"Let's see.... I can buy a very reliable Prius with a fair amount of room for $23K and get 50mpg. Or I (supposedly) can buy a Volt in a few years for $37K that can go 40 miles if I recharged it with a plug"
Then I guess you would not buy a Prius for $23K when you can buy a 36 mpg car for $13K. You can't make up that difference either.
As for the $37K price tag this is new tech and new tech is always expensive. I remember when a 50" plasma cost $20K.... early adopters snapped 'em up and they didn't fail.
I agree completely. I read some of the most inane comments on Inside Line.
By re-charge I'm assuming the author means a full recharge. I'd like for the author to explain exactly why you'd want the ICE to fully recharge the battery pack? And if it did how would this increase it's electric only range?
And as you said, since the battery pack is always powering the electric motor how can it be considered 400 lbs of uselessness? His statement implies that after 40 miles you might as well not have the battery pack. Does the author think that the ICE generator is directly powering the electric motor? Yes this person obviously has an agenda but his total lack of intelligence in this matter discredits whatever point he's trying to make.
A way to describe the Volt configuration that possibly even this author could comprehend is that the ICE maintains the battery's charge at 30%. Is this re-charging? It's comparable to asking whether an air conditioner cools a home or just maintains a temperature? You can't maintain a temperature without cooling and likewise you can't maintain a state of charge without re-charging.
Then I guess you would not buy a Prius for $23K when you can buy a 36 mpg car for $13K. You can't make up that difference either.
The difference is that $23K is still around an average price for a car. $37K is a premium price that many fewer can afford. It's not just "is it a good value?", it's also "can I afford it?".
As for the $37K price tag this is new tech and new tech is always expensive. I remember when a 50" plasma cost $20K.... early adopters snapped 'em up and they didn't fail.
Well the first Insight and Prius didn't cost more than an average car price. When the plasmas were $10K I suspect there weren't many buyers other than early adopters.
So according to this logic, GM may have a $27K Volt in 2010, but it will really be 2015 before they have a competitive product?
You seem to be saying that the Volt needs to be priced comparably to the Prius in order to be a competitive product. I'm not sure why. Certainly there are vehicles currently on the market that are priced higher than $23k that really don't have more practical utility than the Prius yet they sell. The Volt may end up being better equipped with better performance. It will certainly get better mileage in all situations other than very long trips.
Regardless when the Prius first came out Toyota sold it for a loss. Gas prices were relatively cheap and it was very hard to justify the practicality of spending the premium for a hybrid when you could save thousands of dollars by going with a Corolla instead. The GM's executives were saying about the Prius pretty much what you're now saying about the Volt. In retrospect GM now admits that they made a big mistake.
BTW, Toyota is also planning to release a plug-in version of it's Prius. It will only have a 10 mile all electric range and the estimated price premium over a regular Prius is expected to be around $6k. Since you don't think the Volt will be a competitive product even at $27k how competitive will a $29k plug-in Prius be with only 1/4th the electric range?
"So according to this logic, GM may have a $27K Volt in 2010, but it will really be 2015 before they have a competitive product?"
If you mean "price competitive" then yes... but that doesn't mean the Volt can't sell in decent numbers. There are quite a few near-lux cars in the $30 - $40K range that sell between 50 and 100K units.
IMO, there are a lot of people who will pay to show their greenness by saying they use no gas. It's just another way to impress the neighbors.
"I agree completely. I read some of the most inane comments on Inside Line."
Hence, why the Volt had to be put out there so early... the world is full of people who need to be educated, like so many horseless carriage owners at the turn of the last century.
The Senate is currently working on a proposal that would give up to a $7,500 tax credit for buyers of plug-in vehicles like the Volt.
I'm personally not a big fan of tax credits but if they must exist then at least they should make some sense. I believe the goal is to reduce fuel consumption so any tax credit should be based upon fuel economy, not the vehicle type. If there are non-hybrids, non plug-ins that can attain the same or better fuel efficiency they are just as deserving of a tax credit.
With that said the problem becomes how to assign a fuel efficiency rating to a vehicle like the Volt? I don't think that should be too difficult. First determine what the mpg of the Volt will be once the ICE generator has kicked in. GM is stating this will be around 50 mpg. Then estimate what percentage of the average drivers annual mileage will take place under these conditions. Let's say 40%. So for every 10,000 miles driven 4,000 will have involved the ICE burning gas to charge the batteries. At 50 mpg that's 80 gallons for every 10,000 miles driven or 125 mpg. That should qualify for any tax credit based upon mpg.
Right now the EPA requires that the mileage be calculated with a discharged battery. That's fine, but there needs to be an electric range number (in miles) for plug-ins.
My understanding of the just-passed House tax credit is it starts at $3,000 for 5kWh + $150 for flex fuel capability + $250 for every kWh of battery capacity over 5kWh (up to a maximum of $3,000). A plug-in Prius would probably get nothing, while a Volt would get all $6,150. I think the 1st 250K vehicles fully qualify and it gradually declines after that. If the Senate gives more the bills will need to be reconciled.
The object here apparently is not to promote high mpg, but no gas usage at all.
The object here apparently is not to promote high mpg, but no gas usage at all.
Well the objective should be to use our tax dollars to promote a maximum displacement of gas usage. Encouraging people to buy vehicles that use no gas does not necessarily accomplish this if the vehicle sees reduced service due to it's limitations.
"I'm sure the batteries are still perform a function (such as capturing free braking energy) and are not "uselessness"."
This would require a transmission similar to the HSD. I have not heard that the Volt will have regen braking. From what I have read the transmission is pure electric, without the reverse-generator function of the HSD that puts charge back in the batteries.
