People have a very low tolerance personal space intrusions. People on the whole have a pretty decent intuition on whether someone genuinely is recommending something vs. is being paid to do so. People also have a pretty good intuition on figuring out who is a paid shill. Anyone who seriously tries to make money from this will quickly find themselves without friends. I can't think of a single friend of mine that would tolerate this shit on their feeds. I hope this gains traction as it will be a quick and easy way to thin out the online social circle.
If this catches on (it won't), you'll just end up with a circle of technically ignorant folks circle-jerking each other for ad revenue while the rest of us get on with our lives.
Wrong. You should learn about the technology before you go and shit on it.
The Volt is not a true serial hybrid - that would imply the engine is decoupled from the wheels. While the volt typically operates in that mode, its transmission/motor/engine configuration is similar to the Prius, where the gas engine can power the wheels directly in case the battery is dead. It's arranged in a planetary configuration. This results in much better fuel economy when operating in the gas mode. This has the added benefit of providing some extra "emergency" power if you really get on the gas pedal - the engine will kick in for wide-open-throttle highway accelerations.
No, there has never been a production vehicle like the Volt to date. The plug-in Prius releasing this year will be close contender but has a much smaller electric-only range.
When you are in a situation where you are meeting lots of folks quickly, nothing beats handing over a business card. It is a minimal conversation disruption. Ever tried to use the bump app in a crowded convention center? Spotty cell service, finding the damn icon, or your battery is dead... It just doesn't work well enough to replace tried and true paper for casual information exchange. The interruption completely derails a casual conversation. In an environment where you only have a few minutes to chat, it's not worth it.
Now it would be nice if QR embedded codes were standard on business cards to trivialize data entry.
Nope, business cards are here to stay. Folks that don't do serious business level interactions might be able to lose them, but the pros will use them for a while to come until the exchange becomes easier.
In terms of how much you pay which is what most people care about. That's, btw, if you don't put a single ounce of gasoline in the Volt. Even in it's best potential environment and usage it'd still cost more overall than a Prius. There is no way to make up the cost premium of the Volt through the cost savings of not buying gasoline.
OK, so you're using a Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) comparison. Nobody has ever claimed the Volt has a lower TCO than the Prius execpt for people looking to trash it. If you can't afford it, you are not a target user of the first-generation Volt. This first generation of the Volt is targeted at folks that want to not use gasoline, and are willing to pay a premium to do it. The strategy is simple and it worked for the Prius. When the Prius came out, it was not a lower TCO than other cars on the market either. Now, 10 years later, it's approaching parity and it is successful as such.
The cost of the Volt WILL come down in subsequent model years as the technology improves.
It is not possible to run a Prius (again, excluding the new plug-in version which isn't really out yet) without using gas. It is possible to run a Volt without using gas. Why does everyone overlook this one simple detail?
So? Why would I want to pay more to use a less convenient form of energy?
You don't, which is why you haven't bought it, and GM couldn't care less about you right now. You're not the target demographic, YET. If you're looking for the lowest TCO, you're not getting it with the Volt. You're not going to pay for it, which is why you haven't bought it.
HOWEVER. Cars evolve. This is a step in the evolution. Soon, in a few years, you will be seriously considering purchasing an EREV. And you can thank this generation of Volts and its well-off "foolish" buyers for paving the way for you.
I defend the Volt, and I haven't bought one for the same reasons. I can't afford it. Yet. But I can see the vision that GM is executing on here and I think it's a great thing.
Thank you, at least someone understands the proper comparisons around here.
Things will get interesting because the definition of what "fits your needs" will become very complex, which will spawn an interesting market of EREVs optimized for different market segments until the battery technology gets to a point where we're all humming along for 200 miles on a charge.
The planetary drive is actually really similar to the Prius gearbox and is quite an elegant proven solution. It allows for higher efficiency when running in the gas-only discharged state (since you are avoiding an unnecessary mechanical->electrical->mechanical energy conversion), and also doubles as a CVT so you lose your manual-gear-select transmission and save lots of weight. Weight is your #1 killer for efficiency. You also get higher peak performance as you can bring in the gas engine in a wide-open throttle emergency acceleration situation. You have the power available, why not use it when you really need it? Still, the vehicle runs EV-only under normal driving conditions which is brilliant.
