GM Cornered Into Defending the Volt 769
Al notes a story in Technology Review reporting on a CMU study (now over a month old) claiming that the Volt doesn't make economic sense, and GM's response. The study suggests that hybrids with large batteries offering up to 40 miles of range before an on-board generator kicks in simply cost too much for the gas savings to work out (PDF). Al writes: "Unsurprisingly, GM disputes the claims, saying 'Our battery team is already starting work on new concepts that will further decrease the cost of the Volt battery pack quite substantially in a second-generation Volt pack.' Interestingly, however, GM admits that the tax credits for plug-in hybrids will be crucial to making the volt successful. Without those credits, would an electric vehicle like the Volt be viable?"
It does matter.. (Score:5, Interesting)
The Union is *currently* unwilling to cut back wages or benefits which is a requirement for GM to even get access to ANY of the "stimulus" money.
Only when GM goes into bankruptcy protection (chapter 11) will GM have more of a free hand to cut what needs to be cut.
Until one of the 2 happen, the Volt won't see light of day at a dealership.
Economic Sense vs. Business Sense (Score:3, Interesting)
GM is working on it? (Score:5, Interesting)
There are tons of people working on better electric storage system technology. This makes it sound like they are doing the engineering on their own.
Look here [google.com] and this one [stanford.edu] is really interesting IMO.
When they get a breakthrough on high capacity systems it will make a lot of things possible that currently are not, not just cars. It is the battery technology that really puts the hobbles on generating your own electricity at home. Well, that and solar collector technology as well as HOA restrictions etc.
If I could get tax breaks to install a 95%+ self sufficiency system I'd do it in the blink of an eye. Having an electric car on top of that would be even better. I would like a nice little commuter car or two; 40 mile range is great if it will also support solar trickle charging while parked etc.
With an initial investment, I could become 95% free of the grid ... well, if I could do that, I'm all in... big time.
Rhetoric. (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not a huge fan of this technology replacing the existing infraustructure (gas powered vehicles) yet. But only because of energy density in the fuel, not what fuel it is. And these vehicles do have a niche market -- must be about as frightening as Apple is to Microsoft (oh, wait... that's not a fair comparison. Apple might actually be double-digits now). But as the technology develops, and the energy density problem is solved, gas-powered vehicles will go the way of the dinosaur. /tongue in cheek
Re:Ummmm (Score:3, Interesting)
If they can't afford to make it commercially viable on their own, they shouldn't look to do it on the taxpayer dime.
Long-term, I agree.
However, this is a great example of a short-term subsidy that can help jump start the process until it _is_ commercially viable on it's own.
As it stands, the cost of the environmental impact is an externality to GM and the car buyer. By making cars (such as the Volt) that can drastically lower this impact, the cost is incorporated into the purchase price. Especially being new technology, this will initially have a much higher price point until efficiencies of scale/better production methods can eliminate the need for the subsidy.
At least, that's how it _could_ work :)
Re:Doesn't Make Economic Sense (Score:4, Interesting)
I'd much rather have a VW Sharan that gets 7 and still gets 40+ to the gallon
I honestly can't figure out what 'gets 7' or 'will ride 7' is in reference too...
After googling the Sharan the only thing that makes sense is that you mean 7 passengers?
Re:It does matter.. (Score:1, Interesting)
Only when GM goes into bankruptcy protection (chapter 11) will GM have more of a free hand to cut what needs to be cut.
Bingo. Give the man a cookie.
Once they enter bankruptcy everything is put on the table. The legal system, informed by all parties, becomes the arbiter.
This is why bankruptcy will NEVER BE PERMITTED by the powers that be. The UAW most definitely does not want their contracts to face scrutiny. Obama and Co. will do whatever must be done to preclude that. This is a rock solid bought and paid for voting block we're talking about here. The UAW and it's ilk have elected themselves political immunity from such trials.
Re:Doesn't Make Economic Sense (Score:5, Interesting)
Before you get all proud about the 40MPG rating, please note that a US Gallon differs from an Imperial Gallon.
A US Gallon is smaller, which makes British mileage ratings appear inflated compared to US ratings.
