Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

Is the Chevy Volt over-hyped?

Aug 8, 2007 9:41AM PDT

In my recent column, Chevy Volt runs on hype, I tried to figure out why this concept car from GM has generated so much interest. What do you think of the Volt? Does it deserve all the attention, or are there more worthy concepts?

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
I do not think it is a hype
Aug 13, 2007 6:39PM PDT

Living in Belgium, and working on alternative fuels since 30 years, I became aware 10 years ago that if the biofuels are interesting and promising they could not solve all the economic and environmental problems of ICE.

An electric car such as the GM-Volt is better that any car working with an ICE even with alternative biofuels. We recognize however that the production and distribution of electicity may be a source of some environmental problems but not to be compared to the ones of the ICE.

I think a lot of people have understood this, and a car such as the GM-Volt appears to be a practical solution to their problems.

A lot of people around me say they cannot wait to buy the car as soon as it will become available if the economics (sale price and performances) of it remain as announced.

- Collapse -
Hype or trial balloon? THINK????
Aug 14, 2007 3:05AM PDT

Not to repeat previous opinions, some of which hit the nail... But didn't Ford have an electric project that they predictably ignored/mismanaged/mothballed? There is a company derivative to that failed effort that MAY actually put some wheels on the road soon (late 2007-early 2008?). Check out THINK.NO as the Think City might be of interest to many. And it seems to be more than hype - there is even a deal to have Tesla supply batteries. Fun website that has an english version. THINK about it... And this from a country that has relatively inexpensive gas.

- Collapse -
C'mon...it's a CONCEPT...which are ALL ABOUT hype
Aug 14, 2007 5:32AM PDT

GM floats a balloon and it flies. How is that over-hyped?

The whole point of presenting concepts is to gauge public and, just as importantly press reaction, if only to see if a vehicle idea is worth pursuing without having to take a chance and spend all the resources up front. Considering GM's financial picture over the past few quarters, it makes far more sense to do it in this manner than to have actively developed this with nothing more than gut feel and a wing and a prayer that it'll fly with the masses, focus groups notwithstanding.

After all, this IS the monolith that gave the world the Pontiac Aztek.

- Collapse -
This has my attention.
Aug 14, 2007 5:38AM PDT

We're a 2 hybrid family. Now with 2 units we'd love to get an all or almost all electric car. We commute 20 miles round trip to work and so far any PHEV could mean never stopping for gas and paying the 1 to 2 cents a mile for the electricity. Even if electric rates double that's 4 cents a mile which still beats our 50 MPG hybrid.

Bob

- Collapse -
Volt Hype??
Aug 15, 2007 12:28PM PDT

Interesting how every time we get a "concept" vehicle that might wean us off oil the technology is always 20 years away. I don't know about you but I'm getting tired of car companies particularly GM constantly dangling that carrot nobody ever gets to taste...

- Collapse -
its the Media's fault.
Aug 15, 2007 1:30PM PDT

The media is hyping the Volt, comapring it to this, and that. passing judgements on something that doesnt exist yet. im sure Gm isnt going to complain free publicity. Now the new Camaro, that is hype.

- Collapse -
Overhyped? -To the Car Tech followers only
Aug 15, 2007 9:13PM PDT

Car-tech people are above average in knowing about cars, obviously, so hear about news because they look for it. The average person is not a car tech follower. Follower? Maybe....
It is important to get ads specifying gas savings into the public eye more than ever. Looking at the current ads and you will see gas gulping ads and commercials specifying speed and power over gas ("zoom, zoom, zoom"). Heck -just LOOK when you get your coffee through the drive-thru next time. Can you see the end of the line? If the answer is "Yes" it's because you are in one of the many SUV's or trucks idling in the line using up gas on a short trip!

- Collapse -
Overhype from GM: What else is new?
Aug 16, 2007 8:49AM PDT

The company that's contributed to destroying the US auto industry has always made promises it knew it could not keep, while churning out consistent crap on the same platform. Garbage!