"And as you said, since the battery pack is always powering the electric motor how can it be considered 400 lbs of uselessness? His statement implies that after 40 miles you might as well not have the battery pack. Does the author think that the ICE generator is directly powering the electric motor? "
That is what GM said; "a gasoline/E85-powered engine generator seamlessly provides electricity to power the Volt's electric drive unit..."
Energy does not go to the battery; it simply stays at whatever SOC it has when "depleted". I read that statement to mean that the ICE powers the electric motors, no batteries involved.
I suspect that the Volt does not have ANY on-board capability to recharge the batteries, including regen braking.
We had previously been discussing whether the Volt has a regenerative braking system. It would seem logical that it should, as the current breed of hybrids do. Well it is official, we have heard back from GM and the official word is yes, there is a regenerative braking system.
The system seems the same as the production systems found now:
” When the brake pedal is applied (foot comes off accelerator pedal) the Electric Traction motor switches to a “Generator”.
I am not familiar with the Volt power system but if GM really did their research and learned from Toyota's HSD, it would make sense that the Volt's ICE can supply electricity to either battery to keep it charged above 30% or power the electric motors directly.
It makes sense if you consider energy efficiency and energy loss on conversion from one point to another.
For example, if mechanical energy converted to electrical energy is optimistically 90% efficiency (ICE to generator), and the electrical energy converted back to mechanical energy at the axle at 90% efficiency (via electric motor), the resulting transmission efficiency from ICE to the wheel of volt would be about 81%.
A regular automatic transmission can do better than that. But, of course, in an automatic transmission, the engine does not shut off when the car is stationary.
Now if the electricity generated passes by the battery before it is released to the electric motor, there is additional efficiency loss due to energy conversion from electrical energy to chemical energy and back. And that is by a factor of roughly 50-60%.
If the generator-motor would have 81% transmission efficiency, the generator-battery-motor would have 48% transmission efficiency.
That is actually a horrible figure. However, the volt is designed to be powered by batteries that is primarily charged by grid electricity and not by the ICE and that is where it make it's economic rationale.
I would guess that driving the volt with the ICE and with empty battery would be a terrible waste of fuel especially on the highway. Much worse than a regular car.
Well said peralta. Something not many people think of is the enormous cooling requirements when losing so much energy during all those different conversions, as it all goes to heat. There would be more losses to run the cooling systems.
I'm assuming this is still valid. I am under the impression that the Volt would be able to run indefinitely on ICE power...converted to electric..as the battery runs down. Not sure how to square that with your power loss assumptions.
How Does It Work?
The Chevy Volt will use a new powertrain that GM is referring to as the "E-Flex" system. It uses electricity to move the car at all times, and uses an engine as a generator to repenish its batteries. To charge it, owners will plug it into a standard household electrical outlet. When they drive the car, it will use only its electric motor, no matter what speed it is driven, until its battery has less than 30 percent of a full charge remaining.
At that point, a small four-cylinder engine will turn on. That engine will not directly send power to the wheels -- instead, it will act as a generator, recharging the batteries.
According to GM Vice Chairman Bob Lutz, the Volt will use its GPS system to determine how long to run that engine. "The car will know how far you are from home," Lutz told reporters in September, "and it will only run the gas engine long enough to give you enough charge to get you home where you can actually plug it into the wall outlet. So the car will be smart enough to know where its home base is."
GM engineers estimate that the average driver will be able to travel 40 miles before the gasoline engine even ignites. But the range of the Volt under battery power alone will change based on how much weight it is carrying, how fast it is traveling, and other factors. The 40-mile figure is significant, however, because most Americans drive less than 40 miles per day. For many owners, the Volt would function as an electric car virtually all the time, using gasoline only when they took longer trips than they take on a typical day
There should be a travel distance algorithm mode switch.
One is for the regular 40 mile or less per day usage before recharging,
second is for Max fuel economy mode with up front display of range before battery is depleted, for travels > 40 miles and
third is for Max battery range with same up front display of range before battery is depleted, for indefinite all day long travel.
OR
You have the option to enter data into the car on how many miles you plan to travel for the day then the car will automatically calculate for best usage of power between battery and ICE.
OR better
You enter your intended travel for the day in the car's navigation and the car calaculates for itself the total distance to be travelled.
If you ran out of battery prematurely, you will be driving inefficiently on ICE while dragging along the heavy dead batteries.
The ICE is most efficient if the car is already in motion since it doesn't have to inefficiently channel energy through the batteries.
The ICE would even be more efficient with almost 100% transmission efficiency if there is a clutch for direct mechanical drive, ideal for indefinite highway driving.
"I would guess that driving the volt with the ICE and with empty battery would be a terrible waste of fuel especially on the highway. Much worse than a regular car."
They're saying 50mpg. If it hits that number it will be much better than a regular car.
There is also talk of using On-Star so your Volt will always know how far it is away from home and attempt to to optimize its operation.
I have a 19.2 mile each way commute... a nearly ideal Volt distance. I'm sure the engine would run occasionally, which is not necessarily a bad thing. It keeps things lubed and the gas fresh. Volts should have a program that runs them occasionally for that reason, even if you never exceed battery range.
I'd think people considering Volts would ask themselves how often they would go over 40 miles without having charge access. For something like 80% of the population the answer would be "not often".
The ICE would even be more efficient with almost 100% transmission efficiency if there is a clutch for direct mechanical drive, ideal for indefinite highway driving.
That would be the most efficient way to use the ICE but I think it would add complexity, weight and cost. The ICE is not going to be powerful enough to be the sole source of propulsion in some driving conditions, eg accelerating, going up a grade. So you'd need the capability of being able to supplement the ICE with the electric motor. I think your previous suggestion where the ICE generator directly powers the electric motor and uses it's occasional surplus to keep the batteries at 30% SOC has a lot of merit and it doesn't sound like a monumental engineering feat to accomplish this. Who knows, maybe the Volt will be doing this to some extent. In addition to it's greater efficiency it would reduce charge cycles on the battery pack. However you'd still want to only operate the ICE in a narrow power range that represented it's peak efficiency.
"That would be the most efficient way to use the ICE but I think it would add complexity, weight and cost"
Not necessarily. Things quickly becomes complicated if it is multispeed transmiision but not in a single speed gear reduction system. Single speed gear reduction system is almost always used by electric motors to power the wheels (except for in-wheel motors). That same gear reduction can be shared with the ICE.
"However you still want to only operate the ICE in a narrow power range that represented it's peak efficiency. "
A 1.4 L turbo gas engine will probably make efficient horsepower from maybe 15 hp to 70 hp. Below 15 hp requirement as in stop and go, that is taken cared by the battery power and the engine is off (like the prius).
Steady highway speed needs 15-30 hp. Assuming it has one fixed mechanical gear (as in top gear of a regular transmission), the electric motor will shoulder the extra boost needed for acceleration.
In that case. say you want to drive all day long. The distance all day would probably 600 miles (60mph average over 10 hours).
40 miles of that distance will be handled by battery and 560 miles will be petrol. The battery part will take care of the stop and go situations and also on the occasional additional boosts on the highway.
In the configuration you are describing the Volt would actually have more available power after the first 40 miles because now it could tap into the electric motor and the ICE for propulsion. Unless you are suggesting that the car also be able to access the ICE during the first 40 miles. The whole point of this car is to burn zero gasoline for most trips so I don't see that happening. Plus this car would correctly be called a hybrid at this point, which would probably disqualify it from some of the tax credits now being considered.
I'd think most of the power will go to the motors and some to the battery to maintain a minimum charge. At that point the battery should be there to smooth out the highs and lows and capture free braking energy. If an engine is the power source since you really want to run it in a narrow, very efficient range.... hopefully one where the use of HCCI becomes possible.
I think you are right. Until recently I was under the impression that all the power generated by the ICE went straight to the battery pack, which would have been horribly inefficient. On the other Volt thread I was directed to a link which confirms what you're saying. For some reason it seems that there are Volt enthusiasts who feel somehow duped by the fact that the ICE will only maintain a charge rather than recharging the battery pack. I can't understand why anyone would object to that.
With that said I don't quite understand the significance of OnStar or using GPS for calculating the distance to your destination/home. If once the battery pack is depleted to 30% it is maintained there what does it matter how far you are from home?
Apparently if the battery has reached its charging threshold and OnStar determines you are within a predetermined distance of your home and proceeding in that direction it will be able to delay kicking the engine on until you get there. Every little bit helps, I guess.
"I can't understand why anyone would object to that."
Only if they're irrational. I know I would not want to arrive home ready to plug in only to find out my car was fully charged. I want to use cheap electricity, not expensive gasoline!
"With that said I don't quite understand the significance of OnStar or using GPS for calculating the distance to your destination/home. If once the battery pack is depleted to 30% it is maintained there what does it matter how far you are from home? "
If you travel 40 miles or less everyday, then you don't even need the ICE. You might as well add maybe 50-100 lbs of reserve battery and delete the ICE altogether.
The ICE is a range extender, nothing more, but it is somehow expensive and still pollutes the air.
The goal is to use grid electricity to charge the battery where it is cheaper rather than the ICE. If you travel say 200 miles, then it is best to use 1) battery power where it is most efficient and also 2) ICE where it is most efficient.
1) Battery is most efficient (financially) when it gets it's charge from the grid and not from ICE. It is also best for stop and go application portion of the long distance travel. It is also efficient on steady speed but it has limited range.
2) The ICE is most efficient if it powers the electric motors exclusively, and bypassing the batteries. It is also best if the car is already in motion and not stationary.
With those presumptions, it is best that the battery will be depleted just in time when you arrive home for grid recharge.
Going back to the subject of deleting the ICE. How much would it cost if you remove the ICE and in it's place, put additional 100 lbs of reserve battery (or shall we say range extender battery?)?
Will it be cheaper and make more sense to go pure EV?
By the way, the 1999 model Toyota electric RAV4 had a range of 120-130 miles per charge and it did not even used lthium batteries. It used EV95 NiM hydride batteries where the patent rights was then purchased by TEXACO. TEXACO subsquently denied production of more EV95 batteries and threatened the companies with electric vehicles on the road.
No wonder, the car companies were scared and crushed their EV's despite public protest from leasee, owners and treehuggers.
Speaking of EV RAV4, there are still some of them running and escaped the crushing. Some have more tha 150,000 miles on the odometer without battery problems.
Companies build engine plants all the time. Better here than in China. This is the plant that will be building the 1.4 for the Volt and Cruze.
Speaking of "investor relations ploy" there was a story that GM is planning to build Volt batteries in the U.S. using government setup money, of course.
IMO, this would be a good thing... otherwise we'd just be going from imported oil to imported batteries. They'd probably still have to import lithium, but I believe the largest producer is Australia, which is not an unfriendly nation.
The highest energy density of the Li-ion batteries being considered for EV applications right now is about 130 watt-hours per kilogram. So adding another 100 lbs of battery might get you an additional 6 kWh of stored energy or roughly 30 more miles. The Volt would now have a 70 mile range. I'm guessing this would add at least $3k to the price of the vehicle and that is a very optimistic guess.
