The Buzz Around the Chevy Volt
by Kristi Piziks, Detroit, USA 
on 01.11.07
A lot of hybrids talk a good game, but the Volt has the potential to deliver.
The big buzz at this year’s North American International Auto Show in Detroit is around the Chevy Volt. It has surprised many to see GM throw their hat in the hybrid ring as such a formidable competitor. It’s being called one of the most significant hybrid developments to date.
There are two things that make the Volt’s E-flex drivetrain noteworthy. First, it is a series hybrid, which means power is fed directly to the motor, not the battery. It can be plugged into a household electric socket and charged fully within about six hours. Completely charged it can drive roughly 40 miles on electricity alone. According to GM, more than 75 percent of Americans live within 20 miles of where they work, meaning the Volt would get them to the office and back on 100% electricity with no direct emissions.
If the battery does run down, the 1.0-liter, three-cylinder gas engine acts as a generator to charge the battery and provides enough power to for up to an additional 600 miles.
The second significant aspect is that the gasoline-driven generator engine can easily be replaced with an engine that runs on E85, diesel, bio-diesel, pure ethanol or even a hydrogen fuel cell. People would then be able to chose their engine based on fuel availability and prices in their region.
According to Chevy, the Volt gets 50 mpg with the generator running in what’s call ranger-extender mode. If driven 60 miles, with the last 20 miles in this mode, this results in a 150 mpg equivalent for the trip.
In purely electric mode the Volt produces no emissions, and the small gasoline engine produces carbon emissions on a much smaller level than larger gasoline engines. While it does use electricity, at least this resource comes from domestic sources like coal and natural gas.
The Volt and other vehicles using the E-flex drivetrain would be a terrific advancement toward keeping people on the road without the current level of no-holds-barred use of our earth’s resources to do it. However, GM admits that the battery technology to make it happen is at least three to five years out, because the current nickel battery available weighs too much to make such a vehicle realistic right now.
With all this being said about the hybrid technology, the Volt is also a beautiful car to see in person. The crowds around it at the Detroit Auto Show made it difficult to get a full view, but the details in each element are exceptional, from the clear plastic roof to the 3-D gauges. As I’ve said before, automakers are clearly catering not only to our sense of environmental responsibility, but our desire to pull up in a car that turns heads.
The Chevy Volt is definitely an international story, but it’s also very local. Being from Detroit, it encourages me to see so much excitement around a General Motors vehicle. The Volt isn’t perfect, and it can’t hit the dealerships soon enough for many of us, but with Michigan having the second worst economy in the U.S., maybe there’s hope that there can be a turn around, not only the environment, but the economy as well. Either way, with its series hybrid technology, the Volt is a step closer to a purely electric car, and for some proponents, that’s great news. See also: ::2007 Toyota FT-HS Concept Fuel Economy, ::The Toyota FT-HS Hybrid Sports Concept Car, ::Ford Airstream Plug-In Hydrogen Fuel Cell Concept
Follow @TreeHugger on Twitter & get our headlines with @TH_rss!
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- 7 Ways the Troubled Automotive Industry Could Change Your Car and Your Commute
- Check Your Car Emissions Before Obama Does
- Is the Cash for Clunkers Program Right for You?
- Ghent With It: Go Vegetarian For a Day
- No Sew Breezy Beanie Hat From Scrap Fabric
- The Green Message Behind Michael Jackson's Death
Hey GM, thanks!
Nice to hear that - ummmm - in 3 -5 years this car COULD possibly be driving public streets, due to those lame, bad old batteries. Nice looking, dangling carrot though!
Note to GM: Just keep falling back more than 30% behind Toyota and you will be out of business, period.
People don't remember that the first car ever to break the speed barrier was an electric car, driven by Carl Jenatzy BEFORE 1900! In 1899, ninety percent of the cabs in New York City were electric!!
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Crete/6111/electcar.htm
Readers of the above article will find it incredulous that we're now MAYBE about to see another EV on US streets by 2010 - need I say more??
If Carl Benz awoke from the dead for 1 day, I guess he would ask, in disbelief: "WHAT did you say your fuel efficiency was?? -people, please, where have ya been for the last sixty years?? And - cough- what's with the air???"
Not to see a solar panel (now up to 40.9 % efficiency, according to TreeHugger article recently) on every goddarn roof in this country is beyond undereducated, complacent and i.m.O, inexcusably dumb.
Sorry, American Dreamers, either it's time to wake up - or maybe start dreamin' again - of a better way of doing stuff!
I wonder why they're saying that about the batteries, though. I mean, Tesla and others seem to be able to find pretty decent Li-Ion batteries and it's not secret tech, it's laptop batteries. Why can't GM do the same thing? Anybody know?
it has a range of 40 miles off the battery. Where I live in the Greater Vancouver area my daily commute to work and back would be about 50 miles. And I'm not the farthest commute in Vancouver. Unless I have an outlet at work to charge the volt, it doesn't seem feesible. The article mentions that 70% of Americans live within 20 miles of work. So that's 40 miles return trip. With traffic jams, air conditioning, and possible detours, it sounds like you would just miss the mark and very often start the gas engine halfway home. Having GM put out an electric gas hybrid is great. Just would have been nice when they were making the initial plans they could have opted for more electricity and less gas. Or no gas.
It is kind of sad to see the buzz this car is generating as it shows how little the public (and the press) actually know about hybrid technology. Really, the only buzz around this car is that it is GM that is doing it (a shock in itself), and the styling (which severely compromises the space inside and functionality). Give me the wide open interior and huge hatch of the Prius, any day.
For years (10 years at least), the series hybrid has been talked about as the logical and more elegant hybrid solution, for many engineering reasons I won't go into here. Every conference on this subject has concluded this, and the reasoning behind it has been well documented. Many industrial applications use this exact technology; it is actually far more simple than an assist hybrid because drivability as the gas engine and electric assist motor switch modes is a very dificult engineering problem. Which is why everyone is poying up to buy the Toyota system; it's that hard to develop.
The problems with a series hybrid?
First, batteries are expensive, and a series hybrid needs much more robust batteries than an assist hybrid like the Prius. That is why the assist hybrid is attractive; all the ICE technology is an easy match for actually building something abd the batteries are smaller and lighter, and don't need to be so robust. That is why the Volt doesn't even have suitable batteries yet. Kind of hard to build a car without them. Which is why Toyota is building a bunch of non-plug in assist Prius hybrids. They don't have to wait for battery technology to catch up. GM is still in the maybe-in-the-future mode.
Second, manufacturers have been very scared of how to explain the series hybrid. After all, it's just an electric car with an on board generator, for crying out loud. You can just imagine how that goes over around a conference table in Detroit, as they discuss how the stupid general public will never get it. And that's before they even start talking about batteries!
I wish the press would offer some facts and background to explain some of this to the public instead of just gush on about how wonderful and revolutionary this is. We would be far better informed with just a few short comments and possibly sources. I can appreciate the Volt, but realize it really just a concept, and a watered down one at that. It is wrapping an existing idea with impracticle hot rod styling without solving the problem.
Everyone has known for quite a long time (including Toyota) that a series hybrid is more elegant, efficient engineering solution. The reason Toyota and everyone else aren't selling one is because current batteries aren't up to the task, as well as being significantly more expensive solution than the current hybrid system. You can bet Toyota is working very hard on the engineering, however, and will roll it out years ahead of GM.
So GM isn't solving the one thing which is holding back the series hybrid, the battery problem, and as such the Volt is a "someday vehicle", much like GM's famous fuel cell program. After all, you could style a jazzy car and say "it runs on moon dust" but if you never build it, who cares?
When GM makes engineering as big a priority as styling maybe some of this stuff might get built. In the mean time, Toyota is happy to sell you a hybrid.
RideTheFuture
The reason why 90% of the cabs were electirc and were over taken by gasoline engines was purely because of economics and driving range. If they were so good back then they would have kept using them.
The 40% efficient solar cells are not yet ecomonical. Once they are within my own budget then I will install them myself.
The reason why we don't drive Teslas and Tangos is because most of us are looking for a $15,000 car.
Economics rules all facets of our lives, like it or not.
I do agree with you though about GM, used to make the best cars in the world and strarted downward spiral of really ugly designs and junky cars starting in 1971. I hope they start to turn around.
Well-said, RideTheFuture and annonymous. One thing that built this country is that WE had the ideas and the know-how to implement them. Perhaps the greed factor for the Big 3 could be to cozy up to the utility companies instead of Big Oil. Imagine the deals and illicit profits to be made if there were behind the scenes negotiations going on for powering a US fleet of electrics and hybrids by the utility companies instead of gas pumps!! Instead of Big Oil, what would they call it? Big Voltage?
I agree with the solar panel idea as well.
Whether you agree with global warming or not, there's nothing to be lost from reducing pollution, decreasing our energy dependence on murderers, and increasing our national and individual self-sufficiency.
Good luck,
vsk
Is it feasable to incorporate solar panels to trickle-charge the battery? I mean, you drive your car to work, and it bakes in the sun in the parking lot all day, then you drive home. I know all the solar challenge cars are obviously doing this. It may not be enough to recharge fully, but if it replenishes 50% on the battery, that would get you home plus run your errands to boot, and it is less being siphoned off the grid.
"Is it feasable to incorporate solar panels to trickle-charge the battery?"
I think it certainly is:
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2005/08/solar-powered_t.php
But it's probably not the best choice. Something like this would be better:
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2006/12/googles_solar_t.php
I'm amazed by the stupidity and ignorance in these comments. First it is a great platform, no one wants to acknowledge that because it's GM, if it were Toyota everyone would be ecstatic.
About the batteries Read this http://www.hugg.com/story/Powering-GMs-Electric-Vehicles/
Not exactly an easy solution. As someone mentioned Toyota does not have a plugin hybrid either. But that's ok because it is Toyota. Oh and a hatchback is sooo much better...so what. This is a concept car. It's supposed to look cool, not ugly. The E-flex system will allow for almost any body design. And lets not forget that GM also will be releasing it's dual mode hybrid too, which is similar to Toyota's tech.
Let's not forget that this a concept!!! It was clearly stated in the article that this tech is 3-5 years down the road, a person can rant on and on about how impractical or practical this technology is but again I am pretty sure GM knew what they were doing, since it's a concept. The idea behind it could have been around for millenia, nonetheless it's good marketing for GM to stick them selves into the market, even if the thing isn't driveable and usable right now, they have wet the appitite of american investors, they are just trying to get back into the market. We could go on and on about how out of sync with the world they were, how Ford, GM, and all other american automakers ignored the changing trend, and stuck to what was saleing at the moment, and they made tons of money off it while they could.
I myself am one who would like to see the gas electric hybrid be fully exploited, it's going to take alot of time get off our dependance for gas, at least things are moving in that direction. I would like to see all american cars be 30 - 70 mpg fuel wise. As well as car makers make functional style wise automobiles for city commuters and small towners. In the city you need small compacts, and outside you need larger vehicles... imsyelf want to see something like those small toyota PU's that has some get up and go, but also gives me my money's worth on the gas prices, a PU or station wagon that gets 30-40 mpg, is that do-able? and while they think that over a design wise compact with a 40 mpg and a 14 - 20,000 price tag and thats just for 2008 next year they can up the mpg's and continue making them beautiful.
Until the rubber meets the road, it's all just greenwashing.
"if it were Toyota everyone would be ecstatic."
Maybe because Toyota has shown that they are ready to put a lot of resources behind hybrids, and that when they announce them, they usually release them..?
GM has burned people so many times that it will take a few good moves before people trust them again. That's totally normal. That's what a memory is for.
Great idea GM: Appeal to the green conscientious by creating a sexy hybrid dream car and regain some of the credibility you lost after killing the EV.
This would be a great story if it weren't for the fact that the American dollar is approaching collapse, and we're always one big oil shock event away from the economy tanking, which could rob the middle class of the disposable income needed to buy pricey hybrids.
It's more likely that we're all going to have to forget about fancy electric sports-cars and get back on the bus, on our bikes, and on foot to break our dependence on imported oil and help mitigate global warming.
As cool as it is, the Volt is a ittle too little, a little too late.
Scrwd by GM? I have read nothing but good things about the EV-1... but unfortunately they are recycled beer cans now. Shame ... would have been great for real long term testing as the owners were true fans of them. Cool picture I saw once of one couple who owned one - the power from their solar set up powered the house and charged the car adequately. Free fuel for the car.
A trickle charger from a panel is fine for one starting battery but for propulsion? I might not know enough. However car parking lots with solar panels above to provide shade and power might be the ticket.
vsk
I am really sick of people who can't control their temper on these boards - but someone like JiltedCitizen who defends GM (checked their stocks lately??) and calls everybody else stupid and ignorant:
You have absolutely nothing new to present here, GM does what it always does which is NOT moving ahead but rather stuff senseless and unsustainable vehicle technology down complacent and stagnant thinkers throats - such as yourself.
Boy do you guys believe in a simple marketing strategy which only blocks the market (while others like Toyota - now #2 in the world - move on in the right direction)
So let's keep going and everybody else: - thanks for the passion!
PS: I have completed my first 1000 miles driving competely electric and I charge the engine with WindEnergy (which I subscribe to locally) - l wanna put my money where my mouth is....
Icelander called it right; it is greenwashing. plain and simple. jiltedcitizen, as usual, completely misses the point and is just flame baiting as always.
I totally agree with anonymous; why not just call it moondust??? It has about the same chance of GM producing it.
GM hasn't invented anything here. I saw a series hybrid concept more than 5 years ago. The reason Toyota and others don't build one is they aren't possible yet (yes, just like fuel cells aren't possible yet).
As far as the styling, I don't think it is green to sacrifice function for testosterone racer looks. Detroit is still Detroit, unfortunately. They don't get it like the Europeans and Japanese do. Give be a spunky hot hatch rather than that gross looking car, anyday. And yes, put a hatchback on mine as well :)
Icelander called it right; it is greenwashing. plain and simple. jiltedcitizen, as usual, completely misses the point and is just flame baiting as always.
I totally agree with anonymous; why not just call it moondust??? It has about the same chance of GM producing it.
GM hasn't invented anything here. I saw a series hybrid concept more than 5 years ago. The reason Toyota and others don't build one is they aren't possible yet (yes, just like fuel cells aren't possible yet).
As far as the styling, I don't think it is green to sacrifice function for testosterone racer looks. Detroit is still Detroit, unfortunately. They don't get it like the Europeans and Japanese do. Give be a spunky hot hatch rather than that gross looking car, anyday. And yes, put a hatchback on mine as well :)
Oh, I wish I had the faith in GM that some of you do.
And I wish they would show they can actually put something like the Volt on the market instead of building a concept that is just pie in the sky green washing.
Most of the stuff in the Detroit auto show from GM was big, ugly, macho stuff... you know, same old, same old.
I just wish I loved GM, but I just don't.
Bitch bitch bitch. Beat on GM, beat on 'em good. That's all you lot ever do. GM BAD! Toyota GOOD! Ugh, get a clue. That's what everyone said about Boeing compared to Airbus a while back. Look how silly they were. Set a reminder for 5 years to go back and read these posts. I bet you'll feel a might silly at that point, and ashamed. Or you'll make believe you never bashed GM ever...definitely more likely from you lot.
Oh, and for the goofball who mentioned PV at 40% efficiency? Sure, if you live on the ISS or a communications satellite. Down here, the best you can buy is 22%, just released by SunPower and available starting in the spring. It will be DECADES before we even break 35% consumer friendly groundside panels/integrated thin film.
I'm sorry what is Toyota's big release at the show? Not a hybrid.
I wish I could think Toyota was perfect like some of you. And sorry for calling the comments ignorant and stupid. It just gets a little old seeing all the negativeness towards GM.
Is a plug-in hybrid a great idea? Yep. People have been modding Priuses for a while now. Is a series hybrid a great idea? Yep. Is it possible with current technology? Nope ("Building an affordable plug-in hybrid will require advances in battery technology, the company said." Presumably CNN meant 'series hybrid', not 'plug-in hybrid'). Does it matter who it's from? Nope. Until it's a production car, it's just marketing.
I love our 2002 Prius, and while Toyota is doing great compared with GM, they're far from a 'green' company. They still make a big chunk of their money selling those bloated SUVs and trucks.
"I'm sorry what is Toyota's big release at the show? Not a hybrid."
Well, the FT-HS is a hybrid and got good publicity, but the fact is that Toyota has been selling hybrids in NA for 7 years (IIRC) and in Japan for 10 years, and that they now have 5-6 hybrid models available to the buyers, plus they're working on plug-in (possibly the next Prius, which itself was announced to be around 90 mpg).
I'm no fanboy of any car company, but when you make a list of their actual accomplishments, GM isn't at the top (though not at the bottom - that's probably DaimlerChrysler). I give them some kudos for trying to change, but they've always had cool concepts in the past (there was a post on Hugg recently about a really cool concept from GM.. from 2000 or something) which never amounted to anything, so I think my skepticism is justified.
In response to the trickle charge idea, I came up with a concept a little while back that might suit :)
Why not have your local council/transportation office install solar or wind generators in the upper-market parking areas and allow you to plug in your car at the parking meter, paying a bit more per hour for the convenience? Once the initial cost is offset, they're getting free income and you're recharging your car for free.
I guess this would call for a standardisation of charging connectors, but still, it would be nice if your transport agency had more money to wave around and you never had to worry about running out of juice - park your car up for 8-9 hours a day while you're at work, and I'm pretty sure that should charge it up a fair bit :)
Just an idea, please rip to pieces or steal and incorporate in your town! Haha
In reviewing these comments, I truly have to take my hat off to Toyota’s PR machine. They have done quite the job of convincing the naïve and green that everything Toyota does is wonderful for the environment and everything GM does is bad.
Speaking of taking hats off, if any of the anti-GM masses care to take off their tinfoil hats and review some facts, they will see that:
1. GM has released hybrids across many types of vehicles, not just sedans and wagons. GM has released a broad range of city buses, pickups, SUVs and cars to test various hybrid powertrains. The dual mode that GM is developing – in cooperation with DCX and BMW – allows for a broader range of more capable hybrid vehicles than the Toyota system.
2. GM also detailed in Detroit plans for its PHEV (plug in electric vehicle), the Vue, which will soon be available. Toyota has gone back and forth on whether the new Prius will be a plug-in, in the upcoming model or ever.
3. The Volt is technologically the next step in establishing energy independence and carbon reduction in the US. While a parallel hybrid like the Prius can only reduce oil usage, the Volt allows most commuters to eliminate oil use, except on long road trips.
4. The Volt, as opposed to the Prius, will be an appealing mainstream car attracting a much larger pool of owners. It is not limited by skinny tires, an unappealing aero design, or lack of creature comforts like the Toyota.
Smart consumers and smart investors are beginning to realize that this is a new GM we’re talking about. Judge them by their actions, not by Toyota’s hype.
Jilted Citizen, one search of these boards shows how mean and aggressive you consistantly are to other posters.
Most of us want to share opinions and ideas, not to be torn a new a__hole. I rarely post anymore because I am sick of your tactics. You are ruining this board for a lot of people.
Why not focus on content and ideas, instead of your usual mode of attacking the people who post? An intelligently written post is much more constructive than a personal attack. You show your lack of intelligence by attacking people instead of prsenting ideas.
"I'm amazed by the stupidity and ignorance in these comments."
-- thank you, you're too kind. It's an honor to be on the same message board as Mr. Einstein.
"First it is a great platform, no one wants to acknowledge that because it's GM, if it were Toyota everyone would be ecstatic."
-- well, I -was- estatic when I saw the Toyota auto show hybrid car. But that was back in 1998....
"As someone mentioned Toyota does not have a plugin hybrid either. But that's ok because it is Toyota."
-- When batteries can pass Toyotas ultra rigorous reliability tests you will a plug in hybrid. After all, for Toyota it is just a battery pack, They have been building the car itself for years... GM on the other hand has a ways to go...
"Oh and a hatchback is sooo much better...so what."
--Your sarcasism is so cool. You're a tough macho man.
"And lets not forget that GM also will be releasing it's dual mode hybrid too, which is similar to Toyota's tech."
--Uh, is IS Toyotas tech, they bought a license to it use when they couldn't make it work on their own.
"Set a reminder for 5 years to go back and read these posts. I bet you'll feel a might silly at that point, and ashamed."
Either you have a time machine, or you are saying that people can't be critical of a company in the present in case they'll someday get better.
Which is it?
LA_Tony could you please back up the following:
"And lets not forget that GM also will be releasing it's dual mode hybrid too, which is similar to Toyota's tech."
--Uh, is IS Toyotas tech, they bought a license to it use when they couldn't make it work on their own.
I follow the auto industry quite a bit and I haven't heard GM licensing Toyota's tech. Ford did but GM has been working with BMW and others on dual mode hybrid tech.
The future form and future of the automobile is a bit foggy right now in my mind.
With what and how will we power them. Big ? right now.
Will fewer people drive in the future, I think yes. (I see higher density housing close to rail and other transit links).
Since I think Ford and GM will stil be around, will we see any of the tech in their concepts come to market.
One closing comment, LA_TONY said "I don't think it is green to sacrifice function for testosterone racer looks." OK but can we have a bit of a sporty look to our green cars, not everyone wants to drive a box or something that looks like the Prius (I used to see an electric car in Ottawa, ON that was almost a box with slighly tilting sides). Get a bit of soul the Volt is a great looking car, it's built off the Pontiac Solstice/ Saturn Sky platform so that's why you get the long hood look. For a production car you could move the cabin forward for more interior/cargo space and have wagon and sedan options such as the Mazda 6. http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/displayPage.action?pageParameter=modelsAllMZ6
Divorce your mind from what the series hybrid drive train bolted into as a concept and realize that this drive system can be packaged to fit many different types of vehicles. If they put forth a boring looking econ car it wouldn't get nearly the eyeballs and as such we wouldn't have all the discussion about it.
That being said I love how practical the Euro hot hatchbacks are.
LA_TONY even thought I named you twice above please don't take it as an attack, you just have posts and comments I took notice of.
Commenters should keep in mind that other commenters are human beings. TreeHugger wants to create an inclusive atmosphere that encourages everybody to join the discussion. Please be constructive and tactful, write as if you were speaking face to face. Even strong criticism is more effective when polite and restrained.
"They have done quite the job of convincing the naïve and green that everything Toyota does is wonderful for the environment and everything GM does is bad."
Hmm, no. Who here said that everything Toyota does is good? They also make gas guzzlers and such.
Praising them for their good moves doesn't mean that people love everything they do. You're projecting.
