« DuPont Refrigerants Unveils First DP-1 Refrigerant Test Car in Germany | Main | Improving Combustion and Reducing Emissions with Methanol/Gasoline Blends »
GM’s Focus on Electricity; Expanded Hybrid Offerings and a 2-Mode Hybrid Plug-in VUE Under Development (corrected)
29 November 2006
Speaking at the Los Angeles Auto Show, GM Chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner outlined the automaker’s planned efforts to diversify the sources of energy that power vehicles in the years to come. First on the list for GM is optimizing the use of conventional gasoline and diesel through increasing engine efficiency and working on partial fuel substitutions such as alternatives, biofuels (including flex-fuel vehicles) and synthetics.
Second is the development of electrically-driven vehicles, “beyond what have already committed to with our fuel cell and hybrid programs.”
I’m announcing today that GM is significantly expanding and accelerating our commitment to the development of electrically driven vehicles...
First, electricity offers outstanding benefits…beginning with the opportunity to diversify fuel sources upstream of the vehicle. In other words, the electricity that is used to drive the vehicle can be made from the best local fuel sources—natural gas, coal, nuclear, wind, hydroelectric, and so on. So, before you even start your vehicle, you’re working toward energy diversity.
Second, electrically driven vehicles…when operated in an all-electric mode…are zero-emission vehicles. And when the electricity, itself, is made from a renewable source, the entire energy pathway is emissions free.
Third, electrically driven vehicles offer great performance…with extraordinary acceleration, instant torque, improved driving dynamics, and so on.
Now, some of you may be thinking, “Wait a minute—what about hybrids? What about fuel cells? Didn’t GM already commit to those technologies?” And the answer is, “Yes, we did.” They are both big parts of our broader commitment to electrically driven vehicles…so, rest assured, we remain committed to both.
—Rick Wagoner
As part of the expanded focus on providing a range of electrification options, of providing what Troy Clarke, the President of General Motors North America described in a subsequent speech as “offering [a range of] fuel savings fuel at varying price levels,” GM:
Officially introduced GM’s first hybrid car, the Saturn Aura Green Line, which is based on the GM Hybrid System used in the VUE Green Line—a belt-alternator starter hybrid technology. GM has already announced plans to expand the Hybrid system to the Malibu as well.
Introduced the new 2008 Saturn Vue which will also have an updated version of the VUE Green Line Hybrid powertrain;
Announced that in 2008, the VUE will become the first front-wheel application of the GM two-mode hybrid system being applied in the larger format Tahoe/Yukon SUVs. (GM has already announced that in 2008, the 2-mode hybrid system will expand to the Cadillac Escalade full-size SUV and the Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra crew cab full-size pickups.)
- Announced that in 2009, the 2-mode hybrid system in the VUE Green Line will offer an electric all-wheel-drive.
I’m pleased to announce today that GM has begun work on a Saturn VUE plug-in hybrid production vehicle. The VUE plug-in hybrid, GM’s first, will use an advanced battery, like Lithium-Ion.
...production timing will depend on battery technology development. But based on our work with EV1 and our different hybrid-electric vehicles, we at GM already have a lot of experience developing and integrating advanced battery technology into our vehicles…and we’re working today with a number of battery companies to develop the technology necessary to build a plug-in hybrid.
The technological hurdles are real…but I can tell you that this is a top priority program for GM, given the huge potential it offers for fuel-economy improvement.
—Rick Wagoner
GM expects that the Saturn Vue Green Line plug-in hybrid will offer electric-only propulsion for more than 10 miles. At higher speeds or when conditions demand it, such as brisk acceleration, a combination of engine and electric power or engine power only will propel the vehicle.
In addition to plug-in capabilities and the modified 2-mode hybrid system, the Saturn Vue Green Line hybrid SUV’s powertrain will feature lithium-ion battery technology, two interior permanent magnet motors and GM’s 3.6L V-6 gasoline engine with direct injection.
When ready for production, the li-ion energy storage system will be replenished when the battery charge is depleted to a specified level by utilizing the 2-mode hybrid system’s electric motors and regenerative braking systems. When the vehicle is parked, the battery can be recharged using a common household exterior 110-volt plug-in outlet.
The 2-mode hybrid system will be altered for use with plug-in technology. It maintains two driving modes—one for city driving, the other for highway driving—and four fixed mechanical gears to maximize efficiency while maintaining performance. In addition, special controls will be utilized to enable higher speeds during electric-only propulsion and maintain electric-only propulsion for longer periods of time.
GM rates the VUE Green Line hybrid as delivering a 20% fuel economy improvement over the base model. The company said that it expects the front wheel drive, two-mode hybrid VUE to improve overall fuel economy by 45% over today’s base VUE. Saturn chief Jill Lajdziak during her announcement of the plug-in work that she expects the plug-in powertrain to double the fuel efficiency of any SUV on the road.
I should point out that GM’s commitment to improving fuel economy, reducing vehicle emissions, and developing electrically driven vehicles is not a short-term strategy. We’re in this game for the long term.
—Rick Wagoner
GM said that it will provide additional announcements on the development of electrically driven vehicles during the coming auto show season, including the North American International Auto Show in Detroit.
