GM-VOLT : Chevy Volt Electric Car Site

Of all the factors needed for electric vehicles to come into full acceptance, many agree improvements in battery technology are up there, at or near the top.

While early adopters are willing to accept range limits, first-generation pricing and recharging times of several hours or longer, many would-be consumers are waiting for more.

Will they get it? What is reasonable to expect?

To hear from someone with much more than average knowledge, we spoke yesterday with Haresh Kamath, a senior project manager for the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI).

As an independent, non-profit R&D organization, the U.S.-based EPRI says its members include 90 percent of America’s electricity producers, and in all, participation comes from 40 countries.

To allow the car to travel much farther than present-day EVs, Chevrolet built the Volt with a range-extending gasoline generator. What would it be like in the not-too-distant future if GM were able to build an all-electric Volt that that needed no engine to go just as far?

Kamath, who is actively involved in battery research, was kind enough to answer our questions, and to do so took time away from his attendance at the ongoing 28th International Battery Seminar & Exhibit in Fort Lauderdale, Fla.

His perspective may be one to consider next time you read a blurb selling the sizzle from a tech company dangling the possibility of several-times multiplied energy density in the next few years.

“I would be careful about putting a time line on that figure,” Kamath said while offering a more conservative estimate, “What we do know is in probably in the next 10 years or so we will probably get at least a two times increase in energy density.”

Among the most significant sectors pushing for improved batteries, he said, are consumer electronics, transportation, and power stations with energy storage needs.

“Transportation gets a very high priority,” Kamath said, “The projections are that the transportation market will eclipse the consumer electric market by 2020; many people believe this is the case.”

Presently, lithium-ion (li-ion) batteries – as found in the Volt and all other modern EVs – have shuffled out to be the technology of choice.

How much more can li-ion batteries be improved, and will they remain the battery of choice?

“In the short term lithium-ion looks like it is going to be the winner,” Kamath said.

How would it be to have much faster charging batteries? Cutting costs, and increasing range are higher priorities, but ways to expand all parameters are being worked on.

To further clarify, he said li-ion derivatives are numerous, and the technology should be thought of more as a “family” of batteries than a “type.”

There are at least 6-8 competitive variations of the li-ion battery, if not more, he said.

At present, there is an ongoing shake-out ramping up to an unprecedented scale.

Manufacturers in all sectors are working on ways to improve them.

Scientists are vying to be the one to put their name on the next great technological leap forward.

At the same time, efficiencies are expected to grow over the next 4-5 years, Kamath said, through a combination of scale, production learning curves, trial and error with designs, and improvements in technology.

This should help drive down cost, improve profitability, or both.

Kamath said some of the most critical factors battery manufacturers are contending with – more or less in order – are: 1) cost, 2) life, 3) range, and, 4) recharging time.

Naturally, the people working on solutions will take their gains anywhere they can, but these are the top priorities.

While attempting to streamline li-ion formulations, every manufacturer is working to improve its proprietary discoveries.

Other chemistries with longer-term development possibilities mentioned were lithium sulfur and lithium air, as well as, zinc air and silicon anode technology.

But again, no new battery technology is ready for prime time, and no one has shown they can accurately predict when one will be ready, or who would be first to make it so.

Presently, EV buyers are called “early adapters.” The goal is to just get them to be called everyday car buyers. Improved batteries are a key part of this vision.

One could guess that it might be a well-known company like LG Chem, or A123 Systems, or it could just as likely be a smaller firm.

If a smaller start-up did invent The Next Big Thing, Kamath said, it would probably seek to license it to several buyers.

“If there were technologies substantially better than the rest,” Kamath said, “they will spread around quite a bit faster than you might expect.”

The industry’s state of competitiveness, and need to keep up with increasing demand is that compelling, he said.

While refusing to name potential companies that might come out ahead in the tech race, Kamath only said it is open to anyone’s speculation, and he would hedge his guesses.

“I would not put all my money in one or two technologies,” he said, but rather the smart players are placing “multiple bets,” and even in-house, companies are running competing projects.

Regarding the transportation sector, in the near term, it has been said that insulated and actively climate-controlled EV batteries could be streamlined as a way to cut costs.

As many are already aware, batteries work best at moderate temperatures.

To this, Kamath added that some chemistries may eventually prove better in varying temperatures, or under different load demands.

In time, he said, some chemistries may be optimized for warmer climates, and others chosen for where conditions are colder.

Although EPRI is funded by utility companies, expenditures from government sources are seen as necessary to help spur development of next-generation technology.

Similarly, some chemistries will be shown to work better for high-performance applications, such as in a sports car, while others will work better for a truck.

The whole development process is a series of multiple trade-offs, he said, and now is a time of rapid learning.

Engineering decisions will in time refine end results, he said, and these will not necessarily be perceived by the customer who only wants to know whether the design works as intended or not.

Since autos potentially must endure all climates, we would take from this that unless a climate-tolerant chemistry could ever be developed, their batteries should remain actively climate controlled, as is the case with the Volt and Ford’s pending all-electric Focus.

Present chemistries are adversely affected by extreme cold and heat, and this naturally will affect ability to accept a charge, available range, and expected life.

At the same time, climate-controlled batteries magnify development and engineering costs, and to an extent, add weight and complexity.

While for now consumer electronics exceed the demands of the transportation sector, they also are seen as a first place to try new battery technologies.

Kamath made sure to say safety concerns are real for electronics, but they are not as severe as they are for vehicles meant to carry people.

Perhaps you have heard of “thermal runaway” cases where laptop batteries caught fire? This is a scenario the transportation industry cannot afford to ever let happen.

But once proven safe and better in smaller, less expensive, shorter-lived products, Kamath said improved batteries may find their way from electronics to cars and trucks – maybe, we will add, one you could drive some day in the not-too-distant future.

Instead of Nissan under-promising and over-delivering on the range capability for its new all-electric LEAF, some are alleging it may have done the opposite.

At least this is the scuttlebutt from stories beginning to stack up in a LEAF discussion forum and news outlets saying LEAF drivers are experiencing “range anxiety” in fewer miles than they were led to believe they would.

And no, it is not because they attempted a coast-to-coast drive in the limited-range car, or something like that.

Stories are adding up of lower than promised range, and erratic drops in range estimates from the Nissan Leaf’s computer. (Photo courtesy of Nissan.)

As the stories are playing out, LEAF drivers are depleting battery power within the estimated allowable traveling distance, and learning the hard way what it is like to be out of juice in a world where electrical recharging stations are few and far between.

For those not familiar, the LEAF’s 24 kWh battery pack holds more charge than the 16 kWh battery in the Chevrolet Volt, but Nissan took the chance of producing its electric car without a back-up power source.

The Volt cannot travel as far in all-electric mode, but, as explained last year, it has a 1.4L gasoline engine (generator) to power the drive motor(s), allow for “extended range,” and recharge the battery.

On a full charge, Nissan has said the LEAF should be good for around 100 miles in the city up to as much as 138 miles if the driver really nurses it.

A growing feeling among some early adopters is the LEAF’s real range may be closer on average to 60-80 miles, more or less.

The U.S. EPA has also pegged the expected range at 73 miles.

But not living up to range is only part of the problem owners are describing.

The LEAF comes with a sophisticated computer to estimate range based on available battery charge, plus past data that tracked how aggressive the driver was in the past. Despite this, tales of the computer’s readout being erratic and inaccurate are also coming forth.

As reported by Jalopnik, anecdotes have included one owner who said the LEAF is good for only 50 highway miles, another who watched a 17-mile range vaporize inside of five, leaving him stranded, and a reporter who ran out of power – and then posted an unflattering but pithy commentary on the Wall Street Journal’s Web site (see video below).

Fortunately, the reporter was able to take advantage of free towing that Nissan offers LEAF owners who run the car out of power.

Nissan released the LEAF this winter and has only reported 154 units sold in January and February combined. Its battery is not climate controlled as is the battery in the Volt.

Regardless of mounting anecdotal evidence, in question is whether problems will be shown to be faults of the car or driver or both.

Even with a computer second guessing driver patterns, range will vary depending in part on how hard and fast the car is driven.

For now the jury is out, but we’d surmise dramatic accounts of being stranded in busy traffic cannot be helpful to sales, as people are often swayed by perception.

Presently Nissan has all the pre-orders it can handle at an estimated 20,000.

In light of our story yesterday centered around a wide-spread lack of knowledge of electric vehicles, it would not be surprising to learn in time whether some of the early enthusiasm for the LEAF, at least by some, was not based on full information.

But thus far Nissan has not said it has withheld any facts.

In response to the range issues, a Nissan spokesperson said “isolated incidents” experienced by some LEAF drivers do not represent a trend.

While readers of this site and other alternative energy proponents are keenly aware of emerging transportation technology, a significant number of American car buyers remain uninformed about even the basics on how EVs and hybrids work.

These were the findings of a survey answered from Oct. 22-Nov 2, 2010 by 1,898 new car buyers and shoppers last fall, who if graded, would have scored from a C at best, to a low F.

Aside from what it might suggest about people who are not even close to being up to date in the most information-saturated society in history, their lack of understanding is being seen as a persistent barrier to sales, says Synovate, the firm that conducted the survey.

Ignorance is not bliss

Surprisingly, somewhat more was known about comparatively new Battery Electric Vehicles (BEV), than Plug-In Hybrids (PHEV), and Hybrid Electric Vehicles (HEV), even though hybrids such as the Toyota Prius have been around since 1997.

Near the same time Synovate quizzed grown-ups, Detroit-area students participated in a web-cast presentation on the electrification of automobiles featuring the Chevrolet Volt. Getting the older folks who drive and spend money to learn as eagerly is now being realized as a major hurdle to overcome. (Photo by Jeffrey Sauger for Chevrolet)

Want some examples?

About a third answered that BEVs produce tailpipe emissions.

Just over one half did not know it takes more than 15 minutes to recharge them.

Fully 85-percent confused all-electric BEVs with hybrids and Extended Range Electric Vehicles (EREV) like the Chevrolet Volt, and said BEVs are fueled by both gasoline and batteries.

Answering questions about hybrids, 77 percent said these cars are fueled by hydrogen, and 72 percent said they have zero tailpipe emissions.

(Wrong) answers prompt more questions

How it is that a third of this cross-sampling of Americans still think hybrids run solely on battery power 14 years since popular versions were first introduced, is open to anyone’s guess.

If it is true America is “addicted to oil,” as oil-industry affiliated former President Bush said, then one might surmise millions of alleged addicts still haven’t reached out that much for help.

Or, perhaps efforts to enlighten them by both Republicans and Democrats, the media, car companies, and other advocates have not been heard.

Survey results from 1,898 new car buyers. Extended Range Electric Vehicles (EREV) were not surveyed, but analysis can be applied to such examples as the Chevy Volt.

The closer one looks, the more its seems the “addiction” metaphor is extremely fitting.

The survey further indicates that many Americans are not well aware of alternatives to internal combustion engines (ICE) even though many millions of their tax dollars have gone toward grant programs and stimulus handouts used to fund them.

Is it apathy? Are people simply overwhelmed? Tuned out? Just too busy?

What ever the reasons, the survey reveals at least one major variable contributing to why top auto executives predict worldwide market share for EVs and hybrids will range from (only) 2-10 percent nine years from now.

For the foreseeable future, according to Stephen Popiel, senior vice president of Synovate, car dealers will have to spend time as the first to explain the working of EVs, plug-in hybrids, standard hybrids, and, one could deduce – EREVs like the Volt.

“We have to wonder if consumers will become disillusioned when they understand the actual requirements of electric vehicles, Popiel said, ”Will the person who goes to their Chevy dealer to buy a Volt, or their Nissan dealer to buy a Leaf, still buy the vehicle once they discover the need for plugs and 220 volt outlets? And, if they become discouraged with the electric option, will they stay and buy a different Chevy or Nissan vehicle? Or simply leave in confusion?”

Need for education

In case anyone is just getting caught up, the proposed “paradigm shift” for alternatively powered vehicles is not the name of a new type of transmission.

Seriously, Popiel said the evidence is clear that much more will be needed to teach consumers.

“The C and D grades consumers earned [when totaled] in our research simply aren’t good enough to support the profound societal shift the industry will need to deliver federally-mandated quotas,” Popiel said.

While asking whose job it is to get the message out, Popiel offered his view that it was in the interest of pioneering automakers, although work done to build consumer acceptance would later be capitalized upon by automakers that follow. It is also the job of the government leaders who are promoting alternative transportation solutions, he said.

“Clearly, there is a role for government to play, beyond just legislating quotas. There needs to be a significant consumer education process to explain why we must move from a petroleum-based powertrain to an electric based powertrain,” Popiel said, “The awareness campaign would have to address questions of environmental protection and national security, i.e. dependence on foreign oil leaves our society vulnerable to outside disruptions.”

Tipping point?

As many alternative energy advocates would be quick to agree, the reasons why everyone needs to know how EVs and hybrids – and other technologies – work are actually cross-cultural, and transcend political affiliation and individual sentiment.

No matter where you stand on topics like global warming, peak oil, the quality of the environment, national security, reducing America’s dependence on foreign oil, augmenting American industry, and more, EVs and hybrids potentially offer something for people of all ideological stripes.

This said, Americans have often been accused of being crisis managers.

Actually, with runaway national debt, a trade imbalance, and other economic issues, there is abundant evidence that as a nation, We The People are not even managing our crises very well.

So how will the industry sell more EVs and hybrids as one solution to some of the problems this country faces?

A typical response is the tipping point hinges around the vehicles’ price, the price of oil, and thus fuel.

While this assertion may contain some validity, let’s briefly think about its latter half.

What would happen if gasoline and diesel did go to $5 per gallon – and did not stop, rising toward $6 or more, approaching or even equaling what people already pay almost everywhere else in the developed world?

Would it mean automatic sales for EVs and hybrids? In the short term, it is likely. In the long run, do we really know?

Such talk gets bandied about by auto industry execs and pro-EV fans all the time.

Fact is, economic writers disagree on this hypothesis.

Similarly, philosophers also disagree on many subjects, but one statement widely held in one form or another is, “be careful what you wish for.”

If fuel costs do rise to new levels, what would happen to the cost of petroleum-based plastics in automobiles? How much more would it cost to supply parts for their manufacture, to run their assembly lines, and ship them?

For that matter, since petroleum is used pervasively, what would happen to the cost of computers, a loaf of bread, the cost to send kids to school, housing – the cost of everything?

How bad could a potential domino effect be to the entire economy if the price of oil escalated significantly, say to $120, $150, even $170 per barrel or more as some have already predicted it could?

Even if more Chevrolet Volts were produced, and demand increased, would the Volt and other cars still be able to sell for the prices they do, and would people have the money to pay for them?

This is the survey prospective new car buyers were asked to answer.

The consequences of runaway oil prices is something the mainstream media, as well as “underground” contrarian economic newsletters can speculate about, but fact is, until we go down that road, we do not really know.

And short of this, what would be more amenable than essentially hoping for another crisis – or at least more financial pain – for purported “addicts” to then be forced to manage?

Besides automakers lowering selling prices as soon as feasible, how about we all push even harder for next generation batteries with increased energy density and faster recharge times?

This is what they are already working on, we know, and for the sake of EVs and hybrids, there are many who say the technology can’t come soon enough.

At the same time building more recharging infrastructure and finding more effective ways to power the grid, are also seen as enlightened solutions rather than yet another crisis to fix by an already overburdened society.

So, coming back to the lead topic, it is at least clear that more people will need to wake up to the situation facing us.

Alternative transportation solutions are actually just pieces of a larger puzzle everyone stands to gain or lose by learning more about.

While EVs and hybrids haven’t sold a lot of the “car guys” or even most consumers yet, the need to solve the problems they are intended to is already there, and it is at least free to learn about them. If more people do, some may even find they could meet their needs now.

This is a complex topic. We know we’ve only scratched the surface.

Just offering some food for thought.

Although electric vehicles like the Chevrolet Volt are prized for their nearly silent operation, they have been deemed too quiet, and will need to have active pedestrian alert systems installed in coming years.

So says President Obama who on Jan. 4 signed into law S841, the Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act of 2010, after it was unanimously approved by the Senate.

Although details must be worked out, Public Law No: 111-373 will mandate EVs and hybrids sold in the U.S. to be equipped with some form of device or apparatus that will continually emit a certain minimum sound at lower vehicle speeds, and shut off automatically as speeds increase.

To protect pedestrians, bicyclists, and others considered vulnerable, EVs and hybrids
will eventually be required to emit some kind of always-on sound.

According to Jose Ucles, a spokesman for the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA), definitive regulations could take four-and-a-half years before being imposed, more or less.

The next step is to initiate “rulemaking” over the following 18 months, Ucles said, and then a “final rule” will come within three years or so after that.

The process is not on a strict deadline, Ucles said. It has flexibility built in to allow for a proper study to further quantify the need for sound from EVs and hybrids, additional feedback to be given as required, and the results analyzed.

For the time being, Chevrolet Volts, which already come equipped with a warning system, will remain as they are.

“Nothing is going to change immediately,” said GM Spokesman Rob Peterson, until new rules are clear. “When it is required, we will obviously comply with that.”

Some background

Actually, voluntary compliance by some automakers is already causing issues. Both the Nissan LEAF and Hyundai Sonata Hybrid have stalled delivery to the UK and U.S. respectively, in anticipation of rules for these markets.

Citing the conflict, one EV-favoring editorial has already decried the increasing “absurdity” of the situation, as the question over just how dangerous silent cars might be is debated in regions around the world.

And sure enough, in a sense the shakeout could appear absurd as lawmakers in various countries come to differing conclusions about the threat, real or imagined.

To give a voice to those in the U.S. who say they have the most to gain or lose, we called the group most responsible for the new law, the National Federation of the Blind (NFB).

“Yes, it was us,” said NFB Director of Public Relations, Chris Danielson of the initial move to get legislators and automakers to consider the needs of the advocacy group.

The ball got rolling in 2003, Danielson said, when blind people began noticing it was nearly impossible to hear when hybrids were passing or approaching at lower speeds.

Knowing they would be asking for a precedent, Danielson said they studied and debated the issues as well as they could for the first couple of years.

“We knew there would be concerns,” Danielson said, “that it might be controversial.”

At one point in their fact-finding journey, they invited alternative energy transportation industry stakeholders to offer their views. To that particular meeting, Danielson said, unfortunately few showed up.

Even when no one is near a rolling EV or hybrid, they will have to continually make precautionary sounds, at least at lower speeds. The U.S. DOT calls distracted driving an “epidemic,” and concerns remain that drivers may not always be as vigilant as needed.

Further along the way, the NFB funded research that added weight to its argument.

“Dr. Lawrence Rosenblum, a perceptual psychologist at the University of California at Riverside, did conduct studies in which he asked subjects to listen to recordings of hybrid vehicles and press a button indicating which direction they thought the vehicle was approaching from,” Danielson said in a follow-up e-mail, “I believe that he also conducted experiments with an actual vehicle in a parking lot. He concluded that a pedestrian may have only a second between hearing a hybrid vehicle and being struck by it – not enough time to react and change course, in other words.”

Even people who can see have had near-miss experiences – including one lawmaker – who reportedly was almost run over by an unheard hybrid outside a grocery store.

In time, NHTSA also collected “statistically significant” data showing a higher incidence of hybrid/pedestrian collisions in states from which the information was available.

And beyond this, Danielson said anecdotal evidence has been adding up for years.

He recounted the story of one blind woman who had her foot run over, another person who was saved only by his guide dog, another whose white walking cane was crushed by a hybrid he could not hear.

“Until blind people start to get run over should nothing be done about it?” Danielson asked.

The NFB’s position is it likes quiet cars too, Danielson said, but essentially silent ones are asking for trouble.

The idea the NFB has since come to support, he said, is not only to protect the blind, but anyone who might be endangered.

This assertion has also been repeated by NHTSA.

Measures toward reconciliation

Obviously, along the way some people disagreed with mandating sound emitters, and proposed alternatives.

One suggestion was that the problem was not that cars were too quiet, but that suburban and urban environments are too loud.

Dodging the question of whether this could have been a case of the absurd fighting “absurdity,” and regardless whether there’s truth to it or not, in any case there is little chance of making an entire city quieter.

And even in quiet environments, Danielson said, problems can still happen.

Others have suggested implementing transponders to alert blind people.

Not only would he not want to have to carry an extra device at all times, Danielson said, it would do nothing to answer the critical question about a moving EV or hybrid answered best by hearing it: “How far away is it, which way is it traveling, and how fast?”

GM supports the concerns of the blind. You may have seen this video last November in an article about the Volt’s warning system. Although GM tried, it appears remedies will be stronger still.

In the course of making its case known, the NFB gained support from the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and the Association of International Automobile Manufacturers.

Notwithstanding earlier non-participation, automakers have since been empathetic.

Initially, GM worked with the NFB, and designed the Volt’s warning system to alert pedestrians, and this was thought to be enough.

But the NFB – and the U.S. Congress and Senate – thought more needed to be done.

In 2008, H.R. 741 was introduced by Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-NY), and co-sponsored by 238 fellow members of Congress to propose making always-on sounds from otherwise silent cars mandatory.

It went no where.

In 2009, similar legislation sponsored by Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) with a total of 29 co-sponsors did make it through, was unanimously approved, and signed by the president.

Some additional details

The law does not apply to internal combustion engine vehicles, even if they are very quiet.

Exactly how much sound should be required from EVs and hybrids, what the tone should be, at what point it could be shut off, and related issues are to be studied.

Unknown is at what speed the car’s natural sounds from wind noise, rolling tires, etc. would be enough to be heard. It is expected pedestrian warning systems could be automatically switched off, say, at highway speeds, or speeds approaching them.

It is not specified whether the sounds come from a speaker, or some other device.

Whatever they come up with, it will be required to be tamper resistant.

Enforcement would likely be at the state level, so, for example, if an owner figured out how to deactivate the system, varying fines or penalties would be imposed state by state.

We do not know if a universal system would be mandated, or carmakers could come up with different solutions to satisfy a standard.

Also unknown is whether first-generation EVs and hybrids would be grandfathered in, or owners would be required to retroactively install pedestrian warning systems.

It is at least somewhat ironic that the law was passed and only now will formal studies be conducted to determine how much sound will be enough to make EVs and hybrids safer.

UPDATE. 3/10/11 (2:15 EST): Despite the article that we reported stating Volt production increases are definite this year and possible next year, we are being told this portion of the story is inaccurate. GM Spokesman Rob Peterson said the U.S. Volt production plans remain at 10,000 units this year, and 45,000 units next year. No comment one way or the other was given regarding a price decrease for the Volt. When we saw this story last night, it seemed unambiguous, and was said to have come from a direct source. As you can see in text, we only re-reported it believing it was accurate. Our apologies for the mix-up. -Jeff

As many as 1,000 new jobs and 15,000 more Chevrolet Volts are to be created this year at the Detroit-Hamtramck plant as GM prepares to hire a second shift and mulls the possibility of slashing the Volt’s price as well.

Plans for 2011 have been expanded to build 25,000 Volts, instead of the originally projected 10,000.

GM executives are also discussing whether to pump out 120,000 Volts in 2012, a number that comes fairly close to tripling initial intentions to produce 45,000.

Another whole shift is to be hired beginning later this year at the Detroit-Hamtramck Assembly Plant. (Photo courtesy of GM.)

This news was originally reported yesterday by the Detroit Free Press which says it was told of the increases by Detroit-Hamtramck Plant Manager Teri Quigley during an event recognizing the facility as a Michigan Clean Corporate Citizen.

Laid off workers would reportedly be first to be considered for the 900-1000 new jobs to be created. Hiring and training is expected to begin later this year and the second shift is anticipated to approach full productivity by early in 2012.

This could become an increasingly common sight by this time next year, if not sooner. (Photo courtesy of GM.)

Also in the works will be supplementation to the plant’s electricity usage through installation of solar panels, according to the report which attributes this assertion to Frank Moultrie, chairman of Detroit-Hamtramck’s UAW Local 22.

It was further said that Detroit-Hamtramck would assist GM’s Fairfax, Kan. plant with production of the new Chevrolet Malibu, while ceasing production of the Buick Lucerne and Cadillac DTS.

Possible price cut

If expanded production is not enough to increase Volt sales, how about lopping $10,000 off the price?

This was the number GM CEO Dan Akerson challenged the Volt team to look for ways to achieve in December according to a column published by the Detroit Press yesterday.

How this will be accomplished, or if it will be remains to be seen, but the column quotes an anonymous GM “insider” who said they “are there.”

GM is proud of this part of the sticker. Reports are it may soon have reason to be proud
of a reduced price portion too. (Photo courtesy of GM.)

A three-fold means to lower the Volt’s price was speculated by the un-named tipster, one of which was raising the production capability – and this part has now become official.

The other two possible ways to slash the Volt’s price were re-engineering the Volt’s interior and battery.

One pundit quickly began speculating whether a smaller battery might be used, and how a 20-mile range, $30,000 Volt would sell compared to the more powerful and costly existing one which promises up to 50 miles on electric power before the range extender kicks on.

We do not know whether GM would indeed do anything to the 16 kWh battery, let alone cut its capacity, or replace it with a new generation version so soon in order to reduce the Volt’s price.

All we know is it is reported that one way or the other, GM strongly desires to sell the car for less and still make a profit.

While The Motortrend Truck of the Year will retain its uses, GM is considering that the Motortrend Car of the Year will become that much easier to sell if gas prices continue upward. (Photo courtesy of GM.)

As has been noted by the readers of this site, the escalating price of fuel and a decreased price for the Volt could be key to increasing Volt sales – and GM apparently agrees fully with this line of thinking.

In light of oil prices exceeding $105 per barrel and projected to hit $120 this year, Akerson’s statement to investors in November about a “$120 plan” – a sales strategy should oil crest that high – is being cited as the rationale for why GM intends to focus more on its economical cars.

The Chevrolet Cruze, its sister the Buick Verano, the soon-to be Chevrolet Sonic, and of course the Chevrolet Volt are some of the models that stand to enable GM’s profits to continue to rise even as the price of gas does also.

Of these cars, the Volt is said to be the one that could most stand, 1) a production increase, and 2) a price reduction.

At least the first half of this two-fold strategy looks certain, and the other half seems quite likely too – possibly due simply, or in large part, to the increased numbers that would be sold.

We will report more as soon as we find out.

While it could be said to be anyone’s guess how electric vehicles in the U.S. will be adopted in coming years, nearly every stakeholder is at least attempting to estimate it one way or the other, not least of these being General Motors.

In a study funded by a GM research grant, and conducted by the Center for Automotive Research (CAR) in Ann Arbor, Mich., researchers did their best to wade through available data to project EV deployment in America’s 50 states from 2011-2015.

Beyond early adopters who see the need, what will it take to get more Americans to embrace electric vehicles? (Photo of Chevrolet Volt courtesy of GM.)

Lead researcher, Kim Hill was quick to qualify that projections made by the study – which was released in January – could be subject to wide fluctuations in coming months and years depending on a long list of not-easily predictable variables.

Even top-level executives for EV-pioneering companies including Nissan, Ford and GM, among others, have said that by 2020, EVs could represent anywhere from 2-10 percent of the global auto market, with about 5 percent being an average estimate.

Where hybrids have first gone, the researchers say EVs shall soon follow. Aside from a few earlier EVs such as the EV1, their nationwide deployment is otherwise precedent setting, so hybrid stats were used as a “proxy” for lack of more information to go on.

With advances in alternative energy continually being announced, and worldwide political and economic uncertainty also having their effect, even those at the forefront of the push for EVs admit no one possesses infallible insight.

Nevertheless, the study does what it can to make specific projections based on factors including automakers’ own manufacturing and sales forecasts, articles from the media, and known expenditures or promised expenditures by government and industry that will foster EV deployment.

The researchers also based their findings on known facts about hybrid deployment. Their assumption is that individual people and whole regions which first adopted and supported hybrids would be more likely to support fully electric (and Extended Range Electric) vehicles.

Beyond the free market

A simple capitalistic model of consumer supply and demand is said to be insufficient to bring EVs into full acceptance in any kind of a timely fashion.

Factors that stand to affect EV deployment include all forms of government incentives on the local, state and federal level.

A byproduct of living in this democracy is that there is uneven distribution of incentives state by state.

In lieu of pennies from heaven, the CAR researchers said dollars from government agencies will serve just fine to help facilitate a swifter, smoother EV deployment.

To further help prime the pump, significant EV purchases are expected by federal, state, local and corporate fleets.

The study says U.S. government purchases will be instrumental to EV market penetration and cites a few commitments already announced to buy EVs, noting the government was “vital” to hybrid sales, as one of their most significant consumers.

“The federal government has been one of the largest purchasers of hybrid fleet vehicles,” the study says, “In the past two fiscal years, the federal government has purchased 64 percent of all GM Chevy Malibu hybrid models, 29 percent of all Ford Fusion hybrid models, and 14 percent of all Ford Escape hybrids.”

A similar trend would be needed, or at least most helpful for EVs, the study suggests.

Notable among corporate early EV adopters is General Electric, which has committed to buying 25,000 EVs, of which at least 15,000 will replace existing vehicles in its 30,000-vehicle fleet. GE has said its first 12,000 will be Chevrolet Volts.

Other substantial fleet purchases include those expected to come from FedEx, Staples, Frito Lay, and Enterprise Holding rental car company, among others.

Beyond fleet purchases, another linchpin will be government-industry partnerships.

These include a large variety of EV-facilitating initiatives through Clean Cities, The EV Project, ChargePoint Americas, Better Place and others.

Consumer demand

The study says decisions by automakers to deploy first-generation EVs has been (and will continue to be) weighted toward communities already deemed most “electrical vehicle ready.”

As mentioned, a higher acceptance of hybrids in these regions has already been documented.

Unlikely to surprise the readers of this site, the study predicts consumer decisions will continue to be affected by factors including, but not limited to: cost of fuel, monetary incentives (including grants, rebates, tax credits, loans, or registration fee exemptions).

Other factors affecting consumer acceptance include special parking privileges, and privileges usually only multiple-occupant petrol vehicles and motorcyclists enjoy – accessibility to High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) and High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes.

Overall, it is noted Colorado and California lead the way in sweetening the deal for EV early adopters. Other states showing stronger than average commitment include Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, and Utah.

And speaking of first adopters, aside from those willing to contend with limited-range commutes, potential EV buyers will also be swayed by existence of public or privately available charging facilities.

Much more must be done to make more red dots appear in the middle part of the map.

The lion’s share of public electric recharging stations presently is in California, the study says, with about 431 of the 603 listed in the Department of Energy’s database.

Other states lagging behind, the study says, include Oregon with 39, Texas with 22, Washington state with 15, Illinois with nine, and Florida and Hawaii each having seven. A “significant” investment is also underway in New England.

(We would note it’s also likely these recharging station numbers will soon be outdated, as new ones are continually added, as is the case, for example with recent reports coming from Chicago that 280 new stations are to be installed by year’s end.)

Crunching the variables

As can be discerned by some of the charts, the 21-page report sorts through many more variables than we’ve only touched on.

Even so, the study – which can be downloaded from CAR’s Web site – concedes it cannot predict the future, but does its best to do so anyway given what is known about the past and present.

And now, the numbers that you’ve been waiting for. Question is, how accurate will they prove to be given rapidly advancing alternative energy technology, and unpredictably unstable political times which have recently demonstrated that whole regimes can be challenged and toppled in the matter of days?

Certainly the need to know is there, and by their presumably looking objectively as possible at available information, the researchers have at least taken steps toward transcending mere faith, educated guesses and intuition.

The study says its findings are presented not as a sales forecast, but as information available to leaders and policymakers to better enable them to decide if, how, where and when to spend resources toward an EV future.

We all want the security and comfort that comes from a certain future. This is one group’s best estimate given what is known. For EV advocates, an upward line is good. Aside from negatives like threats to the world reserve currency, and an increasing price for oil, what positive steps could be taken to make this line crest even higher?

Whether its insight will prove accurate remains to be seen, but the study at least makes clear that EV deployment is a grand global experiment.

As with any cause, there are those who embrace it early, and those who will need more information, if not also stronger motivation than they presently have.