Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chevy Volt: Is This Our Future?

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 92 posts

Re: Chevy Volt: Is This Our Future?

#31

Post by mmatants »

daimyoyo wrote: post #20
sliverstorm wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

400 miles? You kidding? I have never driven anything that can go 400 miles per tank- I typically refill at 200-250, and some of my bikes I'd refill at 80.

When I'm on the highway, I tank my car up and it'll be roughly 200 miles at halfway and 300 at 1/4. Granted, I've never driven my car to vapors on the highway but it seems logical that a tank of gas will get me around 400 miles. It's a 14 gallon tank so that translates to around 30mpg highway. I don't think it's unrealistic to ask for an equivalent efficiency in an electric car.

For the main usage of the car that EVs are supposed to replace - commuting - the comfortable range can be far less than a tank of gas. Maybe a quarter.

For long-haul trips, it is of course a much bigger issue - in part because putting charge stations in the sticks (vs charging at home for regular commute) is so much tougher.

Re: Chevy Volt: Is This Our Future?

#32

Post by oldstrangers »

dstein wrote: post #26

I've always thought the Volt sounded way over-engineered. Why bother with a fancy hybrid engine rather than concentrating on making a lightweight, affordable all-electric car? The simple approach is always going to win. Zenncars.com was taking this approach but I'm not sure of their progress.

That's exactly the concept behind the Nissan Leaf, which they discussed in the article.

For me, the Leaf isn't the answer. I drive from Houston to Austin regularly. It's a 200 or so mile drive. The Leaf gets 70 miles to a charge. What good does that do me? I would barely make it out of Houston before having to recharge for hours.

Ultimately, Hybrids like the Volt are the best answer for the moment. They provide a practical, non-scary transition into eco friendly vehicles. Eventually, cars like the Prius and Volt will be commonplace, paving the way for more radical solutions.

Re: Chevy Volt: Is This Our Future?

#33

Post by masklinn »

georgieporgie wrote: post #27
daimyoyo wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I'm on the highway, I tank my car up and it'll be roughly 200 miles at halfway and 300 at 1/4. Granted, I've never driven my car to vapors on the highway but it seems logical that a tank of gas will get me around 400 miles. It's a 14 gallon tank so that translates to around 30mpg highway. I don't think it's unrealistic to ask for an equivalent efficiency in an electric car.

30mpg highway is really good and does not reflect the average experience of a consumer. That said, I think you're (sadly) right, but not for the reason you're stating. Because electric cars can't be recharged in five minutes, consumers will suddenly think they have to go even further on a charge. They will completely ignore the fact that they commute 15 miles each way, every day, and the fact that they already have t…

> 30mpg highway is really good

Depends on the car you drive. 30mpg is really good for a gaz-guzzler, but mid-range sedans can easily be driven into the 40s.

Re: Chevy Volt: Is This Our Future?

#34

Post by ugh »

sliverstorm wrote: post #16
tophat02 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never understood this argument. I mean, yes, I get that all you're doing is moving the energy production somewhere else; but isn't that a GOOD thing? My response to the "you're just moving" argument is that you're doing more than moving it, you're CENTRALIZING it. It's much easier to replace one coal plant with a nuclear plant or a wind farm (or 10) than it is to replace the thousands of cars that plant powers.…

There's two sides to the argument. On the one hand, centralizing is big. It allows huge gains in efficiency- steam plants fueled by coal are 99% efficient, and by the time the power reaches the wheels of your car you're still probably around 60-80% (Otto cycle is 25% at absolute best , not counting drivetrain losses) It allows flexibility in source- nuclear, coal, wind, solar- and the source can be 'hot-swapped'. At…

It’s a good idea to say that but many people will then immediately go to the next extreme: electric cars cannot possibly be useful at all unless all our energy production is already carbon neutral†. The right way to approach this is to offer a detailed explanation, not to only say that electric cars burn coal. It’s a true statement, but it leads to misconceptions.

I will say what I always say at this point: electric cars are about enabling large scale infrastructure change. A gas powered car will burn gas now and in twenty years. An electric car burns (mostly) coal now but it doesn’t have to in twenty years. That’s what electric cars are all about.