November 29, 2006 in Hybrids, Plug-ins | Permalink | Comments (68) | TrackBack (0)
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/22062/6983051
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference GM’s Focus on Electricity; Expanded Hybrid Offerings and a 2-Mode Hybrid Plug-in VUE Under Development (corrected):
Comments
Hopefully this puts pressure on Toyota to release a PHEV. 10 mile range is underwhelming, but its a good first step.
Posted by: craig | Nov 29, 2006 1:41:40 PM
Finally! But to be honest I do not believe them...plug-in hibrid in 2009...I doubt!
Posted by: Skrivo | Nov 29, 2006 1:50:28 PM
10 mile range is underwhelming, but its a good first step.
It is underwhelming -- but 20-25 miles would be pretty significant. It would cover many short errands for most urban and suburban dwellers, and it would cover the commute to (or from) work one-way for many as well. It's conceivable that employers will offer plug-in opportunities for elec owners, which means if they can get to work on elec, they can get home on elec.
Posted by: stomv | Nov 29, 2006 2:02:25 PM
A 10 mile range plug-in is hardly worth the effort and makes zero sense. Bob Lutz, No. 2 man at GM, last week mentioned 25 to 30 mile range for plug-in, so apparently Rick and Bob don't lunch together very often. Lutz has described the fuel cell car as having evolved into an electric car (fuel cell cars are ALWAYS electric cars, since electricity is the only thing a fuel cell can produce), and here is Rick talking about fuel cells again and acting like the technology is distinct, for some reason. Rick is acting as though Altair NanoSafe li ion batteries don't even exist, so I have no idea what kind of li ion battery development he's talking about.
What I got from Rick was more mush, refusing to reject any technology. Apparently, everything is being developed at GM. I note that Toyota has said they do NOT plan on building a hybrid plug-in. For a company that grew only because of California, they are telling Californians to jump in a lake. Will be interesting to see the response of environmentalists, who look to Toyota as some sort of hero company. I predict they wil somehow manage to blame GM for Toyota's refusal, like they did in that lying film "Who Killed the Electric Car?" which ignored electric car cancellations by Honda, Toyota and Nissan (all after months, not years) and somehow concluded that only what GM did had an effect on the technology.
Posted by: kent beuchert | Nov 29, 2006 2:13:09 PM
As for that 10 mile minimum all-electric range: underpromise and overdeliver. Why would they stick their necks out too far when they are the first to officially announce they have a PHEV in development at all? It's consistent with GM's corporate philosophy that the first application should be in an SUV rather than a passenger car. As the Aura with BAS system shows, there is a trickle-down strategy in place for solutions that deliver an adequate cost/benefit ratio.
With 85000 people working at GM Powertrain world-wide, it's not surprising that the corporation is pursuing multiple strategies all at once to ensure they don't miss out on a possible quantum leap in component technology that turns someone's idea into a viable mass-market proposition. Safe Li-ion batteries with long life at deep discharge plus high power ratings would be an example. But GM is wisely not betting the farm on any single powertrain strategy before the market shakes out.
FCVs and BEVs are both all-electric (as are hybrids of the two), but the technologies incl. refuelling are so different that from an carmaker's perspective, they are two separate categories, much more so even than gasoline vs. diesel engines. Also, remember that Rick Wagoner is a finance weenie, not an engineer.
Posted by: Rafael Seidl | Nov 29, 2006 2:30:47 PM
Altair's NanoSafe don't exist. They are merely press statements that have never been put to independent tests.
Promising, but the lack of announcing partnerships with reputable companies makes me think this is a pump-and-dump stock scam.
Posted by: mike z | Nov 29, 2006 2:52:10 PM
10 miles is the ideal range.
At 10 miles / day, if you drive for 300 days / year, it comes to 3,000 miles / year and this may be 20 - 25 % of your driving.
After all, cost is primary factor.
Whats not needed is the V6 engine. After all, motors with V4 engine gives V6 power. Honda suffered with V6 engine in their Accord-Hybrid.
Hope competition from Toyota push GM into V4.
Better late than never. Good work GM.
Now they have realised that they cannot run the company with gas-guzzlers alone.
1st, they pushed 6-speed tranny on 6-8 models.
2nd, they are selling Flex-fuel vehicles.
3rd, hybrids.
Posted by: Max Reid | Nov 29, 2006 2:58:19 PM
Ok, so WHEN is the two mode hybrid system going to be actually available?
Posted by: hampden wireless | Nov 29, 2006 3:03:55 PM
10 miles is a good start. Perhaps they could offer a 20 mile "extended" range at some dollar cost + boot (trunk?) space cost.
They they could see what people would pay for. 10 miles also would cause people to ask for recharging stations in work which could be interesting.
Here you would have people recharging at peak ( or at least non-off peak) times. Perhaps you could work out a smart charger that would avoid known peak times or could be shut off for several hours / day ( for a reduction in cost ).
10 miles is definitely interesting - it causes more system optimisation to be done than a 100 mile range would off the bat.
If we find how to work with 10 mile range we could end up with a more economical ( and lighter ) car in the long run.
