It remains to be seen which vehicle class becomes more popular, the pure electric or extended range electric car.
A new report from Automotive News looks at the view from both sides, with comments from executives of the front runner companies GM and Nissan. The author frames the key question as whether pure electrics can obtain mass acceptance with their limited range, or whether a gas extender will be required to get large scale acceptance.
The early adopters, which we here represent, will snare up all the first copies of each for varying reasons, but our group is small and it is what happens after that that really matters.
“I feel strongly the early-adopter movement is done in North America,” said Micky Bly, GM’s director of EVs and hybrids. He also thinks the early adopter segment in Asia and Europe will quickly be acounted for as well.
Bly does not believe pure EVs can be adopted by the mass market because of their reduced utility.
“I think pure battery electric vehicles — they’re not going to be niche vehicles, but they’re not going to be a primary vehicle,” said Bly.
In contrast, Bly is convinced the extended range electric Volt however can function as a primary vehicle and thus reach mass market acceptance. “The mass market EV has to be CAPABLE of being your primary vehicle,” he said.
Nissan is using the environmental selling point it thinks buyers will trade for in exchange for limited range.
“For us, the important thing about the Leaf was to have a unique proposition: zero emissions,” said Brian Carolin, VP of sales and marketing at Nissan North America.. “You can’t get better than that.”
Though complete oil abstinence is a fine and worthy goal, and there are many willing to make sacrifices to embrace it, it is unlikely to appeal to a large segment of the US population.
As such Carlolin admits for the first time publicly “Nissan someday might offer range-extended electric vehicles.”
By the end of 2010 the Volt-LEAF showdown will finally begin and we will see which vehicle type will dominate. Either way both are important vehicles and both will be increasingly sucessful as battery costs goes down.
GM’s Bly is looking forward to the match.
“It’s exciting. We need that sort of competition,” he said of the Nissan LEAF but jokes, “I’ll be glad to see it launch one day after mine.”
Source (Automotive News)
+2
Jun 22nd, 2010 (6:21 am)If they’re smart they will.
+22
Jun 22nd, 2010 (6:27 am)Speaking of “Zero emissions” I did some research yesterday to determine what I would need to power my Volt by solar energy. I wasn’t very knowledgeable about solar so it was fun to learn. I thought I’d simplify it and share for all those who may care.
The Volt needs 8,000 watts (8kw) of electricity to take it 40 miles. If you charged it every night you would be able to drive 14,600 miles per year with almost no gas.
Tampa, Florida gets 5.67 hours of usable sun per day which is a high average. You can find how much you have in your city here. http://www.wholesalesolar.com/Information-SolarFolder/SunHoursUSMap.html
5.67 hours of sun times one 230 watt solar panel 5.67 x 230 = 1304.1 watts per panel per day or 1.3 kws so I would need 7 panels to produce 9.1 kws of energy per day. 6 panels would only produce 7.8 kws which is close but no cigar. Of course you could use different wattage panels to get a closer number to exactly 8 kw.
Also looking into the panels most have a 10 year warranty that the panels will produce 90 percent and after 25 years 80 percent. The costs of this system is about $7,500 before installation minus a 30 percent federal rebate. Your state may have an additional rebate as well.
The price per kw hour in my state of Florida went from 12.5 cents in 2009 down to 10.7 cents in 2010. This means a 40 mile charge would cost me 86 cents currently but you can see the volatility in energy prices. At 86 cents per day it would take 22.3 years to pay back a 7,000 dollar system.
But hey, you’re drivin’ on the sun! I say if you have the money go for it! Especially those of you in Hawaii.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/table5_6_b.html Cost of energy by state Chart.
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (6:33 am)They stated as much two years ago. http://green.autoblog.com/2008/05/18/nissan-hedges-all-electric-bet-with-range-extender-option/
+12
Jun 22nd, 2010 (6:40 am)These two cars will foster profound changes to the world starting in November. I personally will make any sacrifice necessary to buy my Volt as soon as possible.
+7
Jun 22nd, 2010 (6:51 am)From the article: Bly does not believe pure EVs can be adopted by the mass market because of their reduced utility.
Correct. The range is too low, the charge time way too high.
+9
Jun 22nd, 2010 (6:54 am)“For us, the important thing about the Leaf was to have a unique proposition: zero emissions,” said Brian Carolin, VP of sales and marketing at Nissan North America.. “You can’t get better than that.”
*********************************************************************************
The basis of selling a zero emissions car is by far not the only thing people look at when they buy a car. A zero emission car is great, but a car like the Leaf, for me is far too restrictive and I don’t want the anxiety that goes with it. It looks like Nissan is gradually realizing this. If they do build an extended range, it should be interesting to see the technical aspects, because GM will hold most of the patents.
-11
Jun 22nd, 2010 (6:55 am)(click to show comment)
+28
Jun 22nd, 2010 (6:57 am)Volt=
40 miles 0 gasoline, just like Leaf
after that, 260 miles, 50 mpg, just like Prius.
Two cars in one.
+3
Jun 22nd, 2010 (6:58 am)Eventually both GM and Nissan will have to offer options, more or less batteries and range extenders.. a ranger extender trailer would be another possibility.
Everything changes as the cost of batteries drops.
+2
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:06 am)The LEAF would never be anything other than a 2nd commuter car for me. Given the engineering of the environmental controls for the battery pack (or lack thereof) I have serious concerns about the longevity of the LEAF battery pack and its ability to retain its energy density. I don’t think it is a very well thought out or engineered propulsion system on the vehicle. It looks to me like Nissan is just trying to be able to say ‘FIRST!’ to market with an EV in the US.
I also think that Nissan is dreaming if they think that Americans will “buyers will trade (zero emissions) for in exchange for limited range.” In the first place it really isn’t zero emissions because most of the electricity being used to charge the batteries is provided via gas or oil fired power plants, so pretty much you’re just transferring the emissions from your car to the power plant. There is some gain from localization of the gas and particulate emissions rather than spreading them all over the roads, but it isn’t 0 by any stretch.
+16
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:08 am)I asked the question yesterday “How much would 8kws of Lead Acid batteries cost” because it would be nice to know your solar is going directly from the Sun to your “Gas Tank”. A user here “Herm” provided the best answer saying Costco sells deep cycle batteries at a cost of only 60 dollars per kilowatt. He suggested buying more than 8 kws, perhaps double like the Volt to extend the life of the batteries. Even if you bought 16 that’s not too costly.
But I put some thought into it and even though that’d be nice it doesn’t make the most sense financially or for the environment. I feel the best solution would be to simply hook it up to your home and while you’re away during the day the Panels would spin your electric meter back 8 or 9 kws assuming you had nothing turned on. However, if you wanted to have an off the grid system to hold the electricity for a charge at night it should be less than 1,000 additional dollars.
+11
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:09 am)It remains to be seen which vehicle class becomes more popular, the pure electric or extended range electric car.
Lately the answer to this question seems highly dependent on how much GM will trust their own technology and make Gen1 available to the masses. :-/
+3
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:09 am)Herm, I like the range extending, generator trailer idea and always have. In almost all circumstances a 100mi range should be sufficient for what I do. I know ahead of time about those situations in which the pure EV won’t have enough range and a trailer is all I’d need to make it a primary vehicle. That way I get greater electric range and skip out on the necessity for added complexity and weight within the vehicle that I don’t need most of the time.
This isn’t a new idea (I’ve seen examples used for both the T-Zero and the Rav4-EV) and I’d really like to have the option to purchase such a system for a mass market EV. Particularly if the generator can be re-purposed for such uses as a home back-up power source.
I like the Volt concept but with just a bit more electric range I’d only need extension 5-8 times a year.
+4
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:19 am)This is excellent news. Hopefully the Volt will get some competition soon.
+3
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:24 am)I always get a chuckle out of anybody that says their car is carbon free. Chances are that the masses that buy the car will be getting their power from a coal fired plant. I suspect that there are a disproportionate amount of people on this site that have the money and the commitment to install a solar charging station and will. However, as pointed out in John W’s excellent cost break down of solar, the cost for a majority of us (and I work in the solar development industry) is out of reach or does not make economic sense. Wind power is spotty at best and also expensive. There may be a number of people close to a hydro power source, but Nuclear is the only power source that is fairly cheap once operational and abundant enough to power a EREV/BEV nation of cars.
Anyway – that is my pet peeve of the day!
Other than that, I think EREV is the wave of the future. At least the next 25 years, until someone makes a battery break through that can get 300-400 miles and then can be charged quickly (15 minutes).
My belief is that if the MiEV comes in at low $20K before credits, it will be very successful with the young college crowd, much like Scion Xd’s and Kia Souls. Leaf is going to be out of reach in price for the people that fit its range limitations. People that can afford the Leaf will be turned off by those very limitations.
Of course, EEStor & Zenn, (cough, cough) may deliver any day now! LOL
+2
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:24 am)I believe most electricity comes from coal, but here’s a nice link to put your zip code into to find out your local souces of electricity and how it compares to the national electricity souces.
http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-and-you/how-clean.html
+6
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:24 am)Pure EVs may actually use more gasoline than EREVs.
For example, let’s say you own a Nissan Leaf and use a Toyota Corolla for longer trips. With a typical driving pattern, assuming you only charge overnight:
Vehicle ……………… Gallons per year
Volt ………………………. 37
Leaf/Corolla ………… 39
Prius …………………… 228
30 MPG car ………… 380
20 MPG car ………… 570
Bottom line: Complete oil abstinence is not possible. We live in a real world. The idea is to minimize oil use.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:25 am)For mass adoption battery prices needs to go down and gas prices needs to go up. So I think this will take a few years, may be the second or third generation.
+5
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:27 am)It’s still all about the batteries.
If LEAF gets over 200 miles range in genII, EREV’s start looking like a less appealing design. But, that’s a big IF.
I think GM is finding that their battery management is very conservative. Perhaps too conservative to be competitive.
We shall see how this all works out, but, I still like the BEV design for a commuter car. I’m with CJS on this one. Give me a simple BEV for commuting. The truck’s paid for. It can sit around until I need it on the weekends.
+9
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:31 am)BMW appears to be furthest into the “you don’t need a range extender” camp:
“Rich Steinberg, manager of electric vehicle operations and strategy at BMW North America, says most drivers in BMW’s Mini E electric vehicle test fleet say they can handle daily driving without worry — and they love not going to a gas station. Most recharging occurs at home.
The additional cost and complexity of range-extended vehicles eventually will turn off buyers, he says. EV owners will realize that they can do their typical daily driving without running low of juice.
“I think with time, when people live with the car on a day-to-day basis and they realize ‘I’m not visiting the gas station more than three times a year,’ they’re going to decide: ‘Why did I invest in that gasoline engine when I’m not really going to use it?’” Steinberg said.”
The key EV question: Batteries alone, or a gasoline engine, too?
http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100621/OEM06/306219967/1186
+5
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:32 am)With the oil still gushing into the Gulf, love for the oil companies is at an all time low.
I still believe that GM thinks the only real demand is from early adopters, which IMHO is incorrect.
For E-REV’s – Now that the Gen-1 Volt is complete, we know that the next step is to wring out the costs for Gen-2 and Gen-3, and to introduce additional models to choose from. Once the costs have been brought to within sight of a standard ICE, it can be sold as as both “green” and as the correct economic decision. So you have choice, it should require less maintenance, you are helping the environment, and are saving money over the life of the vehicle. Why would you not want an E-REV????
As to BEV’s – There is a market for these vehicles. Not as a mainstream primary vehicle, but a great second car. Again, it is all in how the vehicle is advertised to the consumer. For my wife, the capabilities of the current LEAF would be perfect for her driving needs. But there is no choice available, and in her opinion, the car is horrible to look at. So no BEV for her until it is something she WANTS to drive.
As early adopters, we are willing to pay for what we want. If the manufacturers really want to sell these vehicles in large volumes, they have to give us a range of choices, have it make sense from an economic standpoint, and make us feel good about making this change from the old technology. That is when you will begin to see the decline of ICE based vehicles.
Oh, and maybe have the cars available for sale EVERYWHERE!!!!!
And IMHO, it can’t come too soon…..
+3
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:32 am)They are also working hard on a swap compatible model. It’s no secret that Carlos has a huge order from Better Place for something near 3 Billion dollars (Renault) and intends to rule this market.
He hopes that all the other auto manufacturers sit back and wait. Fine by him.
Better Place – Renault swap EVs are already running around Tokyo
http://www.betterplace.com/company/video-detail/tokyo-electric-taxi-project-opening/
Thus, I don’t see why they would not be adding a plug-in to the mix. Makes perfect sense.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:32 am)Now that high quality lithium batteries are in use. Manufacturers will focus on charge system R&D. Wouldn’t be surprised to see 80 MPG EREV CS by 2014. Let’s see where Japan, Korea, and Germany go with this.
=D-Volt
+4
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:33 am)But my daily driver is a 16mpg truck.
There are a lot of us out here stuck with older and larger vehicles because we can’t afford to have three cars. Until now. A LEAF would pay for itself immediately (as a lease) by directly offsetting the maintenance and gasoline costs of the truck. We can keep the utility of owning a truck, just don’t drive it every day.
+24
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:36 am)It gives me great satisfaction to watch the Japanese car makers grudgingly admit that GM has leap-frogged them, while simultaneously taking great pains to avoid actually admitting it. First Toyota quietly abandons its “LiIon batteries aren’t ready for prime time” mantra, now Nissan acknowledges that the geography and demographics of America make EREV a better fit than BEV (in the near term, anyway). When do you think the Japanese fanboyz will finally admit that this round goes to GM?
+2
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:37 am)Regarding auto-propelling energy, I wouldn’t say “impossible”, but instead “inconvenient” or “expensive”.
Also, the Leaf would make a great 2nd car to a Volt. (instead of a Corolla).
+21
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:44 am)I plan on buying a BEV for city driving and a hybrid for longer trips. Then I plan on buying an HDTV to watch HD shows and a standard TV for regular shows. Then I plan on buying a home with a good northern exposure for summer and a home with good southern exposure for winter. And finally, I plan on going bankrupt. It’s not easy being a purist, but hey, somebody’s got to do it.
