GM-VOLT : Chevy Volt Electric Car Site

General Motors Spokesman Rob Peterson has been on the Chevrolet Volt team since before the concept car was shown in 2007.

At last week’s EDTA conference he gave a talk at a breakout session titled, “To Market We Go: Building Successful Launch and Marketing Strategies.”

Addressing industry peers, he opened up GM’s strategic playbook, and outlined its key four-point approach. Point number one, which we’ll focus on here, he called “Relationships.”

Getting people behind the wheel in test drives is part of GM’s marketing strategy as well.

Before he got into his core message however, Peterson noted that now the Volt is in production, some roles have changed. Last year, instead of him taking center stage, it would have been the Volt’s Vehicle Line Director, Tony Posawatz who was now seated in the audience. This year marked the turning of a page in the Volt story.

“The fact that I am here and Tony is now over there is a signal that things have changed a little bit in the marketing of electric vehicles,” Peterson said, “Because today we’re not talking about the development of electric vehicles, we’re talking about marketing electric vehicles.”

This should send “a big signal” to enthusiasts, suppliers, industry and government stakeholders and consumers, he said, because Chevrolet now has a transportation solution called the Volt.

“It is here today and we’re putting them in driveways as we speak,” he said.

Rob Peterson outlined what GM is doing now to market the Volt.

Peterson conceded GM is not the same company it was when the Volt was conceived. Four years of challenges and a financial crisis was a tough experience.

“We had to handle it with some humility and swallow our pride a little bit,” he said. “And that wasn’t just an overnight occurrence back in 2007. Candidly speaking, when we revealed the Chevrolet Volt, I don’t think many of you in here or many of the people who witnessed us launching it felt that we were committed to bringing electric vehicles to market.”

He said in those early times, GM recognized it was at a low point but with opportunity to rebound, so it endorsed a shift toward greater openness.

“Our communications strategy beginning in 2007 was one that was very simple,” Peterson said, “For a company that was short on credibility and long on engineering talent, we were going to be as transparent as possible and that’s when the journey for the Volt truly began.”

Even though it could be uncomfortable for some traditionalists, Peterson said, the new policy was necessary.

Another of several Volts being run around Washington on brief test drives.

“Now that is a challenging strategy for the people like Tony Posawatz and the development team to have a communications person stand by their side; want to showcase the wins and sometimes the stumbles along the way,” he said, “But it was needed in order for us to actually succeed. Because our transparency is what built the credibility along the journey the past five years.”

Relationships

“We started to reach out to the utility companies through EPRI back in 2007. It was a logical relationship to have. We both shared the same customers. Our customers who’ll be buying our vehicles will also buy their power from them,” Peterson said, “It has worked for us to be integrated with them, to have a connection to them along the way – the same with the Edison Electric Institute.”

Implicit in Peterson’s message was that General Motors wanted to establish a proper foundation for the time ahead, and begin new partnerships between formerly unrelated industries.

“We needed to make sure what we were doing was in lockstep with the strategies of these two organizations,” Peterson said.

Rob Peterson was hired to the Volt Team in 2006. He has an easy-going manner which helps him share his considerable knowledge and enthusiasm for the car.

A second focus for relationship building, he said, was toward electric vehicle advocates.

“No question about it, the enthusiasts, Chelsea Sexton, Felix Kramer, GM-Volt.com Web site – these were the embers that stirred in the public’s eyes and were out there waiting to be ignited. We needed to reach out to them and grace them. Many of these people we had shunned in past years,” he said, “We needed to extend a hand and bring them back in and fan their passionate flames. And you see right now the vehicles that we’re selling. Many of these enthusiast groups are the ones that are actually knocking on the dealership doors in the first part.”

Another direction for GM’s relationship building effort included reaching out to the advanced-tech transportation industry as a whole.

“A final element of the relationships was industry. We needed to be very active in the EDTA,” Peterson said, “Tony Posawatz who’s co-chair of the EDTA has done a fantastic job from our perspective of making sure that the voice of electric vehicles are heard. Not only in this forum, but in other forums.”

GM intends to bring these cars mainstream as swiftly as it can.

In taking the approach it is, Peterson said, GM is also elevating the entire electric vehicle movement.

“We’re representing the industry as a whole and not just the Chevrolet Volt. We’re true believers that a high tide raises all boats,” Peterson said, “There’s nothing here that we can do that benefits just the Volt. When Volt succeeds many other electric vehicles succeed along with it.”

