Gm planning another electric car......

Discussion in 'Alternative Energy' started by mightybooboo, Jan 8, 2007.

  1. mightybooboo

    mightybooboo Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    11,301
    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2004
    Location:
    So Cal Mtns
    So,an electric car with an onboard charging system that only charges the battery.Unlike Prius where the ICE is part of the drivetrain.

    I should have thought of that,it makes perfect sense.Wait,I DID think of that,got reamed for it though.Go figure......
    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070107/bs_nm/autoshow_volt_dc

    Reuters
    GM goes electric with concept car

    By Jui Chakravorty Sun Jan 7, 6:06 PM ET

    DETROIT (Reuters) - Struggling auto giant General Motors Corp. (NYSE:GM - news) on Sunday revived its once-failed idea of a mass-market electric car, unveiling a new "concept" car called the Volt designed to use little or no gasoline.

    Introduced at the North American International Auto Show here, the Chevrolet Volt will draw power exclusively from a next-generation battery pack recharged by a small onboard engine -- if the technology is ready in two or three years.

    "We have a thoroughly studied concept, but further battery development will define the critical path to start of production," said Jon Lauckner, a GM vice president for product development.

    The Volt is designed to run for 40 miles on pure electric power, making it marketable for everyday family use.

    For the average American driver who drives 40 miles a day, or 15,000 miles a year, the Volt will require no fuel and lead to an annual savings of 500 gallons of gasoline, GM said.

    Unlike current gas-electric hybrids, which use a parallel system twinning battery power and a combustion engine, the Volt will be driven entirely by electric power.

    GM has been stung by criticism that it conspired to kill the EV1, an experimental electric vehicle program it launched in 1996 and killed by 2003. The documentary film "Who Killed the Electric Car?" released last year criticized GM for first developing but then abandoning electric vehicles.

    GM said the Volt will have advantages over the defunct EV1, including smaller batteries, faster recharging, more room for passengers, and a faster maximum highway speed.

    "For most drivers, the Volt will use little or no gasoline," GM chief engineer Nick Zielinski told reporters.

    The Volt's combustion engine is designed only as a supplement to keep its batteries charged, an innovation GM executives hope will help the automaker jump ahead of Toyota Motor Corp. (7203.T), which now dominates the hybrid market.

    Battery technology is key to the next generation of hybrid vehicles as automakers seek ways to lower the cost of batteries and increase their power and storage capacity.

    The Volt will be outfitted with new lithium-ion battery packs, which hold a charge longer than the nickel metal hydride batteries now used widely in automobiles.

    Lauckner said the Volt should be ready for production around the same time the lithium-ion batteries will be, which GM expects to be in two to three years.

    Last week, GM awarded lithium-ion battery development contracts for its Saturn Vue Green Line hybrid to Johnson Controls Inc. (NYSE:JCI - news) affiliate Johnson Controls-Saft Advanced Power Solutions and Cobasys, a venture of Chevron Corp. (NYSE:CVX - news) and Energy Conversion Devices Inc. (Nasdaq:ENER - news). Cobasys will work with privately held A123Systems to develop the technology.
    ------------------------------------------------------------

    BooBoo :gromit:<----"It'll never work"
     
  2. mightybooboo

    mightybooboo Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    11,301
    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2004
    Location:
    So Cal Mtns

  3. mightybooboo

    mightybooboo Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    11,301
    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2004
    Location:
    So Cal Mtns
    HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! post number 3 under the whole story link.....
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    3. Ahhh, awesome awesome GM!! so creative!! My mind was stuck in hybrids; of course it seems obvious now the the beans have been spilt, but OMG who ever thought of completely detatching the ICE from the wheels!!
    Genius!
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    BooBoo Did !!!!!!!

    BooBoo :gromit:<----"It'll never work"
     
  4. michiganfarmer

    michiganfarmer Max Supporter

    Messages:
    6,615
    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2005
    Location:
    Near Traverse City Michigan
    Id buy one if it was priced under $25,000
     
  5. mightybooboo

    mightybooboo Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    11,301
    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2004
    Location:
    So Cal Mtns
    Well,in 3 years maybe they will build it and we can see what it would cost.
    I would pay 35000 actually if I could get my hands on one,and had the means to spend it.

    One of the problems is they seem to always want to go after the highend consumer.

    I think there would be a lot of savings in fuel costs.

    BooBoo :gromit: <-----"It'll never Work"
     
  6. AngieM2

    AngieM2 Big Front Porch advocate

    Messages:
    44,854
    Joined:
    May 10, 2002
    Neat looking car, but how do you lower the windows? That configuration doesn't look user friendly, just concept neat.

    Angie
     
  7. MELOC

    MELOC Master Of My Domain

    Messages:
    7,220
    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Location:
    Pennsylvania

    for goodness sake booboo, they can't cheapen the trendy design and mass produce them for common folks. that would shock the world and mess up the system.
     
  8. Ken Scharabok

    Ken Scharabok In Remembrance

    Messages:
    6,844
    Joined:
    May 11, 2002
  9. mightybooboo

    mightybooboo Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    11,301
    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2004
    Location:
    So Cal Mtns
    Ya'll make such good points.

    Me,I drive a Jetta,like small cars myself.Then again,I live on twisty Mtn. roads,fits me to a tee,until it snows that is.

