GM 70MPG Plug-In Hybrid

[Clocker]

I've never been a big advocate of hybrids from a customer investment standpoint. Even at $3/gallon of gas, it's been hard to make up the additional cost to the consumer over the life of the vehicle unless you drive a ridiculous amount of miles.

Fortunately, I think the technology is maturing and coming down in price so that we can reduce our automobile dependance on foreign oil & save consumers some $ at the same time. GM's 2-Mode hybrid system soon to be out in our full size SUVs in 2007 is a great step forward. And, speculation is that the 70 MPG plug-in hybrid is just an evolution of that system so it could be coming sooner rather than later.

I guess there's also an environmental aspect that's interesting. Hybrid's may be 'greener' in the overall scheme of things. But that won't really matter much at all since China & India will be the biggest polluters in the world in the no so distant future and I would not expect them to be worrying about emissions (automotive or other) at all.

Either way, I think the plug-ins are another good step toward a diversified menu of choices for powering vehicles (E85-which I run my truck on, biofuels, diesels, gas, and (eventually) fuel cells). For me it's all about reducing dependance on foreign oil.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-0611300137nov30,0,2814326.story?coll=chi-business-hed

GM is recharging into electric cars

By Jim Mateja
Tribune auto writer
Published November 30, 2006


LOS ANGELES -- The electric car isn't dead after all.

General Motors will resurrect it with a plug-in version of the Saturn Vue sport-utility vehicle. GM Chairman Rick Wagoner said the automaker has begun work on creating a battery-powered plug-in but wouldn't say when it would be ready for sale.

"I can't give you a date but can tell you this is a top priority program for GM given the huge potential it offers for fuel economy improvement," Wagoner said at the opening of the Los Angeles Auto Show.

Wagoner estimated a Vue plug-in could obtain better than 45 percent higher mileage than a gas-driven Vue, which would give it nearly a 70 m.p.g. city mileage rating. Ironically, after Wagoner's remarks about saving energy, a protester walked to the podium demanding Wagoner sign a pledge to be the industry leader in fuel conservation. The protester was quickly removed from the microphone by Wagoner.

Environmentalists have become plug-in advocates, saying most motorists commute less than 50 miles to and from work each day and could do that on batteries alone without consuming any gas and creating any emissions. And they could plug in overnight to recharge the batteries.

"The technology hurdles are real but surmountable. Production timing will depend on battery technology development," Wagoner said of the need for higher output, longer lasting batteries.

Though analysts lauded GM for spearheading plug-in hybrid vehicles, they said it also was a wise public relations move.

"GM didn't appreciate the impact Toyota and Honda hybrids would make on consumers, and so news of a plug-in is a good PR gesture and a step to take to catch up with Toyota and Honda and let people know they are in the [environment] game," said Jim Hossack, vice president of AutoPacific.

Catherine Madden, analyst with Global Insight, agreed with the PR ploy.

"This puts GM in the limelight for the moment as it tries to change the perception that Toyota and Honda lead the way in hybrids and it doesn't care about the environment. This is a start, but the plug-in has to work and GM can't just talk about it."

Wagoner said the Vue plug-in would use lithium ion batteries to learn how much better range they can provide than the nickel metal hydride batteries used in today's hybrids. Estimates are that driving range could be doubled.

"GM is committed to the development of electrically driven vehicles that will help improve energy diversity and minimize the auto's impact on the environment. We'll follow with additional announcements during the auto show season, including Detroit, in about six weeks."

In Detroit, the speculation is that GM will detail plans to use an on-board source of energy, perhaps an electric motor or small generator fueled by an alternative fuel of its own, to recharge the batteries when needed while driving a plug-in.

Wagoner said only, "Stay tuned."

He downplayed being first in an industrywide race to market a plug-in.

"It's good to be first, but what's more important, what moves the needle is being first to offer 200,000 to 1 million of them, rather than being the first one out with plug-ins."

Toyota is looking into plug-ins, and GM's announcement may have been directed at stealing some of the Japanese automaker's thunder should it plan to unveil a plug-in at the Detroit Auto Show. Wagoner said GM will continue to develop gas/electric hybrids, vehicles that run on biofuels such as E85 ethanol blend, as well as hydrogen fuel cells, in addition to traditional gas- and diesel-powered engines.

Considering consumer shock from bouts with $3-a-gallon gas in recent months, Wagoner said, "We believe that the best way to power the automobile in the years to come is to do so with many different sources of energy."

GM is developing gas/electric hybrids in cooperation with DaimlerChrysler and BMW. Wagoner wouldn't rule out a plug-in venture with others but said there are no current plans.

As a concession that the Hummer brand has served as the target of environmentalists hell-bent to put an end to gas guzzlers, Wagoner said every Hummer model will be converted to run on E85 over the next three years.

