Energy Crops can’t be viable long-term without fertilizer.
Reality: After Ethanol is extracted from energy crops, there is a lot of leftover biomass. This leftover substance is perfect for soil remediation.

Ethanol Myth #5: Gas stations aren’t selling E85 now, so why would they in the future?
Reality: Today, only a very small percentage of cars on the road can run on E85, so most gas station owners can’t afford to dedicate a pump to E85. A federal mandate that all new cars are FlexFuel would change that in a hurry.

Ethanol Myth #6: We can never make enough Ethanol to completely replace gasoline, so Ethanol is not viable.
Reality: The first part may be true. We may never be able to make enough Ethanol to completely replace gasoline. But why would that make Ethanol not viable? If we can replace 35% of our gasoline with Ethanol, and 80% of our gasoline with EREVs, that adds up to 115%, more than enough to completely replace gasoline.

Ethanol Myth #7: Cellulosic ethanol is not ready. More research needed.
Reality: Dollar-a-gallon ethanol plant in U.S. operation next year.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-9928810-54.html
The only major impediment for scaling up the current methods is volatile gas prices. If gas goes below $2/gallon and stays there for a few months, then any investment in large scale ethanol production would go bankrupt. A gasoline floor tax of $2.50/gallon would solve this easily.

Bottom line: The combination of EREVs and Ethanol can give us a zero emission solution using our current infrastructure of 110v home outlets and liquid fuel filling stations. What’s not to like?

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 6:42 pm

lol…
I dunno. I know there’s one in Oahu…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmVshVbQG-0

Don’t worry “old man” this is a tame video for you. That last link I posted almost stopped your heart with all that beauty.

Been to that one a few times. Nice location and even better view if ya know what I mean.

(Quote)
Dan Petit Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 6:42 pm

Muddy,
Thanks for the compliment about being GM’s number 1 fan.
Sometimes I hope I’m not going overboard, but, if you only could see how really well GM prevents us independent techs from having headaches from hell, you would also be GM’s number one fan too.
The headaches out here from the other OEM’s are a real heartbreak for the owners who must pay for expensive technology which is not sufficiently perfected or quantity-price-scaled very low like GM’s. That’s why you can trust GM to do the very best for electrification.
Euro OEM’s doing electrification is a not just a little bit scary from what I see out here every day about how their stuff is so proprietary, the costs are 300 to 400 percent more for parts, far too often.

(Quote)
DonC Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 7:00 pm

I can’t find the source but I remember someone from GM — an engineer not a finance guy — saying that hub motors would be tres cool but there were problems such as mass, unsprung mass, and wear and tear on the motors.

Rather than hub motors, AWD on an EV would probably be effected by a two motors with differentials.

(Quote)
Koz Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 7:08 pm

Don’t you mean you want the ability to drive your car on longer trips without significant refill time or other impracticalities. I’m pretty sure you don’t have innate desire to burn gasoline.

(Quote)
Koz Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 7:11 pm

EREV?

(Quote)
Koz Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 7:12 pm

BM300 (Black Matter 300M ranage)

(Quote)
DonC Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 7:13 pm

Yes, biofuels are a terrific idea. A couple of points:

1. On Myth 2, the dollar a gallon is the cost of refining so you wouldn’t add that again.

2. On Myth 4, lots of plants, like miscanthus, don’t use fertilizer. You just have to harvest it after the nutrients have returned to the roots.

3. On Myth 6, Steven Chu says we have more than enough surplus land to totally replace gasoline — it just depends on the yield.

4. On Myth 7, even though E100 is $1/gallon in some places — brewery waste — more research is needed. Exxon is putting $600M into algae which can make gasoline, diesel, or jet fuel. At some point you’d hope we could have micro-organisms that just used water and carbon and produced fuel directly without the need to start with a stock of biomass.

It would make sense to mandate that all cars be E85 ready but in places like CA the number of E85 pumps is pitiful.

(Quote)
Jeff Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 7:17 pm

Laura…US Toyota says no one knows the schedule for US Prius PHEV public sales….a little teasing going on.

From PriusChat forum

http://priuschat.com/forums/prius-hybrid-news/68310-plug-in-prius-revealed.html
———————————————-
No, no one knows. As in, there is absolutely zero information available about when Toyota will deliver a PHEV Prius to the public.

Oh, wait, I forgot… I know!

Doug Coleman
Prius Product Manager
Toyota Motor Sales, USA

PS. I will actually be in Japan next week learning all about our PHEV demonstration models… and more….