Posted by: mahonj | Nov 29, 2006 3:04:59 PM
10 miles would be awesome compared to zero today. Funny to hear the geekheads bash everything.
10 miles would get millions to and from work, if they can even double suv milage like they are talking about that would be a quantum leap forward. I just hope cobasys stays involved.
Posted by: Richard | Nov 29, 2006 3:05:02 PM
I think there is some debate as to wether or not GM will still be in business in 2009!
Posted by: andrichrose | Nov 29, 2006 3:08:08 PM
Whether 10 miles, 20, 30 is ideal is ultimately going to be decided by the customer.
Lets say a hybrid vehicle costs 20K and with 10 mile range there is an extra 4K, so
for 20 miles - 8K extra
for 30 miles - 12K extra.
No one will be willing to foot 8-12 K. So an average guy will go for 10 mile range. Meanwhile the smart guy who know about optimum returns will also go for 10 miles .
Posted by: Max Reid | Nov 29, 2006 3:18:40 PM
Hello andrichrose
If GM goes down, Michigan's economy will also go down and will hit the US economy very hard.
Imagine the GM pensioners going down and settling in Mexico since healthcare, food and energy are cheaper there.
It will hit the real estate market as well.
So pray God for GM to live.
Ofcourse their future lives in alternate fuel vehicles.
Posted by: Max Reid | Nov 29, 2006 3:45:36 PM
10 miles covers 90% of my trips ... and even if I have to go 20 at least the first 10 don't need gas. Not to mention that after the first 10 it's still a hybrid.
Posted by: Neil | Nov 29, 2006 3:48:14 PM
Let's give GM some credit for at least announcing hybrids. But I've said it before and I''ll say it again: can GM deliver? They'll have to expect stiff competition from Toyota with their Prius and other hybrid choices, Honda, Nissan (whose hybrids are on the way), and even Ford who has the most fuel-efficient SUV on the market (the Escape FWD Hybrid).
We shall see what we shall see.
Posted by: Mark R. W. Jr. | Nov 29, 2006 4:24:25 PM
Give us a Vue with 4 cylinders and 20 electric miles, instead of 6 cylinders and 10 electric miles. This is a no-brainer.
Posted by: JC | Nov 29, 2006 4:31:30 PM
In Hybrids, GM is slow, but in Flex-fuel they have moved quickly. After all there are 8 million FFV's in the World and thats 1 % of World vehicle population.
Hope they move fast on hybrids also in the future.
Posted by: Max Reid | Nov 29, 2006 4:32:56 PM
I'm thrilled to see this announcement.
I've never been a GM fan, to say the least. But I know that the healthier and more competitive US car companies are, the more they'll push the imports to develop greener cars sooner. Plus, keeping those jobs in the US is a huge bonus.
I was sure that when GM announced this it would be very bad news, like a PHEV Tahoe (shudder). So I'm glad I was wrong on that major detail.
I suspect that we'll see a longer battery-only range than promised. A lot could happen between now and when this vehicle ships, including GM hearing from a lot of would-be customers saying the range should be at least 20 miles.
The real fun will be watching the other companies react to this news in the next 6 to 12 months. I bet we'll see some interesting announcements--will the new 2009 hybrid model from Honda suddenly morph into a PHEV? will someone commit to the US EV model and try to leapfrog GM?--as the companies try to one-up each other and be "greener than thou."
Posted by: Lou Grinzo | Nov 29, 2006 4:43:09 PM
I have another hunch as to why they are targeting the 10 mile range. They made it clear that their charging system would work with a standard 110 volt household current. If you double and triple that range, the charging time goes up proportionately. They probably feel that people aren't going to want to keep them plugged in for 8 hours straight, more like a couple hours. Keeping it simple.
Using the Tesla as a basis for comparison, they only quote their quick charging times when using their special charging device which I believe runs off of 220 volts.
Posted by: Angelo | Nov 29, 2006 4:48:48 PM
10 miles on a charge is a great start, and would work really well for my daily commute. And as Lou Grinzo mentioned, this should give GM's competition a reason to accelerate electric autos as well as other alternative fuel vehicles.
This is exciting, but I hope it's not too little too late for all of us.
Posted by: TheGiant | Nov 29, 2006 5:48:46 PM
It's a step. GM have the engineering expertise: they've built the EV-1 (a plugin) and the PNGV Precept (a hybrid). We could nitpick and say: the range should be 30 miles, it should be in the Astra, etc etc, and all of it would be true. But it's still welcome news, and a long overdue first step.
Posted by: dt | Nov 29, 2006 6:52:06 PM
Enthusiastic kudos to Rick Waggoner and Company. This will challenge the competition, stimulate GM divisions, and gives birth to a new growth in Detroit. All those who understand the 10 mile initial goal is of course under promising, so to deliver improvement at launch.
Just the fact that GM, a nearly exclusive ICE business, has today made it clear they are in the alternative energy transportation business is reason to celebrate.
And just to make it more interesting, redirecting the U.S. market away from non-renewable oil, changes the virtual balance of power in middle-eastern energy States. Energy independence is a step toward global independence. Good work GM!
Posted by: gr | Nov 29, 2006 7:23:28 PM
"Meanwhile the smart guy who know about optimum returns will also go for 10 miles"
are you implying the smart guy doesn't consider external costs (emissions, natl. security)?
