IT is my guess the VOLT without the batteries would cost less or about the same as an ICE car of the same size.(People will buy this)

I think the government should step in and say they will buy the first trillion $ worth of batteries.(Get it started no tax credit)

We the people would buy the cars and get the batteries for free.

The government can then charge $25.00 a month on everyone's car insurance (not just the Volt's) to help pay for the batteries.(Tax)

The batteries can be changed out , fixed, or sold to the electric grind when need be.(Money can be made here)

The batteries would need to have a set size and standard.

The big three can all make cars to fit the batteries.When the batteries get better cars go farther.They can make cheap or expensive cars.

The BIG oil company's can invest in the batteries (factory) so they get in on the ground floor and are not left behind.

We need to invest in the batteries and get the volts on the road.

Cool idea, you're not the first person to think of this (I actually thought of this a while back too and I'm not the first either I'm sure). The EREVS would probably still cost a little more than a normal ICE because they have a gas engine and electric motor, but they would still sell like hot cakes since they wouldn't consume gasoline. The $2-3,000 extra for the electric motor would pay for itself in a year or two of no gas bills.

There is already $25 billion federal funds set aside for anything that will enhance automobile fuel efficiency and this would DEFINITELY help out fuel efficiency. 78% of the nation wouldn't use a drop of gas if everyone drove one of these and the other 22% would only need it for a few miles of very efficient gas mileage. It would change everything. I think we should start with this money, they should drop about $15 billion of the $25 billion just for batteries. The Volt's batteries are going to average about $6-7,000 each. So $15 billion would put free batteries in over 200,000 EREVs. That's a start!

Ok, so $1 trillion would be nice, that's only about 2 years worth of oil for our country. With all the problems facing our country and how willing we are to spend $8 trillion to fix a financial melt down largely due to energy shortage problems, you'd think it's a no brainer.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/06/news/economy/where_stimulus_fits_in/index.htm?postversion=2009010610

Plus, I don't think we even need 150 million (assuming each battery cost $6,667) new cars actually, that's probably a bit much, that would buy anyone over 20 years old a car, I don't think there is quite that much demand and there will undoubtedly be many old people and country folk and what not who we'll have to pry their redneck mobile out of their cold dead fingers. We probably only need about 75 million over a ten year period or so, so that would only be $500 billion worth of batteries provided by the government. If it was spread over 10 years, you're talking a piddly $50 billion a year to provide 7.5 million EREVs a year!

But there are a few downsides.

One problem with just dropping $500 billion would be that it would ALL be going to either China, Japan, or Korea (or a combination thereof). They are the only ones producing lithium ion batteries. If we can wait for A123 to build their own battery plants in Michigan, which are already announced (and you can read about them at the below link) then that money would be a boon to our economy in every way. The tax revenue alone from selling all those EREVs and batteries etc. would make back much of it

http://www.triplepundit.com/pages/good-news-in-detroit-a123-announces-plan.php

So give them a few years to get their state of the art multi-billion dollar battery plants up and running and they will be employing around 14,000 Americans, and then we will be in good shape to do a massive project like this.

It's dubious if global lithium production levels could meet this kind of jump in demand, but it could happen, especially if it's spread out over 10 years.

Another reason to wait 5 years is that EV batteries are in their infancy, there are companies working on things like ultra capacitors that will make lithium ion batteries look about as appealing as dog food. Even lithium ion technology is progressing by leaps and bounds with the EV race at full steam. Spending $500 billion and buying 75 million batteries now would be buying technology in its infancy. Granted, that money would probably be put to good use in badly needed R&D funding to keep our battery technology competitive with Asia, so it's really a chicken and egg issue, but I think we should wait for the EREV technology to mature for just a couple of years, when all of the bugs have been worked out of the first gen Volts and the 2nd gen is on the drawing board, and there are a lot of platforms for it (a Ford EREV, Chrysler, GM has one for all of its brands etc.), and then put the hammer down by 100% government subsidized batteries here in America, and we can kiss our oil dependency days good bye once and for all.

Wow, I see what Dav8or says about me fantasizing. People would be freaking out about how our country has become communist, it will never happen. They would never realize that the oil it would save in the first year is worth $500 billion alone much less how it's creating much needed jobs and helping our auto makers stay alive without just taking hand outs, and that tax revenues on 75 million domestically produced cars would be quite something.

These are probably the same people that either won't believe in, or don't care to learn about peak oil issues. One thing is for sure though, Obama is a lot more likely to implement a plan like this than Bush would ever be.

Yep, this is what Better Place is doing. Just take the battery out of your worries. The initial cost of the vehicle will be reduced and the life cycle and the resale value of an EV without the battery (weakest component by far) will be excellent.

A potentially better way to take the batteries out of the price would be to build an E-REV capable vehicle and offer it without the battery (or with a tiny battery). This way, the vehicle still maintains the same engineering more or less, but in the batteryless/tinybattery versions, the ICE is consistently driving the generator to provide locomotion. If the Volt estimates are correct, that should still provide for mid-upper 40s in terms of mileage... in fact, potentially more when alleviating all the weight of the big T-packs.

Given the numbers we throw around, the fed tax credit accounts roughly for the cost of the battery -- since the baby-Volt wouldn't have a substantial enough battery, it would not qualify for the credit, and the prices would end up the same. Accordingly, I would think there would have to be some manuevering by GM to get the battery-free version on the roads (and into garages) -- who knows how. If they allocate the major portions of R&D cost to the Volts with the t-pack, that would likely change the cost structure enough to allow the two models to not directly compete with eachother. This also becomes more viable when/if the battery costs balloon.

Of course, GM could always sell the battery to those owners who bought the non-battery version, especially if replacement/install will be as easy (for those qualified, naturally) as GM wants us to believe. That may be where it gets easy to make some money -- take the battery cost to GM (the actual cost incl proportional R&D, not the numbers that GM throws around to get us to buy into buying a $35k Civic), add 50%, and it's an upgrade. I haven't closely looked at the IRC with respect to the credit, but adding on the electrical components may apply. Otherwise, it would be simple enough (and likely not affect funding) to modify the credit to allow for adding the battery.

/ramble

CPI is providing the batteries for $6,000, so there isn't too great a gain by simply eliminating that cost. You still have very sophisticated electronics and hardware needed to make the whole thing work, and its only produced in quantities of the tens of thousands, not hundreds of thousands nor millions.

Only time will bring the cost down, so you will just have to wait.

A potentially better way to take the batteries out of the price would be to build an E-REV capable vehicle and offer it without the battery (or with a tiny battery). This way, the vehicle still maintains the same engineering more or less, but in the batteryless/tinybattery versions, the ICE is consistently driving the generator to provide locomotion. If the Volt estimates are correct, that should still provide for mid-upper 40s in terms of mileage... in fact, potentially more when alleviating all the weight of the big T-packs.

Given the numbers we throw around, the fed tax credit accounts roughly for the cost of the battery -- since the baby-Volt wouldn't have a substantial enough battery, it would not qualify for the credit, and the prices would end up the same. Accordingly, I would think there would have to be some manuevering by GM to get the battery-free version on the roads (and into garages) -- who knows how. If they allocate the major portions of R&D cost to the Volts with the t-pack, that would likely change the cost structure enough to allow the two models to not directly compete with eachother. This also becomes more viable when/if the battery costs balloon.

Of course, GM could always sell the battery to those owners who bought the non-battery version, especially if replacement/install will be as easy (for those qualified, naturally) as GM wants us to believe. That may be where it gets easy to make some money -- take the battery cost to GM (the actual cost incl proportional R&D, not the numbers that GM throws around to get us to buy into buying a $35k Civic), add 50%, and it's an upgrade. I haven't closely looked at the IRC with respect to the credit, but adding on the electrical components may apply. Otherwise, it would be simple enough (and likely not affect funding) to modify the credit to allow for adding the battery.

/ramble






This just defeats the entire purpose of this vehicle! It would become just a hybrid at best. A hybrid with a price premium. Why not just get a standard Prius or other hybrid?

No, I don't recommend this on any level, from engineering to marketing. The Volt should keep it's marketing and technological edge. If it didn't have better performance than a Prius then it would hurt it's image. You may think it would have better performance but it would not. Sorry to break your bubble but the Prius plug-in (or normal hybrid) will probably have a better highway efficiency than the Volt (after the batteries of both cars are down to their lower cut-off level). This is because the mechanical transmission system out on the highway is more efficient than the electrical system. You think I'm crazy? Just run the efficiency numbers (you can search this forum because I already did). The results are sad but true. If it were not true we would have had serial hybrids in cars for decades (even without lithium-ion batteries).

I'm not so crazy about the quick swap battery idea in a car. There is too many "If". It may work in another countries with little energy infrastructure. I'm sure many would complain that a $30,000 car that can not start until you buy the battery for another $6,000 on top of it. The company might as well buy the battery in the first place. If we already have Better Place Project in place before the EV cars are ready in mass production that may be a different story. It seem to be some thing like "Which came first chicken or the egg?" problem. It somewhat similar why there is not much on bio fuel, E85, natural gas, ethanol, ect... Yeah there is a few around, but not popular as gasoline.

In part of what I agree what omnimoeish says, "That EV batteries are in their infancy." It just a matter of time, that I'm sure battery technology may change faster then the auto industry can keep up. Let alone that quick swap battery unable to keep up with the battery technology standard. I believe it be better off to treat the battery as parts of the transmission, engine, gas tank, two door, four door, and/or color of the car as an options. There may be different type of battery to pick for your EV car as different type of engine (s4, v6, s6 or v8), transmission (automatic or stick shift) ect... It can happen another way something like once the battery get cheaper cause of some form of standard, It may become a larger storage similar to "Hard Drive" market point of view. There are just too many "if" for the "quick swap battery" idea and not tested in the market yet.

I'm not so crazy about the quick swap battery idea in a car. There is too many "If". It may work in another countries with little energy infrastructure. I'm sure many would complain that a $30,000 car that can not start until you buy the battery for another $6,000 on top of it. The company might as well buy the battery in the first place. If we already have Better Place Project in place before the EV cars are ready in mass production that may be a different story. It seem to be some thing like "Which came first chicken or the egg?" problem. It somewhat similar why there is not much on bio fuel, E85, natural gas, ethanol, ect... Yeah there is a few around, but not popular as gasoline.

In part of what I agree what omnimoeish says, "That EV batteries are in their infancy." It just a matter of time, that I'm sure battery technology may change faster then the auto industry can keep up. Let alone that quick swap battery unable to keep up with the battery technology standard. I believe it be better off to treat the battery as parts of the transmission, engine, gas tank, two door, four door, and/or color of the car as an options. There may be different type of battery to pick for your EV car as different type of engine (s4, v6, s6 or v8), transmission (automatic or stick shift) ect... It can happen another way something like once the battery get cheaper cause of some form of standard, It may become a larger storage similar to "Hard Drive" market point of view. There are just too many "if" for the "quick swap battery" idea and not tested in the market yet.






Sound's like you haven't even checked out Better Place yet. Here is the website. I suggest the speech given at the Microsoft convention. It the latest and is very polished. It should answer all of your questions. Oh, Canada just signed on yesterday!


http://www.betterplace.com/

Oh, about the swap-stations. They are just a node on the network. I'm guessing they will be replaced with quick-charge stations as the technology become available. The main bulk of the charging is done at your home or at work.


P.S. if you have trouble finding the video on the site, please let me know. You can also go to YouTube and search better place Microsoft.

There is already $25 billion federal funds set aside for anything that will enhance automobile fuel efficiency and this would DEFINITELY help out fuel efficiency.

I thought they already raided $17 Billion of that money to float the temporary life line ... and sense more $Billions will still be needed to keep GM from going bankrupt in 2009, I doubt they will be paying it back any time soon.... which means of the $25 Billion that was passed for this... there is currently ~$8 Billion left... and I suspect that too will be just given to them to keep GM from going under instead of being used to promote fuel efficiency.

I thought they already raided $17 Billion of that money to float the temporary life line ... and sense more $Billions will still be needed to keep GM from going bankrupt in 2009, I doubt they will be paying it back any time soon.... which means of the $25 Billion that was passed for this... there is currently ~$8 Billion left... and I suspect that too will be just given to them to keep GM from going under instead of being used to promote fuel efficiency.

That idea was turned down by Congress, so President Bush authorized TARP funds so the money came from the gushing frat keg.

When the volt comes out and is working great. I think the government should place an order for say 3 million volts.

This way GM can go all out and make the volts and not worry about them selling.Then the government can sell the cars to us.

This should lower the price of the volt because they are buying so many.Worst case they sell the volts at a loss but we would have so many volts on the roads.

Lets just Hope the volt works great.

That idea was turned down by Congress, so President Bush authorized TARP funds so the money came from the gushing frat keg.



Hey, I like a gushing frat keg as much as anyone. However, don't you all think we should spend a bit of our bounty on some gas for the truck to get us to the next party? ;)