GM shocked the industry in 1996 when it brought out the EV-1 battery-powered electric car, at first powered by lead acid batteries, and by 1999 with more potent nickel metal hydride batteries.

The electric car promised an end to reliance on foreign oil as well as the means to remove cars as one of the causes of air pollution and global warming.

GM leased the vehicles in California and Arizona at $300 to $400 a month, but ceased production in 2000, citing a variety of problems, one being a limited driving range of 100 miles before needing to plug into a socket for a 6-to-8-hour recharge before moving again. Another problem was that with limited demand, GM was losing money on the deal.

GM said it invested more than $1 billion in the electric car but had few takers--only 800 leases in four years.

Environmental groups insisted GM gave up too soon and that thousands wanted the car, but GM only built 1,000 in four years and didn't make enough available for consumers. Earlier this year, GM was the subject of a documentary film, "Who Killed the Electric Car?"

GM spokesman Dave Barthmuss said the automaker contacted 5,000 consumers who inquired about the car, but after being told about the limited range, long recharge time and lease cost, only 50 agreed to become part of the 800 who leased the car.

 

[P5-133XL]

When dealing with a plug-in hybrid, One that uses an electricity outlet rather than the gas engine to recharge, aren't you just fooling with the energy statistics and envirornmental statistics. Sure you may be getting 70MPG, but that isn't counting the cost of the electricity gained from the plug and that still has to be paid for by the consumer in a seperate transaction from the filling station. The same goes for emmisions, it does not incorporate the emmisions of the energy producers that supply electricity to your home. My point is that it is just passing the buck on to somewhere else rather than the car; It doesn't actually solve anything.

Or perhaps my biases are showing, and this is a good thing ...

 

[Buck]

I hope something like the EV1 comes out soon to add to the low/no consumption fuel mix. Clocker, have you read about the Bluetec technology developed between DaimlerChrysler and Volkswagen? Very nice technology, as it addresses both the CO and NO camps in the diesel emissions segment.

Five-Part Technology Overview

 

[Buck]

When dealing with a plug-in hybrid, One that uses an electricity outlet rather than the gas engine to recharge, aren't you just fooling with the energy statistics and envirornmental statistics. Sure you may be getting 70MPG, but that isn't counting the cost of the electricity gained from the plug and that still has to be paid for by the consumer in a seperate transaction from the filling station. The same goes for emmisions, it does not incorporate the emmisions of the energy producers that supply electricity to your home. My point is that it is just passing the buck on to somewhere else rather than the car; It doesn't actually solve anything.

Overall, I don't see a cost savings either. However, I do believe that emissions would be reduced. I think the emissions produced by the energy suppliers would be less than what is generated as a whole by each vehicle.

 

[Clocker]

When dealing with a plug-in hybrid, One that uses an electricity outlet rather than the gas engine to recharge, aren't you just fooling with the energy statistics and envirornmental statistics. Sure you may be getting 70MPG, but that isn't counting the cost of the electricity gained from the plug and that still has to be paid for by the consumer in a seperate transaction from the filling station. The same goes for emmisions, it does not incorporate the emmisions of the energy producers that supply electricity to your home. My point is that it is just passing the buck on to somewhere else rather than the car; It doesn't actually solve anything.

Or perhaps my biases are showing, and this is a good thing ...

It allows us to reduce dependance on foreign oil and more fully utilize other sources of energy such as Coal, Nuclear, etc.

So in that respect, the Vue 70MPG plug-in hybrid would be (according to the latest U.S. data) 49.7% coal-powered, 19.3% nuclear-powered, 18.7% natural gas-powered, 6.5% hydro-powered, and 3.0% oil-powered.

 

[timwhit]

In the Chicago area about 85% of electricity is nuclear produced, so this would reduce emmissions.

Plus, power plants are more efficient energy producers than any automobile.

 

[P5-133XL]

It allows us to reduce dependance on foreign oil and more fully utilize other sources of energy such as Coal, Nuclear, etc.

So in that respect, the Vue 70MPG plug-in hybrid would be (according to the latest U.S. data) 49.7% coal-powered, 19.3% nuclear-powered, 18.7% natural gas-powered, 6.5% hydro-powered, and 3.0% oil-powered.

I will give you those points.

Unfortunately, all forms of power generation (including nuclear) have their unwanted byproducts and environmental flaws. Those will not be counted as emissions caused by the car's electricity usage. So it is still simply passing the emissions buck.

It may be that electricity generation is more pollution friendly than cars, but I don't know that. It may be easier to deal with polution issues with the large electricity producers than the difuse point source of all automobiles: Again, I don't know that one way or another. Maybe it is better for the nation to pass the proverbial buck.

The cost of the cars electricity usage is also not being counted against it when examining its economic impact on the consumer. The total operating cost may be lower/the same/higher depending on the cost of electricity in the specific location. My cynicism is high but I seriously doubt that when GM is marketing the car they are not going to give the electricity cost per mile and add that on to the cost of the gasoline to get a true operating cost that could be compared to gasoline only. My guess is that GM will be saying it costs more but look at the extra mileage you will be getting (without mentioning the extra electricity costs): It'll pay for itself in a reasonable time frame unlike other hybrids. But if it did that, it would be lying, wouldn't it...

 

[Clocker]

As long as it reduces dependance on the middle east, it's a huge win. That's all I need. F those OPEC bastards.

 

[Bozo]

Nice idea but...

There is the problem of range. Great for city driving, but in the suburbs it wouldn't work well. On the days that I drive to town, run my errands and pick up items at stores that are not near us, I put over 100 miles on the car.
Then there is something everybody seems to over look. Doing something with the batteries when their useful life has ended. And what about the batteries in an accident? One battery leaking into a sewer pipe leading to a stream or river would do far more envirnmental damage than some gasolene.

Then there are the OPEC countries. Like the head of OPEC said, he's not worried about E85 or electric cars. They will just open the tap and drive the price of oil down to the point where it is not economically feasable (or profitable) to use anything else.

Bozo :joker:

 

[Clocker]

It's a plug-in hybrid. It uses mostly batteries but has a powertrain to charge them up when the plug-in charge is gone.

 

[P5-133XL]

As long as it reduces dependance on the middle east, it's a huge win. That's all I need. F those OPEC bastards.

Again, I will definately surrender that point, and yes it is a strong one. As a nation, we are following an energy path of destruction by being dependant upon oil. If one looks at the independant forecasts concerning crude oil supply and demand, $3.00 a gallon is gonna be outright cheap in a few years. But then there is the fact that in the early 70's the prediction would be that the world would be running out of oil deposits within 20 years. It's now 2006 and the same experts are still saying the same thing with the same 20 year time-frame. It feels like they have been crying wolf for an aweful long time ...

Back then the solution most quoted was the use of shale-oil. Supposedly the US has hundreds of years worth of shale-oil production. Back then, the only reason given was that we hadn't switched was because the production of shale oil was slightly more than the current cost of crude. Well, today, the same situation still exists: Shale oil production still costs more than crude even though crude has drasticly increased in price. So what's going on with shale oil?

 

[timwhit]

The Wikipedia article talks about the economics behind oil shale.

It is probably economical to start mining oil shale at the moment, but after production of oil shale starts to hit the market, this will increase supply to a point where barrel prices will drop. Basically, I think the oil companies are waiting to make sure that oil prices stay high enough for long enough before investing billions of dollars in oil shale mining and pipelines.

 

[Clocker]

What I've seen on TV was that shale oil in Canada is only profitable once crude costs around $80-100 per barrel (or something like that) because it takes a lot of energy to get the oil out.

Bozo makes a great point that OPEC as well as Big Oil will control the cost of their products to discourage the investigation of alternate sources & technologies. Eventually, demand around the world will eliminate their ability to control prices though, I think.

 

[P5-133XL]

The Wikipedia article talks about the economics behind oil shale.

It is probably economical to start mining oil shale at the moment, but after production of oil shale starts to hit the market, this will increase supply to a point where barrel prices will drop. Basically, I think the oil companies are waiting to make sure that oil prices stay high enough for long enough before investing billions of dollars in oil shale mining and pipelines.

Good article: It explains alot about shale oil.

One of the things that caught my eye was that it says the amount of shale-oil equivilents is aprox equal to 1/2 the known crude reserves: So much for hundres of years because if the known crude reserves is only 20 years worth, then we've only added 10 years (assuming no increases in demand) by exploiting all the shale-oil.

 

[Pradeep]

I like the idea of the Honda Civix GX natural gas powered cars, where you can buy a small filling station that sits in your garage, and fills your car from your natural gas line overnight. Cost comes out to about $1.30 per gallon (filling station being around $3K). 200 mile range is more than enough for my commute, still need a petrol powered vehicle for longer trips.

At work, they have four of the Zipcars. If I lived close enough, they would be a serious contender for vehicle replacement, cost is about $8 per hour (gas included!)

 

[Bozo]

Shame the Honda doesn't run on Propane. You could fill them any place you get your gas grill bottle refilled.

Bozo :joker:

 

[mubs]

Note: All references to petrol refer to gasoline. All references to gas refer to the vaporous thing.

Gas is used in some parts of the world to run cars. They're very common in India, many vehicles being modified to use dual fuels - petrol and either Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) or Liquified Petroleum Gas (LPG).

CNG is made by compressing methane (CH4) extracted from natural gas, and is considered to be environmentally "clean". CNG has grown into one of the major fuel sources used in car engines in Pakistan, Bangladesh and India. The use of CNG is mandated for the public transport system of New Delhi, India's capital city. The Delhi Transport Corporation operates the world's largest fleet of CNG buses. (shameless extract from Wikipedia). Oddly, this did not happen voluntarily or through legislation, but because of an order from the highest court in the land. The issue was gross pollution resulting in a Public-Interest-Litigation case and the now historic decision handed down by the Supreme Court. Delhi air is far, far cleaner as a result.

LPG is a mixture of hydrocarbon gases. New Delhi uses CNG exclusively; LPG is used in other parts of India. LPG is manufactured during the refining of crude oil, or extracted from oil or gas streams as they emerge from the ground. Propoane is usually a component of LPG.

Conversion to dual-fuels involves installing an extra tank that can hold about 13 gallons (50 litres) of LPG in the trunk (this is the main downside; loss of trunk space), and the necessary controls to select the fuel to use, petrol or gas. The controls also include an electronic gauge (usually a row of a few LEDs) to determine the amount of gas in the tank. There is no modification done to the engine other than to the fuel supply system. My understanding is that emissions and emissions equipment are not affected either. Conversion costs about $450 and takes less than a day. The kits & controls come from Italy, so I presume they've been doing these conversions for a while. Conversions are approved by the Dept. of Motor Vehicles and so endorsed in the vehicle records. The auto insurance company has to be notofied as well, and insurance goes up a bit.

Some domestic car manufacturers offer dual-fuels as a factory option; integration in the car is way better than an after-market conversion.

If one were to do the whole thing illegally, one would stick a cooking gas (LPG) cylinder or "bottle" in the trunk, with the necessary pipes and controls. This kind of set up is *not* approved officially and can get one in a lot of trouble should it come to light (because of a fender-bender or a speeding ticket, for instance).

In use, you can switch from one fuel to another anytime when the engine is off. You go to a petrol station that dispenses LPG and fill up there, just as you would petrol. If you fill up on petrol as well, you get an extended range. Dual-fuel stations are becoming more widespread. Mileage with LPG is slightly less by about 8%. Engine power also drops marginally. But the savings are extraordinary.

Petrol costs about $4.60 a US gallon (Rs. 55 per litre) in Bangalore. Prices are fixed by the Govt. (no free market mechanism for "essential" fuels). That price includes hefty central (federal) and state taxes.

LPG costs about $2 a U.S. gallon, so payback is pretty good. LPG sold at filling stations for vehicles is outside the purview of price controls, so the price varies a bit with world-wide demand (summer/winter).

My car gets about 22.8 MPG (9.8 km/litre) in mostly heavy traffic, 2nd or 3rd gear, short stretches of fourth gear, even shorter stretches of overdrive. This month, I'll be having my car fitted with an LPG kit. I'll be going on my first long distance trip (500+ miles) in the last 10 days of December, so I'll know first hand how it works out. My brother's Honda Civic has an aftermarket gas conversion kit installed, and he's very happy with it, using it on gas all the time except when he goes out of town and can't find gas; then he simply switches over to petrol till he gets back.

With pervasive availability in the U.S. of natural gas, this is a very viable option. All over the world, gas is cheaper than petrol or electricity, and when there's so much of it most everywhere, I fail to see why it's not available as an option in the U.S. The gains are enormous compared to the pain.

 

[Pradeep]

LPG gas conversions are quite common in Australia as well. Especially taxis. However, the financial incentive to do so has diminished drastically in the last 10 years, it used to be that LPG was substantially cheaper than petrol (say 20%), however they are now almost equal in price per litre, and given the slight mileage loss, it saves no money at all.

 

[Pradeep]

Shame the Honda doesn't run on Propane. You could fill them any place you get your gas grill bottle refilled.

Bozo :joker:

Perfect for tailgating as well, just plug your portable gas grill into your car for extended cookouts

 

[Mercutio]

Car threads make my eyes glaze over. But I think this is cool.

 

[Bozo]

All the fork lifts used inside of our plant run on Propane. It's been that way for 30+ years.

Bozo :joker:

 

[Buck]

Maybe I should switch my dinosaur burner over to used vegetable oil.

 

[mubs]

Got a MacDonald's or Burger King close by?

 

[Buck]

Got a MacDonald's or Burger King close by?

Most fast food places are near by, but I would rather ask the closest Indian restaurant. Besides being shrewd business men, Indian restaurant owners are left with plenty of used oil. I should know, I'm there at least once a week eating as many Pakoras and Samosas that my diet can handle.