backtop


Print 41 comment(s) - last by thurston.. on Apr 5 at 8:24 PM


The U.S. wants to buy the first 100 Chevy Volts that GM produces.
The government is a big fan of GM's new electric vehicle

On Wednesday the 2011 Chevy Volt achieved an important milestone, with a pre-production model rolling off the assembly line in Hamtramck, Michigan.  Previously pre-production Volts have been built by hand and tested.  Porting the process over onto the assembly line was a critical step in preparing to commercially deploy the vehicle.

States GM's Detroit-Hamtramck plant manager, Teri Quigley, "We have a very experienced workforce at this plant and through all of their preparation and training workers here have been given the privilege to take GM into the future with this car."

The plant is expected to continue to build pre-production models until late this year, when it will jump to a production build in preparation for the November 10 launch.

In other news, in order to meet its fuel efficiency goals, according to 
Ward's Auto the government says it wants to buy the first 100 Chevy Volts produced by GM.  The government has vowed to cut its fleet's fuel footprint by 30 percent by 2020.  The government also expressed interest in Chrysler's upcoming plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) Dodge Ram.  It, however, has not yet expressed interest in the top-selling Ford Fusion Hybrid.

GM has responded to the government's intent to purchase the first 100 Volts.  It released a statement remarking:

We are pleased to see that the Federal government is interested in the greening of their vehicle fleet. Media speculation has led to reports that the GSA and DOE will be buying the first 100 Chevrolet Volt's because we will meet this criteria. At this time we have no further details regarding these purchases.

The Chevy Volt is the first electric vehicle to be mass produced in America (Tesla Roadsters are manufactured overseas and in small batches, while the mass produced 2011 Nissan Leaf will initially be produced in Japan).  It gets 40 miles on a charge, thanks to its 16 kWh battery.  It can be charged from a 120-240VAC standard residential outlet using the SAE's new standards compliant SAE-J1722 adapter.  It can also extend its range to over 300 miles, by employing a small built in 4-cylinder gas engine.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

What that statement really said
By Lord 666 on 4/2/2010 8:57:46 AM , Rating: 5
"We are pleased to see our parent company is interested in the greening of their vehicle fleet. Media speculation has led to reports that the GSA and DOE will be buying the first 100 Chevrolet Volt's because we need someone to buy them for quality testing"




RE: What that statement really said
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 4/2/2010 10:24:08 AM , Rating: 5
The government owns some 500,000 plus postal trucks that go house to house across the USA everyday burning a ton of fuel. These trucks are next to nothing equipment wise (frame, 4 tires, steering wheel, engine and that's about it). Would it not make sense to have GM build a mega super simple postal truck using this type of power and save money all over the place? It should also lower cost of building this type of vehicle. Save enough enough in fuel cost and they will not have to let go of some 300,000 employees that will lose their jobs if they cut the Saturday delivery....

I don't know, maybe it's a bad idea to use what you have to help other things you have.... :P


RE: What that statement really said
By Slaimus on 4/2/2010 2:17:28 PM , Rating: 5
The USPS has long since been independent of the federal government in terms of funding for its daily operations. It would not be any government agency that tells the USPS to do such a thing.


RE: What that statement really said
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 4/2/2010 2:51:36 PM , Rating: 2
Were the USPS receives it's funding is from the stamps they sell (not taxes) so yes they have always been separate from the Federal Government financially speaking. However, it is a Federal office, that is why all USPS are Federal employees and it is why USPS had to go to congress to ask to cut Saturday deliveries. The Federal Government controls how the USPS spends their money.. what and where money can be spent.


RE: What that statement really said
By porkpie on 4/2/2010 3:06:57 PM , Rating: 3
To correct a few things.

a) Until 1970, the USPS was a federal agency.
b) Even today, the USPS receives about $100M in annual funding from the government (the Postal Service Fund).

As for using a Volt-like vehicle for delivery, postal vehicles drive far more than 40 miles per day. I don't know that the economics would pay off in that situation.


