Chevy stops Volt production (temporarily ...)

Interesting. May I ask how you get that?
I am assuming the EPA made some calculations to arrive at 1 gallon of gas is equivalent to 33kwh.
Using your numbers (50 mpg=3 miles/kwh) calculates out to about 1 gallon is equivalent to 17kwh?

I prefer to keep it simple. Efficiency is the amount of fuel it takes to move you a certain distance. I use the EPA numbers as I haven't done the tests myself.

 

The withholding of CS-mode efficiency data was the first sign of expectations not being realistic. The MPG following depletion fell well short of what had been hoped for.

Then came the reality of heater demands in the winter. No matter how many times we pointed out the impact to EV range electric-heating would have, the enthusiasts just plain did not want to acknowledge it. They even fought intensely against the benefit of having a HOLD button, despite the reality that it could help overcome that problem.

The reason for resistance was obvious. They wanted to differentiate Volt from Prius... hence all the "vastly superior" chanting we had to endure prior to rollout.

Now there's the reality of acceptance. PHV delivers great all-around efficiency and without the need to consider purchase of an aftermarket charging-station. PHV also comes close to middle-market pricing without dependency on tax-credits. Energi availability will change the dynamic too, creating more pressure to compete with an array of features rather than just heavy EV focus.

The reason for the "too little, too slowly" concern will become more apparent in the next year. Time is not abundant. Reality will be faced. Change will be required.

 

Keep in mind the EPA methodology (which I have questioned EPA on) is strictly intended to assign a *gasoline* MPG consumption number to EV mode for CAFE purposes, which of course EV uses zero gasoline, so we wind up with ~100 MPGe.

The 100 MPGe number does not reflect the non-gasoline fuel sources that go into making the electricity. Unfort everyone assumes it does. For example. Consumer Reports constantly states that 100 MPGe reflects high efficiency and near zero consumption of fossil fuels for EV, but this is totally incorrect. The 100 MPGe does reflect near-zero use of gasoline, but it is not accounting for the energy demands of EV, even if you have green elec sources, you are still using a lot of energy demand to make a car go.

So if you use 17 (vs 33) that still gives too much benefit of doubt to EV but it is step in right direction. It gives you rough parity on a CO2 basis for EV and gaso mode at 50 MPG, but I am not even particularly enamored with saying CO2 is the only cost of making electrons ( if we go by CO2-only, that says for example nuke power is zero eco-cost to society).

 

I apologize, I was not clear and I mentioned the incorrect organization.
I am speaking purely of efficiency, not green house gases. That number from the EPA can't be applied to individuals, and since my points that for ME as an individual the Volt is more efficient, the EPA numbers don't apply.
The 33kwh equivalency number is purely for efficiency numbers' not greenhouse gasses.

I was incorrect in mentioning the EPA. The equivalency is based on Gasoline gallon equivalent - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

On a purely efficiency level, with my driving habits, the Volt is vastly more efficient than the Prius and much more efficient than the Prius. The Prius is a wonderfully efficient car, and for some people's driving patterns it is more efficient than the Volt. I am glad to see it leading the pack in hybrids and hope to see them break the 3% market share soon.

Both are wonderful cars, each with advantages and disadvantages.

 

I disagree with your assessment of what EPA is about. CAFE numbers are NOT the epa numbers we see. The EPA is providing comparison information in consumer form and spent lots of time working on improving the process to match consumer experience. The point of EPA is to have a standard measurement technique based on science.


Efficiency, as measured by EPA, is tank-to-wheels and is very well defined. You are not arguing about efficiency, you are arguing about vague feeling you have, not CO2 but also not well articulated. EPA is about science and engineering, if you cannot even articulate what your measure is, then you cannot justify doing anything with the EPA measures to estimate. If you want to define some other formal measure and go out and measure it for lots of cars, your free to do that. But your "analysis" makes no sense to me.

If you want to do wells-to-wheels then you can try to adapt but as you say its more complex depending on the source of electricity.

There are many dimensions on which one can measure, vehicle energy efficiency (what EPA does), life-time energy efficiency, resource efficiency (lifetime pollution impact), economic efficiency, GHG efficiency, political efficiency.

 

If you focus only at the vehicle efficiency, EVs are superior. If you focus only on fuel production efficiency, gasoline HVs are superior. If you combine them and view them as well-to-wheel efficiency, both are about the same.

When it comes to plugin hybrids, one can be designed to take advantages of both gasoline and electricity. On the flip side, one can also be designed to take both disadvantages.

From the environment point of view, this chart sums up the greeness:

 

That chart is based on some assumptions about grid production sources. Is it using 2012 sources?

It would be interesting to understand how many EV owners purchase renewables for their household grid consumption. I get my EV charging from renewables.

 

Plug in cars are at the chicken v. egg conundrum. Do to the battery, the cars cost more than the standard fueled ones available. The price keeps people from buying them, and companies won't invest in research and production if people won't buy them. Waiting for the free market approach for gas prices to increase to the point where a plug in price is considered acceptable is reactionary. Pushing them now will be less costly.

So we have the tax credits to help subsidize the batteries cost the get the ball rolling. Investment has already gone into research. The 2013 Volt received a modest boost in EV range and efficiency without cost increase from a newer battery chemistry. Barring a miracle break through, technological improvements aren't going to drop battery prices fast enough for the cars to go mainstream. We need battery production to increase.

Auxillary components for the battery packs are comparatively cheap, and since everybody is using their own format, increased sales of one model isn't going to help out another one. Production of the cells needs to increase in order for volume price reductions to have a dent in battery prices.

In order to have the same affect on cell demand and thus product, Toyota needs to sell 3 to 4 Prius PHVs to every Volt sold.

What clock is ticking? The first Prius came out in 1997 for Japan. The US got a refresh version tailored to the market in 2001. It was pricier than the Corolla and Echo of the time, and remained a low volume seller. The gen2 arrived at dealers in 2004 which is when the model took off in sales. So it took Toyota 6 years to get the Prius to high volume.

The Volt was released in 2010. There are improvements to the battery for the 2013. Any possible price decreases won't happen until the next generation, which will be in 2 to 3 years. Why the impatience with GM then? Because what some marketing suit, who may no longer be with the company, said years before? Because of obtuse behavior from internet fanbois, imagine that? Or because they aren't Toyota?

It was another 8 years since the Prius went high volume before Toyota released a plug in model. Third party plug in kits hit the market in 2005. How slow was that clock? Alright, that was a cheap shot. Makes more sense for Toyota to wait for the next generation than rush something for the current one. It was still a few years after the gen3 introduction though. Without the Leaf and Volt coming to market, we'd probably still be waiting. Can't forget the incentives. Without the tax credit or HOV sticker, how many would pay over $30,000 for Prius with a Camry hybrid XLE available for less?

Why do the comparisons come up in every Volt thread? Is someone bringing up the Volt in every Prius PHV thread? There are at least two long threads specifically comparing the cars. It doesn't need to be rehashed all the time. This thread really isn't even about the Volt itself, but its factory.

 

IIRC, the data is from 2009.
The chart isn't an accurate representation of the states. It isn't even an average for the state. Using a random zip code for a state can skew the results.
The numbers for Pa appear to be from the western side where coal is a large percentage. Here in the east, we have several nuke plants(remember TMI? it's still running). I know for me that the Volt will emit less CO2 than the national average.

 

It takes about 5 years for a traditional car company to design a new car. The precept was convoluted and expensive. The other parts, the carbon fiber body costs too much even today for a low performance car, and diesel has severe emissions control problems without ultra low sulfur fuel that was not wide spread until 2010 in the US. Precept begot 2-mode that now seems like its being canceled because it is too expensive. I hope they invest in another hybrid technology for trucks and that the large SUV market fades away.

GM has admitted that killing the ev1 was a mistake, and continuation of the program would have brought the volt out much sooner. The ev1 would not have sold well. The leaf is arguably a much more saleable car and it is having trouble. But the ev1 would have served as a green halo, instead of the hummer and crushing of the ev1 serving as a brown halo. Keeping the ev1 would have aided gm in developing batteries, motors, and electric hvac. Those are the main areas needed for a successful phev that gm does not have. The volt may have arrived in 2007 instead of 2010, not much tine savings but we might be at a sucessfull gen II around now. Try not to be backward looking.

Try a test drive of a volt it is a well engineered car. Back on topic sales were 2800 last month, the factory is not being idled by lack of volt demand. The volt is getting a version 1.5 in one or two years, and battery prices are continuing to fall. The market will be more competitive next year. The success or failure of these cars depends on the next generation model, not this one.

 

It is from EPA's Beyond Tailpipe Emission site. Here are their assumptions.

 

I see John still continues to badmouth the Volt. I now own a 2012 Chevy Volt, and this car continues to amaze me every single day. I got back from a 3700 mile trip in this car that covered 10 states. I'll let the picture of my trip information do the talking:



When I'm home, my gasoline consumption is literally zero. As for John, had this car sported the Toyota badge instead of the Chevy badge, he would be defending it every bit as rabidly as actual real Volt owners do. Too bad John couldn't be bothered to actually compare the cars before engaging in his mission to continually smear, besmirtch, and diss the car. Nothing like a blind hater.

The history on the Volt pricing was that it was originally supposed to hit the market at about $25k. Blame an economic depression, currency devaluations, and a bankruptcy for GM for all three combining to force the cost of the car to the $40k mark. The prodcution numbers will not hit Lutz's lofty goals until the cost of the car can be brought down to something close to the original targets.

On the subject of the factory closing. They are adding a line to build the new Impala at that plant. Current inventories have nothing to do with the decision to close the place for a month.

John continues to cover up the fact that the PIP enjoys the same subsidies as the Volt, when he mentions the tax credits. A lie by omission is still a lie, as he is deliberately misrepresenting the facts.

 

They seem to be using 2009 grid production assumptions, that pre-dates the introduction of the Volt.

 

Nah. Blame GM hype and their unswerving over promising and under delivering.

"40 miles on 8 kwh" was more GM BS (actual: 35 miles on 12.5 kwh).
"New serial hybrid" was more GM BS (actual: Prius copy.)
I could go on ...

Awesome fuel economy by the way. How often did you plug in ?

 

If you focus only on fuel production efficiency, which you seem to measure by carbon production, gasoline HVs CAN be superior, if compared to coal-based electricity or electricity with a large fraction of coal.

But you are not looking at the CO2 for the sources the owners are paying for.. that is a major point for EVs.. the owner gets to choose the source of fuel. Wind is way more efficient than gas in production efficiency, so is hydro. Solar and nuke, as measured in COE, are better (though each higher upstream CO2 generation than wind or hydro).

Also you looking at the current production/CO2 for each, not the CO2 for over the expected life of the car.

With a recent article saying sales since April have been 1/3 in Cali, where the average grid makes the volt already less CO2 producing than a HV, the overall impact is probably a net positive.

The other point it that the comparison should not be between cars the owner might have bought, but between cars they would likly have bought. A lot of Volt owers were trading in BMWs and Audis.. not hybrids, so they still produce a new CO2 reduction by driving a volt even in the most coal intensive power systems.

 

Then blame every other EV maker for the same over promise. None have yet to hit their desired mark.

Every day except one as the place I stayed had a ground problem that made the charger shut down. My longest stretch of EV was 69 miles, between Paradise, TX (where I used to live) and Pueblo, CO., where I was able to take advantage of some nice steep down grades to build up lots of additional EV miles. My worst day was the day that I left for TX., where I fought severe headwinds, and netted "only" 53 miles of pure EV driving.

 

Quantify "a lot."

 

I guess some of those people were trading in Prii as well.

 

Not true.

Nissan was quite clear which test cycle it used for it's range results, and even published a table showing range under different conditions.

Contrast and compare that to the garbage GM spewed. Besides obfuscating whether 8 kwh was from the wall or from the battery, GM in the last days before the car went on sale changed the usable battery from 8 kwh to 10.6 kwh.

I'm not interested in the Volt as a car -- I think it is OK so far as it goes, which is a Prius copy with a battery. There is no defending GM though. That company sucks rocks.

 

Some earlier reports has Audi, BMW and VW at about 6% (Which Cars Are Getting Traded In For Electric Cars? We Find Out)

There have not been any recent reports with percents
Prius most traded-in car for Volt and Leaf, because of HOV stickers?
reports The Toyota Prius is the most traded in car, followed by the Toyota Camry, Honda Civic and BMW 3 Series.


With 21K volts sold,if one assumes 5% for BMW, that would be about 1000 BMWs traded for volts. Same with the other models.