Also, US residents can buy a Diesel VW Jetta, which seats 5 comfortably, and (legitimately) gets 40+MPG. They sell like hotcakes, although the total number imported is still somewhat small. I've driven one -- it's quite nice. Almost impossible to distinguish from its petrol-powered cousin.
Of course, your main point still applies: By global standards, cars sold in the US are hideously inefficient, and we have an inherent fear of diesel, thanks to the loud, smoky GM diesels of the 1980s.
market forces work (Score:2, Interesting)
for problems where the producer and buyer drive progress. electronic gadgets, for example: i want my iphone cheaper. i want my iphone with more doodads. competitors are happy to oblige. congratulations: progress
there are other problems in the world, where neither producer nor buyer have a vested interest. and yet these problems are very real. here's one: justice. crime
you need a government, a strong one, with police powers, to run the judiciary since producer and buyer need an impartial justice system that favors neither producer nor buyer
now you could ignore justice and criminal law. and the social environment will deteriorate such that the marketplace deteriorates. or you could have a justice system run by populism that ignores the needs of producers. or a justice system bought and sold by corporations that ignores the needs of consumers. which are just two forms of injustice
the physical environment is the same thing: neither producer nor buyer has a vested interest in maintaining it. so its get dumed on by both, and the marketplace deteriorates. so you need a third party, a government, to engage in maintaining the environment by setting environmental regulations and enforcing them. the marketplace WILL NOT TAKE CARE OF THIS PROBLEM ON ITS OWN IN AN EQUITABLE MANNER
i say: leave to the marketplace issues that progress in the marketplace can solve
but that does not describe all of the problems in the world
irrefutable fact you need to learn: the marketplace is not where all progress in the world takes place, and does not answer every question that needs answering. this sort of marketplace fundamentalism some morons believe in is a simpleton's ideology that needs to die
Re:rich buyers (Score:3, Interesting)
Car companies are calling for *MORE* gas taxes (Score:2, Interesting)
Contrary to all of the "GM is in bed with big oil!" nonsense, the reality is that the automakers have been battling the conflicting voiced desire of consumers to have more efficient vehicles, with the reality that cheap gas has them buying inefficient beasts when it comes to putting words into actions.
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/automakers-join-call-for-higher-federal-gas-tax/ [thetruthaboutcars.com]
It's hard for products like the Volt to come to market in any real way when gas continues to drop to undercutting levels that eliminate the advantages, so the CEOs are asking for the price of gas to be normalized to a level that more realistically incorporates its full cost.
Re:Why? (Score:4, Interesting)
With a grain of Salt.... (Score:1, Interesting)
Their results simply ignore the vast majority of control strategies that exist to improve the performance of PHEVs when they are operated in the "blended mode". As noted on Page 5, they say "Since the performance of blended configurations can vary widely based on a broad range of
control strategy parameters, for simplicity and fair comparisons we restrict attention to
the range-extended PHEVs that run entirely on electrical power in the charge-depleting
range and switch to operate like an HEV in the charge-sustaining range."
My question is, How can the authors make tall claims about the lack of performance of PHEV, if they eliminate interesting options citing simplicity
Re:rich buyers (Score:2, Interesting)
"hopefully enough rich, environmentalists "
Talk about oxymoron. The Rich Environmentalists don't drive, they fly in their fancy Gulfstreams for weekends in Europe, where they can bash the SUV driving soccer moms without any conscience of hypocrisy.
The rest of the environmentalists are poor hippies who are really just pushing their socialist ideas on society, and the Green movement is just convenient way to try to accomplish their Utopian ideals.
I'm sure there are a few "middle class" environmentalists out there, but if the bumperstickers on the cars in my town are any indication, they tend to drive Gas Guzzling Volvos.
Most of the people I know who are driving Hybrids are moderate conservatives, who hate their hybrids once they get their first repair bill.
Just like CFLs, were supposed to save the planet, and actually are full of toxins and dangers which nobody really thought about, Hybrids and their toxic batteries which leak dangerous and extremely corrosive acid when they crash, the long term impact on the environment may actually be worse than driving petroleum fueled cars and trucks.
