General Motors is moving forward with the Chevy Volt:
General Motors has announced it will work directly with A123 Systems, a start-up based in Watertown, MA, to develop batteries that are fine-tuned for the Chevrolet Volt, an electric vehicle scheduled for production in 2010 or 2011. The new agreement between the companies is designed to speed the vehicle to market.
GM has announced a series of contracts with various battery makers in recent months. The deal with A123 is viewed as an indication that GM thinks they can deliver the batteries that the Volt will require to achieve the desired 40 mile range on a single charge. A123’s advantage is explained as:
A123 uses a new lithium-ion chemistry that allows its batteries to be much lighter and more compact than the nickel metal hydride batteries in existing hybrids today, and safer than the conventional lithium ion batteries found in consumer electronics.
According to the GM link, 78% of all commutes are less than 40 miles. If GM can deliver a reasonably-priced vehicle that can achieve this range, then it could be a huge step toward the eventual (and necessary) electrification of our transportation infrastructure. I say “could be”, because people are still going to have to buy them. If, for instance, the battery packs are incredibly expensive to change out, or there are other issues with the car, all bets are off. But I am optimistic about their chances. However, reading some of the statements GM has made, I don’t think they will have them in production until after 2011.
It looks like GM is playing a pretty successful marketing game. Across the web pundits put GM “ahead” of Toyota on a product that is years from shipping.
Some of us computer types have compared it to the “vaporware” wars of the 1980s and 1990s. There, a big computer company caught without a product in an important new segment played a series of PR moves “announcing”, “promoting”, “delaying”, “re-announcing” and sometimes finally “canceling” a product.
Sometimes that was enough to kill the smaller companies in the field. Everyone waited for that promised product.
Right now that looks like what we are seeing. It looks like something designed to undercut the mindshare of the Prius, and it looks like it is working fairly well at that.
(What the ultimate car, if any, will look like and what it will cost is another question entirely.)
Is it really possible this could be vaporware? I think there would be a lot of angry people, myself included. The public outcry they got from cancelling the EV1 would be nothing compared to the attention they will get if they don’t deliver the Volt.
BTW, another thing we experience in software:
Even if we state the features of a future product, our customers will always dream beyond that. We’ll get feedback on all the things they plan to do with the product – some of which are not supported in that published feature set.
I call it building cloud castles, and it’s easy when you aren’t grounded by a real product.
The fact that the Volt does not exist allows every dreamer to endow it with features that would make it acceptable (or even attractive) to them.
Somebody explain to me why Tesla can get 200 miles out of its battery, while GM is struggling to get 40?
Is it cost, weight, incompetence, or all of the above?
Robert,
There are at least two issues with electric cars such as the Volt that GM has so far not commented on:
Embodied energy
This is the total energy consumed by an electric or hybrid car during its lifecycle, not just the energy it would use for propulsion. There is some evidence that the “dust-to-dust” energy consumed by an electric or hybrid is actually more that a conventional ICE car would consume.
Lithium is an extremely energetic element that is never found in its natural state, which means the lithium extraction industry is also energy intensive, which in turn accounts for much of the embedded energy that would be in a Volt battery.
A company called CNW Marketing Research did an analysis last year showing a Prius would actually consume more energy during its entire lifecycle, even though it would use less motor fuel than a conventional ICE car.
Prius Embodied Energy
The lithium Extraction Industry
Will there be enough lithium to support a world-class auto company using great numbers of large, heavy-duty lithium-ion batteries for propulsion? (I’m sure GM hopes the numbers will be in the hundreds of thousands or millions, and GM isn’t the only auto company with an eye on using lithium-ion batteries. Renault has also announced their intent to develop hybrids using lithium-ion batteries, and who doesn’t think Toyota, Honda, and the rest aren’t close behind?)
That’s a thorny question, and the probable answer is troubling:
Lithium is a critical strategic commodity with most of the world’s supply now coming from Chile and Argentina (With some reserves in Brazil). Production and demand are now close to being balanced and there is little excess supply to meet the already growing demand for smaller lithium batteries to supply the millions of consumer electronics such as cell phones and laptop computers. A world-class automobile company deciding to use massive amounts of lithium will surely put big smiles on the faces of all the lithium speculators in the world. (If I were GM and serious about the Volt, I would already be secretly buying up the world’s lithium supply.)