+4
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:45 am)When Leafs/BEV’s are used for longer range trips pushing battery capacity and are stranded on the side of the road, owners may ask “Why didn’t I invest in a range extender”. Or when something comes up and and you need to go somewhere quick, but your only car, a BEV, has a battery level of 5%, they may ask the same question.
I aggree with Bly, the Leaf or any BEV, is a great secondary car, but not a primary one.
+13
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:46 am)This is really getting to be a tired argument. Robert LLewelyn makes a good stab at it in his Youtube series Fully Charged.
Watch this excellent video, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfTiRNzbSko , he makes the point that people are not accounting for the huge pollution and CO2 emissions cost of extracting, transporting and refining oil.. once you do this ICE powered cars emit 10 times what the worst BEV will ever do.. even if recharged with 100% coal electricity.
+10
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:50 am)150 years ago the western world relied on whale oil. Then we started getting oil from petroleum. And today we should start transitioning to a world where we replace petroleum oil with plant oils and alcohols. We may never live in a oil-free world, but as a technologically advanced society we DO have the ability to change where we get the oil from. And this should be even more practical if we do as you wisely suggest; minimize oil use.
+4
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:54 am)Very funny!, but a strawman argument in any case.. a BEV is only recommended if you have multiple cars in your household.. like the majority of Americans have.
Nissan makes the case that the LEAF will become the primary car in the household because it will be the car that is used most of the time.. the secondary or backup ICE clunker will be reserved for longer trips or when you have no other choice.
+4
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:57 am)The thing that Nissan does not mention when they explain their rational for going pure electric is that is releases them from the CARB 10 year warranty requirement on the battery. So if they put in a range extender then they will have to offer a way more robust battery to get the life. This 10 year life requirement for EREV is part of the reason that the volt only uses 50% of it’s capacity while the Leaf uses 80%.
Also, this makes the range extender trailer an even better idea since it skirts the above mentioned issue.
+5
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:57 am)It might make things clearer to use the correct units.
energy (kWh) = power (watts or kW) x time (hours)
The Volt needs 8,000 watt-hours (8 kWh) of electricity to take it 40 miles.
5.67 hours of sun times one 230 watt solar panel = 1304.1 watt-hours per panel per day.
Without state rebates, solar panels usually don’t make sense financially. With state rebates, the story changes considerably.
No. Solar systems don’t require batteries. This is a common misconception.
Most solar systems are “grid-tied”, which means the electric grid acts like a giant battery. During the day, when the sun shines, electricity from the solar panels flows into the grid, and your electric meter actually spins backward. During the night, the grid supplies electricity back to you.
If your meter spins backward more that forward, the electric company gives you a check for the extra electricity you generated. However, the number of solar panels required to do this is usually cost prohibitive. The general case is the your electric bills are cut dramatically.
Power utilities love solar panels because they generate the most electricity during the day, which corresponds to their peak demand period. In fact, many areas have higher rates during the day because of this. In that case, you sell electricity to the grid during the day at a higher rate, and then buy it back at night at a lower rate.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:58 am)Statik makes the point in his blog that once you include an ICE range extender in your BEV you come under the jurisdiction of CARB, and you pay for it!
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (8:03 am)Based on the postings last night, not anytime soon! (Actually that was the pure EV fanboys.)
-2
Jun 22nd, 2010 (8:09 am)One hopes it would be E85-capable — which the Volt is NOT. This would be a nice competitive advantage, market-wise.
+2
Jun 22nd, 2010 (8:11 am)Here’s some 2008 #’s on that. Interesting stuff.
Experian Automotive study finds nearly 35 percent of car-owning households have at least three vehicles
– In a study of households with at least one vehicle, Experian Automotive, a part of global information services company Experian, found that households with three or more cars are the single largest group among American car owners.
The United States is still very much in love with the automobile, with a national average of 2.28 vehicles per household. Experian Automotive found single- and two-vehicle households are almost neck and neck, at nearly 34 percent and 31 percent, respectively. However, households with three or more vehicles maintain the single largest category, at nearly 35 percent. The number of vehicles per household varies across states and regions, with Washington, D.C., having the highest single-car percentage (62.5 percent), and South Dakota the highest percentage of households with five or more vehicles (12.79 percent).
The study also found that as the number of vehicles per household increases, the types of vehicles shift. Households with only domestic vehicles come out on top among two-vehicle households, comprising nearly 40 percent of the category. When moving up to three- and four-vehicle households, Americans tend to prefer a blend of domestic and import vehicles, at 49.8 percent and 59.87 percent, respectively. Households having only new vehicles also lead the two-vehicle category, at 43.5 percent. Interestingly, as the number of vehicles increases, so does the blend between new and used vehicles, with 60 percent of three-vehicle households and more than 70 percent of four-vehicle households having a mix of the two.
Other interesting findings in the study include the following:
— The most common pairing of vehicles in American households with two to
four cars is a full-sized pickup truck and a standard, mid-range
vehicle
— Of households with two or more vehicles in which one is an SUV, nearly
25 percent also own a pickup truck
— The percentage of one-vehicle households for those earning $250,000 or
more annually is 35 percent — about the same as households with
incomes of $25,000 to $34,999
http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2008/02/12/077438.html
+2
Jun 22nd, 2010 (8:14 am)BTW: a good autocar test drive of the Leaf in Autobloggreen this AM. They love the way it drives.
http://green.autoblog.com/2010/06/21/autocar-drives-the-nissan-leaf-walks-away-with-a-grin/
Jun 22nd, 2010 (8:20 am)As I understand it, NASA still uses whale oil as a lubricant in spacecraft today, since it doesn’t really freeze.
And I believe the U.S. still hunts whales, but this is limited to small Eskimo tribes in Alaska.
So nothing is really black and white. It’s all a question of degrees.
The term “Zero Emmissions” seems deceptive to me, since no such solution really exists.
+2
Jun 22nd, 2010 (8:21 am)The other day I did an experiment. I remembered exactly where I drove to for the last two weeks. Remembering was not too hard. I just looked at a calendar and recreated the day. I did it this way instead of logging my trips because I thought that I would subconsciously change my driving pattern. I then went to google maps and plotted each of the trips. I added 20% to each of them for losses like driving around looking for parking and the occasional side trip to a store.
The result was that I exceeded 80 mile on only one occasion. On that occasion I made a trip that was 51 miles each way. I could possibly have plugged in while I was at my destination but it would have been a hassle and too short a time to make much of a difference.
I currently own three cars and I would expect to own at least two for the foreseeable future. The conclusion that I have to draw is that a Leaf would work perfectly well for me.
There’s been a lot of discussion on gm-volt about rural vs city driving. The Volt is usable in a rural setting while the Leaf is not. Recharging could be a problem in the city where people have to park on the street or in an apartment garage. There is a third environment that suits electric vehicles perfectly and that is the suburbs. Everyone has a garage and they drive mostly to and from work or the local school, store, or soccer field.
The poorest American live in either the city or in the country. Who lives in the suburbs? Mostly the middle and upper middle class. The have the infrastructure (garage), driving patterns, and income to make BEVs and EREVs work. How many people live in the suburbs? Rather a lot I’d say. The market for electric vehicles of both type is enormous. The soccer moms of ten years ago have sent their kids off to college and they no longer need a mini-van or SUV. Being “green” is fashionable. That makes now the perfect time to introduce electric cars.
+11
Jun 22nd, 2010 (8:22 am)And in further news; In the spirit of its new “Bare Necessity” campaign, BMW discontinues the manufacturing of its luxury SUVs after admitting that they are purchased by people who don’t really need them.
Nice spin, Mr. Steinberg. It takes brass cajones to make a “necessity” claim when you are a luxury car manufacturer.
+2
Jun 22nd, 2010 (8:22 am)To John W., #2
Do your system, you will be glad you did. Also if you can get it for the cost numbers you stated then that’s a great deal. I ended up paying 20000$ (full retail before rebates) for mine. But we have great rebate structure here in AZ (my utility kicked in 3$perr watt). So after the State , Federal and utility rebates the system was only 6000$.
PS- I love my microinverters.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (8:29 am)I know this is probably too simple, somebody tell me what I’m forgetting, a website lists a BP Solar 7 kw or so panel for less than $600 + batteries mentioned for another $1000. I don’t think an 8k inverter would be that expensive, assume $400, so $2000 and you’ve got a solar charged Volt. Even if you doubled the solar to 14 kw to account for inconsistent sun, it seems like a 3 year or so payback. (15,000 miles / 50mpg x $3.00/gallon =$900 x 3 years) Only drawback I see is that’s about when you would need to replace the batteries.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (8:30 am)To Herm #9,
Where can I get one of those range extender trailers???
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (8:32 am)Two points:
1) Driving long distances with a Nissan Leaf is basically not possible for the average Joe.
2) Auto-propelling energy only accounts for 44% of our oil consumption.
The Volt would be a very expensive solution for a car that you don’t drive much.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (8:34 am)Go to UHaul or your local Nissan dealership.. in 2013
or make it yourself you bum!
The part that no trailer advocate ever talks about it is that CARB will get interested in these trailers very quickly.. so dont talk about it too much.
+5
Jun 22nd, 2010 (8:39 am)The answer is both for different drivers, and thank goodness for choices!
The Mini-E works perfectly as my everyday driver for my scenario of a 25 mile round trip commute (Point A and B have not changed in 13 years) and everything important in my live is within the 100 mile range of the Mini-E.
Interestingly, the projected 50-70 mile freeway range of the Leaf would not work for me as my parents are a 82 mile freeway round trip, San Diego is a 80 mile freeway round trip and my weekly County Planning Commission meetings are a 75 mile freeway round trip. So the Leaf would not work for me, the Mini-E or any 100 mile Bev does.
I am sure the Leaf will work for many people.
The families second car, (my wife’s every day driver) is a Ford Escape.
After a year and 16,000 miles the Mini-E has fit perfectly into our lives, however, I would not have two 100 mile BEVS in the garage. One car would be a gas or range extended SUV or MPV, at least until the Bevs get to 150 mile plus fast charging.
For me to say to someone a BEV is better than a range extended car would be as foolish as someone telling me a range extended car is better than a BEV.
It depends on you. There is a market for both. Buy the best car for you.
Just fyi on the solar issue, we have been powering our home for three years and our Mini-E for one year via solar PV. In So-Cal the higher tier energy rates are 33c a KWh and gas is $3.15 a gallon. Solar fuel equals less than .50 cents a gallon fixed price forever.
The break even point for us is 7 years on the home energy cost and 4.5 years on the replacing gas cost for a total break even point of just under 6 years. This is the point where my gasoline cost and home energy cost over six years would be equal to the installed solar pv system cost.
We are 40% of the way having generated 21.5 megawatts ($7100) and having replaced $1800 worth of gasoline. After that point it’s essentially free gas and free energy (except an inverter every 15 years) forever.
http://electricmini.blogspot.com/
Cheers
Peder
Jun 22nd, 2010 (8:41 am)Just need to make one small correction. How much electricity do you use to charge up to 8kw. If I’m not mistaken, the battery will draw 10kw to retain 8. Plus it’s always a good idea to bump up the system to the max you can install without getting obsolete too fast. Don’t forget that BEV Volt coming soon!!!
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (8:42 am)Thanks for fixing that. His post was interesting and yours corrected something that was distracting in his. However it could have been worse. I just read an article titled “Going Solar” in the April 2010 issue of “Highways,” an RV publication. They do everything in amps, e.g., “a 100 watt solar panel can produce 5 amps per hour” . . . “a single panel could produce 25 amps per day,” etc. Compared to that, John W did pretty well.
+2
Jun 22nd, 2010 (8:44 am)Why would a Leaf do that better than a Volt?
For a typical driver, the Volt’s gas engine only runs around 2000 miles per year. How much extra maintenence is that?
And with the Volt, when you go on longer trips, you get 50 MPG, compared to 16 MPG with your truck. So the Volt will definately save more gas for you than a Leaf.
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (8:46 am)Don’t bother with costco 12V batteries. The 6 Volt batteries are about the same cost and have far better cycle life.
With the 6 volt batteries, you will get 200 cycles if you run them at nameplate capacity. If you run them at 1/2 capacity (16 batteries) they will last 800 cycles. If you run them at even lower capacity they will fail on calendar life if you only cycle them once a day – hence the recommendation for using a double size bank.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (8:46 am)1) You can go long distances w/a BEV, but you either need LOTS of batteries (expensive) and/or frequent/long charge times (inconvenient). But like I said, not impossible.
2) My point was only in regard to auto-propelling energy, which is why I put that out first.
3) In a multicar household, most cars get driven daily (2 commuter parents/kid going to school). However having a Volt in the mix, would allow the daily commuting to be electric, and still have a car that can go indefinately for long weekend trips/whatever.
+2
Jun 22nd, 2010 (8:49 am)I would buy a volt for sure if it were available, I may get a Leaf as I’m on the waiting list. But the perfect car would be something less complicated.
For instance if the Leaf had a very small on board ICE generator that I could control for long trips or those times caught short, thats all I would need. I have many 70 mile drives that the Leaf is better than the volt, but what if it is very warm and the AC is running non stop and i’m caught a few miles short, i just kick off my on board generator and no problem.
Or I need to run to michigan for a baseball tournament for my kid, i just get on the highway and run my generator non stop. Even if I can only go 55 or if I have to stop for lunch and keep the generator going, i’d be able to manage and make it to my destination.
I’d be happy with a 2 gallon tank and an engine size to keep the car driving 60mph without AC or 50 mph with AC. I’d even be happy if it was undersized and it only provided half the power for highway trips if I could turn it on and have it running even when the battery was fully charged because I know i have a 150 mile trip and I need to have the generator running the whole time.
And i’d love to be in control of turning it on and off. You know some people even enjoy manual transmissions.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (8:51 am)That is the far cheaper solution, since using the utility as a battery is “free.”
Free since the utility is forced to subsidize intermittent renewable energy. I’m not arguing that it is a bad thing, but at least be honest and call it what it is; a subsidy from other customers.
The downside is that if the utility isn’t there, you can’t charge. Not a solution for EOTWAWKI
Plus $2500 for a standalone inverter that will make the charger happy.
+2
Jun 22nd, 2010 (8:54 am)GM took the approach that the Volt will have good performance in extended range mode.
Another design philosophy would be to put as much battery as possible, and only have limited performance from a smaller engine that can get you home so range anxiety is alleviated.
I think I like the second a bit better. I wonder which Nissan will chose?
+6
Jun 22nd, 2010 (8:56 am)Its great that GM has such a huge head start in EREVs. They will be much more acceptable to the general public in the near term. But the Leaf appears to be a very good car and its a real blessing there are two great cars to chose from as we start the EV age.
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (9:04 am)Lyle (and other BEV drivers), did you ever feel awkward showing up to a friend’s houses in your Mini-E, and knocking on the door with extension cord in hand? Just seems like mooching off friends, even though its most likely less than $1, its the principal. The same would apply w/a Volt, but if you ever felt uncomfortable asking your friends to plug your car into their home, you could just drive home on gas. I’m sure a lot of friends would be keen to the idea of helping the EV movement, but I could also see some awkward situations too.
-1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (9:05 am)I would like to see more Americans getting back to work with real good paying jobs. Without that, these pretty new toys might sit in the showroom for a long time. The Federal and State budgets can’t maintain those rebates forever (unless they continue to bleed all of us for more taxes). The working class that really needs these cars also need to be able to afford them without the tax breaks.
Oh… One more thing. The “nuke the well head” proposal to melt the surrounding rock to seal the oil spill in the gulf is starting to look like a good idea. Waiting for another 2 to 4 months to stop the bleeding is not a good idea. I happen to love ‘Red Lobster’ but if they don’t get it fixed soon, I fear that seafood restraunts will disappear too. Dang!
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (9:05 am)Yes, well said, +1.
In fact, there are many more reasons to buy an EREV.
One big reason is convenience. With an EREV, you only go to the gas station every 3 months. Many people hate gas stations. You often have to go out of your way to get there, wait in line, handle the pump that smells of gasoline, stand there waiting for it to fill, add another item on your credit card, etc.
And if you run the numbers, EREVs take less time to fuel. For example, let’s say it takes 30 seconds to plug in at night, and another 30 seconds in the morning. That’s 1 minute per day, or 7 minutes per week. A normal car usually has to gas us once a week, and it often takes 15 minutes by the time you’re done.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (9:07 am)This is probably the most accurate comment about what the vision of GM really is for the VOLT.
It appears the real issue is building brand recognition ASAP for a company as a producer of electric cars.
Nissan is pushing hard with a mass rollout of the Leaf, while GM is creating a limited rollout to “test the waters” of acceptability of its technology … as noted above.
**** I posted late last night does anyone know the status of the Buick Hybrid?
How will this play for GM in this mix? ****
I read one of the August 2009 articles about it.
Here is the WSJ article links and a quote about the Buick and the VOLT
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124956408424610951.html
“The Buick hybrid is expected to achieve in excess of 40 miles per gallon of gas, double the performance of a similarly sized model such as the Chevy Equinox in city driving.
+3
Jun 22nd, 2010 (9:08 am)Or put in less battery than the Volt and come in w/a really low price? Of course, by the time this EREV comes out (if ever), battery costs may be low enough they’d stick w/more battery.
-2
Jun 22nd, 2010 (9:12 am)Two srategies I cannot understand.
1)”Nisson might someday offer range extending vehicles” How they can talk about “someday” when range axiety is now.
2) Why would GM approve a design that obviously is too expensive for mass sales. I would think that they had enough time to get an inexpensive range extender designed and built.
+3
Jun 22nd, 2010 (9:16 am)A Mini-E driver, Tom, posted his blog here the other day. His numbers were 6 seconds to plug in, vs. 7 minutes at a gas station.
http://minie250.blogspot.com/
(about 1/2 way down)
Jun 22nd, 2010 (9:19 am)I have a question about this… the 10.7 cents you speak of… is that your actual cost? I’m up in NJ and I pay 12.2736 cents per KWH for generation… plus 4.2830 cents/KWH for delivery… does that make my total 16.5566 cents/KWH? When factoring in for solar… do the utilities have to refund that amount also? Would I only pay this delivery charge on the net total I end up needing from them?
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (9:21 am)So if both plan to have BEV and EREV cars eventually, it looks like GM is doing the hard thing first and Nissan is doing the easy thing first. Time will tell which strategy is more successful.
Neither product is in the consumers hands yet. Looks like much is dependent on who did a better job during engineering and product development.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (9:23 am)Well, we don’t know that yet because we don’t know the price of a Volt.
I’m from Missouri. I deal in reality. Reality is that Leaf’s price is known and Volt’s is not.
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (9:29 am)Now I ask you: which one of the above cars looks like it was designed by intelligent beings?
Answer: The Chevy Volt.
Which one of the above cars looks like it was designed by trained monkeys?
Answer: The Nissan Leaf
Style is important. GM has (with rare exception) always been the style leader in the automobile world.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (9:31 am)OK, I am not a solar expert either, but have had enough physics and radiometry to know that there is a cosine factor in there you might be forgetting about. In other words the panel will put out its peak power when the sun is perpendicular to the panel, but the rest of the time the power will be peak*cos(angle), where angle is the angle of the sun off of perpendicular. In *other* words, the projected area of the panel as seen by the sun keeps getting smaller until it is zero when the sun is on the horizon. This is why panels are often setup to track the sun. Yeah, adding up the juice over the day for a static panel is now a calculus problem, sorry, but I’m sure people have figured this out already.
Also not sure why you would go for “exactly 8 kW”, a little overkill never hurt! Also nothing is ever 100% efficient (storage, charging system, etc).
As I’ve mentioned in the past, a third option which I think will arrive at some point would be to have a small emergency generator which only runs with the car turned off, since it would not produce enough power to propel the car at a reasonable speed. The purists might cringe at this, but it sure beats needing a tow home.
Finally, the #1 concern for me with electrics is battery life. Lithium batteries’ lifetime is shortened by –
1) cycles
2) time (regardless of cycles)
3) overcharge
4) overdischarge
5) physical damage
3) and 4) should not be an issue with a good BMS. 5) is unlikely at least with the Volt’s encasing. If 1) is 5000 cycles, then wonderful.
But 2) is the possible issue. I just took out some lipo batteries from 2006 which were used a fair amount in 2006, then maybe a couple times in 2007, then they’ve sat unused for 2008 and 2009 and so far in 2010. They’ve been stored in a cool place. These batteries are toast, pulling any current causes the voltage to drop like a rock. Maybe the LG Volt LiMn chemistry is better, but how can they truly be sure the cells will last 10 years without 10 years going by? Most lipos (including those in laptops, etc) have proven to be shot after 4 or 5 years, regardless of usage. I hope to get a Volt, but I will definitely be looking over the battery warranty very carefully. How will it be determined that GM owes me a free new battery?
+3
Jun 22nd, 2010 (9:31 am)Another common misconception. Less than 1% of our electricity comes from oil.
U.S. electricity production breaks down roughly as follows:
50% Coal
20% Natural Gas
20% Nuclear
10% Renewables (including Hydro)
Coal is the worst in terms of emissions, but even still, a modern coal-fired power plant is twice as efficient as a typical gas engine car, so the emissions running an EREV on coal are less than gasoline.
And since coal power plants concentrate the emissions into a single spot, there are many more opportunities to remove these emissions. For example, closed loop algae bio-reactors can be used to remove emissions, including CO2, and the algae can be used to make bio-diesel and jet fuel.
The U.S. has been called the Saudi Arabia of coal. We export coal. We have enough for the next 100 years or more. So electricity from coal = Energy Independence.
Obviously coal won’t last forever, but unlike oil, coal won’t run out in our lifetime, so converting to electricity gives us a lot more time to figure out the long-term solution.
+3
Jun 22nd, 2010 (9:39 am)Using a nuke could also blow a hole in the cap holding the oil down there. The gulf is a huge basin of muck. A nuke would blow massive amounts of material into the water even if it did actually shut off the leak.
Right now, the amount of oil leaked into the gulf (for 60 days) is equivalent to 38 seconds of water coming from the Mississippi river.
http://www.freep.com/article/20100622/NEWS07/6220346/1322/Just-how-big-a-mess-is-the-gulf-oil-spill
Yeah, it’s a huge environmental problem, but, we need some perspective as well.
My fear is that we will get a huge hurricane in the gulf and it will stir this crap together like some large frape coffee drink. How do you separate the Texas Tea from the water then?
Jun 22nd, 2010 (9:39 am)Nissan-Renault already has some experience with serial PHEVs. 500 Renault Elect’road were sold in 2003.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electroad
+2
Jun 22nd, 2010 (9:41 am)Good point. If the Volt is priced too high, all bets are off…
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (9:43 am)This is a minor change brought about by the fact that early Volt rollout is in non-E85 available areas. HOWEVER, it is imperative that GM support their “green” profile and investments in cellulosic ethanol by implementing flex fuel on 2012 vehicles. The message is simple: if we want energy independence we need to use domestic energy resources. Plant oils and alcohols made in North America are a significant step in achieving the energy independent goal.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-10455652-54.html
GM needs to grok the power of a single energy independent news story featuring a Volt owner who wants to be “green.” He will drive his under 40 commute on grid electricity and on the weekend visit to grandma he fills the vehicle with E85 for extended range. Both sources of energy are produced in N America and the E85 is fully sustainable. This will resonate with the green oriented Prius owners offering them a viable reason to trade up to a Volt.
There are soon to be 55 NEW E85 pumps in Cali due to Southern CA Assoc. of Governments Clean Cities Coalition’s Expanding California’s E85 Ethanol Fueling Infrastructure (DOE grant. ) If Volt is to lead the way to lowering the use of petroleum, it must be flex fuel. And legislation to provide E85 pumps in major markets may be necessary. Gov. Schwarzenegger has done a laudable job of pushing this forward already but more must be done.
http://www.energy.gov/recovery/cleancities.htm
GM is doing an excellent job of bringing the Volt to market on time and with great attention to quality. The FF capability has huge marketing potential and in light of the challenge for market share, all options must be utilized.
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (9:47 am)The payback can be minimal. One thing that the solar people never do is tell you how many kWh per year a 1 kW system will produce. Where I am it’s pretty good — a 1 kW system produces about 1500 kWh per year. In FL you’d probably end up with less production. On the other hand when the system went in electrical consumption went down by 25% — that’s the “paying attention” factor. Combine that with rebates and the payback is positive.
If your provider is SDG&E there is an $.08 rate for EVs. I’m certain other providers have a similar rate.
Nicely thought out observations and discussion. +1
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (9:51 am)You’re ignoring the elephant in the room, the item in this list that requires no new technology and can actually fill the gap left by eliminating coal — nuclear. Nuclear is already one of the cheapest sources of electricity. Modern designs and construction techniques as well as a regulatory regime based on a few standard designs (AP1000, EPR, ESBWR, etc.) will lower capital costs substantially. And, nuclear is also a very young technology, with enormous potential for additional improvements – Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor (LFTR), liquid-metal fast breeder reactor (GE Prism), or one that has gotten a lot of publicity due to the involvement of Bill Gates, TerraPower’s Traveling Wave Reactor (100-year refueling cycle), and lots more in the area of small modular reactors (Toshiba’s 4S, Hyperion, NuScale, Advanced Reactor Concepts).
End the Oil (and Coal) Age and bring on the Uranium (and Thorium) Age.
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (10:03 am)Any automaker with a committed electrification program will be forced to this conclusion eventually. Look for Nissan to continue touting the BEV Leaf, while offering the range-extender more quietly in the showroom. They will be caught in the paradox of publically not wishing to diss the No Oil Zealots while at the same time being forced to sell to those with practical automotive needs.
If worse comes to worst, the “Stinky EV” trolls can start chanting for the iMiev (until Mitsu sees the light).
+4
Jun 22nd, 2010 (10:04 am)REAL WORLD SOLAR
I’ve got 5 kw of solar panels on my home roof in SW FL and 13 kw at the office. On my best day, I get about 33 kw HOURS (must understand units here) from the home array and 76 kwh from the office array. In my mind, I have approximated these numbers to 30 and 70. Solar charts seem to indicate your numbers would be 20% less than this in non-sunny parts of the country- or 20% more in places like AZ. And BTW, 5 kw is a fairly common size array for many homes.
While charging EITHER the Volt or the Leaf for an AVERAGE days driving will cost you 4-6 kwh (Leaf and Volt driving energy will be comparable PER MILE), you must first figure out your home usage to know whether there is actually a surplus to be “powered by the sun”. If you are the type who lives by incandescent bulbs, doesn’t turn off the TV when nobody’s watching, refuses to air dry clothes and must live with the AC on and house always closed up, it is likely that the utility will always be supplementing your lifestyle.
Getting solar (and an electric vehicle) is significantly about self-examination. Solar is an expensive undertaking. It makes you realize that every watt (or drop of gasoline) is precious and that you do everything you can to reduce your energy footprint. For me, the lifestyle (and purchases like LED light bulbs) have meant that I can expect the home meter (when it is not AC season, which I will call June-Oct where I live) to turn backward all day long and forward about 8 kwh at night. And, as mentioned in a previous post, I will be buying a solar hybrid AC unit for the home (we have one at the office) which will cut my energy usage from that appliance by over half.
My backward turning meter builds a surplus of approximately 600 kwh each month that accumulate until they get used up during AC season. For those of you who have the option to avoid storage batteries, do so. Think of grid-tied as a 100% efficient battery that never wears out. Keep in mind that, yes, some fossil fuel source may supplement you at night, but you kept that fossil fuel monster at bay during the day with your excess solar. And in the future, we could see other mechanisms that use your excess solar during the day to harmlessly store energy to be recovered at night (think of something like a pump pushing water back up behind a hydro-electric dam during the day and the dam giving you back the energy at night).
