Archives

GM steps up Volt concept for Shanghai show. (http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070417/FREE/70416009/1065)

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/501/Volt_as_an_FCV.jpgKevin Wilson - AutoWeek - April 16, 2007

Chevrolet is showing the “next iteration” of its Chevrolet Volt concept at the Shanghai auto show in China this week. Based on the same E-Flex architecture as the plug-in hybrid concept first revealed at the Detroit show in January, this version replaces the gasoline engine/ generator with a hydrogen fuel cell and uses a battery pack only half the size of that in the gas-hybrid model.

Chevy distributed concept drawings of this fuel-cell version when it debuted the Volt in Detroit. Larry Burns, GM vice president of R&D and strategic planning, repeated, in countering charges of “greenwashing,” that the company intends to produce such a car but cannot yet state when, since development depends on advances in the production of lithium-ion battery technology. GM vice chairman Bob Lutz wrote recently on the corporate FastLane blog that GM is “100 percent committed to making this happen,” and corporate execs are telling us to watch for another step in the development of this E-Flex architecture to be revealed at the Frankfurt show in Germany.

While the original Volt was described as a series hybrid (in which the engine is present only to charge the batteries—all drive is electric), the fuel-cell version operates a little differently. After the battery pack’s 20-mile range (half that of the gas-hybrid model) is exhausted, the Volt’s fuel cell not only can charge the batteries but also can provide electricity directly to the drive motors, one for the front wheels and one “hub motor” in each rear wheel. The Volt is still a plug-in, so the batteries also can be charged off the grid. Total range is 300 miles … http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070417/FREE/70416009/1065

I have never seen a company strive so hard to make itself completely irrelevant. It's fascinating in a morbid sort of way.

I read that as "We'll never make our own deadline, so lets add FCV so we have something to blame (Hydrogen infrastructure) when it craters.

Officially putting the FCV plug in hybrid in the "Never gonna happen" pile.

Hi Guys:

___Great responses! GM is indeed burying itself one concept at a time … Let alone what they have to offer to the real world today which is … Ahhh … Nothing :(

___GM cut the Li-Ion pack to half the size for the FCV based version vs. the std. Series-ICE based “Volt” concept to save maybe $2K on the pack and $1K on the ICE/MGSet yet added a $100K fuel cel w/ a life expectancy of ~ 50,000 miles. That sounds cost effective given how GM is so concerned about battery costs and longevity and such. What about the 8kWh JCI-SAFT/A123Systems Li-Ion pack? It must not have any issues but the 16 kWh packs supplied by the same with half the load per cel does :confused:

___As you can tell, my blood pressure rose a notch or two after reading this even though we all know that GM has touted the Volt as an E-Flex platform capable of running off a large Li-Ion pack as a BEV, FC as an FCV w/ small to intermediate sized pack to buffer, Bio, E85 and gasoline based ICE as an ICE based series PHEV w/ an intermediate sized Li-Ion pack as it was presented in Detroit.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

Just realized... If GM officially makes the Volt FCV does that open up the spigot for government funded R&D. Thought I saw a Hydrogen of Tomorrow or something grant that Congress was giving to any US car maker working on Hydrogen (but not foreign makers).

I'd really boil me if I found out that my by weekly government extortion payment (spelled TAXES) is going to fund (spelled BAILOUT) GM.

11011011

Agreed. Fuel Cell Vehicle = Never Going to be Built. They might as well say that the Volt will be a Warp Drive/Battery hybrid.

Ok, what about this concept, in particular, gets you guys so upset.

The way I see it this is EXACTLY what GM has said the E-Flex would offer from the beginning. These various concept presentations are made to show that flexibility and to get the temperture of the marketplace. This seems as reasonable a way to ease the marketplace into Fuel Cell technology as a Hybrid is a reasonable way to ease it into EV technology.

Now, I'm with you on the economic and energy inefficiency of fuel cells in general, but if one could have a decent range of EV only, perhaps a fuel cell charger of your own or the ability to grab a couple of bottles of hyrdrogen to keep in the garage one could, essentially, have an EV with the fuel cells as back-up should you need to go further than your EV range would allow. If the hydrogen is produced in an environmentally friendly way without the use of fossil fuels I think this is a worthwhile endeavor to consider even if it's not the most cost effective one.