Peterson’s sincerely delivered message indicated GM is intent on not repeating past mistakes. On the contrary, it is working in today’s cultural, economic and political environment to show it has and will do what it takes.

“Having solid relationships with organizations like EDTA, EPRI, EEI will go a long way. This need for relationships – something that we started on this journey – is definitely not going to go away either,” he said, “The bond of the relationships is going to have to actually be stronger as we move forward and we try to move the EV market segment from a burgeoning one to mainstream.”

Peterson went on to outline three more key Volt marketing strategies, but we’ll have to save those for another day.

Yesterday J.D. Powers and Associates released a summary from a nationwide study examining consumer attitudes toward clean energy transportation choices.

Conducted in February, the 2011 U.S. Green Automotive Study queried a statistically significant 4,001 Americans in the market for a new vehicle, plus examined a year’s worth of relevant online social media conversations – 14.8 million in all, from forums, chat rooms, and other sources.

Its findings support the most optimistic auto industry forecasts for proliferation of electric vehicles, hybrids, and plug-in hybrids. The study states that by 2016 these will comprise around eight percent of the market, but opines this is not really all that much.

The Volt is one of many kinds of cars lumped into J.D. Powers’ green-tech study. Individual models and brands were not surveyed.

Besides electric and hybrid variants, all alternative-tech solutions were surveyed as a category, and included clean diesel, compressed natural gas, and innovative twists on traditional internal combustion power.

The study gauged how much consumers would consider these powertrain types for their next new vehicle purchase. It also explored specific perceived benefits and concerns that factor into the decision-making process.

Leading off with the question, “Why Go Green,” a two-page Special Report plus a separate press release interpreted the study’s findings saying despite a tripling of models available in five years, electric and hybrid variant proliferation will be rather low.

J.D. Powers researchers pointed out that eight percent by 2016 represents just 1.4 million units sold out of a 16.7-million-unit total annual market.

The research firm further rhetorically asked why automakers are even bothering to invest so much for such a small piece of the pie.

Projected number of hybrid and plug-in models by year.

It answers its question by saying original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) stand to gain by:

•Easing consumer frustration with rising fuel prices in an era when driving times and distances are on the rise
•Improving their brand’s environmental footprint and nurturing a “green” brand reputation
•Contributing to the reduction of U.S. dependency on foreign fuel sources
•Addressing government mandates for fleet-wide fuel economy standards

“OEMs are also banking on a groundswell of advocacy, should technological advances lead to alternative powertrains that better align with consumer expectations and wallets,” said J.D. Powers, “The key for OEMs is for one of the technologies they offer to be the one most embraced by the masses, legislators, and ancillary industries and interest groups. While OEMs are touting and lobbying for their choice as the right one, there continues to be a great deal of confusion from the consumer perspective.”

Chevrolet has said its key strategy at this point is getting people involved, telling personal stories, making the Volt’s value real to them.

In addition to higher initial price, factors barring the way for more pervasive proliferation include:

•Fuel availability and the fueling process (or insufficient infrastructure for plug-in vehicles)
•Maintenance costs and reliability
•Performance trade-offs (range, acceleration, top speed, etc.)
•Disbelief that the benefits in economy and emissions are worth the personal investment

Of consumers sampled, 75 percent who indicated they would consider a hybrid electric vehicle cite lower fuel costs as a main benefit. In contrast only 50 percent cite ‘better for the environment’ as a main benefit of these vehicles. At this point, most consumers said prices look too high, and the choices too confusing.

To learn more, we called J.D. Powers in Westlake, Calif., and spoke at length with Mike VanNieuwkuyk, executive director of global vehicle research.

Positive press helps too.

Much greater granularity of data beyond what the press got is available to paying clients, he said. Since he is knowledgeable of the whole study, we bounced our questions and thoughts off of him, and he confirmed what we had intuitively surmised.

The study is but a snapshot in time, he said. It represents consumer attitudes as of February, but variables stand to potentially shift projections radically.

We discussed three variables holding up greater consumer acceptance for electric vehicles, hybrids and plug-in hybrids. These are fuel prices that are not painful enough, insufficient consumer knowledge, and lack of a perceptibly clear-cut best technological choice.

We asked if the survey had inquired what consumers would do if gas consistently rose above $5 per gallon?