You won't see active wheel technology on the road for a long time, if ever. The extra weight on the wheels makes the ride and handling on these vehicles really lousy and most consumers won't accept that.
It is not possible to run a Prius (again, excluding the new plug-in version which isn't really out yet) without using gas. It is possible to run a Volt without using gas. Why does everyone overlook this one simple detail?
1 and 2) It will be a tragedy if GM's dealer model ends up hurting the Volt long-term. The reality is that it's a very limited release vehicle and you get the slew of problems associated with that.
It's important to remember that The Volt's initial release release was limited to a handful of cities. This is likely because bringing up dealer service centers to speed with a GM's first "heavy" electric vehicle is likely slow and expensive.
However, while you agree with my points, you proceed to ignore them: 3) Like I said in the parent post, you can not compare the Volt to a Prius. They are different classes of cars. If the Prius meets your needs, buy it. It is a better value for a gas-only hybrid. 4) The Volt is not an entry-level starter vehicle for teenagers. It doesn't claim to be. Buying kids new cars is irresponsible, a waste of money and is bad way to teach people about vehicle ownership. They're statistically gonna wreck them anyway. 5) The Volt is not an electric-only car. Buy the Leaf if it fits your needs. 6) The Volt is not a diesel car. Buy a VW diesel if it fits your needs.
Oh, and there you go again spouting technical ignorance. Your ignorance is part of the uphill battle that the Volt is fighting for everyone. The Volt is NOT an electric-only car like the EV1. Yes, they share a lot of similar elements, but it is COMPLETELY different from an application and infrastructure perspective. Saying the Volt is a re-hashed EV1 is a direct insult to the brilliant engineers working on the Volt project.
Yes, GM has organizational challenges and they should not have been bailed out by the Feds. But don't confuse the failures of the upper-management politics with the very real engineering that is happening on the Volt project. The Volt project very well will define the future of GM.
Even if GM drops it, there is a phenomenally enormous and mostly hidden-to-the-public eco-system of lower-tier suppliers that are building up to support projects like the volt, and they will continue to support other companies in EREV and eventually EV projects. Only good will come from this project, despite what all the idiots in washington say.
You can't compare the Volt to the Prius. I've posted this to other subthreads here.
If you go by just putting gas in the thing, then yes, the Prius comes out favorably. If you compare a Corvette to a minivan by how many passengers you can haul in it, yes, it sucks.
You're not supposed to regularly put gas in the Volt. If you are, you're using it wrong.
The Prius is a gasoline-only hybrid (ignoring the new short-range plug-in version this year which only goes 8-11 miles on a charge or half a typical commute). The Volt is an extended-range electric vehicle.
The Volt is a new class of vehicle. You plug it in regularly, and ideally you almost never put any gas in it. The Prius doesn't do that.
So if you don't want to plug in your car and you want to keep using gas, yes, buy that Prius.
You can't compare the Volt to the Prius. Reviewers who do so are technically incompetent and dishonest.
If you go by just putting gas in the thing, then yes, the Prius comes out favorably. If you compare a Corvette to a minivan by how many passengers you can haul in it, yes, it sucks.
You're not supposed to regularly put gas in the Volt. If you are, you're using it wrong.
The Prius is a gasoline-only hybrid (ignoring the new short-range plug-in version this year which only goes 8-11 miles on a charge or half a typical commute). The Volt is an extended-range electric vehicle.
The Volt is a new class of vehicle. You plug it in regularly, and ideally you almost never put any gas in it. The Prius doesn't do that.
So if you don't want to plug in your car and you want to keep using gas, yes, buy that Prius.
The volt is a completely new class of car. It's a trailblazer. The first year is always a challenge.
You can't compare a Volt to a Prius or Leaf any more than you can compare a Corvette to a dump truck. Yes, they both have wheels, electric battery packs, and doors, but they are entirely different classes of vehicles.