I know that my Volt will be powered by the sun, but the rest of you will need to audit your lifestyles to see if an investment in solar even makes up for current wasteful ways.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (10:07 am)The new range extender for both the LEAF and Volt?
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2010/06/lotus-20100622.html#more
“A collaboration between Lotus Engineering and Fagor Ederlan will develop the 3-cylinder Lotus Range Extender Engine (earlier post) for series production.”
+3
Jun 22nd, 2010 (10:08 am)Given that we keep coming back to this canard let’s go over the facts one more time. First, for long term budget purposes all the temporary deficit spending doesn’t matter. It’s not even a rounding error. So long as the spending is temporary it doesn’t matter. “Spend now save latter” isn’t a river in Kansas, it’s actually a good idea.
Second, first grade math demonstrates that we’re undertaxed rather than being “bleed dry”. Federal taxes constitute 19% of GDP. Medicare alone is projected to suck up 6.5% of GDP. Add another 6.5% of GDP for Social Security and that’s 80% of the federal budget. Defense is 4.7% of GDP, which means that at current tax rates the only programs fully funded by taxes are Medicare, SS, and Defense. Everything else — like roads, housing, bridges, schools, research, criminal prosecutions, and so forth — is essentially deficit spending.
I’d be happier than most people to see lower taxes but let’s move on from the Kook Aid Narrative that we’re taxed too heavily. That’s pure unadulterated BS. The truth is that everyone wants more benefits but no one wants to pay for them, and so we have a bunch of politicians who contend that the problem is “spending in Washington.” Wrong. The problem is in the mirror, and when you hear someone talk about being abused by high taxes you know what you’re hearing is a reflection of the guy in the mirror who eternally yearns for a free lunch.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (10:17 am)I agree. If a Leaf was my secondary car, and since I’m a homeowner who likes to do “stuff” around the house, I would have to keep my pickup truck as my gas-powered vehicle for longer trips. Instead of having Leaf/Corolla taking 39 gallons per year, I would have a category above called Leaf/F-150 and it would be much higher than 39 gallons. Having a Volt would give the best of both worlds–electric drive for most days to be gas-free, and still have a fuel-efficient car for longer trips.
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (10:17 am)Roger,
Typical engineer, good one.
Based on experience with my solar system (in AZ) his numbers on harvest look about right.
+2
Jun 22nd, 2010 (10:18 am)In case you’re not aware, you’re getting negged because you used the “H word.”
So much has been said for so long about the impracticality of Hydrogen that no one wants to touch it again; so you just get -1 from a lot of readers.
I’m no different, but to just hit the high points, Hydrogen has problems with:
1) Expense of the fuel cell itself (even with a lot of improvements lately).
2) Hydrogen itself is a carrier of energy, and not an energy source. You must expend energy to make hydrogen; in nearly every case you use more energy than it would take to charge the equivalent in battery power. Today, the cheapest way to make Hydrogen is from Hydrocarbons; using chemical energy (and releasing CO2).
3) There is no practical/safe/efficient means of storing Hydrogen gas on board. Simply compressing it adds still more energy to that used to make the hydrogen (and liquified H2 adds much more). Most metals become brittle in the presence of Hydrogen (the smallest atom in the Universe has a way of seeping into molecular structures), and plastics may not be safe under pressure. A way of chemically ‘sopping up’ the Hydrogen seems like a better approach; but the leading candidate material consists mainly of — Lithium. Better used in a battery, IMO.
4) In order to use Hydrogen as a fuel, an infrastructure most be built at horriffic expense. This has to be done in the face of two existing infrastructures for delivery of electricity and gasoline. The only way this could be attempted within a generation of time is through massive government spending; which would come on the heels of our current increase in massive government spending. No thanks.
5) (And of special interest to Volt fans), GM has a thriving Hydrogen research effort which has placed itself in opposition to the Voltec program within the corporation’s internal political structure. Most of us see a gain for H2 in cars as a stab in the heart of electric cars, and the Volt specifically. As evidence of this, Bob Lutz mentioned a lot of internal opposition to the Volt when the project was put forward, and the flat declaration of a Hydrogen spokesman that the Volt would, specifically, not use a fuel-cell range-extender.
Hydrogen’s day may come, but not for a long, long time. When it does, it will need an EREV approach; a way to use an existing energy infrastructure to help establish a new one: It might matter less if you cannot find a Hydrogen station if you can find the plug in your garage. GM does not seem placed philosophically to make this leap, at this time.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (10:21 am)There are many unresolved issues with nuclear. LED light bulbs are probably cheaper and safer. The point would be that with cars, it’s easier to build lighter and more aerodynamic vehicles than to put increasingly sophisticated drive trains in heavier and less aerodynamic vehicles. With houses it’s easier to heat and cool well insulated units or light them with efficient lighting than to spend tons of money on huge government backed construction projects.
IOW it’s easier to pick the fruit off the ground than to build ladders to pick the fruit at the top of the tree. At some point you may need the ladder but let’s do the easy stuff first.
+3
Jun 22nd, 2010 (10:22 am)Love your question. I have thought about it often. However, it is a HUGE opportunity to plug EVs. Pull out your extension cord and a QUARTER. When you hand the quarter to the home’s occupant, he will ask what the quarter is for. Tell him that you want to pay for the electricity you are using. The person will VIRTUALLY ALWAYS hand you back that quarter as it is a trivial amount. But what happens in that person’s mind later as they think about the (near) transaction? Who would think about driving anywhere on gas for a quarter? I guarantee you’ll get all of your friends to start considering an EV.
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (10:25 am)Which would lead to the sequel … “Attack of The Mutant Crabs”!
Jun 22nd, 2010 (10:31 am)The chemistries are very different. For the batteries used in the Volt and the Leaf there will be some degradation over time simply due to age — my SWAG would be 15% or 20% after 10 years — but nothing approaching what you see with laptop batteries.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (10:36 am)Interesting link. Best case, I’m over 30% nuke, hydro and other renewables (and yes, coal for the rest). The Southern Company has made a commitment to nuclear, and the first new nuclear plants in over 20 years have been started here (Georgia). Why the auto industry hasn’t been willing to take us more seriously as a potential hotbed for EV use is beyond me.
A lot of interesting discussion of solar. Whether or not a rooftop solar array is used specifically to charge the EV in the garage, it’s output bolsters the grid at the very time of greatest demand; even if your car isn’t plugged in at Noon, one down the block may benefit from your foresight.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (10:38 am)Joe, it’s amazing how touchy a lot of Volt fans are about this. “The basis of selling a zero emissions car is by far not the only thing people look at when they buy a car. A zero emission car is great, but a car like the Leaf, for me is far too restrictive and I don’t want the anxiety that goes with it.’
I don’t think Nissan has ignored this with the Leaf, they are just approaching it from a different perspective. With a 109 thousand dollar two seater car being the onlycurrent electric option, Nissan has a chance to offer water to a populace that is dying of thirst.
They can be known as the no gasoline option. It’s simple. In contrast, understanding the Volts contribution takes knowledge. In fact without getting educated, the Volts virtues can be obtuse, hidden or down right confusing. Remember that quote; 40 miles, who wants a car that goes 40 miles.
The Volt will be snapped up by early adopters no questions asked. Everyone else will have to slowly develop a mental picture of what has long been known here. 40 miles covers most daily driving, most drivers will only need 30 to 40 gallons of gas a year. The battery is warrantied for 10 years. Blah, bla bla, bla bla… Ohhhh, I get it it’s an electric car with extended range, good idea. Avoid the temptation to say, yeah EREV that’s what I said all along dummy.
Eco turbo has a good way to visualize it at at number 8. But if we still have moments after years of pondering the Volt where we read and think AHaaa yes that’s it; how complicated is it going to seem to someone who has never heard of a Volt and is not very technical but is looking for a way to get off of gas.
Maybe GM should hire DaveG to follow people around and listen in on their conversations, and when they get confused he can whip out his spreadsheet.
Nissan’s idea is simple. The car uses no gas. If the range works for you, buy it, if not don’t. And it will evolve. They hint at future 200 mile range and now even EREV versions.
GM is trying. They did the 230 awareness spots. And that completely blew up on them. But, not in a good way. They tried the next new thing commercial, to stunned silence and low still very low awareness. It seems like they have resolved themselves to be the “official early adopter provider”. Will the early adopters explain the idea and prove the concept. Of course, gladly. Clearly Lye has sold a lot of Volts, and they don’t even exist yet.
In contrast Nissan has already accounted for their first year allotment and is parsing the demographic information from those first customers now. Simple idea with a logical sales and distribution plan. Is it for every one? No. Is the first year production sold out, leaving Nissan marketers prepared to move on to the next problem. Yep.
Technical differences will be meaningless to most consumers past the early adopters. Both companies know how to engineer and make cars. They will have problems with that only if they develop incredible hubris. Like ignoring industry standards after the Audi debacle and are convinced their way is best no matter what.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (10:40 am)#46
You got that right. Plus, one with enough capacity to actually power a car will be way too heavy for a BEV to tow. Unless the whole system, both trailer and car, is engineered that way from the beginning, in which case CARB will be VERY interested from the get go.
+2
Jun 22nd, 2010 (10:46 am)From the article:
““I think pure battery electric vehicles — they’re not going to be niche vehicles, but they’re not going to be a primary vehicle,””
AND
““The mass market EV has to be CAPABLE of being your primary vehicle,” he said.”
That all depends on what you consider your “Primary” vehicle. I consider my car that I drive to work (till I get laid off…lol) my primary vehicle because it is the one I drive the most for the entire week and around town shoplifting……oops I mean shopping, grocery getter, and the ever way too dang often trip to Lowe’s/Home Depot. The LEAF will replace all of that 100%.
I consider our vacation long haul hooptie just an occasional car. Trips to Disneyland at least 8 times a year, camping twice a year (maybe), SNOWBOARDING!!!! at least 4 times a year.
I think renting a big car would save more money. That way I wouldn’t have to make monthly payments or finance the friggin thing.
+2
Jun 22nd, 2010 (10:49 am)By my count, GM won round one by making the technologically complicated Volt a seamless, powerful and fun to drive car choice.
And Nissan won round two by taking a relatively simple EV and making the complicated marketing, sales and distribution process easy for customers.
On to round three…
Jun 22nd, 2010 (10:52 am)Maybe you have said before and I missed it, but what did your home solar system cost you in total? All panels and all interfaces.
+5
Jun 22nd, 2010 (10:53 am)I still say build a Volt Pickup Truck. A Colorado version, A “Voltorado”…lol (got that from MuddyRoverRob), even if it got 20AER and you have to put in a 1.8L ICE.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (10:56 am)The usable solar energy obtained during the day offsets what the homeowner gets off the grid at night when they plug their car in the garage. Simple enough.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (10:58 am)Though it will be used as a primary vehicle, that may not be it’s reason for selling widely. Or it may be who knows. You could turn kdawg’s statement around and say the Volt may be a perfect second car for a Leaf owner.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:01 am)That’s kind of scary. Didn’t GM hold the patent on NiMh batts? Not to stir up sh|t but dang man.
I don’t think their patents pertain to the “Series Hybrid”. You can have many variations. You can even have the simplest to the most redundant complex. It’s all a mater of how you control the electron flow and there’s really an infinite way of doing that.
-3
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:01 am)That’s not all of the cost. If you are charging at night, where is that energy coming from? You are either going to be feeding your solar electricity into the grid and drawing from it at night (so you aren’t really charging your volt with solar) or you will need a second huge battery pack to store the solar energy during the day. This will more than double the cost and reduce the system efficiency by doubling your ding from charge/discharges…
+2
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:02 am)Oh ya baby….bring it on. Bring it on!
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:05 am)Thank you for that excellent post!
Now I wonder what that solar cost would look like compared to the TRUE COST OF GASOLINE.
By that I mean the cost per gallon we see at the pump PLUS those tax dollars we each pay for wars to protect our oil sources, those dollars we pay for various air and water pollution clean-up activities and damage to our environment. And then there are the medical costs of that pollution in our water, air and food chain that eventually wind up in our bodies.
We would find it difficult to add the cost of the lives of the soldiers, embassy workers and oil workers killed in their jobs. Also difficult to factor in, the cost of vigilance regarding terrorism funded by petro-dollars that Americans send to our enemies around the globe.
There are untold billions of dollars hidden of true cost of gasoline that are not reflected at the pump. We all pay those cost everyday. (Even if we don’t happen to drive anywhere that day.)
So, the fact is, the 86 cents-per-day solar cost you projected in your excellent post is probably the least expensive thing on the table. Probably the deal of the century.
GO VOLT!
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:05 am)Sh|t man, the 2 compliment each other if you own both. Why do many of the “other” angry posters not see that? That’s damn near the ultimate.
But that’s just IMHO for whatever it’s worth.
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:07 am)How wide spread is E85 availability? I don’t think I’ve ever seen an E85 pump.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:11 am)#70
Perspective? I wonder what % of cyanide in one’s bloodstream will kill one?
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:14 am)The world of solar continues to evolve. Dramatic changes occurred in the 14 months between the two solar installations and microinverters emerged. I delayed the first installation as the fed tax credit was expanded. Now FL (and many other states) have proposed significantly cutting rebate amounts. At the same time, solar salesman tells me prices dropped dramatically. On top of this, my metal roof made the installation more difficult/expensive. With all this said, $55K – $20K (from state) – $17K (fed) = $18K to drive away approx $200 in CURRENT (it will go UP!) in monthly bill. Time of return depends on financing costs and how fast comparative utility rates rise. If you don’t buy solar, you have nothing but paid utility bills in your hands when you sell 20 years from now. With solar, you stop paying the utility and your house is worth more. I am tired of hearing complaints of how long it takes for payback. There is almost nothing in your house that adds equity value AND ALSO gives you money, too.