“We didn’t specifically put out there if it got to $5 would this change your opinion,” VanNieuwkuyk said, “What we did ask them is if they expected in the next two, and also the next four years out, where they thought gas prices would be.”

Formulating a marketing message as simple, clear, and compelling as a blue sky is needed J.D. Powers said.

He quoted the overall response.

“On average, the expected price for two years out was about 20-percent higher than it is today. That’s where consumers minds were back in February,” he said, “Now ask them today watching prices north of $4 again, maybe that changes a little.”

In other words, it’s an uncertain time in which consumer speculation – thus an opinion answered in a general survey – is subject to swing in response to subjective stimuli.

“Again this is a very fluid kind of a situation. Looking four years out the thought was we’d probably be about 35-percent higher than we are today. But there still was also the portion of the people who said it’s going to be over 50-percent higher than we are today,” VanNieuwkuyk said, “So, I think some consumers are very bullish and say ‘yeah, you know we’ve been through this before, it will be OK, it will level out.’ Others are not so sure. And depending on which way this goes can greatly change how consumers think of these particular alternatives.”

As for lack of consumer knowledge, we spoke to him about the study that showed many consumers really have no clue how alternative transportation even works in order to make an informed decision.

He said some respondents said there was not enough good information to make a decision, but conceded the fault may not only belong to marketers who failed to share their message.

Regardless, he said, the job still falls on those promoting alternative choices if they want to sell more cars.

He also commented on the perceived difficulty consumers have in calculating cost-for-benefit for higher-priced, advanced-tech vehicles.

What makes this car worth it is not always an easy calculation. Early adopters get it, but others have yet to fully embrace the message.

“That kind of is the what’s behind all of the lack of commitment by consumers – is that they see this price premium [for a plug-in car, for example] and they go ‘Wow. How does this actually work?’ You know, the math is very hard to do,” VanNieuwkuyk said. “So a lot of times it’s easier to just kind of stick with what you got, maybe pick an easier route.”

Spelling out the benefits is one of a few tasks of the decade for purveyors of electric cars, hybrids, and plug-ins, he said.

“As a marketing side of this, being able to express that equation in terms of how it matters for the consumer is important for them because they are not necessarily going to be able to consider all these elements,” VanNieuwkuyk said, “Whereas somebody on our end possibly could do that.”

There may not be enough public charging stations, and it may cost to install one at home – if that is even possible – but as fuel prices rise, the purportedly fuzzy plug-in selling proposition may become clearer.

At this stage, a tipping point has not been reached, VanNieuwkuyk said, but it could be as he portrayed one possible scenario:

“Where consumers will get over that issue is when psychologically it gets so stressful at the pump, it’s ‘I’ve gotta do something,’ and they just assume the math is OK,” he said, “But right now – at least leading up to this point – that equation isn’t apparent for consumers at all.”

In sum, there are three variables, any one of which could radically augment a shift in consumer buying preferences. While fuel prices are the most obvious factor, they are not the only one. Also fundamental is consumer knowledge and potentially game-changing technology.

If an obviously better technology came along that was not financially painful, that too would get peoples’ attention, VanNieuwkuyk said, and J.D. Powers would be looking at new projections.

At this point, most consumers think of expenses they can understand, which are primarily sticker price and fuel costs, he said. The plethora of choices, and no clear perceived winner will mean slower sales for manufacturers and fighting over a limited pool of potential buyers until one, some, or all of the aforementioned variables change.

If an ever-increasing list of accolades for the Chevrolet Volt’s design, function, and engineering haven’t been enough, the car has achieved yet another honorary nod of recognition, this time in the area of safety.

Yesterday, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) announced results from its first-ever U.S. crash evaluations of plug-in electric cars, and both the Volt and Nissan LEAF earned the top rating of “good” for front, side, rear, and rollover crash protection.

As a result of their ranking, the IIHS bestowed on the Volt and LEAF its TOP SAFETY PICK award for state-of-the-art crash protection.

This perfectly good Chevrolet Volt is about to be sacrificed frontally into a solid wall in the name of safety research.

It turns out there is a secondary benefit to the extra heft from their lithium-ion battery packs, as both “small” cars were shown to have crash resistance approaching a larger car, and scored well within standards for their size.

“The LEAF and Volt’s extra mass gives them a safety advantage over other small cars,” said Joe Nolan, the Institute’s chief administrative officer. “These electric models are a win-win for fuel economy and safety.”

