The video below illustrates a safety test GM is putting Chevrolet Volt test cars through, called the flooded road test.
It takes place at GM’s Milford proving grounds and is headed by Engineer Rob Drexler. Concerns about putting large batteries in water is the rationale for the test which is done “to verify and confirm the customer is protected from any water intrusion into the battery,” says Drexler.
He notes the Volt’s battery system has three or four detection systems inside that will kill the power if water is detected inside. Development testing with a battery shell in the same trough, checking to ensure water did not enter it had been done six months ago.
The test demonstrated is an actual live battery in a Volt run through at various depths and speeds. It is both driven forward and in reverse multiple times. In between each run, engineers physically check the battery and the air induction system to make sure it passes specifications.
Whether water enters the pack is determined indirectly in between each run, and after the whole test the pack is physically completely broken down and visually checked by hand.
Drexel notes there are very stringent specifications for the allowance of any water into the battery and that the Volt is, of course, passing.
Previously, GM battery engineer Lance Turner described a test where GM fully submerged an EV-1 into a tank of salt water to simulate what would happen if a passenger accidentally drove into the sea.
I asked Turner if such a test had been done with the Volt. “I can’t confirm or deny,” says Turner.
+5
Jul 11th, 2010 (6:39 am)Also, for those still wondering if batteries and water mix, many of the world’s submarines run on battery power.
+4
Jul 11th, 2010 (6:41 am)MILFORD PROVING GROUNDS.. LARGEST TEST FACILITY IN THE WORLD.
Just another reason to by a Chevy Volt!
Jul 11th, 2010 (6:45 am)The electric car test drive I saw on the Simpsons was tougher.
-3
Jul 11th, 2010 (6:47 am)Not saying they shouldn’t do this kind of thing, I just wish it was already done!
LJGTVWOTR
+13
Jul 11th, 2010 (6:54 am)If you payed attention … the narrator said this is a follow up test… now they are retesting using near production vehicles. Pay attention children.
-8
Jul 11th, 2010 (6:55 am)Huh?
GM told us the battery pack is liquid cooled. They even showed us the water pump.
http://gm-volt.com/2008/10/20/contract-awarded-for-the-chevy-volts-water-pump-system/
So if a little water got into the pack, it would just mix with the coolant.
Am I missing something here?
+1
Jul 11th, 2010 (7:05 am)I am appreciative of everything they test on this vehicle. Everything that “passes with flying colors” just instills that much more confidence in the product. Thanks.
+6
Jul 11th, 2010 (7:05 am)The T battery probably has cooling blocks or cooling coils which draw heat away. Similar to the cooling blocks used on computer CPUs. The liquid is kept clean and under control inside a heat management system.
Good to see the Volt being put through extreme condition testing.
=D-Volt
Jul 11th, 2010 (7:12 am)A water CPU cooler is designed to cool one small hot spot.
The battery cells are large and distributed throughout the pack, so I would think the battery liquid cooling system would surround the cells, similar to the way a liquid cooling system works in a gas engine.
In any case, I would be more concerned with:
a) water from the road getting into any of the 400 volt DC wires
b) liquid cooling in the pack leaking into the cells
I’m sure GM engineering has thought of this, and has taken the necessary design precautions.
Jul 11th, 2010 (7:22 am)They are probably making sure water doesn’t get into the areas cooled by the flowing liquid.
Jul 11th, 2010 (7:27 am)We’ll know more on this in time. I can see a system of conducting rods doing the work of extraction. With the “liquid cooling” working around the outside case to draw it away. This T cooling system doesn’t need to be extreme. Simple low cost rods with a basic fluid system. I have worked with this type of pump. Have assembled and maintained them in industrial application. As long as the fluid is kept contaminant free. The pump does very well and runs for years.
=D-Volt
+1
Jul 11th, 2010 (7:39 am)Oh goody, another hood open shot. Now if we could some info on that fancy transmission.
Ah, with that shape the Volt *would* make a good submarine.
Just kidding, do not try THAT at home.
Jul 11th, 2010 (7:43 am)There is no way the batteries and electronics in the battery pack would be immersed in water. There would be major issues about corrosion and short circuits! each battery cell is between cooling fins (we have seen pictures of this). The fins all stick out each side of the row of cells. I assume there is a liquid cooling system attached to the row of fins.
Tesla has provided more details of their system and it consists of plastic hoses pressed up against the side of each cell and water run through the hoses.
As you can see from the pictures this is an early pre-production Volt and the video could be up to a year old. I am sure they would have repeated this with a production Volt off the assembly line.
Jul 11th, 2010 (7:56 am)The coolant is sealed and the battery is sealed separately. If water gets to either it would show a different system breach.
+5
Jul 11th, 2010 (8:27 am)“Splash Engineer”
There’s a phrase I had not ever heard before.