Re:The Volt is the least of GM's problems (Score:3, Interesting)
As in NOT releasing a diesel engine here. They're ALL over Europe. Every company that sells vehicles in Europe sells a Manual Transmission Diesel vehicle.
VW has a Polo that puts the the "economy" vehicles they advertise in the US to shame. I get a chuckle when ever they come on the TV with "Up to an awesome 35 MPG". I can't get less than 40MPG unless I'm towing a trailer. And I've done 60 MPG when trying.
Gen II BioDiesel is GTL [wikipedia.org]. Meaning you can make it from ANYTHING. It's what Germans used to survive WW II. Coal, natural gas, trees, human waste, (human waist). Not just that, it's "perfect". Carbon chains that are exactly the right length with no extra crap.
I imagine in a decade or so we'll all be running diesel engines with super capacitors. When you're out on the highway nothing is more efficient than an engine connected directly to the wheels. No genset, no motor, etc.
Re:rich buyers (Score:3, Interesting)
What passes for 'hybrid' is dissapointing. (Score:3, Interesting)
GM sells the Malibu in a 'hybrid' version. A 'mild hybrid'.
The engine has an oversized starter motor and a 36V battery pack in the spare wheel well. At a stop, the motor shuts down and is restarted in 500ms when the driver presses the acclerator pedal. Apparently, the Belt-Alternator-Starter [wikipedia.org] system also can kick in and add a power boost to help with accleration, and in the city can improve MPG by 10-20% Interesting concept, and saves gas, but hybrid? Not by a mile. At least not IMHO.
But GM will claim it, and plenty of people will buy it. It does save gas, this is good. But it is an example of the slow, painful, scratching-and-clawing approach Detroit is taking towards hybrids.
I'm not very hopeful for an alternative fuel either. My personal choice is some form of ultracapacitor [gizmag.com]. A capacitor makes a lot more sense than a battery; quick recharge, fewer chemicals hopefully, lots of available current hopefully. Still got the issue of the catastrophic release of energy if the capacitor got damaged, but batteries blow up too.
I'n not hopeful we are gong to see ultracapacitors within 10 years. A long time to wait.
Re:Volt is no Prius (Score:2, Interesting)
The Volt isn't much different that the Prius or Civic hybrid in that you don't have to ever plug it in if you are really that lazy. But, since it has a larger battery you have the option of charging it up at night or while you are parked at work and then running on electric only for the next 40 miles or so and at highway speeds. That's not an option with the current hybrids.
If you don't typically drive more than 40 miles between charges then you may get away with never having to use gas. You could, in theory, go months without buying gas at all but if you take a long road trip you don't have to worry about range because you can put gas in it every 3 or 4 hundred miles like any other car.
Also left out... (Score:3, Interesting)
GM stated the following criticism of the study:
1) The cost/benefit ratio was based on a battery price several hundred dollars more than they're currently paying. And GM claims they are making advancements that will lower the cost in the future.
2) The study compared the 7 mile electric only mode of some proposed plug-in hybrids. However, GM criticized the study for not taking into account the need to recharge every 7 miles.
I know for myself, that 7 miles doesn't do me much good. Even going to the grocery store doesn't would eat up a lot of that range.
More thoughts with better quotes here...
http://gm-volt.com/2009/03/04/gm-vp-jon-lauckner-blasts-carnegie-mellon-phev-study-and-says-volt-cells-several-hundreds-less-than-1000-per-kwh/ [gm-volt.com]
Re:Doesn't Make Economic Sense (Score:3, Interesting)
How many options for maintenance/repair places do you have though?
I almost bought a used Passat once but settled for an Altima because I know of more places locally that won't cost me an arm and a leg if something goes wrong.
Re:Ummmm (Score:3, Interesting)
If the to government said it was only going to tax gas as much as it took to keep the environment and research alternative fuels I think many people would be okay with that.
No, you're missing the point. The government should tax gas by enough to offset the cost of the environmental damaged caused by digging it out of the ground, refining it, and burning it. Yes, that's hard to quantify, but you could probably get within an order of magnitude. Being able to shift the tax to green initiatives is just gravy.
The whole point, here, is to expose the consumer to the full, complete cost of fossil fuels. If you did that, green technologies (which don't get shadow subsidies in the form of negative externalities) would suddenly look highly competitive.