By JediJeb on 4/2/2010 3:41:29 PM , Rating: 2
My uncle worked for GE back in the 1970s and one of his projects then was building a electric version of the normal Mail Jeep they use. Problem was they just couldn't get enough batteries in them to travel a full route, though I think some did see service back then for short trips.

Also most rural mail carriers use their personal vehicle and get paid so much per mile for that instead of using a USPS owned vehicle.


RE: What that statement really said
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 4/2/2010 3:44:14 PM , Rating: 2
most routes are around 18 to 40 miles... Once in a while you have a 50 mile route. I carry for the Post office part time, 3 different towns, only one route over 40 miles. However, there are thousands of towns and the mileage could change. So, a little better distance would be a plus, however it would seem like a big cost cutter...


RE: What that statement really said
By porkpie on 4/2/2010 4:35:43 PM , Rating: 2
Looks like I'm actually wrong on this point then. I stand corrected.

And furthermore, given the highly stop-and-go nature of postal delivery, a regenerative-braking vehicle would probably be ideal.


RE: What that statement really said
By Keeir on 4/2/2010 5:12:40 PM , Rating: 2
Furthermore, a Volt-like would probably not be the ideal solution. A Leaf-like with BEV-100 mile range and "fast" 480V recharge would probably work well in Urban areas. Could probably get 200-300 miles of travel in a single day pending unloading time.


By Seemonkeyscanfly on 4/2/2010 5:14:44 PM , Rating: 2
agreed... regenerative-braking vehicle would be even better... but it's things like that they should focus on... Help GM, help the Federal Government, Help the USPS, and help the tax payer in long run - if less support needed. It's a major win overall


RE: What that statement really said
By icanhascpu on 4/2/2010 5:17:59 PM , Rating: 2
What do you mean "actually" wrong?

Like its some rare event for you.


RE: What that statement really said
By porkpie on 4/2/10, Rating: 0
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 4/2/2010 5:51:51 PM , Rating: 2
Hey my sample pool is from about 200 routes in Illinois near Chicago. If you travel out to Montana or Wyoming they may have less house to deliver to but much further apart and therefore more miles. Like that 50 mile route I work is only 300 homes, and in the same city a 22 mile route has 700 homes. Both take about the same time to work but one is more mail to sort the other more time on the road. So, maybe the national average is over 40 miles, but it takes a long time to go 40 miles at around average speed when work in stop times of 5 to 10 miles per hour.


RE: What that statement really said
By MadMan007 on 4/3/2010 1:29:31 AM , Rating: 1
It's easy to maintain such a record when the vast majority of posts are grounded in opinion.


By whiskerwill on 4/3/2010 1:48:03 AM , Rating: 3
I'm pretty sure he's made more than "one" error in 2000 posts, but he provides more facts and figures than anyone else on the board. All I've ever seen from you though is childish insults.


By knutjb on 4/3/2010 2:46:43 PM , Rating: 2
Why wait for GM and Obama to build what Ford already has. http://www.caranddriver.com/news/car/10q1/2011_for...
I know a guy who drives a regular one and loves it, it's ugly but very practical and comes in useful derivatives, propane, natural gas and EV.


RE: What that statement really said
By bhieb on 4/2/2010 10:48:51 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
It, however, has not yet expressed interest in the top-selling Ford Fusion Hybrid.

I love this line. Well DUH the Pepsi corporate office does not have Coke vending machines either.

When you own/invest in a company you tend to want to spend your money their first.


RE: What that statement really said
By Keeir on 4/2/2010 11:39:27 AM , Rating: 1
Alright, the Ford Fusion we can all agree is a fantastic car. But its also fairly expensive.

if the price premium over a base C/D-segment 25 MPG car is $10,000 for the Fusion and $20,000 for the Volt (remember no government subsidy)

And your Goal is to reduce -gasoline- usage as much as possible, over 100,000 miles, the Fusion reduces gasoline usage at a cost ~6.67 dollars per gallon. The Volt reduces gasoline usage at a cost of ~5.75 dollars per gallon. (Note this is if we -ignore- the increase in electricity)

As expected service life of car increases, the Volt becomes a better and better bargin

If the End goal is to reduce gasoline consumption as much as possible per dollar, the Government should buy Prii, Leafs, Volts, and Fusions in that order.

If the end goal is a compromise between buying American and effectively reducing total gasoline usage, Volts would be the best.

Assumed Numbers over 100,000 miles

Car      Premium    Gas Savings    Dollars/Gal
Volt     20,000     3,500 gal      5.75
Leaf     15,000     4,000 gal      3.75
Fusion 10,000     1,500 gal      6.67
Prius    7,000      2,000 gal      3.50
Leaf^   16,700     4,000 gal    4.18
Volt^    21,700     3,500 gal      6.20
Leaf*    8,500      4,000 gal      2.12
Volt*    13,500     3,500 gal      3.87

^ Includes approximate electricity required valued at Industrial Average Rate per DOE of 6.8 cents per kWh
* Includes Government 7,500 Credit and 1,000 charge for installation of 220V charger


RE: What that statement really said
By JediJeb on 4/2/2010 3:46:16 PM , Rating: 2
What about the new Hyundai Sonata hybrid?


RE: What that statement really said
By Keeir on 4/2/2010 5:19:29 PM , Rating: 2
As far as I understand, the Hyundai Sonata Hybrid starts at ~28,000 dollars (Hyundai Site does not yet have offical MSRP). This puts it at a 9,000-10,000 premium over a comparable Sonata/25 MPG car.

Since its fuel economy is roughly the same as the Fusion and the premium is rouhgly the same, it falls in the 6.50-7.00 dollar a gallon range.

(Now, I am assuming that for the most part the Government will want to purchase base model cars without alot of the frills a personal car might have. Heated seats for example, do not provide significant more utility to the government, but might be a feature you value...)


Govt to buy the first 100
By Breathless on 4/2/2010 10:31:20 AM , Rating: 2
and who pray tell paid for that kind gesture of the Govt?




RE: Govt to buy the first 100
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 4/2/2010 10:38:36 AM , Rating: 2
Me... and I tell you right now, I did not want to do it either. I mean I do not even get to drive one of them.


RE: Govt to buy the first 100
By MrPeabody on 4/2/2010 11:45:50 AM , Rating: 4
Hey, at least the government will get a bunch of tax breaks for their purchases. See? They can be fiscally responsible.


RE: Govt to buy the first 100
By shin0bi272 on 4/2/2010 12:05:25 PM , Rating: 2
ahh but if they are already claiming the child tax credit they dont get the hybrid car credit. Oh and then theres the fact that the plug in hybrid cars are no cleaner since you have a 50% chance of getting your power from a coal plant anyway. And if/when the EPA starts regulating coal plants your power bill will go up. And when your power bill goes up the price to recharge your pathetic plug in car will go up from 5 dollars to 15 dollars... A DAY. Multiply that by 100 and you get 1500 bucks a day that they are spending to drive vehicles that are no cleaner than your average Denali or Yukon which they could drive for less than 5 bucks a day. Well that is till the oil companies get regulated into 7 dollar a gallon gasoline. See socialism can be fun... for the people at the top at least.


RE: Govt to buy the first 100
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 4/2/2010 12:21:52 PM , Rating: 2
OK, so we just sell hybrids to communities that receive their electricity from nuclear power plants... So the Government can decide who get what type of car. Increasing the level of fun you can have with socialism... It will not be long before you are waiting in line for 3 days for a pair of boots that do not even come close to fitting you and you will be happy you received a pair before the supply ran out. JOY!!


RE: Govt to buy the first 100
By sinful on 4/2/2010 7:02:33 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
OK, so we just sell hybrids to communities that receive their electricity from nuclear power plants... So the Government can decide who get what type of car. Increasing the level of fun you can have with socialism... It will not be long before you are waiting in line for 3 days for a pair of boots that do not even come close to fitting you and you will be happy you received a pair before the supply ran out. JOY!!