The LEAF weighs about 3,370 pounds which exceeds Nissan’s approximately 3,200-pound midsize Altima. The Volt weighs about 3,760 pounds and likewise, it exceeds Chevrolet’s approximately 3,580-pound, large-class Impala.

The insurance industry’s advocacy and research arm wants to know what it is insuring. So, out-doing the government, it runs only the driver’s half of the car into a barrier at 5 mph more speed to really focus that kinetic energy into the dummy.

“The way an electric or hybrid model earns top crash test ratings is the same way any other car does,” Nolan said, “Its structure must manage crash damage so the occupant compartment stays intact and the safety belts and airbags keep people from hitting hard surfaces in and out of the vehicle.”

This year, General Motors’ tally of winners of the TOP SAFETY PICK award now totals 12 models and Nissan has three. Including the Chevrolet and Nissan electric cars and seven hybrids, a total of 80 cars have won in 2011.

The dummy struck the airbag with its head and the lower dash with its knees (note grease paint smudges from impact).

“What powers the wheels is different, but the level of safety for the Volt and LEAF is as high as any of our other top crash test performers,” Nolan said.

We called IIHS spokesman, Russ Rader, yesterday to see if there was anything he could add, and there was. He said the IIHS tests are done over and above federal crash tests and present a tougher standard.

“Our tests are designed to push the envelope beyond what the government is requiring,” Rader said, “For example, the frontal offset tests that the Institute does is more challenging for the structure of the vehicle than the government’s test.”

Another sacrificial Volt. This one will be for the side impact test.

How so?

“Our frontal test is a 40 mph offset test that concentrates the energy of the crash on the driver’s side,” Rader said, “The government’s 35 mph frontal test is a full-width test so it’s less challenging for the structure of the vehicle.”

He said the side impact tests are tougher too.

This smash equals the kinetic energy of an SUV or pickup truck.

“The side impact test that we do simulates a SUV or pickup truck striking the car from the side,” Rader said, “The government just updated their procedures with the new test. The first test they do for side impact protection uses a barrier that represents another car hitting the test vehicle on the side, so it’s not representing the mix of vehicles that are out in the real world.”

He added that the IIHS has no plans to test the Prius Plug-in Hybrid or other electric cars until they are on the open market.

For now, the Volt and LEAF stand in stark contrast to other electric cars it has informally tested. Although the GEM e2 and Wheego Whip are not required to undergo federal crash testing, the IIHS proactively subjected them to side barrier tests “for research purposes only.”

This is the dummy inside the side-swiped car post impact. Note grease paint stains to show where the body struck the inside of the car.

This research subsequently caused the IIHS to politely say the evolved golf carts were tantamount to death traps.

“Crash test dummies in the GEM and Wheego recorded data suggesting severe or fatal injuries to real drivers,” said the IIHS. “The GEM and Whip belong to a class of golf cart-like vehicles that aren’t required to meet the same federal safety standards as passenger vehicles. Although growing in popularity, these tiny electrics aren’t designed to mix with regular traffic.”

But mix with traffic they nevertheless do.

An unfortunately destroyed Volt. The positive aspect is the safety structure did its job.

And while we’re on the topic, a couple days ago, Polaris Industries, Inc. announced that in six weeks it will close a deal to purchase Global Electric Motorcars LLC (GEM). Presently it is a wholly owned Fargo, N.D. based subsidiary of Chrysler Group LLC.

“GEM is the recognized leader within the low-speed vehicle market, with a well-respected brand and approximately $30 million in sales during the 2010 calendar year,” Polaris said, “Since the company was established in 1998, they have placed over 45,000 electric-powered vehicles on the road worldwide.”

A lot of these sales were to corporate and government fleets, as well as private citizens in areas where they can be legally driven.

The IIHS essentially said these cars do not hold a candle to the Volt and LEAF. The Chevrolet and Nissan were engineered at great expense to pioneer mainstream electric transportation, and it seems clear their manufacturers hit a home run first time up to bat.

Nolan warned drivers concerned about safety to steer clear of what the IIHS considers unsafe vehicles, while recommending the Nissan and Chevrolet.

“Eco-minded drivers keen on switching to electric would do well to buy a LEAF or Volt for highway driving instead of a low-speed vehicle if they’re at all concerned about being protected in a crash,” Nolan said.