Maybe we could keep that person around for the launch of VOLT.
Its going to create a HUGE splash!
GO VOLT!
+5
Jul 11th, 2010 (8:37 am)Off Topic, but on Meet the Press, Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs talked about the Volt. Specifically Obama is going to Michigan for a ground breaking of the Battery Plant… I will have to go back and re-listen on NBC.com, but I believe he said the batteries will be able to power a car 100 miles on a single charge. LOLOL Mis-information coming from the top of the U.S. We are in good hands!
+5
Jul 11th, 2010 (8:58 am)And the source for charging the batteries is Nuclear! We need to replace coal plants with Nuclear. Wind and Solar are fine for the locations that are viable, but we should be like Europe. 70-80% Nuke! EREV with E85 (BTW, winter mix in the midwest is really about E70).
+3
Jul 11th, 2010 (9:01 am)I believe this kind of testing is absolutely necessary with all the streets in southwest Florida flooded during heavy thunder showers. We need to be reassured that no one will be electrocuted. I found out my Volt will be ordered in November from my dealer in Michigan and will be delivered in March 2011. I can hardly wait. WOO-HOO
Take Care,
TED
-23
Jul 11th, 2010 (9:10 am)(click to show comment)
-6
Jul 11th, 2010 (9:17 am)Pat said:
the dum dumbs in US will never catch the finer points & rationale for buying EV …
>b>Hey, no gas = more cigarettes and beer.
Jul 11th, 2010 (9:21 am)Off topic. Did anyone receive an email from GM this morning to become a “Volt Insider”? You do get to answer a question about whether you just want more info or you want to buy one as soon as it is available in your market. Interesting, but I am not getting my hopes up as I live in Kentucky. But hey, it is more than what I had yesterday. Still pondering the Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan Hybrid…the Volt seems so far away for me, especially after the 10k and 30k build announcement.
Hawk
+3
Jul 11th, 2010 (9:23 am)The liquid cooled battery pack has to work like my son’s liquid cooled gaming PC. “Tubes” of coolant pressed against the battery in its own sealed circulatory system.
+6
Jul 11th, 2010 (9:29 am)Always good to hear from the anti-american Pat. Where are you from Pat. It would be a good point of reference for us to understand your animosity.
+3
Jul 11th, 2010 (9:31 am)Ted, you are the man! Glad to hear (actually a little jealous) that you have your Volt lined up already.
+4
Jul 11th, 2010 (9:37 am)If Nissan and others, including GM, do not build the car to withstand the mass market who beats on and abuses the way they have since cars came into being, then they are all doomed. Bottom line is that I don’t care if you are U.S., Canada, Mexico, Europe or Asia, we will always mis-use cars to race, burn out, overload, pull bushes out of the ground, tow your buddy’s car, and on and on. If you never ride your car hard and put it away wet even at least 3-4 times a year, you are either full of it, or just one of the 0.01% of the popluation! LOLOL
+1
Jul 11th, 2010 (9:45 am)Well… you actually have a point. I’ll bet that a large part of the Voltec system would make for a very good drive train for a small submarine, ROV or manned.
Jul 11th, 2010 (10:02 am)Yes, it would but it would be hard for GM to claim credit. The US Navy used this scheme to power subs in World War II.
Jul 11th, 2010 (10:18 am)I don’t know exactly how the battery pack cooling will work, but if you look at a cutaway of the pack, there are a number of printed circuit boards inside to control and monitor the cells. I don’t think those components would be compatible with water intrusion.
+2
Jul 11th, 2010 (10:50 am)That is great they are doing all these tests, but I am sure that when I do get my baby Volt I will wash it by hand myself and I will not be passing any road with as much water as shown in the video. That is just me guys..Why, because it is my baby Volt. Go GM…Show them wrong.
+2
Jul 11th, 2010 (11:00 am)The high level of transparency with the Volt’s development contrasts with how Nissan has been with the LEAF. With Nissan it’s been all talk and promises and very little proof and hands-on evaluation.
GM has clearly done their homework with the Volt.
+4
Jul 11th, 2010 (11:17 am)This guy walks into a Chinese bar and has a seat. The bartender says “Herro, how can I help you” The man says, “I’ll have a Stoli with a twist”
The Chinese bartender thinks for a second and then says.
“Once upon a time, there were FOUR bears!”
-7
Jul 11th, 2010 (11:22 am)No, only a very few submarines are nulcear powered. I was talking about pure EVs and those with diesel generators. A nuke sub only has very small batteries to smooth the power flow. The nuclear reactor is always on and there to provide power. It is on, even when you don’t want it on.
What do you mean like Europe? Do you mean like France? Germany is shutting down all their commercial nuclear power plants and England is just starting to learn how much it’s going to cost them to decommission their reactors.
