backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 50 comment(s) - last by jRaskell.. on Oct 16 at 12:52 PM

Chevrolet Volt
Thanks to battery tech the Chevy Volt could see an all-electric driving range of up to 80 miles

GM is readying its extended range electric vehicle called the Volt for production in 2010. The car promises to give the average driver a vehicle capable of at least 40 miles on electric power alone with a gasoline engine to recharge the battery when driving for longer distances is required.

The key component to the Volt and its ability to meet the promises GM has made is the lithium-ion battery the car uses. Applied Sciences Inc. is currently working with carbon nanofibers which could stretch the Volt's all-electric driving range to 80 miles.

Working along with GM and Applied Sciences to make the Volt a reality is another firm called Pyrograf Products. Pyrograf and Applied Sciences share a common owner, but separate investors according to Dayton Daily News.

Developing the technology to design a battery for the Volt using carbon nanofibers isn't cheap. The two Ohio-based firms received investments of $1 million from the Ohio Third Frontier program and $500,000 from GM.

Pyrograf says that its output of carbon nanofibers currently accounts for 25% of the global carbon nanofiber production. The reason the carbon nanofiber is such an important part of the Volt equation is twofold. First, the nanofibers allow for more efficiency form the battery. Second, due to performance that is more efficient the amount of overall carbon in the battery can be reduced. The total effect being less weight for the electric drive train to propel, equating to longer driving distances being attainable compared to other battery systems.

With any vehicle, reducing weight is a key component to improving performance. The original electric car from GM, the EV1, had a lead acid battery that weighed about 800 pounds. The Volt's current lithium-ion battery is about 400 pounds according to John Mackay, a spokesman for Applied Sciences.

Mackay said, "By making the carbon perform better, you can reduce the weight of that component in the battery. GM researchers say they have not seen any carbon materials that have performed as well as ours."

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Sick
By xKeGSx on 10/13/2008 11:33:12 AM , Rating: 2
This definitely justifies the price tag and new look now...




RE: Sick
By inighthawki on 10/13/08, Rating: -1
RE: Sick
By xKeGSx on 10/13/2008 11:40:50 AM , Rating: 2
I was being sarcastic, but point well taken anyway.


RE: Sick
By inighthawki on 10/13/2008 3:19:28 PM , Rating: 2
Oh my bad, i just read it normally and missed the sarcasm, but yeah at least my point got across anyway


RE: Sick
By Samus on 10/13/2008 4:32:11 PM , Rating: 4
If you don't need the 80 miles of distance between charges, consider that the under optimum conditions (no cargo, ideal driving conditions, and no additional passengers) the vehicles achieves up to 40 miles on a charge.

With the new battery technology you can assume 3-4 passengers, full cargo, and snowy/congested driving conditions and achieve AT LEAST 40 miles per charge.

So the improvement in battery technology helps GM claim 40 miles per charge under all conditions, not just ideal ones.

Does the name of that battery research company bother anyone else? You should never have the word PYRO associated with a technology that has been known to catch on fire/explode ;)


RE: Sick
By inighthawki on 10/13/08, Rating: -1
RE: Sick
By Alexvrb on 10/13/2008 9:13:57 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
The size of the gas tank to recharge the battery is too small to make too long of a trip, you would need to constantly refuel
I don't know where you're getting your information, but everything I've read indicates that even with the smaller fuel tank, the Volt will have a total range somewhere in the 340-400 mile ballpark before needing to refuel. That means enough fuel for 300+ miles AFTER the battery. I don't think having to stop for fuel every 300-360 miles is all that absurd.

Of course, that's not the primary purpose of the vehicle. The reason they downsized the tank in the first place is that you're trying to minimize fuel use in your daily driving. The ICE gives you the additional freedom and flexibility that it would not possess as a pure electric. So although it is not the primary goal of the vehicle, the range extending capability ensures it does not need to be "refueled constantly" during a trip.


RE: Sick
By jRaskell on 10/16/2008 12:52:59 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If you don't need the 80 miles of distance between charges, consider that the under optimum conditions (no cargo, ideal driving conditions, and no additional passengers) the vehicles achieves up to 40 miles on a charge.


To date, pretty much everything I've read on the Chevy Volt is claiming at least 40 miles on a charge (including claims directly from GM), not 40 miles under the most optimal conditions.


RE: Sick
By Indianapolis on 10/14/2008 12:57:53 PM , Rating: 4
I think there's a glitch in the forums, because sarcasm never seems to come across.


RE: Sick
By Spivonious on 10/13/2008 11:42:02 AM , Rating: 5
I agree. My total commute is about 25 miles, so upping it from 40 to 80 makes zero difference for me.

Rather than increasing range, GM needs to find ways to reduce cost. If they can sell the Volt for $25k or less, they will sell millions.


RE: Sick
By MrTeal on 10/13/2008 11:56:10 AM , Rating: 5
If you can boost the range from 40 to 80 miles without increasing the weight, it should logically follow that you could keep the same 40 mile range with reduced cost, weight or both.


RE: Sick
By theapparition on 10/13/2008 12:48:56 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly,
I'd love to see the price drop due to a "half" battery pack solution. For those who need the extra range, get the "extended battery" edition. Not unlike cell phones or notebook computers.

Considering that it is estimated that the battery alone in the Volt is approx 10k(x2), offering a half battery pack should shave an approximate 10k off the price. Not too shabby.


RE: Sick
By Doormat on 10/13/2008 12:58:55 PM , Rating: 2
Furthermore (and also like PCs), it may be possible to build the vehicle in such a way that you can upgrade or downgrade between battery packs.

If you get a new job with a longer or shorter commute that would justify downgrading to the 40 mile battery or upgrading to the 80 mile battery, you could have it swapped out (for a fee of course).


RE: Sick
By austinag on 10/13/2008 12:09:42 PM , Rating: 2
My commute is 55 miles round trip. If this increase in range is accurate, the car would make sense for me now.


RE: Sick
By blurredvision on 10/13/2008 12:47:48 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I agree. My total commute is about 25 miles, so upping it from 40 to 80 makes zero difference for me.


How would it make zero difference? You could now make two trips without using any extra energy whatsoever. You say this like electricity from a wall socket costs you nothing.


RE: Sick
By Spivonious on 10/13/2008 2:19:32 PM , Rating: 2
I figured this out on another Volt article, but charging the Volt every day for a month would cost me something like $15. Saving an extra $7/month is not worth a $15,000 premium in price (assuming that they could get the price down to $25k).


RE: Sick
By foolsgambit11 on 10/13/2008 2:50:31 PM , Rating: 3
Uh.... you say this like you don't understand. While reduced weight would account for a small improvement in mileage, they aren't doubling the efficiency of the vehicle. Most of that extra range comes from improved energy density in the battery - that is, his electricity bill may go down a little, but he couldn't make two trips for the energy of one. He would use close to the same amount of electricity either way.

On the other hand, if he uses a smaller portion of the total capacity of the battery, he should experience greater longevity from the battery pack. Whether that offsets the cost of buying for capacity he isn't going to use, I don't know.


RE: Sick
By inighthawki on 10/13/2008 3:14:54 PM , Rating: 4
Because if it takes say, x amount of electricity to charge it up to drive 40mi, it takes 2x amount to go 80mi. Like i said in my first post, its simply now a matter of how long/how many times u can take the car out before recharge. In 95% of the situations, people don't get home from work only to drive another 20 miles. It still costs the same, there is no extra efficiency involved. Electricity is still measured in the same unit, and still takes the same amount to drive. The battery simply holds more power and itll probably take longer to recharge.


RE: Sick
By ebakke on 10/13/2008 12:52:06 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
GM needs to find ways to reduce cost. If they can sell the Volt for $25k or less, they will sell millions.
I found a way. Ditch the UAW.


RE: Sick
By codeThug on 10/13/2008 1:05:47 PM , Rating: 2
+10

Exactly.