AutoblogGreen

1. Could someone explain to me the 400kg battery? Lithium phosphate cells are ~110Wh/kg. Even if we assume that control circuitry and the like brings them down to 90Wh/kg, 400kg would be 36kWh. Why on *earth* do they need 36 kWh to go a mere 40 miles? That's *900 watt hours per mile*. How could they possibly be burning power that fast?

Posted at 11:42PM on Apr 7th 2008 by meme

2. The Volt battery is 16 kWh target at end of 10 year life. Only half of that is used, because they limit it to 30% to 80% charged to mitigate abuse of the battery from otherwise deep cycling.

I doubt the battery material itself is 400kg. I think that's for the entire pack, which includes the shell the interior, and liquid cooling.

Posted at 12:28AM on Apr 8th 2008 by OhmExcited

3. That's an amazingly heavy battery, then. 16kWh at 400kg is 25Wh/kg. That's lead-acid battery density. They must have "casing" and "cooling" 4 times heavier than the batteries themselves. How could the design be that bad? :P

Posted at 1:44AM on Apr 8th 2008 by meme

4. Images in the Volt gallery are the Chev. Traverse, not the Volt.

Posted at 1:52AM on Apr 8th 2008 by Mathew

5. I think it is 400 lbs/~180kg, not 400 kg.

Posted at 5:24AM on Apr 8th 2008 by Laban

6. Laban is right. The battery weighs ~400 pounds, not kg. The GM press release talks about a battery that weighs "more than 375 pounds." Sorry for the mistake.


http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/04/03/gms-chevy-volt-update-all-systems-go-malibu-based-mules-comin/

Posted at 8:23AM on Apr 8th 2008 by Sebastian

7. Oh, and Mathew, those are the images that GM provided to us on the Volt day. We couldn't bring our own cameras.

Posted at 8:24AM on Apr 8th 2008 by Sebastian

8. Great post Sebastian, keep the Volt news coming.

Posted at 9:11AM on Apr 8th 2008 by rar

9. I wouldn't be surprised even if it was 400kg. Depending on how you do your book keeping, that could cover all sorts of health and safety systems that are either required or built directly into the battery pack.

Posted at 9:43AM on Apr 8th 2008 by Will

10. This is REALLY going to happen! We may not be able to afford the final product, but it is really going to be great. Only time will tell.

Common GM, $30K MAX!

Posted at 9:56AM on Apr 8th 2008 by Tim

11. Lot's 'o luck with that under $30K pricetag!

An article was just published by Businessweek by way of MSNBC, that discussed automakers’ efforts and requirements to be able to reach the new 2020 CAFE standards.

In it Bob Lutz was mentioned discussing the Chevy Volt. Here is a quote from the article:

“The company once targeted $30,000 as the price for a Chevy Volt. But the cost of developing the technology is making that an unreachable dream. Lutz now figures a more realistic price for the Volt would be about $48,000. He reckons that $40,000 might be possible, without making any profit. Only government tax incentives could take the price tag nearer to $30,000. ”

Source (MSNBC)

Posted at 10:51AM on Apr 8th 2008 by Wave54

12. Still, that's ~60Wh/kg, which is still half the energy density of the cells. Tesla's blades got 130Wh/kg using 160Wh/kg cells. How is GM getting 60Wh/kg with 110Wh/kg cells? I just don't get it :P Must just be tons of steel.

Posted at 2:57PM on Apr 8th 2008 by KarenRei

13. "12. Still, that's ~60Wh/kg, which is still half the energy density of the cells. Tesla's blades got 130Wh/kg using 160Wh/kg cells. How is GM getting 60Wh/kg with 110Wh/kg cells? I just don't get it :P Must just be tons of steel."

I believe the "tons of steel" thought is right on the money, the battery pack is also being used as a structural member for the frame.

Posted at 3:21PM on Apr 8th 2008 by paul.stoller

14. i'm waiting for the volt but i don't beleive it's so long waiting for a batterie
when the tesla roadster is using the same batterie pack. a lot a poeple don't want us to drive electric. the oil compagny must see the website

http://www.teslamotors.com/

Posted at 5:14PM on Apr 9th 2008 by robert villeneuve

15. Meme: If your figures are correct, that is more than a bit troubling. The battery pack for the Tesla Roadster requires a more elaborate safety and thermal regulation system, yet the entire ESS battery pack still manages 130 wh per Kg!

But then again, that was after 2 years of development. Perhaps GM will get the weight down in the 2 years before the Volt goes into production.

Posted at 7:15PM on Apr 9th 2008 by Chris M

16. Correction: That was a 400 pound battery, which works out to about 181 Kg, or about 88 wh per Kg. That is nearly 4x better than lead acid, and better than NiMH, but well below the 130 wh per Kg achieved by Tesla Motors.

Posted at 8:14PM on Apr 9th 2008 by Chris M

17. @ Wave54
What Bob Lutz says and does is never the same thing. The fecal matter dribbling out of his mouth is unbelieveable. The original target price of 30,000 only returned a 33% profit. Now that interest has wildly exceeded his expectations the profit margin is getting pushed up. He wants a 50% profit margin to replace the plush cash flows lost since SUVs fell out of favor. Notice, he is quoted as saying the "cost of development", NOT - THE COST OF PRODUCTION - ! He wants to recoup that cost quickly! NEVER believe GM! Lutz is drooling over Teslas stats about pre-selling every car they can make at a profit. Lutz is a maggot who would gleefully burn your grandchildrens future to futher his own ends.
What his greed means to you: NO CHEAP ELECTRIC CAR FOR YOU, EVER.

Boycott Gm! Run the theives out of business!!! Whenever a company doesn't deliver on it's promises, punish them unmercifully!
Just imagine Bob Lutz dirty and unwashed, dressed in rags, squatting on a pile of garbage by the side of the road begging for scraps. That would be justis. A more likley senario is him looking out from his forted mansion at you, or more problaly your children and saying: "What an ugly site, those people should be exterminated."

Posted at 8:27AM on Apr 11th 2008 by ty

18. I love following Volt development, but why on earth is GM being so open about this R&D? In a competitive marketplace companies are always very secretive about the timing, performance, specs, successes, failures, etc to that they can get an edge on their competitors. Something seems very wrong with this openness....

The only thing I can think of is that GM has such low credibility with the American people now for shoddy quality and promoting extreme gas guzzlers for the last 20 years that it's their last hope of demonstrating a credible effort to change course. Still seems awfully peculiar...

Posted at 10:52AM on Apr 20th 2008 by frdglt