Hi Efusco:

___My beef is because Electricity itself can be made so much more efficiently and environmentally friendly if one were to go “Off the Grid” with far less waste then splitting H20 and then compress it up for tank storage vs. feeding a pack w/ the DC to begin with. I know A123Systems M1 cels begin to show a hellacious drop off in Cap below around - 20 degrees C. A Fuel Cel simply stops even when considering Honda’s best below 0 degrees C capable FCV. Then we have costs of both H2 and the FC. I would rather see a Bio-fueled CI-ICE then an FCV given longer term H2 storage is all but an impossible let alone being very expensive in terms of energy consumed to produce :(

___If China comes up with a way to use H2 cost effectively, more power to them. Right now, I am not seeing any breakthroughs needed given H2 is a pure energy carrier produced by electricity or NG/fossil fuels vs. the std. 120 or higher V plug-in capable solution.

___My money is on an EEStor ESU w/ a .6 – 1.0L SI-ICE (E85 capable for whatever reason?) in a 2015 version of the Chevrolet “Volt” long before an FCV version is even close to hitting the road ;)

___Good Luck

___Wayne

I hear you, efusco, but the way I see it is that we desperately need EVs on the market first because they are doable today (battery technology is just fine and getting better every day) and already have the necessary infrastructure in place (there aren't many homes in America that don't have electricity), and it's fine if they have an ICE for long distance charging today as it would still drop America's oil consumption by an order of magnitude, meaning oil reserves will last that much longer and we can get a much larger percentage of our fix from non-Arabian sources.

Once that's done we can start playing with fuel cells which by all estimates are at least 15 years away and still haven't been proven to be any greener or cheaper than oil-derived fuels.

Gasoline-burning PHEVs buy us lots of time. Fuel cells will take lots of time.

Gasoline-burning PHEVs buy us lots of time. Fuel cells will take lots of time.

Amen.

Additionally, as a sad skeptic who even ponders whether PHEVs will struggle initially because "you have to remember to plug them in every night, and that's just too much to ask" :(, it's a risk making things even minutely more complicated.

Time out.

Does the fuel cell version replace the series hybrid? Are they saying that the series hybrid version is dead and gone? Or does this exist with the series hybrid version, demonstrating the versatility of the E-Flex platform? Those are two very different things. One is bad, one is good.

Fool cells? Bah! :mad:

Hi Tim:

___The E-Flex can go with any of the listed power producing units as you have stated. I believe the reason GM is readying the FCV version for the China show is because I have read they (China) are more likely to be the first large country to convert to an all-alternative fuel w/ H2 at the top on their list. Here in the states, the public decides with their wallet’s and an $8.00 + per equivalent gallon fill for H2 vs. $0.75 for electricity won’t fly but in China, the government has a bit tighter control over what their populace can and cannot do. Way OT but something I read a few months ago in the WSJ or NY Times?

___GM can produce the Volt with the SI-ICE as a PHEV which I still think they will do. I think they have too now that the Japanese are readying PHEV’s and EV’s for their 2010 and later future lineups. A FFV Pontiac G6 won’t stand a chance with gasoline at $3.50 + while the Prius III-Advanced or whatever it will be called let alone a Nissan Altima/Versa PHEV variant are being fuel by electricity for $0.60 to drive the same distance and for not that much more $’s upfront ;)

___Good Luck

___Wayne

This is baaad!!! :mad:

No rhythm!

No plan!

Lutz is terminiating the American auto industry!

Hi Efusco:

___My beef is because Electricity itself can be made so much more efficiently and environmentally friendly if one were to go “Off the Grid” with far less waste then splitting H20 and then compress it up for tank storage vs. feeding a pack w/ the DC to begin with. I know A123Systems M1 cels begin to show a hellacious drop off in Cap below around - 20 degrees C. A Fuel Cel simply stops even when considering Honda’s best below 0 degrees C capable FCV. Then we have costs of both H2 and the FC. I would rather see a Bio-fueled CI-ICE then an FCV given longer term H2 storage is all but an impossible let alone being very expensive in terms of energy consumed to produce :(

___If China comes up with a way to use H2 cost effectively, more power to them. Right now, I am not seeing any breakthroughs needed given H2 is a pure energy carrier produced by electricity or NG/fossil fuels vs. the std. 120 or higher V plug-in capable solution.

___My money is on an EEStor ESU w/ a .6 – 1.0L SI-ICE (E85 capable for whatever reason?) in a 2015 version of the Chevrolet “Volt” long before an FCV version is even close to hitting the road ;)

___Good Luck

___Wayne
I have no idea what that last thing was, but the issue with pure EVs is that you can't just get in and drive 3000 miles across the country and most people don't want to keep a second vehicle for those trips outside of EV range. IF a short range EV can be combined into a partial FCV allowing exchange of cylinders to permit longer range trips when necessary I don't see why that would bother anyone even if it takes a lot of energy to produce the Hydrogen...it's use would be relatively infrequent with the huge majority of energy coming from the grid.

I hear you, efusco, but the way I see it is that we desperately need EVs on the market first because they are doable today (battery technology is just fine and getting better every day) and already have the necessary infrastructure in place (there aren't many homes in America that don't have electricity), and it's fine if they have an ICE for long distance charging today as it would still drop America's oil consumption by an order of magnitude, meaning oil reserves will last that much longer and we can get a much larger percentage of our fix from non-Arabian sources.

Once that's done we can start playing with fuel cells which by all estimates are at least 15 years away and still haven't been proven to be any greener or cheaper than oil-derived fuels.

Gasoline-burning PHEVs buy us lots of time. Fuel cells will take lots of time.
You can see it that way if you like, but too many people either have no way to plug in (big cities and they are 'stacked' in a garage, or no garage and they park on the street), or they can't justify 2 vehicles, one for routine driving and one for longer trips...there's no way to quickly recharge an EV should one want or need to drive outside the range of the batteries. That's simply not acceptible to the vast majority of Americans. A compromise like a partial FCV, small ICE (either gas, CNG, diesel, whatever) or some other range extending means will be necessary to appeal to a mass market...and that is necessary for the vehicle and concept to gain wide acceptance and, most importantly, make money for the manufacturer. That's why the hybrids are so successful...people see that they don't have to make sacrifices so they'll accept the technology.

Time out.

Does the fuel cell version replace the series hybrid? Are they saying that the series hybrid version is dead and gone? Or does this exist with the series hybrid version, demonstrating the versatility of the E-Flex platform? Those are two very different things. One is bad, one is good.
The fuel cell version would be an alternate version...the type would vary by market and location....diesel where it's better accepted in the EU, fuel cell in markets where replacement/recharge cylinders are easier to fit into the infrastructure, gas for us country folk. Nothing is dead and gone, it's just an effort to display the "flex"ibility of the E-flex system.

Fool cells? Bah! :mad:
That seems to be the general concensus, but I think you folks are being a little too closed minded.
The original concept...a pure FCV seems, at this point, bad to me too....the huge amount of storage for a full range vehicle, the necessary infrastructure changes, safety issues, etc make it impractical in the short term. But if you could use a BBQ grill size storage tank that was interchangable and refillable as your back-up to the PHEV portion of a vehicle allowing infinite mileage of driving by simply replacing the tank every 50 miles or so I think you'd have something easier to achieve, less infrastructure issues (you could get these at any gas station or grocery store), and still essentially be living off the grid 99% of the time.

In many ways such a system offers huge advantages over the ICE/PHEV in that if your commute is short and you don't often take long trips the vehicle could suffer due to the infrequent running of the ice....you'd have to run the ICE once in a while just to cycle the oil and get the old gas out...what a waste when you could do that with hydrogen.

The Chevy Volt was touted as a series hybrid, using technology that was at hand.

Now GM is modifying it to be a FCV, with too many roadblocks in that technology to make their commitment credible.

One last thing here...I'm playing devil's advocate to all those who see "GM" and begin to froth at the mouth. I listened to a recent podcast by Lutz, I've seen a few private e-mails of his and I'm convinced of his sincerity in this project.

I'm not convinced it's the solution, but I am getting closer to believing it's workable. I'm not a GM fan, I'm definately not a Lutz fan, but there's something different about this project and I encourage everyone to keep an open mind and just watch the development. In my mind this is GM's "last chance"....I just don't see them surviving if they can't make something of this project. I pray it works.