Last week at the EDTA conference we had opportunity to sit down with Vehicle Line Director for the Chevrolet Volt, Tony Posawatz, to discuss myriad issues including future cost cutting.

Posawatz said his days start at 5 a.m. and the Chevrolet Volt is keeping him even more busy now that it is in production. When we caught up with him around 6 p.m., he was still on the go, manning the Volt display, energetically engaging visitors and industry peers.

As we were talking, a man came up smiling, shook hands all around, and greeted Posawatz.

He was a leader from Delphi automotive components, Posawatz explained.

Costs for this car will come down, but that doesn’t mean it will be cheapened.

“So, we’re seeking he and his team to develop us a lot of good, highly efficient, low-cost components for the future.” Posawatz said with humor in his voice.

“We’ll get it,” came the reply with a grin.

“See, and he is committed,” Posawatz said to laughter.

As we had already been discussing the car, I could not help but take the bait and open up the broader question.

“Is that how you are going to cut the cost for the Volt,” I asked.

“We have a lot of ways, lot of ways to cut the cost,” Posawatz said.

I replied everyone is curious because a couple weeks ago GM’s Vice President of Global R&D, Alan Taub, stated unequivocally that GM was “on track” to meet a target. So, how would GM get production costs down? Would it consider stripping the Volt, making it cheaper somehow?

“None of that,” Posawatz said, “But I just told the last gentleman: like any new technology, whether it be the $4,000 cell phone, plasma screen TV, you know, computer storage – they all have their costs. It’s no different from the first high-volume battery.”

Tony Posawatz is also co-chairman of EDTA’s board of directors. Manning the booth, he entertained one and all.

In a nutshell, Posawatz said Volt supply contracts were made when GM’s credibility was at a low point. To some, the Volt was possibly another experimental car with no guarantees.

“So some of the original cost we have is cost that is probably higher than it needs to be because the suppliers were either reluctant to enter the business, there was no competition for it, or there was no assured high volume,” Posawatz said, “Some of those things have changed.”

Earlier that day, Posawatz had told a breakout session audience his theme centered around the Bob Dylan lyrics: “The times, they are a-changin.’” While he was referring to GM’s overall involvement in the EV industry, it seemed clear this theme was resonating deeper into contributory aspects, including the Volt’s production cost.

“As we increase our volume, contractual relationships will change with higher volume price comes down,” Posawatz said. “As we resource [battery] cells and they no longer come from Korea, and they are going to come across the state from Holland, Michigan, do you know how much money is reduced?”

After the Holland plant is up and running, he said, a major part of the Volt’s cost will come down, without stripping any quality out of the car. This will happen after GM is sure its domestic plant can reliably produce LG Chem’s “secret recipe” for its batteries.

“So, some time in 2012, we haven’t stated the date, they are on track to build their plant, upgrade their facilities, their capacity,” Posawatz said, “But that’s just one example where I don’t think shipping the cells across state versus from Korea with duties, tariffs, special refrigerant – expensive refrigerant – and temperature control [will cost nearly as much].”

EDTA had a test drive set up for the present, and thus far only Volt. In the background is the convention center where the conference was held.

“Can you put a dollar amount on it,” I asked.

“No, no, we’re staying away from that. Posawatz said. “I know Alan quoted a dollar amount.”

“No, he actually didn’t and he didn’t answer specifically,” I said of a question whether it was a $10,000 target set by GM CEO Dan Akerson.

“Oh, OK,” he said, “I thought he quoted that, but we have thousands of dollars that will come out of the car.”

“’On track’ implies $10,000,” I added, “but he didn’t state it.”

“Well again that’s speculation as to what the ultimate target is, but we feel very good that some of these enablers that I identified and levers that I indicated [will have their effect],” he said, “I challenge people to be able to see if they know where the cost comes out because so much of it is commercial.”

“Another thing,” I replied, “is some are saying even if you do reduce production cost, you’ll just say ‘great, we’ll just keep that as profit,’ and keep selling the car at the same MSRP assuming the market bears that. Would you do that?”

“I think we have a lot of options in the future,” Posawatz said, “I think that the possibility of having a broader price range in the Volt is highly likely including lower price points to start off – especially if you want to have greater volume.”

Would you ever sell the Volt for $35,000,” I asked.