- Collapse -
I hope not!
Aug 16, 2007 3:41PM PDT

Liveing only 11 miles from work I'd buy one in a heart beat for 95% of my driveing.

- Collapse -
Hype!
Aug 17, 2007 9:43PM PDT

Wake up and smell the fumes people...as long as you are quoting MPG..you are reliant on the pump, which is directly connected to the Oil Companies, and if you think the price per gallon will go down when we all start using hybrids capable of 200 mpg, then you are dreaming in technicolour..they certainly are not going to see their obscene profits drop in an attempt to conserve a vanishing resource..your miles traveled per dollar out of pocket will probably cost about the same as now no matter how little fuel you put in the tank.

Hybrids are ALL hype. Mainly to placate the minds of those concerned about the new religion of Global climate change..makes them feel as if they are doing 'something' about it, even if they don't quite understand what.

As for bio-fuels..great idea..now we turn the already strained soil over to producing an alternative to oil, by pumping the ground full of petro-chemical fertilizers to sustain a uni-crop system to power our transport..which soon becomes obsolete as we have nothing left to take to market as farmers race to cash in on cash crops..that is until Agri-business gets into bed with the oil companies, in the same manner as the car companies have done.

The fact that any foods will have to be imported, as we now only produce fuel on our farms is something to be considered, especially when it becomes more expensive as third world countries realize they now have to same position as the Middle East does now..pay the price or go without.

As for hydrogen fuel cell technology..why go that route? Any car on the road right now could be fueled by hydrogen, after modifications..but of course that would lift the monopoly away from the oil companies unless we agree to them extracting hydrogen from oil to keep us under their tight control...but to do that requires more energy than making gasoline, so what's the point in that ?

I agree..if that was the case...but it ISN'T!

Any country with access to geothermal energy can extract hydrogen from sea water at almost no cost. Iceland is already doing this..and if you want a real eye-opener..go read this web page.

http://scifun.chem.wisc.edu/CHEMWEEK/Cl2&NaOH/Cl2&NaOH.html

For those of you baffled by chemistry goobledegook..part way down the page is the statement

" The chlorine gas and hydrogen gas are collected separately and piped away from the electrolysis apparatus. The chlorine is dried, compressed, and liquefied for shipping and storage. Although the hydrogen can be compressed and stored in cylinders, the commercial value of hydrogen in not sufficient to warrant this. The hydrogen is usually burned at the electrolysis plant to provide the thermal energy used to evaporate water from the sodium hydroxide solution."

In short..one of the major chemical processes in the US considers hydrogen to be a 'waste gas' and they burn it off

And if you care to explore the uses of sodium hydroxide (caustic soda)further..especially in the aluminum industry, you'll find it is a catalyst to produce aluminum oxide and HYDROGEN..and in fact OTHER countries are looking into this fact, as the stuff can be reused almost indefinitely in the manufacture of hydrogen, producing other useful by products in the processes.

As long as it means an end to the Oil Monopoly, and a threat to the economy of the almighty dollar...the US dollar is propped up by the fact the WORLD has to buy its oil supplies in US petro-dollars, in the event of a REAL alternative fuel becoming available..the US debt outstanding would be called in and the whole western economy dependent on the US buying power and credit worthiness would crumble overnight.

The only hope we have of ever seeing a means of transport powered by something other than gasoline, is for some major nation to rid itself of its oil dependence and begin selling it TO us..somewhere like China that has both the economic clout, and the military power available to cause the US to think twice about invading under the guise of bringing democracy to the people, or imposing embargoes..cut off their imports..we lose out on their exports..and as most Major manufacturing is now done by them..that's shooting ourselves in both feet.

Face it folks..the US military isn't going far on dry gas tanks, and they certainly are not going to allow us to have nuclear powered units in our cars either..sheeze someone might make a WMD from them!

We are all bent over the proverbial barrel..and oil one, and there's no prize for guessing where the bung hole is situated or what is aimed at it.

Back to pedal power or walking if we really want an alternative means of non-polluting transport..and even we humans produce CO2 in the process, so I guess we need to be fitted with catalytic converters to prevent this?

Bob

- Collapse -
THE reason to use fuel cells
Aug 18, 2007 4:13AM PDT

1 - Fuel cells use hydrogen but do not emit the toxic waste we breath, that comes from internal combustion engines today.

2 - Fuel cells are roughly 60% efficient and that combined with small electric motors which are 96% efficient, make a fuel cell vehile 350% to 500% more efficient than an internal combustion vehicle using all hydrogen as its fuel.

We can and must start using "EFFICIENCY" as our new mantra. If you truly care about humanity's future, you will move to this view. Driving a 20 mpg SUV should not only be highly taxed, but it should become a cultural mortal sin.

- Collapse -
THE reason to use batteries
Aug 21, 2007 4:00PM PDT

1. An automotive sized LiIon battery pack costs much less than a automotive sized fuel cell.

2. H2 storage for an automotive fuel cell costs more than an automotive LiIon battery pack. True for carbon fiber high pressure tanks, Liquid H2 Dewar flasks, and metal hydride storage.

3. Batteries and charger are 85% efficient, fuel cell only 50%. Fuel cell and electrolyzer combined, less than 30%.

If "EFFICIENCY" is to be our new mantra, then we should drop the less efficient (and more expensive) H2 fuel cells and develop battery electrics and plug-in hybrids instead.

- Collapse -
It is all hype !!!!!
Aug 18, 2007 1:25AM PDT

Electric cars don't magically make power.....

the basic power for all electric cars still has carbon impact.

1)In battery cars its the energy used to make the chemicals for the battery, and lets not forget the backside of hazardous waste disposal at crash sites and end of use.

In plug in cars it is in coal or oil fired plants that make electricity plus battery concerns.

Hydrogen power is a myth taking 5 times more energy to free the hydrogen then it will ever release.

Remember that no system is 100% effecient, so every time we convert one type of energy to another ther is a loss.This makes cars that convert one type of energy into another inherently ineffecient.

Right now and for the forseable future if you want maximum efficiency with the smallest carbon print buy a small motor scooter. If you need a car the newest small diesels are clean and hyper efficient (way better in the real world than the touted prius).Other than that you are making a political statement with you purchase not a real impact.

- Collapse -
"Free" power is available right now...
Aug 18, 2007 1:58AM PDT

Let's see... I can make a case for almost free transport available right now! My sister has a solar inter-tie system on her home in NJ that is generating Green Credits as we read. With no great modifications the home is running in the "green" - right now! Unfortunately the solar panels had to be imported from Germany, making the installed cost over $16000, but still worth it over time. She also has a Prius, which can be converted to a plug-in mostly electric commuter car which could be recharged by the excess power generated on her roof. Again too costly at present - but these things will evolve. And there is no reason to wait for better technology as an excuse for doing nothing now. That is what the oil establishment would have us do to avoid any real competition.

- Collapse -
Hydrogen costs less now because of Brazil
Aug 18, 2007 3:54AM PDT

You are 850% wrong about the cost of hydrogen. Hydrogen comes from many sources, but the cleanest, most efficient source is ethanol that is derived from sugar cane. A simple self-excited reformer converts ethanol into pure, clean hydrogen for your fuel cell, to power your home and vehicles.

Brazil has spent over 30 years deriving an excellent business model for getting ethanol from sugar cane, resulting in NO IMPORTS of oil, and in fact now EXPORTING ethanol, building the country's economic strength.

The key fact for YOU to note is: Ethanol from corn (U.S. model) yes it takes about 1.1 units of energy input to create 1.0 energy units output. BUT WITH SUGAR CANE? 1.0 units of energy input produces about 8.5 units of energy from ethanol! Hence, sugar cane ethanol production is 850% more efficient energy wise, than that from corn.

Do not let the Big OIl Firms and their owned friends in government tell you OTHERWISE ! Do Not Be gullible and MISINFORMED either. American can and must and will produce all its own energy, from all sources, and sugar cane ethanol is one of the cleanest and most economical, on a total cost basis, and on a net CO2 footprint basis.

PS: Currently Ethanol only costs half that of gasoline to produce, making ethanol from sugar cane the most economical liquid energy for our "oil and gas" firms. We will see if they are energy companies or just "oily heads" eh? America deserves smart leaders when it comes to key national policies. I wonder when we will

- Collapse -
Brazil has shown that ethanol is a viable answer
Aug 18, 2007 4:04AM PDT

the message was cut off accidentally and finishes thus:

"You are 850% wrong about the cost of hydrogen. Hydrogen comes from many sources, but the cleanest, most efficient source is ethanol that is derived from sugar cane. A simple self-excited reformer converts ethanol into pure, clean hydrogen for your fuel cell, to power your home and vehicles. (Low temperature fuel cells next to your home are 5% more efficient than the current grid model.)

Brazil has spent over 30 years deriving an excellent business model for getting ethanol from sugar cane, resulting in NO IMPORTS of oil, and in fact now EXPORTING ethanol, building the country's economic strength.

The key fact for YOU to note is: Ethanol from corn (U.S. model) yes it takes about 1.1 units of energy input to create 1.0 energy units output. BUT WITH SUGAR CANE? 1.0 units of energy input produces about 8.5 units of energy from ethanol! Hence, sugar cane ethanol production is 850% more efficient energy wise, than that from corn.

Do not let the Big OIl Firms and their owned friends in government tell you OTHERWISE ! Do Not Be gullible and MISINFORMED either. American can and must and will produce all its own energy, from all sources, and sugar cane ethanol is one of the cleanest and most economical, on a total cost basis, and on a net CO2 footprint basis.

PS: Currently Ethanol only costs half that of gasoline to produce, making ethanol from sugar cane the most economical liquid energy for our "oil and gas" firms. We will see if they are energy companies or just "oily heads" eh? America desperately needs intelligent, technically adept leaders when it comes to key national policies that involve energy, environment, and the liveable future . . . NOW."

- Collapse -
Ethanol is not H2
Aug 21, 2007 5:12PM PDT

Yes, ethanol can be used to make H2, but there is considerable energy lost in the reforming process, and more energy is used up in packing the bulky H2 into a form compact enough for cars. Result is that an ethanol-to-H2-to-fuelcell car has little, if any, efficiency improvement over an ethanol-electric hybrid, and is much less efficient than a plug-in. Considering the storage problems with H2, it would be better to use ethanol directly in an ICE hybrid (or direct ethanol fuel cell, if affordable) Of course, the whole thing is moot, H2 fuel cells and H2 storage tanks are still far too expensive for automotive use.

Brazil succeeds with ethanol due to a tropical year-round growing climate and reliable rainfall and cheap labor for harvesting cane and lots of available farmland. Not many nations have all of those conditions.

Do Not Be gullible and MISINFORMED. The oil companies are the major proponents of H2, as they are the biggest producers of H2, they have the cheapest sources of H2, and they intend to be the biggest sellers of this pricy new H2 fuel when the oil runs low.

The future is electric.

- Collapse -
Ethanol to H2
Aug 22, 2007 2:05AM PDT

Ethanol converted directly to H2, just before injection into the fuel cell, requires no storage; ethanol uses the same storage tanks as today's gasoline powered cars. The efficiency of the total system is 60% to 200% higher than any vehicle that uses an internal combusting mechanical engine with its numerous moving parts. Its important to look at the whole system, not just one part of it.