If you had an EV with a 70 mile range would that be your only car? Unless you live in a retirement community the answer is probably no. So now you're in the situation where you have to own and maintain 2 vehicles, obviously more expensive. You will also use your EV less, resulting in less fuel savings. Any trip you now take of 70 miles (probably 60 miles) or more will be with your ICE powered vehicle meaning you will have sacrificed 70 electric miles that you could have taken advantage of with an EV that had an ICE range extender. Bottom line is that a person with an EV and an ICE vehicle for long trips will end up burning more gas and polluting more than a person driving an EV with an ICE range extender
Until we have affordable EVs with ranges of 200+ miles and a fast charge infrastructure the EV with a range extender is the most practical way to go and will result in the greatest fuel savings.
The RAV4 EV is probably the best EV application to date. It's battery pack weighed over 900 lbs and cost $27k to replace. As you stated it had a range of over 100 miles but I seriously doubt many RAV4 EV owners ever embarked on a trip this long. It would be a major inconvenience for your battery to die before you got home. So I suspect almost all RAV4 EV owners/leasees had another vehicle.
The two areas with the greatest Lithium reserves are in South America (either Chile or Bolivia) and China (the Tibet region). However up until recently Lithium really wasn't too valuable so there hasn't been a lot of exploration. So undoubtable other reserves will be discovered.
It wouldn't surprise me to see these batteries manufactured domestically. While costs are higher here than in China these battery packs will weigh several hundred pounds. So the expense of shipping them here won't be trivial. Also China doesn't have the greatest reputation right now for quality control. When you're talking about something that if manufactured improperly could potentially catch fire or explode that will be a major consideration. That's one reason that Toyota will be manufacturing all its battery packs in house. I don't know if these manufacturing plants will actually be in Japan but they will be Japanese owned and controlled.
I'd be interested but that interest would be limited by the fact that I'd still need to own or rent another vehicle on occasion.
Let me ask you this. If you took this hypothetical Nissan Rogue EV with 140 mile range and added an ICE range extender to it would that make it a less appealing vehicle in your mind? If your answer is yes then basically you are saying that anyone making a trip over 140 miles needs to be using a strictly ICE powered vehicle.
I don't think any vehicle that does not provide a means of remote refuelling stands much of a chance of widespread acceptance, especially if there are range extended EV's available.
People don't like to chance being stranded, especially when the solution is a tow truck rather than simply fetching a gas can.
This guy got an EVRAV4 and then gave up his pick up truck and Mercedes to get a second EVRAV4 (used and more expensive purchase), his third car is a prius that seldom sees the road.
Why does this person own a Prius, actually 2 Priuses? If his RAV4 EV had a range extender would he still have a need to own a Prius? Also he describes taking 6 hour breaks on long trips in his RAV4 so that the batteries can re-charge. If you think this is a practice that the typical motorist will embrace then you are more than a little out of touch. BTW, a 27 kWh depleted battery pack, like in the RAV4 EV, will not recharge in 6 hours off a typical 110/120 volt outlet.
tpe said: "....the mpg of the Volt will be once the ICE generator has kicked in. GM is stating this will be around 50 mpg."
Since the ICE/generator/motor path is around 80% efficient, I don't see how this 50 MPG is achievable in a 3300 lb Volt at battery depletion. (Normal transmissions are around 95% efficient or higher.)
The 50 MPG might be possible if the ICE: 1. ICE shuts off below 20 mph (with time hysteretic logic added). 2. Battery helps feed the motor during acceleration or up hills. 3. ICE delivers some small amount of charge to the batteries, along with regenerative braking.
Without all the above, you might be able to get 30 MPG or so, not anywhere near 50 MPG as GM has so far stated.
This would seem to contradict some of the latest statements saying that the ICE doesn't recharge the batteries, although that probably only means the ICE won't bring the batteries to a full charge, providing sustaining charge only to keep the batteries at 30%.
Well, you can get a Volt or some other similar car for your $37k or this thingie...you decide:
"what’s really interesting about the iMiev right now is that Mitsubishi has just released a price figure of what $37,496 US, which is about $2,500less than we often hear talked about as the price point for the Chevy Volt.
Despite the similarities in pricing and release date, the two cars are very different beasts. The iMiev is based on a current Kei-car produced by Mitsubishi for Japan, and has a 47kW electric motor powered by a 330-volt lithium ion battery pack. The car will have a top speed of 80 mph and an all electric range of about 100 miles. Charging will take place via a normal power outlet and should take about 14 hours to completely charge the battery, though there is all a 220V charge option, which only takes 7 hours."
I am not sure why the obsession against the range extender.
My current car gets 25 mpg on the road. I drive from portland to seattle about once a month. Almost all my other daily driving is under 40 miles. So...
I can spend my $40k on a battery only EV and keep my old car for seattle trips...sorry, I am not going to double or triple my drive time to get to seattle waiting for a recharge.
So 400 miles r/t @ 25 mpg (generous) I would use 16 gallons of gas.
With a Volt I get 50 mpg minus the 80 plug in so I use ~5 gallons.
I would actually use more gas per month with the full EV. And yes I could buy another higher mileage car, but that is another ICE on the road, no? And what about all the oil and etc in the manufacture and shipping and support of said vehicle...not to mention the cost.
Another thing good about the Volt et al (just read dodge is in the same game) is that it is speeding battery research and maybe more importantly, scale manufacturing of the batteries so we can see if price will be such that BEVs can gain advantage.
"Well, you can get a Volt or some other similar car for your $37k or this thingie...you decide: ..picture of iMiev....."
Is the iMiev sized for smaller (on average) Japanese people? Looks small in there. Remember the old Datsun B210? The only friends of mine that could fit in that Japanese-market sized vehicle were my short friends. Usually they have to add a little room inside for it to make it in U.S./Canadian/European markets.