(Quote)
DonC Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 7:48 pm

One issue for the Aptera is that you may not be able to park it in the garage — it’s front wheels are set wider than a Hummer’s! Other issues are that the windows don’t roll down and it may be a pain to change the tires with the “pants”. The bigger issues, however, are that so far the craftsmanship on the car has been completely lacking and Aptera hasn’t yet announced a battery supplier. But from a technology standpoint if there is one vehicle out there that is light enough and aerodynamic enough to be a BEV, it would be an Aptera 2e. To me it’s sort of a three wheeled Hypercar, and that car made sense ten years ago.

The problem is that Aptera needs a bunch of money in order to produce the car. They can make the car by hand but it will be too expensive.

I agree with your point that the three wheel requirement is goofy, IMHO. I think they should be eligible for the loans so long as they meet the safety requirements. Whether a vehicle has three or four wheels seems meaningless.

(Quote)
-1 Dave G Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 8:51 pm

HI DonC,

Yes, I’ve heard Energy Secretary Chu talk about this, but this assumes that the amount of surplus farmland will remain high, and that some yet-to-be-invented bio-technology will improve yield significantly. My point was that ethanol can replace 35% of gasoline without any surplus farmland, and without any new technology. The only real issue is economics, especially volatile gas prices. A gas floor-tax of $2.50/gal would fix that.

Algae is also very promising, but I don’t think they are anywhere near $1/gallon. Best I’ve heard is around $5/gallon right now. So there is more work to be done on algae.

The number of E85 pumps is pitiful in many places, but this is because so few cars are FlexFuel. It’s a chicken/egg scenario. Car makers don’t want to add the extra $100 to their cost if there aren’t many E85 stations. Service stations literally can’t afford to switch pumps over to E85 when only 10% of the cars on the road can use it. The solution is simple: a government mandate – all cars sold in the U.S. must be FlexFuel by 2013. This would level the playing field for all car makers. This was Obama’s campaign promise:
http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/factsheet_energy_speech_080308.pdf
(top of page 5). I hope he keeps this promise.

(Quote)
60Hertz Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:23 pm

I agree – a ground source heat pump (where the heat exchanger is burried below the frost line) can be cost effective in northern regions, especially in the Midwest where we enjoy very reasonable electric rates. Much like the 2010 Volt, it comes with an up-front cost that most people find hard to swallow, especially if you are retrofitting into an existing home. With the spike in propane cost over the last couple of years, I have actually installed some resistance heat in my house to supplement the propane furnance, since resistance heat is dirt cheap to install. Since my utility offers time-of-use rates, my off-peak rate is $.05/kWh, which is about 40 percent lower cost per BTU of heat than propane at $2.20 per gallon. So I run the electric heat off peak and propane heat on peak. I have seen commercially available systems available to seamlessly do this kind of fuel switching (either with resistance heat or heat pump) or with thermal mass storage that heats up off peak, but again these have high up front cost. If I was building a new home now, I would probably make the investment, since you can tolerate a longer payback on your house than you can on a car.

Which brings me back to the Volt – At $.05/kWh, you can see why I would like to have one sitting in my garage right now charging up after my day’s commute. I figure it will be about 1/10 what I am spending now on gasoline. Of course, that assumes I have $40k burning a hole in my pocket (which I don’t) and that I could actually get my hands on one here in the rural Midwest (I figure the first year’s 10,000 will go to the classic large population/high pollution areas.)

(Quote)
LauraM Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:38 pm

Well, yes. But since gasoline is the infrastructure we have, it’s the one I want to able to use. The ability to burn ethanol (and presumably other biofuels) instead is a definite plus. But it’s not nearly as widely available as gasoline.

(Quote)
LauraM Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 9:58 pm

Oh. That that makes completely sense. If I were in your situation, I would definitely stick with GM.

Personally, I want both Ford and GM to succeed. The United States desperately needs more than one auto company. (I don’t count Chrysler anymore since Fiat basically owns all the upside.)

If I were going to buy a car right now, it would be a Ford Fusion hybrid. I’d rather support GM since they’re the ones building the Volt. And since, well, as an American taxpayer, I own them. But they don’t have any cars available right now that gives the kind of mileage I want.

(Quote)
LauraM Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:08 pm

lol. You’ve made your point.

No. I haven’t driven a Ford lately. I used to rent them all the time, and I was perfectly happy with them. But the car rental place near my apartment switched to Hyundai. And I absolutely hate them. I know I’m not supposed to judge based on a rental, but, after my experiences with them at the rental place, there’s no way I would ever even consider buying one.

(Quote)
LRGVProVolt Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:13 pm

You are definitely in the market for a Volt, MuddyRoverRob! I agree with everything you said. That is where urban design has to change to make the roads accessible to slow speed vehicles. The advantage to using them in populated areas, is mass reduction of the drive system since higher speeds are not neccessary. Smaller engines and smaller batteries. Although I said I would buy a NEV and a Volt, it is more likely that I like you will only be able to afford one car, the Volt, and very likely a Gen2 at that.

Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.

(Quote)
LRGVProVolt Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:18 pm

Koz,

somehow my comment got disconnected from your “Still no “Joule” concept?” comment..

(Quote)
LauraM Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:22 pm

But doesn’t Toyota have a lot invested in nimh? I read an article recently about them looking around for alternative sources for lanthanum. Including investing in an lanthanum mine in Vietnam.

http://www.viettimes.net/blog-entry/vietnam-cashes-rare-earth-lanthanum

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/reuters/2009/08/31/2009-08-31T120314Z_01_N31369969_RTRIDST_0_ENVIRONMENT-MINING-TOYOTA-PIX.html

They also told Bloomberg that they’re sticking with nimh because it’s cheaper and more durable. Of course, that might be their way of not letting the competition in on their long range plans….

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601101&sid=aOtaVdBkvOK8

And switching to Lithium ion wouldn’t solve their rare earth problem, would it? They’d still need neodymium, which I thought was rarer and harder to come by than the lanthanum?

(Quote)
LRGVProVolt Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 10:55 pm

Jackson,

I posted earlier on what is happening now with big oil. Last month we imported 355 million barrels of oil at a cost of $25.2 billion. China spent huge numbers to lock up contracts, 1 or 2 a week, for petroleum. 23 to 35 deals last yr. to insure that they have enough petroleum for their country. They are spending 30 billion per year: that’s equal to Exxon Mobil budget. The price of petroleum is going to increase sooner than everyone thinks it will; even sooner if a world catastrophe occurs! Visit PickensPlan for his most recent video on this at:

http://www.push.pickensplan.com/

Congress is back in session and will be considering HR1835 and S1408 in October. This Natural Gas Act, according to Pickens, will solve the problem of foreign oil dependence in five or six years.

There are shale fields all over the country especial on the East Coast that will provide us with huge reserves of Natural Gas. With horizontal drilling and th technology we now have to crack the shale and extract the natural gas, we can become free over country from what now is a billion dollar a day habit.

(Quote)
LauraM Says:
September 16th, 2009 at 11:11 pm

I completely agree with your analysis of the heart of the problem. There is a major world imbalance in savings and in production, and it’s bad for everyone. It reminds me of Marx’s predictions about corporations chasing demand.

That said, while I agree that the Asian savings rate are too high, I also think ours is way too low. A negative savings rate is not justifiable regardless of how low interest rates are. We let the banks get away with manipulative practices like bizarrely low minimum payments for far too long.

Personally, I suspect the differences in savings and the resulting trade imbalance has just as much do with government incentives and economic structure as cultural differences. The Asian economies are set up to favor the producer at the expense of the consumer. They keep their currency artificially cheap, impose tariffs, subsidize production, etc.

Japan is different from the other Asian countries in that it has an actual safety net. But it’s minimal compared to the US. (At least for the newer “temporary” employees.) And, Japan, like Europe taxes consumption. The US does not. (Some of the states do, but it’s minimal compared to Europe and Japan.) They also have a deflationary spiral. China, India, and South Korea all have currencies with a high potential for appreciation. All of these things encourage savings and discourage consumption. We, on the other hand, had to take actual risk just so that we could earn enough to keep up with inflation.

By the way, if you’re claiming that men tend to save more than women, I think you’re way off base.

(Quote)
Texas Says:
September 17th, 2009 at 12:06 am

EVO, I am not confusing standards, thank you very much. I think you are not taking into account swap standards, smart-grid standards, etc. In fact, Congress awarded billions of dollars to companies to work on smart grid technologies and standards. Thus, How could we possible have the perfect standard already? We do not. Please check it out. We are in the Wild West phase when it comes to the EV. Like Henry Ford delivering that first Model-T. Don’t kid yourself with your ignorance.

(Quote)
Texas Says:
September 17th, 2009 at 12:11 am

He would have to be one strong teenager. I know we put steroids in the milk but those batteries are heavy! lol.

No, American cannot leave the robots to the Japanese. It’s the future of manufacturing and those with the better automation technology will profit handsomely. I would rather sell robots than have to buy them from Japan. You disagree?

(Quote)
-1 solo Says:
September 17th, 2009 at 12:35 am

One problem nobody mentioned about ethanol or E85 is the dramatic decrease in fuel economy compared to gasoline. E85 is widely available where I live (Central IL) but few people buy it because it doesn’t save money even though it’s cheaper. The fuel economy loss is about 30% from what I have read, which means if ethanol has to be correspondingly less expensive. Often it is and often it is not depending on the widely fluctuating price of gas from day to day. Most people don’t want to bother with the calculation so it is not as popular as it could be. The other issue is range. Decrease fuel economy 30% and you decrease range 30%. If there is no cost benefit, you wind up wasting time at the gas station when you could be home reading http://WWW.GM-VOLT.COM.

Is ethanol a good idea? I think so, but I think E85 is not. If gas was standardized at E40 and all cars ran on it and it was the only fuel available, we could put a good ding in our oil imports.

Any thoughts?

(Quote)
LauraM Says:
September 17th, 2009 at 12:53 am

I forgot to add–when you take into account demographics, there’s a strong possibility that those high savings rates are going to reverse in ten to twenty years. Japan’s savings rate is already declining . And, if current trends continue, South Korea and, eventually, China, will follow suit in ten to twenty years. (Thailand and Vietnam don’t look that great either demographically.)

Of course, those imbalances are still causing immense damage in the meantime…

(Quote)
koz Says:
September 17th, 2009 at 5:49 am

The problems lie in the cost of health care. I agree health insurance should be reduced back to what insurance is meant for, low risk expenses that a consumer cannot afford to pay. We will be argueing health care reform forever. If we don’t have tort reform and remove private “insurance” from the affordable heath care equation, there will never be any headway made.

Just transfering the same cost burden from the employer to the employee does nothing to solve the problem. Actually, in our current system it would be transfering at a higher cost because of taxes and higher individual insurance rates. Heathcare is not a discretionary consumable. This is one of the core facts that everyone, especially every congressperson, must first wrap their brain around before even engaging in a meaningful heathcare fixing debate.

If costs are lowered via tourt reform and cost reform, then we can relieve the burden from the employer. By cost reform, I mean no insurance provider should get a lower cost than a paying customer, immediately paid health transactions have a much lower cost than an insurer administered one so they should be 10-15% less than the lowest insurer’s price. I still don’t see a botom line benefit to removing employers from the equation, unless there is universal health care, but at least if costs are brought under control the additional burden is minimized.

(Quote)
koz Says:
September 17th, 2009 at 6:23 am

Keith,

That is a testament to a lack of understanding rather than a sharing of it. Do you think PBP doesn’t know what battery costs are? Do you think they don’t understand what capital investment is?

They are planning to offer their service for @$100/mo. This is a direct replacement for gas consumption or personal battery ownership plus energy consumables. How it works financially for them is part of their secret sauce and there is a lot more to it than just monthly service proceeds.

I’m not saying the business model is a recipe for success or failure. I don’t know enough of the details to form a meaningful opinion and you demonstrate even less knowledge of their plan.

(Quote)
Koz Says:
September 17th, 2009 at 6:16 pm

ahhh, makes sense

(Quote)
Koz Says:
September 17th, 2009 at 6:21 pm

I’m splitting hairs here I know but there may be some value to it. I believe your desire is really to be able to travel where you want, when you want and with the comfort and convenience you are used to. Am I correct in this assumption and that is really not a desire to use any particular resource or infrastructure. In this case, utilizing gas stations is the only realistic option available today, but this should not unreasonably confine future possiblities as long as they adequately service your requirements.

BTW, ethanol is very available just not E85 or E100. Most gas stations are already supplying E10-15, I believe.

(Quote)

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts

Hacked e-mails reveal global-warming fraud? November 20, 2009
This is how open minded liberals operate. "And, perhaps most reprehensibly," Delingpole writes, "a long series of communications discussing how best... […]
BigCityCat
Is the Volt Engine Direct Injected? November 20, 2009
I recently read that the Cruze's engine will be DI. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevy_Cruze#Chevrolet_Cruze Obviously the Cruze's engine will... […]
omnimoeish
First Reports of the Chevy Volt's Charge-Sustaining (Generator) Mode Operation November 20, 2009
The first two journalists' reports of what it's like to drive the Chevy Volt while in generator mode operation have been published. 1) New York... […]
admin
Florida giving $5000 rebate to convert Prius to plug-in November 20, 2009
- Probably Hymotion - $10,400 standard price - $5000 state rebate - $1000 additional federal incentives - $4,400 final cost. Hurry because their... […]
Texas
New York Times CSM story November 20, 2009
Link to the New York Times story of November 19, 2009 about a test ride of the Volt in charge sustaining... […]
srschrier
New video: Volt drive in Detroit November 19, 2009
November 19, 2009 Detroit Free Press story with video featuring a Volt drive with Andrew Farah in... […]
srschrier
New Video: Volt Corrosion Testing November 18, 2009
From GM VoltAge, the Volt's corrosion... […]
srschrier

New Electric Car Concepts: From the Meek Twizy to the Mighty e-Tron

222 Responses to “New Electric Car Concepts: From the Meek Twizy to the Mighty e-Tron”

Leave a Reply

Recent Posts

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts