Subscription Center
Aug 11, 2009 05:19 PM | 24
General Motors today announced that its Chevrolet Volt electric vehicle, set to begin production in late 2010, is expected to achieve city fuel economy of at least 230 miles per gallon, based on a new U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) formula that neither GM nor the EPA has defined very well publicly.
For comparison, Toyota's Prius currently is rated to get up to 51 mpg during city driving.
Here's what we do know: The Volt will have two modes of operation. In "electric" mode, the Volt will not use gas or produce tailpipe emissions because the car will be powered by electrical energy stored in its 16-kilowatt-hour lithium ion battery pack. When the battery charge gets too low, the Volt is designed to automatically switch to "extended-range" mode and use a gas-powered engine-generator to produce electricity to power the vehicle. The energy stored in the battery supplements the engine-generator when additional power is needed during heavy accelerations or on steep inclines.
The EPA's plug-in electric vehicle federal fuel economy methodology assumes plug-in electric vehicles will travel more city miles than highway miles solely on electricity, GM said in a statement. (At low speeds and short distances, the Volt is expected to operate solely on battery power, without touching the reserves in the gas tank.)
Still, the Volt's actual gas-free mileage will vary depending on a number of factors, including how far the car travels, the weight of the cargo and passengers, and whether the air conditioning is used. Based on the results of unofficial development testing of pre-production prototypes, GM reports the Volt can achieve 40 miles of electric-only, petroleum-free driving in both EPA city and highway test cycles, before needing a recharge (which can be achieved at a household outlet).
During a live blogging event today on GM's FastLane Blog, Jon Lauckner, GM's vice president for global program management, reinforced that the 230 mpg rating is a preliminary estimate "based on Volt development testing with our pre-production vehicles and the draft federal fuel economy methodology developed by EPA for EREV [Extended Range Electric Vehicle] vehicles like the Volt."
GM's reported gas mileage at this point may "end up being very misleading because [customers] won't get that mileage in the real world," Brett Smith, an alternative technology analyst at the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, Mich., told Bloomberg.
Image of the Chevy Volt at the 2008 LA Auto Show © Justin Kane via Flickr
Tags:
Chevy,
Volt,
GM,
electric vehicle
More News Blog:
Next: Slow hurricane season so far, but new tropical depression looms in the Atlantic
Previous: Do food stamps lead to obesity?
See what we're tweeting about
BecCrew Gogoat! RT @IGN Here's a closer look at the world of Pokemon X & Y http://t.co/8v0S45XZNr BecCrew Omgg RT @Earth_Pics The tallest living dog is ‘Zeus’ (USA).... http://t.co/HZXH9usEsK
mdichristina Hello, Heathrow.
Deadline: Jul 25 2013
Reward: Varies
This challenge provides an opportunity for Solvers to build a web-based or mobile “app” to explore data relationships in scholarly conte
Deadline: Jun 29 2013
Reward: $7,000 USD
The Seeker for this Challenge desires proposals for chemical methods that could rapidly degrade a dilute aqueous solution
Powered By: 
YES! Send me a free issue of Scientific American with no obligation to continue the subscription. If I like it, I will be billed for the one-year subscription.
24 Comments
Add Comment230 miles per gallon... really? Tell me another one Pinocchio! This kind of irresponsible self aggrandizement is part of what got our USA Auto Mnfctrs into deep trouble in the first place. Making claims that have no basis in truth is yesterday's model of selling cars. For far too long they have relied on the "If You Build It, They Will Come" model of production based, consumer needs neglected business. Today we consumers need actual information, based upon good, solid facts. Otherwise, GM can just shove it up their tailpipe!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe suggestion that this vehicle achieves 230mpg is disingenuous to the extreme. They assume that the electric portion of the commute does not have a mpg equivalent, effectively assuming that this portion is free. Although for the first 40miles no internal fuel is used, the Volt still uses electric energy generated somewhere. In effect, they could argue that the Volt is capable of returning infinite mpg if you commute less than 40 miles per day. This is akin to saying that an electric milk float costs nothing to run due to its infinite mpg based on petrol. In reality, the volt has a 12 gallon fuel tank with a range of 640 miles. This equates to 54mpg over any extended distance.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOver shorter distances, the true cost of generating the electricity must be factored in. This is analysed in more depth in the second reference, but if we are using conventional oil or coal fired methods of generating the electricity this may or may not be more efficient or cleaner than running a fully petrol vehicle. Certainly diesel engines will probably be giving equal or better overall actual energy usage to this vehicle. Only if truly renewable and clean energy sources are used to generate the electricity used by the Volt will we see total benefits in terms of pollution and saved oil from this vehicle.
Ref:
Fuel capacity and range:
www.chevy-volt.net/chevrolet-volt-battery-details.htm
Fuel Efficiency equivalents:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_efficiency_in_transportation
The suggestion that this vehicle achieves 230mpg is disingenuous to the extreme. They assume that the electric portion of the commute does not have a mpg equivalent, effectively assuming that this portion is free. Although for the first 40miles no internal fuel is used, the Volt still uses electric energy generated somewhere. In effect, they could argue that the Volt is capable of returning infinite mpg if you commute less than 40 miles per day. This is akin to saying that an electric milk float costs nothing to run due to its infinite mpg based on petrol. In reality, the volt has a 12 gallon fuel tank with a range of 640 miles. This equates to 54mpg over any extended distance.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOver shorter distances, the true cost of generating the electricity must be factored in. This is analysed in more depth in the second reference, but if we are using conventional oil or coal fired methods of generating the electricity this may or may not be more efficient or cleaner than running a fully petrol vehicle. Certainly diesel engines will probably be giving equal or better overall actual energy usage to this vehicle. Only if truly renewable and clean energy sources are used to generate the electricity used by the Volt will we see total benefits in terms of pollution and saved oil from this vehicle.
Ref:
Fuel capacity and range:
www.chevy-volt.net/chevrolet-volt-battery-details.htm
Fuel Efficiency equivalents:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_efficiency_in_transportation
Who cares about mpg? What's its time in the 1/4 mile? How quick can it go from 0 to 80 mph?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI have been reading articles about this amazing fully electric vehicle "Chevy Volt" with excellent back up generator to recharge the battery, however I have not come across of how long to fully charged the ion battery?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNevertheless, whether or not this vehicle claims 230 miles per gallon, a 40 miles range per fully charge is what we needed for our daily commute. Definitely a wise decision on buying your next car would be fully electric vehicle, and of course it will be this vehicle that I think less smog pollution to help us live longer, you bet the "Chevy Volt" will deliver !
Wow! Now you are sounding like Scientific American, not Scientific Democrat....as we say, Bravo Zulu!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGM cannot stop themselves from continually sliding down the slope to oblivion. Do they think there are enough idiots out there that will buy that lie and keep them in business? When they refuse to move away from fossil fuel, they condemn themselves to failure. Why don't they put a solar panel on top of the car that will continue recharging the battery and run the air conditioner? I wonder if they are still puzzled why they are going under?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI call shenanigans.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe idea that GM suddenly jumps from worst to first by a HUGE margin in terms of mpg is just too much to swallow. Not only is the claim totally ridiculous, it's even been reported that their fuel economy degrades rapidly with the distance you travel. So even if the true number is more like 50 starting out, by the time you've gone through half a tank of gas that number is back down to low 20's or even teens. The fact that they can make an announcement of 230 mpg with this kind of inconsistent performance just emphasizes the weaknesses of our current rating system.
Nice job finding the loopholes, GM. Looks like nothing will stand in the way of your total corruption of the American auto market.
In case nobody else notice the GM, now a government owned company, came up with this mpg scheme with the help of the EPA, another government run organization. And they say the government is unbiased and won't lie and give an unfair advantage to further their products. Their lying about the mpg to harm other non-government owned competitors. Any chance they'll do the same with national health care?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWobbler provides a pretty good argument against the GM's fudging of the vehicle's capability. What is important to consumers is really $/mile, and we need 2 numbers to assess this. The first is kwh of electrical energy to get you that initial 40 or so miles. Using our local marginal rate (at least where I live, I pay a much higher rate above a certain threshhold useage per month) we can then calculate cost and have some basis for comparison against gasoline powered travel. The 2nd number we need is the mpg once the batteries are depleted. Any less information is not really useful, so a single number won't do.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI have a Honda civic hybrid and my gas engine runs all the time, with the electric motor helping durring accelleration. I might be mislead, but does the Toyota Prius have an electric only mode? If so; why isnt that factored into the MPG rating of the Prius?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAlso where did this average 40 mile commute come from? Was it years of market research or GM's batteries can only get 40 miles so lets call that an "average commute".
Assuming it takes 16 kWh to charge the 16 kWh battery, in the Philadelphia area electricity runs about $0.17/kWh and gas is about $2.60/gallon.
For 640 miles (estimated full range of the Volt) I would pay close to $34. Which is about $0.05 per mile.
My Honda Civic gets about 40 MPG and has a 13 gallon tank. Range, 520 miles. So I pay about $0.065 per mile.
If I drove 12,000 miles in a year I would save an estimated $180 if I had the Volt rather than my 4 year old Civic.
The solar panels on the roof of the garage should be enough for getting back and forth to work.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn addition, there would be no exhaust being produced in stalled traffic because all the cars would be running on batteries.
I don't think it's quite fair to condemn a whole program because of a single slip-up
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this-- "Bucky" Turgedson
The whole program is a slip-up. Fairness established.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEPAs history in determining official CAFE mpg numbers has been suspect for 30 years. In 1978 it was pointed out to them that their method of determining CAFE mpg without running the A/C was not accurate. The EPA agreed and also dug in their heels and said in writing they would not change their test method even though they admitted it was inaccurate. They wrote letters to Senators Goldwater and Garn to this effect. These senators staffs tried to help change this EPA mistake but to no avail.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNow EPA helps GM generate obviously false CAFE numbers in the Volt. Ask anyone who knows how many accelerations the Voltgcan make before the battery is depleted. The number will surprise you.
IE: the 230mpg number is fiction.
Oh, the answer is 23 accelertions. The 230 numer is with ONE acceleration and then a single cruisoing speed of 40mph. A real world driving mode? You tell me.
A GM executive being interviewed on FOX News recently advised that the Volt will be priced around $40,000 but a $7000 government rebate will help ...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this... considering that the taxpayer (and our grandchildren and their grandchildren) have bailed out GM to the tune of billions and billions of dollars, how much will GMs whiz-bang electric Edsell actually cost?
Isn't powering a generator by gas kind of redundant, why not just use the gas to power the car instead of using once source of energy to generate another to power a car. It's just an overcomplicated process, and simplicity is always most effective.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSince we don't know the methodology behind the numbers there's no basis for either praise or criticism of the vehicle. As one reader comments, if you never exceed the 40 mile range before a plug-in recharge, then you never use any gas and the "mileage" is infinite but irrelevant. To get any number, 230 or whatever, has to imply that some percentage of the time the 40 mile limit is violated and the engine starts up. Fair enough, but without that info the article is misleading and should not have been published without clarification. Shame on GM's PR folks, shame on Sciam's editors
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBut don't knock the car and it's designers before you have a straight story. The principle is good but we don't know how well it has been implemented or how much the car will cost.
16,000watts/230 miles = 66 watts per mile
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhich is slightly more than a 50 watt light bulb.
No lights, no heat, no air conditioner and down hill for 230 miles?
And we bailed them out for what reason?
Oh, I know to save UAW paychecks of Obama's campaign supporters.
If you are honest, you will remember that the first checks to the auto industry happened in 2008...under the Bush administration. It is distortions like this that will keep Obama in office for 8 full years.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGreat dialog going. I used a lot of what I read here formulating the latest Mapawatt Blog post on how GM came up with their mileage and the best way I think an electric car's mileage should be calculated.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://blog.mapawatt.com/2009/08/15/230-mpg-chevy-volt-marketing/
Great dialog going. I used a lot of what I read here to formulate the latest Mapawatt blog post analyzing how GM came to their 230 MPG rating and the best way I think mileage for electric cars should be calculated:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://blog.mapawatt.com/2009/08/15/230-mpg-chevy-volt-marketing/
Considering that , we the taxpayers, bailed out GM, they should GIVE every household one of these things.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe 230mpg thing, ...BS.
As was pointed out already, that's with only one acceleration.
I don't know anyone who has that kind of a drive to work.
Mine's 45 miles for Buddha's sake!
I couldn't even get to work on the electric cruising range!
GM, and all the other automakers, need to be developing alternative methods of propulsion that don't have any reliance on fossil fuels.
Like electric motors that can regenerate enough power to charge their own battaries, and compressed air driven motors.
That idea seems to only be explored in Europe.
Now, if you look at this subject from the environmentalists point of view, it really subplants the pollution from gas powered engines to coal burning power plants.
Answer, hydro electric power and nuclear power plants.
But these are really the realm of the government.
And they should get on it soon, in my opinion.
Aocasio,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiswhile your ideas sound great, there are many hurdles to implementing them. I would suggest reading the book "Sustainable Energy: Without the Hot Air". It addresses many of your "solutions" and highlights that many of them just aren't feasible. Compressed air driven motors are not the answer, because how do you think the air gets compressed in the first place: fossil fuels. And an electric motor that regenerates itself is perpetual motion, which is impossible.