Re:Doesn't Make Economic Sense (Score:5, Interesting)
Cheap, proven technologies are still steps down a dead end road. We need to take a step back in order to start moving forward again. Electric vehicles are that path forward. An economically viable method for providing electric vehicles has not revealed itself yet, however the potential has been seen. The problem is that there is no reason to produce the new technology to make them viable unless electric cars are present to create the demand, and electric cars won't be viable until the new technology is present. So, what we have is a deadlock.
The question becomes "How do we break the deadlock?". This is a situation where the market as it exists today will not provide a solution in an acceptable timeframe, so we must consider external forces. Providing incentives to "early adopters" will be necessary to pull enough electric vehicles into the public to create a demand for the infrastructure. The problem of imperfect power storage is being mitigated by allowing for flexible power sources (i.e. onboard generators).
The Volt is a transitional technology, not the end result. GM can't say that though - after all, who wants to be the guinea pig with something as expensive and important as a car?
Re:The Volt is the least of GM's problems (Score:3, Interesting)
And I've done 60 MPG when trying.
So did I back in 1992 with my gas-powered Honda Civic VX. Sure it was a tin-can, but if fuel efficiency were in higher demand, the auto makers would make more fuel efficient cars. However, most drivers would rather get 20-30mpg and have in excess of 150hp as opposed to the 60mpg and 90hp of my Honda Civic. People seem to neglect the fact that horsepower and mpg are generally inversely related.
Re:The Volt is the least of GM's problems (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:The Volt is the least of GM's problems (Score:3, Interesting)
Exactly. I see ads on TV for cars that say '31mpg' and are advertising it like it's amazing. My 1997 Cavalier gets that. Actually gets it, not just advertises it!
uneconomicall but benificial choice (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Doesn't Make Economic Sense (Score:3, Interesting)
Just last week TopGear had the endurance race, Richard was driving a little VW compact and the trip computer was was showing 74.9mpg! WhereTF is that car in the USA?
Re:Doesn't Make Economic Sense (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Doesn't Make Economic Sense (Score:3, Interesting)
The EPA mileage rating methodology is not accurate for diesel vehicles, and the EPA have openly acknowledged that:
1) Hybrid vehicles tend to have inflated mileage ratings
2) Diesel vehicles tend to have much lower-than-actual mileage ratings. (It has also been noted that diesels with less than 5k miles tend to perform less efficiently)
3) Ratings for gas (petrol) powered cars tend to be fairly representative of real-world performance since the last revision of the rating system.
This could be part of the grand GM conspiracy, or the EPA could simply be incompetent, or the mileage test could have last been revised before diesel and hybrid vehicles were commonplace on the US market. Either way, it does need to be fixed.
2009 Jetta TDI owners have colloquially reported 40-50MPG.
Re:Doesn't Make Economic Sense (Score:3, Interesting)
That'd be 62.3 US MPG.
Also consider that Richard Hammond weighs about as much as a hamster.
However, that all said, these very-efficient (yet tiny) cars do exist, and were deemed to be unsuitable for American audiences. (You wonder why these companies are on the verge of bankruptcy?)
If you stuffed a small TDI engine into a subcompact, I wouldn't doubt that you could get 60+mpg in it.
Is it too much for a lowly American like myself to ask for something bigger than a Smart car, but smaller than a Jetta? The Honda Fit's nice, and one of the most efficient cars available on the US markets, but still doesn't even come close to matching the efficiency of a european diesel subcompact.
Never viable electric car (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Doesn't Make Economic Sense (Score:4, Interesting)
Ha! Love that. Basically he is saying that yes, he does see a need for a larger car. But he'll let other people take care of that for him. I'm sure they are all just totally happy to provide practicality for him while he buys fun cars. Wish he were my friend. Guess they like the role of driving miss daisey.
His point is that he needs a truck so rarely that on the few occasions he needs one, he can borrow or rent. There's no reason to use a van-size vehicle so one person can commute.
I do quite well with an S2000, and the U-Haul literally up the street will rent a van for four hours for $20 plus mileage. So once or twice a year I rent the U-Haul and the rest of the time I don't worry about driving a large vehicle.