Slashdot Mirror
GM Pulls Plug on Electric Car
davebo writes "General Motors' EV1, the all-electric dynamo of a car, has been pulled from the market. You can read the letter GM sent out to current EV1 drivers here. When the EV1 came out, the chairman of GM said it would
"define the GM of the future". Guess he'd like to take that back now . . ." With Ford also cancelling their electric vehicle program, looks like hybrids are it for the next few years.
Wrong wrong and, uh wrong. You forget that a sizable portion of the electricity that ends up at your outlet comes from clean renewable resources, such as hydro electric and wind and solar power. Also, producing power centrally is more efficent than widely distributed power production, as pollution controls can be supervised much easier. The electric car is fantastic because it allow this flexibility in power sources -- you can charge your electric car with whatever you want. Install a fuel cell at home, bam, your car is charged. Install a generator, bam, it's charged. You get the idea.
After looking at the article a bit, it's very interesting to note that the main reason the car was being discontinued was not sales nor popularity issues, but rather CHARGING issues! Apparently CARB (California's nazi regime of pollution control) mandated a new charger system that basically requires a redesign of the EV1 in order to be compatible. Hopefully with these new standards now set, we'll see electric cars back on the market soo.
To explain the charger problem, CARB mandated a conductive charger, or one that uses a direct electrical connection to the charging system. Many vehicles, including the EV1, currently use the Inductive charging system, which utilizes no electrical contact (for safety reasons) between the charger and the vehicle, but rather a inductive magnetic coupling. There is no cheap way to convert between the two systems, hence the discontinuing of the EV1.
I think it makes sense, It would be nice for the world to switch over to electric cars in a year, but in reality, it's not going to work that way.
What will probably happen is that for the next several years, we will start to switch over to hybrid cars, and ease into the electric car idea, and as the prices of gasoline continue to rise, we'll start to switch to completely electric cars. I think it will be at least ten to fifteen years though, before such a thing happens. It's such a massive change to our economy, infrastructure, etc, that we can't really switch overnight like some manufacturers seem to think. This is probably a smart move on GM's part.
I would expect such blatant racism on Fark, but on Slashdot? Mods please ban this asshole.
What makes me look twice is that the government implemented a standard that goes right against the two major electric car makers in America. I think that there might have been some dirty (think oily) outside influence in the decision.
Brought to you by the Artificial Idea Factory.
I've heard a lot in this thread about how electric is a good, clean, cheap energy source etc.etc.etc. Then I read a post which said how the electricity is produced by coal, gas, etc.-burning stations. Perfectly correct. That's where the majority of all our energy on Earth comes from. Then someone flamed them for not thinking about renewable, e.g. solar, wind, wave.
The CHEMICAL and ENGINEERING power costs of making the plastics and metals, the chemicals in batteries, damn, even the wires means that we would use up most of what remains of our (i.e. the world's) oil supplies just building enough "renewable energy" equipment to keep us going for a few years.
We've got, maybe, far less than 75 years of oil left. That means we have about 50 years to become totally dependent on renewable sources, enough for us to use them to produce everything we know and use today.
I have a close friend, who's got more degrees, PhD's and Doctorates than I've had hot dinners and he was the first to show me the figures and open my eyes to this. How do you build and maintain a wind farm of giant metal and plastic structures without oil, coal and gas to power the factories and foundries? It's EXTREMELY difficult.
This is why the scientists are worrying. It's no longer just a matter of "Hey, let's just switch to solar." The manufacturing and maintenance power-cost of anything new is phenomenally expensive if we've got no fossil fuel left to make the damn things and keep them running.
Depends on what part of the each respective country you live in. In the US there are areas where large portions of your pwoer are from clean (or relatively clean such as nuclear) sources rather than coal plants.
Canada gets away with a higher ratio of "clean" to dirty power because their power requirements are so much lower. New York City uses as much power as the entire country of Canada. A lot of programs that work in Canada do so because of the small population size and pattern of distrubution.
Once more unto the breach dear friends...
(1) Power plants are more efficient than your car engine (typically twice as efficient).
(2) Oil is not universally cheap. I pay 4-5x more for petrol than you do. I think Europe has a similar high price for oil.
(3) Dense cities cannot cope with pollution from fuel-burning cars. A perfect example is your own LA. Moving the pollution away is good for the city even if it doesn't greatly help the planet.
(4) Power plants don't have to burn oil or gas or coal. There are plenty of alternatives (though none of them quite as cheap as oil or gas or coal, yet). Hot rock and solar are my personal bets for the future of electricity production; both have potential to be cheaper than fuel-burning plants.