Posted by: FYI co2 | Nov 29, 2006 7:25:13 PM
Considering that 1 out of every 6 gallons of fuel used is burned in a stationary car or truck then even an idle-stop hybrid is a big improvement. GM and other companies are waiting to see what battery technology is most cost effective considering there maybe a demand for 10 million battery packs/yr. Foamed lead could still prove a better buy than lithium.
Posted by: tom deplume | Nov 29, 2006 7:35:30 PM
This is all very amusing considering how much money & effort GM put into fighting California's Zero Emission Vehicle mandate.
http://www.e2.org/ext/document.jsp?docId=1043
Posted by: Dursun | Nov 29, 2006 7:54:12 PM
“Announced that in 2009, the 2-mode hybrid system in the VUE Green Line will be configurable as a PHEV”
Wow! Well, we now have the largest auto manufacturer in the world committing to a PHEV! Suddenly it’s a new ball game (for GM as well as PHEV supporters!). Some, on this site have stated that GM could turn their situation around (they were nowhere in the hybrid world) by leapfrogging everyone and coming out with a PHEV.
Now, ten years after GM shipped the first EV1, they will be showing their first flex-fuel (I assume) PHEV prototype at the Detroit auto show.
Way to go GM!
Posted by: George K | Nov 29, 2006 8:07:14 PM
Rafael Seidl,
10 mi electric range may give the regenerative braking system more space to place the recovered energy. Currently, hybrids sometimes waste some of their electricity(from regen braking), due to full, or near full batteries (battery life considerations). This may be less likely with larger storage capacities. This may boost city mpg a bit, as well as highway mpg with the 2-mode when primarily running on gas+electric.
__On the business front, 10 mi electric range may hide some other aspects. Competitors may say: Is GM that conservative? or Are they hiding something? It also gets the other companies to try to beat this projected product. There in lies the trap, since this seemingly low offering may be positioned at a sweet spot of low risk, but moderate to high reward. If others offer more, they may have to risk more capital, brains, time, and importantly, BRAND REPUTATION. Of course, technology is rapidly changing, and may offer new possibilites affordably.
__The BAS is another example. Currently, it is mostly for engine start stop function, w/some assist capability. If it is spread throughout the vehicle lineup, it may yield 10% city mpg improvments. Bump the motors up, add better/more batteries, and it may rival Honda's current IMA system. The first can be done on the cheap, while the second may be done via 2 mode. The 10 mile all electric range+Plugin may be a distraction. This may be a sucker punch GM is hiding. A large company, with so many talented minds, with their nice ideas shelved for so long, may finally be using the high cards it had for a while, but neglected.
Max Reid,
Bingo, affordability for the masses. The figures you gave may be off, but the essence is right on. Later on, they can add BAS, 2-mode, and plugin systems as options on most models. If you can afford 10 miles worth of batteries, then take that option. If you can afford more and it makes economic sense, buy the 20 or 30 mile package.
Angelo,
The owner may still charge it overnight, on a timer to save by using late night/early morning rates, or to prevent blackouts in the case of hottest summer nights with ACs howling to keep residents cool(power usage sometimes has a peak at 8-12 PM-noticed it last few summers in NYC).
__I do agree a quick recharge with a 10 mi range battery (up to 18kWh) would be easier and quicker vs a larger system. Such large batteries will need commercial/industrial level amp/volt connections to charge in an hour, which is beyond what a residential feed can do overnight.
___There are still many questions/issues. For example, is the 10 mile range the result from gently accelerating from a stop to 30 mph, and then retaining a steady cruise, or is it EPA City MPG test loop driving?
__Battery dimensions and capacities would vary from model to model due to vehicle properties (mass, drivetrain, etc) as GM offers more PHEVs. A 10 mile battery for a Cobalt would be smaller, and less capable, than one for the Vue. This may lead to interesting choices for GM, and other automakers. Do they standardise the battery models to cut down on cost, and stretch scale of economy as far as it can go, or do they offer individually tailored ones to each specific vehicle. The first may lead to 10 mile ranges for the Vue, but ~15 for a Cobalt PHEV.
Tom Deplume,
Graphite foam acid batteries you are referring to may offer cheap, reliable electrical storage units, that are lighter vs conventional lead acid models. OTOH, it may be years until they get it to market, if ever.
Posted by: allen_Z | Nov 29, 2006 8:18:54 PM
"This is all very amusing considering how much money & effort GM put into fighting California's Zero Emission Vehicle mandate."
No one likes to be told what to do..even if it is the right thing.
Posted by: SJC | Nov 29, 2006 9:14:21 PM
The US Gov't will never let any of the remaining US cars companies go under! It's great news to hear GM plans a PHEV car sooner than later. So who cares if GM's EV1 didn't make it in the market place? At least there are now a few major car companies working on this important transportation technology.
Posted by: JD | Nov 29, 2006 9:37:32 PM
10 miles is about all your gona get for a caror suv that costs low enough to MASS produce. 20 miles would litteraly require double the batteries and likely an increase in cost of 10k. They MIGHT have it as an upscale option tho if they think it will sell.