The Volt will be sized to fit up to a 99% percentile American and enough width to prevent it from being a roly-poly hazard. I.E, a real car.
"Well, GM is saying 50mpg... we can try to analyze it, but we don't really know how it works, so any analysis is pure speculation. "
You can bet an 80% efficient transmission on the Volt (generator-to-motor path) will not get as good gas mileage as a current Corolla with an automatic transmission (31 MPG combined city/hiway) unless the battery is used in burst mode to fill in transient torque demands on the engine. The only details left are what logic thresholds GM will choose and how high they can get the MPG to.
Many of us were predicting that the Volt's engine would not recharge the batteries to full after battery depletion because it is a ridiculously low 50% efficient to do so. When GM announced it recently some of us were not surprised.
Frankly, the people who were predicting full recharge were foolish, since the goal has clearly been to use grid power as much as possible.
And they've already said 50mpg, so the battery must be assisting during peak loads and recieving a small charge from the engine and braking to maintain a minimum charge state.
I also expect the Volt's engine to run in far more efficient rpm ranges than a Corolla or any other conventional car including the Prius.
I'm not sure why you would use the Corolla as an example. Why not the Prius?
GM has stated many times they expect the Volt to get 50 mpg after the battery has been depleted. I've got to believe their engineers know a few things about transmission efficiency. While 50 mpg may end up being a little optimistic, especially with the new EPA ratings, it's hard to imagine that GM could be as far off as you are suggesting. Again, it's speculation on both our parts but if there was a way to bet on whether this car will get over 30 mpg with the ICE I'd definitely take that bet.
Comments
Or I (supposedly) can buy a Volt in a few years for $37K that can go 40 miles if I recharged it with a plug"
Then I guess you would not buy a Prius for $23K when you can buy a 36 mpg car for $13K. You can't make up that difference either.
As for the $37K price tag this is new tech and new tech is always expensive. I remember when a 50" plasma cost $20K.... early adopters snapped 'em up and they didn't fail.
By re-charge I'm assuming the author means a full recharge. I'd like for the author to explain exactly why you'd want the ICE to fully recharge the battery pack? And if it did how would this increase it's electric only range?
And as you said, since the battery pack is always powering the electric motor how can it be considered 400 lbs of uselessness? His statement implies that after 40 miles you might as well not have the battery pack. Does the author think that the ICE generator is directly powering the electric motor? Yes this person obviously has an agenda but his total lack of intelligence in this matter discredits whatever point he's trying to make.
A way to describe the Volt configuration that possibly even this author could comprehend is that the ICE maintains the battery's charge at 30%. Is this re-charging? It's comparable to asking whether an air conditioner cools a home or just maintains a temperature? You can't maintain a temperature without cooling and likewise you can't maintain a state of charge without re-charging.
The difference is that $23K is still around an average price for a car. $37K is a premium price that many fewer can afford. It's not just "is it a good value?", it's also "can I afford it?".
As for the $37K price tag this is new tech and new tech is always expensive. I remember when a 50" plasma cost $20K.... early adopters snapped 'em up and they didn't fail.
Well the first Insight and Prius didn't cost more than an average car price.
When the plasmas were $10K I suspect there weren't many buyers other than early adopters.
So according to this logic, GM may have a $27K Volt in 2010, but it will really be 2015 before they have a competitive product?
Regardless when the Prius first came out Toyota sold it for a loss. Gas prices were relatively cheap and it was very hard to justify the practicality of spending the premium for a hybrid when you could save thousands of dollars by going with a Corolla instead. The GM's executives were saying about the Prius pretty much what you're now saying about the Volt. In retrospect GM now admits that they made a big mistake.
BTW, Toyota is also planning to release a plug-in version of it's Prius. It will only have a 10 mile all electric range and the estimated price premium over a regular Prius is expected to be around $6k. Since you don't think the Volt will be a competitive product even at $27k how competitive will a $29k plug-in Prius be with only 1/4th the electric range?
If you mean "price competitive" then yes... but that doesn't mean the Volt can't sell in decent numbers. There are quite a few near-lux cars in the $30 - $40K range that sell between 50 and 100K units.
IMO, there are a lot of people who will pay to show their greenness by saying they use no gas. It's just another way to impress the neighbors.
"I agree completely. I read some of the most inane comments on Inside Line."
Hence, why the Volt had to be put out there so early... the world is full of people who need to be educated, like so many horseless carriage owners at the turn of the last century.
I'm personally not a big fan of tax credits but if they must exist then at least they should make some sense. I believe the goal is to reduce fuel consumption so any tax credit should be based upon fuel economy, not the vehicle type. If there are non-hybrids, non plug-ins that can attain the same or better fuel efficiency they are just as deserving of a tax credit.
With that said the problem becomes how to assign a fuel efficiency rating to a vehicle like the Volt? I don't think that should be too difficult. First determine what the mpg of the Volt will be once the ICE generator has kicked in. GM is stating this will be around 50 mpg. Then estimate what percentage of the average drivers annual mileage will take place under these conditions. Let's say 40%. So for every 10,000 miles driven 4,000 will have involved the ICE burning gas to charge the batteries. At 50 mpg that's 80 gallons for every 10,000 miles driven or 125 mpg. That should qualify for any tax credit based upon mpg.
That's fine, but there needs to be an electric range number (in miles) for plug-ins.
My understanding of the just-passed House tax credit is it starts at $3,000 for 5kWh + $150 for flex fuel capability + $250 for every kWh of battery capacity over 5kWh (up to a maximum of $3,000). A plug-in Prius would probably get nothing, while a Volt would get all $6,150. I think the 1st 250K vehicles fully qualify and it gradually declines after that. If the Senate gives more the bills will need to be reconciled.
