Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

GM Volt Battery Delivered

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 04:24 PM
Original message
GM Volt Battery Delivered
Edited on Sat Nov-10-07 04:41 PM by OKIsItJustMe
http://www.ecoworld.com/blog/2007/11/07/gm-volt-battery-delivered/

GM Volt Battery Delivered

There are no official announcements of when the GM Volt will actually hit the showrooms in production quantities, but the year 2010 continues to hold up as the unofficial date. Last week in the Detroit Free Press, in a report by Katie Merx entitled “A New Era Dawns for GM,” Vice Chairman Bob Lutz stated he “wants to make up to 100,000 fuel-efficient Chevrolet Volts in the first year of production.” This got our attention.

Yesterday I asked GM spokesman Rob Peterson about the quantity of cars planned and the launch year 2010. Peterson could not make an official comment on the year but confirmed that everything is still moving forward on schedule, and that “GM’s internal target is 2010.” That means cars in showrooms in just over two years.

In a significant step forward, last week LG Chem delivered the first lithium ion battery to GM for testing. As Peterson noted “this is being tested not at the cell level but is a full pack that meets all of our power and energy needs.” As we reported in August in our post “GM’s Volt to use A123 Battery,” GM selected two manufacturers out of 31 respondants to their RFP for an automotive lithium ion battery, A123 and LG Chem. It looks like LG Chem has won this round, but Peterson noted “A123 should have their battery here before the end of this year.”

We’re going to say it again: The GM Volt, and its European counterpart, the GM “Flextreme” which has an onboard diesel, is a series hybrid, very distinct from current hybrid designs, and it is a long overdue breakthrough. It is misleading for mainstream journalists to refer to the Volt as a ”plug-in hybrid” and leave it at that - it grossly misrepresents the significance of this innovation. As the diagram below indicates, a series hybrid’s gasoline (or diesel) engine is not connected to the drivetrain, only to an onboard generator. Electricity from the generator, along with stored (and recovered) electricity from a battery pack, are what powers an all electric drivetrain.

The series hybrid design is simpler, requires less maintenance, and delivers outstanding performance. The only thing it was waiting for was the energy density of a usable lithium ion battery. The mystery is why all major automakers haven’t announced series hybrids - for a variety of political or business reasons they still have not, and GM is going to acquire a huge lead in this technology.

Here’s the specs on the Volt: The range on battery-only (using plug-in electricity) is 40 miles - which will fulfill nearly 80% of the normal daily driving cycles in the USA. The range on gasoline-only, if the battery is completely drained, is 600 miles, at 50 miles per gallon. Because the 12 kWh (usable AC) lithium ion battery pack only weighs 400 pounds, it is not a significant drag on the vehicle. We love this car, and up to 100,000 of them are still on track to hit the road in just over two years.


http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/couriernews/news/634694,3_1_EL04_A1GREEN_S1.article

'Green Team' showcases alternative fuel vehicles

November 4, 2007

...

Auto manufacturers are working on a number of different vehicles, including those that run on biofuels, biodiesel, fuel cells that use hydrogen and emit only water vapor, or are gas/electric hybrids. Gunther described GM's "plug-in hybrid," the Chevrolet Volt, as a vehicle that can go 40 miles -- which 78 percent of commuters drive, or less, each day -- on pure electricity and no gasoline.

"We've got our first battery packs delivered to us. (The Chevy Volt) will be ready by 2010."

...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Nay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 06:27 PM
Response to Original message
1. I read the site, but nowhere does it mention cost. Any idea how much
a Volt will cost? I will be in the market for a car about then, but I can't go crazy with money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 11:20 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. "Under $30,000"
http://blog.mlive.com/ann_arbor_business_review/2007/05/us_needs_to_encourage_new_fuel.html
...