Yes electric motors will take over because we will be forced to use what is most efficient. Electric motors operate at 95% and above efficiency. Most rotating, internal combusting engines used today operate at below 15% efficiency outside the lab. Therefore, hybrid systems using internal combusting engines will soon be outmoded, as foreign firms move to all electric systems, much like GM's (unused but developed) Hy-Wire car:
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/gadgets/working-prototype-gm-hywire-concept-172869.php

Ethanol from sugar cane is currently produced in three southern states, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Florda, where the weather pattern is similar to Brazil. The reasons why ethanol from sugar cane is over eight times more productive than from corn are detailed elsewhere in these postings. One reason to note is that each planting of sugar cane can be harvested six times before another planting is needed. Brazil has done the world a favor by showing a profitable business model and developing new strains of high yield sugar cane. America is now behind the energy and efficiency curve, and will continue to go downhill unless we change our cultural attitudes. Inefficiency costs us a ton of money.

Ethanol from sugar cane that is used to power either fuel cells or IC engines, provides us with a low CO2 footprint because it removes CO2 from the atmosphere during its growing cycle. I have seen no calculations yet, but if all the southern states were to grow some sugar cane, its likely we wont have to import oil. This business strategy will make the world safer because we wont have to threaten other countries who want to use their oil as a political tool.

The oil firms do not understand a lot of other technologies and tend to buy up competing firms and shut them down. They are interested in growth of revenues, financial performance, and oil only. Currently, oil is power, and they want to keep their power. They only give lip service to creating competition for oil and gas. Consider this: EXXON/MOBIL has approximately $30 BILLION in its daily free cash drawer, but refuses to change its business model to an "ENERGY" company, which they should do, aggressively, for the stock holders. The CEO and executive team of that firm, in particular, are oil guys, and the succession path will always result in an oil person being in charge, and making decisions that control us all.

- Collapse -
Right on
Jan 3, 2008 12:16PM PST

That may be the first truly informed post I've read, including my own. The IC engine is basically done. I believe we'll see its death in the public world within 10 years. This is especially true now that FC vehicles have gone into full production. The people who talk about efficiency don't seem to realize that they're talking about a tech that is basically in its infancy. Honda seems to think they have an answer in a car currently for sale in US. It's only available in California at this point because the only fueling stations in US are there, so far. I'm sure they'll spread relatively quickly. Honda is also working on a home refueling station. "Big Oil" can't do a thing about it, And they're doomed if they don't head in a new direction, fast!
Imagine what will happen to the price of gas if 1/4 of the driving world doesn't need it anymore. How about 1/2 or 3/4? I'll be surprised if you'll be able to find gasoline by 2050. OPEC will be lucky to get $5 a barrel by 2030, if anyone will buy it at all. IC had its time, which is over if the world pulls its head out of its collective butt. The electric motor, however powered, is the necessary next step.
I wonder what the next will be. The possibilities are endless, and only greed, stupidity, ignorance, closed minds, and other infections to the human condition will hold them back. I think that only the destruction of humanity can stop them.
Let's move on people.

- Collapse -
THINK ABOUT THIS...
Jan 3, 2008 12:41PM PST
- Collapse -
Chevy Volt
Sep 16, 2008 10:25AM PDT

I don't mind if it runs on "hype", BUT I sure don't want my neighbour plugging into one of my outside outlets & running on my volts! How about all those Canadian parking lots with A/C power cords for folks to plug in their block heaters in the winter? Should be interesting!!

- Collapse -
The same company that killed the EV1??
Sep 19, 2008 4:41AM PDT

I find it very interesting that GM will introduce the Volt after they destroyed their EV1 from several years ago. I know the EV1 was totally electric, but still...

The Toyota Prius is a multi-function car in that it's great for commuting in stop-and-go traffic, but it can still be used for long road trips too. Can the Volt be used for anything other than commuting? I see that it's electric charge is rated at 200 miles, but if I go on a 500 mile road trip I wonder if the Volt can handle this.