From Forbes.com:
The race drew teams from Volkswagen, BMW, Mercedes and Peugeot, but Gordon Murray Designs walked away the winner.
The T.27, an all-electric car with a lightweight composite chassis, won the Future Car Challenge sponsored by the Royal Automobile Club (RAC) by completing a 57.13 mile course between Brighton and London on less energy than its fellow competitors. Carrying two occupants, the T.27 consumed only 7 kilowatt hours of electricity, which is about equal to 350 miles per gallon, according to the company. The total energy bill came to 64 pence, or about $1.03.
Second place went to an electrified Jaguar E-Type from Germany which consumed 8.5 kilowatt hours. Tesla Roadsters, Nissan Leafs, an electrified Citroen, a Honda Insight and a few diesels also competed.
Murray, a noted race car designer whose cars won world championships at Brabham and McLaren, is on a quest to get cars to lose weight. By swapping out steel components for parts made from structurally strong plastic or composites, car manufacturers can dramatically increase mileage without impacting performance. Less weight, after all, leads directly to better fuel efficiency and/or acceleration.
A T.27, for instance, can go 100 miles on a charge, the same as a Nissan Leaf or Mitsubishi i. The T.27, however, only sports a 12.5 kilowatt hour battery pack, which is about half the size of the battery in the other two cars. A smaller battery means quicker charging times and, potentially, a lower sticker price. Last year, Murray’s T.25, a T.27 with a gas engine, beat half of the electric cars in the race with an 80 miles per gallon rating.
Bright Automotive in the U.S. is mining similar concepts with a lightweight delivery truck.
Composite cars can also be cheaper to produce. Instead of steel stamping mills and painting stalls needed for applying rust-proofing, manufacturers only need to invest in software and injection molding machinery.
Murray’s company does not plan on producing cars. Instead, it will license its intellectual property. A deal with an established manufacturer may come next year...
Tiny Car Gets 350 MPG, Beats Corporate Competitors In Energy Derby
Michael Kanellos
11/08/2011
http://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelkanellos/2011/11/08/tiny-car-beats-multinationals-in-energy-derby-with-350-mpg
Showing posts with label Tesla Roadster. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tesla Roadster. Show all posts
Saturday, November 26, 2011
Saturday, July 9, 2011
Farewell Roadster
Tesla Will Stop Taking Orders for its Iconic EV in Two Months
Clay Dillow
06.23.2011
http://www.popsci.com/cars/article/2011-06/farewell-roadster-tesla-will-stop-taking-orders-its-iconic-ev-two-months
We knew the Tesla Roadster was fast, but not this fast: after just three years on the market, the Roadster is no more. In about two months, Tesla will cease taking orders for the all-electric Roadster in the U.S., marking the end of an era during which the company helped prove to an often-skeptical public that electric vehicles could perform alongside conventional gasoline performance cars (for a six-figure price). But Tesla isn’t going anywhere. The company is winding down its Roadster production so it can focus on the much more moderately priced Model S, its $58,000 all-electric sedan that is expected to go on sale in mid-2012.
Friday, August 14, 2009
GM says new Volt could get 230 mpg in city driving
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gTbzGj-FRO_vOw4xVy1tOG6DBn_wD9A0THOO0
GM says new Volt could get 230 mpg in city driving
By KIMBERLY S. JOHNSON (AP)
8-11-9
WARREN, Mich. — General Motors said Tuesday its Chevrolet Volt electric car could get 230 mpg in city driving, making it the first American vehicle to achieve triple-digit fuel economy if that figure is confirmed by federal regulators.
But when the four-door family sedan hits showrooms late next year, its efficiency will come with a steep sticker price: $40,000.
Still, the Volt's fuel efficiency would be four times more than the popular Toyota Prius hybrid, the most efficient car now sold in the U.S.
Most automakers are working on similar designs, but GM would offer the first mainstream plug-in with the Volt, which seats four and was introduced at the 2007 Detroit auto show.
The Volt will join a growing fleet of cars and trucks powered by systems other than internal combustion engines.
