Lots of problems may stall the electric car’s debut
June 10, 2009 by Tom GuayPosted in: In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views, News, Technology
Boy, if the feds can’t get excited about electric vehicles, should your company even bother to give them a whirl?
There are plenty of problems — basic economic realities — that make electric vehicles look like pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking. Technically, the plug-in electric vehicle works, but they aren’t ready for prime time. They’re costly and don’t go more than 40 miles without a recharge.
This downbeat assessment’s not coming from the oil industry, which would lose out on gasoline sales to the plug-in electrics. This red-flag warning’s coming from the federal watchdog agency, the Government Accountability Office (GAO).
On paper, plug-in vehicles offer lots of environmental promise. They can significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions and reduce U.S. dependence on petroleum, especially imported oil.
But there’s no reliable, clean electricity source today that can meet these twin criteria. Reason: Most electricity today comes from coal-fired power plants, which are the nation’s largest source of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. That’s not green.
To power these hybrids without creating a CO2 problem, the electricity for plug-in hybrids has to come from nuclear power or renewable energy like wind, solar and biofuels. But these power sources are controversial, unpopular and expensive compared to coal-fired electricity.
Another obstacle is the basic price of the hybrids. The much touted GM Volt plug in will be a $40,000 car that might get 40 miles on battery charge. For the economics to work, a breakthrough is still needed that can significantly drive down the price of the batteries and extend a vehicle’s range.
To make the economic case for hybrids, GAO also points out that gasoline prices will have to be much higher than today’s. Which politicians are going to survive when they make the case for raising motor fuels taxes?
The GAO plug-in report is here.
Tags: biofuels, electric vehicles, nuclear, plug-in hybrids, solar, wind
GreenandMore.com
Loading ...
June 11th, 2009 at 1:38 pm
Has no one seen “Who killed the electric car?” It’s a documentary movie that really explains how much this is all balderdash. GM, Ford, Toyota, et al had thousands of these on the road several years ago. My COSTCO still has 4 charging stations on the side of the store.
GM had a very good machine whose antiquated batteries went 40 miles and they can easily be replaced with modern ones that would go 150 miles.
Rent the video from NETFLIX or go to the site below and you’ll see that most of the article above is still full of mistruths. GM had and still has the technology to surpass the wonderful new VOLT – They just don’t want to be honest because of the Petroleum/Auto Industry stranglehold on the world economy. While you’re renting movies, take a look for HOME and see why we really need to quit being the victim of these corporate liars.
http://www.sonyclassics.com/whokilledtheelectriccar/ is the URL to see the synopsis of the information
June 11th, 2009 at 2:08 pm
What if there was a technological solution for mass transit that would get 80% of the people out of their cars for 80% of the time? Would GAO be interested? This solution could even save Detroit jobs. It does require upgrading our electrical grid, but we all know that needs to be done anyway. It also requires retooling Detroit, but Oh, Obama already promised that over a year ago during the primariies. Also, there is clean coal technology as well. Gasoline could be less than $1.00 a gallon in five years. However, this solution is radical so only respond if you can think way, way outside the box.
June 11th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
Why can’t we make an elctric self sufficient car? Solar panels on the roof and trunk and wind turbines mounted in the front of the vehicle to recharge while the vehicle is moving forward. Makes sense to me. You have to take baby steps to improve any technology. The big improvements will come as the technology hits the main stream and it is profitable. The people want it, why are we not building them? The time of fire and fossil fuels needs to end now. The ecomnomy will not suffer, it will just switch over to the new technology. It is time to move on.
Thanks,
Terry Sherwood
I.S.S. Warehouse Manager
June 11th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
40 miles on a charge it really low. That’s not what I was told on a Hybrid/Electric vehicle factory tour a year and a half ago. This wasn’t a public tour, but a local government procurement tour. I saw the first GM electric car. It’s a blue Corsica. The factory said they had the contract and just as it was to be approved for production Congress nixed it.
Yes, while you’ll never break even on fuel savings because of the initial cost of Hybrids, the point is to try and reduce the carbon footprint. My personal opinion is there’s way too much engine in these vehicles anyway.
The problem that affects battery Hybrids and electric cars that neither you nor anyone else it talking about is battery life/replacement cost. The battery technology of today doesn’t hold itself to this use. There’s batter technology onthe way, but it may take a while. The current public passanger car hybrid battery life is 6 to 7 years at a replacement cost of 6 or 7 thousand dollars. This is not covered by warranty. In a full size cith bus bus the battery replacement cost is around 160,000 dollars. There’s a capacitor system starting to be used,but since the engine never actually shuts down, unless it’s intercity only, there’s very little savings at all.
On top of it all the ADA, representing the visually impared, has been filing law suits to have manufactures engineer these vehicles to be noiser, thus safer for the visually impared.
Until the oil companies can find a way to take our money and make huge profits (research the actual ethonol/water forumla to replace diesel to see what happened after it was approved by the government) we’re going to continue to struggle and be held back. Hence the commercials about how they’re all putting billions into developing green technology. The E85 is a joke, the way it’s done now E85 (Flex Fuel) is a little less pricy, about 10 cents a gallon, than gasoline but you get less MPG and you’re performance suffers some.
June 11th, 2009 at 5:58 pm
Yes, Dan has it right. See the movie WHO KILLED THE ELECTRIC CAR? All the potential was right there and GM would be rolling in clover right now if they had just worked on their electric car, making it better and better. We have all these skilled people with no work….why aren’t they putting some effort into converting the gas-guzzlers into efficient electric vehicles?
June 18th, 2009 at 9:35 am
Yes I preach and share my copy of the movie with everyone who asks. GM chose the Hummer over the EV1. I just read in USA Today that GM may be shedding Hummer. The profits have all been made, sorry consumer. Educate yourself and get into the game to make a EV reality. We all can make a difference. We can stop our dependance on oil by car pooling and choosing other means of transport if possible. Since I owned a Geo Metro that got 55 MPG. GM Sent me letter asking me to purchase and Believe in the New GM. My response: GM Build a EV for $7,000 that was the cost of my GEO new that can go 150 miles on a single charge. I will be a loyal customer again. Quit Telling me it is not possible. BUL***** Your GM!
June 22nd, 2009 at 10:25 am
I too was completely blown away by GM’s decision to scrap the Electric Car. They had a winner but ended up a loser. Hybrid technology is only temporary fix until a true renewable energy source can be developed. Thinking about how the Hybrid charging system works, I have an idea of how to recharge the batteries while driving without increasing drag by attaching wind turbines or decreasing the efficiency of the gas engine by adding a charging system. It is very simple. Any ideas of where to take my idea.