Archives

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/2/AmericanFlag.jpg "Though Obama promised to have 1 million plug-in hybrids on the road by 2015, the dream of a mass-market electric car remains implausible and probably will be for years. " (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/28/AR2009042801191.html)

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/501/2011_Chevrolet_Volt_Exterior_News.jpgCharles Lane - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com) - April 29, 2009

The right course is not always the most economical. --Ed.

General Motors has announced a plan to stave off bankruptcy that includes cutting 21,000 jobs, reducing its dealer network and eliminating its Pontiac division. "I'm a believer in dealing with reality," GM chief executive Fritz Henderson said.

Better late than never. GM wouldn't be in quite so deep a hole if it had not sunk a billion dollars, and much of its corporate reputation, into a not-very-realistic plug-in electric hybrid vehicle known as the Chevrolet Volt.

Likely to cost consumers more than $30,000 even after a big government tax rebate, the little four-seat Volt "is currently projected to be much more expensive than its gasoline-fueled peers and will likely need substantial reductions in manufacturing cost in order to become commercially viable," President Obama's automobile task force reported on March 30.

Translation: Unless and until gas prices shoot up, you'd be crazy to buy one of these much-ballyhooed vehicles, which will run 40 miles on a single charge if... http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/28/AR2009042801191.html

What? The Volt is vaporware? GM overstated it's ability to actually build this car. Gee... What a shock. (Not!)

It almost seems that the restructured New-GM is intending to sell more up-scale (read more expensive) cars, to get the profit margins up, and seems to be abandonning the lower-cost offerings (like Saturn; why else would a New-GM keep Cadillac instead?). It's a perfectly viable business plan, although it means the average working man will probably be more or less economically forced to give up on New-GM-priced cars, and go foreign brands. Then a $30K Volt makes sense --- it's pitched at the Doctors and Lawyers, not Joe the Plumber. In a sense, the way they are structuring New-GM seems like they are making New-GM a rival to Audi or BMW, not to a Toyota-Honda-VW-Hundai. As I said, it looks like a viable business model, just not the model I was hoping they'd come up with, more oriented to producing cars at a price that's within reach for the vast majority of people who will be bailing them out.

Pitch the fancier (more costly) cars to the smaller, more affluent, market segment.

If that's the case, it's kind of ironic that the guys who produce New-GM cars and trucks will probably not be able to afford to buy them.

There's a report about a poll on CNN today that suggests a ground-swell of Americans who are trying to dramatically change their lifestyle, so they live within their means (or they do without, not opting to buy that luxo-cruiser). If that's the case, then the "average" new vehicle is gonna be a lot more down-scale and Spartan than we have been seeing in the last couple of years. No more plush leather, 4 x 4, monster truck chasis.

We can only hope.

It's not GM did not have enough time - it's they sat on this technology.

Even if the EV1 was pulled like it was, GM could have been persistent with the technology and had something the early part of this decade. They looked only a quarter ahead assuming cheap credit and gas forever and suffering now.

What the Obama Administration might add to their "To Do" List:

GM sold the rights to the EV1 battery tech (help me: was it Chevron?)

Anyway, make an issue of it like AIG raises so they might be pressured to avoid bad PR and make it available, sell it, whatever.

Then everyone benefits.

...make it available, sell it, whatever...

It would probably be rather ironic if they ended up selling it to Ford.

And then Ford improved it before they sold it.

It would probably be rather ironic if they ended up selling it to Ford.

And then Ford improved it before they sold it.This video is for you! :D

Background: a handful of EV1s were given to universities and museums. Still, they were inoperative. The Univ of Wisconsin engineering school made a project of getting their EV1 running again....they had a number of sponsors.

As you view the video - note the blue oval on the rear.

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/showphoto.php/photo/1027/si/ev1

As you view the video - note the blue oval on the rear.

:biglol:

Almost there. Now they just need to improve it. :D

What the Obama Administration might add to their "To Do" List:

GM sold the rights to the EV1 battery tech (help me: was it Chevron?)