Unlike the Prius and other traditional hybrids, the Volt is powered by an electric motor and a battery pack with a 40-mile range. After that, a small internal combustion engine kicks in to generate electricity for a total range of 300 miles. The battery pack can be recharged from a standard home outlet.
Hybrids use a small internal combustion engine combined with a high-powered battery to boost fuel efficiency. Toyota's Prius — which starts at about $22,000 — gets 51 mpg in the city and 48 mpg on the highway.
The number of all-electric vehicles available to U.S. consumers remains limited. The Tesla Roadster, a high-end sports car with a range of 224 miles, is perhaps the best known. But its $100,000-plus price tag keeps it out of reach of all but the wealthiest drivers.
The company is working on an electric family sedan that will be priced considerably less.
Nissan Motor Co. unveiled its first electric car, the Leaf, earlier this month. Nissan said the vehicle will go on sale in Japan, the U.S. and Europe next year.
General Motors Co. is touting the 230 mpg figure following early tests that used draft guidelines from the Environmental Protection Agency for calculating the mileage of extended-range electric vehicles.
The EPA guidelines, developed with help from automakers, figure that cars such as the Volt will travel more on straight electricity in the city than on the highway. If drivers operate the Volt for less than 40 miles, in theory they could do so without using a drop of gasoline.
Highway mileage estimates for the Volt based on the EPA's methodology have yet to be released.
"We are confident the highway (mileage) will be a triple-digit," GM CEO Fritz Henderson said.
The EPA conducts testing to determine the mileage posted on new car stickers. The agency said in a statement Tuesday that it has not tested a Volt "and therefore cannot confirm the fuel economy values claimed by GM."
The EPA is working with the Society of Automotive Engineers and state and federal officials to develop testing procedures to measure the fuel efficiency of advanced vehicles, according to a draft outline of the proposal obtained by The Associated Press.
The plan could be released later this year.
It was not immediately clear how GM reached the 230 mpg in city driving, but industry officials estimated the automaker's calculation took into consideration the Volt traveling 40 miles on the electric battery and then achieving about 50 mpg when the engine kicked in.
Although Henderson would not give details on pricing, the first-generation Volt is expected to cost nearly $40,000, making it cost-prohibitive to many people even if gasoline returns to $4 per gallon.
The price of the sporty-looking sedan is expected to drop with future generations of the Volt, but GM has said government tax credits of up to $7,500 and the savings on fuel could make it more affordable, especially at 230 mpg.
"We get a little cautious about trying to forecast what fuel prices will do," said Tony Posawatz, GM's vehicle line director for the Volt. "We achieved this number, and if fuel prices go up, it certainly does get more attractive even in the near-term generation."
The mileage figure could vary as the guidelines are refined and the Volt gets further along in the manufacturing process, Posawatz said.
Chrysler Group, Ford Motor Co. and Daimler AG are all developing plug-ins and electric cars, and Toyota Motor Corp. is working on a plug-in version of its gas-electric hybrid system.
GM has produced about 30 Volts so far and is making 10 a week, Henderson said during a presentation at the company's technical center in the Detroit suburb of Warren.
Henderson said charging the Volt will cost about 40 cents a day, at about 5 cents per kilowatt hour.
GM is nearly halfway through building about 80 Volts that will look and behave like the production model, and testing is running on schedule, Posawatz said.
Two critical areas — battery life and the electronic switching between battery and engine power — are still being refined, but the car is on schedule to reach showrooms late in 2010, he said.
GM is simulating tests to make sure the new lithium-ion batteries last 10 years, Posawatz said, as well as testing battery performance in extremely hot and cold climates.
"We're further along, but we're still quite a ways from home," he said. "We're developing quite a knowledge base on all this stuff. Our confidence is growing."
The other area of new technology, switching between battery and engine power, is proceeding well, he said, with engineers just fine-tuning the operations.
"We're very pleased with the transition from when it's driving EV (electric vehicle) to when the engine and generator kick in," he said.