The Prius is still largely a gasoline-only vehicle. Yes, the plug-in version is out this year, but it only gets you 8-11 miles, vs. the Volt's 30-40 miles. . The Leaf is electric-only. For the vast majority of Americans, it's stuck as a second car because you can't practically road-trip in it with the current American infrastructure.
The Volt seeks to address these shortfalls.
It is the first production extended range electric vehicle. You cannot compare it to a Prius or Leaf, which are two different classes of vehicles altogether. The Prius's battery pack and electric range are only a fraction of the Volt's. The Leaf is just an electric car that requires charging stations. The Volt is actually engineered for the current infrastructure reality of the US - you can get gas everywhere, and you can only charge your car in so many locations, so it's a "crossover" vehicle that can let a broader class of folks adopt to a MOSTLY electric style of living.
GM knew full well going into the project that it was risky and it caters to a VERY specific audience of "Green Early Adopters" - folks that are willing to pay a premium for cutting their petroleum footprint.
If you don't like the Volt, you are obviously outside the target demographic. The Volt serves a lot of purposes outside of selling a EREV (Extended Range Electric Vehicle) - it also helps get actual production units to start building the battery production capabilities and infrastructure needed to sustain an electric vehicle fleet. Yes, the Prius has laid some inroads here, and the Volt is another push by another manufacturer.
If you study history at all, the Insight and the Prius were in very similar positions when they came out. Both were sold at low-to-no margins and had relatively crappy first-year sales.
The First Generation Honda Insight (the first mass-produced hybrid) only sold 17,000 units over several years. The First Generation Prius was initially sold at low-to-no margins by
There is unanimous consensus among the engineering an scientific community that we need to reduce our petroleum usage. There is also a general consensus that an electric vehicle fleet is the most practical way of achieving this goal (and this includes fuel cells which are nothing more than expensive batteries).
Let the technology bake. The battery cost is rapidly falling. Get a few model years out. You may be pleasantly surprised. If it's outside of your budget, don't buy it. It's not for you anyway. You will still benefit from the technological advances of the vehicle. You can't afford a space shuttle but you still benefit from the fringe developments of that program. These types of projects are critical to the development of our electric vehicle infrastructure. You can't convert the American fleet to electric overnight anyway, the grid would have some major problems anyway with a million vehicles charging on it suddenly; they need a few years to get that upgraded. The Volt is the first step of many.
This article is crap. They only quote a CD-based infotainment attack which requires access to the vehicle, and an aftermarket system attack which was poorly engineered. They describe a TPMS DOS attack (RF interference from the sensors) that might make your check tires light come on. Boring.
Right now, if you car doesn't have a RF transceiver, there is nothing to worry about since gaining physical access to the network requires breaking into the vehicle.
If your car does have an RF link (bluetooth, cell phone), you're still relatively OK - infotainment systems as a rule are very segregated from the powertrain networks and usually only linked by a CAN bus that only supports some high level messaging. The Infotainment ECUs do not share the same CAN bus as the powertrain components and there is generally an ECU that acts as a "firewall" such that any DOS-style attacks on the infotainment CAN bus won't affect the other vehicle systems.
I will concede that vehicles with OnStar are a bit more concerning, as I think OnStar has more hooks into the rest of the systems, although I'm not sure how deep. So that is one to worry about...
There have been some attacks demonstrated against the outward facing systems where an attacker can mess with your radio, but the systems are architected such that an attacker needs physical access to the bus to do any real damage to a vehicle.
Nope, my logic is fine. I stated my assumptions - comparing worst case scenarios. You're applying a "best case scenario" (no gas tank rupture) to a worst-case lithium cell failure - thermal runaway with cell integrity failure. Lithium cells in a thermal runaway situation normally vent byproducts for a controlled burnoff of the products rather than explosion. Like you said, there's no free oxygen to burn the gas tank, same applies to the lithium cells. ASSUMING THEY'RE NOT RUPTURED.
Unfortunately you are making the common mistake of assuming that Lithium Ions cells have elemental lithium in them - not true. You can't apply the high-school chemistry notion that elemental Lithium is very reactive.
