GM is determined to put the Chevy Volt in production as early as 2010
It appears as if everyones favorite series-hybrid may make it into production as early as 2010. This news comes courtesy of General Motors Larry Burns, GM's vice president for research and development and Jim Queen, group vice president of global engineering. It is no secret that the Volt was a huge hit for GM at the Detroit Auto Show this year, and as our own statistics show, it was a hit with consumers who research their vehicles on the internet as well. Another positive point for the Volt's production possibilities is that Bob Lutz is behind the project, and as "the man" in charge of global product development, as he wishes, GM does.
Last week, Burns said that the next-gen Delta platform would underpin the Volt. Because this same platform is expected under the next-generation of the Chevy Cobalt, the same plant in Lordstown, Ohio might get the nod to produce the Volt as well. Although the vehicle is expected to be produced in America, it is also hoped by GM that the Volt could be sold in other parts of the world, and the platform can accept other methods to charge the batteries, such as a diesel engine in Europe.
According to this article on Automotive News (subscription required), GM has decided to go ahead with the development of both the original Volt concept with its internal combustion engine powering a generator which is capable of charging the on-board lithium ion batteries as well as the more recent fuel cell platform which uses an on-board hydrogen fuel-cell to provide a range-extending charge to said batteries. Speaking of which, the batteries are currently the largest stumbling block to seeing the Volt in your local Chevy dealer's lot. Assuming that suppliers can get the high-tech batteries and their associated systems working in time, it looks like the Volt is "a go"; which is great news indeed. Could the General be seen as the new green automaker, taking the lead from stalwarts such as Honda and Toyota? They could, and the Volt would be an excellent opening salvo in making that possibility a reality.
Update: According to a GM spokesman no plant has yet been selected as the production site for the E-Flex vehicles although planning and development are proceeding full speed ahead. Since Lordstown is the current plant for the Chevy Cobalt, it's obviously in the running but is not a shoe-in.
Click here for our initial coverage of the Volt.
Gallery: Chevy Volt Concept
[Source: Automotive News (subscription required)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Ben Paz 11:27PM (3/03/2008)
The bottom line problem with all car manufacturers is that EV vehicles pose a threat to their business. Simplified engines and less complex vehicles do not generate revenue streams after sales. This represents a significant loss for the manufactures. Simplified also means more competitors enter the market, more than ever before. Technologies for higher performance batteries and more efficient electric motors are not the expertise of the car manufacturers.
Regardless of whether you desire a better enviorment or an favor energy independence EVs are for you. In addition, investment is descrease investment in foreign oil has the added benefit of reducing the bank rolls of terrorists. This is not a stretch, the US is the number one consumer of oil in the world. If we use significant less oil and oil imports drop. Less money will be available to flow in to nations, yes nations, that support terrorism even indirectly. This is also a cause for anti-war activists who desire to bring troops home from Iraq and keep them out of harms way.
Please email me if you have further information or strongly disagree.
Reply
Matt 9:19AM (5/07/2007)
You know what they say.. Wars are won using good intelligence. I have a hunch that Toyota is going to do their damnedest to steal the thunder when the time comes.
As a person who loves to read science and technology articles I appreciate that GM is being so open but I hope it doesn't come back and get'em.
Reply
jcwinnie 10:26AM (5/07/2007)
Language Cop is perplexed by the phrase, "everyones favorite series-hybrid". The descriptor became a short hand noun like "renewables" and "favorite" became the main adjective. Yet when I think of "favorite", as in "vanilla is my favorite flavor of ice cream", I think of something that I am accustom to having. I don't go to the ice cream story and buy a concept of a possible sample of what might might be made as early as 2010.
Reply
kert 1:21PM (5/07/2007)
the batteries are currently the largest stumbling block to seeing the Volt
Repeating something often enough does not make it true. Repeat in a loud voice:
there is
nothing
wrong
with the
batteries
as demonstrated by RAV4EV, EV1, tZero, Tesla, Hymotion, CalCars, countless conversions on streets and so on and so on. Heck, even GM itself demonstrated that a long-range series hybrid was doable in '98, with EV1 four seater series hybrid prototype.
So, again, how come that in 2007, batteries are not good enough ?
Reply
Ron Fischer 1:05PM (5/07/2007)
GM's "issue" with traction batteries is that they're unlike any other component in the vehicle. GM neither controls their production through patents (as with fuel cells) nor is there a large market of established, undifferentiated suppliers which GM can bash against one another to get a best price at desired specs. Sadly for GM, there are only two or three external suppliers who also control the patents. When GM says "batteries aren't ready" this is really code for "we have no control".
Specifically GM doesn't put the problem this way: "there are no high volume manufacturers of advanced Li-Ion traction batteries". Rather they overstate that the batteries are not ready in some fundamental way, which is clearly not the case.
This, more than anything else, gives me deep concern over what GM's management is up to with Volt.
Reply
JoSCh 1:36PM (5/07/2007)
Obviously a conspiracy between GM and the oil companies. If I keep repeating that does it become true?
Reply
kert 2:09PM (5/07/2007)
I'd say big corporations usual fear of innovation, conservativity, managerial blunders and short-term profit motives above all else are standing in the way, not some conspiracy.
Heck, GM's reps have themselves that killing the EV1 was the wrongest move that they ever did. Rightly so, if they would have put that '98 series hybrid into small fleet production and use and kept on improving upon it, there would probably PLENTY of battery suppliers to choose from now.
Reply
Schmeltz 3:10PM (5/07/2007)
Kert:
You site RAV4EV, EV1, tZero, Tesla, Hymotion, CalCars as examples demonstrate that the current batteries are good enough. Well, lets look at those for a second. The Rav4 and EV1 were nickel metal hydride battery vehicles, neither of which had a suitable long distance range, and as a result, are not made anymore. Funny also how I don't see you bashing Toyota for killing off the RAV 4 EV, (providing it was so wonderful, and Toyota can do no wrong). The Tzero is an interesting little car with a "kit-car" appearance, and again, a short range of 50-100 miles depending on your lead foot. Not much of a contender. Now Tesla could be a contender, but they need to produce the goods first. Hy-motion and CAlcars are Plug-in conversions to existing hybrids. They have a good thing going but they offer no warranties and they void the existing corporate warranties of the cars being converted. Therefore, if something goes wrong, "too bad, so sad" I guess. All bets are off. If the batteries were ready for mass-consumer grade products as you suggest, someone would have made it by now.
Reply
kert 3:55PM (5/07/2007)
im not bashing anything or anyone. i am pointing out that the claim that GM uses as an excuse, is convenient for them, but wrong.
Note that for Volt, only 40-mile electric range is needed. NiMH can provide that with room to spare.
I am not going into argument on why Toyota & GM killed their BEV products, its been beaten to death. I do recommend you to look up the EV1 Series Hybrid configuration prototype, though. Four seats, and a range of 390 miles. So range as an excuse to stopping production does not fly.
Your argument of if it was possible, somebody would have done it does not fly well either, as there arent many established entities in the world that can roll out production cars, the industry has high entry barriers. And the ones that would be in position to do so, see little incentive for themselves, as SUVs make better profits than thinking about the future.
Just for your information, certain asian car brands that have taken blows on certain market segments, ARE under perssure to innovate, and thus Subaru R1E and Mitsubishi MiEV programs. The prototypes are in testing NOW, not when the batteries are ready.
Reply
kert 4:36PM (5/07/2007)
The Tzero is an interesting little car with a "kit-car" appearance, and again, a short range of 50-100 miles depending on your lead foot.
Er, tZero records claim in excess or 250 miles. You are either misinformed or deliberately spreading misinformation.
Now, when tZero could do 250 miles in 2003, why cant GM still do 40 in 2007 ?
Reply
mikeinBuilding7 5:51PM (5/07/2007)
Hold on there, Europe ONLY gets the Diesel? I want that Damn-ed Diesel Volt in the U.S of A! Better power to weight ratio, and I can burn Bio-Diesel.
