Interested in your opinion on this - Volt related

[Skinhead]

The data and the math here are not mine, but the assumptions and calculations appear reasonable.........which means the conclusions are more proof the Feds need to stay out of the private sector.  Can you find any flaws in what follows?
 
 


Cost to operate a Chevy Volt
 
Eric Bolling (Fox Business Channel's Follow the Money) test drove the Chevy Volt at the invitation of General Motors.
 
For four days in a row, the fully charged battery lasted only 25 miles before the Volt switched to the reserve gasoline engine.
 
Eric calculated the car got 30 mpg including the 25 miles it ran on the battery.
So, the range including the 9 gallon gas tank and the 16 kwh battery is approximately 270 miles.
It will take you 4 1/2 hours to drive 270 miles at 60 mph. Then add 10 hours to charge the battery and you have a total trip time of 14.5 hours.
In a typical road trip your average speed (including charging time) would be 20 mph.
 
According to General Motors, the Volt battery hold 16 kwh
of electricity. It takes a full 10 hours to charge a drained battery.
 
The cost for the electricity to charge the Volt is never mentioned so I looked up what I pay for electricity.
 
I pay approximately (it varies with amount used and the seasons) $1.16 per kwh.
 
16 kwh x $1.16 per kwh = $18.56 to charge the battery.
 
$18.56 per charge divided by 25 miles = $0.74 per mile to operate the Volt using the battery.
 
Compare this to a similar size car with a gasoline engine only that gets 32 mpg.
 
$3.19 per gallon divided by 32 mpg = $0.10 per mile.
 
The gasoline powered car cost about $15,000 while the Volt costs $46,000.........
 
So Government wants us to pay 3 times as much, for a car that costs more that 7 times as much to run, and takes 3 times longer to drive across country..... REALLY ?????

[x]

Leaving aside everything else for the moment, the kwh charges are more than 10 times too high.

[MP]

Just saw the Volt's latest TV ad.  Bragged about the "new, EXTENDED Range".  They call 25 miles EXTENDED Range? 

That is TERRIBLE.

MP

[x]

Just saw the Volt's latest TV ad.  Bragged about the "new, EXTENDED Range".  They call 25 miles EXTENDED Range? 

That is TERRIBLE.

MP

No... they are talking about the total range of the car including distance traveled when electricity is generated by the gasoline powered motor.

You guys sound a lot like the folks that made fun of the "horseless carriage".

[ricoman]

You guys sound a lot like the folks that made fun of the "horseless carriage".
[/quote]







yup, but was the "horseless carriage" supported by the taxpayers of the time-like the Volt is?
It's a pos car with less than cutting edge tecnology at best. And we get to help pay for it!
I love subsidies and union owned companies-hey, that's what will get him another term.

[CajunRider]

$1.16 per kwh for electricity??? 

I seriously doubt it.  The national average is somewhere around 10 or 12 CENTS per kwh...

That being said... I still wouldn't do the electric car thing.  The technology just isn't there yet. 

[Skinhead]

Ya know, for some one all hung up on alternative energy sources, why did Barry pull the plug on the Fuel cell funding just as GM was getting close to a production model.  I know the infrastructure to refuel it isn't there, but is that all there is to it?

[PAVALKER]

Not totally correct.... of course.....

Per Snopes....    http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/chevyvolt.asp

[Skinhead]

Not totally correct.... of course.....

Per Snopes....    http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/chevyvolt.asp

Thanks, I guess I should have Snopes'd it, but I usually can't find a reference to what I'm searching for there, so I quit relying on it. 

[Donald]

The numbers are totally skewed, it does not require 16kw to recharge a battery of a"dispensible" 16KW.
Cost per KW to charge it is probably less than $.50 (50 cents), that said, in regard to the fuel cell, infrastructure will catch up, just like the plans for "battery stations".
Fuel cell is definitely in our future, we will just have more grey hair by the time it happens.
Remember 10 years ago, no one had heard of Bio-Fuel, every Tom, Dick and Harry is running his farm equipment on it now.

[Romeo]

Not sure about any of the numbers, don't really care. What I do care about is finding ways to push the technology. Sometimes "the market" gets in the way of corporations looking into and developing new technologies. Every new technology starts out inefficiently, competition takes over, the engineers do their job, and before ya know it, it's not only feasible, it's preffered. Let's hope that's the case here.

[musclehead]

You guys sound a lot like the folks that made fun of the "horseless carriage".

yup, but was the "horseless carriage" supported by the taxpayers of the time-like the Volt is?
It's a pos car with less than cutting edge tecnology at best. And we get to help pay for it!
I love subsidies and union owned companies-hey, that's what will get him another term.
[/quote]

didn't they talk about increasing the subsidy from a $8,000 tax credit to a $10,000 credit?

the KWH are too high, that part is flat wrong. how is the electricity generated? (coal anyone?)

the thing I'm wondering about is total sales? I've heard figures from 33,000 to 17,000 units sold.
I've also heard they aren't ordering them at the stealerships.

in all my driving around i've only seen one, and I spotted it because it was proudly labeled "VOLT" on the side 

[alph]

you'd be better off switching your current vehicle to run on natural gas!!  runs cleaner, is about $1.25 per "gallon" plus you can fill up at your own house!!

[bscrive]

I just don't think that paying $46000 for a car that is comparable to a $20000 chevy cobalt is worth the money.  I could buy a hell of a lot of gas for the $26000 difference.

[RoadKill]

Using snopes math you save 4 cents per mile driving a volt in electric mode. that is a whole freakin dollar saved every recharge or 4 dollars per 100miles. 1000 miles would save 40 bucks. 10000 miles would be 400$ savings and that's like 4grand every hundred thousand miles.  That means the car would pay for itself in fuel savings about every 1.2 million miles. Not including tires, and maintenance of course.     Some one check my math, PLEASE

[Bob E.]

The thing that also skews the numbers is the assumption that in the 270 mile range, you are driving only the 25 miles on the electric motor and the rest on gasoline.  However, most driving is short trips back and forth to work or a run to the store or whatever.  So assuming you top off the battery every day for a dollar or so and only drive 20-30 miles round trip to work, that gasoline would last a very long time while you rack up miles.

In my case, I drive 25 miles each way to work...50 miles round trip.  Assuming I get to work entirely on the battery and then drive home entirely on gas getting the average 30mpg cited in the foxnews article, I would use about 0.83 gallon of gas.  So it would cost me about $1 for electricity and about $3.16 (current reg gas price).  That's $4.16 per day, about $20.80 per week, for a total of about $1082 per year.  On the other hand, a similar small car getting 30mpg would cost about $1642.00 per year. So, in 10 years, you would save over $5600 dollars in fuel/energy costs.  Compared to my Jeep Cherokee, which gets about 20mpg, the savings would be alot higher...nearly $14,000 over that same 10 years.

[Jess Tolbirt]

The thing that also skews the numbers is the assumption that in the 270 mile range, you are driving only the 25 miles on the electric motor and the rest on gasoline.  However, most driving is short trips back and forth to work or a run to the store or whatever.  So assuming you top off the battery every day for a dollar or so and only drive 20-30 miles round trip to work, that gasoline would last a very long time while you rack up miles.

In my case, I drive 25 miles each way to work...50 miles round trip.  Assuming I get to work entirely on the battery and then drive home entirely on gas getting the average 30mpg cited in the foxnews article, I would use about 0.83 gallon of gas.  So it would cost me about $1 for electricity and about $3.16 (current reg gas price).  That's $4.16 per day, about $20.80 per week, for a total of about $1082 per year.  On the other hand, a similar small car getting 30mpg would cost about $1642.00 per year. So, in 10 years, you would save over $5600 dollars in fuel/energy costs.  Compared to my Jeep Cherokee, which gets about 20mpg, the savings would be alot higher...nearly $14,000 over that same 10 years.

in 5 years you will have to put 3000 dollars worth of batteries in it ,,

[WamegoRob]

I'd take this 20-yr-old model with its 100+ mile range over a 2013 Volt every day:

http://www.greencar.com/articles/20-truths-gm-ev1-electric-car.php

[rmrc51]

I'd take this 20-yr-old model with its 100+ mile range over a 2013 Volt every day:

http://www.greencar.com/articles/20-truths-gm-ev1-electric-car.php

So would I!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[FryeVRCCDS0067]

When and if electric vehicles become $30,000 long range performance vehicles I might consider one.

[MP]

The thing that also skews the numbers is the assumption that in the 270 mile range, you are driving only the 25 miles on the electric motor and the rest on gasoline.  However, most driving is short trips back and forth to work or a run to the store or whatever.  So assuming you top off the battery every day for a dollar or so and only drive 20-30 miles round trip to work, that gasoline would last a very long time while you rack up miles.

In my case, I drive 25 miles each way to work...50 miles round trip.  Assuming I get to work entirely on the battery and then drive home entirely on gas getting the average 30mpg cited in the foxnews article, I would use about 0.83 gallon of gas.  So it would cost me about $1 for electricity and about $3.16 (current reg gas price).  That's $4.16 per day, about $20.80 per week, for a total of about $1082 per year.  On the other hand, a similar small car getting 30mpg would cost about $1642.00 per year. So, in 10 years, you would save over $5600 dollars in fuel/energy costs.  Compared to my Jeep Cherokee, which gets about 20mpg, the savings would be alot higher...nearly $14,000 over that same 10 years.

Our $25,000 VW Jetta TDI gets 40+ mpg.  So, our cost would be very little higher than the Volt under your scenario.  Plus, I saved $20,000.  The interest alone would pay all the difference.

Also, our electric power grid is running at 90%+ of capacity.  Where is all the extra electricity to come from?

You figure out how many KW it takes to drive that 25miles to work each day, and it would double or more the typical household electricity use.  If even 1/2 of cars switched over, it would overwhelm the power grid for years, if not decades.

MP

[MP]

Just saw the Volt's latest TV ad.  Bragged about the "new, EXTENDED Range".  They call 25 miles EXTENDED Range? 

That is TERRIBLE.

MP

No... they are talking about the total range of the car including distance traveled when electricity is generated by the gasoline powered motor.

But it is an ELECTRIC car!  I would be buying it for that reason.  If I was interested in the "extended range" on gas, I would buy a gas car that gets better mileage on gas, for 1/2 the money.

I do thank you for not throwing a personal attack this time.

MP

[Momz]

Seems like it's time to buy a PRIUS.

[Dubsvalk]

What happened to vehicles running on hydrogen?   Are they still being used in California?  Other countries have had good success stories with them.  Of course Obama isn't in bed with Iceland. 
Dubs

[bigguy]

you'd be better off switching your current vehicle to run on natural gas!!  runs cleaner, is about $1.25 per "gallon" plus you can fill up at your own house!!

They're hitting that hard in Shreveport with the development around the haynesville shale. I recently saw a new item where somebody (I believe it's Chesapeak Energy Corp.) is putting several LNG filling stations. (I think it was 10, but am going by a very unreliable memory)
If I lived over there, I'd seriously consider it for a commuter.

[Bob E.]

The thing that also skews the numbers is the assumption that in the 270 mile range, you are driving only the 25 miles on the electric motor and the rest on gasoline.  However, most driving is short trips back and forth to work or a run to the store or whatever.  So assuming you top off the battery every day for a dollar or so and only drive 20-30 miles round trip to work, that gasoline would last a very long time while you rack up miles.

In my case, I drive 25 miles each way to work...50 miles round trip.  Assuming I get to work entirely on the battery and then drive home entirely on gas getting the average 30mpg cited in the foxnews article, I would use about 0.83 gallon of gas.  So it would cost me about $1 for electricity and about $3.16 (current reg gas price).  That's $4.16 per day, about $20.80 per week, for a total of about $1082 per year.  On the other hand, a similar small car getting 30mpg would cost about $1642.00 per year. So, in 10 years, you would save over $5600 dollars in fuel/energy costs.  Compared to my Jeep Cherokee, which gets about 20mpg, the savings would be alot higher...nearly $14,000 over that same 10 years.

Our $25,000 VW Jetta TDI gets 40+ mpg.  So, our cost would be very little higher than the Volt under your scenario.  Plus, I saved $20,000.  The interest alone would pay all the difference.

Also, our electric power grid is running at 90%+ of capacity.  Where is all the extra electricity to come from?

You figure out how many KW it takes to drive that 25miles to work each day, and it would double or more the typical household electricity use.  If even 1/2 of cars switched over, it would overwhelm the power grid for years, if not decades.

MP

Oh...you're right.  I wasn't necessarily pushing electric cars, I was merely pointing out that the original study results as well as some of the other comments on this board were flawed.  But yeah, I agree...they still aren't feasible or totally economically sensible...yet.  But it is alot closer than the original article would suggest.

[MP]

The thing that also skews the numbers is the assumption that in the 270 mile range, you are driving only the 25 miles on the electric motor and the rest on gasoline.  However, most driving is short trips back and forth to work or a run to the store or whatever.  So assuming you top off the battery every day for a dollar or so and only drive 20-30 miles round trip to work, that gasoline would last a very long time while you rack up miles.

In my case, I drive 25 miles each way to work...50 miles round trip.  Assuming I get to work entirely on the battery and then drive home entirely on gas getting the average 30mpg cited in the foxnews article, I would use about 0.83 gallon of gas.  So it would cost me about $1 for electricity and about $3.16 (current reg gas price).  That's $4.16 per day, about $20.80 per week, for a total of about $1082 per year.  On the other hand, a similar small car getting 30mpg would cost about $1642.00 per year. So, in 10 years, you would save over $5600 dollars in fuel/energy costs.  Compared to my Jeep Cherokee, which gets about 20mpg, the savings would be alot higher...nearly $14,000 over that same 10 years.

Our $25,000 VW Jetta TDI gets 40+ mpg.  So, our cost would be very little higher than the Volt under your scenario.  Plus, I saved $20,000.  The interest alone would pay all the difference.

Also, our electric power grid is running at 90%+ of capacity.  Where is all the extra electricity to come from?

You figure out how many KW it takes to drive that 25miles to work each day, and it would double or more the typical household electricity use.  If even 1/2 of cars switched over, it would overwhelm the power grid for years, if not decades.

MP

Oh...you're right.  I wasn't necessarily pushing electric cars, I was merely pointing out that the original study results as well as some of the other comments on this board were flawed.  But yeah, I agree...they still aren't feasible or totally economically sensible...yet.  But it is alot closer than the original article would suggest.

And, if Obama and his energy czar get their way, the electric would compete much better if gas is $15 a gallon.  Which is the direction SE wants it to go.  Of course, he DOES NOT live here!

MP

[Romeo]

you'd be better off switching your current vehicle to run on natural gas!!  runs cleaner, is about $1.25 per "gallon" plus you can fill up at your own house!!

I thought I was the only one thinking that. I am not normally a conspiracy theorist , but I just can not understand why we aren't utilizing our greatest natural resource.

[Romeo]

Seems like it's time to buy a PRIUS.

But George, they're so butt ugly

[Valkahuna]

One thing nobody mentioned is that in Electric mode, at stand-still, there is "Zero" torque, yet as soon as the electric motor turns, it generates 100% torque. In snow, that means that in electric mode, the tires spin, which in turn then are "retarded" through ABS, and electric engine management. This causes the car to initially barely roll forward, then when wheel spin is detected, the program stops the spinning and the forward motion. At least with Hybrid cars the gas engine takes over at some point.

I have friends in New England in the car business, who tell me that when they have to move all the cars to clear their lots of snow, they typically just push the Hybrid cars. Now imagine how much worse the all electrics fare.

[Skinhead]

Prius owners:

Southpark Californians Smelling their own farts.	powered by Aeva

[BigAl]

Obama says he will buy a Volt in 5 years when he leaves office.

I got a Hundred on me that says he will be out of a job much sooner than that.

I sure hope we win.

If he leaves we all win.

President Barack Obama on the Chevy Volt.	powered by Aeva

[G-Man]

Not sure about any of the numbers, don't really care. What I do care about is finding ways to push the technology. Sometimes "the market" gets in the way of corporations looking into and developing new technologies. Every new technology starts out inefficiently, competition takes over, the engineers do their job, and before ya know it, it's not only feasible, it's preffered. Let's hope that's the case here.

Unless the gov't gets involved and spend billions,....then the companies they invested our money in go banckrupt instead of bringing something of value to the market.

[bscrive]

This is what I am waiting for.  Don't know how it would work in Canada, though.

Compressed Air Cars - France	powered by Aeva

[3fan4life]

I would say that the Chevy Cruze is a much better alternative.

From Car and Driver magazine:

As a tech statement, the Volt is this century’s bold stroke. But in the harsh world of new-car economics and no-kidding comparison tests, it finished second to its kid brother here for several reasons. Topping that list is initial cost. Even after you’ve cashed in the federal government’s generous $7500 tax credit and applicable state or local subsidies, the Volt costs roughly 50 percent more than the Cruze. And, in any given lifetime, there’s no way to make a payback pencil out. Based on EPA combined-mileage ratings, $4 per gallon for gas, and $0.112 per kWh for electricity, the savings attributable to driving the Volt 100,000 miles solely on electricity over the gas-powered Cruze is only $8089.

Keep in mind that this "savings" is spread out over 100,000 miles and is based on the Volt NEVER using a single gallon of gas. And $7,500 of it comes from a federal tax credit. Then if you financed instead of paying cash (all $45,000) the interest eats up all of the savings and then some.

The entire article:

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2011-chevrolet-volt-vs-2011-chevrolet-cruze-eco-comparison-test

[bigguy]

you'd be better off switching your current vehicle to run on natural gas!!  runs cleaner, is about $1.25 per "gallon" plus you can fill up at your own house!!

I thought I was the only one thinking that. I am not normally a conspiracy theorist , but I just can not understand why we aren't utilizing our greatest natural resource.

Most likely, the initial investment in infrastructure to transport, store, and distribute the gas makes it far less profitable for the oil/energy companies. The pressure in the natural gas lines at your house is very low. (as low as 1/4 lbs) You'd have to have a serious compressor to pump enough of it into you car to give you any realistic range. You'll probably have to use Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) to get the necessary energy density to use as a viable automotive fuel.
Don't get me wrong. This is completely doable. I grew up in SE Arkansas farming country back in the 70s and 80s. There were a lot of tractors that ran on propane and several farmers converted their farm trucks to also run on propane. The only problem was, you had to stay in the Delta where you could find a propane tank to refuel from. I just don't think there's as much profit in it for the energy companies as there is with oil.

[Hoser]

To paraphrase a remark in the first Robocop movie regarding the hostage taker's response when demanding a car for his getaway:  "I want a car that is really big, really fast, and gets really crappy gas milage".  I kinda feel that way.     Hoser