Lithium ion batteries don't spontaneously burn when exposed to air or water. They almost always burn because of thermal runaway, and it's usually the electrolyte that burns. Thermal runaway usually occurs because of dead shorts. Modern LiON cell design takes this into account and makes it VERY physically difficult for dead shorts to occur. There is copious fusing mechanisms located throughout the battery, and the battery housings are all composite materials. You pretty much would have to drive a steel stake through the heart of the cell to have any kind multi-cell dead short.
In the context of the volt crash test fires, all of them happened WEEKS after the crash test was performed.
What can happen in a gas fire is that if you sufficiently heat the tank such that it ruptures, you run the possibility of spraying gas everywhere that is then your typical fun fuel-air bomb. Since we're talking about wrecks here (which was the topic of the original article), this is relevant. This is a rare chance given a well- designed vehicle that has a tank in a secure location. So, usually, worst case you have a small leak. Fuel pumps cut off after wrecks for this reason, so you're not dumping fuel through a potentially broken line.
Honestly we won't really know the stats until we get a few million vehicles on the road. Given that there are 300,000 car fires a year, I don't think it will be hard for electric cars to beat that.
To put it in perspective, a Volt battery has roughly 16 KWh of energy stored. An gas tank on an equivalent sized car is roughly 10 gallons. At 36.6 KWh/gal, that's 360 Kwh of energy, or more than 22X the energy of the battery. Now, assuming that all goes up at once, which one do you want to be near? Couple that with the fact you can't easily set off a lithium battery fire with an open flame or a spark, and I know which odds I'll be taking.
Of course the Volt has both energy sources. But, the point is that a battery pack--coupled with modern cooling controls, safety interlocks and fusing--is safer than a tank of gasoline in a multitude of crash scenarios. Yes, you have to be concerned about high voltage exposure, but all modern packs have disconnect relays that are wired to a crash sensor (ala airbags or the fuel pump cutoff switch).
The reality is this whole thing was a witch hunt likely egged on by Volt competitors.
Now, why does Amazon get sales tax exemption with their nexus in the state, yet other mail order operations do not get sales tax exemptions? This is pure and simple government-corporate corruption, and only the small guy loses.
Someone once pointed out to me that the majority of the mass of a tree comes from... Carbon in the air. Not from water or the soil. Look at a forest, the majority of the mass there is captured CO2 from the air.
So, it's pretty simple, plant some more damn trees. Pick some faster-growing species if it makes you feel better. Once they stop growing quickly, cut 'em down, bury 'em, and plant some more. Carbon buried!
Generally falls under the laws about "Equipment violations" - same laws that get you a ticket for having a tail light out, for example. Obviously harder to spot from the road, but a really observant cop could cite you. And should. Because it's retarded.
Stop right there. This is hands down the shittiest advice I've ever seen posted to a forum that could get someone killed. I really hope you're trolling. Saying air bags aren't designed for seatbelt use is completely ignorant and life-threateningly wrong. In fact, it's quite the opposite, an airbag could potentially kill you if you use it without a seatbelt.
While I don't like calling people names in forums, you are an ignorant idiot that could get someone killed if they follow your advice and get in a wreck.
Passive restraint systems ARE without a shred of doubt designed for maximum effectiveness with the active restraints in place. It's a SYSTEM. You could, for example, fly over the steering wheel airbag if you're not wearing the belt. OEM seatbelts are designed with a very carefully calibrated amount of "stretch" to them that will give in a crash too. Changing these out is potential suicide. You are not a crash safety engineer, and god help us if you ever become one. Leave that to the pros. Wear your OEM, crash-tested seatbelts and never ever touch the airbag system.
Slashdot Mirror
People have a very low tolerance personal space intrusions. People on the whole have a pretty decent intuition on whether someone genuinely is recommending something vs. is being paid to do so. People also have a pretty good intuition on figuring out who is a paid shill. Anyone who seriously tries to make money from this will quickly find themselves without friends. I can't think of a single friend of mine that would tolerate this shit on their feeds. I hope this gains traction as it will be a quick and easy way to thin out the online social circle.
If this catches on (it won't), you'll just end up with a circle of technically ignorant folks circle-jerking each other for ad revenue while the rest of us get on with our lives.
Wrong. You should learn about the technology before you go and shit on it.
The Volt is not a true serial hybrid - that would imply the engine is decoupled from the wheels. While the volt typically operates in that mode, its transmission/motor/engine configuration is similar to the Prius, where the gas engine can power the wheels directly in case the battery is dead. It's arranged in a planetary configuration. This results in much better fuel economy when operating in the gas mode. This has the added benefit of providing some extra "emergency" power if you really get on the gas pedal - the engine will kick in for wide-open-throttle highway accelerations.
No, there has never been a production vehicle like the Volt to date. The plug-in Prius releasing this year will be close contender but has a much smaller electric-only range.
Broken original iPhones with cracked screens sell on eBay for $15-20. Original iPads still sell for over $100. Original iPhones sell for $80+.
How many do you honestly think are going in the landfill?
Cool! How's that new version of Android running for you?
Are you high?
When you are in a situation where you are meeting lots of folks quickly, nothing beats handing over a business card. It is a minimal conversation disruption. Ever tried to use the bump app in a crowded convention center? Spotty cell service, finding the damn icon, or your battery is dead... It just doesn't work well enough to replace tried and true paper for casual information exchange. The interruption completely derails a casual conversation. In an environment where you only have a few minutes to chat, it's not worth it.
Now it would be nice if QR embedded codes were standard on business cards to trivialize data entry.
Nope, business cards are here to stay. Folks that don't do serious business level interactions might be able to lose them, but the pros will use them for a while to come until the exchange becomes easier.
What does it comes out ahead in?
In terms of how much you pay which is what most people care about. That's, btw, if you don't put a single ounce of gasoline in the Volt. Even in it's best potential environment and usage it'd still cost more overall than a Prius. There is no way to make up the cost premium of the Volt through the cost savings of not buying gasoline.
OK, so you're using a Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) comparison. Nobody has ever claimed the Volt has a lower TCO than the Prius execpt for people looking to trash it. If you can't afford it, you are not a target user of the first-generation Volt. This first generation of the Volt is targeted at folks that want to not use gasoline, and are willing to pay a premium to do it. The strategy is simple and it worked for the Prius. When the Prius came out, it was not a lower TCO than other cars on the market either. Now, 10 years later, it's approaching parity and it is successful as such.
The cost of the Volt WILL come down in subsequent model years as the technology improves.
It is not possible to run a Prius (again, excluding the new plug-in version which isn't really out yet) without using gas. It is possible to run a Volt without using gas. Why does everyone overlook this one simple detail?
So? Why would I want to pay more to use a less convenient form of energy?
You don't, which is why you haven't bought it, and GM couldn't care less about you right now. You're not the target demographic, YET.
If you're looking for the lowest TCO, you're not getting it with the Volt. You're not going to pay for it, which is why you haven't bought it.
HOWEVER. Cars evolve. This is a step in the evolution. Soon, in a few years, you will be seriously considering purchasing an EREV. And you can thank this generation of Volts and its well-off "foolish" buyers for paving the way for you.
I defend the Volt, and I haven't bought one for the same reasons. I can't afford it. Yet. But I can see the vision that GM is executing on here and I think it's a great thing.
Thank you, at least someone understands the proper comparisons around here.
Things will get interesting because the definition of what "fits your needs" will become very complex, which will spawn an interesting market of EREVs optimized for different market segments until the battery technology gets to a point where we're all humming along for 200 miles on a charge.
They actually went right with this solution.
The planetary drive is actually really similar to the Prius gearbox and is quite an elegant proven solution. It allows for higher efficiency when running in the gas-only discharged state (since you are avoiding an unnecessary mechanical->electrical->mechanical energy conversion), and also doubles as a CVT so you lose your manual-gear-select transmission and save lots of weight. Weight is your #1 killer for efficiency. You also get higher peak performance as you can bring in the gas engine in a wide-open throttle emergency acceleration situation. You have the power available, why not use it when you really need it? Still, the vehicle runs EV-only under normal driving conditions which is brilliant.