GM also is finishing work on the power cord, which will be durable enough that it can survive being run over by the car. The Volt, he said, will have software on board so it can be programmed to begin and end charging during off-peak electrical use hours.
It will be easy for future Volt owners living in rural and suburban areas to plug in their cars at night, but even Henderson recognized the challenge urban, apartment dwellers, or those who park their cars on the street might have recharging the Volt. There could eventually be charging stations set up by a third-party to meet such a demand, Henderson said.
GM says new Volt could get 230 mpg in city driving
By KIMBERLY S. JOHNSON (AP)
8-11-9
WARREN, Mich. — General Motors said Tuesday its Chevrolet Volt electric car could get 230 mpg in city driving, making it the first American vehicle to achieve triple-digit fuel economy if that figure is confirmed by federal regulators.
But when the four-door family sedan hits showrooms late next year, its efficiency will come with a steep sticker price: $40,000.
Still, the Volt's fuel efficiency would be four times more than the popular Toyota Prius hybrid, the most efficient car now sold in the U.S.
Most automakers are working on similar designs, but GM would offer the first mainstream plug-in with the Volt, which seats four and was introduced at the 2007 Detroit auto show.
The Volt will join a growing fleet of cars and trucks powered by systems other than internal combustion engines.
Unlike the Prius and other traditional hybrids, the Volt is powered by an electric motor and a battery pack with a 40-mile range. After that, a small internal combustion engine kicks in to generate electricity for a total range of 300 miles. The battery pack can be recharged from a standard home outlet.
Hybrids use a small internal combustion engine combined with a high-powered battery to boost fuel efficiency. Toyota's Prius — which starts at about $22,000 — gets 51 mpg in the city and 48 mpg on the highway.
The number of all-electric vehicles available to U.S. consumers remains limited. The Tesla Roadster, a high-end sports car with a range of 224 miles, is perhaps the best known. But its $100,000-plus price tag keeps it out of reach of all but the wealthiest drivers.
The company is working on an electric family sedan that will be priced considerably less.
Nissan Motor Co. unveiled its first electric car, the Leaf, earlier this month. Nissan said the vehicle will go on sale in Japan, the U.S. and Europe next year.
General Motors Co. is touting the 230 mpg figure following early tests that used draft guidelines from the Environmental Protection Agency for calculating the mileage of extended-range electric vehicles.
The EPA guidelines, developed with help from automakers, figure that cars such as the Volt will travel more on straight electricity in the city than on the highway. If drivers operate the Volt for less than 40 miles, in theory they could do so without using a drop of gasoline.
Highway mileage estimates for the Volt based on the EPA's methodology have yet to be released.
"We are confident the highway (mileage) will be a triple-digit," GM CEO Fritz Henderson said.
The EPA conducts testing to determine the mileage posted on new car stickers. The agency said in a statement Tuesday that it has not tested a Volt "and therefore cannot confirm the fuel economy values claimed by GM."
The EPA is working with the Society of Automotive Engineers and state and federal officials to develop testing procedures to measure the fuel efficiency of advanced vehicles, according to a draft outline of the proposal obtained by The Associated Press.
The plan could be released later this year.
It was not immediately clear how GM reached the 230 mpg in city driving, but industry officials estimated the automaker's calculation took into consideration the Volt traveling 40 miles on the electric battery and then achieving about 50 mpg when the engine kicked in.
Although Henderson would not give details on pricing, the first-generation Volt is expected to cost nearly $40,000, making it cost-prohibitive to many people even if gasoline returns to $4 per gallon.
The price of the sporty-looking sedan is expected to drop with future generations of the Volt, but GM has said government tax credits of up to $7,500 and the savings on fuel could make it more affordable, especially at 230 mpg.
"We get a little cautious about trying to forecast what fuel prices will do," said Tony Posawatz, GM's vehicle line director for the Volt. "We achieved this number, and if fuel prices go up, it certainly does get more attractive even in the near-term generation."
The mileage figure could vary as the guidelines are refined and the Volt gets further along in the manufacturing process, Posawatz said.
Chrysler Group, Ford Motor Co. and Daimler AG are all developing plug-ins and electric cars, and Toyota Motor Corp. is working on a plug-in version of its gas-electric hybrid system.
GM has produced about 30 Volts so far and is making 10 a week, Henderson said during a presentation at the company's technical center in the Detroit suburb of Warren.
Henderson said charging the Volt will cost about 40 cents a day, at about 5 cents per kilowatt hour.
GM is nearly halfway through building about 80 Volts that will look and behave like the production model, and testing is running on schedule, Posawatz said.
Two critical areas — battery life and the electronic switching between battery and engine power — are still being refined, but the car is on schedule to reach showrooms late in 2010, he said.
GM is simulating tests to make sure the new lithium-ion batteries last 10 years, Posawatz said, as well as testing battery performance in extremely hot and cold climates.
"We're further along, but we're still quite a ways from home," he said. "We're developing quite a knowledge base on all this stuff. Our confidence is growing."
The other area of new technology, switching between battery and engine power, is proceeding well, he said, with engineers just fine-tuning the operations.
"We're very pleased with the transition from when it's driving EV (electric vehicle) to when the engine and generator kick in," he said.
GM also is finishing work on the power cord, which will be durable enough that it can survive being run over by the car. The Volt, he said, will have software on board so it can be programmed to begin and end charging during off-peak electrical use hours.
It will be easy for future Volt owners living in rural and suburban areas to plug in their cars at night, but even Henderson recognized the challenge urban, apartment dwellers, or those who park their cars on the street might have recharging the Volt. There could eventually be charging stations set up by a third-party to meet such a demand, Henderson said.
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Test driving the electric Tesla Roadster
http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_12003362
Test driving the electric Tesla Roadster in Silicon Valley
By Matt Nauman
Mercury News
03/26/2009
What defines a sports car? Until recently, it was design, performance and sound — the deep, throaty rumble of a Corvette's V-8, for example, or the machined purr of a Porsche 911 Turbo.
Then came the electric and electrifying Tesla Roadster. A half-day spent thrashing a Tesla on the curvy ribbons of road above Palo Alto and Woodside was enough to convince me that silence is golden.
And breath-taking. And scary.
The Roadster, in production since mid-2008 and now equipped with a re-engineered transmission, makes a strong statement about the future of driving.
Here's a car that can go very, very fast — 0 to 60 mph in 3.9 seconds with a top speed electronically limited at 125 mph — yet all of its power comes from electricity. For a starting price of $109,000 — the one I tested was about $122,000 with options and delivery charge — you can get a two-seat machine that you can drive nearly 250 miles between charges.
Me? Starting from Tesla's Menlo Park showroom, which ironically used to be a Chevrolet dealership, I headed for the hills. Sand Hill Road is nearby, a neat juxtaposition as some venture capitalists were early backers of Tesla. The Roadster, painted a shade called electric blue that might be found on a Prada handbag, oozes athletic elegance, not AIG bonus excess.
Then it was onto I-280 before heading to Page Mill Road, Skyline Boulevard and other mountain roads. In all, I spent more than three hours behind the wheel, logging about 100 miles.
When I handed the keys back at the dealership, the range estimator said it had enough juice left for about 80 more miles. But I'm guessing the kind of aggressive driving that the Tesla encourages might have led to small reduction in range.
Using a 220-volt charger that most owners have installed at their homes, it takes about four hours to fully charge Tesla's battery pack. Owners get a small extension cord for quick "fill ups," although it would take about 36 hours to charge from empty to full using a standard household 110-volt outlet.
Built on the chassis of the Lotus Elise, the Tesla Roadster is a small, low-to-the-ground ride. Its rounded front end features hood louvers and jewel-like lights under a large covering. The rear is similarly subtle, with an unobstrusive spoiler and three round lights on each side. Neither the Tesla logo on the hood nor the TESLA in block letters on the trunk lid scream for attention.
Getting inside the Tesla's cabin required a bit of acrobatic skill that I'm surely missing. Think Steve Wozniak on "Dancing With The Stars.'' You step down and into the driver's seat, while sliding under the steering wheel. Getting out is easier, but not much.
Once inside, though, I found a comfortable seating position that fit with the sporty nature of the car. Our tester had Microfiber seats, and on this sunny afternoon, they were a better choice than the standard leather chairs that can make for a hot ride.
The interior design reflects a car that's functional, rather than overly luxurious. Four round air vents. Two gauges easily seen through the three-spoke, leather-wrapped Momo steering wheel. The JVC stereo/navigation system had good sound, but an after-market feel with its tiny buttons. I switched it off, and concentrated on the driving experience.
Between driver and passenger, knobs control temperature and air flow. With the Roadster's top down on this sunny afternoon, I ignored these functions as well. The shifter is remarkably simple — up for reverse, the middle notch for neutral and down for drive.
Spend some time on the Tesla's informative www.teslamotors.com Web site, and the simplicity of electric driving is revealed. While an internal-combustion engine might have 100 moving parts, the Tesla's powertrain has one, its rotor.
Indeed, four components move this machine. The battery pack contains 6,831 lithium-ion cells, which I'm sure are happier here than running some spreadsheet on a laptop. The 115-pound motor is designed to be efficient, making sure 85 to 95 percent of the car's power goes to moving its wheels. The transmission, which was an early bugaboo for Tesla, is now finalized as a single-speed gearbox. Finally, the power electronics module is the big brain in the trunk, managing acceleration, torque, regenerative braking and charging.
For a driver, it all works seamlessly. Put key in ignition, check your mirrors, stomp on what used to be called the gas pedal and drive. There's no clutch pedal, nor any feeling of changing gears. Torque is outlandish, and instantaneous.
Instead of a roaring V-8, you hear mostly road noise — air rushing around you, tires on pavement, an occasional "wow" or "whee" from your passenger. Indeed, the high-pitch whine from the electric powerplant reminds some of a washing-machine on a full spin cycle.
To me, it's a pleasant reminder of driving a car without a gas tank, without a tailpipe, without a need to be smog checked.
Handling was precise and the ride was tight, as you'd expect from a six-figure sports car. I'm not sure the brakes were as muscular as on some other cars on its class.
I was the first newspaper reporter to drive a Tesla back in 2006 when it was a novelty, an electric car that wasn't ready for primetime. Back in a finished version, I quickly appreciated the advancements, including working gauges, door handles and a sound system.
But my first impression didn't change. Fast? Check. Good looking? Check. Silent? Check. An afternoon drive? I'll take it.
Contact Matt Nauman at (408) 920-5701 or at mnauman@mercurynews.com.
Test driving the electric Tesla Roadster in Silicon Valley
By Matt Nauman
Mercury News
03/26/2009
What defines a sports car? Until recently, it was design, performance and sound — the deep, throaty rumble of a Corvette's V-8, for example, or the machined purr of a Porsche 911 Turbo.
Then came the electric and electrifying Tesla Roadster. A half-day spent thrashing a Tesla on the curvy ribbons of road above Palo Alto and Woodside was enough to convince me that silence is golden.
And breath-taking. And scary.
The Roadster, in production since mid-2008 and now equipped with a re-engineered transmission, makes a strong statement about the future of driving.
Here's a car that can go very, very fast — 0 to 60 mph in 3.9 seconds with a top speed electronically limited at 125 mph — yet all of its power comes from electricity. For a starting price of $109,000 — the one I tested was about $122,000 with options and delivery charge — you can get a two-seat machine that you can drive nearly 250 miles between charges.
Me? Starting from Tesla's Menlo Park showroom, which ironically used to be a Chevrolet dealership, I headed for the hills. Sand Hill Road is nearby, a neat juxtaposition as some venture capitalists were early backers of Tesla. The Roadster, painted a shade called electric blue that might be found on a Prada handbag, oozes athletic elegance, not AIG bonus excess.
Then it was onto I-280 before heading to Page Mill Road, Skyline Boulevard and other mountain roads. In all, I spent more than three hours behind the wheel, logging about 100 miles.