Ok, so we just go with the Republican route, where our corporate masters get to decide who gets what kind of car -- meaning, no cars for anyone.

Wage cuts all around -- people in China don't need a car, why do you lazy "entitlement" Americans think you need one!

Oh, be sure to wave to the CEO as he flys by in his new helicopter.

If the Republicans have their way, pretty soon everyone will be living in a grass hut riding a bike to work - "Hey, you lazy Americans have to compete with other 3rd world countries!" The Republicans are the ultimate enviro-nazis, they're just too busy having tea parties to realize it.


RE: Govt to buy the first 100
By porkpie on 4/2/2010 9:24:37 PM , Rating: 2
"If the radical environmentalists have their way, pretty soon everyone will be living in a grass hut riding a bike to work"

Fixed that for you.


RE: Govt to buy the first 100
By Reclaimer77 on 4/3/2010 5:00:27 PM , Rating: 1
You, everyone in your family, and everyone who rated you up should be thrown into a mass grave. Seriously that was the dumbest most ignorant hate post ever.


RE: Govt to buy the first 100
By rudolphna on 4/3/2010 11:56:29 PM , Rating: 2
That is really, really, really, really funny coming from you. You who is the biggest right-wing nut job on this site. Can't take what you dish out everyday? Sad.


RE: Govt to buy the first 100
By Reclaimer77 on 4/4/2010 10:00:17 PM , Rating: 1
Yeah I love how suddenly everyone who isn't a radical leftist is a "right wing nut job extremist". Give me a break. Yeah it's so crazy and terrible that I hold the ideals and opinions that made this country great in the first place. Excuse the hell out of me...


RE: Govt to buy the first 100
By thurston on 4/5/2010 8:24:53 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Yeah I love how suddenly everyone who isn't a radical leftist is a "right wing nut job extremist".


No, just you. I don't think FITCamero or Porkpie are lefties, but I wouldn't call then right wing nut jobs. You on the other hand are a right wing nut job.


RE: Govt to buy the first 100
By Keeir on 4/2/2010 5:29:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Oh and then theres the fact that the plug in hybrid cars are no cleaner since you have a 50% chance of getting your power from a coal plant anyway.


Given the current grid of the US, on average across the entire US, a Plug-in Car releases 30%+ less "real" emissions and 50%+ less C02 per mile than the best availible strong Hybrid, a Toyota Prius.

Even in the rare situation where your power is 100% Legacy Coal (West Virgina is 98%), an Electric Plug-In still emits less C02 per mile at the exchange of slight increase in some real pollutions such as Particle and NOx. However, the trade-off is that electric car is not shoving the pollution right now the throats of the people that live/walk/etc right next to the road.

In West Coast States, such as Washington, where Hydro and Nuclear make up large percentages of the power and Coal is small, the advantages become.... very significant.

quote:
Multiply that by 100 and you get 1500 bucks a day that they are spending to drive vehicles that are no cleaner than your average Denali or Yukon which they could drive for less than 5 bucks a day.


5 bucks a day? Only if you drive less than 20 miles!

BTW 5 dollars of electricity at the National Average Retail Home Rate (~11 cents) is enough to push the average electric car over 150 miles. Good luck though on trying to prove that somehow a Denali is cheaper to operate per mile than any electric car.


RE: Govt to buy the first 100
By whiskerwill on 4/3/2010 1:51:08 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
a Plug-in Car releases 50%+ less C02 per mile
Who gives a crap? It doesn't do anything anyway.


Car Sharing Integration
By Shig on 4/2/2010 10:21:50 AM , Rating: 2
Is the only way I see the ~40,000$ price tag being worth it.

Or GM needs to convince the very wealthy that they should buy it somehow.

At least it looks cooler than the Leaf lol. The government is in pretty deep on this one.

Since so many of my tax dollars went to this car, I have to root for it, but it's getting harder and harder.




RE: Car Sharing Integration
By AssBall on 4/2/2010 10:33:43 AM , Rating: 1
Yeah and now another 4 million is getting spent so that we can "test" the first 100. Just because our government's fleet is "greener" on paper doesn't mean you will see our elected officials or their staff actually driving these things when they have their comfy suburbans and limosines.