You won't see active wheel technology on the road for a long time, if ever. The extra weight on the wheels makes the ride and handling on these vehicles really lousy and most consumers won't accept that.
It does matter. What does it comes out ahead in?
It is not possible to run a Prius (again, excluding the new plug-in version which isn't really out yet) without using gas. It is possible to run a Volt without using gas. Why does everyone overlook this one simple detail?
1 and 2) It will be a tragedy if GM's dealer model ends up hurting the Volt long-term. The reality is that it's a very limited release vehicle and you get the slew of problems associated with that.
It's important to remember that The Volt's initial release release was limited to a handful of cities. This is likely because bringing up dealer service centers to speed with a GM's first "heavy" electric vehicle is likely slow and expensive.
However, while you agree with my points, you proceed to ignore them:
3) Like I said in the parent post, you can not compare the Volt to a Prius. They are different classes of cars. If the Prius meets your needs, buy it. It is a better value for a gas-only hybrid.
4) The Volt is not an entry-level starter vehicle for teenagers. It doesn't claim to be. Buying kids new cars is irresponsible, a waste of money and is bad way to teach people about vehicle ownership. They're statistically gonna wreck them anyway.
5) The Volt is not an electric-only car. Buy the Leaf if it fits your needs.
6) The Volt is not a diesel car. Buy a VW diesel if it fits your needs.
Oh, and there you go again spouting technical ignorance. Your ignorance is part of the uphill battle that the Volt is fighting for everyone. The Volt is NOT an electric-only car like the EV1. Yes, they share a lot of similar elements, but it is COMPLETELY different from an application and infrastructure perspective. Saying the Volt is a re-hashed EV1 is a direct insult to the brilliant engineers working on the Volt project.
Yes, GM has organizational challenges and they should not have been bailed out by the Feds. But don't confuse the failures of the upper-management politics with the very real engineering that is happening on the Volt project. The Volt project very well will define the future of GM.
Even if GM drops it, there is a phenomenally enormous and mostly hidden-to-the-public eco-system of lower-tier suppliers that are building up to support projects like the volt, and they will continue to support other companies in EREV and eventually EV projects. Only good will come from this project, despite what all the idiots in washington say.
You can't compare the Volt to the Prius. I've posted this to other subthreads here.
If you go by just putting gas in the thing, then yes, the Prius comes out favorably. If you compare a Corvette to a minivan by how many passengers you can haul in it, yes, it sucks.
You're not supposed to regularly put gas in the Volt. If you are, you're using it wrong.
The Prius is a gasoline-only hybrid (ignoring the new short-range plug-in version this year which only goes 8-11 miles on a charge or half a typical commute). The Volt is an extended-range electric vehicle.
The Volt is a new class of vehicle. You plug it in regularly, and ideally you almost never put any gas in it. The Prius doesn't do that.
So if you don't want to plug in your car and you want to keep using gas, yes, buy that Prius.
You can't compare the Volt to the Prius. Reviewers who do so are technically incompetent and dishonest.
If you go by just putting gas in the thing, then yes, the Prius comes out favorably. If you compare a Corvette to a minivan by how many passengers you can haul in it, yes, it sucks.
You're not supposed to regularly put gas in the Volt. If you are, you're using it wrong.
The Prius is a gasoline-only hybrid (ignoring the new short-range plug-in version this year which only goes 8-11 miles on a charge or half a typical commute). The Volt is an extended-range electric vehicle.
The Volt is a new class of vehicle. You plug it in regularly, and ideally you almost never put any gas in it. The Prius doesn't do that.
So if you don't want to plug in your car and you want to keep using gas, yes, buy that Prius.
If you're going to be running on gas often enough that the Volt compares to the Prius in miles-per-gallon, the Volt isn't for you.
The volt is a completely new class of car. It's a trailblazer. The first year is always a challenge.
You can't compare a Volt to a Prius or Leaf any more than you can compare a Corvette to a dump truck. Yes, they both have wheels, electric battery packs, and doors, but they are entirely different classes of vehicles.
The Prius is still largely a gasoline-only vehicle. Yes, the plug-in version is out this year, but it only gets you 8-11 miles, vs. the Volt's 30-40 miles. .