The Chevy Volt was touted as a series hybrid, using technology that was at hand.

Now GM is modifying it to be a FCV, with too many roadblocks in that technology to make their commitment credible.

What roadblock to a partial FCV as I describe above...interchangeable tanks giving modest added range only when necessary? The technology works, there are running FCVs out there, just that the original concept was for a different scale, scaled back to a back-up energy source, just like gas would be, it's a much more realistic project.

I should have said "PHEVs" in that first sentence instead of "EVs".

I was trying to say that PHEV's are desperately needed today in order to drastically reduce the amount of oil we consume, and that they are fully do-able with today's battery and ICE technology. You're right about the issue that a very small portion of the population would run into with wall-charging an EV but a PHEV allays that.

None of us are saying the fuel cells are a non-starter but we've all already gotten over our initial excitement at the idea and accepted the reality of them, which is at least 15 years and billions of dollars of infrastructure away.

We can't wait that long, and there's no need to when COTS (Commercial, Off The Shelf) technology exists for PHEVs today.

Hi Efusco:

___My thoughts … When we finally get off the gasoline addiction, we can run E85 from our own sources and very little needs to be done to the existing infrastructure to support it. We cannot pump it through the pipelines which is another problem all its own however. Today’s gas stations have both an electric plug as well as tanks for Ethanol even though I am not at all hoping for Ethanol to take over unless we have reduced our fuel consumption down to the level of PHEV’s promise. If you are traveling 3,000 miles across the country, that means an H2 infrastructure and storage for an FCV which is far worse then any Bio-fuel or the outlet we will see in more and more locations for free. Think Costco in CA. and their free charge if you were parked in their lot and shopping at their store not 10 years ago. Traveling 3,000 miles in one shot would be tough on Electricity but Ethanol would take care of that once every 5 years trip vs. the H2 alternative and the huge waste in attempting to make it work in both the car and at the fill-up stations with today’s most advanced technologies.

___Most even considering a 3,000 miler take a 500 - 600 mile segment and stop at a hotel for the night(s). That is exactly when the PHEV using the E85 capable range extender will come to play.

___The Li-Ion’s from both JCI-Saft and A123Sytems can be charged at massive C-Rates without degradation. If I were a gas station owner, I would make darn sure I had a huge current capable 240/277 V setup for the sheer profit of it all. Here is 50 kWh’s worth of fuel (200 miles range and a 20 minute fill?) for $10.00 when it only costs the station owner $5.00 - $7.00 even at commercial rates. That is far more profit then the $0.05 - $0.10 or so the stations currently make on a gallon of gasoline today. The electric supply cap upgrade might be a bit over the top however :rolleyes:

___Pop Sci or Pop Mechanics did a story on alternative fuels in a Civic or FCV based Civic alternative (Honda’s smallish FCV at the time) to get across the country. Running an FCV cost something like $8.00 per gallon equivalent and was way out of range compared to every other alternative tested. We have it linked around here a few times in the past … This is while filling up at a commercial facility. The costs let lone prices and longevity of the PEM are ridiculous vs. the std. PHEV with range extending solution we will have before us in < 4 years time.

__Finally, GM will build the Volt or similar vehicle because they will be forced to compete in the market place. If they do not, they will die. Toyota’s $2,000 upcharge for today’s Ni-MH based HSD (less going forward) is already going to kill them if Toyota decided to push it into every one of their vehicles at that markup let alone a $4 - $5K upcharge for a 30 - 40 mile PHEV in which GM, F, and DCX have nothing to go up against unless the Volt and Edge Hy-Series minus the “Hy” are built for the 2011 MY.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

I've heard about the fast charge Li Ions, but, at this point, they seem as unrealistic to get to the market in a usable form as a full FCV.

Hi Efusco:

___The fast charge Li-Ion’s are in vehicles now but the chargers were not scaled up to punch up a packs SoC that quick is all. The HyMotion uses A123System Cel’s and they can be fast charged from 0 to 100% SoC in < 10 minutes no matter the cap. A123Sytems is already making .5 million cel’s a month for various other uses and scaling up for PHEV’s would take less then a year after that … Have you seen an impact drill, table saw or laptop computer powered by a fuel cel? I have seen the write-ups of lab based laptop setups but none in the real world vs. Li-Ion’s which are everywhere. The extremely robust - automotive capable Cel’s (JCI-SAFT and A123Systems) are ready to go from everybody we have spoken with. GM has them installed in a number of test mules including the DualMode Tahoe’s and Yukon’s as well as the SaturnVue DualMode front driver PHEV’s even now. This is far easier to put together let alone costing 100’s of thousands of $’s less the any FCV you could possibly consider purchasing (we cannot but it would be an interesting to see the MSRP at $350 - $500,000 for an FCV capable Car/SUV :D) and/or fuel the darn thing today.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

Hi Efusco:

___The fast charge Li-Ion’s are in vehicles now but the chargers were not scaled up to punch up a packs SoC that quick is all. The HyMotion uses A123System Cel’s and they can be fast charged from 0 to 100% SoC in < 10 minutes no matter the cap. A123Sytems is already making .5 million cel’s a month for various other uses and scaling up for PHEV’s would take less then a year after that … Have you seen an impact drill, table saw or laptop computer powered by a fuel cel? I have seen the write-ups of lab based laptop setups but none in the real world vs. Li-Ion’s which are everywhere. The extremely robust - automotive capable Cel’s (JCI-SAFT and A123Systems) are ready to go from everybody we have spoken with. GM has them installed in a number of test mules including the DualMode Tahoe’s and Yukon’s as well as the SaturnVue DualMode front driver PHEV’s even now. This is far easier to put together let alone costing 100’s of thousands of $’s less the any FCV you could possibly consider purchasing (we cannot but it would be an interesting to see the MSRP at $350 - $500,000 for the car/SUV :D) and/or fuel today.

___Good Luck

___Wayne
Certainly that's the up side, but they also lose power with tiime, are quite costly compared to NiMH, cooling is an issue, and longevity an issue as well with the rapid charging rates. And, again, you run into infrastructure issues w/ the charging stations. I'm all for this, do NOT get me wrong, I just don't think we're there...likewise w/ FCV I agree, but it's not outside of the realm of reality.

Okay, as soon as you mention "exchangeable" energy storage
containment means, you open a big can of worms. If the
general public were clueful enough to handle that model of
energy purchase, and we already know they're not, then you
could have said storage containers in many forms -- batteries,
jerry-jugs already filled with gasoline, or even H2 cylinders
if that's what you'd prefer. The interfaces would have to be
totally standard and more idiot-proof than a modern gas pump
[which is beyond some peoples' capability already], and
readily available to all vehicle owners regardless of their
living situations. No reason a couple of "electricity
containers" couldn't be taken out of a car and brought
inside for overnight charging, right? Or a CNG cylinder
hooked up to a "Phill" box? Whatever form you'd like it
to take, removable storage is theoretically doable for any
vehicle, but the safety and standards implications are stunning.
.
And I've had several fuel cell hawkers agree that fuel
cells are best as a stationary, climate-controlled installation --
local generation and use of H2, almost like a battery, where
storage volume and temperature fluctuations are less of an
issue. Sure, generate the electric power at those points,
but let me store it in my vehicle in a much more sensible way.
.
Now, maybe E-flex is that same concept now extended to the
forms of fuel-consuming energy producers -- an available
selection of traditional ICE, FC if you really insist, Mr.
Fusion, wood-fired steam engine, whatever. Does it only produce
electricity, or do we want it to contribute mechanical
propulsive force too? Can we easily swap *that* means out
with another depending on the type of trip we're about to
take? How lego-car do we want to get here?
.
_H*

Hi Efusco:

___Let me show you something you cannot do with any NiMH from Sanyo, Panasonic EV, Mitsubishi or Matsu****a that I know of …

KillaCycle - World’s quickest Electric bike while running A123System's M1 Cel's. (http://www.cleanmpg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4183)

___High temp reliability at high C-Rates far exceeds that of a NiMH, internal impedance is supposedly a lot lower and its fast charge and discharge capability as well as SoC range is so far beyond the Ni-MH it isn’t even close. These are truly super batteries for lack of a better term and are available today.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

I totally agree with you, Bailout, that we should take advantage of the technology for PHEVs now, because it is a way to reduce energy use, and anything that can be done to reduce use, should be done. Let the other technologies develop, but make as much use of what we have now as possible. I think we have to assume that we have less time than we think to save us.

As far as the asking people to remember to plug in, we all have to start doing things we are not accustomed to, to try to turn back what we have created. Maybe someone will invent wireless electric connections, so we don't have to remember.

Ken

google for "paddle" and "charger"
.
_H*

Gotta love Fuel Cell Vehicles. They cost $1 million each, last only 50,000 Miles, and there's nowhere to refuel them. How mainstream!

That seems to be the general concensus, but I think you folks are being a little too closed minded.
The original concept...a pure FCV seems, at this point, bad to me too....the huge amount of storage for a full range vehicle, the necessary infrastructure changes, safety issues, etc make it impractical in the short term. But if you could use a BBQ grill size storage tank that was interchangable and refillable as your back-up to the PHEV portion of a vehicle allowing infinite mileage of driving by simply replacing the tank every 50 miles or so I think you'd have something easier to achieve, less infrastructure issues (you could get these at any gas station or grocery store), and still essentially be living off the grid 99% of the time.

In many ways such a system offers huge advantages over the ICE/PHEV in that if your commute is short and you don't often take long trips the vehicle could suffer due to the infrequent running of the ice....you'd have to run the ICE once in a while just to cycle the oil and get the old gas out...what a waste when you could do that with hydrogen.

We're not even close to affordable FCs and hydrogen fuel. A PHEV with a small engine is doable *right now*.

Hi Efusco:

___Let me show you something you cannot do with any NiMH from Sanyo, Panasonic EV, Mitsubishi or Matsu****a that I know of …

KillaCycle - World’s quickest Electric bike while running A123System's M1 Cel's. (http://www.cleanmpg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4183)

___High temp reliability at high C-Rates far exceeds that of a NiMH, internal impedance is supposedly a lot lower and its fast charge and discharge capability as well as SoC range is so far beyond the Ni-MH it isn’t even close. These are truly super batteries for lack of a better term and are available today.

___Good Luck

___Wayne
I saw that post earlier...and it is impressive.
So here's my question...are all the automotive manufacturer's sandbagging us? Tesla isn't using a 10min fast charge. Toyota hasn't suggested that they'll be packing a PHEV with these in the near future. GM says they don't have the technology yet but have a contract with A123.

Again, I'm all for a pure EV when we can overcome the fast recharge/long distance travel, deep cycle discharge without loss of performance over time (something Tesla hasn't overcome yet), longevity and/or inexpensive replacement of the battery every 100k miles or so.

Despite the protestations of the EV folks I have to believe that there are real barriers to this...be it cost, be it the ability to mass produce adequate numbers, be it reliability, or a combination I tend to believe those who say the technology is not ready.

Listen, if an EV came out and did not meet the expectations of finicky Americans it could devestate the future of EVs...people are upset because they can't use the MFD on their Prius to adjust the mpg readout when it's off by 2%! What would happen if 2 years into the "fast charge EV" some of the batteries started failing or range diminished by 50%...the media would be all over it, people would be scared off and the industry itself would be sorely damaged...even today, 3 1/2 years after release, the same false rumors and myths persist about the Prius--not a day goes by at PC where someone doesn't ask how much the battery costs when it dies at 100k miles or how you recharge it or something. EVs would increase that anxiety even more.

Further, even with fast charging, you're going to need a long range EV (200-300+ miles) to pull in folks that don't have a means of charging at home...they're not going to want to run by a charging station every other day if the range is only 100 miles or less. And nobody is going to want to go on a highway trip and have to stop every 2-3 hours to recharge.

Anyway, by our jousting it sounds like we're on different sides of this thing whereas I believe we're very close on the issue with out differences being more related to how we envision the 'next step' in the process of moving to a pure EV society.

I also want to be clear that I absolutely agree thatand ICE-PHEV is the clear next step...be it the E-flex model of GM or a Prius III or whatever. At the same time I see no reason not to look at and explore alternative back-up power sources such as interchangable hydrogen FCs, diesel, etc...