Posted by: wintermane | Nov 29, 2006 10:41:37 PM
By late 2009, if batteries are still at the point that the price difference between a 10 mile battery range and a 20 mile range is an issue for most buyers, then PHEVs will be in trouble. Because that will also be about the difference between a straight HEV and a 10-mile PHEV.
I expect, though, that the delta will be well under $1000. Battery developments seem to be coming pretty fast.
Posted by: Silverthorn | Nov 29, 2006 11:18:24 PM
10 mile range is too small. Not because the range is too small, but because the battery would be discharged too quickly... 10 miles for an suv might be just 5kWh (500 watt hours per mile * 10 miles)
If the motor is just 50 kwatts, then running it top speed would require too much power. too many Cs will wear the battery out very quickly. A larger capacity allows you to draw power off less quickly / unit of storage capacity, therefore the battery can last longer.
Matt
Posted by: Matt | Nov 30, 2006 1:26:08 AM
Is this just spin to counter the negative publicity from the doco "Who Killed The Electric Car"? I hope not.
I have to say Rick Wagoner at least sounds like he knows what he's talking about, it's hard not to be enthusiastic about this announcement.
kent beuchert; Last I heard Toyota WERE talking about PHEV's positively.
Posted by: Shaun Williams | Nov 30, 2006 1:32:41 AM
The fundamental problem with electric and fuel cell is the cost in CO2 terms of making the electricty or the hydrogen. Can only ever make sense if there is NO longer any natural gas or coal burnt in power generation. If there is, then the extra elec needed can only come from burning more gas or more coal. As CO2 becomes more critical, elec and H2 cars will only be possible in places with surplus renewable - certainly they will never make any sense in Europe or US. Absolutely crazy. Its like in a famine, instead of eating rice, making it into breakfast cereal then eating it.
So, run the vehicles on natural gas instead. To see what GM are doing in Germany, click on this or paste into browser
http://www.ngva.co.uk/index.php?fuseaction=site.viewFile&id=5342
Posted by: John Baldwin | Nov 30, 2006 3:06:04 AM
Rafael Seidl: Altair Nano batteries are alive and well. They are being installed in Phoenix Motor's 130 Mile SUV and going on sale next year (2007). see www.phoenixmotors.com Also see http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4201003.html for a cool movie by popularmechanics
Go through their website and presentations before you judge them.
Posted by: Ruan Jurgens | Nov 30, 2006 4:04:18 AM
Rafael Seidl: Sorry the link was wrong its www.phoenixmotorcars.com
Posted by: Ruan Jurgens | Nov 30, 2006 4:09:42 AM
John: You must realize that NG cars are only carbon neutral if the NG comes from Bio Sources. If you are running on fossil NG then you are just pumping more CO2 into the air. In any event the NG supply is finite and, in the case of North America, declining. For Europe the NG supply is largely controlled by Russia that is perfectly willing to turn of the tap (as to the Ukraine) when it suits their purposes.
H2 and electricity can come from a host of clean sources. Even if you are using coal to generate the energy you at least have the opportunity to sequester the CO2.
Posted by: Neil | Nov 30, 2006 6:35:17 AM
Nope. They still don't make a car I'd want to drive. Well, in the US at least.
If GM wants my business, which they might not since I'm not an "average" person, they'll make a compact car that gets over 40mpg.
Posted by: Icelander | Nov 30, 2006 6:54:27 AM
I oppose NG vehicles, but not due to CO2.
NG will have the same Hubbert peak as crude oil and I don't want to see that peak anytime soon.
How are we supposed to heat our homes if NG is burned up in our cars, hastening NG production declines?
NG vehicles in 10-20 years would/will face the same criticism cars get today of using a declining, imported, fossil fuel. An electric vehicle is at least feasable. Electric heating, at least here in MN, is not feasable on a widespread scale.
Posted by: darwin | Nov 30, 2006 7:50:00 AM
My point was that if you run vehicles on electricity or on hydrogen fuel cells you need to burn MORE natural gas or MORE coal to make that electricity than you would if you ran the vehicle on natural gas.
So, Darwin, if you are worried about Hubbert peak for natural gas, do not use this precious fuel to make electricity or hydrogen.
Neil - as long as any elec generation is from coal or gas, if you need to make any more it has to come from coal or gas as the renewable and nuclear is already being fully used. UK analysis concluded that there is unlikely to be a surplus of renewable/nuclear before 2060......if this is true, running electric or H2 fuel cells before that date causes an increase in CO2 compared to running vehicles direct on natural gas.
Obviously Bio-gas is truly green and sustainable and great to clean up a cities CO2 performance (eg Lille in France all buses run on bio-gas), but its not the whole answer.
Posted by: John Baldwin | Nov 30, 2006 8:13:28 AM
UK analysis concluded that there is unlikely to be a surplus of renewable/nuclear before 2060
Exactly what limits the number of nuclear plants that could be built in the next fifty years? Any bottlenecks for manufacturing the capital equipment could be overcome in much less time than that. If your statement is true, it's because the arbitrary number that will be built will be built to satisfy the demand, hence no 'surplus'.
