Filed under: EV/Plug-in, GM
WSJ: GM making sci-fi cars, Volt is a "moon shot"
The Wall Street Journal is not kind to GM's plans for the Volt electric car in the article headlined Could GM's Salvation Be Stuff of Science Fiction? After calling a driver-less car GM is showing off at CES "science fiction," here is what the Wall Street Journal has to say about the Volt:
The push to produce cars that can drive themselves isn't the only moon-shot project GM has in the works. Mr. Wagoner has also greenlighted a nearly billion-dollar effort to launch a battery-powered car, called the Chevrolet Volt, within a few years.
With the exception of the Prius, the Wall Street Journal writes, "many attempts at moving the state of the art forward don't pan out." The Journal says GM's driver-less car plans could be a real embarrassment and uses news of a possible delay in the release of the Volt as support for this position.
With all due respect, the Journal is confusing two very different technologies. I don't know about driver-less cars but electric drive is a proven technology that exists and has existed on the roads for years. GM made the EV1 a decade ago and there are many electric cars on the road today. An electric car is not science fiction. It is very real, hard fact and if American car companies don't get on board, they will be left behind.
Related:
[Source: Wall Street Journal]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
BlackbirdHighway 8:25AM (1/07/2008)
OK, I had doubts about the Volt before, but now I'm convinced it will do just fine.
The Wall Street Journal is wrong on just about everything: The Dow is going to 30,000, oil is going back down to $20, it's a good idea to invade Iraq, global warming doesn't exist, tax cuts for the rich are good for the economy, the housing bubble won't be a problem.
Reply
Mark 9:15AM (1/07/2008)
Blackbird has a good point about the WSJ. The biggest problem I see in the summary is that the moon shot was NOT sci fi. It was a real deal. GM has invested tons of money in sci fi in the past. Some would say fuel cells are more sci fi than proven automotive technology. However, a moon shot is a different matter altogether. The Volt may indeed be a moon shot - it is pretty much "bet the company" time for GM. An all out "land men on the moon and return them to earth in this decade" effort is what we need to solve both our dependence on foreign oil and global warming.
Reply
Tony Belding 9:34AM (1/07/2008)
TO BE FAIR, the article focuses largely on cars driving themselves, and I think that technology is highly questionable. It's certainly not something I'm crying out for. I could say the same about fuel cells.
This was a striking bit. . . "Technology moves slowly in the auto industry. Today's internal combustion engines are not radically different than those of 100 years ago."
Yes, but some would look at that and interpret that powertrains are long, long overdue for advancement.
Reply
Mike 10:24AM (1/07/2008)
I think the Volt is much more of a reality... so long as the battery technology is there.
I would agree that autonomous vehicles are a "moon-shot" in that there are multiple, high-tech issues to address; how to integrate in the vehicle, how to communicate vehicle-2-vehicle, how will the highways (each managed by a separate state DOT) communicate messages to the vehicle, and finally, how will the customer react to a vehicle that takes over when it thinks you are doing a bad job?
WSJ needs to give more credit and less whining about GM’s efforts.
Reply
kert 10:41AM (1/07/2008)
as for driverless cars, i guess WSJ missed a little event called DARPA Grand Challenge.
Reply
Bill 11:58AM (1/07/2008)
The technology for the Volt is there.
The issue is the cost of large format lithium batteries.
At their current cost of over $1000/kWh, GM can't put a 16kWh battery pack into a Volt with a mass-market retail price point of under $30,000.
GM's betting mass production and technical improvements in battery technology will bring the cost of the battery pack down sufficiently by 2010.
Reply
calebe 1:33PM (1/07/2008)
WSJ is pretty much clueless. You know, there are still people that believe we never went to the moon.
Reply
kert 2:30PM (1/07/2008)
::At their current cost of over $1000/kWh
You can have lithium phosphate batteries for as low as $500/kwh or so, actually even way less if you go to china ( *cough* Thundersky brand *cough* )
http://www.zeva.com.au/tech/LiFePO4.php
Reply
russellgeister 4:50PM (1/07/2008)
more GMC bulls**t
Reply
Joseph 5:25PM (1/07/2008)
All news sources are brain-dead. It's that simple.
Well, except for ABG. ;)
Reply
fnc 6:25PM (1/07/2008)
What an idiot reporter. If the batteries work, the Volt will make GM a mint. Hardly a moon shot, more like putting Sputnik in orbit. Just putting the right technologies together and tweaking them to meet a new set of requirements.
Driverless cars? I don't think it's unreasonable to assume we'll have vehicles that drive themselves under very specific conditions in ten or twenty years. The tech will be developed off of the highways for specialist requirements (such as DARPA:GC) and proven to be sound enough to be allowed to drive some of the time.
Reply
ani 6:04AM (1/08/2008)
I decided to follow the link and read the real article. You have completely misrepresented what was said in the article. It is a pretty standard piece. Points out the potentials and the risks about the Volt. The problem with EV's are not the drive but the "gas tank" or the battery. EV's are "science fiction" till an affordable and safe battery is ready. That might happen in 2 years or 10. But till that happens it is science fiction. You have taken the moon shot comment totally out of context. All in all a pretty positive article which shows that GM's perception is changing.
Reply
Owain Ozymandias Buck 8:32AM (1/08/2008)
Agree with others--the Volt is not sci-fi. It's just sci.
I guess the WSJ thinks the moon landing was faked on a sound stage in Hollywood. But do they believe in the 100 mpg carburetor that was suppressed? ;)
Sci, folks--sci FTMFW
Reply
Kent Beuchert 9:00AM (1/08/2008)
Ah, yes, I always go to the NY Times to get the latest auto development news. I note that they fell for the same "news item" that others did when Wagoner, during a Qand A on the VOLT took the time to tell the enthusiasts that he "couldn't guarantee"
a late 2010 launch, which, we all know, is exactly the same thing that both he and project chief Lutz have been saying for the past year. Only the Times and other are also apparently unaware that the only significant obstacle that has ever existed
to VOLT production has been the ability of the battery pack (from two candidate companies) to meet GM specs (i.e. 10 year + lifespan, etc.). Recent news onthat score shows VOLT battery engineers very upbeat, claiming the first two packs from LG exceeded their requirements. You know, NY Times, that really doesn't sound to me like a "moon shot." I mean, the Detroit Electric first produced in 1907 might still be around if they knew how to build cheap bateries way back then. I might add that the modern auto is MOSTLY electric and that Joe Buffoons have been converting old clunkers into electrics all over the place during the past year. I think GM and 4 world class battery and electric propulsion companies can figure out how to make a serial
plug in vehicle. These types of vehicles have existed as diesel locomotives for the past, oh, 60 years. Duh! Is the NY Times really this braindead?
Reply