    Yeah,I dont get it either.They should do em like the Jetta.You can get a cheap base model right up to a pricey luxury sports car,all on the same platform and same body style.

    BooBoo :gromit: <----"It'll never Work"
     
  10. Bearfootfarm

    Bearfootfarm Hello, hello....is there anybody in there.....? Supporter

    Messages:
    52,864
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2006
    Location:
    Eastern North Carolina
    Wonder what kind of mileage it will get if I strap 2 big round bales of hay to the roof?
     
  11. mightybooboo

    mightybooboo Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    11,301
    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2004
    Location:
    So Cal Mtns
    About what I get in the Jetta,zero. :rolleyes:

    BooBoo :gromit:<---- "It'll never Work"
     
  12. Ken Scharabok

    Ken Scharabok In Remembrance

    Messages:
    6,844
    Joined:
    May 11, 2002
    Is there any spillover from battery technology R&D for a vehicle to those with an off-the-grid electrical system? That is, could the same batteries being developed for a vehicle be used to make a more efficient off-the-grid storage system?

    I can envision a system much like my electric hot water heater. I have a timer on it which only activates the elements for about two hours in the early AM. Provides all the hot water I normally need (excluding clothes washing). Could it be developed to where you use commercial 110v or 220v power for a short period to charge highly efficient batteries and then use them at low wattage for the rest of the day?
     
  13. mightybooboo

    mightybooboo Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    11,301
    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2004
    Location:
    So Cal Mtns
    I think we are only at the beginning of a huge change in battery tech.The number of companies involved from basic research to production is getting bigger all the time.

    I liked that nano tech applied to Li-Ion,made a very fast charging,long cycling,low heat battery.

    I dont like the gov. subsidizing research/production costs for battery tech that would be OWNED by the auto makers.We did that for GM with the EV-1 and the Ovonics Ni-MH batts.The tech wound up owned by GM,and sold to an oil company and shelved.Dont think we should pay to have the tech eliminated!
    Now subsidizing development with open patents to ownership,I WOULD support that.

    Costs-They are falling.I listened to a program last night by the guy involved with the batts,lead acid,on the EV-1.He said at the time EV-1 was killed,the mantra was battery costs arent coming down,ever.He says now a lithium Ion battery of the same capacity as a lead acid battery supplied by Panasonic for the EV-1 costs LESS,and quite a bit less,than the lead acids cost then
    .
    And that we can expect new tech batteries to continue to fall in price,while CURRENTLY having 4-6 TIMES the energy density of an equal weight lead acid batt.

    CO emissions in total,Hydrogen vrs. direct electric-If you take the emissions of CO for a direct electric vrs. a hydrogen fueled car,the electric puts out 4 Times LESS CO than making Hydrogen and running it thru a hydrogen car.In fact,pollution wise and energy wise,Hydrogen is just doing what we are doing now,polluting the same amts of CO as ICE cars.He says hydrogen under current tech,and as proposed currently,is no change at all from the status quo.Also that the info on this is being shielded from publication by the Calif. Hydrogen Highway folks,they will NOT release it,but that its a known in the scientific community.HUGE energy wasting.

    One example,they have a huge solar array that makes Hydrogen to power one car I believe it was 60 miles.IF they took it and charged an electric for 60 miles,the power left over would power an average house with all the normal electric amenities,including a 3 ton air conditioner 5 hours a day!Thats how wasteful hydrogen cars are.

    The hydrogen fallacy goes far deeper,I just barely touched one aspect.Most hydrogen is produced from fossil fuels like natgas for one,thats the biggie for the onboard vehicle systems.We gain nothing.Natgas is just the new horizon for the Oil companies.Big Oil remains firmly in charge with their current system intact,subject to the whims of whatever they wish to charge.Not good for us the consumer.

    Ask why Bush and Arnold LOVE it,and why money flows to it while electrics remain unheard of and unfinanced by the gov.Big Oil and their lackeys,no more and no less.

    The Hydrogen highway is just a smoke cloud for wasting YEARS on a switch away from ICE cars and the Oil companies.Even if we switch,there is zero gain for the environmental CO emissions or power consumption.No wonder our oil soaked politicians are all on the hydrogen bandwagon.

    BooBoo :gromit:<---"It'll never Work"
     
  14. Ken Scharabok

    Ken Scharabok In Remembrance

    Messages:
    6,844
    Joined:
    May 11, 2002
    In vehicles, why do batteries need to be in either the front or back ends? What if you used a 'stretched limo' design and put them in the middle. Use the top of that area for movie screens for those in the back or whatever. Battery sevice might be from lift up panels on both sides.
     
  15. mightybooboo

    mightybooboo Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    11,301
    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2004
    Location:
    So Cal Mtns
    Not sure.Ive seen designs where the batts were inside the frame rails and slide out from underneath from the back.They were distributed throughout the frame.Makes for a great balanced,low center of gravity vehicle.

    BooBoo :gromit:
     
  16. mightybooboo

    mightybooboo Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    11,301
    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2004
    Location:
    So Cal Mtns
    What would be the benefit? You have to have battery losses of energy in and out. Are you thinking of off peak charging to make the grid more efficient?

    BooBoo :gromit: <----"It'll never Work"