By William Neikirk
The Chevy Volt came to Capitol Hill today.
You can't buy it now, but General Motors hopes that it will be on the market in a few years at a reasonable price.
It's an electric plug-in. You could recharge the battery overnight and the next day you could drive 40 miles without using a single drop of fuel. If you have to go further than 40 miles, a gasoline engine would kick on, but only to recharge the battery. It's a hybrid, but the motor is electric.
There's a problem. The battery technology hasn't advanced enough to allow you drive to and from work (in most cases) without burning any fossil fuel. But research goes on, partly funded by federal money. And the Volt is a good lobbying tool.
It takes a regular 110 volt cord.
The Volt
GM had it parked a couple of blocks from the U.S. Capitol and, according to company officials, there was a lot of interest from members of Congress and their staff.
It made for a nice showpiece on a hot day, and it also gave GM a chance to do some lobbying on energy legislation now before Congress. There are only two of them in existence
Troy Clarke, president of GM North America, used the occasion to talk to members of Congress about more funds for battery technology but also to make a pitch for a fuel economy standard less onerous than the one contained in a Senate-passed bill.
"We want to be part of the solution," said Clarke (pictured above).
Specifically, he pushed for a measure that would raise fuel economy (or CAFE) standards from an average (for both cars and light trucks) of about 25 miles per gallon today to a range of between 32 and 35 miles per gallon by 2022.
This bill, sponsored by Reps. Baron Hill (D-Ind.) and Lee Terry (R-Nev.), is weaker than the Senate-passed bill, which would require a 35-mile-per-gallon standard for cars and trucks by 2020. The National Automobile Dealers Association calls the Senate bill "extreme and unachievable." It is leading a lobbying drive to drum up support for Hill-Terry.
Clarke said mass-producing the Volt, a sleek little car, is several years away and depends on the technological advance. He said he hoped that such a vehicle could be put on the market in the $20,000 range.
In the interim, he said, the automobile industry will be relying on existing technology on hybrids and on biofuels that could help increase fuel supply.
"There is no single silver bullet in the transition," he said.
If the Volt becomes a practical reality, he said, most people would be able to commute to work by using a modest amount of electricity each night to charge the batteries.
GM officials said the Volt would have a range of 640 miles with a full tank of gasoline recharging the batteries.
• 
• 
• 
Comments
What about those of us who live someplace we can't plug our cars in? I don't actually own a car, but if I did I'd be parking it on the street.
Posted by: Cheryl | July 19, 2007 4:17 PM
GM needs a government handout?!!
Those of you who've driven around Silicon Valley may have seen the Tesla sportscar on the road -- born of Silicon Valley inventors and venture capital and sold out for the next year or so. 0-60 in about 4 seconds, all-electric, and about 200 miles on a charge:
http://www.teslamotors.com/index.php
Cool!
Posted by: Kenny Bunkport | July 19, 2007 5:16 PM
Billy,
"You could recharge the battery overnight and the next day you could drive 40 miles without using a single drop of fuel."
Without using a single drop of fuel??? Where do you think electricity comes from??? Coal, Nuclear... they are fuels.
Posted by: Terry | July 19, 2007 9:58 PM
Electric cars are good for the wussy dems,but I like gasoline powered V-8's.
Go drill for oil in ANWR,build more oil refineries and we'll all be happy.
I flew over Alaska last year...there's nothing there....except billions of barrels of OIL.
Paulo
Posted by: Paulo | July 20, 2007 1:49 AM
Paulo,
It's a shame you need to compensate for your "shortcomings" with a V8.
ANWR: A few months worth of oil and unique, fragile habitats for wildlife...
Posted by: Kenny Bunkport | July 20, 2007 7:13 AM
Who do you think "killed" the electric car years ago???????
Posted by: bill r. | July 20, 2007 9:09 AM
"bill r.", in what alternate universe was the electric car "killed years ago"?
In the real world, planet earth, electric cars have been around since the early 1900s. In fact many of the early autos were battery powered. Consumers gave up on them because the electric motors didn't generate enough power to get the cars out of ruts. Nobody "killed" the electric car. It just couldn't deliver the goods, literally as well as figuratively.
On the real planet earth, the Loch Ness Monster is a fiction, "Bigfoot" is a myth, and battery-powered cars simply aren't a viable alternative.
Posted by: Bruce | July 20, 2007 11:34 AM
"Kenny Bunkport" promotes the Tesla electric car, but doesn't mention that the Tesla car costs $100,000.
Maybe John Edwards, Al Gore, Whitewater Hillary, St. Barack, Madonna and Ed Begley can afford to spend $100,000 on a car, but us ordinary people can't.
Posted by: Bruce | July 20, 2007 11:43 AM
KB,
That's the first I heard of it, looks great right up to the sticker shock of $100k. Maybe through mass hysteria, increased competition, a refined production line or margin cutting, they can get it down to be more cost effective. Still pretty cool though.
Posted by: Bubba | July 20, 2007 12:20 PM
Bruce,
Any sports car capable of 0-60 in 4 sec would be expensive. The point is, the technology exists.
Posted by: Kenny Bunkport | July 20, 2007 2:12 PM
Bruce,
Wrong. I'm not promoting it, but contrary to GM's crying, the technology exists and appears to work as well as the fastest gas-fueled sports cars, some of which cost even more than $100K. Tesla isn't on Capitol Hill asking for a rollback of long-overdue EPA regs and other handouts.
Posted by: Kenny Bunkport | July 20, 2007 2:33 PM
When computers first came into being, they required basically huge separate, climate-controlled rooms and cost hundreds of thousands of dollars -- and took minutes if not hours to process information (one question at a time, to boot). The first personal computers still cost several thousand dollars and were awkward and clunky, and didn't do a whole lot compared to what we see now.
The point of this is that technology for electric and alternate-energy cars is still in the working stages. Once technology, research and consumer demand meet, we'll have usable, practical cars that free us from dependence on oil and that are more environmentally-friendly. See this for what it is -- a work in process.
Posted by: Op109 | July 20, 2007 3:21 PM
It may be a work in progress, and I agree that all of this is progress, but in the US - when cars get more fuel efficient, Americans tend to drive more so no fuel is actually saved. I actually do some work with DriveCongress.com and think that the Hill Terry legislation is a step in the right direction - we do need to set goals, and we do need to make progress. But we also need to make sure we look at these issues from all sides.
Posted by: Anonymous | July 23, 2007 1:02 AM
It may be a work in progress, and I agree that all of this is progress, but in the US - when cars get more fuel efficient, Americans tend to drive more so no fuel is actually saved. I actually do some work with DriveCongress.com and think that the Hill Terry legislation is a step in the right direction - we do need to set goals, and we do need to make progress. But we also need to make sure we look at these issues from all sides.
Posted by: ProgPos | July 23, 2007 1:04 AM