Posted by: Paul Dietz | Nov 30, 2006 8:35:27 AM
Darwin: have you thought about installing an in-ground heat pump? Using electricity and the heat pump you can get up to 400% efficiency (and you can use if for AC in the summer too) http://www.solaceenergy.com/Geo.htm
John: Your point is made. I'm just not sure why you would want to build another set of infrastructure for yet another limited resource. North America is already importing NG. While I'm not crazy about coal, at least you can sequester the CO2 from a power plant, you can't sequester from a tail pipe.
Posted by: Neil | Nov 30, 2006 9:29:15 AM
Is this just spin to counter the negative publicity from the doco "Who Killed The Electric Car"?
Is the Pope German?
Posted by: Dursun | Nov 30, 2006 9:33:10 AM
''My point was that if you run vehicles on electricity or on hydrogen fuel cells you need to burn MORE natural gas or MORE coal to make that electricity than you would if you ran the vehicle on natural gas.''
Not true. Electic motors and power stations are way more effient than ICE's.
Posted by: James | Nov 30, 2006 10:09:01 AM
I do plan on adding a geothermal system to my home when I can afford it. However, that only covers about half your heating needs during the coldest month. You still need to burn something. It would make AC much easier in the summer, and reduce your electric draw there (allowing your car to use it instead).
We need to set up massive wind and solar farms regardless of whether there is a need for the electricity. If the energy is there, society will find a way to use it (such as not building more NG and coal plants and using the electricty for transport).
Once you start producing the infrastructure and the vehicles for NG, related industries will grow and NG use will skyrocket. The momentum is hard to curb. This leaves leaves us in the same situation down the road that this website is devoted to fixing now with gasoline. That is...fighting entrenched business interests to change course for the good of energy/national security. Replacing our upcoming gas/car problem with a slighter later NG/car/AND home heating problem. So it delays and makes worse the need to have solid renewable energy production and use.
Natural gas should only be used for heating homes!!!
Posted by: darwin | Nov 30, 2006 10:32:27 AM
It's a good announcement, lets see what they deliver.
Remember folks, the current Saturn Vue alternator engine stop model was originally announced as a full parallel hybrid model (like the Prius), but when the time came GM management didn't want to spend the money on it.
The fact that they're still talking about a V-6 in a hybrid seems to indicate GM management still doesn't get the technology or the market for it.
Posted by: Scott | Nov 30, 2006 10:47:34 AM
Paul says:
Exactly what limits the number of nuclear plants that could be built in the next fifty years? Any bottlenecks for manufacturing the capital equipment could be overcome in much less time than that. If your statement is true, it's because the arbitrary number that will be built will be built to satisfy the demand, hence no 'surplus'.
I can agree that lots of nuke power is theoretically possible....running cars on elec or H2 need this to happen, thats clear. I just don't see it in a small country like UK.
Posted by: John Baldwin | Nov 30, 2006 10:57:11 AM
I dont quite understand this GM where capable of manufacturing an all electric car in 1993 that was able to do 60 to 90 miles on lead acid batteries , the now famous EV1, and now we are talking about 10miles using more advanced tech . OK I realise that its a hybrid , but is this a wind up!
Posted by: andrichrose | Nov 30, 2006 11:01:39 AM
According to Investor Business Daily, the projected Vue PHEV gets 70 MPG. Not bad, if they can deliver. Hybrid sales are also expected to more than triple by 2011.
Posted by: allen_Z | Nov 30, 2006 11:29:39 AM
I just don't see it in a small country like UK.
So you're claiming the bottleneck is lack of land fo r the plants? That's manifestly ridiculous, even in the UK.
Posted by: Paul Dietz | Nov 30, 2006 11:48:56 AM
I think a 10 mile range actually is quite sufficient. Ok, I travel about 25 miles to and from work every day, so that's about 40% of my distance. What 10 miles really does for you is make those short inefficient trips to go shopping, or to the local bar/club, visit friends, etc the most efficient part of your driving cycle. Weekends kill my Prius' MPG when short trips are the norm. A ten mile range would have a dramatic overall effect on efficiency by making the warm up time period for a hybrid less of a MPG killer.
Cosmo
Posted by: Cosmo | Nov 30, 2006 11:57:20 AM
Nuclear zealots...
Posted by: pizmo | Nov 30, 2006 12:36:52 PM
_Wind/wave/tidal/current/biomass energy would contribute to satisfying electricity demand. Efficiency gains at current power plants would assist too. Scotland has high-quality wind and wave potential. Ireland’s coastal and offshore regions offer similar possibilities. There are some tranquil days, but the roiling North Atlantic usually provides for moderate, to high winds and waves.
_Over on our side of the pond, offshore systems would have to contend with hurricanes, and nasty Nor'easters. Europeans do face extratropical cyclones, some with 60-100mph winds. Of course, all face NIMBY. Placing them well offshore (11-12nm) or hiding them just below the horizon/surface (in the case of wave/tidal/current w/safety buoys) would face less local opposition.
_Integration into a combines system may afford synergies:
a) Storm surge protection, w/gates to account for tides/current/wildlife/shipping/fishing.
b) Tidal/current/wave/wind energy systems electrically link up to/built into the barrier.