The Leaf is electric-only. For the vast majority of Americans, it's stuck as a second car because you can't practically road-trip in it with the current American infrastructure.
The Volt seeks to address these shortfalls.
It is the first production extended range electric vehicle. You cannot compare it to a Prius or Leaf, which are two different classes of vehicles altogether. The Prius's battery pack and electric range are only a fraction of the Volt's. The Leaf is just an electric car that requires charging stations. The Volt is actually engineered for the current infrastructure reality of the US - you can get gas everywhere, and you can only charge your car in so many locations, so it's a "crossover" vehicle that can let a broader class of folks adopt to a MOSTLY electric style of living.
GM knew full well going into the project that it was risky and it caters to a VERY specific audience of "Green Early Adopters" - folks that are willing to pay a premium for cutting their petroleum footprint.
If you don't like the Volt, you are obviously outside the target demographic. The Volt serves a lot of purposes outside of selling a EREV (Extended Range Electric Vehicle) - it also helps get actual production units to start building the battery production capabilities and infrastructure needed to sustain an electric vehicle fleet. Yes, the Prius has laid some inroads here, and the Volt is another push by another manufacturer.
If you study history at all, the Insight and the Prius were in very similar positions when they came out. Both were sold at low-to-no margins and had relatively crappy first-year sales.
The First Generation Honda Insight (the first mass-produced hybrid) only sold 17,000 units over several years.
The First Generation Prius was initially sold at low-to-no margins by
There is unanimous consensus among the engineering an scientific community that we need to reduce our petroleum usage. There is also a general consensus that an electric vehicle fleet is the most practical way of achieving this goal (and this includes fuel cells which are nothing more than expensive batteries).
Let the technology bake. The battery cost is rapidly falling. Get a few model years out. You may be pleasantly surprised. If it's outside of your budget, don't buy it. It's not for you anyway. You will still benefit from the technological advances of the vehicle. You can't afford a space shuttle but you still benefit from the fringe developments of that program. These types of projects are critical to the development of our electric vehicle infrastructure. You can't convert the American fleet to electric overnight anyway, the grid would have some major problems anyway with a million vehicles charging on it suddenly; they need a few years to get that upgraded. The Volt is the first step of many.
This article is crap. They only quote a CD-based infotainment attack which requires access to the vehicle, and an aftermarket system attack which was poorly engineered. They describe a TPMS DOS attack (RF interference from the sensors) that might make your check tires light come on. Boring.
Right now, if you car doesn't have a RF transceiver, there is nothing to worry about since gaining physical access to the network requires breaking into the vehicle.
If your car does have an RF link (bluetooth, cell phone), you're still relatively OK - infotainment systems as a rule are very segregated from the powertrain networks and usually only linked by a CAN bus that only supports some high level messaging. The Infotainment ECUs do not share the same CAN bus as the powertrain components and there is generally an ECU that acts as a "firewall" such that any DOS-style attacks on the infotainment CAN bus won't affect the other vehicle systems.
I will concede that vehicles with OnStar are a bit more concerning, as I think OnStar has more hooks into the rest of the systems, although I'm not sure how deep. So that is one to worry about...
There have been some attacks demonstrated against the outward facing systems where an attacker can mess with your radio, but the systems are architected such that an attacker needs physical access to the bus to do any real damage to a vehicle.
Here's a good discussion:
http://www.autosec.org/pubs/cars-usenixsec2011.pdf
You have a long career ahead of you as a tech sector executive.
Nope, my logic is fine. I stated my assumptions - comparing worst case scenarios. You're applying a "best case scenario" (no gas tank rupture) to a worst-case lithium cell failure - thermal runaway with cell integrity failure. Lithium cells in a thermal runaway situation normally vent byproducts for a controlled burnoff of the products rather than explosion. Like you said, there's no free oxygen to burn the gas tank, same applies to the lithium cells. ASSUMING THEY'RE NOT RUPTURED.
Unfortunately you are making the common mistake of assuming that Lithium Ions cells have elemental lithium in them - not true. You can't apply the high-school chemistry notion that elemental Lithium is very reactive.
Lithium ion batteries don't spontaneously burn when exposed to air or water. They almost always burn because of thermal runaway, and it's usually the electrolyte that burns. Thermal runaway usually occurs because of dead shorts. Modern LiON cell design takes this into account and makes it VERY physically difficult for dead shorts to occur. There is copious fusing mechanisms located throughout the battery, and the battery housings are all composite materials. You pretty much would have to drive a steel stake through the heart of the cell to have any kind multi-cell dead short.
In the context of the volt crash test fires, all of them happened WEEKS after the crash test was performed.
What can happen in a gas fire is that if you sufficiently heat the tank such that it ruptures, you run the possibility of spraying gas everywhere that is then your typical fun fuel-air bomb. Since we're talking about wrecks here (which was the topic of the original article), this is relevant. This is a rare chance given a well- designed vehicle that has a tank in a secure location. So, usually, worst case you have a small leak. Fuel pumps cut off after wrecks for this reason, so you're not dumping fuel through a potentially broken line.
Honestly we won't really know the stats until we get a few million vehicles on the road. Given that there are 300,000 car fires a year, I don't think it will be hard for electric cars to beat that.
More info on how Lithium batteries fail:
http://www.mpoweruk.com/lithium_failures.htm
To put it in perspective, a Volt battery has roughly 16 KWh of energy stored. An gas tank on an equivalent sized car is roughly 10 gallons. At 36.6 KWh/gal, that's 360 Kwh of energy, or more than 22X the energy of the battery. Now, assuming that all goes up at once, which one do you want to be near? Couple that with the fact you can't easily set off a lithium battery fire with an open flame or a spark, and I know which odds I'll be taking.
Of course the Volt has both energy sources. But, the point is that a battery pack--coupled with modern cooling controls, safety interlocks and fusing--is safer than a tank of gasoline in a multitude of crash scenarios. Yes, you have to be concerned about high voltage exposure, but all modern packs have disconnect relays that are wired to a crash sensor (ala airbags or the fuel pump cutoff switch).
The reality is this whole thing was a witch hunt likely egged on by Volt competitors.
Uhh, Amazon is operating one or more facilities in Indiana now: http://www.theindychannel.com/money/27824383/detail.html ..so good on Indiana for holding them to the same rules to which they hold other mail-order operations.
Amazon tried and got away with this shit in South Carolina - they scored a sales tax exemption despite setting up operations in the state:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/09/amazon-warehouse-spartanburg-county_n_1140145.html
Now, why does Amazon get sales tax exemption with their nexus in the state, yet other mail order operations do not get sales tax exemptions? This is pure and simple government-corporate corruption, and only the small guy loses.
Someone once pointed out to me that the majority of the mass of a tree comes from... Carbon in the air. Not from water or the soil.
Look at a forest, the majority of the mass there is captured CO2 from the air.
So, it's pretty simple, plant some more damn trees. Pick some faster-growing species if it makes you feel better. Once they stop growing quickly, cut 'em down, bury 'em, and plant some more. Carbon buried!
Generally falls under the laws about "Equipment violations" - same laws that get you a ticket for having a tail light out, for example. Obviously harder to spot from the road, but a really observant cop could cite you. And should. Because it's retarded.
Stop right there. This is hands down the shittiest advice I've ever seen posted to a forum that could get someone killed. I really hope you're trolling. Saying air bags aren't designed for seatbelt use is completely ignorant and life-threateningly wrong. In fact, it's quite the opposite, an airbag could potentially kill you if you use it without a seatbelt.
While I don't like calling people names in forums, you are an ignorant idiot that could get someone killed if they follow your advice and get in a wreck.
Passive restraint systems ARE without a shred of doubt designed for maximum effectiveness with the active restraints in place. It's a SYSTEM. You could, for example, fly over the steering wheel airbag if you're not wearing the belt. OEM seatbelts are designed with a very carefully calibrated amount of "stretch" to them that will give in a crash too. Changing these out is potential suicide. You are not a crash safety engineer, and god help us if you ever become one. Leave that to the pros. Wear your OEM, crash-tested seatbelts and never ever touch the airbag system.