They will pay thousands to LOOK eco friendly, my sister in law and her husband HAD to have a hybrid that they will never recover the cost of. But hey they look eco friendly, right?
In looking at this report the volt doesnt make one bit of sense. Who can justify a 50.000 dollar car to save a thousand a year in gas. I have to look at this economically for my family. I cant spend Fifty grand on a car to save the world right now. Hell its hard enough to pay 25.000 for a new car let alone fifty. They need to come up with an idea everyone can afford and thats green. It cost way to much money to go green, and my family isnt going to suffer because so suit tells us we need to go green.
Euro Diesels fail BIG TIME when subjected to our EPA requirements. The Euro engines run very lean for good fuel economy, but they're very NOx heavy, which is the primary component of smog. Not a problem for europe where very few people drive, and when they do they don't drive very far. All that smog just blows away.
Here in America you get large, heavily populated, basins like LA and DFW and the smog just accumulates until the sky turns brown.
Now, the obvious solution is to apply low NOx regulations ONLY to areas like LA and DFW, but that would make too much sense. Instead we apply the same rules to ALL localities whether they make sense or not.
I see the future of the automobile in fuel cells. You can even run them off of fossil fuels. They produce CO2 and H2O. You can run a fuel cell off of pretty much so any organic material, as long as you can reform it to the point that the Hydrogen and Carbon can seperate. This is typically done with steam. Since a fuel cell produces a certain amount of heat, the fuel reformation can be done co-generatively.
You are right on about some of the earlier European diesels. That market regulated carbon much more than NOx. However, Europe is catching up with the US on NOx regulations, and will be in essence the same by the end of the decade.
It's the same with GM as well: I read a rather disgusting article in Motor Trend or some other dreck that claimed the Volt was the wave of innovation b/c it would raise the fleet fuel economy average to that they could build more "sports cars" and SUVs, which would sell.
GM and others are pretty much saying "hey, take THAT big oil" with a car like this, but so in bed with oil companies, quietly assuring them demand will still be high by creating more gas guzzlers. They don't want to innovate with their engines and designs to raise their individual vehicle's economy, they just want to play lawyer ball and do the bare minimum. Partly GM, partly us as well. We create the demand for gas guzzlers.
A few years ago, I calculated the cost savings of a diesel jetta over the gas version. The diesel cost $4500 more and assuming diesel was the same price as gas. Even at the 15 mpg rated increase, it would take 180,000 miles to recoup that $4500 added cost and break even.
I did the same thing for the Honda civic hybrid. It gets 9 mpg more than the gas version at over $7000 more. It was close to 400,000 miles for the break even point.
People aren't going to pay thousands more just so they can feel good about the environment.
The we need differing EPA requirements. I'd rather deal with the slight increase in NOx and see the improved MPG. That would do more for us than the silly EPA regs. It's not like we'd turn into Beijing overnight.Euro Diesels fail BIG TIME when subjected to our EPA requirements. The Euro engines run very lean for good fuel economy, but they're very NOx heavy, which is the primary component of smog. Not a problem for europe where very few people drive, and when they do they don't drive very far. All that smog just blows away.
Here in America you get large, heavily populated, basins like LA and DFW and the smog just accumulates until the sky turns brown.
Now, the obvious solution is to apply low NOx regulations ONLY to areas like LA and DFW, but that would make too much sense. Instead we apply the same rules to ALL localities whether they make sense or not.
I see the future of the automobile in fuel cells. You can even run them off of fossil fuels. They produce CO2 and H2O. You can run a fuel cell off of pretty much so any organic material, as long as you can reform it to the point that the Hydrogen and Carbon can seperate. This is typically done with steam. Since a fuel cell produces a certain amount of heat, the fuel reformation can be done co-generatively.
As much as I don't like GM, I actually think the Volt is an important vehicle. It's an overhyped glorified hybrid, but it's a good stepping stone vehicle just like the original Insight and Prius. I wouldn't pay that much for it, but some people will. And their sacrifice will get us some great real world testing and better products later.
I have a friend that bought their daughter a used Toyota Prius and 6 months later had to get a new battery. They came in under the 8 year warranty so they didn't have to shell out for it, but man, that would suck.
So, they want to kill fuel economy too? Brilliant...
I have a 2010 VW Jetta DIESEL "TDI"
$20,000
I average about 38 to 40 miles per gallon IN THE SUBURBS in my daily driving. I can easily top 50mpg on the highway. City driving yields about 35mpg.
A comparably equipped PRIUS was many thousands of dollars more. A Chevy Volt is more than double the cost of the Jetta TDI.
And your diesel engine will outlast the VOLT & PRIUS