“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!

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.

"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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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.

Rafael Seidl: Sorry the link was wrong its www.phoenixmotorcars.com

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.

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.

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.

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.

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'.

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.

Is this just spin to counter the negative publicity from the doco "Who Killed The Electric Car"?
Is the Pope German?

''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.

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!!!

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.

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.

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!

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.

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.