+2
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:20 am)Several times the concept of a class of people – “early adopters” has been put forth as making choices that the “non-early adopters” would not make. But does this paradigm have a basis in reality? What if they perceived the risk of oil early on, but with the death of the Gulf, the risk of being addicted to oil will be “later adopted” by enough folks we reach the “tipping point” and it becomes socially unacceptable to drive a non-electric car. That is how I see the future, with my cloudy crystal ball. All the arguments against the mass adoption of EV’s or partial EV’s seem contrived to me, fiction supported by more fiction.
I think the debate will be over when the 2014 models hit the showrooms. Time will tell.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:21 am)If you can believe the tech reports from BP and others online (and I’m sure you probably can’t), the drill hole goes down a little over 3 miles… over 15,000 feet deep. So relatively speaking, that’s like a pinhole in the earth’s crust, and 3 miles down is very deep. A small tactical nuke would not make a 3-mile hole in the earth, so (maybe) there is some validity to the theory. Melting the rock for a hole that is only 2-feet wide and 3 miles deep sounds like pinching off the top of a straw stuck in your double-big-gulp.
I’m no scientist, as you guys know, but just just being practical… we need to move quicker on the gulf problem. And I’m all for drilling in the gulf too, as long as we take more precautions in the future. I don’t think I would like my ‘Surf and Turf’ topped with 10W-40.
+2
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:22 am)True, you are not really charging with solar. You are using solar to offset your electricity use. And as a solar user you are helping to offset utility companies from building billions of dollars in peaking facilities to provide power at the highest use times of day.
Then you are using the cheaper excess power at night which could of been wasted and simply run to ground, because large baseline plants can’t flip a switch and turn off when the day shift clocks out to go home.
1 – supplements utility company peak power requirements.
2 – uses the existing grid as a battery.
3 – uses cheaper night time power for EV’s
4 – uses night time power that may be wasted from the grid.
5 – sourcing power from your roof and local contractors must be better than expanding the market for Iran and Venezuela exports.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:23 am)#98
Me too. +1 to both.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:28 am)At least 10W-40 is not toxic. Just a thought, after you violate all the nuclear treaties in existence, what is worse than an out of control oil spill?
An out of control oil spill gushing radioactive material!!!!
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:31 am)If nuclear is cheaper than oil, then let it compete, but there’s no need to eliminate coal.
It seems the current trend is to lump all fossil fuels together, but they’re actually very different.
We have enough coal to last at least 100 years, probably more. The U.S. has been called the Saudi Arabia of coal. We export coal. We have more than enough. And there are ways to make coal power plants much cleaner (e.g. using algae).
With oil, it’s exactly the opposite. The U.S. hit peak oil in 1973. We now import 2/3 of our oil. World oil production will peak in the next few years. We will definitely run out of oil in our lifetime. And there’s really no way to make gas engine cars run much cleaner.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:34 am)Good point but note the Volt has no trouble towing a HUGE 53kw generator.. all I am proposing is a small 10kw generator, its just a range extender.. not meant to replace the engine in a car.
Here is a 120lb 30hp motorcycle engine from China:
http://www.globalsources.com/gsol/I/Motorcycle-engine/p/sm/1032586559.htm
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:35 am)If you are wealthy enough not to be concerned about how much you pay in taxes, I salute you. But other than things like a local Police, Fire, Sanitation and Street Lights, I am not benefiting heavily from my ‘tax contributions’. You left out all of the wasteful spending our government does. How many on this blog alone complain about our ‘tax breaks’ and ‘rebate money’ going to foreign car makers and governments. And I won’t even get started on how much this country gives away in the form of benefits to illegals…. I would prefer to be taxed less so I could put more in savings. But it’s nice to know you are doing well.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:35 am)#99
True that. +1
“Externalized costs” make the world go ’round. Does anyone really believe that BP will pay the true cost of their recklessness in the Gulf? Not likely. Again, did anyone see the HBO film on “fracking” last night? Same answer.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:36 am)#85
I’m thinking “Attack of The Zombie Crabs”.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:38 am)Ya know, i’ve though about that. But, you have to consider the poor broke fools like myself in the lower to poverty bracket. There is really no way they can afford either products. Doing as you state would just make me and the others feel even less of garbage. Not that I give a sh|t what anyone thinks of me but the rest might or do.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:38 am)#101
Yeah, lots of “flex fuel” cars, no pumps in our area. What a scam. +1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:42 am)#104
“From your lips to God’s ear” +1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:46 am)Great info! I live in Fl, too! However, I seem to recall electricity going UP, not down in price. I will have to double check my power bill. Progress Energy is cranking up rates for folks going over a certain usage.
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:48 am)You’re not alone here. Many people want to own a pickup, van, or SUV for occasional use, and can’t afford to own 3 cars.
As the Volt MPV5 and other larger EREVs become real, that will replace the need for SUVs and mini-vans, but we’ll still need a few pickups and work vans.
And that’s why I support a FlexFuel mandate. Most passenger vehicles can be replaced by EREVs, but larger gas powered vehicles will remain. Cellulosic ethanol can replace up to 35% of our gasoline consumption without any affect on food supply:
http://www.coskata.com/ethanol/index.asp?source=D77DE2FB-67A8-4D6B-81B5-B138725EFB70
If EREVs can eliminate the other 65%, then we have a solution to replace gasoline, without any new infrastructure, using our existing 110 volt home outlets and liquid fuel filling stations.
+2
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:48 am)2325 Total E85 Stations in the United States | 1646 Total Cities selling E85 in the United States | 104 Blender Pumps – combination of E10 , E20, E30, E40 E50 and E85 in the US ( http://e85prices.com/ ), and there are what less than 50 hydrogen stations with many not publically accessible, but there is an “EV fill up outlet” in virtually every home.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:48 am)When the Trade Currents bring tar balls across the Atlantic, the United Nations will be screaming to nuke that hole if capping it is still unsuccessful. I have not visited the Gulf, and I don’t have time to watch CNN all day at work, but from some reports I’ve seen, there is A LOT of oil down there. It has been over 2 months now since it started. The last report I saw said it might be another 2 months before relief wells are in place. That makes the disaster TWICE as big.
Like I said. I’m just trying to think practical about it. I say “Nuke ‘Em”…
-1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:50 am)#110
The Volt “generator” is on board and engineered into the car. Big difference. I doubt if the LEAF is rated to tow anything, and it would probably void the warranty. Plus, the added weight would KILL the AER.
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:52 am)Hence…. The remarkable insight to add extended range for GM’s new electric car.. the VOLT. One would expect this was the result of the experience they had with the EV1.
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:54 am)Agreed 100%.
It’s ridiculous to base your vehicle buying based on the few times you drive a long haul.
A primary vehicle is the one you drive the most.
For people who live around me (the GTA) there are about 5 million of us that could use a 160km (100mi) BEV (even using 120(75mi) as a ‘safe’ estimate) to potentially commute to work (A “primary” vehicle) and then rent a car or have an ICE as a vehicle for vacations, visiting Grandma in the country, etc. Otherwise known as a “secondary” vehicle.
My use would be all electric for 93.6% of my driving and 6.4% can be on a rented car (based on 25000 km a year).
The catch is that rented car is for one week, as it’s an 800km one-way trip to Tremblant to ski
Far less than owning a second car and the savings in fuel from the EV alone pay for the rental of my “secondary” vehicle.
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (11:55 am)As bad as the OIL SPILL is I would hate think what might happen if a Nuke option was used. These “unintended consequences” can be a real problem.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (12:00 pm)#119
All I know it that there are tens of thousands of “flex fuel” vehicles in the LA basin and, the last time I checked, 1 (one) E85 pump. And GM, et al, got CAFE credits for every one of those vehicles. Scam. Maybe it’s different in other areas of the country, but not THAT different, IMHO.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (12:10 pm)#124
Amen. +1
Again I refer to the HBO film on “fracking” last night. They are using high pressure water (and a witches brew of chemicals) to fracture the shale formations to release the gas. Among the many “unintended consequences” are natural gas bubbling up through the creeks in combustible amounts, and into peoples’ domestic wells ditto. Hence the spectacular film of folks holding cigarette lighters next to the stream from their kitchen faucets and producing balls of fire from the released gas. Somebody posted a YouTube video of one of these on yesterday’s thread. Never mind the highly toxic “fracking fluid” in the domestic water supplies.
If they can do this much damage with pressurized water, what wonders could they achieve with a “nuke”? If they fracture those formations in the gulf, there will be no way to ever seal them.
-1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (12:20 pm)I bet Nissan is already working on it, as are all other manufacturers. This stupid veil of secrecy… Even Volvo, which announced its EREV C30 program a couple of years ago, stopped giving any updates on its progress.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (12:21 pm)Edit to #126 – Sorry, I ran out of time.
Check out kdawg’s #157 on yesterday’s thread for a video of a flaming faucet. Great work kdawg.
Actually, some of the examples on HBO were even more spectacular. If you run a the water a little longer before you light it, you get a really nice ball of fire when it first ignites. One guy singed all the his off his arms.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (12:23 pm)True. Here’s another factor. In California, we have tiered energy rates. So, if household manages to stay below 100% of the baseline “allowance”, the rate is fairly reasonable If you go above the baseline, though, watch out. Here’s how it goes for the standard E-1 tariff:
Usage Rate (cents/kw-hr)
0-100% . . . . . 11.877
101-130% . . . 13.502
131-200% . . . 29.062
200% up . . . . 40.029
Miminum charge, no matter the usage: 14.784 cents/kw-hr.
Here’s the rub: the baseline is set so low, that nobody I know manages to keep their usage in line. Mine is just over 300%, my parents is closer to 400%. Solar makes sense not at the baseline rate, but at the higher rate. I’m a renter (who can afford a house in the Bay Area?), but my parents are considering putting in solar, just to drop their usage down to around 150% of baseline. In such a scenario, and with the tax incentives (including the fact that the house is not reappraised after a solar install), it does make economic sense.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (12:25 pm)I doubt it would have any problems with a 200lb trailer, note that you wont be going very fast with a 10kw genset.. the added drag would not matter much, its only used a couple times a year. The warranty is an issue.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (12:32 pm)The reason that this argument wouldn’t move me towards implementation is not so much that it couldn’t be done, but that the economics are not all that compelling. My feeling is that electric car and solar technologies are in their infancies, and are rapidly making huge strides in terms of their cost-effectiveness. For example, this article is about a recent breakthrough by MIT scientists on using nanotechnology in lithium-ion batteries (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/06/100620200808.htm), and this article talks about a new development in solar cell efficiency (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/06/100617143930.htm).
I guess you just have to ask yourself how important it is to be on the bleeding edge of something that has a payback time measured in decades, when 5 years from now, you could buy something that is twice or three times as efficient for a fraction of the price.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (12:33 pm)Ahh… What’s the worst that could happen? We blow up the Earth just like Duck Dodgers did with Mars!
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (12:33 pm)Cant’ believe how many times this debate is being re-hashed and mis-analyzed.
There are clearly large numbers of people just like us: A current two-car family that will buy BOTH. The pure EV for commuting and shorter trips, and the EREV for the comparatively rare longer trips for which we need the added range.
That way, we’ll run on pure electric 90% of the time, and have the extended range in one of our cars when we need it.
Why the so-called “experts” and others — perhaps preferring the conflict/competition angle because it’s more interesting — can’t see this is beyond me…
Jun 22nd, 2010 (12:40 pm)The vast majority of home solar systems today are grid-tied with a net meter. Absolutely no batteries needed!
Jun 22nd, 2010 (12:41 pm)When was the last time you felt that being practical and looking to the UN for advice were similar pursuits?
Jun 22nd, 2010 (12:49 pm)Actually, there are some great places in the U.S. to plug-in an EV/EREV and drive nearly air pollution free. For example, 90% of the electricity in Idaho is generated by a combination of hydro and other renewable energy forms. In Washington State, 80% of electricity is generated by renewables and in Oregon it’s 74%! –>
Top 10 States to Plug In an Electric Car
Of course, some states aren’t as good–>Worst 10 States to Plug In an Electric Car
Basically, how green you’re driving with an EV depends on which state you live in.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (12:51 pm)Peder Norby said in #47 that his break even point for free fuel is seven years. Plus the value of his home is higher. While we ponder the next great thing that will be available in the next five years to make us regret getting off of gas too soon, he will be paying nothing for fuel that is pollution free and comes from local building contractors here in the US.
24 months after that he will be running his house and driving his car for free, while we gaze at our navels to decide if the next new thing will be worth a try. Ten years after that he will have been pollutant, carbon, gas and cost free for about a decade, while we insist that a better deal is just over the horizon.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (12:52 pm)Thank you for the excellent summary of single/multiple car ownership. Nothing like a few facts.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (12:53 pm)Even if you have two cars it’s likely you’ll put more miles on the EV than simple math would suggest. If you have an EV and an ICE vehicle, you could use either one for a lot of trips. Given that the EV miles are much cheaper you have to think that most people would opt for the EV for these trips.
PS: Good luck with that shoplifting!
Jun 22nd, 2010 (1:05 pm)The solar panels needed to recharge a car will actually fit within the size of a single parking space! I find that very interesting!!
Jun 22nd, 2010 (1:05 pm)Good point. I would add that the abundance of compressed hydrates is one of the reasons that the well failed in the first place. Seems a shame that oil wells flare off NG when it could be the preferred source of energy.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (1:06 pm)My system which is similar to his, only smaller, cost $13,500 after rebates. It produces about 6000 kWh a year. Forgetting about the cost of money, and assuming no maintenance for 20 years, which isn’t likely, it will cost me $.1125 per kWh to produce those 120,000 kWh and recover the cost. This is OK where I am because the cost per kWh is above this and going higher, so there is some return on investment over 20 years. Just not a huge return. And that’s for a place that gets a fair amount of sun, and where when the sun doesn’t shine it mostly means you don’t have to use the AC, which is a big net benefit.
I can buy a kWh for an EV from the electrical utility for $.08, which is probably the highest margin kWh they could sell since the cost to them for delivering it is about zero. The point would be that solar is hardly a no brainer based on dollars and cents. There are reasons to install one but as an investment it’s not so hot.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (1:08 pm)You’re a menace with that pointy stick!