This would work best in shallow water, though pairing anchored low RPM turbines, exploiting currents, with wind turbines in deeper water, may work.
_To cut the need for new transmission lines, off peak should the time to recharge. Avoid/deter peak recharging. Via mobile/satillite/wi-fi/etc, owners would know when it is most opportune/affordable, to juice up their batteries.
_They are installing a pilot tidal current system, in the East River, here in NYC. If all goes well, environmentally, technically, and economically, they will expand it.
http://www.verdantpower.com/initiatives/currentinit.html
Posted by: allen_Z | Nov 30, 2006 3:18:00 PM
General Motors is hard to believe,
Their past policies have always been meant to deceive,
Profit we know is their primary goal,
Management must make the big bucks you know,
Important decisions are made at the top,
They are the ones who decide when to stop
Pushing ahead their gas guzzler's and junk,
We're so used to this practice all else is bunk,
So just put your money where your mouth is right now,
And give us an plug-in to make us real proud.
adrianakau@aol.com
Posted by: Adrian Akau | Nov 30, 2006 6:36:19 PM
''The fact that they're still talking about a V-6 in a hybrid seems to indicate GM management still doesn't get the technology or the market for it.''
Does that also mean that Lexus doesn't get it?
Posted by: James | Dec 1, 2006 1:31:14 AM
Does that also mean that Lexus doesn't get it?
Lexus is an independent company?
Posted by: pizmo | Dec 1, 2006 6:30:23 AM
Accord V6 hybrid is not selling well. Highlander V6 hybrid is selling better. Maybe people would by a V6 hybrid truck or SUV but would rather have a 4 cylinder hybrid in a sedan, like the Camry hybrid.
Posted by: SJC | Dec 1, 2006 7:34:29 AM
No Lexus is part of Toyota...
BTW "Profit we know is their primary goal" is true for most companies. Please consult the Toyota web site for a look at all the lovely SUV's they sell.
Posted by: Tim Russell | Dec 1, 2006 7:34:52 AM
The Toyota Highlander Hybrid also sports a V-6. It's especially maddening because Toyota does make a non-hybrid Highlander with a 4 cylinder engine.
The V-6 and low EV range say to me the battery and motors will not be sized for acceleration or hill climbing, only level cruising. The Prius conversions operate this way. So it's not a case of 10+ miles in pure EV mode after which the ICE fires up. Instead the ICE fires up soon after you leave the driveway, but for the first 20 or so miles it shuts down every time you let off the accelerator. Hopefully it will even shut down on the highway (unlike the Prius conversions). Simulations show this approach delivers similar MPG gains at much lower cost. But it misses out on what I feel are key PHEV advantages -- the complete elimination of cold starts on many days and the ability to go for months without visiting a gas station. I say let's build lots of PHEVs using various approaches and let the market decide.
Posted by: doggydogworld | Dec 1, 2006 8:48:35 AM
I applaud GM for dabbling in as many possible future drive train options as they can: Clean diesel, hybrids, plug in hybrids, electric, hydrogen, ethanol, and engine management systems.
I'll be honest- I've owned nothing but Toyotas all my life. They all have gotten around 25-28 MPG, and had 4 cylinder engines. Decent economy, decent ride, decent interior, and decent styling. Nothing to brag about. They just run and run and run, for 200k+ miles or more.
That said, I rented a Pontiac Grand Prix a few months back on a trip. This was their "econo" model of this make and I wasn't expecting to be impressed. But seriously- the thing got over 30MPG even though it had a large V6 engine. The car was FAST, responsive, and handled very well. It was even very comfortable to sit in, had lots of neat gadgets like an automatic volume control mechanism that accounted for engine noise, and so forth.
I think what I am seeing with many GM products is something Japanese cars used to offer- which is unexpected value and features for the money. I'm not about to say that I fully trust a GM product to run for 250k, but still- the car I drove was way nicer than my mom's Camry or my truck. For the cost, it was a nice car. The fact that it was a basic car that got great gas mileage is promising. Many people claim that we need to be getting 50+ MPG in our vehicles. I would be willing to bet that if the avg American bought an avg car that got 30MPG, that in itself would solve MANY current fuel related problems for a signifiant enough amount of time for these alternative systems to mature.
Posted by: jettison | Dec 1, 2006 9:56:08 AM
Applause for Adrian's first ever Green Car Congress poem - it is the arts AND sciences together that will slay the dragons.
Posted by: gr | Dec 1, 2006 10:40:13 AM
Please consult the Toyota web site for a look at all the lovely SUV's they sell.
What's your point?
Posted by: pizmo | Dec 1, 2006 6:49:21 PM
"The Grand Prix is a mediocre sedan. Its ride, level of refinement, and rear-seat comfort isn't competitive. The 3.8-liter, 200-hp V6 in our test car was responsive but rough and noisy."
http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/ConsumerReportsSnapshot.aspx?year=2007&make=Pontiac&model=Grand%20Prix
MPG (combined) 24
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/2001cartablef.jsp?id=23277
Posted by: Reality Check | Dec 1, 2006 8:19:05 PM
Darwin,
You can use solar thermal and heat pumps for home and building heat then gasify biomass for SNG and fertilizer. We do not need LNG tankers, with the great expense and increased danger, only to be even more dependant on foreign source of energy. If we take a systems view of energy, we can get 100 billion therms out of 1 billion tons of agricultural biomass. This is enough to run all the cars, after we heat our homes and buildings with solar thermal.