When I handed the keys back at the dealership, the range estimator said it had enough juice left for about 80 more miles. But I'm guessing the kind of aggressive driving that the Tesla encourages might have led to small reduction in range.
Using a 220-volt charger that most owners have installed at their homes, it takes about four hours to fully charge Tesla's battery pack. Owners get a small extension cord for quick "fill ups," although it would take about 36 hours to charge from empty to full using a standard household 110-volt outlet.
Built on the chassis of the Lotus Elise, the Tesla Roadster is a small, low-to-the-ground ride. Its rounded front end features hood louvers and jewel-like lights under a large covering. The rear is similarly subtle, with an unobstrusive spoiler and three round lights on each side. Neither the Tesla logo on the hood nor the TESLA in block letters on the trunk lid scream for attention.
Getting inside the Tesla's cabin required a bit of acrobatic skill that I'm surely missing. Think Steve Wozniak on "Dancing With The Stars.'' You step down and into the driver's seat, while sliding under the steering wheel. Getting out is easier, but not much.
Once inside, though, I found a comfortable seating position that fit with the sporty nature of the car. Our tester had Microfiber seats, and on this sunny afternoon, they were a better choice than the standard leather chairs that can make for a hot ride.
The interior design reflects a car that's functional, rather than overly luxurious. Four round air vents. Two gauges easily seen through the three-spoke, leather-wrapped Momo steering wheel. The JVC stereo/navigation system had good sound, but an after-market feel with its tiny buttons. I switched it off, and concentrated on the driving experience.
Between driver and passenger, knobs control temperature and air flow. With the Roadster's top down on this sunny afternoon, I ignored these functions as well. The shifter is remarkably simple — up for reverse, the middle notch for neutral and down for drive.
Spend some time on the Tesla's informative www.teslamotors.com Web site, and the simplicity of electric driving is revealed. While an internal-combustion engine might have 100 moving parts, the Tesla's powertrain has one, its rotor.
Indeed, four components move this machine. The battery pack contains 6,831 lithium-ion cells, which I'm sure are happier here than running some spreadsheet on a laptop. The 115-pound motor is designed to be efficient, making sure 85 to 95 percent of the car's power goes to moving its wheels. The transmission, which was an early bugaboo for Tesla, is now finalized as a single-speed gearbox. Finally, the power electronics module is the big brain in the trunk, managing acceleration, torque, regenerative braking and charging.
For a driver, it all works seamlessly. Put key in ignition, check your mirrors, stomp on what used to be called the gas pedal and drive. There's no clutch pedal, nor any feeling of changing gears. Torque is outlandish, and instantaneous.
Instead of a roaring V-8, you hear mostly road noise — air rushing around you, tires on pavement, an occasional "wow" or "whee" from your passenger. Indeed, the high-pitch whine from the electric powerplant reminds some of a washing-machine on a full spin cycle.
To me, it's a pleasant reminder of driving a car without a gas tank, without a tailpipe, without a need to be smog checked.
Handling was precise and the ride was tight, as you'd expect from a six-figure sports car. I'm not sure the brakes were as muscular as on some other cars on its class.
I was the first newspaper reporter to drive a Tesla back in 2006 when it was a novelty, an electric car that wasn't ready for primetime. Back in a finished version, I quickly appreciated the advancements, including working gauges, door handles and a sound system.
But my first impression didn't change. Fast? Check. Good looking? Check. Silent? Check. An afternoon drive? I'll take it.
Contact Matt Nauman at (408) 920-5701 or at mnauman@mercurynews.com.
Friday, February 22, 2008
Is the Hybrid Escalade an Oxymoron?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/clint-wilder/is-the-hybrid-escalade-an_b_86111.html
Clint Wilder
Is the Hybrid Escalade an Oxymoron?
Posted February 11, 2008
Read More: Cadillac Escalade, Chevy Volt, Clean Tech Revolution, Clean-Tech Investor Summit, Hybrid Escalade, Jeff Sterba, PNM Resources, Sports Utility Vehicles, Sustainability, Suvs, Tesla Roadster, Toyota Prius, Breaking Business News
Some years ago, I'm not sure when, the prize vehicles awarded to heroes of major sports events made the unfortunate transition from snazzy convertible sports cars to the biggest, hulkiest, meanest SOBs - I mean SUVs - on the block. So it was no surprise when New York Giants quarterback Eli Manning, after engineering one of the greatest upset wins in Super Bowl history 10 days ago (with a tremendous assist from his team's defense, I must add), was handed the MVP trophy and the keys to a brand-new black 2009 Cadillac Escalade.
But this is 2008, and there's a twist. It's a hybrid Escalade. And that's now officially a trend. The Super Bowl telecast also included an ad for the new GMC Yukon hybrid, and at Major League Baseball's All-Star Game last summer, I was there in person at San Francisco's AT&T Park to see game MVP Ichiro Suzuki receive a hybrid Chevy Tahoe SUV. (Full disclosure: in addition to clean energy and sustainability, I'm also passionate about sports in general and baseball in particular).
At that time, my book The Clean Tech Revolution (co-authored with Ron Pernick) had just been published, and at a bookstore appearance the next day I was happy to extol Ichiro's MVP award as a great example of clean tech having moved firmly into the consumer and cultural mainstream. I also noted that Fox Sports used biodiesel to power its satellite trucks and broadcast equipment at the game, and the related All-Star Fanfest displayed the Chevy Volt, General Motors' concept car that can be configured as an all-electric, plug-in hybrid, hydrogen fuel cell, or flex-fuel vehicle.
But now, I'm not so sure that biggest-of-the-fleet SUV hybrids are such a good thing. Yes, it's good to see the mainstreaming of hybrid technology, but are hybrid Escalades, Tahoes, and Yukons really just the "lipstick on a pig" philosophy at work - dressing up a bad thing to look a little better, ecologically speaking? GM calls it (I'm not making this up) "intelligent indulgence." GM promises that the hybrid version will improve the Escalade's city gas mileage by up to 50 percent - from its current 12 mpg all the way to 18. Yippee.
The hybrid Escalade reminds me of the 15,000 square foot McMansion with solar panels, or the coal-fired power plant with incrementally reduced CO2 emissions. Sure, it's better than its more harmful, greenhouse gas-producing predecessor, but it also carries the implication that incremental improvements in the way we've always done things - or at least the way we've done things since the 1980s when SUVs and McMansions proliferated - will get us where we need to be on carbon reduction. They won't.
Want to hazard a guess as to the average increase in American home size since the early 1980s? It's 30 percent in square footage, and a whopping 50 percent in cubic footage - the actual amount of space that needs to be heated or cooled (can you say Atrium Living Room?). I learned that useful factoid not from a granola-crunching non-profit but from Jeff Sterba, CEO of PNM Resources, the largest utility in New Mexico, who spoke at last week's Clean-Tech Investor Summit conference in Palm Springs, California (I'll be blogging about the conference next week).
I'm not suggesting that we all need to ride bicycles and live in tiny hovels with uncomfortable temperatures. I do live in the modern world, and like to think of myself as a realist. Large families need roomy vehicles, yes. But they don't have to be the largest non-commercial vehicles on the road, plugging along at 12 miles to the gallon in city driving, if that. (And what percentage of all Cadillac Escalade driving is spent carting big families around? Very little, I'd guess).
I really do believe that technology, with adequate levels of investment and policy support, is the best hope to solve the global climate and resource crisis -- not expecting millions of people to undergo a radical lifestyle change. But I'd prefer to see technology deliver true innovation and game-changing results, like the Toyota Prius or the all-electric Tesla Roadster or possibly (to be fair to GM) the Chevy Volt - not just a 6-mpg improvement for Eli Manning's trophy car. We can do a lot better than that - and pretty soon, we're going to need to.
Clint Wilder
Is the Hybrid Escalade an Oxymoron?