RE: Car Sharing Integration
By Keeir on 4/2/2010 12:04:13 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Just because our government's fleet is "greener" on paper doesn't mean you will see our elected officials or their staff actually driving these things when they have their comfy suburbans and limosines.


I certainly hope not. The benifits of the Volt would be completely wasted in that sense.

I hope the government is smart and deploys Volts on duties that typically include 40-50 miles a day each work day.


I don't get it
By whiskerwill on 4/3/2010 1:43:45 AM , Rating: 1
What if I want to buy one of the first 100 Volts? Why does the government get first pick? First they buy the company, now they start mandating who gets the products and when? Have we totally fallen into the socialism trap?




RE: I don't get it
By knutjb on 4/3/2010 2:49:27 PM , Rating: 2
Trabants for all!


and they will plug them in where?
By masouth on 4/3/2010 11:37:59 AM , Rating: 2
They can also buy a million of these but where are they going to plug them in? 18 months after delivery while congress will finally pass a bill for funding to install the infrastructure at government buildings...installion scheduled to begin in 2015.

Obviously this is ancedotal but I've worked with alternative energy source government vehicles in the past. Once they get out of the "small volume/keeping up appearances because everybody is watching phase" I would be willing to bet the gas engine sees more use than the electric.

Like Al Gore in an SUV...it's a convenient truth.




Conflict of interest?
By JonnyDough on 4/5/2010 2:41:58 AM , Rating: 2
This appears to be a conflict of interest, although perhaps not. In the end the government may simply be trying to free us of foriegn oil and keep a major company (GM) alive. World trade is what the economy is all about. Clinton signed a trade deal with China, Bush went to war with Iraq to buy time by getting us more oil, and Obama is continuing to try to keep us wealthy and a major world power by buying stock in GM and promoting electric cars. America is wealthy today not because of resources, but because of energy. We still produce and use more energy (coal, nuclear, and oil) than any nation on earth.

In the end this may all pay off for America. The government is BROKE (think TRILLIONS of debt) and the only thing they can really do is to keep us going and stay a major world power.

The ones in leadership see more accounting figures than any of us. Money = power. They know that. They try to retain power through wealth. National security depends on being a military power, and America let's face it...we need to be that. We don't want anyone else to have more military power. So often we seem to think that if we would slash our military we would be safer and more wealthy. Well, you're wrong. There are nations out there that would quickly wage war on us and take our land. Political leaders of these nations don't lead the charge, they just command it. They have no fear of the United States. It's statistics that keep them at bay. Military statistics. Power. Through wealth.

So is your government working for you? It's likely. It just doesn't look like it because they can't come right out and say that they have to be greedy and go to war and buy large parts of American corporations in order to survive.

I will still take a greedy capitalist government over the rule of other countries governments like China or Russia. To imagine that them invading us and controlling us would be ok is just insane.

We can fight and argue all we want but when the sh!t hits the fan our government is there and does its job. Remember 911?

There is a spirit in this nation unlike any other, because we are accustomed to freedom. It shall persevere - as long as we keep a vigilant eye on Uncle Sam and voice ourselves when we feel compelled to (acts of domestic terrorism are not helpful to anyone, and I speak to groups like my fellow Michiganders who are in militias...). Our privacy and freedoms are important. Don't ever let anyone take away your constitutional rights.

They are constantly amended, the law does work, it changes with time. Just don't allow them to be changed in ways that strip us of our rights. The Patriot act is one of the worst things to happen to America in a long time. It may be helpful in fighting terrorism but it is also a major infringement upon our rights.

I also disagree with seatbelt laws and raising of taxes, and cameras on the street corners. If these things were properly addressed I'd feel better about being an American, and better about our government.

That is all.




Buying from themselves
By Ristogod on 4/2/10, Rating: 0
"We’re Apple. We don’t wear suits. We don’t even own suits." -- Apple CEO Steve Jobs

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki