GM is on the hybrid bandwagon while other automakers continue to argue against it.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
By Kevin Bullis
According to the Wall Street Journal, Honda, Nissan, and Renault are making the same arguments against hybrid vehicles that General Motors made several years ago to predict that hybrids would fail. (See "Hybrid or Electric: Car Makers Take Sides" and "Honda Won't Pursue Plug-in Hybrids.") The difference now is that the arguments are right this time--at least for some markets.
In the 1990s, U.S. automakers such as GM led the development of hybrid-vehicle technology. But GM elected to drop hybrids in favor of a much longer-term technology--hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles--arguing that hybrids were too expensive and didn't provide enough environmental benefit to be successful. Then Toyota's Prius proved GM wrong. And recently, GM has become a big promoter of hybrid technology, especially next-generation plug-in hybrids.
Not so Honda, Nissan, and Renault. According to the Journal report, Carlos Ghosn, the CEO of Renault and Nissan, complains that hybrids don't really do much to reduce petroleum consumption and pollution, arguing that it's better to build all-electric vehicles that have zero emissions. U.S. automakers such as GM made the same arguments, although they pushed for fuel-cell vehicles, not battery-powered vehicles. (GM, of course, already had a battery-electric vehicle, the EV1, which it scrapped.)
Honda currently sells hybrid vehicles, but the company's president and CEO, Takeo Fukui, is skeptical of next-generation plug-in hybrids. Such cars would still have both electric motors and a gasoline engine, but they could go much farther on electricity alone than today's hybrids can. GM has been touting its Volt concept, which would go 40 miles on electricity stored in lithium-ion batteries. For longer trips, a gas generator would kick on to recharge the battery, providing an additional 600 miles of range. Fukui's argument is that the gas engine in the Volt is unnecessary. Presumably, he is suggesting that it would be better, and cheaper, to use batteries alone, or to stick with gasoline.
His argument doesn't make sense in the United States, where there's probably not much of a market for a car that can only go 40 miles on a charge. But a couple of trends suggest that there may indeed be a growing market for relatively short-range electric cars. London has a congestion tax on vehicles driving in the city--and other cities are considering imposing similar fees--from which zero-emission vehicles are exempt. It's not unlikely that such regulations could evolve to keep non-zero-emission vehicles out of city centers entirely, Ghosn suggests. Meanwhile, the taxes make it more expensive to drive gas-powered cars. Climate-change legislation could also make it more expensive to drive conventional vehicles. As these costs rise, the people who will feel the pressure most are those who are likely unable to afford a car with both an engine and an electric motor. For them, a 40-mile, zero-emission, all-electric commuter could be appealing, especially considering the fact that (in the United States) most people drive less than 40 miles a day.
Comments
geisemann on 10/25/2007 at 6:29 PM
2
Hybrid=A combo Technology something MID TERM
Full Electric= Future.
The EV1 is all-electric and GM Volt being made is all electric.
Stop calling the VOLT A HYBRID
As an Electrical engineer I know the difference between Hybrid and Electric.
Stop calling the GM volt a HYBRID. Hybrid in terms of technology is low tech.
It takes me back to the times of TUBE - Transistor TV sets when Transistor technology was not up to snuff and people had to use tubes.
Called a 1960 Hybrid TV set.
All electric is MUCH superior in terms of maintance, no oil changes, no Nickel battery waste etc.
GM for the record is making an Electric car with an engine to charge the battery if needed. The charge engine can be removed and the car will still work. A hybrid cannot do this it uses an old tech gas engine with help from an electric engine.
malkmus on 10/26/2007 at 10:36 AM
1
In an interesting aside the weight of a car becomes much less of an issue in electric cars since most of the energy penalty for accelerating a heavy vehicle is recovered during the breaking, hence the penalty in efficiency for having an on board generator is not all that large.
The only slight worry I see with the Volt is that it is currently specified with LiIon based batteries. There is at the moment no known Li battery that has a sufficient number of recharge cycles for automotive use. Equally there is no in the field experience with automotive LiIon whatsoever. Hence behaviour in harsh environmental conditions over a long period of time has not been tested yet. It seems to me that a realistic time frame for the Volt (or any other mass market Li based electric car) will have to be somewhat further in the future. Maybe if the cycle from Prototype to mass market for most automotive technologies is anything to go by 2012-2015 should be a more reasonable if slightly depressing estimate. Lets hope some major breakthrough in batteries happens soon....
franquellim on 10/26/2007 at 10:59 AM
10
GM expects to begin road testing "mules" (likely malibu frames with EV drivetrains and batteries) by the end of this year. They have announced a manufacturing facility and already have supplies for all major components, including battery packs, with a production target of 2010.
Please refer to the excellent website "www.gm-volt.com" for additional information.
(I'm not affiliated with the site, just a fan)
jpdemers on 10/26/2007 at 11:02 AM
31
Americans don't use their cars just to commute, which I think needs to be taken into account. They take long trips, and take a ton of toys with them, on vacations and weekends. Most can't afford two cars, which leads to all those single-passenger SUVs making the daily commute to the office at 13 miles per gallon.
A plug-in electric with an on-board generator, and a 600-mile range, is what these people will be wanting.
guetenburg on 10/29/2007 at 11:53 AM
5
For an ELECTRIC CAR, go to www.Plug-InMotors.com. This company is making Pure Electric Plug-In Vehicles. Or EV's.
RichardL on 10/26/2007 at 2:29 PM
3
hamid on 10/30/2007 at 10:54 PM
11
This is an EV with range extension. So it can be called a
REEV: Range extended electric vehicle
or an
EREV
The new nano-phosphate lithium ion batteries have a lifetime of 15 years (5000 recharge cycles), do not catch fire, do not heat, work in -20 temperature, and can deliver so much power that an EV can easily beat a Ferrari.
Checkout A123. There are no serious questions remaining about the battery, except for cost.
pberk on 10/25/2007 at 7:58 PM
1
B.E.S. on 10/26/2007 at 3:02 AM
1
The VERY significant volume thus liberated can then be devoted to ADDITIONAL batteries -- extending the Volt well past its 40-mile plugin range... perhaps into somewhere in the neighborhood of 100+ mile range. Now that's a commuter car even most Americans could appreciate.
advill on 10/26/2007 at 1:28 PM
11
Problems are;
Regular american is over 220 Lb. (don´t fit in average size car )
Regulation avoid use of diesel engines
Americans has to change taxes to gross vehicular weigth or MPG tax to promote economies via market incentives...in the mean time everything will be bla..bla...bla..
hamid on 10/30/2007 at 11:07 PM
11
Europe is fighting REEVs because they can never compete globally with an EV. EVs will be coming from China and India. Europe is FINISHED!
olmon on 10/26/2007 at 3:34 AM
6
There have been electric cars in the past that had reasonable ranges & speed and there are other technologies that are proven and could be tapped. The FACT is - - - the public is only going to get what the people that are really in power let us have.
bj on 10/26/2007 at 7:38 AM
24
Also, nobody mentioned the Think City, which was originally designed by Ford, but is now owned by a company in Norway, that has a novel solution for the high cost of the Lithium battery pack-- lease it.
http://en.think.no/
Too bad it's an annoying Flash website. Cool commuter car with a range slightly over 100 miles, which makes it usable for most commuters. I wish they'd start selling them in the US.
soarhead on 10/26/2007 at 12:50 PM
6
An update for you: Tesla recently completed official EPA range testing, and the vehicle came in with a 235 mile highway, 254 city! Sound backward? Actually the Tesla gets better mileage in the city because of regenerative breaking in stop-n-go traffic. Go to Teslamotors.com for the latest.
By the way, I am not a salesperson for the Tesla. I believe GM had the world on a string back when they made the EV-1. I drove one, had friends who loved them, especially with the newer generation batteries. They were forced to give up their vehicles! GM screwed up again! If only they had stuck with the EV--they would have back orders for their product today, not lay-offs!
One more by-the-way: Most all of the stuff GM, Ford, and others are doing ties their technologies to a block of metal that has pistons, rings, crank shafts, valves, etc. Can you imagine what would happen to all of the supporting industries if a motor with only three moving parts became the norm? The unions wouldn't have it!
TimG on 11/03/2007 at 12:12 AM
8
You have really nailed it! When (not if) EVs take off there will be some major fights in Detroit boardrooms. Everybody knows that the major automakers don't make money selling cars. They make the big money selling parts! The simplicity of the EV totally screws their business model. I think this is the real reason that GM dumped the EV1 - panic.
advill on 10/26/2007 at 1:43 PM
11
A mix of supercapacitors + diesel engine could be a better solution.. how is that secret ultracapacitors project doing?
hamid on 10/30/2007 at 11:12 PM
11
Checkout PHET in China.
Alex De Maida on 10/26/2007 at 10:50 AM
1
theBike45 on 10/26/2007 at 11:08 AM
14
strategies are still behind hybrids, although most of them have jumped ship to back plug-ins.
The math is pretty simple and both economics and emission concerns favor the plug-ins by a very large margin. Honda breezily talks all-electrics when they can't even produce a plug-in, but typically fails to understand that a plug-in with a 40 mile plus range can accomplish 95% what an
all-electric car can, and at today's battery prices, do so in an infinitely more economical
fashion..
SVE on 10/26/2007 at 11:58 AM
42
Gurthang on 10/26/2007 at 5:23 PM
13
gabrielg01 on 10/27/2007 at 5:01 PM
294
DougDante on 10/29/2007 at 10:29 AM
2
If I'm commuted 25-50 miles away, and I get an urgent call that a loved one is in the hospital, then I need to go NOW.
I don't have time to worry about my car in a situation like that, so I won't buy one that would prevent me from going where I need when I need.
Also, when I go on vacation, I don't like to do a lot of planning. Maybe get an oil change, call a hotel, and go. I don't want to have to choose my destination and timing based on what kind of fuel my car takes.
That's why plug in hybrids are better - until there is an established quick-charge infastructure, EVs will be secondary cars and toys.
guetenburg on 10/29/2007 at 11:48 AM
5
gabrielg01 on 10/29/2007 at 12:50 PM
294
Cars would have 2 swappable batteries, and be used in sequential fashion. When one battery is discharged, you would still have one full battery left. You'd go to the gas/battery station and get the new one. This way, one would never "run low" and be in danger of getting stuck.
Really, what is so effin' complicated about this?
gjcoram on 10/30/2007 at 10:44 AM
6
gabrielg01 on 10/30/2007 at 1:16 PM
294
Yes, surely there would be some people/companies trying to abuse the system. But the market would sort them out anyway. Companies that care about their brand image would make sure to provide good service. The regular gasoline business is in fact no different. Lots of people avoid mom-and-pop gas stations, and stick to certain brands for fear of buying poor quality gas.
There could be additional layers of quality checking. The batteries could have built-in systems that showed how many cycles they gone through already. The batteries could also have an individual ID number, which could be tracked via a database. One could look up battery#9999 and see that it was picked up at the Elm Street Shell station on date x/y/z, and then dropped off at the British Petroleum station a week later, so on and so forth...
Most of the infrastructure is already in place - only minor and gradual adjustments would be required. We could have a dual gasoline-electric service infrastructure for a long time, as the electric component is phased in, and the gasoline part is phased out.
gabrielg01 on 10/30/2007 at 1:17 PM
294
Yes, surely there would be some people/companies trying to abuse the system. But the market would sort them out anyway. Companies that care about their brand image would make sure to provide good service. The regular gasoline business is in fact no different. Lots of people avoid mom-and-pop gas stations, and stick to certain brands for fear of buying poor quality gas.
There could be additional layers of quality checking. The batteries could have built-in systems that showed how many cycles they gone through already. The batteries could also have an individual ID number, which could be tracked via a database. One could look up battery#9999 and see that it was picked up at the Elm Street Shell station on date x/y/z, and then dropped off at the British Petroleum station a week later, so on and so forth...
Most of the infrastructure is already in place - only minor and gradual adjustments would be required. We could have a dual gasoline-electric service infrastructure for a long time, as the electric component is phased in, and the gasoline part is phased out.
gjcoram on 10/30/2007 at 10:45 AM
6
gjcoram on 10/30/2007 at 10:45 AM
6
williamsmedia on 10/31/2007 at 11:37 AM
3
TimG on 11/03/2007 at 12:30 AM
8
I made this suggestion some years back in a note to Scientific American. Really, the whole thing could be done robotically w/o ever leaving your car. You would get a battery that is recharged, tested, and certified with the swipe of a credit card or modern equivalent. The energy companies could set them up at existing gas stations and they would be a dream of a business model! No more having to deal with explosive, toxic chemicals or environmental hazards. Just hire a couple of high school kids to oversee the robot system then sit back and print money.
williamsmedia on 10/29/2007 at 8:24 PM
3
Todays consumer Hybrids, even though most use a portion of gas, can reach up to 35-70 miles per gallon. A huge difference in gas consumption, money saving at the pump, and definitely better on the environment. Much better then any new car available in the last year or so.
Here is a Hybrid car coming out of beta, the company claims around 150-300 miles per gallon: http://www.aptera.com ---Straight out of the Jetsons I know, but some great looking stats. My conscience tells me to go down this direction.
asdar on 10/30/2007 at 4:27 PM
62
The electric has these advantages:
1. Much less maintenance
2. less expensive running costs
3. Doesn't use gasoline directly
4. Quiet
The Hybrid has these advantages:
1. range
2. convenience
3. uses less battery material
4. cheaper
5. not dependent on charging stations
6. more easily marketed to the population at large
Both types use less gas than ICE.
I'm a huge fan of the Volt series Hybrid because it answers almost all of the questions.
It's no contest for me between hybrid and electric currently, Hybrid wins.
The two reasons that it's not a contest are:
1. The population will buy hybrids, EV's don't offer the convenience.
2. The battery material for one EV can be used on four hybrids and cover over 80% of the driving, that I call the commuter drive.
If we can get four times th