Part of GM’s challenge will not only be hoping their supplier can develop a practical, low-cost, reliable (one that doesn’t tend to overheat and explode), lithium-ion battery, but also to hope a huge increase in demand doesn’t cause the price of lithium to shoot through the ceiling as they get close to the rollout date of their Volt.
Let’s also hope Chile, Argentina, and Brazil don’t decide to become the Organization of Lithium Exporting Countries (OLEC) – we already have enough problems with OPEC.
If the Volt and other electrics are succesful, will we some day curse “Big Lithium” as we now do “Big Oil?”
Will we some day be as concerned about Peak Lithium just as we are now about Peak Oil?
Best,
Gary
The real front-row seat is A123’s battery. If that’s successful, someone will make a car that uses it.
Sooner, or later, the PHEVs become do-able. If the doomsters are right, then sooner. If they are wrong, then maybe in another generation. Government policy will play a major role.
The good neww is that PHEVs offer radical reduction in liquid fuel demand. This is where all the doomsters are wrong.
The doomsters draw plots showing 2.2 percent annually compounded increases in demand, leading to doubling of demand in 30 years. Hence, disaster.
In fact, fossil crude demand is almost flat now. With successful introduction of PHEVs, demand will start falling. Worldwide. Every year. Roughly 3/4 of crude is used in transportation.
So, there is no crisis coming. In fact, I think this will be a tremendous environmental boon for everybody. Cleaner air, quieter streets.
Economically, a boon for US consumers, who will not send hundreds of billions overseas top OPEC nuts.
Someday these batteries will be made in China for chump change.
As Rapier has suggested, the move to solar and other power sources that can be fed into our grid is where the action will be. The grid can handle it – PHEVs tend to re-charge at night.
The reductions in fossil crude demand will be so sharp, it may obviate the need for biofuels. But, if not, we can make biofuels to fill the gap.
Some problems are intractable, such as wars, religious intolerance, corruption etc. Human foibles. If you want to be a pessimist, I invite you to brood over these problems.
The energy “problem”, happily, is very, very tractable. There are multiple solutions from both sides – conservation and alternative fuels.
Mr. Price Mechanism will work.
The Volt is no marketing game. Of course GM may still screw it up (like Toyota did by inexplicably choosing lithium-cobalt-oxide for their PHEV program). But for now GM has grabbed the lead.
I’ve driven people nuts with my “PHEVs will save the free world” spiel since 2003. That’s when I saw the 2nd gen Prius and realized hybrids weren’t a joke after all. Then I sat down with a calculator and figured PHEVs were the ONLY near-term technology which offered a sacrifice-free 80% reduction in gas consumption.
The batteries are closer than GM says. You can buy cells off A123’s website or in DeWalt 36V cordless tools. LG Chem also has small cells in production. Unlike lithium-cobalt, the new chemistries are OK for large cells. Pack design and testing don’t happen overnight, but they certainly don’t take four years. In fact, GM has tentative plans to sell a PHEV version of the two-mode Saturn Vue in 2009. The batteries are ready, it’s the rest of the car that has issues.
The original show car was a non-running shell intended to showcase new interior and exterior materials. It was a case of “hey, the boss wants to show a PHEV, what can we slap together in a month”. Now they have to build a real car. They have no production 120 kW motors, no production 71 hp 3 cyl turbo, no production electric AC and heater, no production high voltage power electronics, and so on. It’s a huge undertaking. IMHO if the Volt fails it’ll be due to this stuff, not the batteries.
If, for instance, the battery packs are incredibly expensive to change out,
This is almost guaranteed, but shouldn’t be a problem since they’re spec’d to last the life of the car. As with the Prius, batteries that fail early will be replaced on warranty. Packs that fail on old cars will be replaced with salvage or rebuilds (just like engines).
Upfront cost WILL be a problem. Not just batteries, but all those custom parts mentioned above. Amortized over a few million vehicles they won’t cost more than the mechanical parts they displace. But the first PHEVs will sell at a premium. It’s an absolute no-brainer for the US Gov’t to heavily subsidize PHEV upfront cost. It beats other approaches (e.g. gas taxes) hands down.
I don’t believe the Tesla is shipping either. There was just a shake up in that company.
Now, expect that it will ship fairly soon … but I think it also demonstrates the “many a slip between cup and lip” that comes as you finalize a product.
Oh Gawd, nobody quote the CNW Marketing survey at me. It is so full of stacked assumptions …
On the on other hand, maybe it proves my point about what game is really in play here.
This is a battle for mindshare, between companies that have shipping products, and those who do not.
At the same time, of course, those same companies scramble to bring real Prius competitors to market.
If they succeed, the “virtual” product goes “real” and I’ll judge it as such.
But please don’t take a “demonstration” product as a “real” one. If that worked, hydrogen fuel cell cars would have been real 20 years ago.
This is the total energy consumed by an electric or hybrid car during its lifecycle, not just the energy it would use for propulsion. There is some evidence that the “dust-to-dust” energy consumed by an electric or hybrid is actually more that a conventional ICE car would consume.
This is something naysayers always bring up about hybrids/PHEVs, and while valid it totally misses the point. That is, for a whole lot of us the two main reasons we want an electric car are a) energy independence and b) environmental (non-) effects.
Energy independence means no more Iraqs; in fact it means the entire Middle East gets to go back to Third World status, where clearly a significant number of Muslims wish them to be. It also means I can conceivably charge my car with electricity I generate myself, via solar panels or whatever.
And environmental effects means that, while I know building my EV created a mess, I won’t be responsible for any fuel-related environmental disasters.
Are these reasons enough to pay a huge premium? Maybe, maybe not. That, to me, is the $64,000 question GM’s going to have to answer soon.
BTW, the Institute for Lifecycle Environmental Assessment make an interesting comparison. While the energy of manufacture is a small faction of lifetime energy consumption, the toxic emissions associated with manufacture are a large fraction.
I assume that has a lot to do with metal smelting & etc.
Garsky said: “That is, for a whole lot of us the two main reasons we want an electric car are a) energy independence and b) environmental (non-) effects.”
Garsky,
The problem is there may be huge environmental adverse effects from electric cars — not for you as the driver, but for the people who live near the extraction industries where they will produce the lithium for the batteries.
The nickel for the NiMH batteries in the Prius and Tesla and most consumer electronics comes from Sudbury, Ontario, and it would be difficult to say nickel extraction has not had a negative environmental effect there. (A tradeoff that apparently most of Sudbury seems willing to accept because of the economic benefits it brings.)
There is no reason so far to believe that lithium extraction on a massive scale will have any less of an impact on the environment. True, that negative efect may be shifted mostly to Chile and Argentina, and like Sudbury they may be willing to accept it for the economic benefit it will bring them.
But don’t think electric cars are entirely free of adverse environmental effect. As Robert Heinlein famously said, “There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch.” It will all be a matter of tradeoffs — and economics.
Best,
Gary Dikkers
Somebody explain to me why Tesla can get 200 miles out of its battery, while GM is struggling to get 40?
Answer to this two-fold I think. One is cost, lower range means you need less batteries. And secondly, the battery they chose has lower energy density than other Lithium-ion batteries on the market.
There are a couple of very interesting blog entries on Tesla Motor’s website that talks about their choice of batteries. It looks like they’re using current off the shelf lithium ion cells that you find in your laptops. And if you read their entry on charging, you’ll see that you only get 200+ mile range if you fully charge their battery packs. Something they do NOT recommend you do unless you really need it.
Thanks for the response, Gary–
I’m not naive enough to suppose that an electric vehicle can be constructed with NO accompanying environmental harm–heck, if I rode a bike I’d be willing to bet ITS manufacture caused some damage (and what of my shoes?).
Maybe I’ve been reading our friend Mr. Matthews’ posts too closely, but I’m thinking the extraction and refining of petroleum fuels causes a lot more damage than localized mining of nickel and/or lithium.
I’m willing to be persuaded otherwise (with all due respect to Robert and his employer), but right now my gut feeling tells me liquid fuels are worse.
I’m willing to be persuaded otherwise (with all due respect to Robert and his employer), but right now my gut feeling tells me liquid fuels are worse.
Of course, as I have pointed out numerous times, I believe the liquid fuel infrastructure has got to go. I don’t believe that a sustainable liquid fuel infrastructure is possible. I believe a sustainable electric infrastructure is possible, if we pull our collective heads out and get with the program.
Tesla claims they can get 200 miles out of their battery because they are spending 30-35K (IIRC) per car on the battery pack. They have engineered a pack that consists of off the shelf Li+ batteries configured into a larger system.