Now, an electric car you buy now likely won’t survive until a large portion of our energy comes from carbon neutral sources. We don’t even know whether we will be able to pull that off at all. Why then buy electric cars? Why sell them? Why subsidize them? The reason for this is that changing every gas powered car to an electric car takes time and requires a lot of infrastructure and testing. We really shouldn’t start building electric cars only in forty years, we should start right now.

—

† Whether we should work towards being carbon neutral, whether that’s possible at all and makes sense is certainly controversial. For the purpose of this article I just assumed that we should.

There are other possible benefits of switching to electric cars. For one it makes us less dependent on oil. Oil is not unlimited (so is coal but it is at least less limited), being dependent only on energy and not one specific energy source makes it easier to react to changing energy source prices.

Re: Chevy Volt: Is This Our Future?

#35

Post by ChuckMcM »

daimyoyo wrote: post #12

I've said before and I'll say again: Electric cars will not gain widespread acceptance until you can travel the equivalent of a tank of gas on one charge. Tesla motors is close, but you need at least 300 and closer to 400 miles per charge.

It would be more accurate to say that you won't accept an electric car until it can travel between 300 and 400 miles on a charge. That is a fair statement.

However its unclear yet that "widespread acceptance" requires that. The Volt and the Leaf are out there, so its really going from theoretical to empirical. After they they have been in full production for a year, if they (and the other electric vehicles) are not gaining market share commensurate with the vehicle replacement rate, then you can say "See they just don't have widespread acceptance."

Re: Chevy Volt: Is This Our Future?

#36

Post by fletchowns »

Lewisham wrote: post #5

I'm actually most concerned about the lifetime of the batteries. From what I've read, the batteries top out at 8 years, and presumably degrade before that. As the $20k Chevy Cruze is the same chassis as the Volt, I guess the batteries come out at ~$15k. That's a huge amount of money to renew use of your $40k car after 8 years (unless you see that $15k as some sort of investment in the environment). The Volt design co…

If you crashed your 2002 BMW M3 ($43k new) and it was then useless to you, like an electric car with kaput batteries, you could be back in business for $15k (current used price of that M3).

Re: Chevy Volt: Is This Our Future?

#37

Post by willyt »

sliverstorm wrote: post #15
daimyoyo wrote: post #12

I've said before and I'll say again: Electric cars will not gain widespread acceptance until you can travel the equivalent of a tank of gas on one charge. Tesla motors is close, but you need at least 300 and closer to 400 miles per charge.

400 miles? You kidding? I have never driven anything that can go 400 miles per tank- I typically refill at 200-250, and some of my bikes I'd refill at 80.

Euro perspective: My car's a 12 year old rusting hulk but it does 550 miles to a tank of diesel. I think more modern cars will get 750 or more. I don't think many people regularly drive more than about 400 miles without an overnight break though.

Re: Chevy Volt: Is This Our Future?

#38

Post by [deleted] »

bbg wrote: post #19

I want to love electric cars, but I see two big issues: (1) if they go mass market, all that electricity will still have to be generated somewhere. Coal? Nuclear? (2) The batteries need rare-earth minerals, which are brought to market through environmentally-degrading open pit mining. Furthermore, at this point, most rare-earths are available almost exclusively from China.

[deleted]

Re: Chevy Volt: Is This Our Future?

#39

Post by AlisdairO »

Lewisham wrote: post #5

I'm actually most concerned about the lifetime of the batteries. From what I've read, the batteries top out at 8 years, and presumably degrade before that. As the $20k Chevy Cruze is the same chassis as the Volt, I guess the batteries come out at ~$15k. That's a huge amount of money to renew use of your $40k car after 8 years (unless you see that $15k as some sort of investment in the environment). The Volt design co…

i doubt it's all in the batteries - the volt is a substantially more complicated car. The volt can get away with a smaller battery than other EVs as it doesn't need such huge range - it'll still be a substantial cost, of course.
Post reply on HN