Bob Lutz was quoted as saying some very interesting things. See source article here. He was commenting on the Federal decison to increase fuel economy ratings. In the discussion, which took place on May 10th, he said that the Volt’s consumer cost would be less than $30,000. He also said that the Li-ion battery is now only 2 to 3 years away from mass production, and that the vehicle could have a combined electric-combustion range of 750 miles.
He also quite thoughtfully invoked the need for a Manhattan Project-like effort of the Federal government to wean the U.S. off petroleum and onto renewable energy.

For those who follow the Volts’ development carefully these are some very important pieces of information from Bob. Its the first time we’ve heard a possible price-point for the car, and a number likely to make a lot of people happy. Also we are tantalized by the prospect of the car arriving a year ahead of time.

With the Zaap Obvio and possibly Tesla sedan slated to arrive in 2009, an early Volt arrival will be a very good thing.

...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suziedemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-10-07 07:07 PM
Response to Original message
2. Great News!!! Thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-11-07 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
4. The battery sounds exciting. But they can shove the car.
I'm very interested in the battery. I am on the verge of building a photovoltaic power system. And right now, it's all 1970's technology. No, make that 1900 technology. Lead plates and sulfuric acid.


I don't think people are getting this electric car thing. The power either comes from putting petroleum in a gas tank, or petroleum in a power plant gas tank. Either way, until we find a way to generate power without using petroleum, it's hardly any benefit, if any. Granted there is hydro and nuclear. But this isn't something to get excited about UNTIL we do. Then we're really making a difference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amandabeech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-11-07 07:19 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. The U.S. uses very, very little petroleum to make electricity.
My recollection of the the distribution is 20% hydro, 20% nuclear, 30% natural gas, 2-5% (?) renewables other than hydro, and the rest is pretty much coal.

Google EIA, the Energy Information Agency for the latest distribution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-11-07 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. I was using petroleum in it's broader sense.
That's over half of our energy production via means that produce global warming effects. That's all.

The car does nothing towards providing a solution. It's like having a cart and no horse. Bush was the worst thing to ever happen to America, and the planet.

Right now I'm pricing the power company versus photovoltaic power to bring onto a property, in the event that I'm lucky enough to close escrow. I'm really interested in this new battery. I hate the thought of adding my use of energy to the grid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tinrobot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-11-07 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. It's absolutely a step towards a solution.
If those numbers are correct, then the Volt will get approx 45% of it's electric power from non-carbon sources, and the carbon sources it does use will burn the carbon much more efficiently. So, the real carbon savings are most likely much greater than 45%. If you put solar panels on your roof, that power will be 100% clean.

So, the Volt is absolutely a step towards a solution.

Powering the car with rooftop solar panels is another step towards a solution.

Cleaning up the grid is yet another step towards a solution.

One step at a time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-12-07 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. That's true. It is a step in the right direction.
But I'm not a fan of nuclear. However, it's still a means of eliminating petroleum.

I admit to being cynical. You are right in what you say. But I'm looking at a bigger picture. Global warming is one facet. There are others. I'm very unhappy with other facets of this mess. But never mind that. This would reduce our reliance on imported oil. And that's got to be good.

It's funny how I can miss something so basic. To be honest, I just want to see an end to cars in general. I know that sounds draconian. But it's the world I want to live in. And one I'll never see.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amandabeech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-12-07 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #7
16. I hesitate to use the word "petroleum" when I mean "coal."
Certainly, burning either one of them will generate lots of greenhouse gases.

However, lighter petroleum products are insanely useful because they have lots of energy in a form that is easy to handle and transport. I would like to move toward an electric transportation system, together with using the foot, the bicycle, and yes, the carpool lanes. However, I don't think that that transportation conversion will happen overnight, and I see some uses for petroleum that will be hard to get around.

My favorite example is farming. My grandfather did it with horses, but he ditched the horses as soon as he could afford a tractor and the fuel for it. Horses may come back in smaller farming operations, for example, family-owned fruit and vegetable operations. However, for grains, the tractor really beats the horse. I see tractors on grain farms as some of the last petroleum-using machines on the planet. Also, I think that farm-to-market or farm-to-railway head transportation will use petroleum long after the internal combustion auto goes into the museum.

You can make oil and gasoline out of coal, but it is an credibly messy and co2 intensive operation. Of course, it may be possible to store some of that co2 underground or otherwise, but I'm not counting on it.

What I'd really like to see is the generation of electricity by coal phased out, and renewables, nuclear (yes, I'm one of them) and conservation pushed up to take up the slack.

Good luck on your solar installation. Keep us posted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-12-07 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #6
17. That's a little off. Nuclear 22%, Hydro 6%, 15% gas, 53% coal. As of 2001, at any rate.
The remaining 5% is miscellany: 3% from oil, 1% from wood and waste incincinerators, 1% from geothermal, solar and wind are an astrisk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-11-07 10:30 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. "... putting petroleum in a gas tank, or petroleum in a power plant gas tank ..."
It's not the same.

A typical gasoline powered automobile is much less efficient than a power plant. So, even though there is transmission loss, assuming that your local utility did burn gasoline it would be ecologically better to burn it there and charge the batteries on your Volt than to burn it in a standard automobile.

However, if you get your PV system built, you can use it to charge the batteries in your Volt.

The advantage of the Volt over a "conventional" all-electric car is that the Volt can use a smaller capacity battery—large enough to achieve its "40" mile all-electric range, which is all most commuters need not large enough to achieve the "245" mile range of the Tesla roadster.

That means less weight and less expense for the battery.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-12-07 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. It's an improvement. But not much of one.
I do realize that the fraction of power produced by "renewable" means, like nuclear, does eliminate the need to use petroleum.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-13-07 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #10
18. No, you don't understand
Even if there were absolutely no renewable energy involved, energy is used more efficiently in an electric car than in a standard gasoline powered car.

(Less CO2.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-13-07 05:11 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. I know.
I'm not a novice. I'm a mechanical engineer. Which may or may not mean much. But I studied this stuff in school. And I even know someone who was one of the designers of that electric car that Ford built as a prototype back in 1989. But aside from that, what I'm getting at is that to simply produce a car it takes around 10% of the energy that the car will use in it's lifetime. It's a fairly small improvement, at this time. Now if we were all hydroelectric, or photovoltaic, then we'd be making a big difference. And I know I shouldn't be so critical since any improvement is good. But I'm looking at the bigger picture. The car is only a fraction of our global warming problem. Energy production, manufacturing, major transportation are all big contributors. To be honest, we could make about as big a difference with our cars by simply not driving them. There's a lot of frivolous activity going on with automobiles. It's an interesting subject. And we're up against a calendar.


And I'll admit that the 10% number that I quoted may not be realistic with electric cars. I know it is with internal combustion. But there is a significant difference between the two. Electric cars don't have hardened and ground valves and blocks and transmissions.

And another thing. This is why I am trying so hard to fight this sense of euphoria that consumers get when they discover potential solutions. There is a very strong tendency for people to not want to change. To continue with the lifestyles they are used to. And it's the very lifestyles we live that is going to have to change. Not necessarily the mechanisms by which we live them. I say that because of one thing. Population. Even in terms of electric cars running off a grid that is fully renewable, we have big problems. There is a much more serious bigger picture than most people realize. We simply cannot have, nor is it healthy in a multiplicity of ways, billions of cars. Rubber tires, bearings, glass, body parts, the energy to produce them, ship them, batteries. If you truly see the whole picture, then your head hurts. I think we had our last chance around 1970. I don't think we're going to pull out of this. But I could be very wrong about that. I was just listening to a discussion this morning (on a London based radio show, of course), where they believe we will have time to change our course.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-13-07 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. Okay, good
Incremental change to "business as usual" is better than no change to "business as usual."

I hate campaigns to change the world by changing a single lightbulb. (Changing a lightbulb is a fine thing, but don't sit back down and congratulate yourself on preventing global warming.)


As energy prices increase (as they almost inevitably will) people will have more incentive to find ways to save energy. This morning, I put on my souvenir baseball shirt from the 1982 Knoxville World's Fair



The logo referred to the theme "Energy Turns The World." A quarter century ago, the exhibits dealt with alternative energy and energy conservation.