Furthermore, their car is really a novelty sports car so the body is light weight and is not tasked with performing very practical things.
Tesla’s business plan calls for the development of a sedan that will cost in the 70-100K range (also IIRC). That is expected to be due out in a few years. After that they want to develop an affordable electric car. Both of those depend on the success of the sports car which so far has garnered a great deal of attention
A123 is very close to delivering a cost-effective, long range pack for the conventional market. As a result, they are a far better barometer for the electrification industry than Tesla is.
Tesla claims they can get 200 miles out of their battery because they are spending 30-35K (IIRC) per car on the battery pack.
That’s about what I calculated when I tried to get to a ballpark for battery replacement in a Tesla. I think I came up with $40,000. My guess would be that the Volt has quite a bit less battery power, thus explaining the lower range.
One thing to keep in mind is that lithium chemistries are not the only promising battery chemistries being developed. While lithium currently looks to be the most promising don’t discount technologies such as Fireflys batteries (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefly_Energy) or advanced supercapacitors from folks such as EEStor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EEstor)
Personally I really like the idea of Fireflys batteries. They use readily available and already commercialized components. According to Fireflys claims exiting manufacturing lines can be used to create their batteries. The biggest downside I can see is that they currently are only working with the US Governement and Husqvarna
I like the Firefly batteries also, or at least their PR 😉
If I recall correctly, the US DOE and the DOD both spread battery monies pretty wide. That shows the perceived need for a better battery, any better battery.
As far as a car company’s need to partner early with a specific battery maker … that might matter in the short run, if a good battery is invented but only slowly ramped up in production.
In the long run everyone will adopt the winning batteries (if any).
My guess would be that the Volt has quite a bit less battery power, thus explaining the lower range.
I did some poking around the Chevy Volt website and they mention using a 16kW-Hour battery pack for the E-Flex system in the Volt. In comparison Tesla uses a 53-kW-Hour battery pack for their roadster.
The Tesla’s batteries cost $30-40K per the above:
$30-40K * (16/53) = $10-12K
Pretty much what plug-in conversions cost now for the Prius.
IOW, everyone is playing with the same battery reality.
(Though PR does not drive home that $10-12K battery cost)
That $10-$12K figure for the battery in the volt is a bit high, but that I believe is current costs. If they battery is being mass produced I could see it coming down significantly provided the raw materials don’t rise in price significantly at production volumes.
And the CNW “study” makes an appearance! LOL.
Here’s an article which gives a better feel for the Volt than the official PR. Read for context, not tech accuracy which is spotty.
I wish Tesla well, but pure BEVs are as dead as ever. The Roadster’s battery pack alone costs more than the entire Volt, and it can only push a tiny 2-seater 200 miles. No one drives exotic sports cars more than a few hours anyway, because they’re uncomfortable and don’t hold much luggage. But it’s hard to see their planned $50k mainstream 4-door BEV (aka WhiteStar) competing. They’re hinting their less expensive, 3rd generation car (aka Bluestar) may be a PHEV. Their fans are upset, but it’s the only choice.
Tahil (PDF warning) argues that lithium reserves are insufficient. But his numbers show known reserves could in theory provide one billion 30 kWh packs (the Volt pack is only 16 kWh, Prius conversions more like 9 kWh). Geographic concentration is an issue, but clearly there’s enough lithium to get the ball rolling. As Paul notes, over time other chemistries will get in on the action. My expectations are low for pixie dust companies like EEStor and PolyPlus, but Firefly is legit.
http://www.hybridcars.com/technology-stories/lithium-ion-batteries.html
Batteries.
http://www.hybridcars.com/technology-stories
/lithium-ion-batteries.html
Are lithium batteries recyclable?
If so and the one billion 30kwh battery packs is even remotely correct and attainable I don’t see the lithium supply being a huge hurdle once recycling is thrown in.
Ramping up may be an issue at first but I wouldn’t think it would be a huge stumbling block.
It strikes me that the near-future automotive battery types are already in volume production, for other uses.
A123 has a strong tool market.
The incremental increase from automotive use would, as you say be a ying and yang. It would provide some further economies of scale, but it might also stretch upstream suppliers.
(I think lithium, might be a little like oil in that the short-term market factors(whatever they are) may not be the same as the long term market factors (whatever they are). A “crunch” doesn’t necessarily mean a “peak” as it were.)
When I saw that dust to dust study, I actually clicked on it because I was curious what methodology they were using.
ABOUT THIS REPORT
This is a general-consumer report, not a technical document per se. It includes breakdowns
of each vehicles total energy requirements from Dust to Dust but does not include issues of
gigajuelles, kW hours or other unfriendly (to consumers) terms. Perhaps, in time, we will
release our data in such technical terms. First, however, we will only look at the energy
consumption cost.
I guess the 400 page energy report doesn’t have any room for actual measurements of energy.
I think the price of PHEVs is not too important. Of course, i live in Los Angeles, where people drop $45,000 on a car, and feel frugal.
Seriously, look at monthly payments. So, instead of a $30,000 car with $20k of goodies stuck on it, Detroit sells a $40k PHEV with just $10k of doo-dads stuck on.
The monthly payments are the same. Or, if a little higher, you sell the lower fuel costs. No time wasted in smelly gas stations.
I contend Detroit is making a huge error with the Volt, by bringing it out under the Chevy brand, as some sort of econocar.
It should be a Cadillac. People pay for joy of bypassing gas stations, and the quiet ride. Then later, as production costs go down, introduce to lower brands.
I think it is game over for the fossil boys, and I think the NYMEX is finally catching on. See today’s EnergyRoundup? Next bath in commodities funds. This is going to be fun.
I hate to say it, but in one year we might be talking about huge V8’s again, and not Volts.
A few comments
-GM has already indicated they’d consider taking a loss initially during low-volumes (like Toyota did with the Prius) to make it sell
-Leasing the battery pack is being considered.
-I would expect they are shooting for $30000 and hoping for under $40000
The comments from doggydogworld are very insightful Robert
I was thinking about a $30-40K price later in the day (as I drove my Prius).
It isn’t something I’d jump for, given how well the Prius works for me, but of course it is in my interest when other people jump for $30-40K hybrids.
That said, how much “hybrid hype” articles did we have swirling around the Prius, with a front-end cost of $22K?
Put another way, what color are your cloud castles? 😉
At $30-40 do you imagine a luxury car?
I hope not, because we just said the price was going to batteries, not burled walnut.
BTW, on the “Toyota sold the Prius for a loss” thing …
My recollection is that this was a charge made by GM. And I seem to remember that Toyota’s response was “no, we’re not.”
Now, the volumes at which Toyota is selling Priuses seems to give lie to that, but … why the heck did you choose to believe GM in the first place?
You’ve got two interested parties (GM and Toyota). They each tell you what is in their self-interest to tell you. At a minimum you should discount them both. That is you should say “GM charges that Toyota sold the Prius at a loss, but we’ll never know. Certainly though, that can no longer be true.”
(I might suggest that it is another element of their longstanding PR campaign.)
“during low-volumes (like Toyota did with the Prius)”
odograph: I am not trying to imply that Toyota loses money on the current generation Prius.
“the volumes at which Toyota is selling Priuses seems to give lie to that”
I wasn’t referring to current volumes.
What do you expect a lithium-ion Prius PHEV to cost? Surely getting close to that $30K mark, at least initially. The NiMH prototypes don’t have enough range to compete, the EV only mode is the important part
When GM first announced the Volt, they were talking about it being a serial hybrid. I haven’t heard anything different so I assume they still intend to go that route.
A serial hybrid is a configuration where the car is for all intents and purposes an electric car but there is a small gas-powered generator on board to feed energy back into the battery.
Contrast that with the Prius parallel hybrid where you have an electric motor and a gas motor both working as equal members but optimized for different situations (gas for acceleration, electric for cruising, etc)
As a result, it’s not entirely an apples to apples comparison when discussing the Volt and the Tesla as the Tesla is a pure electric vehicle.
GM will be able to get away with a smaller, more economical battery. I would guess that for them the two major considerations are power cycling (from full to empty to full) and safety.
A123 is attractive because their battery chemistry is extremely safe and they have delivered strong evidence of long term reliability
electric for acceleration. Gas for cruising.
oops you’re right 🙂
“Contrast that with the Prius parallel hybrid where you have an electric motor and a gas motor both working as equal members but optimized for different situations (gas for acceleration, electric for cruising, etc)“
As an old motion-control programmer I can kind of see what my Prius is doing. It has a lot of possible modes:
gas only – no electric – no charge
gas only – no electric – charging
gas only – electric motor – no charge
no gas – no electric – no charge
no gas = no electric – charging
no gas – electric motor – no charge
It chooses the mode based on the demand placed by the driver, the grade of the road, and the charge in the battery.