Anyway, make an issue of it like AIG raises so they might be pressured to avoid bad PR and make it available, sell it, whatever.

Then everyone benefits.

Cobasys, technically. I don't know their exact relationship with Chevron, whether it was just a contract deal or if they're affiliated.

I wonder if there's a precedent for taking over or nullifying patents if they're not in use. The closest thing I can think of is recent rulings on pure-software patents, but that's honestly a different animal.

Legally, there is probably nothing that can be done, but if the PR was a bad as the AIG raises, it might be enough pressure to prompt them to do the right thing.

The only reason a mass-market EV is implausible for the foreseeable future is they're all predicated on expensive Lithium based batteries that are still under development and years away from commercialization on a large scale. Oh, and did I mention expensive? Battery costs are by far the main reason the new crop of EVs are expected to cost so much.

Meanwhile, 8-10 years ago we had actual production EVs available California using NiMH batteries. They worked great -- and by all accounts the few that were sold instead of leased are still working great. NiMH batteries are widely used and available, only weigh about 30% more for a given capacity -- and (very importantly for commercial purposes) cost a fraction of what Li batteries do.

GM sold the NiMH patent to what is now ChevronTexaco after it killed the EV1, and ever since automakers seem to have been unable to procure or manufacture NiMH batteries in the larger format needed for EVs. I still think that the public would be best served if we were to revoke the patent, compensate the owner for its projected revenues based on current sales, and release it to the public domain NOW rather than 2015 when the patent otherwise expires. There is NO legal question that we have the legal authority to do it.

What's a good way to do a writing campaign to Washington?

If we get a good tip, maybe put the link on the front page.

GM sold the NiMH patent to what is now ChevronTexaco after it killed the EV1, and ever since automakers seem to have been unable to procure or manufacture NiMH batteries in the larger format needed for EVs. I still think that the public would be best served if we were to revoke the patent, compensate the owner for its projected revenues based on current sales, and release it to the public domain NOW rather than 2015 when the patent otherwise expires. There is NO legal question that we have the legal authority to do it.

What the Obama Administration might add to their "To Do" List:

GM sold the rights to the EV1 battery tech (help me: was it Chevron?)

Here are some links to the GM->Chevron->Texaco->Cobasys patent info:

Cobasys Info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobasys

Patent Info: http://www.ev1.org/chevron.htm

Manual for the Battery that can't be sold or imported to the US:
http://www.evnut.com/rav_battery_data_sheet.html

Case where "Chevron" sued Toyota for using battery tech and why the Prius battery is now "small":
http://www.ovonic.com/PDFs/Financial_Reports/form_8k/8k_mbi_patent_infringe_settlement_7july04.pdf

The EV95 "Pelican Brief" fueling the speculation that Chevron "burried" the patents:
http://evworld.com/blogs/index.cfm?authorid=51&blogid=104&archive=1

More references to the Patent Dispute:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_encumbrance_of_large_automotive_NiMH_batteries
11011011

What's a good way to do a writing campaign to Washington?

If we get a good tip, maybe put the link on the front page.

Here's something from AMSA, we could probably follow their guidelines. http://www.amsa.org/grassroots/letterwriting.cfm

Thanks for all those great links, Dan.

Is there any chance the import restrictions on the Panasonic EV95 only apply to commercial/resale use and not to personal use? I'm practically drooling on the keyboard after reading that 95Ah figure. I'd be more than satisfied with just a 144V stack of these.

Thanks for all those great links, Dan.

Is there any chance the import restrictions on the Panasonic EV95 only apply to commercial/resale use and not to personal use? I'm practically drooling on the keyboard after reading that 95Ah figure. I'd be more than satisfied with just a 144V stack of these.As part of the judgment against them Panasonic paid Texaco $30,000,000. Shortly after that they stopped producing the EV-95 battery. I think CalCars produces an EV-95 clone that they claim does not infringe on the Texaco patent. Then again, Panasonic made the same claim till the EV-95 got sued out of production.

11011011