“We’ll see how that all plays out in the future. We don’t make those kinds of pricing decisions now,” he said, “Then again the simple fact is the Volt in 2011 comes with nav[igation] standard. Future cars won’t have nav standard. It comes with the Bose Energy Efficient Sound System standard. It comes with so much stuff loaded into the car; the five years of OnStar.”

Current models are loaded. There will likely be versions made available with fewer options. This plus other cost savings will give Chevrolet the option to price the Volt lower.

“What’s going to change when you get your U.S.-made engine on line,” I asked.

“Not much. Effectively it’s another example of a cost reduction,” he said, because it will be another major component now made in-state, without international shipping fees.

“We feel very, very good about where we’re going, and its not like this is a new plan,” Posawatz said, “This is the plan all along to work the cost out. Some of the contacts were set up frankly because our first year volume was low.”

In his outgoing, engaging manner, Posawatz commented on those who have tried to research GM’s initial Volt production cost.

“This is why we laugh a little about people who claim they know what the cost of the car is,” he said, “OK, that may be the cost for the first 10,000 cars, but it is not [the cost for] the lion’s share of the cars that we will produce at high volume for mass market.”

Our thanks to Tony for taking time to graciously answer questions at the end of a long day.

Held during Earth Week in the heart of America’s capital, this year’s Electric Drive Transportation Association Conference & Annual Meeting was a converging of private, corporate and government stakeholders involved with the promotion of electric vehicles.

The event ran from April 19-21, and was begun with a speech by U.S. Department of Energy Secretary Steven Chu, and an “Innovation Motorcade” – a parade of EVs and hybrids through Washington, D.C.

In its own words, this is how the coalition describes itself: “EDTA performs public policy advocacy, education, industry networking, and international conferences. EDTA’s membership includes automotive and other equipment manufacturers, energy companies, technology developers, component suppliers, and government agencies.”

GM’s Rob Peterson (left, facing) discusses the Volt with a visitor, while Tony Posawatz (seated, profile) entertains a number of others with his boundless enthusiasm for the car.

Advanced-tech transportation has come a long way since 1989 when the EDTA was begun. This was a year prior to GM’s Impact electric concept car, and seven years before production of its EV1. It was a time when electric drive transportation was more a wish than “the future” as many say it is today.

One guest speaker, addressing a breakout session with over 125 in attendance, said he remembered when only 10 people might have shown up to such a talk about a sub-topic related to the EV industry.

If a summary could loosely capture the attitude of this year’s meeting, it might be along the lines that leaders and attendees were enthusiastic over how far electric drive transport has progressed, while acknowledging how far it yet has to go.

Yes, this is a UPS electric delivery truck – circa 1930s! UPS wants us to know it has embraced electric powertrains before, and is doing it again.

Unfortunately, partaking in all the conference offered was impossible for any one person. At best one-third of it could be taken in because of the way it was structured.

In addition to a large exhibition area where automakers, component manufacturers, and others had their displays, the conference was comprised of breakout sessions held three-at a time during 1-hour, 15-minute time slots throughout the day.

We’re not sure if plug-in privileges are open to all at the Renaissance Marriott across the street from the Walter E. Washington Convention Center where the EDTA conference was held, but it made for nice advertising for Toyota.

This meant having to pick one to sit in on, while deciding which of the other two sessions to miss. Following up was difficult because the organizers chose not to video the breakout sessions. Some private recordings were done, but otherwise, the event was not recorded at the request of some of the speakers.

In any case, the conference was worth it to get a feel for the general state of affairs as several industries grapple with questions of where EV transportation is going from here.

Siemens was on hand to show a progression of its electric motors.

Already known are the obvious successes: EVs are for sale now, supporting infrastructure is evolving, and growth is accelerating on all fronts.

Naturally, GM was present with its Chevrolet Volt, and very much a key player in the lead. Additional participating automakers were Toyota, Nissan, Mitsubishi, Volkswagen, Tesla, Coda, Think, Volvo, and more.

Notable this year was that marketers for some of these automakers held center stage at one breakout session to discuss what their companies are doing, and will be doing. This contrasted from last year, when, for example, GM’s Line Director for the Volt, Tony Posawatz, would have been in the position of describing its future E-REV car.

Now the questions are how to make rollout as seamless and mainstream as soon as possible. The most optimistic U.S. projections at this juncture are EVs could comprise 10 percent of all cars by 2020, and auto executives openly expressed doubt that even this is attainable.