People are just saying that Toyota has been backing hybrids for over a decade, and that in general their business isn't based on big SUVs (GM went as far as heavily discounting them and giving away "free" gas cards to make people overlook how much they'd pay in gas).
Not it's not toyota's tech. I thought it was a joint development.
Anonymous,
You make a good point; not everyone who rags on GM is necessarily under Toyota's PR spell.
But your point about the gas cards isn't so strong. GM sells SUVs, and part of their pricing strategy is to use incentives when necessary to keep the factories open. In one case in Florida, GM used the gimmick of a gas card instead of gas. Did that marketing incentive cause global warming, or did it just get some attention?
When GM started using incentives heavily, just after 9/11, most commentors credited GM with staving off a recession in America. But you have your own view.
I hope you'll agree that blaming automakers for supplying product that is in demand is silly. All carmakers build what they expect consumers will want. Credit Toyota for being ahead of the game on fuel economy by being the second to market a modern hybrid in the US. Credit GM for envisioning a serial hybrid that could eliminate oil imports.
Let's clear up the confusion. GM never licensed Toyota's hybrid technology. GM has its own hybrid programs, as well as a joint venture with DCX and BMW to develop dual-mode hybrids.
Although GM lags Toyota in sales of hybrids, it does not lag in technology development, and has shown itself to be the leader in several areas of develoment.
Ford DID license Toyota hybrid technology. The reason was that Ford found that although they had done their own R&D, it was so similar to Toyota's that they were vulnerable to patent lawsuits. Rather than run that risk, they reached agreement with Toyota.
Nissan actually is the firm that truly did license Toyota's hybrid technology because they lacked the technology in house.
"Toyota's business is based on big SUV's."
Ever heard of the Corolla? Camry? Yaris (not big in the US, but best seller every-where else)? These are Toyota's best sellers.
"I hope you'll agree that blaming automakers for supplying product that is in demand is silly."
It would be silly if the demand was filling a real need, but the auto industry in great part creates demand. Their advertising budgets are bigger than all other industries combined and they have been extremely successful at convincing especially Americans to buy big SUVs (take a $20k pickup truck, ad seats in the back and sell it $30k..). I suggest you read Keith Bradsher's (sp?) book "High & Mighty: The Dangerous Rise of the SUV". He has many interviews with people inside the industry and they very candidly admit what they're doing. It's not just GM, but GM and Ford were the two biggest players that started that trend.
In short: It would be silly to blame them if everybody needed a powerful pickup truck or 7000lbs 4x4 SUV, but since that demand mostly comes from intensive marketing, they have to share the blame.
"Although GM lags Toyota in sales of hybrids, it does not lag in technology development, and has shown itself to be the leader in several areas of develoment."
I think that's very hard to tell either way. It would be unfair to compare GM's cutting edge concept stuff with Toyota's commercial stuff (especially stuff released a few years ago such as HSD), and we don't know what Toyota has in its R&D labs
So you either compare consumer stuff with consumer stuff, or R&D stuff with R&D stuff, but in the latter case you can't know if what you're seeing is really their best stuff or if they're keeping part of it secret.
My guess would be that we're probably seeing the best stuff from GM because they need all the good PR they can get, but I wouldn't be so sure with Toyota.
um just a thought, when you plug this thing in, wont it in effect emit more CO2 emmissions by plugging it in with KWh usage coming from coal production?
The comments about marketing hit home, I think, but we must also take into account the intense lobbying by car makers to keep CAFE standards low and get exceptions for "light trucks" and so on. That's not just GM of course.
Anonymous,
Let's do it as you suggest, and compare what hybrids are currently available from Toyota and GM.
Toyota has introduced hybrids in sedans and wagons based on those sedans (the Highlander/RX is based on the Camry). That is all.
GM has introduced hybrids in pickups, in city buses, in sedans and in crossovers. All with unique platforms, and with unique technology.
Toyota has led in sales, winning the sprint to date. But GM views hybrids as a marathon, and has brought far more diverse product to market, to understand the market and technology better.
We'll see who wins long term. If you possess the courage of your convictions, then you should profit from them by buying Toyota stock.
Big if.
I think they are much closer to producing this vehicle then people might think.
The reason for the hesitation is that they don't wish to use the huge nickel batteries and the present lithium batteries are slightly dangerous .
If you research more into it, you'll see that GM is looking into the new batteries of the future coming out soon and dropping in price drastically. Well, they WILL drop drastically so long as there is demand... which I think is the intention of GM to create.
http://www.a123systems.com/html/home.html
Look here to see that they ARE looking into the new phosphate lithium batteries. These can hold 10 times more energy or 10 times lighter. Plus they charge very fast and release its charge fast which might actually increase the Volts acceleration dramatically. Plus they decompose into rust and have a longer life then normal lithium batteries. The price for these batteries are high but are dropping dramatically so long as there is a demand... and again I think this is the catch 22 that GM is trying to overcome. They are creating the demand so that these prices do drop and create the affordability which will in turn create more demand.
Now Imagine if you have normal size solar panel system on your roof to charge a battery in your garage that would charge your volt when you came back from work. You'd rarely ever plug into the grid or use gasoline for your car !!
Yes, sounds too good to be true but I think they are approaching a dramatic revolution in car transportation and in energy use.
Now lets get these batteries down in price and get going !!
I think the "Volt" is a giant step in the right direction for GM. There are a lot of naysayers in here and I don't necessarily disagree with some of the comments. However, as someone who works in the automotive industry (not for GM, rather, a supplier) I do know the GM engineering group is excellent. As the old saying goes, "this is not your father's Oldsmobile".
Further, I'm directly involved with the hybrid/flex fuel technologies and GM should be given a ton of credit for investing huge sums into developing this cutting-edge tech. You may say, "they're no Toyota" or "I'd rather drive a Prius any day" and that's fine. Toyota is nothing more than a car company and their engineers are no better than anybody else...they're just more efficient. Personally, I find the Prius ugly and it is just the PC fad vehicle du jour.
The "Volt" has a lot more going for it. Remember, it takes 3 years to develop and launch a vehicle. 2010 is merely the next generation (no matter the type of car it may be).
I'm happy to see this from GM. It shows they're learning and they're fighting to stay on top. My hat's off to them and I hope the "Volt" will take the country by storm.
*steps off soap box now* ;-)
Remember who killed he EV 1. Remember who wouldn't sell the EV 1's to the people who leased them. Remember who crushed and shredded every last EV 1. The EV 1 was a great all electric car that on the street in 1996! Go watch 'Who Killed The Electric Car'. Then tell me what you think about GM.
Grat post, I have been so taken by this car I created a site about the Chevy Volt. It has pictures, videos, news, a forum and more.
I don't know about you guys but it seems like a waste of time to argue which company is more green. Whoever comes out with a really great green car, that's what we should buy. Right?
Also, can anyone explain the engineering problem in detail as to why we can't make a plug-in hybrid, especially since we can make plug-in all-electrics?
"Why can't GM do the same thing? Anybody know?" - Anonymouse
Because Tesla is a nitch product and really just a prototype developer. GM is a mass production car company.
To put this in perspective, yes one could use Li-Ion laptop batteries. But what happens if those were Dell batteries and instead of a laptop going up in flame it was an automobile - with your whole family in it. Can we say lawsuit, recall, etc.
Now in the case of Tesla who is selling their vehicle at a nice premium. If they needed to recall and replace the batteries they have the overhead in their car production to do so and only a handful of vehicles to recall.
In GM's case they'd have tens if not hundreds of thousands of vehicles to recall. On vehicles sold with much lower premium and therefore not much profit room to cover such an event.
Furthermore, Tesla really doesn't have to care if they're still here in 10 yrs. If the Tesla bombs the designers will move on to new companies, perhaps just start a new car company.
GM has to know what these batteries will do in 10 yrs. They also need to know how they're going to handle re-collection and re-processing. It's one thing if a few Tesla's full of Li-Ion batteries are on the road. But what about when millions of cars are full of them? What then?
Furthermore, neither GM nor Tesla know what will happen to those batteries in 10 yrs. What if batteries are fine at first but after 10 yrs if not replaced they start catching on fire, exploding and killing people?
These are the issues GM has to consider. Which sadly, most people knocking GM seem not to have the foresight to have realized.
I'll accept GM taking a bit more time to test things and using foresight then rushing in and possibly putting lives at risk.
"With traffic jams, air conditioning, and possible detours, it sounds like you would just miss the mark and very often start the gas engine halfway home." - Matthew Inouye
I think they're accounting for that. Remember, traffic jams don't make a real difference anymore. (ie: the engine is turned off, no wheels are turning, etc)
I also believe they have taken into account air conditioning, etc. That's one of the big differences between this vehicle and GM's EV1. They realized that the consumer was not interested in the EV1 due to it's limitations. So they've changed the flaws to enable mass-market adoption. 2-seater to 4-seater. More performance. More appealing design. More accessories. And most of all - extended range. All of this has made for a much heavier vehicle. The result of everyone wanting their air conditioning, sound system and navigation unit is that the Volt only gets 40 miles on a charge. Even still, the figures based on a 60 mile commute equate to approx 150mpg. Okay, still pretty darn good if you ask me!
"Just would have been nice when they were making the initial plans they could have opted for more electricity and less gas. Or no gas."
- Matthew Inouye
They can't opt for no gas. It's not marketable. It won't sell. The market has clearly defined that consumers do not want to be stuck away from home needing to recharge. And that consumers want a 4-seater. What GM is showing is that they have learned from the EV1. And are making progress.
Don't despair. The first step is getting a vehicle like this on the road. Once that happens, you'll see technology advance and instead of horsepower it'll be battery power that car makers will be pushing for in development.
"Really, the only buzz around this car is that it is GM that is doing it (a shock in itself), and the styling (which severely compromises the space inside and functionality)." - Anonymouse
But of course, the styling, is going to open the market wide open for sales of the Volt. And knowing GM it will be re-styled as a Chevy, Pontiac and possibly even a Saturn. The thing being, that a lot more people are going to consider buying such a vehicle because it looks nice. GM's first goal is to sell cars. If they don't do that, they don't stay in business and any dreams we have of a simple super-efficient vehicle goes down the drain if auto-makers go bankrupt due to lack of sales.
But rest assured, if the Volt succeeds there will likely be a smaller ugly super-efficient model aimed at having the highest MPG advertisable for marketing purposes. ;)
"I wish the press would offer some facts and background to explain some of this to the public instead of just gush on about how wonderful and revolutionary this is." - Anonymouse
Neither were hybrids. Such technology is actually over 50 yrs old. (ie: Diesel Electric Submarines). But the Japanese companies were giving repeatedly accolades. Even though in reality they took a short-cut rather than delivering a zero emission vehicle. They petitioned California to change the law. And Toyota and Honda essentially killed any chance of a full electric vehicle being marketed in the near term by eradicating the need. GM got really hurt by the legislative change. And Honda and Toyota racked in millions. Who really killed the electric car? The lobbyists for Honda and Toyota!
And to anyone who thinks that GM's EV1 was marketable, please note that Honda's Insight which was even more practical than GM EV1 has been abandoned due to lack of sales.
"The reason Toyota and everyone else aren't selling one is because current batteries aren't up to the task, as well as being significantly more expensive solution than the current hybrid system. You can bet Toyota is working very hard on the engineering, however, and will roll it out years ahead of GM."
Possibly, but then again. Toyota was behind GM on the implementation of the pure electric car. They beat out GM on that one via legislation.
*****
I just get sick and tired of constant praise for Japanese auto-makers whenever they do anything. And constant dismissal of GM and other U.S. auto makers. Granted, a lot of their focus on fuel efficiency has been with big trucks. But where as several years ago a full size 7+ passenger SUV got 8/12 City/HWY mpg. Many of the new ones get 15/20 City/HWY mpg. Now, my Durango is never going to compete with my Prius in fuel efficiency. But I have repeatedly averaged between 19-22mpg on HWY travel. And if I just cruis around 60-65mpg and feather the accelerator I have achieved 25mpg on a number of occasions. That's pretty impressive.
And I haven't heard a single accolade from anywhere. Guess what, some of those trucks and SUVs are actually needed. Sure many people who don't need them - drive them. But do you realize how much benefit the environment receives from double the mpg on those trucks for all the vehicle fleets (utilies, cable, telephone, construction workers, etc, etc, etc).
Nor does GM get much recognition for making almost all their vehicles E85 capable. And yes, at present there is not much E85 availability and concern on the high corn usage. But for years we've been complaining about auto-makers waiting for the infrastructure to be made. Now we're griping because GM decided NOT to wait for the infrastructure and take a risk and make it a brand wide specification. Duh!
On top of that, with regards to the bio-fuel concerns, corn usage, etc. There are other alternatives being researched. One I heard of that could be revolutionary was bio fuel derived from pond scum/algae. Now this tickled my brain because I was a marine biology major and also worked in a sewage treatment plant. The wastewater was clean but filled with tons of fertilizers. One could theoretically take that over-fertilized water and pump it into massive 3ft deep man-made algae ponds. The result would be a renewable biofuel source. Dependance from oil rich nations, middle-east, Venezuela, etc. A cleaner healthier water system as the sewage would not be getting dumped into the ocean. Furthermore, it'd entail an increase in green bio-mass that would constantly be extracting CO2 from the air (reducing greenhouse gasses), releasing oxygen. Amazing potential.
So what do we do? we gripe that GM has released a new technology with no infrastructure to support it. I mean come on, they've giving up a means and created a potential demand. But they get very little accolade for such.
*****
"Whether you agree with global warming or not, there's nothing to be lost from reducing pollution, decreasing our energy dependence on murderers, and increasing our national and individual self-sufficiency." - VSK
Absolutely right on that....pollution reduction is always a good thing.
******
"Maybe because Toyota has shown that they are ready to put a lot of resources behind hybrids, and that when they announce them, they usually release them..?"
Maybe that's because Toyota has boatloads of cash. And American car companies which were encouraged to take care of their worker's through pensions, etc by the U.S. government way back when. Then we got on the whole free trade kick. Now U.S. companies are tied hand and foot by Unions. (ie: GM's planned sub-compact for the market on hold due to union disputes.) Japanese auto-makers are free from worrying about healthcare, benefits, etc. The market sags, car sales lag, and GM & Ford are left having to paying thousands of union workers to stay home and do nothing. Thus losing more profit. Thus having less, and less for research and development.
But Toyota & Honda get all the acclaim. You want to see a good GM car. Let this country break the unions back. We already have laws protecting 8 hour work days, 40 hour weeks, overtime, etc. Every encounter I've had in my life with union workers have shown them to be lazy, inefficient, and seldom doing their job. Is it any wonder GM struggles?
*****
"Great idea GM: Appeal to the green conscientious by creating a sexy hybrid dream car and regain some of the credibility you lost after killing the EV." - Dave
GM didn't kill the electric car. The Japanese auto-makers lobbyists with the California government did.
*****
In truth, it's merely politically correct to hate on America & American companies.
*****
"Ever heard of the Corolla? Camry? Yaris (not big in the US, but best seller every-where else)? These are Toyota's best sellers." - Anonymouse
Best sellers do not equate to the most profitable. Often times best sellers are loss-leaders merely breaking even and keeping factories open. Where as profits come from premium lines. Sportsters, SUVs, etc. These often enable the company to keep the other cars being made.
*****
"Remember who killed he EV 1. Remember who wouldn't sell the EV 1's to the people who leased them. Remember who crushed and shredded every last EV 1. The EV 1 was a great all electric car that on the street in 1996! Go watch 'Who Killed The Electric Car'. Then tell me what you think about GM." - RT
I think people who watch this film and spout such off a) only prove their stupidity b) do nothing to help the environment c) potentially hurt companies trying to innovate.
That film is one of the worst piece of garbage ever pressed to DVD. The EV1 was NOT a viable production vehicle. Even the Honda Insight which only suffered half of EV1's potential flaws proved to be unviable & unmarketable.
So why don't you ask yourself who killed the most fuel-efficient hybrid on the road? Honda!
*****
I get so frustrated with pop-environmentalism. Look, I am an environmentalist at heart. I majored in marine & environmental science for over 5 yrs. I love this planet and all it's creation.
But you've got to realize that you get more bees with honey than with vinegar. All you stupid idiots (and yes you're stupid) dismissing this step, bashing GM, are the worst thing for the environment. You're worse than Enron and worse than the single soccer-mom driving her Suburban. Why?
BECAUSE YOU'RE DISCOURAGING
What every true environmentalist at heart should be saying with regards to the Chevy Volt is this "Wow, GM...you've missed the boat a number of times in the past. But this concept is definitely going in the right direction. If GM actually produces this vehicle I might re-consider buying GM."
Say that, say it loud....encourage them to go in this direction. Don't discourage progress. Otherwise, you're doing more damage with your rhetoric. Cause I can guarantee you that the soccer mom driving the suburban would absolutely love to have a two-mode hybrid suburban that she could charge from her solar roof and drive it around town running her errands without having to fill up the tank.
It's like the global warming issue. So much has become politics and whether or not man is causing global warming, etc. The whole issue of reducing pollution is being lost. So many make it a debate of whether warming is happening and if it's man's fault. If someone disagrees then it's a flurry of fury. However, if you simply ask that person regardless of whether we're experiencing warming or not...do you think it's a good thing to invest in reducing pollution and creating a cleaner environment for our children's future. Most will agree with you.
When you phrase it as a confrontation you lose an ally. When you phrase it wisely and with open arms you often gain a supporter. The first actually HURTS the environment. The latter furthers both peace and the environment.
That was one heck of a long comment -- a 7 pager. Wow.
Just saw this.....
http://www.cnn.com/2007/AUTOS/05/08/bc.gm.climate.reut/index.html
GM first automaker to join group in support for carbon limit mandates.
GM first automaker to join group in support for carbon limit mandates.
Yes, they are wonderful with greenwashing. Thanks for pointing it out.
Translation: Screw fuel economy, let's burn corn in Hummers. We at GM are EcoHeroes!
Check out the latest news and videos about the Chevy Volt Concept Car
http://www.chevy-volt.net
id love for such a car to become a reality. but i hope it isnt gm. i hope they die for their sins.
Chevrolet's marketing dept. can't quite understand the Volt concept. I visited their webpage about a month ago (today's date is June 28, 07).
Under the Volt webpage, at
http://www.chevrolet.com/electriccar
they post a "What It Is" subpage where they "explain" their drive system. What do you think about this page? Under the heading
"go gas-free", I read that the generator connects to the battery, which connects ....... and this powers the car.
I think a viewer is misled into thinking that a puny 53 kw generator drives the car. That would be a mere 70 hp output.
I contacted Chevrolet twice about correcting their webpage. They even gave me a nice Customer Service No.,
71530093018, that you are welcome to follow up on. But, they have not changed their explanation of what makes the car go gas-free. Do you think I am splitting hairs?
I think GM should be commended for their efforts and hopefully we see this vehicle out on the road sooner rather than later. It seems there may be a new line of thinking at GM, so lets hope it is better for all. Every little bit helps, if they take baby steps, maybe it will lead to giant steps.
As for all the GM bashing, I don't hear anyone bashing Toyota for releasing the v-8 powered 1/2 ton Tundra (I'll bet the Tundra will out sell the Prius in 2007 and 2008). You'll also notice that GM's new 1/2 ton pick up gets better gas mileage than the Tundra and GM is releasing hybrid and eventually diesel versions of these trucks which get even better gas mileage.
Someone also asked why doesn't GM use the same batteries as the Tesla vehicles...........maybe b/c the low volume Tesla vehicle being released using Li-Ion batteries costs almost $100,000. I know I can't afford that. It's a lot different making a large scale, lower priced production vehicle with that technology vs. making a battery that can power a lap top computer or a $100,000 car. Plus there are issues with heat build up wit Li-Ion batteries that are still being resolved (remember all the Sony recalls b/c of laptops catching on fire).
Its hypocrits on websites like this that make me sad. I'll bet a lot of these people who post on here drive out of their way and sit in traffic to get their Starbucks coffee, they wear clothes made in Asian sweatshops, and they waste all kinds of electricity and natural resources by buying and using the latest electronic gadgets. If you really want to reduce energy consumption, start riding your bike, use public transportation, and turn off that computer to stop using so much electricity. I assume it's alright for people to sit on a computer all day surfing the web or posting messages on blogs. Yeah, that's really eco-friendly...........
If you already take all the energy saving steps (and hopefully more), then I commend you, but remember: taking small steps helps and we can all do better.
As for the idiot calling other people in this country "undereducated, complacent and i.m.O, inexcusably dumb", I ask you: 1) How many solar panels are on your roof; 2) How much energy do you try to save when it is not convienent for you (again I see you using electricity to post your thoughts on a website); 3) What are you doing to make the world better - are you taking engineering classes s o you can develop the next great energy saving device, or do you sit around bitching and moaning about how stupid everyone else in the country is for not buying solar panels and driving a Toyota prius, while not really finding a solution? That my fiend is to quote you: "beyond undereducated, complacent and i.m.O, inexcusably dumb".
Hummer + Corn comment merely shows a lack of both ingenuity and intelligence.
Look, for years people griped at auto makers for not offering environmental alternatives. Automakers responded - there is no infrastructure.
So GM, decides to take the step to make almost all their vehicles ethanol compatible. And people trash GM!!!
It is NOT GM's fault that most ethanol is derived from corn at this time. GM simply provided the means to use a renewable fuel source over oil. They should be lauded.
The reason most ethanol is derived from corn is because a) it is easy to do, and b) the federal government subsidizes corn - so it's profitable to farmers.
That said, the future of ethanol is not in corn...corn is merely a temporary stop-gap. The likely future of ethanol is in algae. And there is immense potential in this regards.
So expand your dim narrowminded brain and think a bit outside of your Democrat programmed box.
Take all of our sewage treatment plant output (which is over-fertilized water). Build flat lakes in the desert with lots of sun. Pump the sewage water in. The right algae with all the sun, nutrients and water will grow rapidly. Be harvested and processed into ethanol. So not only will you gain fuel but you'll help the environment by cleaning the last stage of our waste water.
Now waste water becomes a commodity. India's hundreds of millions worth of waste can now become oil's alternative.
That said, this still leaves us with a problem of emissions. But this too is temporary. Given time to improve fuel cells and some recent conversion methods. We could see a vehicle like the Chevy Volt e-flex go from generator powered by gasoline derived from oil, to corn derived ethanol and then to algae derived ethanol and then replaced completely with a fuel cell using ethanol derived from algae.
But if you keep your brains feeble and merely stand on your soap box deriding every failing rather then commending and encouraging good direction on the part of companies. Then you do more to ruin the environment than a Hummer. Because eventually, Hummers could be powered by fuel cells using clean renewable ethanol.
But you have to crawl before your walk. And when a kid walks and falls you don't yell at them - you encourage them....and one day you'll see GM run!
I would love to see this car now! I am in the market for a new vehicle, but don't want to buy something that is going to further degrade our environment. Therefore, I am looking only at hybrids. Unfortunately, the Prius costs a little more than I want to pay and doesn't offer the options that the Chevy Volt does. If Chevy could get this vehicle out within the next year, I would be the first in line. With Prius sales continuing to climb, the Chevy Volt definitely has the ability to revive GM. Previously, I would have not even considered purchasing a GM vehicle because of the environmental damage GM has caused with their SUV and truck lines. This car would make me reconsider.
I can't believe there is so much hate on here towards GM as they are finally getting into the hybrid game. I think the Volt is going to be one of the biggest things to hit the auto industry in the past 50 years, like the automatic transmission or fuel injection. GM has lagged behind Toyota and Honda in the hybrid market, this is true. But GM is doing something neither Honda or Toyota has done or is doing...they are making a Hybrid that people will WANT to drive, and I mean everybody, not just environmentalists. The Volt looks GOOD (whereas the prius looks like a pregnant roller skate) which, although its sad to say, means more to most Americans than fuel economy or air quality. America is a rich country...people may say gas is too expensive, but they don't stop driving. Not ONE mile less then when gas was cheap. They may say they care about the environment (while sitting in the A/C drinking an ice cold beverage and watching a Plasma screen TV) but what they really care about is having a car that looks good and is fun to drive. I may be rambling, but I'm very glad that GM is making this car, and yes, it will be built. It has gone from concept to pre-production in less than year. GM knows they are getting their butts kicked in the hybrid market and they are doing everything they can to catch up. I think the volt will be light years ahead of anything Toyota will have in 2010, and all it took was a little bit of American Ingenuity.
Agreed.
Totally agreed. Lets not forget that Toyota is no darling to the environment. Yes, they sell a hybrid, but not because it is good for the environment. It's because it makes them money. Toyota saw a market where GM saw none. They took a gamble and won, GM didn't take the gamble and got behind. For all the toyota lovers out there, lets not forget that they sell way more Tundras, Highlanders, Sequoias, 4runners and LandCruisers then they do Prius's. And some quick facts: Tundra 14mpg city, 18 mpg hwy. GMC Sierra 17 mpg city, 22 hwy. The only difference between Toyota and GM is that Toyota started marketing themselves as eco-friendly first. That is rediculous in itself though. There is no such thing as an environmentally friendly car.
I'm with you guys on that one. GM has received tons of hate on here, so now it's time to give toyota a little. Does anyone here keep up with the press?? Here's an article for the toyota crowd
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601101&sid=aorH8Hf_3gHU
Not only does toyota not give a damn about America or our environment or energy independence, they don't even want to make a plug in hybrid. This looks to me like toyota is trying to keep us addicted to oil, whereas GM is trying to get us off the stuff.
Everyone needs to remember, GM is not a bad company, they're just a car company. And Toyota is a car company too. Both companies have the EXACT same goal: SELL MORE CARS
I think the hate of GM is due to the EV-1 fiasco. GM obviously sold out on it's all-electric car because they would make no money on spare parts.
It's been said that gas won over electric in the 1900s because it was the better, cheaper technology. Not true. Did VHS win over betamax because it was better and cheaper? No, because it was marketed better. What about apple vs. microsoft? Gas and electic car technologies were at the same level in the early 1900s - gas was actually considered inferior because of the polution and noise (no mufflers).
The real question here is if GM will ever actually produce the Volt. I'm betting not. The battery excuse is just that - the current battery technology is sufficient. I think Chevy owns lots of stock in Exxon-Mobile.
I disagree. I think the volt will be built, and in record time too. GM is not only building the volt, they are actively trying to change the fundamental rules of transportation in the U.S. The volt will not be the only car of it's kind. GM is ramping up this new E-Flex system that will greatly diversify the types of fuels that we can use to power our cars. Anything from E85, to biodiesel, to Natural Gas to eventually fuel cells. GM is putting WAY more resources behind this then they ever did the EV1. I remember when I was in High school and some GM officials came to my school to showcase the EV1. They never tried to sell us on it. Not for a second. All they said was "This is where we are at today, imagine where we will be tomorrow". They made in abundantly clear that is wasn't a very practical car, but a stepping stone to future technology. Well, that future technology is here, and now GM is pushing it, and pushing it hard. GM is staking so much on E-Flex, that if it doesn't work they may be out of business. Read just a few of these articles and you can easily see the scope of this undertaking.
http://www.gm-volt.com/
http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/07/chevy-volt-heads-into-gms-production-pipeline/
I for one want to see GM stomp the crap out of the foreign car manufacturers. The Chevy Volt will do just that. Most of my friends are anxious to be able to purchase this vehicle as am I. I will be needing to replace my Bonneville in the next 16-18 months and I want to replace it with the Volt!
I think they (GM) are setting themselves up to fail (again). Why don't they take competing with the combustion engine seriously? If you want to offer electric make it as convenient as gas powered. Period. Otherwise it really is NOT for everyone.
Does anyone really believe this Chevy Volt will come out? Remember the EV-1?????
Have you watched the DVD "Who Killed the Electric Car?"
IF we ever see a production model Chevy Volt I will be very surprised. But when oil is cuked dry or there is a HUGE war in the gulf, then maybe the technology GM crushed back in the 1990s will suddenly appear to save us all.
Toyota & GM both gambled. GM gambled more, and lost.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GM gambled on zero emission electric vehicles. The disadvantages combined with battery technology just not being where it needed to be made for a zero emission but less marketable vehicle. But California had dictated that 2% of vehicles sold would have to be zero emission vehicles.
Toyota (and Honda), gambled on a compromise. They came up with a vehicle that was far from zero emissions. But was much better than present vehicles efficiency. They talked California into altering their laws to allow said vehicles to count towards the reduced emission policies.
The end result, a single change of a law placed GM from being ahead of the pack to being well behind. They were working on a better implementation. But one that was much more difficult.
Now Toyota is heralded while GM is demonized. But the truth is GM went for the higher road and was burned for doing so. Toyota compromised and now is acclaimed for doing so. Furthermore, I expect a lot more from Toyota and Honda, both of which have much better profit margins due to the lack of union pension and health benefit weights that weigh down American car companies.
(GM has thousands of employees that are union workers and receive benefits. Health benefits companies like Toyota and Honda workers have paid for by the Japanese government. But beyond that, GM has even more former workers that receive pension and health benefits. Decades ago large companies like GM were encouraged by the U.S. government to setup pensions and be a support to the government Social Security system. But the U.S. government changed it's game plan and raised taxes on the companies while at the same time going toward free trade and reduced import tariffs. Companies like GM found themselves saddled with huge pension/retirement plans and greatly increased price competition from free trade, and increased government tax burden. Is it any wonder they have struggled to be competitive?)
For those mis-informed who hate GM merely for the EV-1. General Motors did not sell out. California did! We the people sold out GM!
Furthermore, regardless of all the trash talk, teh EV-1 was NOT commercially viable. If you need proof of this, look at Honda's "Insight" which failed to be commercially viable. It had the best MPG in the US (70mpg). But they couldn't sell it. Why? Because of the inconveniences of it, especially being a 2-seater. The EV-1 had ALL the disadvantages of the Honda Insight plus more (ie: limited travel range, long re-charging times). Oh, and it cost easily 2x-3x more to manufacture than the "Insight".