Jun 22nd, 2010 (1:13 pm)In my area there are five. Electricity, gasoline, E85, diesel and natural gas.
I once looked into getting a Honda GX with the at-home NG compressor. But, with repair costs, the NG compressor would make NG cost more than gasoline.
In OK and TX, NG is probably a viable solution. There are 8 NG public stations within 25 miles of my house. Getting an NG vehicle is nearly impossible though.
My car is E85 and my next truck will be the same. There are 7 E85 stations within 25 miles. One is the Kroger where I buy groceries.
Hopefully somebody will get me an electric-drive car for commuting in the foreseeable future. For now, I can get by on using 75% less gasoline than someone that doesn’t pump E85.
http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/locator/stations/
Jun 22nd, 2010 (1:15 pm)Definitely too simple. There is no such thing as a 7 kw panel, or even (so far as I know) a 1 kw panel. There are BP Saturn Series 7 panels, but the largest is 190 watts. You might be able to get one of those for $600.
The next thing you have to realize is that solar panels are rated by their maximum output – what you might be able to get near noon on a perfectly clear day if the panel was pointed directly at the sun. Typically you might multiply that rating by 4 or so to get average output on a sunny day, then downrate based on the number of sunny days you have per year.
So let’s say you figure you will get an average of 600 watt hours/day out of each panel. If you want 8 kWh/day you will need 14 of those $600 panels. And don’t forget that is just an average. You will get a lot less than that in the fall and winter, even on sunny days, and you might have several days of stormy periods with little sunshine.
You would need a really massive battery pack to smooth out those variations. As others have said, I think it is better to forget the batteries and tie the solar system into the grid. Then you can let your electric utility soak up all the excess and feed it back to you when you need it. They are effectively an infinite-size storage battery.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (1:21 pm)So you’re claiming that no member of your family has ever gotten a Social Security check or had medical bills paid for by Medicare? That doesn’t seem likely. Or you’ve never sold a car to someone in the military or who worked for a defense contractor or who worked on a highway project? Never had a family member go to school? Never drive on a road? Never use tap water?
Not trying to pick on you, but everyone claims that they don’t get any government benefits and they pay too much in taxes. Yet in the aggregate this is absurd because the benefits paid outstrip the taxes paid — so it simply can’t be true. Simple math just doesn’t permit the conclusion you’re reaching.
The “look at wasteful government spending” line is just a BS extension of the Kool Aid Narrative I’m referring to. The fact is that the vast majority of your “wasteful spending” is simply someone else’s “effective government program”. And in any event all spending other than SS, Medicare, and Defense doesn’t amount to anything anyway. If you throw in interest on the debt and other entitlements taxpayer’s aren’t paying for the benefits they receive as it is.
Basically until you outline how much you want to cut from SS, Medicare, and Defense all this complaining that “my taxes are too high” is complete BS.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (1:23 pm)That depends on your requirements. We will have two cars, even if one of them is a Volt. I average 1-2 trips per month that are too long for the Leaf, so I would be able to drive it most of the time. I would rather have a Volt, because I could drive it all of the time, but it seems pretty clear that a Volt will be even more expensive to purchase than a Leaf.
-1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (1:27 pm)A lot of talk on solar. Check this out.
Consider this, if you buy 8 of these cells ( http://evcomponents.com/cscart/index.php?dispatch=products.view&product_id=29845 ) for a 25VDC pack and you connect a small charger to it fed by your solar set, it charges during the day, connect a 240VAC Pure Sine inverter on it then plug your in home EV charger to it then you have stored the “Free” energy so later when you charge at home you use the free energy to fillup and not the lower tier from the grid.
The key is you need to tap the DC power just before it hits your grid tie inverter and you have DC blocking so the batt pack doesn’t feed into the grid when the sun goes down.
The 8 pack above will get you 5000Wh. But effective power is 5000 * .8 = 4000Wh. Cool, that’s just enough to fill up the Volt!!! For FREE even!
/well you have to at least front the storage cells, charger, BMS and inverter so it’s really not free but you no longer need to use night tier to charge.
-1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (1:28 pm)The infrastructure for delivering gasoline, diesel and E85 is essentially the same one: a means of getting hydrocarbon liquid fuel to a point convenient for consumers, where it is stored long enough to be metered out into vehicles. Biodiesel, Methanol or Butanol could also be lumped in with these. Likely, there will be fuel stations in the near future where four or more of these will be dispensed side-by-side.
This leaves a third major infrastructure, for delivering Natural Gas as a fuel. Unlike the situation with liquid fuels, Hydrogen Gas would have very little in common with Natural Gas where transmission, storage and end-use metering is concerned. Hydrogen (the point of the comment you quoted) would constitute a fourth. Considering that with EREV and biofuels we would get most of the same green and home-fuel benefits without it, Hydrogen deserves to remain last on the list for many decades to come, IMO.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (1:29 pm)Dude, I think he meant a 7KW package……lol
Jun 22nd, 2010 (1:29 pm)Whether a solar system — and using that system to power an EV, EREV — makes economic sense for someone is highly variable. The biggest variables:
1. The utility rebates and state and local tax incentives available where you live;
2. Whether your utility has a Time Of Use rate structure;
3. Whether your state has a Solar Renewable Energy Credits (SREC) program (like New Jersey, for example)
3. How much of your electric use your system will cover and how many annual miles in an EV, EREV it will power.
4. The system’s overall production capacity.
5. The financing you use to put it up, etc. etc.
In other words, it’s too simple to say “solar is not a hot investment” and leave it at that. In fact, the answer as to whether or not solar is a “hot investment” is extremely variable. For some, it is truly a “hot investment”, for others, perhaps not so much….
Jun 22nd, 2010 (1:29 pm)That is really counter-intuitive.
In Texas, the more you use the less it costs. I would think that the transmission, lines, transformers, etc. would cost less per user if they used more electricity (as a percentage).
Here is a chart from a provider in my area:
http://www.streamenergy.net/energy_home_texas.asp
My current rate is 10.3cents/kwh 24×7. OnCor is installing smart meters, but, they won’t be done for several years. We probably won’t see time-of-day rates until after the roll-out.
For those getting 8cents/kwh for electric cars… how do they manage the connection to ensure that only electric cars are using that feed?
Jun 22nd, 2010 (1:32 pm)Careful, Don. Kool-Aid comes in more than one flavor.
-1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (1:41 pm)Nissan seems to be trying to claim that the Leaf will create “zero-emissions drivers.” Not true. When a Leaf owner needs to take a longer trip, he will use an ICE-powered vehicle, and will generate emissions. When a Volt owner needs to take a longer trip, he will take the Volt, which will become an ICE-powered vehicle, albeit a very efficient one, and also generate emissions. So both of these owners will burn gas, but the Volt owner will have a less complicated life when he opts for longer trips!
I have PV solar panels on my rooftop as well (6 kw system) and discovered a hidden economic benefit: A cooler home in the summer, due to the fact that the panels shade the roof (they have a 6 inch standoff with free airflow), and due to the fact that they convert 20% of the sun’s energy into electricity (rather than heat). So my home air conditioning usage has gone down, further reducing my electricity use. My electric bill went from over $4,000 per year, to about $200 (I’m in California — San Jose). That nearly covers my payments on the system, and the system will continue to run for 25 years after the loan is paid off!
Jun 22nd, 2010 (1:41 pm)Some coal plants are horribly sited and lead to environmental degradation that amounts to far more than their benefits. Prevailing winds and climate patterns can lead pollutants to unexpected places, though there is no excuse for putting coal plants next to watersheds and bodies of water that are the foundation for important and fragile ecosystems.
But not every energy solution is well thought out. Shaving off a few days work to start up a deep water drill rig above a pocket holding a lot of compressed methane hyrates is likely not the best use of resources either.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (1:51 pm)Straw man? Both Volt and Leaf will do a lot to eliminate gas use for the customers that buy them.
Think of it as selling zero emission/no gas cars, not zero emission drivers? A little less nefarious? No?
Jun 22nd, 2010 (1:55 pm)There is a solar provider in my area that will:
1. Install a large solar array on your house for free.
2. Give you the electricity it produces to offset the lease cost (In all cases, you break even or make money. They guarantee the electricity produced will offset your lease.)
3. Fully cover all storm damage and maintenance.
It’s a 15year contract to use your roof and interface with the grid. You never have to buy anything except pay a lease. If the inverter or anything else blows up, they replace it for free.
Once the 15yr lease is up, you can get a new system or cancel it. (You can’t buy the system at the end of the lease. bummer.)
I think their marketing strategy is to get roof space before anybody else. I’m considering it, but, 15 years is a heck-of-a long time. Most people don’t keep the same house that long.
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (1:57 pm)E85 is more difficult, considering it’s sensitivity to the possibility of water in long distance pipelines. One reason why the farther you get fro the middle of the country, the less likely you are to see E85.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (1:57 pm)OT IMO Using any kind of bomb to seal off the oil has too high of a risk of making the problem even worse. I have no idea of what the opening looks like so I don’t understand why they can’t just take a very heavy, very long and tappered or pointed cork so to speak and ram it into the hole. I know there is alot of pressure coming out but the right configuration of solid steel needle cork, like a needle valve I would think should work?
Jun 22nd, 2010 (2:01 pm)#149
Not necessarily, AFAIK. My understanding is that ethanol/E85 can’t use the same pipelines as petro products. I think that the stuff is too corrosive, or else they haven’t figured out how to prevent cross contamination. So the alcohol based fuels have to go by truck. Maybe that’s why we don’t have any to speak of in SoCal. You might think that, with our reputation as “greenies”, that the stuff would be popular here, but it’s nowhere to be seen.
+2
Jun 22nd, 2010 (2:02 pm)KDawgs post #16 is an excellent link to how your electricity is produced. In NE Wisconsin, it is 74% coal / 19% Nuke and 7% everything else. I myself am in the engery independence group versus the environmental group. We are paying about $0.12 kwh but can pay $0.24/Kwh for green engery. The extra $0.10 Kwh is actually for a fund to pay for wind, solar, etc investment. It is funny because, they promote this all the time in Wisconsin, but hardly anybody contributes. Our company did an informal survey and found 65% of the people ponied up for the green energy program. The company decided, (and we make thin film for the Solar industry mind you) to offer prizes to anyone that participated in the program. All you had to do was take your last years utility bills into HR for verification. OOOOPss, only about 3% were really doing it.
We had a few people claim that they didn’t participate because they didn’t want to violate their privacy by showing HR their bills even in confidence. Of course those people got ridden harder than the rest! 
Prediction:
Volt will be a huge hit within 3 years. It will take the Prius slow path to success.
MiEV will be a hit with the young crowd.
Leaf will fail due to price and limitations.
Ford, Nissan, and others will be out with their EREVs in 5 years, after getting serious when the Volt takes off in 3 years.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (2:04 pm)#158
You beat me to it. +1 Thanks.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (2:07 pm)#159
Someone on CNN the other night said that the casing and/or the concrete job are suspect. They said that there was a real fear that, if the “top kill” had worked, it might have just blown out the side of the casing down below and made it worse. What do I know? But I think that’s part of why they have sort of given up trying to shut it off from the top.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (2:11 pm)@Texas – you have it right. The real decision to make is how to extend range. Should you add on the internal combustion engine, with it’s plusses and minuses? This is the Volt approach. Alternatively, should you find a way to swap out an empty battery with a full battery? This is the Better Place approach.
Better Place is working with Renault/Nissan and with Chery, the Chinese car manufacturer. Together, they represent a huge capacity for enabling the “switch” approach.
Further, Better Place has a ready-made market in Israel who wants to completely eliminate gasoline use. This market is nearly guaranteed to adopt the Better Place approach, which will provide plenty of scale with more than 2.2 million cars.
My personal belief is that even the US can adopt this swap technology in many areas of high auto density. The New York – Washington DC corridor. Atlanta. Chicago. San Francisco, San Jose and Sacramento – even all the way up to Lake Tahoe.
One of the benefits of the swap approach is cost – it is cheaper to manufacture a car with a full electric car with a swappable battery than it is to manufacture a car with both electric and gasoline propulsion systems. And the ongoing cost of pure electric is substantially less than electric/gas because gas is more expensive. And in the US, as in many other places in the world, total cost makes a huge difference. Especially since Better Place will lease you the battery, which takes the huge initial battery cost out of the picture, the swappable model has a chance of success in the US.
-1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (2:20 pm)Exacty right, you cannot distrubute E85 through pipeline due to contamination and corrosive nature of ethanol. It does have to be trucked which is huge cost and really anti-green in the end. We have stations all over Wisconsin as we are heavy into corn production. The E85 facilities are close to the corn suppliers and the fuel stations so it makes sense in Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota. It does not make sense for SoCal. Then you have some groups argue that you are taking land out of food production and again with the transportation problem it will probably be only viable in the Midwest . Cellulose ethanol is a long way off. Just like the South West & South East are more optimum for Solar than northern states, Ethanol probably has its place only in the corn belt. And don’t forget, it burns less efficient than 90%-100% gas. 25%-30% less mpg with E85. So in reality it is cost & environmental neutral at best. I like it because US farmers make out. And again, I go for the energy independant route.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (2:31 pm)People, keep a lookout and call your solar contractor. It is to their benefit to keep abreast of all the changes. More things like this program will emerge. In FL, legislators just approved something called the PACE program. I doubt that many localities have implemented it yet, but it will basically involve your local government paying the costs and you pay them back via higher property taxes (WHICH ARE DEDUCTIBLE)- or at least so I understand. Do not use this forum for anything more than cursory education. It would be foolish to jump on or off the solar bandwagon based on what you read here. MANY things are a consideration here, but note that the only downside anyone discusses is HOW LONG the payback period is. We all know that solar is better for the environment and makes so much sense. And, at the very least, the federal government is picking up 30% of the tab for you to improve your home.
