Audi Prez thinks people who will buy the Volt are idiots

The U.S. government clearly wants to get off foreign oil dependence. Hence, an emphasis on electric cars. In China, as well. It goes beyond global warming.

The views of car CEOs are self-serving. He's right about price, though. The Volt won't sell at $40K. More like a $20K car.

 

He's right.

Very few are going to be willing to dump $50k into this thing when alternatives are both cheaper and (perhaps most importantly) NOT GM products. ound:

- Brad

 

Chevy Volt Design: Electrifyingly Bland

Although I think the Volt will do a lot better (at least initially) than the Audi president forecasts, I think most people are missing the point here. The Volt is a $40,000+ Chevy that looks like a subcompact car. At that price, GM should have made it a Cadillac and styled it more radically. Note the comments from Inside Line's Jane Nakagawa when the production photos were first released:

CHEVY VOLT DESIGN: ELECTRIFYINGLY BLAND

DETROIT — If you're breathing, you like cars and you have a mouse in your hand, you've probably seen the "leaked" images that hit the Web this week purporting to be the production-ready Chevrolet Volt "extended-range" electric vehicle. But whether those photos were mistakenly released or were a deliberate attempt by General Motors to hike the hype in anticipation of next week's "official" unveiling of the Volt, GM probably isn't crazy about the result: Reaction has been heavily critical, reports Edmunds.com's industry-watching blog, Edmunds AutoObserver.

Automotive Web sites buzzed about the leaked images of the Volt. In comparing it to the chiseled and aggressive Volt concept car, some are mildly complimentary, but critics seem to outnumber approvers by at least four to one.

"Derivative" is a response that resonates on many Web sites, as the viral-reaction party line immediately settled on the Volt appearing to pay combined homage to Chevy's successful — but not necessarily sexy — Malibu sedan and Toyota's almighty (but absolutely not sexy) Prius hybrid.

"It's a huge disappointment," said Jane Nakagawa, a freelance automotive writer, frequent contributor at AutoObserver — and a former director of advanced planning for Nissan North America Inc.

Nakagawa bluntly calls the Volt's final styling — if that's what the images we've seen indeed portray — "completely unacceptable. They made a big, fat promise," and didn't follow up, she said.

The slabby, conservative Volt "looks like Grandma's electric vehicle," she added.

"The production version looks like the unlikely love child of a one-nighter involving GM's concept and the Prius," another longstanding automotive journalist reported to AutoObserver.

"I think this design will seem ancient in 27 months when it finally hits the streets. By then, we'll have a third-generation Prius, a couple of Honda hybrids, and other green machines to choose from."

Some think GM's aged brain trust quashed any attempt at a revolutionary shape for the Volt — in turn losing the potential to attract younger buyers attuned to new-age designs.

"The number-one lost opportunity (with the Volt's derivative styling)," Nakagawa said, "was getting young people to come and buy this car. It's a sad, sad moment for GM," she said. "The Volt (concept) was a glimmer of hope the Big 3 isn't as stupid as you thought."

GM took pains in recent months to temper anticipation of the Volt's design in light of what it described as the engineering realities of meeting the Volt's performance objectives — particularly the crucial 40-mile battery-only driving range. Meeting performance objectives — particularly in the area of aerodynamics — played a major role in determining the Volt's exterior design, GM claimed.

Chevy Volt Design: Electrifyingly Bland

 

IRT the first paragraph quoted above: yes ... a statement ... and an extremely VALID one at that!

IRT the second paragraph quoted above: I hear that argument all the time when talking with others about the general concept of the "transition" from fossil-fuel vehicles to EVs. My wife and I have already made a "pact" of sorts: if-or-when we ever purchase either a plug-in hybrid OR an all-out EV ... we'll turn off the TV whenever the car is re-charging. Since our TV is on most of the time, we are certainly wasting "our share" of electricity ... but if we simply turn it off whenever re-charging any sort of plug-in vehicle, we will not be causing any sort of "net increase in carbon dioxide emissions" as a direct result of our residential / electrical demand. In fact, since we have a large-screen - 60" - TV with a 6.1 surround-sound system and are running on a cable box and DVD player much of the time ... I imagine our KWH count will actually go DOWN a little bit if we simply turn the entire system off whenever re-charging the car!