Certainly a larger battery would allow the car to choose “electric motor” a little more often. In fact, I imagine it would be a lot like the experience of driving my car right after a 20 mile downgrade. At that point the car is fully charged and favors the electric motor very strongly.
(on “odograph: I am not trying to imply that Toyota loses money on the current generation Prius.” … many do. The current generation was introduced to the US in 2004. GM’s “Toyota loses money” claims came after that.”)
minor changes. i should have said “gas on” above rather than “gas only.” that way “gas on – electric on – no charge” makes more sense.
and, subtler inputs to the “which mode” equation are “are the engine and catalytic converter hot enough?” and “is the driver making a high heat/AC demand?”
i’ve actually been surprised that the engine was running at a stop light in winter … i turned down the heat, and off went the motor.”
Of course, as I have pointed out numerous times, I believe the liquid fuel infrastructure has got to go. I don’t believe that a sustainable liquid fuel infrastructure is possible. I believe a sustainable electric infrastructure is possible, if we pull our collective heads out and get with the program.
We’ll have to wait and see.
This whole discussion points to the fact that storing electric energy is nowhere as convenient as storing energy in liquid fuels. Just because we haven’t figured out how to make liquid fuels renewable and efficienctly so, does not mean we won’t.
This whole discussion points to the fact that storing electric energy is nowhere as convenient as storing energy in liquid fuels. Just because we haven’t figured out how to make liquid fuels renewable and efficienctly so, does not mean we won’t.
I think the more important point is that ICEs will never be as efficient as an electric motor, so spending the resources to develop a truly renewable liquid fuels infrastructure is a waste when focusing on electricfication of our transportation infrastructure will yield better results with fewer resources and ultimately be cleaner.
I think the more important point is that ICEs will never be as efficient as an electric motor, so spending the resources to develop a truly renewable liquid fuels infrastructure is a waste when focusing on electricfication of our transportation infrastructure will yield better results with fewer resources and ultimately be cleaner.
Which way is ultimately cleaner is not as obvious as you contend.
While the ICE may not be as efficient as an electric motor, there are many other factors to consider, such as fuel production efficiency, storage, etc.
Robert said:
“Of course, as I have pointed out numerous times, I believe the liquid fuel infrastructure has got to go. I don’t believe that a sustainable liquid fuel infrastructure is possible.”
What do you mean? Not at any level? Not at the level that would be demanded by hybrids such as the Volt?
What do you mean? Not at any level?
In the long run, I don’t think we can sustain even half our current level on biofuels. Efficiency of solar to ultimately biofuels is just too inefficient. The future looks to me like it has to be electric, with some modest liquid fuel applications.
While the ICE may not be as efficient as an electric motor, there are many other factors to consider, such as fuel production efficiency, storage, etc.
I don’t see fuel production efficiency as being much of a problem, electricity is readily produced and has many economical means of expanding production. Oil and other liquid fuels on the other hand do not.
Liquid fuels may have a higher energy concentration than batteries but all non-petrol liquid fuels currently take too much energy to produce and don’t look to change significantly anytime soon.
Which brings me back to the point I was trying to make. I’m not saying we cannot develop liquid fuels that will be economical and renewable, I’m just saying the effort and expense required is much larger than the effort to further develop batteries and expand our electrical grid.
I don’t see fuel production efficiency as being much of a problem, electricity is readily produced and has many economical means of expanding production. Oil and other liquid fuels on the other hand do not.
You mean the way China is building coal power plants? Or did you mean the way they are building CTL plants? Did you mean to comment on the state of the US’ electric grid? Easily expandable, we just won’t get to it anytime soon… What is so economical about electricity but not oil?
Liquid fuels may have a higher energy concentration than batteries but all non-petrol liquid fuels currently take too much energy to produce and don’t look to change significantly anytime soon.
My point exactly. Renewable hydrocarbon fuels are where it’s at. Enough with ethanol and biodiesel already.
I’m not saying we cannot develop liquid fuels that will be economical and renewable, I’m just saying the effort and expense required is much larger than the effort to further develop batteries and expand our electrical grid.
How does that work? Do you have a crystal ball that shows how much effort it would take to develop batteries?
The truth is we don’t know anything about the future. Best to keep our options open.
Here’s a skeptic’s view of the Tesla – much of that caution applies to the Volt.
I got an electric assist bicycle with a lithium battery and a 20 mile range.
ISTM that the problem is 4000 pound vehicles with 250 horsepower motors. The issue isn’t gasoline vs. electric. Electric is superior for city driving and chemical fuels are superior for long distance trips and hybrids can do both. But you have to pay for two engines in one car for a hybrid and it is not clear anyone is making money building them.
Anyways, if it was up to me, I’d tax gasoline at the level the Europeans currently pay and let people buy whatever vehicle they want. If someone needs an SUV because he has a big family, fine. if somebody wants to live 50 miles from work and drive solo fine.
Electric is perfect for buses and postal vans that run fixed 20 mile routes and go back in the shed for recharging. Even better, they can electrify the streets. It was done before. Municipalities can heal thyself before mandating requirements on the rest of us.
In a way, the fact we waste so much energy is comforting to me. We can use half as much oil without affect our standard of life any. It will take eight seconds instead of four seconds to go 0 to 60mph, BFD. The liquid fuel infrastructure might shrink, but I don’t think it will ever completely go away. Even when the last drop of oil is used up, there will still be a need for some small amount of chemical fuels.
How does that work? Do you have a crystal ball that shows how much effort it would take to develop batteries?
No crystal ball, but from what I’ve read about the current lithium phosphate chemistries and batteries that firefly is developing it seems that we are much closer to a workable battery than we are to a renewable liquid fuel.
Best to keep our options open.
On this we agree entirely, and my assumptions about the course of these technologies could very well be wrong. If economic renewable liquid fuels become a reality I would be very happy, but from everything I’ve read it seems we have more progress on the electric side of things.
“If GM can deliver a reasonably-priced vehicle that can achieve this range, then it could be a huge step toward the eventual (and necessary) electrification of our transportation infrastructure.”
Easy. Indentured servitude.
“GM eyes electric car initiative” by Bernard Simon, Traverse City, Michigan, in Financial Times on August 13 2007:
General Motors may allow buyers of its Chevy Volt electric car to rent the vehicle’s battery as a way of pricing the vehicle at a comparable level to a traditional, petrol-driven family saloon. …
Battery rentals would help fulfill GM’s goal of giving the Volt a wider appeal than the petrol-electric hybrid vehicles now on the road. Noting that the Volt will be marketed under GM’s global, mass-market Chevrolet brand, Frank Weber, the car maker’s chief engineer, said that it “needs to be affordable to the buyer of a normal mid-sized car”. …
Mr Weber estimates that an average Volt owner would spend about $25 (£12) a month on petrol, against $145 for a traditional Malibu. The difference could be used on battery rental payments, giving a similar total cost.
I agree the future for transportation must be electric.
What I can’t get my head around is how are we going to recharge millions of BEVs/PHEVs with renewable electricty at night when the sun isn’t shining?
Possibly bad news for those who accepted GM’s PR that they were “ahead” on low cost batteries for PHEVs:
“General Motors may reportedly allow buyers of its Chevrolet Volt plug-in hybrid car to rent the vehicle’s expensive battery as a way of pricing the vehicle at a comparable level to a similar size vehicle with a conventional powertrain when it is launched in 2010. The lithium-ion nanophosphate battery system being developed by GM with A123Systems is planned to give a battery-only range of around 40 miles and last for at least 10 years. The gasoline saved by the vehicle would release funds for battery rental, giving a similar overall running cost.”
I said above that no one knew how to sell and warranty such batteries at reasonable cost, and that seems to reinforce the idea.
Rental plans and high-priced batteries may work for limited niche markets (Hollywood), but probably not for Main St., USA
To be utterly redundant, look for solutions that are shipping today, and don’t wait for cloud castles to materialize.
“…The gasoline saved by the vehicle would release funds for battery rental, giving a similar overall running cost.”
Add to that the cost of the electricity to charge the battery, and OOPS the Volt has the higher overall running cost.
To be utterly redundant, look for solutions that are shipping today, and don’t wait for cloud castles to materialize.
That goes to the heart of my problem with the Volt – the technology is still in development. And may be for years.
What I can’t get my head around is how are we going to recharge millions of BEVs/PHEVs with renewable electricty at night when the sun isn’t shining?
We don’t. We charge them with excess electricity available from the grid overnight (at great rates). We are already getting the pollution, so we might as well find a use for that excess power.
Powerplants have excess capacity at night, but there is no “excess electricity” and we are not “already getting the pollution”. Most peakers and load followers shut down entirely at night. Those that remain up as spinning reserves are basically idling, they burn almost no fuel and generate almost no electricity.
200 million PHEVs would require we burn a lot more fuel at night and generate a lot more pollution. But 200m PHEVs with smart chargers give utilities a lot of incentive to use high efficiency combined cycle plants instead of low efficiency peakers. Smart PHEVs also match up very well with intermittent sources such as wind, solar, etc.
“200 million PHEVs would require we burn a lot more fuel at night and generate a lot more pollution.”
For better or worse, whatever comes will be feathered in over time.
Remember that the current retirement rate for US vehicles is something like 5% (I don’t know the new car “expansion rate” off the top of my head, but it’s got to be similar.)
And of course, it sounds like it will be a while before PHEVs are so darned attractive that 100% of all new vehicle buyers choose them.
“According to the GM link, 78% of all commutes are less than 40 miles.”
Is that best case round-trip or one-way commute. With job/destination recharging infrastructure (A2G) no biggie but when I see numbers I always assume best case is chosen.
Gary Dikkers said…
“The problem is there may be huge environmental adverse effects from electric cars — not for you as the driver, but for the people who live near the extraction industries where they will produce the lithium for the batteries.”
As usual, more hyper-concerned what-other-people-are-doingism.
Gary, do you think drilling for oil is worse than digging up some permanently re-usable lead, usually dug-up as a by-product?
Gary, do you know feeding cows corn causes methanogenic global warming in the form of cow farts? OMG!!! Maybe we should “flare” that corn as ethanol and carbon dioxide.
Your comments are dead-ender hippy whining.
ps Anybody have the oct 2003 issue of the fed Omnistas?
We don’t. We charge them with excess electricity available from the grid overnight (at great rates). We are already getting the pollution, so we might as well find a use for that excess power.
But surely the whole point is to eliminate the baseload coal-fired powerstations that are producing this excess power.
Robert,
Here’s something for you to look for — just across the North Sea from you, built by those clever Norwegians (in collaboration with Google).
Think electric car
Some innovations here, that may make it a competitor for Volt:
1. 120 mile range on one charge
2. Ordered over the Internet and built to order — just like a Dell computer
3. A possible Stirling engine to make it a hybrid
4. A leased battery as part of the car deal
Best,
Gary
Interesting link, Gary.
I would add:
5. Life after transportation for batteries: Peak shaving the grid.
They say that GM is building the Volt
Will they do it, I don’t know
But if the don’t, I do know this,
That someone else will get my business!
Battery leasing is dumb. People already lease the whole car, breaking one lease into two doesn’t change the economics. Most battery lease concepts are based on wishful thinking — the Think article is a perfect example. No way a $16k pack from Tesla leases for $100/month. Not even close.
Some GM exec worried about Volt cost submitted to the same wishful thinking. The Volt will cost more than a Cobalt, period. A $6000 fuel tank and a bunch of electric components that cost more, at least initially, than their gas-engined counterparts guarantee it. Volume will address component costs, but batteries will always be expensive. Even in volume a Volt-sized PHEV will carry a $3-4k premium.
Mass use of PHEVs in the USA will save the $300 billion per year we spend importing oil and $100-200b per year of Mideast “defense” expenditures. 16 million new cars per year at a $5000 premium is $80 billion per year. Paying 80b to save 400b+ is a no brainer. We just need to put the proper feebate mechanism in place. As a national security issue it needs to be done at the federal government level.
Bloomberg quotes unnamed sources saying GM plans to build as many as 60,000 Chevy Volts in the first year of production. They also say that’s high enough volume to get the cost under $30k.
Heck, if they follow through I’ll buy one.
http://www.autoobserver.com/2007/08/chevy-volt-the-.html
Best read on the technology I have found. This will be a reality.
http://www.autoobserver.com/2007/08/chevy-volt-the-
.html