Much of that stuff is just now penetrating society.


The waste associated with millions of automobiles is significant, but as the price of scrap metal (for example) has increased, recycling has improved. (Our local junk yard takes cars, lifts them up, and tips them this way and that to get all of the fluids out of them.)


We will all get less wasteful, as people feel the pinch to do so. Perhaps that will save us from the accompanying ecological threat. (I hope so.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-13-07 09:12 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. Right. I think the problem is my early awareness.
I've grown cynical and frustrated over the years of watching the crazies just burn up the environment. Here's a good example of the mentality I'm talking about. I went into my realtor's office last week. When I told her I sent an email, she ran over to the computer, printed it out, read it, and then tossed the paper in the garbage. YIKES!

I came from a family where we knew what was going on, and were taught to turn off lights, and be frugal. And that was the early sixties. My dad, Maynard, was so careful about using gas that he'd see how far he could coast when coming up to a stop light. But those were the days before the impatient hoards of cars. And my friends called it "Maynard mileage". He had the first Subaru back in 1970, that was a tiny four cylinder horizontally opposed. We really thought things were going to change. And they didn't.

I grew up in a neighborhood of architects and aeronautical phd's and NASA scientists, in a town (Palo Alto) ahead of all others. They even have their own power company. And I remember in the mid sixties, the electric car show in the mall down the street. They were using Hudsons!

It has been nearly forty years of watching in disbelief. So you're right, it's hard to watch the newly found enthusiasm. Especially since I've had the good fortune of buying and selling real estate, and living in different places. Only to see the horrible ecological disasters first hand.

Well, we're on the same page. I just need to try and return to something I once was, but have lost. I'm buying a piece of property right now. And I was on it today. And I can hear cars. It was a very quiet place only a decade ago. And I find it highly aggitating. In fact I'm sitting here right now with a monster head ache. I had it all day. I worry nonstop about this situation we're in. And almost no one else really cares. Only a few. I think I've learned a lot from your post. And from a few others like it here. I've become more extreme in my frustration. I can't save the planet. But I can be realistic about what we can and should do. It was a great time to be alive, and also a terrible time. And I'm also learning to try and take care of myself or I'll be useless for what lies ahead.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-12-07 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #4
12. did you see the part where it can go 40 miles on batteries alone?
My commute is 10 miles.

Plug it in at night.

No gasoline used at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-12-07 06:03 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Plugging it in IS using petroleum.
Not all power companies are hydro electric or nuclear. This is the issue I have with electric cars. However, under the condition that the power company is hydroelectric, it's a good thing. Nuclear is good in that it doesn't contribute to global warming, but it has it's own problems.

And also, the automobile is only a fraction of our total global warming contribution. And to go from gas to electric is only a fraction of a fraction. It's not going to be a big solution to our situation by any means.

I commuted more than ten miles for many years. Rain and snow. Now if Americans were willing to be patient enough to do that, we'd be making a far bigger difference than going from gas to plugin. In fact, it wasn't a sacrifice. It was a blessing. I loved it. But it took someone beating me over the head to get started.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
razzleberry Donating Member (877 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-12-07 07:17 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. The US uses very little petroleum to make electricity .n/t.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-12-07 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Petroleum in the general sense. That which causes global warming.
Coal, natural gas. And in that respect, it's nearly half of our energy production. The emphasis needs to be in areas other than the car. The electric car is refined, except for the battery. Storage and generation are the two big ones. It's going to be interesting to see how we can manufacture and do heavy transport without using petroleum.

I'm not optimistic. Things are going downhill quickly. On both ends. Number of users, and increases in evidence of environmental damage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NMDemDist2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-11-07 06:35 PM
Response to Original message
5. that's about perfect for me in it's timeframe
wonder what it would take to set it up with a wind generator charger?

I'd be fat city then....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Apr 29th 2024, 10:30 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC