One of the best products that I reviewed last year for my "On Technology" column in the San Diego Daily Transcript was the Chevy Volt. After driving it for about a week, I found it to be one of the most innovative automobiles to come along in years, combining the best of electric- and gasoline-powered cars. It exhibited an entirely new approach to the electric car from a company that had suffered from a lack of innovation over the years, and one famously accused of having killed the electric car. Every element of the car was a vast improvement over former General Motors cars, including the interior and exterior materials, the fit and finish, and its handling and comfort.
The Volt has a range of 40 miles on a full battery charge. If you don't travel more than that each day, you'll never need to buy gasoline. But if you need to go farther, you can drive indefinitely using gasoline to power its onboard generator. What I also found so exciting about this car was that it was entirely engineered and manufactured in the United States, by American workers.
Work on the Volt began nearly a decade ago, years before GM filed for bankruptcy. Stories in Businessweek and other magazines chronicled the challenges of its development team. It faced insurmountable odds and frequent setbacks and had to solve difficult technical problems and create new inventions. The team worked with the backdrop of always wondering whether the product would be killed because of budgetary pressures, especially as Detroit auto sales suffered.
Somehow, against all odds, the Volt team prevailed, and thanks to our government's rescue of the automotive industry, GM survived to introduce the car in 2011.
In my review I said:
"It's an exciting new vehicle on two fronts. First, it's the most technologically advanced automobile that's designed to reduce gasoline consumption. And second, it provides a sense of pride in showing that our country can still innovate in the automotive industry, an area where we've played catch-up for so many years. All the more commendable considering that the team that worked on the Volt did so under a cloud of uncertainty during the financial crisis that threatened to bankrupt their company."
Other auto reviewers heaped similar praise on the automobile, several noting its positive effect in reducing our dependence on foreign oil. Others selected it as car of the year.
Last month, the Chevrolet Volt and its twin, the Opel Ampera, won Europe's prestigious "Car of the Year" award. The 59 judges from 23 European nations described the automobile as a true technological step forward and "a mature product" that is "better suited to consumers' needs than the conventional electric car."
Earlier this year, a GM-owned Volt, while being stored in a GM facility, caught on fire three weeks after a laboratory-supervised crash test at that facility. The fire was caused by coolant leaking from the cooling system, which came in contact with the battery long after the crash and caused a short.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration investigated and concluded that, "Based on the available data, NHTSA does not believe that Chevy Volts or other electric vehicles pose a greater risk of fire than gasoline-powered vehicles."
At the time, Chevrolet offered to buy back Volts from any owner and provided loaner cars to Volt owners during the investigation. Chevy's behavior went far beyond what it was required to do and demonstrated a huge contrast with Toyota's abominable handling of its sudden acceleration fiasco.
But San Diego's Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., was not satisfied with the NHTSA and GM investigations, and his committee recently held hearings in which it questioned whether NHTSA and GM were conspiring together to hush up the Volt's fire. Issa implied that GM and NHTSA hid the Volt battery defect to avoid embarrassment for GM's new car, a claim that runs counter to all evidence presented. And in an appearance on MSNBC, Issa compared subsidies for Chevrolet's electric car to the Iran-Contra scandal.
Issa's subcommittee's staff report, sarcastically titled, "Government Motors: A Preliminary Report on the Effects of Bailouts and Politics on the Obama Administration's Ability to Protect American Consumers," states that the administration has provided taxpayer subsidies to produce the Volt and offered buyers of the Volt a federal tax credit of up to $7,500 per vehicle.
The implication of the report was that because GM was building the car, and GM was subsidized by the government's bailout, NHTSA was somehow protecting the Volt, the showcase of the new GM. In fact, contrary to this "fact-finding" report, the $7,500 tax credit was passed by the 2007-08 Congress under the Bush administration, in the Energy Improvement and Extension Act of 2008.
So here we have elected officials doing their best to trash one of the most innovative products this country has produced, all in the name of politics.
One of our difficulties in competing with China is because the Chinese government heavily invests in important consumer industries. To compete with China, we need a government policy that builds up industries that are strategic, not tears them apart.
AutoWeek, a respected automotive publication, said it best:
"Message to politicians: Your childlike behavior is numbing, and it's beginning to piss off all of America. The greatest problem with this particular witch-hunt is the message it sends to innovators in the United States, not to mention competitors abroad, when the crown jewel of a resurgent General Motors is attacked merely as a political salvo."
One would think we would all welcome and support innovative products and technologies that advance our country's capabilities and reduce the use of oil. Apparently, some in politics would rather twist the truth to point blame on the current administration. Not only is this shameful, but it also undermines the effort to create American jobs. It's behavior we'd expect more from our economic enemies than from those that we elect to represent us.
From the April 17 issue of The San Diego Daily Transcript; reprinted with permission.
Follow Philip G. Baker on Twitter: www.twitter.com/pbaker
Neil Wagner: Capitalists and Environmentalists Agree: Green Innovation Rocks
Alison van Diggelen: GM CEO Dan Akerson: On Chevy Volt Future and Climate Change
Kiplinger financial magazine found a five-year payback for the Volt compared to a Cruze.
Another complication is the fact that the main motor also generates electricity when recovering energy from braking. An inverter system (which includes inverters, rectifiers, converters, and microcontrollers) has two-way AC power connections to the main motor and the generator, which it allow it to deliver power to the motors or to accept power from the motors when they’re acting as generators.
More later....froze up server at this site: technologyreview.com...see the article there
Just how long do you think it will be before your VOLT starts breaking down on a regular basis? ......read this:
Teardown Reveals the Remarkable Complexity of Chevrolet's Volt
A look inside the car reveals just how complicated it is.
Kevin Bullis 04/20/2012
A recent tear down of the Chevrolet Volt reveals the surprising complexity of this extended range electric vehicle. UBM Tech Insights took apart the car’s battery & charging system to identify the components of each, & it’s making at least some of its results, including photos, available for free here.
It’s been clear for a long time that the Volt is a complicated car. GM prefers to call it “advanced.” To a skeptic, all that complexity means there are more ways for something to go wrong.
The Volt is an electric vehicle in the sense that it’s powered by an electric motor almost all the time. But it also has a gas-powered engine for extending car’s range.
In fact, the Volt has two electric motors. One serves primarily as a generator—it’s attached to the gas engine & generates electricity that either recharges the battery or powers the car’s main electric motor.
A complex transmission system also allows the gas engine to connect directly to the wheels. The new teardown looks at the electronics used to control this system. The charging & power distribution system is complex, having over 10 million lines of code and 100 microcontrollers.
Consumer Reports magazine found that the Volt, so far, has much better than average reliability, in fact beating every other model GM has.
http://www.plugincars.com/consumer-reports-says-chevy-volt-currently-gms-most-reliable-vehicle-109593.html
Since the gas engine hardly ever even comes on, I assume it will outlast the usable life of the car. Thanks to regenerative braking and the brushless AC induction motor, most of my driving is frictionless... friction and heat is demise of all that fails in current cars. i.e.: brakes, clutches, pistons, valves, mufflers, etc.
Funny thing about electronics and "millions of lines of code" is that they aren't moving parts and therefore if properly engineered have a theoretical unlimited life span.
I hope that the Volt succeeds, and that the technology is successfully adapted for a less expensive car.
I guess its too much to hope that the light rail mass transit system that we had here in the South Land when I was a kid will be brought back.
That doesn't fit the Republican narrative.
Crony corporation, General Electric, claims it is buying 12,000 Chevy Volts and forcing all employees to drive them so that they can save money. Really? Does anyone believe that GE is spending about $480 million to save $2 a day in gas for each vehicle? GE has also told employees that they can run the cars on gas only, further evidence that GE's decision to buy Volts is a blatant example of crony capitalism.
How technologically advanced is a car that has a power source that takes 12 hours to charge only to have the capacity of one gallon of gas? And why are taxpayers footing the bill?
The blatant crony capitalism displayed by GE in buying thousands of Volts as elections approach and as they are rewarded by getting the contracts to sell charging stations is being ignored by the media.
Q: Does anyone believe that GE is spending about $480 million to save $2 a day in gas for each vehicle?
A: The Volt really saves GE over $4/day vs. gas, which works out to over $12 million a year in fuel savings for the GE fleet. Also, you cite $480 million as if GE would get cars for free if they didn't buy Volts. Subtracting the $1.40 it costs to fully charge a Volt, the Volt's savings at $4/gallon gas vs. a similarly sized compact (avg 25.6 mpg) gasoline-powered car = $5.45 (gas for 35 miles @ 25.6 mpg) - $1.40 (electricity for 35 miles) > $4/per day in saving.
Q: GE has also told employees that they can run the cars on gas only, further evidence that GE's decision to buy Volts is a blatant example of crony capitalism?
A: GE makes charging stations for electric cars. They are going to install charging stations at the homes of employees. What's wrong with a company validating it's new product?
Q: How technologically advanced is a car that has a power source that takes 12 hours to charge only to have the capacity of one gallon of gas?
A: With a 240V charger, a fully-discharged Volt takes no more than 4 hours to charge. And even on the very coldest nights, when charging with a standard 110V outlet, my Volt has never taken more than 10 hours to charge, and usually takes 8 hours to charge. But it really only takes my Volt 10-seconds to charge - the length of time it takes to plug it in - because like most people I tend to be away from my car for at least 8 hours as I sleep (maybe you don't sleep at night?). Also as noted above, cars in the Volt class (compact) get an average of 25.6 mpg, so the capacity of the charge is actually equivalent to more than 1+1/3 gallons of gas.
Q: And why are taxpayers footing the bill?
A: I agree, taxpayers shouldn't be footing the bill. But neither should taxpayers be footing the bill for someone's mortgage interest, or for accelerated depreciation for oil companies, or footing the bill for the $80+ billion annual military bill to secure oil shipping lanes.
Did GE's Inmelt renege on his deal from Obama he got on Volts and making the charging systems.
from Forbes DOT com 3/16/11
Recently, President Obama selected GE CEO Jeffrey Inmelt to chair his economic Advisory Board. GE is awash in windmills waiting to be subsidized so they can provide unreliable, expensive power. Consequently, and soon after his appointment, Immelt announced that GE will buy 50,000 Volts in the next two years, or half the total produced. Assuming the corporation qualifies for the same tax credit, we (you and me) just shelled out $375,000,000 to a company to buy cars that no one else wants so that GM will not tank and produce even more cars that no one wants. And this guy is the chair of Obama's Economic Advisory Board?
We do, the problem lies with the $10,000 tax credit to buy one . . .
Especially when the average income of a Volt buyer is over $160,000
federal tax credit of up to $7,500 per vehicle.
When you figure in the cost of gas, my payment on the "overpriced" Volt is LESS THAN it would be had I bought a Hyundai Sonata.
The money I borrowed from an American bank went directly to Detroit and was inserted into the US economy. The continued 20 dollars a month I spend on electricity goes to my local electric utility and my buddies who work there... NOT Iran or Hug Chavez.
This car is more FUN to drive than any car I've ever owned... and I've had some nice ones.
The ONLY people who 'bad mouth' the Volt (or the Leaf for that matter) do not own one. Therefore, their opinions and comments are simply invalid.
Comments are not invalid just because the authors didn't drive a Volt. One could argue that your comments are invalid *because* you own one - you might just be justifying a poor decision. "fun" is a subjective term but I find it unlikely that the Volt is fun to drive compared to other $40K vehicles. The Prius was "fun" and my VW Beetle was "fun" too, but maybe "novel" is the word.
I agree that it might be better to use electricity than foreign oil, although the majority of our oil is purchased from Canada and Mexico.
Your claim that the payment is lower than on a Hyundai Sonata is ridiculous - a Sonata can be had for $20,000, half the Volt (before rebates). The Sonata Hybrid is $25K, and gets same mileage more or less as the Volt (if you don't plug in the Volt) so it's a good comparison. You might spend $1200 a year in gas on the Sonata (12K miles). So it would take you six years to make up the difference in price. But what about the cost of electricity? Depends on where and when you charge up. Some places electricity still costs more than gasoline, but for most locations, it's probably about half the price. So it would take ten years for your Chevy volt to break even with the Sonata.
The Volt accelerates from 0-60 faster than the Ford Crown Victoria Police Intercepter with a 4.6 liter V8. Stop calling it a golf cart!
I have nothing against subsidies for new technologies - like Volt, for example or any other electric car. I do not even mind (kill me) subsidies for electric solar panels, that improved their cost 10 times in last 10 years. And of course nobody remembers subsidies for Prius - currently the most popular Toyota car.
Energy sector is not like Apple's iPad business. Typical ROIs there are measured in decades. Without government help innovations and even operations there will be stalled.
Oil industry gets government help for almost a century and the nuclear one is for half a century and I think it is OK. Why suddenly government investment in electric transportation became an issue?
Oh, BTW, I leased the Volt, thank you for advise. 350/month and at least $100 savings on gas - I drive beautiful new car for 250/month! And my first oil change should happen after the lease end.
Here in Minnesota, I wouldn't consider buying a Volt as long as 30-40% of the battery is zapped with cold weather.
So, for average MN weather three winter month would result in 22-29 miles per charge, or even less if temperature drops to teens. The rest of the year you'll get 35-42 miles.
Depending on your daily errands that may be OK anyway, or not. My Volt has 30% of mileage driven on gas, still lifetime fuel economy is 95 mpg.
It is much easier to impose a police state on a fed up and fearful population.
I own a Volt. Great car. I own it to lower the amount of money going to countries that hate us. I also own it as a contingency plan. If Iran creates an oil shortage similar to the 70's with gas lines, I will be unaffected.
Quit blaming everone else fo rthe death of the Electric car and buy one! Forget the fact that the prius is a far better value, the Volt is built by Liberals for Liberals, order one today, or know you are part of the problem!
http://cleantechnica.com/2012/04/04/chevy-volt-sales-way-up-march-its-strongest-sales-month-to-date/