 

I've done the calculation for my Hymotion-converted Prius, and I'm with you 100%. At the Virginia Power generation mix, I estimate maybe 30% C02 savings for every electric mile that substitutes for a gasoline mile. If I add in 15% overhead for refining of petroleum, it comes out closer to 40% savings.

Even with 15% energy overhead cost for gasoline, breakeven for electric power generation is just about 2 lbs C02/KWH. You can find states with measured C02/KWH around that level:

www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oiaf/1605/cdrom/pdf/e-supdoc.pdf

Those numbers are all CO2/net delivered KWH, so transmission losses are factored in.

That electricity-for-gasoline figure cited above has tripped me up before. It's for California only. Think marginal, high-cost stripper wells. Or something. In any case, as near as I can tell, it has nothing to do with the average gallon of gasoline. Your cite from DOE agrees with what I found -- the "overhead" for gasoline is in the 15 to 20% range. (Or as DOE puts it, the well-to-tank portion of the overall wheel-to-well efficiency).

For the "mine-to-powerplant" portion of the cost of coal, I agree that you can't find national figures. The handful of studies I've found have all cited very low energy overhead costs for coal mining, relative to the energy in the coal. Typically 1 to 2 percent. So I tend to ignore that in the calculation.

Anyway, the point is, with all coal, if you can manage to show a plausible calculation suggesting that you reduce C02 with electric transport in a Prius-like vehicle, you certainly can't show coming ahead by much. And in all likelihood, as I read the data, electric transport on coal-fired electricity in a PHEV Prius probably produces more C02 than the same miles driven with gasoline. I think you come ahead a bit at the current US generation mix. You'd do better with cleaner electric sources. In my situation, at least, it's a modest improvement, that's it.

 

Audi reveals the purely electric e-tron


Audi reveals the purely electric e-tron

- The highly anticipated Audi concept showcases the performance sports car capabilities of electric vehicle technology
- Utilizing four motors, e-tron produces 313 hp and 3,319 lb-ft of torque
- The electric vehicle study incorporates a range of novel approaches

INGOLSTADT/FRANKFURT, Germany, Sep 15, 2009 - Audi presents the highlight of the IAA 2009: the e-tron, a high-performance sports car with a purely electric drive system. Four motors – two each at the front and rear axles – drive the wheels, making the concept car a true quattro. Producing 230 kW (313 hp) and 4,500 Nm (3,319.03 lb-ft) of torque, the two-seater accelerates from 0 to 100 km/h (0 – 62.14 mph) in 4.8 seconds, and from 60 to 120 km/h (37.28 – 74.56 mph) in 4.1 seconds. The lithium-ion battery provides a truly useable energy content of 42.4 kilowatt hours to enable a range of approximately 248 kilometers, or 154 miles.

The performance figures are by no means the only evidence of the consistent and holistic strategy. The design makes it clear that the e-tron belongs in the major leagues of sports cars, and the package takes into account the specific realities of an electric vehicle. The battery is directly behind the passenger cabin for an optimal center of gravity and axle load distribution.

The e-tron is able to freely distribute the powerful torque of its four electric motors to the wheels as required. This torque vectoring allows for dazzling dynamics and an undreamed-of level of agility and precision when cornering.

Audi has taken a new, and in some cases revolutionary, approach to many of the technical modules. A heat pump is used to efficiently warm up and heat the interior. The drive system, the power electronics and the battery are controlled by an innovative thermal management system that is a crucial component for achieving the car’s range without compromising its high level of interior comfort. Networking the vehicle electronics with the surroundings, which is referred to as car-to-x communication, opens new dimensions for the optimization of efficiency, safety and convenience.

