I have an article in today's Guardian online, "Is the Chevy Volt just hype?" I argue that the key to the near-term success for plug-ins in this country is government incentives and mandates, which in turn will critically depend on the outcome of the presidential election. But that should not be a surprise, since no country in the world has achieved significant market penetration of an alternative-fuel vehicle without major government incentives and mandates.
I noted that one alternative fuel vehicle expert told me that GM has "already sunk at least $1 billion into the Volt and cannot reasonably expect a profit from a $45,000 new car in an economy which is imploding. The actual cost of the vehicle may be higher." And that leads to two key, related points:
If this country doesn't strongly embrace plug-ins, Europe may well become the leader. After all, gas prices are considerably higher in Europe, which means plug-ins will provide consumers there far larger fuel cost savings. Also, Europeans drive about half as much as Americans, so they may be able to avoid gas consumption almost entirely with a well-designed plug-in, perhaps one with a smaller all-electric range.
And this leads directly to the question of whether of the Volt is overdesigned:
The vast majority of people commute much less than 40 miles a day. This is true in US and even more so in other countries. In addition, as plug-ins become popular, we will very quickly see electric outlets in parking garages, malls and the like, so people will be able to charge at home and then again at work or when shopping.
So I think a plug-in that goes closer to 20 miles all-electric before reverting to a gasoline hybrid makes much more sense, especially for initial market introduction where the cost of the vehicle still reflects the use of expensive batteries that have not come down in cost. Ultimately, economies of scale and improvements in manufacturing and technology will make the batteries and the whole electric drivetrain more affordable.
This is certainly a very complicated design question, involving trade-offs in the batteries involving the ability to deliver energy versus the ability to deliver power when needed -- as well as trade-offs that automakers don't fully control, such as how quickly companies make charging at work places accessible.
But I think one point is very crucial for designers to understand: It is so much cheaper per mile to run on electricity than gasoline -- a factor of five cheaper or more at current gasoline prices -- that the vast majority of drivers are going to want to go out of their way to keep their plug-ins charged up all the time, and that includes when their car is parked for eight hours at work.
Also, you can take a large bet that companies trying to brand themselves as green, like Google and Wal-Mart, will not only provide incentives for their employees to purchase plug-ins, but they will very quickly retrofit their parking facilities to provide easy charging -- most likely using renewable energy at discounted prices.
You don't want to design plug-ins to cover the full commute of all American commuters. Nor do you want to design it assuming there will be no charging at work. Since half of American cars travel under 25 miles a day, and batteries are simply so expensive right now, I tend to think 15 to 25 miles all-electric makes more sense for early models.
This post was created for ClimateProgress.org, a project of the Center for American Progress Action Fund.
Top 25 reasons to give a damn about climate change
Comments
View as Flat
Biodiversivist Posted 6:04 am
01 Oct 2008
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
Gar Lipow Posted 6:25 am
01 Oct 2008
Permalink
Jon Rynn Posted 6:49 am
01 Oct 2008
Permalink
racc Posted 7:05 am
01 Oct 2008
As well, in an uncertain economy where credit is more expensive and harder to get, automobile companies will have a hard time finding the resources to bring plug-ins to the market and consumers will have a hard time buying them.
This is a perfect time for governments to invest in public transit and rail. As a society, we need to stop wasting resources in the vain attempt to continue the automobile age, which never has or never will be sustainable.
Permalink
scatter Posted 7:52 am
01 Oct 2008
In my view we need all the electric range we can get so that as many journeys can be pure electric as possible. Naturally there will be a cost/range trade off but I think a variety of options should be provided.
In the UK, a 50 mile electric range would cover 98% of car trips.
Permalink
theBike45 Posted 8:30 am
01 Oct 2008
has already tossed around several variant ideas, one to offer the Volt as a battery-only (for the benefit of the brainless Californians), and the other to offer th vehicle with a smaller battery pack. But this shows just how little Romm knows about electrically propelled cars. If you cut the battery pack in half,you DO reduce the capacity by half, to 20 miles of range. But you ALSO reduce the amount of power the pack can pump out, making the car unacceptably slow. THAT's why Toyota, while they were fiddling with their silly NiMH design, could only use battery-only power during low power demand situations. The Volt is not overly powerful as it is - in fact, GM is advising battery replacement should it ever be reduced by around 15 to 20%. YOU ARE ASKING THEM TO REDUCE POWER 50%. Fat chance. Now the Saturn Vue greenline will have enough electrical power to go 10 miles, I believe, if you are looking for a lesser costly battery pack, it is a dual power design, unlike the Volt. Perhaps, however, your biggest blunder is in 1) assuming the car will cost over $40,000. It will NOT. Secondly, you are , for some strange, inexplicable reason, acting as thought that price will not be reduced over time. Fat chance. If you all were even paying half attention , you would remember the words of the A123 Systems exec who predicted a 50% drop in battery prices over the next several years. You would also know, had you been paying attention, that GM Lutz has already
stated that the car's high initial price will be OK because of the fact that early adopters will be well-heeled. And the volume of production during the first year and a half can't even meet the demand already expressed - at the upper $30K price range.
