Technology Review - Published By MIT
Advertisement

Potential Energy


Kevin Bullis is Technology Review’s energy editor.

Recent Posts

Blog Topics

Recent Comments

  • lasertekk : Ah, no, it doesn't.  Both methods of transmission are prone to the same resistive losses inherent...
  • kjblack : Being in the renewable energy business in Australia the best option is to install a grid feed...
  • walt : So we should put our chargers, batteries and inverters on the roof? I think the 14AWG wire used...
  • wayne31r : But how do skylights produce electricity and therefore replace PV?
  • ... : Back to the 1880s Edison vs Westinghouse "Battle of the Currents".  Some things never change! ;)
  • MakeSense : Your idea is basically good, but for the practical business of DC transmission losses. Even over...
  • lasertekk : Call me eccentric, but if I were building my dream home from scratch, I just might outfit and run...
  • VuJoe : I am proposing to use thermodynamics principles to convert solar energy to electical energy via...
  • ... : hey..i want to know more abt this..its wonderful..
  • Brian H : Not so clean and limitless as all that; it turns out the fluid use is rather drastically...
Advertisement
Wednesday, March 04, 2009

Does GM's Volt Make Sense?

A new study says no; GM disagrees.

GM is defending its design for the Volt plug-in hybrid vehicle after a study out of Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) slammed the design, saying that it's not economical. (Plug-ins are hybrids with batteries that can be recharged by plugging them in.)

We've previously reported on the CMU study. It says that hybrids with large batteries designed to provide 40 miles of electric range before an onboard generator kicks on to recharge them--that is, vehicles like the Volt--cost too much for the gas savings to compensate. On the other hand, hybrids with smaller batteries with short electric-only ranges make economic sense, provided they're recharged frequently.

The finding could have policy implications. The recent stimulus bill includes tax credits for plug-in hybrids. The study could suggest what kind of hybrids the government would be wisest to support.

Not surprisingly, GM disagrees with the study. In a blog this week, Jon Lauckner, GM's vice president of global program management, takes it apart. Basically, he says that the battery pack will cost a lot less than the CMU researchers guess it will.

At its core, the study's conclusion is based on an incorrect assumption of the cost of battery packs. In the CMU study, the so-called "base case" used a Lithium-Ion battery cost of $1,000 per kWh ($16,000 for a 40 mile Volt pack) that was cited in earlier academic articles. The problem is this cost is many hundreds of dollars per kWh higher than the actual cost of the Volt pack today. Moreover, our battery team is already starting work on new concepts that will further decrease the cost of the Volt battery pack quite substantially in a second-generation Volt pack. Unfortunately, the impact of dramatically lower battery costs (to $250 per kWh) was treated only as a "sensitivity" in the CMU study when it probably should have been highlighted as THE critical element that would dramatically change the cost-effectiveness of plug-ins with greater electric-only range.

But then he does something odd. He says that the study should have accounted for the tax credits for plug-in hybrids available through the stimulus bill. He implies that these credits, along with cheaper batteries, will make the Volt affordable. But if the Volt relies on government incentives to be economically viable, is it really economically viable?

The key question is whether the large-scale production of the Volt and other plug-ins that the credits are meant to prompt will bring down battery costs through economies of scale, and bring them down enough that these vehicles can make sense without the credits.

Comments

  • Cost
    Of course it's going to cost a lot to start with. Every new technology does. Anybody else remember when you used to pay about $100 per RAM for a home computer?

    If we don't start somewhere, then those costs will always be high because there is no demand (high levels of production usually lowering costs). The technology probably also won't be researched as quickly to make it cheaper and/or more efficient, because the research funding won't be there.

    Why do we seem to forget that cost effectiveness takes time whenever someone proposes a "costly" new technology?

    Just my two cents, but seems like we should be encouraging innovation rather than writing it off so quickly as "too costly". It may not be the best possible idea, but at least it's an idea.

    science_fict...
    03/04/2009
    Posts:2
    Avg Rating:
    4/5
    • Re: Cost
      The article does not discourage innovation. It simply brought up the fact that the taxpayers will be financing the Volt. If the taxpayers had been required to finance RAM we would still paying $100 per Meg.

      I drive a small economy car and didn't try to force anyone to help me pay for it.

      millikenrese...
      03/05/2009
      Posts:9
      Avg Rating:
      3/5
      • Re: Cost
        I seem to remember that the microchip industry was not going to get off the ground. The market was too small so the chips would be way to expensive. The government stepped in and promised to buy a bunch at a certain price to get them going.
          The internet was a government creation for universities.
           I am not against the government throwing money at a new technology to get it going.
          As long as they do not play favorites between companies (no cronyism) and only last for a couple years. Long enough to really see if the market is viable. ("clean coal" money breaks this rule. It goes on and on and on....with no improvements)
          Thinking long rang; if the Volt comes out and is affordable, we can say goodbye to oil fueled despots and keep billions of dollars that would have left the country, in it.

          
          

        DennisBuller
        03/05/2009
        Posts:47
        Avg Rating:
        4/5

This discussion has been moved to our discussions forum.

Advertisement

Log In

Forgot your password?     Register »
Advertisement
Technology Review January/February 2010

Current Issue

Security in the Ether
Information technology's next grand challenge will be to secure the cloud--and prove we can trust it.
•  Subscribe
Save 36%
•  Table of Contents
•  MIT News
» Gift Subscription
» Digital Subscription
» Reprints, Back Issues
» Subscribe
» Table of Contents
» MIT News

More Technology News from Forbes

Advertisement
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology © 2010 Technology Review. All Rights Reserved.