But no one seems to be condemning Honda for "killing the hybrid car".
***
Batteries isn't an excuse. Lithium batteries are extremely dangerous and unstable. If you need proof of this just look at how many laptops, ipods and cell phones have gone up in flames. It's a lot bigger issue concern you're inside of the device. Just a couple lawsuits from such an occurrence in an electric car would cripple any auto manufacturer's development of electric vehicles.
***
I have just one last question...is everyone who watched "Who Killed the Electric Car?" an idiot?
That movie is so full of misleading facts and baseless understandings and mis-representations. And people seem to quote it religiously. And exclaim "EV-1" was marketable, I know it was, I saw a movie that told me it was. Really, a car that cost many times more than Honda's "Insight", and performed far worse, is supposedly marketable when the Insight was not.
Maybe you should take some economics courses, along with accounting and engineering.
And if you're wondering where the EV-1 is? The Chevy Volt = EV-2. With much of the technology and development learned from EV-1 going into the Volt system to remedy the failings of the EV-1 that kept it from being commercially economical.
Also, go throw in all the new apparatus of today's standard car (ie: multiple air bags, CD changers, DVD players and tons more. Go add all that added weight to an EV-1 and really see how viable it is.)
---------------------------------
I don't say all of this because I hate the EV-1. I followed that vehicle for years. Ever since the prototype GM "Impact" in high school. I currently own a Prius, and hope that come 2010 I'll be able to upgrade to a Chevy "Volt" or similar product.
I also own an 8-passenger SUV. Because a Prius is not going to tow a fully-loaded trailer while carrying 4-6 people plus their gear. Moving the same amount of people and gear with my Prius would use twice the gas and about 6 additional trips.
Vehicles are tools, using the right tool at the right time leads to the best efficiency.
But I want to see us have a cleaner environment. And I believe all the steps toward such should be lauded and encouraged. Not demonized or degraded.
Jason,
Really, I couldn't have said it better myself. Thanks for the real history of who killed the electric car (politicians and Toyota, NOT GM). At least some people out there still do their homework and don't fall for the hype. I'm really glad you mentioned the part about unions, pensions, and the reduction in tariffs, that has a HUGE part to play in all of this. Thanks Congress!!!
I really have to hand it to Toyota's marketing guys for making them out to be the "green" car company though. Those guys should all get a raise.
Hey GM,...How about a diesel in the volt so it will be 30% more efficent and can use Biodiesel...Used cooking oil or what have you...cut the electric range down to 10 or 20 miles so it won't be so heavy and we can get one Now!?...Please...I would love to buy the best car and have it be an American car...Chevy Volt could be it. Please bring it on Quickly! Thanks, Tom Markham
After reading many of the comments here I just have to say "Quit Complaining". It is true GM and other American manufacturers made a wrong turn back in the 70's and it will take time to recover from that, but to complain about their attempt to modernize by introducing the Volt is nonsense. Statements like "Solar powered" and "Pure Electric" are simply not feasible for the general public. Who would buy a $150,000 economy car? I would give GM credit for introducing a truly innovative car with styling that would make even a non tree hugger want it.
What about the Toshiba SCiB batteries? Could they be applied to this situation?
Well, I hope GM can make this cost effective. This looks like overkill for me. Just model it off of that cheap car they just announced in India. I'd love to have an inexpensive plug-in car for short trips to work and around town. Then again, my town could just make a real effort to improve mass transit.
Too bad they haven't yet designed it with a motor that'll run off of ethanol.
Actually SMC, the volt will be able to run off of gasoline, pure ethanol, E85, biodiesel, and even hydrogen in the future. GM has already stated this. I don't know exactly how they will do it, but I'm guessing it will be an option when you buy it. Something like picking the type of generator on board. It probably won't run off of all of them, but you'd have to pick which type you want, either an E85 compatible, biodiesel compatible, or hydrogen. Over the next decade, much of that will probably be dictated by where you live in the country, and which fuels are the cheapest/most readily available.
Hey people Gm has built plenty of small fuel efficient cars in the past , but people don't buy them! The only way to shift society to zero or low emmisions cars if is People ike you start buying them. You simply must support GM in their leap into the market. Things will get better, GM will get better, The VOLT version 2 will be better then the VOLT version 1. Thats how things work. I personally will not buy another new GM vehicle, only the Volt is in my sights. Listen up GM, my next GM vehicle will be the volt and only the volt. I'm sick of giving my money to the Middle East so they can spend it on trying to kill us. I know that electricity needs mostly coal to be produced, they will fix that too. Its time to pony up and put your money where your mouth is. Even if it is not a perfect vehicle. If you don't buy it they won't bulit it. The auot inductry is not a field of dreams. These are recyclable vehicles that will all end up in the junk yard. Its a means of transportation only, not an extension of whats not between your legs.
so excited about this concept!!! I'm in love with it already. America is ready for anything that gets better gas millege and is green friendly!!! My hat goes off to GM for a great start with the VOLT!!!
OK, does anybody know why hybrids are hot right now and there is no slowing down ??
It is because of TOYOTA ,,, hands down !
Now, for all the followers like GM, Ford etc. well they do not deserve any respect,,, why ? they didn't have the VISION ! they are are reacting to the market... can't lose that market share !!!!
Id rather see GM go out of business before building this car. They are just trying to clean up their image since killing the electric car they built back in the 90's. Check out the movie Who killed the Electric Car? Id like to see ALL american car companies go out of business before they offer zero emission vehicles. They dont have a clue and they dont care. They are in bed with big oil.
I Own a Honda Civic Hybrid. I oped out of the Prius because I didn't want anyone to think I was as nerdy as the typical poster on this board.
The problem with you econerds is that you just simply look stupid. No one respects you.
The Volt? It looks cool plain and simple. When it comes out I think I'll get one.
You grannies with the pocket protectors and tape on your glasses - Go get a Prius and glide on into the low IQ botique.
Go Nuclear!
Tens of milions of Americans would never have got a chance to go to college if it were not for all those 'overpaid' union workers! The most efficient plants in America and 3 of Car and drivers top ten cars of 2008 belong to General Motors!!!
As for the Prius, well, if you were one of those geniuses who paid a $4,000 premium for a car that gets 32 mpg I truly feel sorry for you. If you think you can find a prius that actually gets better gas mileage I have a bridge I wanna talk to you about.
My 1983 Volkswagen Rabbit got 49 miles per gallon on the highway and 46 in the city! Some progress!
If America had universal healthcare like Japans, Toyota would not even BE in business!! Facts are facts, General Motors has 5 times the number of hybrid vehicles than toyota.
If Honda had to make money on pickup trucks(they don't even try) they wouldn't BE in business either!!!
Those of us who actually know something about automobiles are so tired of listening to pinhead pop eco wannabes that we are truly sick! Buy a toyota. As for me I will buy Apple computers and GM cars!
Really interesting article, and awesome site. We reference your site in our blog often, thanks for the great work!
Possible reason I think that GM killed the electric car was that it used technology that was not theirs or that they had to pay for if they wanted to use or market the car. I have a patent pending but it wont see production or it would see production like my AUTOMATICALLY VARIABLE DAMPING CONSTANT SHOCK ABSORBER which reached fame but I did not get anything for it because I am poor.
MY H2 GETS 8MPG AND I HAVE NO PROBLEM
are they serious? i didnt expect this thing to be more then 25k depending on the model. speaking on nov 08, the style is obviously changed a lot. 40k is out of this world, i rather buy a truck and make money with it then spend 40k on this thing that will just get me around. gas is going down anyways