The object here apparently is not to promote high mpg, but no gas usage at all.
Well the objective should be to use our tax dollars to promote a maximum displacement of gas usage. Encouraging people to buy vehicles that use no gas does not necessarily accomplish this if the vehicle sees reduced service due to it's limitations.
This would require a transmission similar to the HSD. I have not heard that the Volt will have regen braking. From what I have read the transmission is pure electric, without the reverse-generator function of the HSD that puts charge back in the batteries.
That is what GM said; "a gasoline/E85-powered engine generator seamlessly provides electricity to power the Volt's electric drive unit..."
Energy does not go to the battery; it simply stays at whatever SOC it has when "depleted". I read that statement to mean that the ICE powers the electric motors, no batteries involved.
I suspect that the Volt does not have ANY on-board capability to recharge the batteries, including regen braking.
The system seems the same as the production systems found now:
” When the brake pedal is applied (foot comes off accelerator pedal)
the Electric Traction motor switches to a “Generator”.
http://gm-volt.com/2007/02/28/volt-has-regenerative-braking/
It makes sense if you consider energy efficiency and energy loss on conversion from one point to another.
For example, if mechanical energy converted to electrical energy is optimistically 90% efficiency (ICE to generator), and the electrical energy converted back to mechanical energy at the axle at 90% efficiency (via electric motor), the resulting transmission efficiency from ICE to the wheel of volt would be about 81%.
A regular automatic transmission can do better than that. But, of course, in an automatic transmission, the engine does not shut off when the car is stationary.
Now if the electricity generated passes by the battery before it is released to the electric motor, there is additional efficiency loss due to energy conversion from electrical energy to chemical energy and back. And that is by a factor of roughly 50-60%.
If the generator-motor would have 81% transmission efficiency, the generator-battery-motor would have 48% transmission efficiency.
That is actually a horrible figure. However, the volt is designed to be powered by batteries that is primarily charged by grid electricity and not by the ICE and that is where it make it's economic rationale.
I would guess that driving the volt with the ICE and with empty battery would be a terrible waste of fuel especially on the highway. Much worse than a regular car.
How Does It Work?
The Chevy Volt will use a new powertrain that GM is referring to as the "E-Flex" system. It uses electricity to move the car at all times, and uses an engine as a generator to repenish its batteries. To charge it, owners will plug it into a standard household electrical outlet. When they drive the car, it will use only its electric motor, no matter what speed it is driven, until its battery has less than 30 percent of a full charge remaining.
At that point, a small four-cylinder engine will turn on. That engine will not directly send power to the wheels -- instead, it will act as a generator, recharging the batteries.
According to GM Vice Chairman Bob Lutz, the Volt will use its GPS system to determine how long to run that engine. "The car will know how far you are from home," Lutz told reporters in September, "and it will only run the gas engine long enough to give you enough charge to get you home where you can actually plug it into the wall outlet. So the car will be smart enough to know where its home base is."
GM engineers estimate that the average driver will be able to travel 40 miles before the gasoline engine even ignites. But the range of the Volt under battery power alone will change based on how much weight it is carrying, how fast it is traveling, and other factors. The 40-mile figure is significant, however, because most Americans drive less than 40 miles per day. For many owners, the Volt would function as an electric car virtually all the time, using gasoline only when they took longer trips than they take on a typical day
http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/2010-Chevrolet-Volt/
One is for the regular 40 mile or less per day usage before recharging,
second is for Max fuel economy mode with up front display of range before battery is depleted, for travels > 40 miles and
third is for Max battery range with same up front display of range before battery is depleted, for indefinite all day long travel.
OR
You have the option to enter data into the car on how many miles you plan to travel for the day then the car will automatically calculate for best usage of power between battery and ICE.
OR better
You enter your intended travel for the day in the car's navigation and the car calaculates for itself the total distance to be travelled.
If you ran out of battery prematurely, you will be driving inefficiently on ICE while dragging along the heavy dead batteries.
The ICE is most efficient if the car is already in motion since it doesn't have to inefficiently channel energy through the batteries.
The ICE would even be more efficient with almost 100% transmission efficiency if there is a clutch for direct mechanical drive, ideal for indefinite highway driving.
They're saying 50mpg. If it hits that number it will be much better than a regular car.
There is also talk of using On-Star so your Volt will always know how far it is away from home and attempt to to optimize its operation.
I have a 19.2 mile each way commute... a nearly ideal Volt distance. I'm sure the engine would run occasionally, which is not necessarily a bad thing. It keeps things lubed and the gas fresh. Volts should have a program that runs them occasionally for that reason, even if you never exceed battery range.
I'd think people considering Volts would ask themselves how often they would go over 40 miles without having charge access. For something like 80% of the population the answer would be "not often".
That would be the most efficient way to use the ICE but I think it would add complexity, weight and cost. The ICE is not going to be powerful enough to be the sole source of propulsion in some driving conditions, eg accelerating, going up a grade. So you'd need the capability of being able to supplement the ICE with the electric motor. I think your previous suggestion where the ICE generator directly powers the electric motor and uses it's occasional surplus to keep the batteries at 30% SOC has a lot of merit and it doesn't sound like a monumental engineering feat to accomplish this. Who knows, maybe the Volt will be doing this to some extent. In addition to it's greater efficiency it would reduce charge cycles on the battery pack. However you'd still want to only operate the ICE in a narrow power range that represented it's peak efficiency.
Not necessarily. Things quickly becomes complicated if it is multispeed transmiision but not in a single speed gear reduction system. Single speed gear reduction system is almost always used by electric motors to power the wheels (except for in-wheel motors). That same gear reduction can be shared with the ICE.
"However you still want to only operate the ICE in a narrow power range that represented it's peak efficiency. "
A 1.4 L turbo gas engine will probably make efficient horsepower from maybe 15 hp to 70 hp. Below 15 hp requirement as in stop and go, that is taken cared by the battery power and the engine is off (like the prius).
Steady highway speed needs 15-30 hp. Assuming it has one fixed mechanical gear (as in top gear of a regular transmission), the electric motor will shoulder the extra boost needed for acceleration.
In that case. say you want to drive all day long. The distance all day would probably 600 miles (60mph average over 10 hours).
40 miles of that distance will be handled by battery and 560 miles will be petrol. The battery part will take care of the stop and go situations and also on the occasional additional boosts on the highway.
With that said I don't quite understand the significance of OnStar or using GPS for calculating the distance to your destination/home. If once the battery pack is depleted to 30% it is maintained there what does it matter how far you are from home?
"I can't understand why anyone would object to that."
Only if they're irrational. I know I would not want to arrive home ready to plug in only to find out my car was fully charged. I want to use cheap electricity, not expensive gasoline!
If you travel 40 miles or less everyday, then you don't even need the ICE. You might as well add maybe 50-100 lbs of reserve battery and delete the ICE altogether.
The ICE is a range extender, nothing more, but it is somehow expensive and still pollutes the air.
The goal is to use grid electricity to charge the battery where it is cheaper rather than the ICE. If you travel say 200 miles, then it is best to use 1) battery power where it is most efficient and also 2) ICE where it is most efficient.
1) Battery is most efficient (financially) when it gets it's charge from the grid and not from ICE. It is also best for stop and go application portion of the long distance travel. It is also efficient on steady speed but it has limited range.
2) The ICE is most efficient if it powers the electric motors exclusively, and bypassing the batteries. It is also best if the car is already in motion and not stationary.
With those presumptions, it is best that the battery will be depleted just in time when you arrive home for grid recharge.
Going back to the subject of deleting the ICE. How much would it cost if you remove the ICE and in it's place, put additional 100 lbs of reserve battery (or shall we say range extender battery?)?
Will it be cheaper and make more sense to go pure EV?
By the way, the 1999 model Toyota electric RAV4 had a range of 120-130 miles per charge and it did not even used lthium batteries. It used EV95 NiM hydride batteries where the patent rights was then purchased by TEXACO. TEXACO subsquently denied production of more EV95 batteries and threatened the companies with electric vehicles on the road.
No wonder, the car companies were scared and crushed their EV's despite public protest from leasee, owners and treehuggers.
Speaking of EV RAV4, there are still some of them running and escaped the crushing. Some have more tha 150,000 miles on the odometer without battery problems.
Just what we need - a new plant to fabricate combustion engines. This whole thing is an investor relations ploy.... :sick:
Good bye GM!
This is the plant that will be building the 1.4 for the Volt and Cruze.
Speaking of "investor relations ploy" there was a story that GM is planning to build Volt batteries in the U.S. using government setup money, of course.
IMO, this would be a good thing... otherwise we'd just be going from imported oil to imported batteries. They'd probably still have to import lithium, but I believe the largest producer is Australia, which is not an unfriendly nation.
If you had an EV with a 70 mile range would that be your only car? Unless you live in a retirement community the answer is probably no. So now you're in the situation where you have to own and maintain 2 vehicles, obviously more expensive. You will also use your EV less, resulting in less fuel savings. Any trip you now take of 70 miles (probably 60 miles) or more will be with your ICE powered vehicle meaning you will have sacrificed 70 electric miles that you could have taken advantage of with an EV that had an ICE range extender. Bottom line is that a person with an EV and an ICE vehicle for long trips will end up burning more gas and polluting more than a person driving an EV with an ICE range extender
Until we have affordable EVs with ranges of 200+ miles and a fast charge infrastructure the EV with a range extender is the most practical way to go and will result in the greatest fuel savings.
The RAV4 EV is probably the best EV application to date. It's battery pack weighed over 900 lbs and cost $27k to replace. As you stated it had a range of over 100 miles but I seriously doubt many RAV4 EV owners ever embarked on a trip this long. It would be a major inconvenience for your battery to die before you got home. So I suspect almost all RAV4 EV owners/leasees had another vehicle.
The two areas with the greatest Lithium reserves are in South America (either Chile or Bolivia) and China (the Tibet region). However up until recently Lithium really wasn't too valuable so there hasn't been a lot of exploration. So undoubtable other reserves will be discovered.
It wouldn't surprise me to see these batteries manufactured domestically. While costs are higher here than in China these battery packs will weigh several hundred pounds. So the expense of shipping them here won't be trivial. Also China doesn't have the greatest reputation right now for quality control. When you're talking about something that if manufactured improperly could potentially catch fire or explode that will be a major consideration. That's one reason that Toyota will be manufacturing all its battery packs in house. I don't know if these manufacturing plants will actually be in Japan but they will be Japanese owned and controlled.
http://www.roskill.com/reports/lithium
Looks like the Aussies do have a lot of the stuff, along with the Chileans and others.
All preferable to buying Middle Eastern oil...
Would you be interested if say Infiniti would make an EV version Nissan Rogue with 140 miles range and only costs $42,000?
Put it in another way, how about a Lexus version of a RAV4 but EV with same 140 miles range for $42,000?
Let me ask you this. If you took this hypothetical Nissan Rogue EV with 140 mile range and added an ICE range extender to it would that make it a less appealing vehicle in your mind? If your answer is yes then basically you are saying that anyone making a trip over 140 miles needs to be using a strictly ICE powered vehicle.
People don't like to chance being stranded, especially when the solution is a tow truck rather than simply fetching a gas can.
http://www.eaaev.org/Info/RAV4-EV_User_Experiences.pdf
This guy got an EVRAV4 and then gave up his pick up truck and Mercedes to get a second EVRAV4 (used and more expensive purchase), his third car is a prius that seldom sees the road.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2006/09/24/MTGQ3L- B2SU1.DTL
Why does this person own a Prius, actually 2 Priuses? If his RAV4 EV had a range extender would he still have a need to own a Prius? Also he describes taking 6 hour breaks on long trips in his RAV4 so that the batteries can re-charge. If you think this is a practice that the typical motorist will embrace then you are more than a little out of touch. BTW, a 27 kWh depleted battery pack, like in the RAV4 EV, will not recharge in 6 hours off a typical 110/120 volt outlet.
Rich greenies are buying 'em up... well, that's what it is, a rich greenie's toy.
http://www.eaaev.org/Info/RAV4-EV_User_Experiences.pdf
The answer to that question is the same as the answer to this one:
Do half of the people you know have solar panels on their roof?
Since the ICE/generator/motor path is around 80% efficient, I don't see how this 50 MPG is achievable in a 3300 lb Volt at battery depletion. (Normal transmissions are around 95% efficient or higher.)
The 50 MPG might be possible if the ICE:
1. ICE shuts off below 20 mph (with time hysteretic logic added).
2. Battery helps feed the motor during acceleration or up hills.
3. ICE delivers some small amount of charge to the batteries, along with regenerative braking.
Without all the above, you might be able to get 30 MPG or so, not anywhere near 50 MPG as GM has so far stated.
This would seem to contradict some of the latest statements saying that the ICE doesn't recharge the batteries, although that probably only means the ICE won't bring the batteries to a full charge, providing sustaining charge only to keep the batteries at 30%.
"what’s really interesting about the iMiev right now is that Mitsubishi has just released a price figure of what $37,496 US, which is about $2,500less than we often hear talked about as the price point for the Chevy Volt.
Despite the similarities in pricing and release date, the two cars are very different beasts. The iMiev is based on a current Kei-car produced by Mitsubishi for Japan, and has a 47kW electric motor powered by a 330-volt lithium ion battery pack. The car will have a top speed of 80 mph and an all electric range of about 100 miles. Charging will take place via a normal power outlet and should take about 14 hours to completely charge the battery, though there is all a 220V charge option, which only takes 7 hours."
I am not sure why the obsession against the range extender.
My current car gets 25 mpg on the road. I drive from portland to seattle about once a month. Almost all my other daily driving is under 40 miles. So...
I can spend my $40k on a battery only EV and keep my old car for seattle trips...sorry, I am not going to double or triple my drive time to get to seattle waiting for a recharge.
So 400 miles r/t @ 25 mpg (generous) I would use 16 gallons of gas.
With a Volt I get 50 mpg minus the 80 plug in so I use ~5 gallons.
I would actually use more gas per month with the full EV. And yes I could buy another higher mileage car, but that is another ICE on the road, no? And what about all the oil and etc in the manufacture and shipping and support of said vehicle...not to mention the cost.
Another thing good about the Volt et al (just read dodge is in the same game) is that it is speeding battery research and maybe more importantly, scale manufacturing of the batteries so we can see if price will be such that BEVs can gain advantage.
Ooops too late to edit...noticed the gas used would be close to 7 gallons.
"Do you think the mindset of people who sought out and bought EV's back in the early 2000's is representative of the greater population?"
The survey was conducted in 2006, not too long ago.
I can change early 2000's to 2003 if that is better..but I think it can be assumed that they started looking into it in 2002.
Is the iMiev sized for smaller (on average) Japanese people? Looks small in there. Remember the old Datsun B210? The only friends of mine that could fit in that Japanese-market sized vehicle were my short friends. Usually they have to add a little room inside for it to make it in U.S./Canadian/European markets.
The Volt will be sized to fit up to a 99% percentile American and enough width to prevent it from being a roly-poly hazard. I.E, a real car.
It is pretty small..133" end to end..compare that to the 3 door Yaris which is 150 inches.
The 100 mile range is for ideal conditions... no AC or heater. One tester found about 60 to be safe running the heater.
Might be an ok commuter/in city/second car for some folks. Personally, anything below a Yaris size is out of the question for me.
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/03/21/new-york-2008-autobloggreen-drives-the-m- itsubishi-i-miev-w-vid/
http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpcontainers/do/vdp/articleId=124867/pageNumber=1
As for these EV, add the cost of a 2nd car. That's why they don't fly with the general public.
You can bet an 80% efficient transmission on the Volt (generator-to-motor path) will not get as good gas mileage as a current Corolla with an automatic transmission (31 MPG combined city/hiway) unless the battery is used in burst mode to fill in transient torque demands on the engine. The only details left are what logic thresholds GM will choose and how high they can get the MPG to.
Many of us were predicting that the Volt's engine would not recharge the batteries to full after battery depletion because it is a ridiculously low 50% efficient to do so. When GM announced it recently some of us were not surprised.
And they've already said 50mpg, so the battery must be assisting during peak loads and recieving a small charge from the engine and braking to maintain a minimum charge state.
I also expect the Volt's engine to run in far more efficient rpm ranges than a Corolla or any other conventional car including the Prius.
GM has stated many times they expect the Volt to get 50 mpg after the battery has been depleted. I've got to believe their engineers know a few things about transmission efficiency. While 50 mpg may end up being a little optimistic, especially with the new EPA ratings, it's hard to imagine that GM could be as far off as you are suggesting. Again, it's speculation on both our parts but if there was a way to bet on whether this car will get over 30 mpg with the ICE I'd definitely take that bet.