Posted by: SJC | Dec 2, 2006 7:56:28 AM
mike z -
Nope Alair Nano is very real:
http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/12/phoenix_install.html
allen z -
Partially correct. FireFly graphite foam lead acid battery will go into production next year, but sounds like they already have US military as big customer, so maybe these batteries won't be available to general public for a few years. Good Wall Street Journal article you can get to from FireFly web site at:
http://www.fireflyenergy.com/main/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=25&Itemid=93
Wouldn't you be courting them big time for three years out if you were GM. Rafael is correct Rick Wagoner is a finance weenie.
Rafael Seidl -
I don't see how FCVs and BEVs are very different. Further, Series HEVs are clearly the future for HEVs. Altair, Valance, A123 for Li Ion batteries...FireFly, Power Technology, and maybe AltraVerda for improved Lead Acid...All promise increased Energy Density, increased Power Density, and increased Cycle Life at reduced cost in the near future. Production is scaling up now for Li Ion companies mentioned and for FireFly Lead Acid.
The INCREASED POWER DENSITY will allow for:
(a) Improved regenerative braking.
(b) Improved acceleration and full speed freeway driving in all-electric mode.
(c) Rapid recharging.
This will make SERIES HEVs with simpler, reduced cost, electric drive systems viable. The similarities and synergies between FCVs, BEVs, HEVs, and PHEVs will increase. HEVs will disappear in favor of PHEVs. Why would you purchase an HEV when you can go for a 10 mile all-electric range PHEV at slight increase in price and get some mileage using $1 per gal equivalent electricity.
I'm not going to pray for GM's survival. They need to do more. I'm praying for EEStor's ultracapacitor to pan out. I see no sign of fraud so far. They're quietly and quickly going to market. Those pensioners better get off the coach...sorry, but that's the reality from my view point.
John Baldwin -
Good point but dated. When you use central power generation for electricity generation you have much greater opportunity to sequester CO2. Large SOFC plants offer higher generation efficiencies than you mention. Also, we are on the cusp of a major shift to alternative energy sources right now. Wind has been the fastest growing source of energy for several years. It continues to drop in price and accelerate in growth. Solar will blow this away within the next 5 to 10 years. It looks like all three major forms of solar
have reached the peak power cost threshold:
(a) photovoltaic panels (PV)
(b) concentrated solar thermal (CS)
(c) concentrated photovoltaic (CPV)
Certainly this is true for the first two:
http://www.solarbuzz.com/News/NewsNACO437.htm
http://www.stirlingenergy.com/breaking_news.htm
http://pesn.com/2005/08/11/9600147_Edison_Stirling_largest_solar/
If we start mass marketing of BEVs and PHEVs tomorrow, then it will take 20 years or more to put a serious dent in the numbers of vehicles used in the US. If we have even more wind generation and are well into solar ramp up at that time then you will see significant reduction in CO2 output. Incentives could help this along, but it is economically unavoidable at this point. The Prius was selling before oil increased in price. How will they sell if Toyota can get close to 100 mpg AND reduce the drive line cost by 50%? That is their claim for 2010, in three years. GM could leapfrog with a good Series PHEV design.
Max Reid -
4k for 10 mi
8k for 20 mi
12k for 30 mi
I also think this is low relative to current battery costs, but I think this will start changing in three years time. Obviously, they better offer upgrade options. If Tesla can sell 100 cars in three weeks at $100k per, then clearly there is some market for cars that cost more but readically reduce gas use. I would pay a premium because I'm an environmental nut. A friend of mine would because he lost a brother in Iraq. Again, GM could leapfrog with a good Series PHEV design. Why oh why are they planning for another parallel/series HEV? Lesson of the Prius is to get it right now, with lower production rates, and then scale up production as they start to sell faster...or GM can lose market share again. They will probably jump on this like IBM jumped on the home computer. Roughly similar change in technology happening here.
My message to GM. It's something. I'm also underwhelmed. Technology is there to do better. My next car will be BEV or PHEV with 40+ mile all-electric range. I want all-electric freeway performance, but will compromise on this if necessary. I'm voting with my consumer dollars and am targeting technologies that will make a difference.
40 miles per day = 75% of US driving
Here's one concept:
http://afstrinity.com/extr.html
Effect on oil consumption:
http://afstrinity.com/oil.html
Move faster GM! Take a little risk weenies!
Posted by: mds | Dec 2, 2006 11:16:22 AM
Correction. 2009 is the date given for the electric all-wheel-drive in the two-mode hybrid. Date for the PHEV model is unspecified.
--Mike
Posted by: Mike | Dec 4, 2006 7:07:35 AM
Noted. Thanks Mike!
Posted by: mds | Dec 4, 2006 9:39:48 AM
mybe the mankind invent a car future that use one of the best natural power of the earth.if any one want more information about this idea can cotact my amail. and know my new idea about the side of the inishtain.
Posted by: hamid | Jan 13, 2007 10:12:19 AM