(5) It takes decades to develop technology from concept to production line. It's important that research into EV continues so that the technology is fully developed when (if) the cheap sources of electricity finally appear. This may seem "absurd" to you but many people thought the Altair was absurd too. Look where it got Bill Gates. Being on the bleeding edge can often pay off in the long run. Companies with deep pockets (ie, GM) are willing to sink billions into "absurd" concepts because every now and then one of those crazy ideas will pay off big.
"Diesel car. I can get 50mpg on highway driving at normal speed."
;)
;)
A Honda Civic 1.6VVTi is capable of near-enough 50mpg when driven so's to maximise use of the green `economy' light.
I've got the Seat Toledo 1.9TDi SE (so a very similar engine to your VW diesel, no doubt). The quoted mpg ratings are 45, 55, 65.7mpg. I get around 55mpg on the motorways myself, ticking along at 70-75mph (only had it a fortnight, results still pending!).
"very nice handling"
Check. I went for a spin around the back-roads in deepest darkest Surrey last night, bombing around corners at a rate of knots, with no sideways rolling/wallowing at all.
"side aribags and all kind of safety features"
Check
"What do you all think?"
I think I got the same performance - almost the same car - but without the VW-brand price-hike, myself
And the power-to-weight ratio seems about right at 1.9TDi and 1.3 tonnes.
~Tim
--
Rushing on down to the circle of the turn
All the car companies wanted their technologies to be the one every other company used in the new machines. That way they could collect on patents or at least control the direction of the market.
BUT theese 2 lost the battle for comformity. All the others car companies joined forces to make fuel cells. Which means if theese 2 also went with fuel cells then they could get cheeper mass produced parts all the fuel cell cars had in common.
conspiracy theory start
I wouldn't be suprised if the president, chemical companies, and oil companies didn't have something to do with this choice. It keeps us going to a station to buy 'fuel'. Since electric cars eliminated MUCH of the need for theese company's products and the services gas stations provide lots of jobs would be 'lost'. And lots of companies would have to change the way they do business. And we all know how hard financial groups can fight.
conspiracy theory end
My grandfather owned an electric car. It wasn't much more than a heavy duty golf cart with a hard shell (fully enclosed), but it could go 40 mph and go several miles on a charge. He lives in a small town in Iowa and he would use it to take my Grandmother out for dinner, run to the store down the street, etc.
It ran on car batteries, and he used the same set of batteries for over 10 years before they finally couldn't hold a significant charge. Car batteries are easily recyclable (see my previous posts from where I worked at a secondary lead refinery recycling car batteries).
He eventually sold the car to a man from California who drove to Iowa hauling a trailer so he could haul the car back to California. Unlike a lot of cars, my Grandfather got more money for the car than he paid for it 10 years before.
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
As several people have noted, the hybrid seems to be the way that auto manufacturers are going for "reduced emissions" vehicles.
At a recent "Engineers' Week" party, the local Toyota dealer had a couple of Prius available for inspection and demonstration. I was unimpressed. The drive system is overly complicated and 50 MPG is pathetic for a "reduced emissions" vehicle that has economy as its main selling point. Granted, it's better than 20-30 MPG I get in my eight-year-old Firebird, but it's not impressive. A ten-year-old Honda Civic or Geo Metro can do that, and they're pure gasoline!
This car has it right. The most efficient way to run an internal combustion engine is to have it operate at high manifold pressures and low RPMs: Wide Open Throttle. By using a 17 horsepower (12.7 kW) diesel tractor engine and a tall final drive ratio allows this car to get around town at 35 miles per hour while achieving 128 miles per gallon. Of course, it has a top speed of only 65 miles per hour.
Ten years and OVER A BILLION DOLLARS??? If that's what it takes GM to develop a simple DC drive system, the stockholders of GM need to rethink their investment! That figure is more likely to be what they want to try and write off their corprate tax returns!
Anyone who has ever turned a wrench on an electric golf cart could design an electric car. As far as charging the vehicle, who gives a damn how it's done?! Plug it in or park next to the charger. Pick the LEAST expensive technology and go with it.
The problem with the electric cars is that you can't turn a big ass SUV into an electric car. Ford and GM are interested in PROFITS, not ecology. If they have to devote parts of their assembly lines to a niche vehicle, that takes up resources from their SUV lines.
And for the record, I drive a big-ass Ford Bronco with big tires and a lift kit.... I have nothing at all against SUV's and their drivers. But I'm getting damn tired of this country relying on foreign oil. Electric cars may not totally be the answer, but they are at least a step toward the solution. I'd drive one to/from work if I could buy one. Then keep my Bronco for trips, pulling my boat or camper, or hauling stuff from Home Depot. You know, like use the right tool for the job??! Cheaper and smaller for short trips, big and bulky when the job calls for it.
I always thought GM sucked, now they have confirmed it....
The number 1 problem of working in a cubicle - 23 power cords, 1 outlet...