You know, I'm getting tired of listening to ignorant Joes spouting opinions when they obviously don't know enough about the technology to even have an opinion, much less try to "inform" others.
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 9:43 am
01 Oct 2008
A Volt with half of its proposed battery capacity would probably perform worse because it would spend even more time using the recip engine to drive a generator to drive an electric motor to turn the wheels. Note that no cars on the road today attempt to use a generator to power an electric motor. Locomotives do it but it is a mileage trade off for mechanical advantage. The Volt is counting on that grid charge to give it a decent average mileage.
It's all academic. We will find out if and when the Volt gets to market.
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
Delay And Deny Posted 9:53 am
01 Oct 2008
Brie must be brain food as Eurocrats make the right decision...hydrogen...not batteries!
http://www.h2daily.com/index.php/20081001729/Latest/More- ...
The European Commission welcomes the support of the European Parliament for its proposal to simplify the approval of hydrogen powered vehicles. This will mark a step forward in the development and marketing of clean and safe hydrogen vehicles. As a result, they will be seen more often on Europe's streets and the European automotive industry could become more competitive by taking the lead in hydrogen technology. The EP vote is based on a compromise reached with the Member States, which is expected to adopt the package shortly.
http://www.nanotech-now.com/news.cgi?story_id=30854
Researchers in Greece report design of a new material that almost meets the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) 2010 goals for hydrogen storage and could help eliminate a key roadblock to practical hydrogen-powered vehicles. Their study on a way of safely storing hydrogen, an explosive gas, is scheduled for the Oct. 8 issue of ACS' Nano Letters, a monthly journal.
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 10:07 am
01 Oct 2008
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
Delay And Deny Posted 1:46 pm
01 Oct 2008
The Nocera process is 100% efficient at converting electricity to hydrogen.
100%
Not an electron lost.
Permalink
Bob Wallace Posted 2:33 am
02 Oct 2008
"Nocera also concedes that the platinum he used as a catalyst is too expensive to realize the process on a mass scale and that the platinum must be replaced with a cheaper alternative."
http://yaleclimatemediaforum.org/features/0908_nocera.htm ...
And we would also have some sort of miraculous breakthroughs in storage, transportation, distribution, and fuel cell engines themselves.
But don't let all those minor problems distract you from your propaganda campaign "j".
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 2:57 am
02 Oct 2008
Sell a base model with 15 mile battery range, then have optional battery packs that plugin to extend your range for your particular average daily use.
An average commute is under 15 miles one way. So many people could plugin at work.
Whatever your driving range was, you could add more battery capacity.
GM should just buy the backup generator from another company. Rather than starting a whole new division to do that. Your engineers consult with generator manufacturers.
that would make an affordable 15k base model Volt. Add more range for a couple thousand more.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin
Permalink
KoalaOgawa Posted 8:29 am
02 Oct 2008
Does he believe that reducing the mileage range will significantly reduce the cost of the car? If this is his thought process, any engineer involved with the Volt development will tell you that is simply wishful thinking.
If there is no siginificant cost advantage for reducing the mileage range, why reduce the range by 50% ?? Again, it makes no sense.
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 12:47 pm
02 Oct 2008
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 3:05 pm
02 Oct 2008
The difference between a 15k price and 17 or 18 for extended range is signifigant for a car that is intended for mass adoption as an oil saving technology leap.
The extra thousands would pay back in gas savings. Justifying the extra cost up front. but if you have a 12 mile commute to work, where you can plugin to charge up for the drive home. Then save money by going with the 15 mile battery range.
More powerful expensive cars like the Volt will have their market, but it won't be the choice of most car buyers. An economy car to save our economy and climate is urgently needed. GM is not being helpfull in this effort, with it's over the top Volt.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin
Permalink
RossBleakney Posted 3:40 am
03 Oct 2008
I agree, to a certain extent, with racc. Focusing on eliminating the gasoline consumed during commuting via very expensive new cars seems a bit of a waste. I wonder if you could get better results if you spent the same on electric bikes and public transportation. The most popular use of public transportation is for commuting and big events (ball games, etc.). Folks are willing to spend the time to figure out the system if it makes their commute more pleasant.
There are two other types of car usage. One is for "around town" errands and visits (grocery store, day care, soccer practice, etc.). A smaller electric only range (say, five miles) would handle most of those quite well. The other big use of a car is for big trips. That is where the gas engine is essential.
Permalink
christophersj Posted 3:53 am
03 Oct 2008
At least it still beats a Toyota Yaris in City MPG.
Oh, and I second the call for carbon fiber bodies. Amroy Lovins has great demos of this.
-CJ
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 6:39 am
03 Oct 2008
29/27 4 wheel drive
34/30 2 wheel drive
Yaris:
29/35
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
Gary Gifford Posted 11:13 am
04 Oct 2008
Cheers,
Gary Gifford
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 11:27 am
04 Oct 2008
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink