Chevrolet Spark EV

[rj_astra]

Electricity grid is the transport and its doesnt help that battery tech is patented and bought by oil companies before it can be used cheaply by auto manufacturers who are at the whim of oil corps. Look at who killed the electric car doco on how chev was told to crush all its evs by an oil giant.

Not sure what planet you are on but most manufacturers seem to be able to roll out a EV car pretty easily nowadays.
Are these oil companies the same ones who bought the patents to the 100mpg carburettors in the 1970s? Why would they restrict battery tech when these same oil companies are investing in renewables etc?

[mondo2000]

My idea is that the technology needed for ethanol use, is already developed and distributed. EV's need a completely new infrastructure and end user product.

Yes there is energy consumed developing the ethanol, but we're still burning coal to generate electricity. So the EV's aren't really any better in that respect either.

Ethanol is a renewable, carbon-neutral fuel. When sugar can grows it consumes oxygen fron the atmosphere, the carbon is stored in the plant fibres and sugars, which are fermented to produce alcohol, which releases the carbon back to the atmosphere when it is burnt as a fuel. The Murwillumbah sugar mill is powered by biomass, the sugar cane offcuts/scrap is burnt to heat a boiler and produce the electricity required to run the mill.

Brazil used to be almost totally dependent on oil imports. These days it is energy self sufficient thanks to ethanol. Australia could do the same. On a global scale ethanol can only replace a small percentage of fossil fuels. There just aint enough farmable land to make enough ethanol to replace oil. Unless you want to stop feeding about 7% of the world's population (about 500 million people).

Electricity grid is the transport and its doesnt help that battery tech is patented and bought by oil companies before it can be used cheaply by auto manufacturers who are at the whim of oil corps. Look at who killed the electric car doco on how chev was told to crush all its evs by an oil giant.

You were either on drugs or watched a different documentary. There was zero mention of oil companies telling GM (not Chev which is a GM brand and had nothing to do with the EV1) to crush the EV1s. GM (for whatever reason) wanted to abort their EV program when the zero emission requirement in California was dropped. GM owned the cars (they were leased to customers, never sold), they lost money on every one they made, they didn't want to sell them to lessees because they would have to keep spare parts inventory for 11ty years, as well as technical support for a car that was unique at the time. So they were crushed.

An interdasting question is why, more than 10 years later, was the Chevy Volt so shit compared to the EV1?? The EV1 had a drag coefficient of 0.19, great performance and a range of 160 miles from a NiMH battery pack.

[Captiva Fan]

An interdasting question is why, more than 10 years later, was the Chevy Volt so shit compared to the EV1??

My guess would be cost & bleeding-edgeness of technology. The EV1 was owned by GM, and without the warranty worries they could build something which was less hardy & less 'safe'; if I was less lazy I could probably Google it, but I'll also bet it was way more expensive to build than a Volt & my guess is an RRP probably would've been totally out of the realms of what you coudl sell a GM (even Cadillac) product for.

[rj_astra]

An interdasting question is why, more than 10 years later, was the Chevy Volt so shit compared to the EV1?? The EV1 had a drag coefficient of 0.19, great performance and a range of 160 miles from a NiMH battery pack.

And it only seated 2, was built on a bespoked platform and cost heaps to make. They were also mainly sold with a lead acid battery with no more range than a Volt. The EPA mileage/range calculations were A LOT looser than those applied today.

The Volt is built on a Cruze chassis, seats 4, has a decent boot, and a range extender engine to boost range to 500km odd. It also went from concept to production in a remarkably short time.

[mondo2000]

My guess would be cost & bleeding-edgeness of technology. The EV1 was owned by GM, and without the warranty worries they could build something which was less hardy & less 'safe'; if I was less lazy I could probably Google it, but I'll also bet it was way more expensive to build than a Volt & my guess is an RRP probably would've been totally out of the realms of what you coudl sell a GM (even Cadillac) product for.

There are a lot of similarities between the EV1 and the Volt. They have similar size batteries (about 20kwh). They both drive the front wheels through a simple reduction gearbox. Both use AC induction motors. In fact the EV1 motor is virtually the same as the motor used in the Tesla Roadster and Tesla Model S today. The controllers are very similar. The EV1 had awesome technology for its time, but is very average compared to electric cars today. Batteries are now much cheaper. Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistors (used in the controller) are now much cheaper. In other words an EV1 could be built today at lower cost than a Volt.

And it only seated 2, was built on a bespoked platform and cost heaps to make. They were also mainly sold with a lead acid battery with no more range than a Volt. The EPA mileage/range calculations were A LOT looser than those applied today.

The Volt is built on a Cruze chassis, seats 4, has a decent boot, and a range extender engine to boost range to 500km odd. It also went from concept to production in a remarkably short time.

Making the Volt a 4 seater the same size as the Cruze was a massive mistake. The Volt has one less seat and costs twice as much. The Volt prototypes may have started with Cruze chassis' but my understanding is the Volt uses a different floor pan to accomodate the battery in the trans tunnel, so it is more or less a bespoke platform. The Volt went from concept to production in about 3.5 years, which is quite quick for an all new car. It would have been quicker if they built a car similar to the EV1, which they had a lot of data from.

Early EV1s had lead acid batteries and a range of about 80 miles. Later EV1s had NiMH batteries and a range of about 160 miles (NiMH batteries were also retro-fitted to early production EV1s.) The Volt has a battery of about the same nominal size but of a far superior chemistry, so it stores more energy. The Volt has an electric range of about 40 miles. Yes, mileage calculations/measurement have changed, but still that is a massive difference in electric performance.

If I was Bob Lutz, I would have built a pure electric 2 seater the same size as the EV1. With a 40kwh lithium ion battery it would weigh the same as an EV1(1400kg compared to 1700kg for the Volt) or less, and meet updated crash safety standards. There is no reason why it couldn't have a drag coefficient of 0.19 (compared to 0.30 of the Volt). Range would be about 400 miles. Because it would be smaller and have no internal combustion engine, it would cost about 25% less than a Volt to build. If they sold it for the same price, GM would have a hope of breaking even. A sporty 2 seater makes a better aspirational purchase. An electric shopping trolley or family car at double the price of an ICE shopping trolley or family car doesn't make sense.

Of course GM built a car completely different to the EV1 to validate their decision to terminate their earlier electric car program. They have to maintain their assertion that the EV1 was a failure. Now they are losing $40,000 on every Volt. Sucks to be GM.