If you want an update to what the world production numbers for nuclear power are The Oil Drum just posted an article. Here is the chart. Down, down, down. With good reason – nuclear is a money pit.
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6710
+1
Jul 11th, 2010 (11:28 am)LOL. If you don’t know about it – obviously it didn’t happen. Search around instead of making illinformed statements.
+5
Jul 11th, 2010 (11:28 am)Not to rain on the parade, but you all should not take any solace in batteries in submarines. I used to teach this stuff in the Navy and water in the battery compartment can easily doom a submarine. In fact, some of you may remember the famous Bonefish battery compartment fire that doomed the few remaining diesel submarines the US Navy had left back in the late ‘80s. [It made the nightly national news]. From deadly chlorine gas to metal-melting temperatures, there is ample reason to fear salt water intrusion into the (lead acid) battery compartment. It is a far cry from the submarine issues to this Volt submersion test, but I felt I should put this forward since people kept coming back to submarine batteries. While I am a strong Volt proponent, I will tell you that nothing strikes fear into a submariner’s heart as much as the mixing of water and batteries. Please do not use this as a selling concept as you educate others on the value of a Volt.
Jul 11th, 2010 (11:30 am)Yes, I did, and since I’m in Texas, I’m hopeful to be in a launch market, so I checked the “I want to buy one as soon as possible box” and it didn’t cost me $100 bucks to do so either.
+2
Jul 11th, 2010 (11:34 am)I doubt too many high school drop outs will be buying either Leaf or Volt. They just don’t make that kind of money …
+3
Jul 11th, 2010 (11:35 am)I don’t often get rude and blunt in these forums- but you have NO IDEA what you are talking about. ALL US Navy subs are nukes and “smooth the power flow”? HUH?! I could not begin to tell you just how far off you are with that comment. The battery, indeed, represents little compared to the old days, but you are really talking out of your A$$ with that one!!!
Jul 11th, 2010 (11:41 am)OFF SUBJECT…. This is a dumb question but has anyone figured out why the test cars has two or three paint colors or black bumpers? Is it a color coding for which car gets tested for what? Or is it to make sure if it got stolen it would stick out? It is not that they are running out of grey paint?
+1
Jul 11th, 2010 (11:50 am)Texas: No, only a very few submarines are nulcear powered. I was talking about pure EVs and those with diesel generators. A nuke sub only has very small batteries to smooth the power flow. The nuclear reactor is always on and there to provide power. http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6710 (Quote)
I don’t often get rude and blunt in these forums- but you have NO IDEA what you are talking about. ALL US Navy subs are nukes and “smooth the power flow”? HUH?! I could not begin to tell you just how far off you are with that comment. The battery, indeed, represents little compared to the old days, but you are really talking out of your A$$ with that one!!!
(Quote)
LOL, the squids are “submarining” each other today!
Jul 11th, 2010 (12:02 pm)
Jul 11th, 2010 (12:06 pm)Sure, just switch the ICE to a diesel and you essentially have the classic WWII submarine.
-14
Jul 11th, 2010 (12:08 pm)(click to show comment)
+2
Jul 11th, 2010 (12:37 pm)Certainly with EV’s wholly dependent on electronics and not fully tested mass produced battery chemistry — copious testing’s paramount. In my product design (EE), I test beyond ALL limits. Not just “does it pass” – I push the envelope–break it. That’s paid off. (Always my IE instincts balancing fit and form.) This is actually an industry unto itself. Accelerated failure analysis. What does three years of hard driving do? Five years. 20 years!
Getting five-nines (99.999%) uptime takes seven-nines reliability. Easy to say and most difficult to achieve. Maybe this sounds corny considering Mercedes built a brand around ultra-reliability – if anybody can do it GM can.
+3
Jul 11th, 2010 (1:28 pm)Stuart, at this point this criticism seems out of place. Nissan has just given something like 500 journalists test drives at the testing track in Japan. That’s probably similar to what GM has provided. That said, my favorite review is this one:
http://www.nctimes.com/business/article_e543c90c-2fdb-591f-b5d6-d6e7a51c7102.html
It’s my favorite for two reasons. One is that this is a test drive on actual streets and roads in the US, not on a test track. (I don’t think we’ve had such a drive in a Volt). Two is that the reviewer is not a car guy — he’s just a young journalist working for a very small regional newspaper — so his reaction should be quite close to what you’d see from the average driver. And it’s all good.
I’m not suggesting that the Volt won’t provide an equally nice driving experience. It might in fact be better. The point would be that Nissan and GM are marketing their EVs based on many things but not so much on what strikes me as the most obvious advantage — that EVs deliver a smoother, quieter ride with more stable handling. At some point you have to give people a reason to spend more money up front on an EV. Gas savings or national security or a desire to save the planet might work for a few, but most people just want what’s best for themselves. A premium drive would be one way to convince people to pay what they perceive to be a premium price.
Jul 11th, 2010 (1:48 pm)No DonC, there have been numerous “on street” road tests of the Volt.
And by numerous journalists (automotive and otherwise)
Where you been?
.LB
+1
Jul 11th, 2010 (2:09 pm)…and what the heck does being an EV have to do with handling? battery mass? Highly doubt that, as it would depend where they put it!
.LB
Jul 11th, 2010 (2:12 pm)I remember seeing earlier videos where the Volt has been subjected to water tests. This appears to be one of many H20 encounters for the VOLT.
+4
Jul 11th, 2010 (2:44 pm)Not really. I work in the field and travel all over the world discussing these things.
Just back from China. They are building reactors now at a fast pace and have plans to accelerate. Nothing is in their way. Except for the legal issues brought on by uninformed activists that tie up construction and cost billions in delays, nuclear is the cheapest long term option right now. The Chinese don’t have to worry about activists I guess.
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf63.html
Also, other countries are starting to build in Europe. Italy is reconsidering their long term avoidance of nuclear and Germany is having second thoughts about shutting down their plants. it seems that it might look good to the greens on paper but it is not practical to do so. Japan, also a big nuclear user.
In the US, thanks to the 2005 energy policy act, we have over 20 units that are moving along right now.
Operational license requests underway.
http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/col.html
Early site permits already underway.
http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/esp.html
In the US, they don’t come to the NRC for this unless they are very $erious.
Right now, despite what else you might read, there is a minor nuclear Renaissance going on world wide.
-2
Jul 11th, 2010 (2:45 pm)The Volt test drives I’ve seen have all been on closed courses, which GM has said is because of legal reasons. So I presume you have cites to these “numerous” test drives you’re referring to. Care to share? I may have missed what you’re referring to.
Duh, yeah it depends on where they put it. And since they can put it in many places, and since they aren’t morons, they put it in the center of the car below the seats. Viola, better handling than having the car weighted towards the front.
Jul 11th, 2010 (2:54 pm)See post #9.
-12
Jul 11th, 2010 (3:05 pm)(click to show comment)
+2
Jul 11th, 2010 (3:14 pm)I would disagree Pat.
GM has not produced a car that takes any special knowledge to drive it. Thats the beauty of the design. It is casually simplistic to drive due to the technology that the driver does not see.
How many educated people know what is going on in their computer, or how the wireless on their IPOD works, or for that matter, how their direct injection variable valve V6 with computer controlled automatic transmission works. The answer is, barely a few. A 14 year old farm boy could drive the volt just as well as a Harvard educated lawyer.
The Volt will be near $40K because it is a new type of car with two motors and an expensive battery that will be produced in limited numbers (in what I call a public testing program) because it is part of the development efforts for future cars at GM.
PS, you never told us the background on your animosity towards the USA.
+1
Jul 11th, 2010 (3:25 pm)DonC,
This test drive looks pretty good. If they are on a closed course here, it sure looks like normal streets to me and the guy is not driving around in circles. This is a pretty old Video at this point.
http://newpapyrusmagazine.blogspot.com/2010/07/chevy-volt-test-drive.html
+2
Jul 11th, 2010 (3:39 pm)It’s better not even to reply to the obvious trolls, guys. They will go away if we don’t give then the attention they crave.
Jul 11th, 2010 (4:20 pm)It is also the way a number of submariners have died… even one on a nuclear sub.
When salt water hits sulfuric acid it produces chlorine gas.
-1
Jul 11th, 2010 (4:34 pm)#31 Jokeman said:
This guy walks into a Chinese bar and has a seat. The bartender says “Herro, how can I help you” The man says, “I’ll have a Stoli with a twist”
The Chinese bartender thinks for a second and then says.
“Once upon a time, there were FOUR bears!”
I think that was a Japanese bar!
Jul 11th, 2010 (4:39 pm)You contradicted yourself in your post if you think about it a bit…
Where at the batteries? Down low. An EV has a lower center of gravity which helps with handling.
+1
Jul 11th, 2010 (4:45 pm)It is only down in continental Europe. It is going up everywhere else, including the United States.
That chart was very intentionally designed to show the only place with a decline first to make you think it is going down elsewhere too. If you put all of the others on there first you’d see the slight growth everywhere else with the sharp decline in Europe on top.
It is also not something to gloat about either. Go look at the coal consumption figures out of Europe – it is up sharply. Yes, the wind power output is up sharply, but it comes nowhere close to replacing the nuclear. The bulk of the cut is made up with burning coal
+3
Jul 11th, 2010 (4:45 pm)I think it is very smart for GM to make videos of all the “torture testing” they are doing on the Volt. They should make these videos available for all the dealerships to have on hand if a customer is worried about getting electrocuted in a flood or whatever.
Potential customers are going to have all sorts of little worries that might make them skittish about going ahead and buying a Volt. The Chevy dealerships are going to have to be well educated about the Volt. They need to know all the objections that potential buyers are going to have BEFORE they walk in the door of the dealership.
Customers will have all sorts of questions about servicing the Volt too. Bottom line, I hope that GM is making the dealerships train their mechanics AND their salespeople about the Volt. Make them pass a certification test about the Volt and so forth.
GM needs to have really well thought out TV commercials that cover the top 5-10 concerns and misconceptions that people might have about the Volt. Some people are “nervous nellies” about new technology. It will take some hand holding and education to get those people confident enough to “sign on the dotted line” at the dealership.
GM needs to be ready for all sorts of situations. The Volt really IS “coming soon to a dealership near you”. The curtain is about to come up. It seems like it’s taken forever, but the electric car revolution is almost here. I can already visualize myself sitting in my Volt going down the road with that “new car smell”.
Jul 11th, 2010 (5:05 pm)GM Volt Fan said:
Potential customers are going to have all sorts of little worries that might make them skittish.
Salesman: “With this car you might not need any gasoline.”
Customer: “Oh really? But what about…, oh never mind, I’ll take it.”
Jul 11th, 2010 (5:05 pm)I don’t have a big problem with nuclear. I just hope that the nuclear industry can somehow design and build their new plants a lot CHEAPER and still have all the safety concerns, waste concerns, and nuclear terrorism concerns taken care of. If the nuclear industry is going to have a big renaissance they’re going to have to. From what I hear, COST is still a really big problem.
Maybe someday, we’ll have those Generation IV nuclear plants that don’t need to be near large bodies of water and large cities. Put them out in the middle of nowhere. Somehow design them to recycle most of the nuclear waste like I hear is possible.
Design them to process the nuclear fuel so that the waste can’t be used to make nuclear bombs. I hear China and India is going to build a bunch of nuclear plants. It would be nice to know that some muslim terrorist can’t simply break into a nuclear plant and grab tons of plutonium or whatever for bombs.
-1
Jul 11th, 2010 (6:13 pm)They probably can now, if they don’t mind having green kids. (color)
+1
Jul 11th, 2010 (6:18 pm)I’m thinking this is the GM Technical Center in Warren. Note you keep seeing the same building in the background. FWIW I think GM has said that for legal reasons they can’t allow non-employees to drive the Volt on city streets until the cars were production. (Maybe risk management says “no”). This is why you see the test drives at Milford or around the parking lot at Dodger stadium. Test rides are of course different, so Lyle could ride along as a GM employee drove a Volt into NY City.
But this is not that big of a deal. I was just pointing out that Nissan was allowing test drives of what is essentially a 99.9% production Leaf around city streets in San Diego as an example refuting the notion that Nissan is far behind where GM is with the Volt. Seems that both companies are about at the same place. All good. No doubt GM has more Volts in NA than Nissan does, but GM is going to assemble the Volts here whereas Nissan is assembling the first model year Leafs in Japan. So Volts are here and Leafs are there. Claiming the Leaf is vaporware because Nissan only has one production leaf in NA is like saying the Volt is vaporware because GM doesn’t have any Volts in Japan.
-1
Jul 11th, 2010 (6:33 pm)How will you get your car back to Florida?
What are you thoughts about Volt service?
Jul 11th, 2010 (6:52 pm)RB said:
What are you thoughts about Volt service?
Service? You mean where is the reset button?
-1
Jul 11th, 2010 (7:01 pm)If gm is only making 10,000 in the first year, they are thinking there the cars are going to need a lot of 1st year service. I assume that will be mainly computer re-programming and various electronic adjustments, though in the normal course of things there will most likely be some sensors that are found to be non-performing, and other stuff that needs to be adjusted. First-year shakedown of an complex product is, one hopes, not going to require anything major, but most likely there will be a lot of smaller stuff.
FWIW, for this reason I think gm is making a mistake to avoid the early adopters, who would be much more accepting of those 1st-year glitches than will the general auto public.
-2
Jul 11th, 2010 (7:04 pm)This seems not that likely IMHO. Yes nuclear plants are cheap to run, but they cost an arm and a leg to build. So it all depends on how big the arm and the leg is. When you’re like the US and you’re the “Saudi Arabia of Natural Gas” it’s hard to believe that the far lower construction costs and high efficiencies of combined natural gas plants don’t outweigh the far higher costs of the fuel as compared to the very high construction costs and low fuel costs of a nuclear plant. (May not be the case for a place like Japan).
Certainly Amory Lovins doesn’t buy it. http://www.rmi.org/rmi/Library/E08-01_NuclearIllusion
You probably know the answer to this: Has anyone been able fund a nuclear plant without a government guarantee? I think the answer to this is no. To me the fact that the capital markets don’t want to fund the nuclear option strongly suggests it’s not the winner from a financial standpoint. In the interests of full disclosure I’ve had friends whose parents took a beating on Whoops bonds so I’m sensitive to the nuclear power industry’s history of not delivering the promised numbers.
Jul 11th, 2010 (7:18 pm)This is making fun of Pat to all you serious people.
Now I see the rationale by dum dum Pat who have no rationale thinking & grey cells …a high school drop out [too many of these where Pat comes from] .. Pat is so dum dum and cost high so dum dumb cant afford it .. the dum dumbs like Pat will never catch the finer points or have rationale…
+1
Jul 11th, 2010 (7:44 pm)In contrast to the U.S., ountries like France and South Korea have been able to produce abundant, safe, reliable, low-cost electricity generated from nuclear poewr plants because of one key reason: their startegy is to build a large number of reactors all at the same time using a well thought out common reactor design. This ensures that the reactor design approved for all of the plants constructed will be as safe as possible, with economies-of-scale helping to keep the costs down for each reactor.
The way I see it, if you’re going to try to reduce the world’s dependence on oil, you’re probably going to have to begin shifting the bulk of transportation and heating onto the grid–I don’t see any other way. This will almost certainly mean continuing to rely on the nuclear option as part of a well-diversified grid mix. Perhaps low-cost natural gas power plants can provide a bridge in between when we begin shutting down the older dirtier coal-fired plants to when the next generation of nuclear plants are built, not to mention renewables.
The concern that some readers have with the waste material in reactors being used for building bombs is justified. However, a new generation of Thorium reactors, if ever built, will not have that drawback.
I realize that the nuclear discussion here is somewhat off topic in term’s of today’s article, but it nonetheless represents a topic which is well worth weighing into.
Sincerely, George, Canada…go Volt!!
+2
Jul 11th, 2010 (8:02 pm)I think your point is rather weak – pavement is pavement whether it’s within corporate grounds or not. The fact is, GM has been letting outsiders and media drive the Volt throughout its development. Remember the overrevving issues occuring when transitioning into extended range mode that a few reporters commented upon last year? And consider that GM recently drove a Volt 750 miles from Michigan to Consumers Report’s test facility in Connecticut to let them drive it and check it for themselves on their own turf.
Only in the past month has Nissan begun allowing outsiders to drive an actual LEAF. And does anybody have any knowledge or videos of Nissan’s own torture tests? Have there been any yet? I’ve seen nothing resembling the water tests, winter freezing tests, hot desert tests, dust tests, hill climbing tests, etc. etc. for the Volt.
Sorry, but Nissan has not come close to the transparency with the LEAF that GM has shown with the Volt. Perhaps given their low standing in people’s minds GM felt they had to do it. Whatever the reason, I feel very good about the Volt being as good as promised. With the LEAF, where’s the beef?
+3
Jul 11th, 2010 (8:08 pm)TEX, I don’t know what substance you are putting between the cheek & gum for chew, but you are a little whacky. Subs are all nuclear power, and many ships (Navy) are as well. That chart you attached is only showing a slight dip in European Nuke power. In fact if you read the article, it is partly due to reduced demand. Not shutting down plants. Regarding Germany, a number of plants there have an expiration date on licenses coming up in 2021. All plants have a license expiration date. Even your drivers license has an expiration date. The plan is to re-issue the license per normal procedure. It is done all the time.
Bottom Line — Wind, Solar, Hydro should be used when and where it makes economical sense. Nuclear should be used in all other instances. EREV with E85 will become major source of transportation in the next 5 years. BEV will play a small roll and be relegated to the SCIONS, FOCUS and similar type vehicles targeted for young college crowd, with the exception of a few die hard eco-nuts. Of course there will be the high end BEV toys for the rich and famous as well.
Jul 11th, 2010 (8:14 pm)RB, have you talked to your local Chevy dealer to see what their plans are for the Volt when it comes to your area? I wonder if they’d be willing and capable to (unofficially) take care of a Volt if you were to be able to get one in DC or Jersey/NY. They very well might see the advantage of familiarizing themselves early with an actual one.
Your risk would be lasting around 12 months I think, after which availability should officially come your way. Sometimes rules need to be broken in order for progress to happen.
Jul 11th, 2010 (8:40 pm)In my particular situation, it is not a practical thing to do. You would understand if you read the reviews of that dealer’s service. As Bob Lutz said, 25% of dealers are outstanding, 50% are OK, and 25% are the pits. (Well he said something like that.) And that bottom 25% has to be somewhere. The other side is that some other places have one of those top 25% dealers. We used to have one but unfortunately that one closed during the bankruptcy. The one that remains focuses on sales but not service, which for a standard car is fine; you just take it someplace else.
+1
Jul 11th, 2010 (9:39 pm)Well lets share this link for one:
http://gm-volt.com/2010/07/06/chevrolet-volt-highway-ride/
guy
which you do and have known all along since you posted a comment to CorrvetteGuy:
“DonC Says
Jul 6th, 2010 (10:43 am)
CorvetteGuy: I’ve been waiting for 3 years to be able to take deposits and the big boss now says ‘Go for it.’ That’s good news. Congrats”
Did you or did you not view that video?
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
-1
Jul 11th, 2010 (10:55 pm)Certainly doing “tract reactors” may be hypothetically better than doing one-offs. But at this point there isn’t any evidence to support the idea. Not only would there be a shortage of trained people to construct one nuclear reactor much less a hundred, the claims that nuclear reactors can be built cost effectively are contradicted by realty. The Olkiluoto plant in Finland was supposed to prove one and for all that nuclear plants could be built on time and under budget, but, over budget by 70% and years behind schedule, it’s more or less proven that nuclear reactors are money pits which will bankrupt you. As has been reported:
According to Professor Stephen Thomas, “Olkiluoto has become an example of all that can go wrong in economic terms with new reactors”. Areva and the utility involved “are in bitter dispute over who will bear the cost overruns and there is a real risk now that the utility will default”. See generally http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/29/business/energy-environment/29nuke.html
FWIW the US produces almost twice as much nuclear power than France (113 vs. 63). As for looking to France as an example of cost effective power you’ll need to look elsewhere. The reactors were built by the French government and the accounting was so horrible that no one can tell how much they cost.
Jul 11th, 2010 (11:01 pm)Go read my comment #63 for the distinction between a “test drive” and a “test ride”.
As a practical matter there is a huge difference. Test rides are easy to manage since you control everything and can avoid potential problems. Test drives not so much, which is why you don’t see Steve Jobs letting people in the audience test drive new products. But he’s more than happy to give all of us a test ride.
-1
Jul 11th, 2010 (11:12 pm)Drives on closed courses at low speeds, especially by trained test drivers, is hardly the same as having the Average Joe drive it around on beat up city streets and on a 23 lane freeway. Not sure what’s so hard to understand.
No doubt GM has been more transparent. To some extent you may not have been paying attention to the Leaf. There has been the same process of driving mules and on closed course as we’ve seen with the Volt. And in June 500 journalists took test drives on the Nissan equivalent of Milford. Now we’re seeing test drives of the Leaf on city streets, highways, and expressways, which we haven’t yet seen for the Volt. So there should be no doubt that at the moment there is no more reason to doubt the Leaf than there is to doubt the Volt. In your words, the beef is there if you choose to look.
Jul 11th, 2010 (11:14 pm)Don’t forget that the Volt was at the Winter Olympics in Vancouver.
http://www.gm.ca/inm/gmcanada/english/about/Volt/Volt.html
Jul 12th, 2010 (4:56 am)Well Jimza, He’s sort of right. 16 kws could take you a hundred miles, in ideal circumstances if you used almost all the battery. Of course we know the Volt won’t be using all the battery. It’s up to us all to inform people why the Volt only goes 40 miles and why the way GM is doing it vs the way Nissan is doing it is a superior way. I really believe what I heard one person say one time. No company will be happy just selling you a new battery, they’re gonna try to sell you a whole new car.
Jul 12th, 2010 (5:41 am)Jimza Fan Said:
“No company will be happy just selling you a new battery, they’re gonna try to sell you a whole new car.”
I don’t see why using the Volt pack for its potential 100 mile range negates them selling you a whole car when the pack starts degrading in 5 years or so instead of 10.
They’ve always done that with ICE cars. I don’t remember a dealer ever suggesting I replace an ICE and keep my existing car, even though ICEs are cheap, and it’s relatively easy to do.
+1
Jul 12th, 2010 (6:41 am)It is not only highly likely it is a documented fact. Just look to the latest example. Yucca mountain. We have paid for the place twice. It is there, tunnels are in place and the DOE has finished yet another study saying it is safe all at the cost of billionis. How much fuel is there, zero. Now the Govt is trying to kill it for good with some type of legal maneuver that will make all past work useless and you would have to start from scratch to license Yucca. Now the Nuclear industry is paying to develop yet another storage solution. The plants are running and we all enjoy the electrons so the waste is there and not going away. This kind of triple (or more) payment for things due to legal wrangling is what drives up the cost. If it were just an engineering project, and not an endless court battle, the projects would cost far less money.
+1
Jul 12th, 2010 (4:07 pm)Ah quoting from the wishful, pseudo-scientists, the Cassandras at the “Oil Drum”. What a great source of total Nonsense.
There is a Nuclear Renaissance gathering strength here in the USA. Some 30 odd, new “perfected” nuclear power plants are getting ready to break ground in the USA starting in 2011. Everything that can be pre-planned and done without turning any Earth, is being done to shorten the construction time, and reduce the costs, unlike in the 1970s. As a consequence, these cookie cutter, “standard design” plants, already pre-approved, will start building, then. Some 42-54 months later, they will join the Grid, and begin generation of electricity,and little can stop them. even if desired.
All the legal tools and shenanigans, that we, and I include myself as a principled critic of immature nuclear plants of that era, used to stall and bankrupt Utilities trying to build the immature plants of the 1970s have been now ruled illegal. These “perfected” plants when started, will continue construction until finished. They will raise nuclear electric generation from around 19% to almost 40% of the US electric Grid, allowing the Utilities to finally scrap a lot of old, very dirty, “grandfathered”, Coal generation,without much emissions technology. Those old smokers were forced to continue to run, and pollute, when many 1970s era nuclear plants under construction, were scrapped.
Germany has reversed itself and is no longer closing down its nuclear plants and England is now planning to replace its old nuclear plants with new ones. They have discovered the ridiculous results of pseudo-Science by green know-nothings, doesn’t work. Windmills live an average of only 8 years, not 30; they produce less than 29% of rated nameplate generation and require lots of stabilizing conventional base load to prevent Grid oscillation and blackouts.
Even as “Oil Drummers” continue to bray about the decline of volumes of sweet, low viscosity, liquid petroleum for refineries built only to handle such input.
The fools don’t recognize that most refineries world-wide have been modified to handle high-viscosity, sour, crude. They prophesied that was an economic impossibility, but it has proved both possible, and largely completed. There is no longer any Refinery concern that served as the basis of the Peakist “Peak Oil” ideology; and sufficient petroleum exists for several hundred years of Civilization’s use. Even as demand for Petroleum of all types continues to decline for most of this century, and demand will almost disappear before the century is half over.
Jul 12th, 2010 (10:22 pm)I think your just quibbling over words to support your statements. The Nissan Leaf is no Volt; you can’t begin to put them on the same level. The Volt is so far advanced compared to the Nissan. For instance, the battery management in the Volt is far more sophisticated; it is not merely air cooled but air and water cooled. The Leaf is only battery powered and does not possess the sophisticated computer software of the Volt. There are other numerous factors where the Volt is different from the Leaf. All in all, you can’t compare the Volt and Nissan without noticing all the major differences that separate the two vehicles into different categories.
Nissan will allow test rides within city limits because that’s really where the Nissan Leaf will be used; no so much on the highway since it has limited AER and brings attention to the one big arguement againstr BEV’s – range. True in areas like the West Coast – Seattle down to San Diego – charging infrastructure will be installed along the highway. Only them will the Leaf be able to demonstrate a “Freedom Drive” as the Volt has. Still, even then, the Leaf will have to stop more often to recharge while the Volt travels +300 miles before refueling. The Volt will file up on gas and recharge its batteries at the same time, when traveling down I-5. As time shows us battery advancements, the time when they will equalize will come, but for now the Volt offers the best options for those owners who have to travel more than 100 miles, those who can’t afford an electric commuter vehicle and an ICE vehicle for longer trips, or those who see upgrading to a more powerful battery when available instead of buying a new BEV. It will be a while before the BEV market gains market share compared to EREV cars like the Volt. Don’t get me wrong on this issue; I do believe that many people will buy a Leaf (those individuals are among the drivers who only travel under 40 to 100 miles per day round trip). But once car owners realize the totality of capability and quality of craftsmanship of the Volt, it will sell like hotcakes compared to the Leaf. This will last for a few years before the battery improvements make BEVs competitive.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again
Jul 13th, 2010 (12:01 pm)Aren’t we actually buying the Volt to take advantage all of those trips at nearly 40 miles or less? If you want to go on long trips the eliminate-foreign-oil-dependence mode is a train or bus. The trips where all or at least huge chunks of them are all electric will make the Volt’s capabilities worth-wile. Reveling in a long freedom trip is not even germane to the reasons one would buy a Volt. Except for those who are looking for cutting edge technology for technologies sake alone, and don’t give a hoot about displacing the use of oil.
I don’t understand how driving up and down I-5 in CS mode is a virtue, goal, objective, preferred result, or aspiration for people who look forward to GM getting electric Volts on highways. It’s just a trade-off, until bio fuels, cheaper batteries, practical quick charging or pre-ground unicorn horns can extend the range with out gasoline. Seems like an alternative aspiration would be to try to avoid it.
So if you can take take Amtrak, you can drop the last 40 or 50 gallons of gas a year you would have needed in a Volt. And driving up and down I-5 on gasoline is so completely last century.