Posted February 11, 2008
Read More: Cadillac Escalade, Chevy Volt, Clean Tech Revolution, Clean-Tech Investor Summit, Hybrid Escalade, Jeff Sterba, PNM Resources, Sports Utility Vehicles, Sustainability, Suvs, Tesla Roadster, Toyota Prius, Breaking Business News
Some years ago, I'm not sure when, the prize vehicles awarded to heroes of major sports events made the unfortunate transition from snazzy convertible sports cars to the biggest, hulkiest, meanest SOBs - I mean SUVs - on the block. So it was no surprise when New York Giants quarterback Eli Manning, after engineering one of the greatest upset wins in Super Bowl history 10 days ago (with a tremendous assist from his team's defense, I must add), was handed the MVP trophy and the keys to a brand-new black 2009 Cadillac Escalade.
But this is 2008, and there's a twist. It's a hybrid Escalade. And that's now officially a trend. The Super Bowl telecast also included an ad for the new GMC Yukon hybrid, and at Major League Baseball's All-Star Game last summer, I was there in person at San Francisco's AT&T Park to see game MVP Ichiro Suzuki receive a hybrid Chevy Tahoe SUV. (Full disclosure: in addition to clean energy and sustainability, I'm also passionate about sports in general and baseball in particular).
At that time, my book The Clean Tech Revolution (co-authored with Ron Pernick) had just been published, and at a bookstore appearance the next day I was happy to extol Ichiro's MVP award as a great example of clean tech having moved firmly into the consumer and cultural mainstream. I also noted that Fox Sports used biodiesel to power its satellite trucks and broadcast equipment at the game, and the related All-Star Fanfest displayed the Chevy Volt, General Motors' concept car that can be configured as an all-electric, plug-in hybrid, hydrogen fuel cell, or flex-fuel vehicle.
But now, I'm not so sure that biggest-of-the-fleet SUV hybrids are such a good thing. Yes, it's good to see the mainstreaming of hybrid technology, but are hybrid Escalades, Tahoes, and Yukons really just the "lipstick on a pig" philosophy at work - dressing up a bad thing to look a little better, ecologically speaking? GM calls it (I'm not making this up) "intelligent indulgence." GM promises that the hybrid version will improve the Escalade's city gas mileage by up to 50 percent - from its current 12 mpg all the way to 18. Yippee.
The hybrid Escalade reminds me of the 15,000 square foot McMansion with solar panels, or the coal-fired power plant with incrementally reduced CO2 emissions. Sure, it's better than its more harmful, greenhouse gas-producing predecessor, but it also carries the implication that incremental improvements in the way we've always done things - or at least the way we've done things since the 1980s when SUVs and McMansions proliferated - will get us where we need to be on carbon reduction. They won't.
Want to hazard a guess as to the average increase in American home size since the early 1980s? It's 30 percent in square footage, and a whopping 50 percent in cubic footage - the actual amount of space that needs to be heated or cooled (can you say Atrium Living Room?). I learned that useful factoid not from a granola-crunching non-profit but from Jeff Sterba, CEO of PNM Resources, the largest utility in New Mexico, who spoke at last week's Clean-Tech Investor Summit conference in Palm Springs, California (I'll be blogging about the conference next week).
I'm not suggesting that we all need to ride bicycles and live in tiny hovels with uncomfortable temperatures. I do live in the modern world, and like to think of myself as a realist. Large families need roomy vehicles, yes. But they don't have to be the largest non-commercial vehicles on the road, plugging along at 12 miles to the gallon in city driving, if that. (And what percentage of all Cadillac Escalade driving is spent carting big families around? Very little, I'd guess).
I really do believe that technology, with adequate levels of investment and policy support, is the best hope to solve the global climate and resource crisis -- not expecting millions of people to undergo a radical lifestyle change. But I'd prefer to see technology deliver true innovation and game-changing results, like the Toyota Prius or the all-electric Tesla Roadster or possibly (to be fair to GM) the Chevy Volt - not just a 6-mpg improvement for Eli Manning's trophy car. We can do a lot better than that - and pretty soon, we're going to need to.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