Secondly, where's the PLUG? At least 20% of the U.S. Auto fleet should be Plugin Hybrids, that would make Nuclear and Wind Power much more efficient solutions to our energy needs. The wind blows at night, and the nuclear power plants are Under Utilized at Night, with the reactions slowed down by lead bars. Let's get all we can out of the Nuclear capacity we have.
EV1: The movie "Who Killed the Electric Car" clearly shows that GM built those cars as KIT CARS, and not on real assembly lines. And Better Battery Tech was available to GM at the time, but it chose not to upgrade the batteries.
Finally, if batteries are REALLY a problem currently, they could always drop back to a 25 mile daily range. As that would still cover the needs of 80% of the driving public.
To me there's no real excuse, except if 40% of the company's stock is held by Big Oil, then, the CEO would Naturally be inclined to build Brick Like, Lead Like high Rolling Resistance Huge Tire Like Vehicles with Huge Engines with Un-usable POWER. Oh, yes, that's just what GM is doing. Plus, you have the Dumb Asses on Wall Street telling the auto industry to sell Gas Guzzlers because these "Experts" "believe" that's what the public wants.
The problem with Conspiracy Theories is they are generally false, Except if Big Oil and Big Money are involved.
Reply
Jeremy Korzeniewski 7:27PM (5/07/2007)
All: batteries are definitely a problem. Don't just assume that because it has been done in the past it can be done again. At the numbers and price that GM would like to sell the Volt at, the need lithium ion batteries to come down in price. Make the range less than 40 miles? Bad idea... that will make them less appealing to the masses, meaning they would sell less, making the associated costs that much higher.
Reply
Devilstower 9:10PM (5/07/2007)
The car is a hybrid. It has a range as big as the gas tank. All we're talking about with the batteries is the electric-only range.
40 is plenty.
Reply
Jeremy Korzeniewski 1:24AM (5/08/2007)
Make sure you read the comments from the posting of this story on Autoblog.
http://www.autoblog.com/2007/05/07/gm-refocuses-on-volt-thinks-2010-sales-are-doable/
You can surely see that there is some amount of weariness regarding the 40 miles on electricity only.
Reply
Dtroiter 8:52AM (5/08/2007)
you are all idiots... bunch of left wing and environmentalist nuts. Who's going to buy a car that requires a huge repair bill in 7-10 years to replace the batteries. The Telsa roadster has a $20,000 repair bill in 10 years to replace the batteries. You are all little sheep following your wacko leaders... People like big cars and trucks, that's why they sell. People don't want little skinny tired economy cars like you guys praise so highly. Sure, everyone would rather pay less for gas, but not giving up the convienience of a car that can actually carry something as well. There's no conspiracy not to make the cars. You don't think they'd love to make a car at $20,000 that will get 60-80 mpg? Probably sell quite a few. The EV1 was an interesting car but not a very functional one. I have ridden in a couple and although "neat", they were far from something most people would accept as a daily driver. Most of you people just read the crap from your "leaders" and push the same BS even though never having actually driven one. The EV1 was panned by almost everyone because of its limitations. It's only now that people are crying about it. I don't see you having one in your driveway? If you and all your little cohorts did, they probably would've kept building them. You try living w/ a EV1 everyday of your life and see if you really would want it. Most people want to be able to travel a couple hundred miles if needed not having to stop or ask someone to please use their power to charge their car as well as expecting their car to last when they buy it w/o expensive repairs. You'll be the first to bitch about battery replacement costs though and figure that they're in bed w/ the battery companies too. How much do you think GM spent on development of that car? It wasn't free and i bet that would've liked one in a bunch more driveways... idiots. ALL THIS MIRACULOUS TECHNOLOGY HIDDEN FROM THE PUBLIC BY BIG CORPORATIONS.... Spend your own money and develop some batteries, oh I forgot, that's the gov't's job to force someone to do it for you.
Reply
Schmeltz 9:14AM (5/08/2007)
Kert:
Regarding the Tzero, I went straight to the horse's mouth for my information, the company's website. Where are YOU getting your info.?
I would like to refer the readership here to the main man over at Green Car Journal, Ron Cogan. He's as much of a green car aficianado as anyone, and even he cautions that the battery issue is no cake walk. Refer to www.greencar.com article: "Making the Plug-in Hybrid Real". At the end he sums up:
"Unreal expectations are being fueled by plug-in interests because these battery challenges are rarely part of the pitch. Yet, battery cost and durability challenges remain. This is a sobering truth that’s better understood than not. Let’s just not shoot the messenger."
So many times, people comment something like: "Why doesn't Big Automaker X just do something easy like Y? Big Automaker X is corrupt, and evil, and kicks puppies, and blah blah blah". That's all easy to say, but real answers are hard to deliver--just ask Tesla. Again, if the magic pill were already here, somebody would have exploited it already--don't you think???
Reply
kert 11:30AM (5/08/2007)
http://www.acpropulsion.com/tzero/SEMAtrip2003.htm
"Interstate 15 to Las Vegas includes two climbs, the Cajon Pass and Baker Grade, both with about 3500 feet of elevation gain. The tzero never faltered and arrived in Las Vegas, 245 miles from AC Propulsion headquarters in San Dimas, with at least 40 miles of reserve range."
wikipedia is another useful, although not 100% reliable source of info
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tzero
"The version debuted by AC Propulsion in August 2003 is powered by 6,800 lightweight lithium-ion cells, similar to those that make up the battery packs of laptop computers, giving it a 300 mile (480 km) range."
put simply, you have wrong info and you are trying to spread it.
Reply
Schmeltz 7:52AM (5/09/2007)
Kert:
I checked the website again, and found that you were correct in their claim of a 300 mile range. I was just about ready to eat crow, when I decided to search to try and determine where I got the mis-information yesterday. I found it at the following link:
http://www.acpropulsion.com/tzero_pages/tzero_html_home.htm
As you can see, that info. came from the manufacturer's website also, I just didn't realize that it was most likely "old" info. I gotta apparently learn to dig a little deeper next time before pressing the "post" button. My apologies for the oversight and the abrasive tone of my earlier posts, however I do resent the implication that I'm trying to spread wrong info.--I'm not, I just didn't check all the facts. I was trying to prove a point that battery technology is getting better, but no-one really has the mass-market vehicle yet that seats 4-5 people and still achieves 300 mile plus range easily, and costs in the $20-30,000 range. Tesla is working on its White Star sedan project which is intended to meet most or all of those requirements, but that is still some ways off.
The T-zero wouldn't be for me, but it is a good step in the right direction. Can we call a truce on that?
Reply
Joe P 1:22PM (5/08/2007)
That Volt sure looks good and it would be tempting to say I'd buy one but I have a question that I've never seen addressed. I live in Chicago and it gets mighty chilly here in January. How will the heater work? If the engine has to run to provide heat then what's the point? And as long as we're on the subject what about those electric cars everyone brags about. Not everyone lives in southern California. What's the range of an EV-1 in 20 degree weather, with the heater on, the windshield wipers on, the headlights on and even the radio on? I still have more qustions but these are the ones I'm most curious about.
Reply
Dtroiter 1:28PM (5/08/2007)
KERT - It's nice that they made it to their destination... too bad they'll have to while until they can return. Also, good thing they didn't run into any heavy traffic in 90degree heat which required them running a lot of accessories... i'm not sure if what type of compressor they'd be using for the AC unit, but I know GM has developed new electronic ones for their hybrids, i doubt they have the same technology.
Joe P - see above, it kills it when you are using accessories and don't have a running alternator to recharge the batteries as you do w/ an engine.
The volt concept would take care of these problems w/ a gas/diesel/hydrogen whatever generator, but there are a ton of issues w/ having batteries that can handle that right now. They are not widely available as Kert believes. Unfortunately stacking hundreds of laptop batteries together is not going to be the answer.
Reply