GM joins forces with 30 utilities for Volt
Forget fuel cells?GM has joined forces with the Electrical Vehicle Institute and more than 30 utility companies to work on tax incentives for electric drive vehicles, such as the Chevy Volt, in addition to recharging stations and and how to stagger recharging to prevent local substation overload. Likewise, "The speed of the recharging, voltage, amperage and other issues all have to be worked out" as well according to the AP.
"This vehicle is real. It's coming into production," said Britta Gross, a GM engineer who is helping to build the infrastructure for cars of the future. "We know that when the vehicle is in the showroom and ready for sale, it's got to work seamlessly with the infrastructure. It's the whole picture. We've got to make sure the infrastructure is ready."
Is the Volt becoming bigger than just the car?
Labels: Chevy Volt electric vehicle concept, plug-in hybrid vehicles
posted by Dahcredyns at
7:36 AM
11 Comments:
Interesting - GM talking about needing to manage the infrastructure - "We've got to make sure the infrastructure is ready". Wow, they did such a good job "managing" the California electric trolly industry in the 1960s and the electric car infrastructure in the 1990s... They sure got out in front of everyone else when it comes to fielding the next generation of cars that people will be buying over the next decade.
I think GM needs to worry about designing and manufacturing cars that people will buy, and let other key players worry about managing their part of the required infrastructure.
I don't care how fast they (or more correctly the the rest of the automotive industry) pump out plug-in hybrids. Do you really think it is realistic to think that the emerging plug-in hybrid car industry is going to bring down the national electric grid? Does GM really think their meddling is required to develop the complete solution? They are so full of it, it is not funny.
The reality is that national electricity providers will certainly be able to implement any new solutions required to sell electricity to their customers. And they will be glad to do it, simply because they will be selling their product (electricity) for a profit, and profit is the most effective motive in a free market economy.
energy independence-
worthy points.
still, as a California resident that has suffered numerous blackouts and brownouts, i'm a little more open to this collaboration. while i agree that GM should focus its energies predominantly on the engineering of PHEVs, etc., this could end up being about more than just the Volt and GM - at least that's my hope.
the US grid is in pretty bad shape overall and too coal intensive. the electrification of the automobile seems to me a great impetus to the plant the seeds of a new energy paradigm that goes beyond EVs, but extends to distributed energy paradigms that reward home efficiency, home solar, etc.
if not, foreign oil dependency, even oil dependency might end, but consumers will be just as screwed as ever. america's free market economy has excelled at just that - further bridging the gap between the haves and the have nots. 90 percent of the people live on the breadcrumbs of the top 1 percent - that doesn't sound very free to me.
call me naively optimistic, but i believe the redistribution of energy more into the hands of the people is bigger than evs themselves. evs, however, can be an impetus towards that end.
If you follow the news on this site and have been following for awhile, you have seen a lot of info and planning for the Chevy Volt. It almost seems like this website could be named the Chevy Volt website. Is this car ever going to happen? GM does not have a real good following for their hybrid vehicles now, partly because they have so very, very few of them. Also the so-called "mild hybrid" of the malibu is kind of a joke. It barely gets better mileage than a regular hybrid and costs more. Just my 2 cents worth.
I had found a 2003 article chronicling the research and technology of the in Hub motor by none other than...GM! 5 years later, where has that gone? The article spoke of how great the technology was (weight dist., few moving parts, etc) yet 5 years later they've again done nothing with it.
Maybe if there is this collaborative, you atleast get a new batch of non-oil lobbyists in the pockets of GM and other car co's. This time pushing electricity instead of oil, which is at least on the right track I suppose.
Brownouts...lived in San Diego during the 'de-regulation' and Duke Energy mess...find it funny that running AC units during they day would cause a shorting or overworking of the grid. Why are the AC units running? TOO MUCH SUN! What can we do with the sun? MAKE ELECTRICITY! It's like you have a well that you are using to pump water to your crops, but the pump isn't working due to the flood you just had!
Another delay tactic by GM is what I think this is. Why are they worrying about the electric companies when there are a grand total of about 3000 EV's in the States? Add in the fact that the Volt will be produced in such limited numbers initially and I fail to see the significance of this PR ploy...
The older I get, the more cynical I get. Also, I am really leaning heavily towards a CNG vehicle...I can get them used for about 13K............
indigo incarnates
I agree that this move has "delaying tactic" written all over it. My prediction is a bit cynicle: GM will develop a fully-functioning prototype of the Volt and then hold a secret auction to sell the patents to the highest-bidding oil company.
Last 10 articles includes one about the Volt - yeah I think Volt blog is definitely a better description.
Anyway, GM has never predicted the Volt for any launch date earlier than 2010 since its debut. So, I'm not sure exactly how this announcement is a delay tactic?
And just to make my love of GM clear, I've regularly criticized GM for overhyping the Volt and, most importantly, for not developing something to contend with the Prius in the interim.
Still, I will continue to hype the Volt whenever a new story breaks. In my opinion the Volt and news about it are more important than the Volt and GM for the Volt is helping to change consumer psychology, especially amongst a consumer group - big SUV and gas-guzzler buyers - that especially needs to reevaluate their consumer habits.
Even more important, changes in the grid are desperately required. Distributed energy, home solar systems, etc can ride on the coattails of Volt buzz - NEED to ride on the coattails of Volt buzz.
The Volt, Tesla, Prius plug-ins, ec. are going to mean far less than they could if they don't couple with much more intelligent energy policy in the US. Considering the last 100 years of energy policy, to assume that free markets and the slow emergence of EVs will just make a perfect world fall into place makes no sense in my humble opinion. In fact its ignorant and, ultimately, counterproductive to what plug-in revolution stands for.
Thus, not only is this partnership good news, it's important news and its why every single other major automaker has a COUPLE or relationships with utilities as well.
If criticism is due, it should be focused on what exactly are the plans of utility companies? Whose interests do they most have in mind? Because if we believe that utility companies are focused on providing nothing but cheap, clean and green energy for the electric revolution, we're taking a huge leap of unfounded, historically inaccurate, faith.
So instead of "reinventing" the EV why can't I just buy an Astra with the EV1 drivetrain in it? Or an Aveo? Why the whole new vehicle from scratch? It just needs a new floorpan/trunk area to handle the batteries...
For that matter why can't I just buy a new RAV4-EV? All the creature comforts of a typical small CUV with a range of 100+ miles. I'd want one with the NiMH battery of the 2002-2003 models because they are still working in some cases with over 150K miles.
Why isn't this being properly addressed in public by the government and GM? Or by Toyota?
Take a normal small vehicle and install batteries under the floor. Pretty simple and MUCH cheaper than developing a WHOLE new vehicle. Don't need a new interior, new trim, new lighting, new doors, new bodypanels, etc. All that comes with an existing vehicle design.
The commentor that explained that this is all just a delaying tactic is EXACTLY right. Just like the decades of fuel cell promises. Not saying fuel cells won't happen but they are still MUCH more expensive than a RAV4-EV type vehicle. And last much fewer miles. And where does that hydrogen come from? Big oil of course who might create it by consuming fossil fuels. At least with EVs we could go on a national solar panel drive - a drive to require them on new construction rooftops and gov't funding to help get them onto existing rooftops.
I have to question if all this run around is designed to keep EVs in quantity off the roads. Too many entrenched interests making HUGE money off of life as we know it now. For that reason I will eagerly buy a Phoenix Motor Cars or Miles EV vehicle when they come available. They build a vehicle without the anti-EV business establishment steering their choices. They are swimming very slowly against the current. I'd buy a Tesla but they cost the price of a comfortable house in my area and I need a back seat.
I want to hear more about why we aren't driving NiMH battery powered vehicles. The batteries are nearly 100% recyclable. 100 miles is enough range for me to drive back and forth to work and around town on two charges. My wife who works in the next county could drive to work two days on one charge. Most of the people I know around the country could live with a pure EV no problem.
Charge during the night when the power plants are wasting energy anyhow.
So can anybody expose the men/women who are pulling the levers on our society and who hide behind the curtain?
Joe-
Those are good points.
Still, we have to accept a few things as just reality, at least today's reality.
Major automakers don't make money on cars like the Aveo. Putting batteries in it makes it even more cost-ineffective.
NiMH plug-ins, as you point out are possible. However, costs and range would minimize them to only a small segment of society. Unfortunately, those are not the economics that drive the Big 3.
Scale for Big 3 automakers means millions of vehicles, especially for new technologies, it's the only way to recover costs.
Moreover, range anxiety is a legitimate and well-studied concern. In many conditions an EV with 100 mile range, might only get 50 miles of electric power.
Most consumers aren't going to pay $40,000 for that kind of range. Even at a 100 miles, most consumers are still not interested, even though such a range would cover most commutes.
That's just today's reality.
Another reality is that you and I are not average consumers. A significant percent of Americans still have no problem buying a gas-guzzler.
Thus, the reason NiMH plug-ins aren't feasible, is because you and I are not average.
Moreover, until fuel prices go up, it's just too hard to justify the costs of the technology for most.
If gas were $4.00 or $5.00 per gallon I think you could quickly get 5 percent of new buyers into such vehicles. Still, those aren't incredibly favorable economics for achieving scalability.
Thus, if you want to blame string-pullers, blame everyone whom has ever helped kept fuel prices low, despite the costs of war, tanker lane security, global warming, pollution, etc.
The real cost of gas is much higher than we pay at the pump. Yet, until those costs are sold at the pump, even lithium plug-ins will mostly be irrelevant for some time I fear.
Who benefits from waiting for the "infrastructure"?
Bullfrogpowered has the contract, a monopoly apparently, but not the capacity.
Cities could be powered, but not the 905 commuters yet, so we all wait.
Tooo funny after GM "killed the electric car" 20 years ago
Post a Comment
<< Home