Coda will offer this BEV sedan for an estimated $44,900 before the end of the year.

Utility company executives were also there, commenting on – among many other things – how they and automakers for the first time in a century are sharing the same set of customers – and their information.

Both sides recognized this, and GM spokesman Rob Peterson noted it reached out years ago to the utility companies’ non-profit research arm, the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI).

Since there are something like 20 potential electric automakers, and 3,000 utilities spread across the U.S., one question was how to get utilities and charging service providers to facilitate such things as updating their systems to handle current loads from level 2 chargers, or how to help EV buyers have the juice available in their garage in the first place.

All sorts of things were to be seen at the exhibition.

Mention was made that the National Home Builders Association has been looking at “EV ready” new home construction.

Another issue was the question of the buzz word “smart grid.” Representatives from EPRI said the broader shape of this is a few years away, and auto manufacturers are still not building smart-grid-ready cars.

To be sure, the brave new world being labored over is still in the gestational stages in many respects.

Another unanswered question is how to cope with multi-unit dwellings like condos or apartments, should occupants decide they want to buy EVs. If they do not have garages, or park on the street how do they recharge?

The Prius plug-in will reportedly cost several thousand less than the Volt, but offers about one-third the electric range.

At this point, the relative trickle of EV sales has not led to widespread public outcry and challenges are being coped with as they come. Preparing the way for a mass EV deployment is the greater challenge everyone is working on.

Many charger installation details are handled at the state and local municipal level, and cannot be mandated or enforced from a national level. As you might imagine, the field is wide open for innovation from good ideas to not as good. At least recognizing which utilities have thus far demonstrated the best practices as a potential model to follow was another topic.

Gaining as much control of processes as possible, where possible, without being overbearing was another concern. Some utilities have been more control oriented, while others view their role more as facilitators.

The idea of adding load to the grid was generally seen as no big deal – no more than adding a hot tub, or other high current load, and utility executives said they have always built to capacity, it is what they do.

In time, the novelty or confusion surrounding EVs will wear off, it was said, as more and more EVs come into neighborhoods around the country.

The Volvo C30 experimental EV uses a 24kWh Ener1 battery, as does the Think City EV. Volvo has said it would lease 400 copies of the car to green corporate clients for $2,100 per month.

Keep in mind also, that electric drive is not the sole realm of consumer autos.

Another key driver to EV deployment are fleets – be they government owned, corporate delivery trucks, rental vehicles, or other service-oriented vehicles.

While electric work trucks are a small market, in the case of some medium to heavy duty work trucks, pure electric is not seen as feasible. Rather, plug-in hybrids that need not plug in if they don’t have to are seen as a path of least resistance, thus easier sell to early adopters.

It was pointed out that for individual consumers, EVs are now both an emotionally based and rationally based value proposition. Typically, fleet managers don’t buy for the emotional reasons so much.

The Nissan LEAF was named World Car of the Year at the New York Auto Show which was held while the EDTA conference in Washington was also taking place.

To get them to sign up, the bottom line has to make sense. Nor do they want to re-train operators to learn a whole new set of behaviors.

Further, even though medium and heavy duty work trucks are much more expensive than autos, they do not even qualify for a $7,500 tax credit, so the proposition really has to make sense.

Clearly, legislative, infrastructural, technical and production-oriented pieces of the EV puzzle need to be worked out.

While stakeholders in respective industries were quick to point out their successes, they were equally unambiguous in pointing out the U.S. has no clear cut road map to EV proliferation.

The estimated $36,495 Think City EV will feature through-molded plastic bodywork. If you scratch it, the color is the same underneath, and it resists dents too. Not a bad driving little runabout.

The overall attitude was one of confidence however. Ready or not, the race to profitability is now on, and no one was calling quits at this early stage. On the contrary, the only way to go is up, and all bets are on this happening.

The dawn of the modern EV age has been likened to the advent of petrol-based motor cars of the early 20th century, but this analogy only goes so far.

Where the picture differs today is we already have national highways, broad-based expectations and customs from more than a century of autos, trucks and motorcycles, so introduction of the EV is not exactly like replacing the horse and buggy.

Seven weeks into this and I finally got to drive a Volt. It’s a zippy car, and very well appointed. That same day, 240 miles to the north at the New York Auto Show, it was being named the 2011 World Green Car.

What is more, we are a far more demanding society while at the same time more sophisticated and technically able to see where this EV experiment could be going – and better equipped to do what it takes to get there. As such, momentum is snowballing.

Many questions remain that will determine whether it will be sooner or later, and what “game changers” could present themselves in the coming years, if not months. We shall see.

The conference closed with a luncheon in which awards were given out to industry leaders. During that time Tony Posawatz took opportunity to announce the Volt had just been named 2011 World Green Car at the New York Auto Show.

Coupled with positive exposure gained at EDTA’s conference in Washington, it was a good week for the Chevrolet Volt.

Chevrolet Volt enthusiasts know GM is a leader in sustainable transportation, but the company has been on such a creative streak lately, some may not be aware of the extent of it.

Last month GM was ranked number one out of 700 entities that filed clean-energy patents in 2010. Of the 1,881 such patents recorded by the Clean Energy Patent Growth Index of U.S. patents, GM was responsible for 135.

In total, GM received 940 U.S. patents in 2010, placing it in the top 25 of all companies. These patents included those for information technology and consumer electronics.

With regards to clean energy, GM’s patents covered hybrid electric vehicles, fuel cells and solar energy, and focused on improvements to current and future technologies.

General Motors is really ramping up for the future. With 135 clean energy patents received last year, it intends to lead the way.

The Clean Energy Patent Growth Index (CEPGI) tracks the granting of U.S. patents in solar, wind, hybrid/electric vehicles, fuel cells, hydroelectric, tidal/wave, geothermal, biomass/biofuels and clean, renewable energy.

According to CEPGI, automobile companies dominated with six in the top 10 spots. Behind number one GM was Samsung, which took second place due to a number of fuel cell patents. Third place went to Honda, which had been last year’s winner. Toyota was fourth with 20 patents, GE was fifth, Nissan sixth, Ford eighth, and Hyundai was ninth.

“U.S. clean-energy patents were at an all-time high in 2010,” said Victor Cardona, co-chair of the Cleantech Group at Heslin Rothenberg Farley & Mesiti, publisher of the index. “GM has clearly put forth a lot of effort in a range of clean-energy technologies, resulting in its appearance at the top of the list for the first time.”

Following is a list of some of the more notable patents GM compiled:

• Multi-injection combustion cycle systems for spark ignition direct injection engines: Improves fuel and air mixing, and reduces hydrocarbon emissions during engine startup and cranking.
• Dynamically adaptive method for determining a battery’s state of charge: Improves fuel economy with a new algorithm that estimates a lithium-ion battery’s internal parameters in real time.
• Electrically variable transmission having three planetary gear sets with two fixed interconnections: Ultra-efficient hybrid electric vehicle transmission design that features low electrical losses, high torque capacity and city and highway modes.
• Variable active fuel management delay with hybrid start-stop: Control system that seamlessly integrates active fuel management with start-stop for additional fuel savings.
• Control of hybrid power regeneration during cruise control: Uses regenerative braking so the onboard battery can be charged during vehicle operation, saving fuel.
• Method of operating a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle: Involves operating a heater when the vehicle is cold to preheat the battery, improving electric driving range.

As can be determined by GM’s stated environmental commitment, the company is working to shift away from petroleum dependency. However, even as it develops advanced-tech solutions, this has not stopped it from continuing to refine internal combustion technology as well.

Behind the scenes, GM is researching and developing advanced propulsion technologies for hybrid and electric cars, and alternative sources of energy.

“The company is pursuing several options to best meet the needs of customers around the world – from gasoline, diesel, and biofuels to electrically driven vehicles such as hybrids, electric vehicles with extended range and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles,” GM said, “Ultimately, GM believes electrically driven vehicles offer the most long-term benefits to customers around the world.”

As for hybrid, electric and other advanced-tech transportation, the company intends to grow as a world leader, said Alan Taub, GM vice president of global research and development.

“GM is on a journey to reinvent the automotive DNA, and that’s driving a great amount of innovation and technological breakthroughs,” Taub said. “We will continue our aggressive focus on advanced propulsion technologies that will benefit our customers and the environment.”

Note that Taub was quoted yesterday saying the Volt is “on track” with cost cuts and improvements. In light of today’s story, it looks all the more likely GM is preparing to be able to back up his assertions with action.

GM-Volt.com will have a substitute writer for tomorrow and may even miss publishing Friday. I’m on assignment at the EDTA Conference in Washington, D.C. – Jeff