Audi Media Site : Home : Home

 

so easy for this guy from audi to use the c2o hype and place a diesel in a market for clean cars where diesels do not belong.

there is more to diesel then just a bit less c2o then a normal NON hybrid petrol car.
like polution instead of cleaner air.

i think this guy is going the same route like GM and others that first did not like the prius and now have to admit it is a great car.

 

I think that his comments are just part of a new marketing campign, designed to get attention. I think it has worked. Have you seen the energyuntamed videos? Mainly they are about electricity behaving badly. We should find out later today (Frankfurt Auto Show) what this is all about.

Audi Launches Mysterious Electricity Untamed Teaser Site, Viral Videos - MotorAuthority

 

Actually, the CARB emissions certification (http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/onroad/cert/pcldtmdv/2010/daimler_ldt_a0030380_3d0_u2_diesel.pdf) shows the 2010 Mercedes-Benz ML350/R350 BlueTec just misses SULEV/Bin2. It is 0.003 g/mile too high on the certified NMOG emissions (cert is 0.013 g/mi; SULEV limit is 0.010 g/mi). All other emissions are at or below (well below in some cases) the SULEV limits, including NOx. As it is, it's classified as ULEV, same as the other 50-state light-duty diesel vehicles currently on the market.

 

The diesel fleet has leg up on petrol when it comes to biofuels. The majority of them don't conversion to burn greater than 50% concentrations of biodiesel, unlike ethanol. Even if we switched to butanol from ethanol, the biodiesel likely has an edge in production energy use.

 

I missed this thread earlier, and am not surprised about the anger shown from the Prius fans. Most Prius fans are rabid PHEV people, and rabid Electric vehicle fans. However, a lot of what he says makes a lot of sense. Even when you consider that he has an agenda. Some things that I think make sense;

-The current carbon footprint of a Diesel compared to a electic vehicle is similar.
-The Volt's production cost is probably going to be too high to be viable. The Prius has a cost for the technology, but it is offset with some other cool features. It is tough to offset a $15000 premium. Not so tough to offset a $5000 premium.
-Clean Diesels are a very viable interim energy saving solution. They do provide and immediate reduction in greenhouse gases compared to gasoline powered cars. In the end everything will probably be hydrogen powered, with our powerplants being mostly Nuclear, but that wont happen for another 100 years.

 

sorry i do not agree

-carbon is not al that matters... there is Nox to
-the so called clean diesels have a premium price to because of its technology like commen rail diesel and partical filters etc.
in europe diesels are more expectif because of this.
-and i hope that hydrogen wil never get there and more about the nuclear statement..... never ever i hope.

 

No, not from what I've seen. There are some hardcore PHEV and EV folks here, but that is hardly representative of the user base.

"Clean diesel" is a stretch.

The current carbon footprint of diesel (TDI) is about 50% greater than that of a Prius. Looks like one could do about as well as the TDI CO2 wise with some conventional gasoline burning sedans.

The diesel premium appears to be about the same as the "hybrid premium" from looking at the stickers.

In its present form, diesel doesn't really appear as attractive a solution as a standard hybrid. Diesel offers the same purchase cost, higher operating costs, and much higher CO2 emissions than a Prius hybrid.

 

Hmm. The main point of the Audi President is that the Volt is a bad idea. Not that hybrids are a bad idea. When you read the article note that he is talking about three general classes of vehicles. Volt type phev plug-in vehicles ($15,000 premium), Hybrid gas vehicles ($5000 premium), and Diesel vehicles ($5,000 premium?). My point in agreeing with him is that Diesel and Hybrid vehicles are both reasonable alternatives that help in solving various environmental problems. They are not equivalent and of course there are pros and cons with each technology. A Volt with a $15,000 premium is not a very reasonable alternative.

I am confused by the statement of the "higher operating cost for diesel" also for the higher CO2 emissions comment. As noted by others above, it seems that they would be similar for both technologies. Not necessarily equivalent, but similar.