It is hard to believe that people on THIS forum are advocating the viewpoint of waiting for the next latest and greatest (and unknown- vaporware) development. We are chomping at the bit for an electric vehicle- when almost no one we know has ever owned one. We are pioneers here, people. The sky is the limit- assuming our addiction to fossil fuels hasn’t blocked out the sun by the time we die.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (2:55 pm)A Leaf or Volt having a nearly 3X efficiency advantage by using an electric motor compared to an ICE is very helpful. That combined with the fact that many states and provinces use a large percentage of renewables and NG helps make a difference, more than just relocating the emissions to power plants. Some of the regulars here will even be using solar and wind for their electrics.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (3:11 pm)LOL That’s some funny shit. If someone or anyone they know ever used a government program. They should just shut up and pay more taxes. Like I said funny shit.
To say all other spending like the $860,000,000,000 waste bill mean nothing LOL give me a break!!!!
I hear others who think like that you don’t want people to use what they have been forced to pay for.
Just because you use something others force you to pay for dosen’t mean you have to support it.
Me I would bring back all our troops all over the world, we could use some of them at our borders, Cut govrnment workers wages and benifits to 10% below the private sector or about 40%. If you want to call yourself a “public servent” you should make less then the public. Shut down the dept of Ed among others as this should be a local issue dump the IRS and all income tax. Raised the money need only for basic government from import tax. Repeal Obama care. Yes SS and medicare need to be fazed out. The sale of all government buildings and property not needed could help with this.
All that said I think Paul Ryan has a good start with his “Road Map for America” Check it out. http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/
Jun 22nd, 2010 (3:11 pm)Sorry! Like I said I knew almost nothing about it yesterday. I’m glad most of what I said seemed right. Even the actual amount of energy produced from each panel seems to be pretty close to correct according to 2 other posters. My buddy and I had a discussion about that today and he was thinking maybe 80% efficiency during that 5.67 hours. I’d like to know on average what it really is. Perhaps it is factored into the 5.67 hour number.
It’s probably a 200 watt panel. 200 watts 5 hours a day of sun. 1 kw. 7 days, 7 kwh per week. Or it’s a rip off and it’s 7kwh per month and it’s a 50 watt panel. You can get a 200 watt panel for 600 now, which is much cheaper than 5 years ago, Nano solar has said they can produce panels for 99 cents a watt, not 3 dollars like everything out there. I think they are actually producing them and installing them in Germany.
I think 6 Volt would make them half the capacity. Unless they were like 200 AH and I don’t even know if that’s possible. You’d need 32 of em. I think. I could be wrong. I found an equation to find out how many watts a battery was because they are only labeled in Amp hours and Volts. I found the equation AH = Watts / Volts So you need 100 Amp hours at 12 volts to hold 1 kw. If I’m wrong correct me, I’m no electrical engineer.
I’m not sure but I’ll look into it and hopefully have an answer tomorrow. I just pay the darn bill.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (3:16 pm)6. Increased value of your home.
From a cnn.com article: “according to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, home values rise an average of $20 for every $1 reduction in annual utility bills.”
-6
Jun 22nd, 2010 (3:17 pm)Volt is the best bang for our buck. Only the Volt covers our funding now an in the future. Today you buy oil, tomorrow you will buy foreign lithium from our supporting country Afghanistan.
So please buy only the Volt because we will benefit twice.
Do not buy the leaf because we will not benefit today and it does not use oil products.
Buy volt, you need to be able to go farther than the other car and keep our funding investors full.
E85 also not good for american people. Keep with best oil from our investors.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (3:21 pm)It’s hardly a subsidy– typical US grid load is nearly twice as high during the day as it is at night. Until we’re past 40% of our generation capacity as daytime-only solar production, it’s a win for the power company who can keep their peaking generators throttled down and rely on their more efficient base-load production. Storage won’t be a concern for decades.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (3:23 pm)Anyone who would like to loose their lunch here is a link to Obama’s budget and house and senate will add more to. Click on all the small boxes to see all the increases.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/02/01/us/budget.html
Jun 22nd, 2010 (3:38 pm)But you have to consider the cost of creating the infrastructure. If the utility can convince people to use less, then they don’t have to build new power plants, beef up transmission lines, or replace transformers with ever larger ones. And there is the matter of energy source. The utility will generally want to use the cheapest source first, whether that is coal, gas, hydro, whatever. If the demand outstrips the supply of that source they have to start buying more expensive sources.
… Of course, there is also the political angle. The utilities are all highly regulated, and the regulating agencies have their own agendas.
That’s easy. They only make that cheap electricity available after midnight, when reasonable people are not using power for anything else.
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (3:40 pm)So you would raise what taxes? By How much? How would you make up the $ 1,500,000,000,000 we are short? Without saying what taxes you would raise this “You need to pay more taxes” is just BS!
Jun 22nd, 2010 (3:47 pm)When the outside temp never goes below 80 all night, you tend to use a lot of electricity at night as well. In Texas, my A/C runs 24×7 for a lot of the summer. The (240v) pool pump runs 6-8 hours at night as well.
If you are saying that the electric companies are only giving that rate at night, then, by all means do it! Just don’t raise my rate in the daytime hours.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (3:49 pm)lol….
uh oh, getting political here.
/hides in the corner rocking back/forth sucking thumb…..
//repeats “I’m a good boy, I paid my taxes…”
//repeats “I’m a good boy, I paid my taxes…”
//repeats “I’m a good boy, I paid my taxes…”
Jun 22nd, 2010 (3:54 pm)LOL Sorry I will climb down off my soap box and go outside.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (3:55 pm)Ethanol/gasoline blends do not like water, yet a pure alcohol E100 vehicle as used in Brazil runs on alcohol and 5% water.. the last step in the production of ethanol to remove that 5% of water is expensive.
I believe the issue with ethanol in the pipelines is that it loosens up all the gasoline gunk that deposited on the pipe walls over the years.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (3:56 pm)DonC, With almost 3 decades of Govt service (firmly attached to the federal teet) with several agencies I can attest that Govt waste fraud and abuse are the norm. Effective Govt. programs are few and far between.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (4:03 pm)Of course, I’d forgotten. Now I remember why I decided years ago that reasonable people couldn’t live in Texas.
/Grin
Jun 22nd, 2010 (4:03 pm)#164
My problem is that Shai Aggasi engenders just about as much confidence in me as Elon Musk, LOL. I’m from Missouri. To about the 10th power.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (4:08 pm)Speaking of road maps, why don’t we make all the roads private? BTW, I don’t imagine you and DonC reconciling your different visions in the near term.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (4:09 pm)#166
Careful. I looked into a similar program here, Solar City. Come to find out, it is the brainchild of none other than our good friend Elon Musk. No, I am not making this up. I managed to get past that, but then they informed me that the financing was being handled by one of the Wall Street giants, Lehman Bros. if memory serves. That did it for me. If those guys are involved, Joe Consumer is going to get shafted some way, IMHO.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (4:12 pm)Hey Chuck! I found the answer to your first question anyways.
I pay 9.9 cents for the first 1,000 kWh
11.9 cents after the first 1,000 kWh
They split it up into Energy Charge and Fuel Charge
So no extra delivery charge. Just a customer charge of $10.50 and $4.15 in taxes.
You’re second question I can’t say I know the answer to, but if I had to guess I’d say yes! Doesn’t seem right for them to charge you for energy that’s not actually delivered from the plant to your house. If you’re spinning the meter back during the day and then spinning it forward at night I guess they could say your still getting it from the plant but if they are charging your neighbors a delivery fee for energy from your home to theirs. Seems a little dishonest. You are using “their” wires but it should at least be discounted.
Another note. It appears if I charged my car through my power company I might as well say it would be the 11.9 cent energy. So earlier I said it’d cost 86 cents to put 8 kWh into the Volt, it’d actually cost me 95.2 cents. And if the earlier commenter who said it may take 10 kWh to give the Volt 8 kWh of charge was right, then it’d cost $1.19. Good news is 11.9 cent energy makes the solar payback that much quicker!
Jun 22nd, 2010 (4:12 pm)#168
Now there I have to put in with you. The rest, not so much.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (4:21 pm)I don’t think the low effective price of the Leaf will negatively affect customers perceptions of the Leaf nor Nissan’s margins either…Oh you mean. Yes, right – perhaps that is true, the first year allotment selling out six months before the cars exist is a fluke.
And mass production and mass sales combined with technological advances will never result in costs per unit going down after the fixed costs have been amortized, once the incentives run out. It could happen. And hey, true story, I once believed in the tooth fairy also.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (4:22 pm)Haha… you know that what seems right to us consumers is rarely the way it goes…
So my company gets me for a flat rate per KWh, yours just gets you for a monthly ticketmaster-like “convenience charge”… ok, fair enough… I have wanted to go solar… and supposedly, though sun-wise, NJ isn’t so good… incentive wise, I can get me some free gov’t money for doing it… hmmm…. well good info! Thanks!
Jun 22nd, 2010 (4:28 pm)This is true in PG&E land (California) up to a point. There’s a tariff (E-9 “Experimental Residential Time-of-Use Service for Low Emission Vehicle Customers”) that provides $0.05140/kW-hr rate for off-peak usage.
But, there’s a catch. That’s for usage below 130% baseline, which for an electric car would be nearly impossible to maintain, and that doesn’t include a $0.14784/kW-hr minimum charge. If you’re over the 130% baseline, the rate goes up to $0.14698 (less than 200%) and $0.18727 (greater than 200%). The peak rates can go all the way up to $0.56110/kW-hr.
Again, it seems to me that with the tax incentives and the rate schedule, it would make sense to add at least some solar capacity….
Jun 22nd, 2010 (4:37 pm)A lot of things may not seem right, but until we field a better team of attorneys and lobbyists than they do, the times won’t be a changin.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (4:42 pm)Well the sun chart says you’re a 4.2 vs Tampa’s 5.6 but since you’re energy is .16 vs our .11 I say go for it! As long as they don’t charge you a delivery fee on the kWh you’ve created. Solar panels are just plain cool in my book. And like someone up there said, it’ll ad value to your home.
http://www.wholesalesolar.com/Information-SolarFolder/SunHoursUSMap.html
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/table5_6_b.html
Jun 22nd, 2010 (4:47 pm)Again, solar systems don’t need batteries.
The only exception is if you live in a remote area where there is no electricity (i.e. living off the grid).
Here’s a good site that shows what types of components you need.
http://www.affordable-solar.com/gt-estimator.htm
You don’t have to buy from them, but it’s a good way to size things up.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (4:47 pm)Does it really matter that you aren’t getting back the exact same electrons as you put in during the day? When you withdraw money from the bank you don’t get the same bills back as you put in, either, but most folks don’t care.
At least solar is truly generating electricity and not just doing a shellgame like E85 and hydrogen. Even a pro-ethanol site (I can re-find the link if you don’t believe me) admitted that 75 units of fossil fuels are used for each 100 units of ethanol created, at least with the US farming system. It apparently is more sensible in Brazil using sugar cane, also their cane farms may be concentrated in one area of the country vs. spread out like our farms, so less fuel is used in hauling stuff around.
Nuclear is OK with me, but expensive as heck, and of course nobody wants one in their backyard.
Solar is pouring out of the sky each day, for “free”, so we may as well grab it and use it.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (4:55 pm)I think you would fall into the Volt/ F150…………..???? category as I doubt your reason for having the F150 is just for commuting.
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (5:00 pm)The generator on a trailer is an interesting idea. In some circumstances, it’s probably workable. Having towed trailers and such behind various vehicles, I know they are sometimes a real pain to maneuver.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (5:10 pm)I know! If you spent 5 hours reading all my posts I said earlier (post 11) I thought it’d be cool to know the electrons in your Volt came directly from the sun but that doesn’t really make sense financially or environmentally and I wouldn’t do that. This discussion about 6 volt vs 12 volt batteries was a whole other discussion. Does a 6 volt battery exist that can hold nearly 1 kWh? I was saying no unless it was rated at 200 Ah and I don’t even know if they make one like that. Am I correct in assuming a 100 Ah 6 volt battery would only hold about .5 kWh? Anyone? Anyone?
Jun 22nd, 2010 (5:15 pm)All ideas are at least worth consideration, but I have to wonder how many people would just leave the gen trailer on out of laziness? Or the, “Ya never know when you might need it”, mentality.
I’ve also seen people apparently forget they have a trailer attached out on the freeway, and whack other cars when changing lanes. Oops, I forgot I was pulling that!
Not trying to shoot the idea down, but they all have pluses and minuses.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (5:25 pm)That depends. In CT the only stations I find listed with E85 are two or three DOT depots. Essentially I’d have to make my own ethanol and add it to the E10 available here.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (5:46 pm)Ummmm…..
Why work with a 6V battery?
Take a look at these cells: http://evcomponents.com/cscart/index.php?dispatch=products.view&product_id=29845, 8 cells for a ~25VDC pack. Most PV’s are setup for ~24-25VDC then converted puresine via a grid tie inverter. You don’t “Need” them, but you can store the free electricity for later, like for charging your Volt instead of using the low tier grid power.
Just a thought.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (5:47 pm)200!!!!
Muuuuhahahahahaha!
Jun 22nd, 2010 (5:50 pm)This is a classic chicken/egg scenario.
I don’t know the exact percentage, but I would guess less than 10% of the cars on the road today are FlexFuel. Most gas station owners can’t afford to dedicate a pump for such a low percentage of the market. And then GM cancels E85 capability on the Volt saying that there aren’t enough gas stations that offer it.
We need a federal mandate that makes all new cars FlexFuel capable by 2013. It only costs $100 per vehicle to add E85 capability. Once we get to a critical mass, say around 1/3 of all cars on the road are FlexFuel, then gas station owners can be profitable selling E85.
Bob Lutz even mentioned this. He said “we need a level playing field” for FlexFuel. This means a mandate. Note that foreign car makers are lagging the U.S. in the area.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (5:55 pm)Yes, a 100 Ah 6 volt battery would be 600 watt-hours, or .6 kWh.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (6:00 pm)Yes… I’ll start looking into it again… thanks for the links!
Jun 22nd, 2010 (6:02 pm)Yes they exist, the standard Trojan T-605 is a common one used for your purposes.. it holds 1.2kwh. Just multiply the voltage by the amp capacity in Ah.. the results will be 1200w for one hour or just 1.2kwh.
http://www.batteriesinaflash.com/deep-cycle-flooded-lead-acid/6v/trojan-t-605-6v-210ah-flooded-lead-acid-gc2-deep-cycle-battery
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (6:08 pm)Herm said:
Nissan makes the case that the LEAF will become the primary car in the household because it will be the car that is used most of the time.. the secondary or backup ICE clunker will be reserved for longer trips or when you have no other choice.
Exactly right, and why it will be better to have an EREV whose backup is a very efficient ICE range extender, not an old clunker.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (6:20 pm)So much solar.. might as well add another comment :p
Anyone in Ontario, it’s a great time to start up home solar.
Look up the microFIT program.
For solar installations >1kW and less than.. 10(? not sure on number right now)
On a grid-tie system you will earn a guaranteed rate of 80.5c/kWh for 20 years.
With solar prices (without shopping around) of around $6-7/W + installation, say $10 a watt
You’re looking at about 6-7 years break even, and then free money from then on.
Be it to run your home electricity or an EV, you could potentially still make profit on top of your electricity use if you install enough panels.
80.5c for your electricity in and 10-17c for electricity you use? Sounds good to me
Jun 22nd, 2010 (6:29 pm)By that logic it would be better to have an EV with an EREV backup and not settle for a 40 mile all electric tether when it is not necessary. It’s all based on a hair a splitting bias any way. There is no need for me try to impose a solution that works for the way I drive on the rest of the world.
In 2010 there will be a choice of mass market EV’s, EREV’s and expensive two seater sport BEV’s. That is a first. Pick one that works for you and stop telling everyone what’s best for them…please, pretty please with a cherry on top.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (6:30 pm)I recall talking to a Solar guy here. He said you should never over produce and scale/size youPV’s to never do so. The issue is this netmetering thing. He said if you over produce in the year, you don’t get paid for it. If you under produce, you have to pay for it. We’re SMUD here. Don’t know if it applies to anyone else here in broke azz CA.
That kind of sucks and seems one wayish but oh well. They getcha one way or the other.
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (6:38 pm)Interesting. Post a story that suggests Nissan recognizes they may need to build an EREV, and the ranting EV-only disinformation trolls take the day off.
A butthead-free environment…
Jun 22nd, 2010 (6:42 pm)lol, I think it’s because the thread went off into two tangents, Solar and Tax/Politics.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (6:59 pm)I don’t see any advantage to using batteries with a grid tie solar system. It’s much better to route the free electricity back to the grid, and spin your electric meter backwards.
Constantly charging and discharging batteries would decrease efficiency, increase installation costs, and increase operating costs. And since it takes energy and other resources to produce batteries, it would be worse for the environment.
In addition, it would be worse for the power companies, since they want that electricity produced during peak daylight hours. In fact, the power companies may not offer you rebates if you store your excess solar electricity in batteries.
If your utility has frequent power failures, you may want to add batteries as a backup, but that would have nothing to do with your solar system. Backup power systems keep the batteries fully charged at all times, so this is a completely different type of system.
The only case where is makes sense to add batteries to you solar system is if you live in a very remote area with no electricity, i.e. “off the grid”.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:03 pm)thanks for clearing the air on units, I was tempted to doit but since I already have 5000 watt system on my residential roof that is grid tied and now paid for after 2 years, decided to keep out of it. I average about 21 kwh per day with better days at 28 kwh. 2 more houses on my side of the cul de sac have 5kw or 8kw units. Since I was first , received my $20 k rebate , but did not get the 30% tax credit. only got $2k. We installed the 8kw system on one neighbors house for $30k and his $9k credit plus a promise from florida of $20k will put him in great shape.
Waiting for an electric sport plane and EV EREV car!!
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:04 pm)I bet Nissan will introduce the EREV Leaf around the same time GM puts the BEV Volt in showrooms. More choices means better choices for all of us!
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:08 pm)Florida pays you at the end of year for any extra watt hrs produced. They monthly credit you with any over toward the next month’s bill.
-1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:10 pm)Mathew B said:
GM took the approach that the Volt will have good performance in extended range mode.
Another design philosophy would be to put as much battery as possible, and only have limited performance from a smaller engine that can get you home so range anxiety is alleviated.
Personally I like the idea of a big engine ‘and’ a big battery. Either way has the option of keeping your foot up and conserving.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:22 pm)#208
I think it’s the same all over CA. We’re a little behind our Canadian friends. See #206. And Florida @ #214. What a shame.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:24 pm)#209
Hallelujah. +1
I still think they get paid by the comment.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:27 pm)If you overproduce, most states require the utility to pay you for it, but they pay you the rate for a power generating plant, which is a fraction of the rate power consumers pay. So yes, over-sizing your system is usually a bad idea.
If you live in California, you may want to check out SolarCity. I believe they have a deal where you actually pay nothing for your solar system and your total electric bill goes down. SolarCity finances the system for you, and you pay a monthly electric bill to them. You need certain things to qualify, like sufficient sloped roof area that faces south.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:30 pm)Here is my theory which may or may not become fact in about 5 years. First, let’s put rebates aside for now, because everyone will get the same rebate. IF and it is only IF, as of today, the MiEV is truly priced at about $22K. Let’s say the Leaf comes in at $29K and the Volt at $35K. Both the Leaf and the MiEV have the same limitation for miles, yet there is a $7K difference. The majority of the Leaf crowd say they can fit within that limitation. Well if you are really only driving those short distances, then you can sacrifice a little comfort and go with the MiEV and save $7K. I am saying that after the first year sales of the Leaf, you start getting into what the mass market can afford. They are going to say, hmmm, same function but lower cost, I’ll take a MiEV. These are going to be the young single or newly weds. Then you will have the older and more affluent people/families that will need a bigger car and they will look at both technologies and say, Hmmm, 40 miles will cover 65-75% of my needs, but man the Leaf still doesn’t get me to Grandma’s house 120 miles away etc. Oh, but the Volt will get me there. And yes it cost about $6K more than the Leaf, but I have piece of mind.
And yes, the Leaf may come down in price, but so will the Volt, and there will be wiggle room for the MiEV too. It just comes down to common sense. I am just looking at it from a realistic pros and cons point of view. In about 3 years the Volt will gain a foot hold (Like Prius did) and expand to other cars, vans and SUVs. Mean while the MiEV (or maybe a similar low cost BEV) will take over that market, “leaving”
(pun intended) the Leaf turning brown and falling to the ground. BUT, like always, I could be wrong.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (7:48 pm)This is a good point, and was discussed here before, perhaps 18 months ago.
In fact, there are a whole range of possible engine sizes. Fisker chose a huge engine for their range extender, which you’ll only use driving a constant 125 miles per hour. Or you could just have a little 2-cylinder to limp home. Or you could have anything in between.
Also, if EREV all-electric range increases, there may be more battery energy available when the gas engine turns on. With that larger buffer, you may never notice a smaller engine, since peak power is usually only required in relatively short bursts.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (8:24 pm)I agree, they have to offer choices to the consumer if they want to stay in business.. I also think Nissan will offer a LEAF 100 and a LEAF 200, with the numbers being the range.
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (8:42 pm)late back to the thread,
Yes the utilities will now have to buy back your unused over generation in California. That law has passed and now the PUC is holding hearings to determine what the rate is that they will pay you. Should have the answer in 6 months.
Solar is highly dependent on the market and the cost of electricity. In low areas, many of these hydro states, (5 to10 cents) it does not make too much sense from an economic viewpoint.
In high areas (25to 50 cents) it makes huge financial sense.
The electric car is the converse of solar.
Usaing a fleet average of 20 mpg fro a gas car you will need 5 kwh to drive an electric car the same miles.
So in an area where energy cost 7cents a KWH, the equivilent to a gallon of gas is .35 cents a gallon
In an area were electricity is 50cents a KWH the equivilent is $2.50 a gallon.
Cheers
peder
Jun 22nd, 2010 (9:57 pm)The 12V batteries are between 105 AH and 125 AH. The 6V batteries are around 230AH. There are only 3 cells, so for the same size battery the cells are twice as big.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (10:06 pm)You better take a closer look at the demand curve. The peak demand isn’t at noon when the solar peaks. It is at 5PM, when solar has already declined considerably.
40% for solar? Yeah, you’re funny.
Solar won’t be the issue, wind is kicking its fanny in the alternative energy world. Wind isn’t predictable so the problem is on the time span of weather changes not daily cycles.
The reality is that in areas with little hydro, 5% is a problem. Texas is living it right now – they have had interruptions from a lack of wind. Even in places high in hydro will have a problem at 20% wind.
You are also over-estimating the difference between daytime load and night time load. Take a closer look at the graphs: the bottom line usually isn’t zero, but some much higher number.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (10:15 pm)I knew I could count on someone arguing the point….
“True believers” that treat alternative energy as a religion that shall not be blasphemed will always show up and argue the point.
I don’t mind the subsidy; I support it. Just don’t blow smoke up my backside and argue it’s not a subsidy.
You better take a closer look at the demand curve. The peak demand isn’t at noon when the solar peaks. It is at 5PM, when solar has already declined considerably.
40% for solar? Yeah, you’re funny.
Solar won’t be the issue, wind is kicking its fanny in the alternative energy world. Wind isn’t predictable so the problem is on the time span of weather changes not daily cycles.
The reality is that in areas with little hydro, 5% is a problem. Texas is living it right now – they have had interruptions from a lack of wind. Even in places high in hydro will have a problem at 20% wind.
You are also over-estimating the difference between daytime load and night time load. Take a closer look at the graphs: the bottom line usually isn’t zero, but some much higher number.
+1
Jun 22nd, 2010 (10:34 pm)For power plants, solar thermal looks like a really good solution.
With a solar power tower, they heat salt to a liquid and then use to make steam. And this molten salt can be stored for later use. That could cover the time between 12 noon and 5 pm.
And on a cloudly day, they can augment the heat from the sun with natural gas, so the total solution is >90% solar, but you don’t have the variability of wind.
And solar thermal is much chepaer than photo-voltaics, compeitive with wind and coal.
Jun 22nd, 2010 (10:47 pm)+1 Dave.
I don’t want to come off as anti-solar or anti-wind. I’ve worked on solar and wind. In that time, I’ve crossed WAY to many people who won’t talk reality when I talk to them. They frustrate me because I am trying to support my family at the same time, and those that can’t talk reality can’t run a business in alternative energy.
-2
Jun 23rd, 2010 (7:14 am)Why is everyone so anti hydrogen here?
A Hydrogen Fuel cell generates electricity which will run the electric motor — just like the Volts engine. Same basic setup as the Volt — add some batteries and you have a Volt. You need some storage to capture regenerative breaking anyway…
Are the Hydrogen guys at GM actually against the Volt? Why? A Fuel Cell looks a lot like a battery to me. Kinda like the UNIX wars when I was a kid
Jun 23rd, 2010 (7:14 am)I feel your pain. As a young idealistic kid in 1979 I went to a MUSE concert (Musicians United for Safe Energy). I drank the Kool-Aid, went to college and studied alt/energy. I work at a company that makes thin film and prints the circuits for one of the thin film solar companies. I soon found the realities of performance and cost. And I am not just talking thin film. I found where it does fit into society and where it does not. It is frustrating when people that do not know what they are talking about, sell people that 1) can’t afford it and 2) do not live in an area that is conducive to Solar cells. There are very wealthy celebs, politicians, and there are very wealthy people in general that can afford the equipment and commitment which is great and I am all for them helping by going Alternative. But the mass public whose median income is $60K a year and own a $100K house in the midwest are not good candidates. People get sold a bill of goods and then find it is not “as advertised” and word spreads what a rip-off. It tarnishes and dulls what is really an excellent tool in the clean energy tool box. To many people are using the Solar “screw driver” as a hammer and breaking the handle. (to speak in metaphors).
Jun 23rd, 2010 (7:31 am)But you have to die of something…? The hidden cost argument ignores the hidden benefits.
I can not imagine a happy life without cars, plastics, this computer, …
Oh oh, here it comes — I do not want to live on raw squirrel in the woods somewhere. Oops, I mean mushrooms and leaves.
Jun 23rd, 2010 (10:18 am)#229
True that. +1
We got involved in a big (for us) solar hot water heating project in the early ’80s that was a real disappointment. It causes me to be very “from Missouri” abut solar power to this day.
Jun 23rd, 2010 (11:18 pm)Believe it or not, Goldman Sachs has done a ton of financing for renewables. So it’s not surprising that they would be joined by some of their Wall St. brethren.
+1
Jun 24th, 2010 (4:58 am)Nice discussion up to this point. The unnecessary didactic cheapens your value and assumes that people who pay for consumption beyond your arbitrary criterion are somehow sinful. A better approach is to simply tell your story and the good it brings to your hearth and home.
Jun 24th, 2010 (6:35 am)I know this daily thread is basically dead now, but I feel compelled to disagree with some of what Noah said:
That depends. If you drive the Volt 40 or more miles every day, and if you don’t have a separate meter for it, you are probably right. But my mileage in a single day varies from 0 miles to 300 miles. Assuming 4 mile/kWh, and using a log I have been maintaining, I would have been averaging only 4.2kWh/day, which is about 34% of my average baseline. So if I was just below baseline without the Volt I would be at the tier 2 limit of 130% with it.
Sorry, but you are wrong. The minimum charge is $0.14784/day, not per kWh, and it is not added to the usage charge. It adds nothing for any day you use 3kWh or more.
True, but these are only the marginal rates. You are still paying $0.0514 for for the first 130% of baseline, so if you do use 200% your average payment is $0.0849/kWh, because 65% of it is still charged at the low rate and only 35% at the high rate. (Incidentally, that $0.0514 is the summer off-peak rate. The winter rate is slightly higher at $0.06006.)
Jul 9th, 2010 (12:10 am)There was in interesting article in July Scientific American that broke down the emissions of electric cars vs gas-fueled cars by state (based on the means of electrical production in that state).