# Chevrolet Volt **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 19, 2010, 11:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643 "2010-10-19T11:12:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/241 "2010-10-28T01:32:09Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > You bolt an automatic to the engine. Very simple. What … in tarnation … are you going on about? European combined cycle automatic Ford Focus 2.0L diesel, Ford Focus automatic 2.0L petrol, and Prius. MPG 48.6, 35.3, 74 respectively. CO2 emissions not as dramatic since diesel emits 15% more CO2 per gallon and has other greenhouse gases as well. Once again, diesels are good, very good. But you do not serve your point well by overstating it. If you want to see a solid pro-diesel case without exaggeration see [here](http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=49&ved=0CDsQFjAIOCg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.its.ucdavis.edu%2Fevents%2F2009book%2FChapter10.pdf&rct=j&q=prius%20carbon%20emissions%20diesel&ei=VszITKnUHI7-nAelp-2nAw&usg=AFQjCNEbdfD0gLhlJCsisbN4rSjL4BJd1A&sig2=2lMRIb0E9uxhRVCTH_Ihgw) (warning: pdf) > [@](#): > > Because of diesel’s higher carbon content, CO2 reductions are not as dramatic as fuel consumption reductions. For instance, while a typical diesel vehicle has approximately 35 percent better fuel economy than a comparable gasoline vehicle, it would have about 25 percent lower CO2 emissions, as is seen in Figure 10-1. The key is the ability to match automotive technologies to the needs of the customer. … It is well documented that a modern, clean diesel engine offers 20 to 25 percent CO2 reduction compared to a similar gasoline engine … comparison of the European versions of the Smart Fortwo car in gasoline and diesel engine modes and in a battery electric configuration, as shown in Figure 10-7. The full well-to-wheel GHG emissions of the gasoline Smart were calculated to be 103 grams of CO2 per kilometer (km). Well-to-wheel emissions from the diesel car were found to be 88 grams of CO2 per km. The well-to-wheel emissions from the battery electric Smart were even higher, 107 grams of CO2 per km, when coal was the source for electricity generation, although they dropped to 71 grams of CO2 per km if the average mix of the U.S. electricity generation was applied, and would be even lower based on California’s electricity mix (ADAC 2008). > The conclusion from this exercise is that the energy source for electricity generation determines in large part the potential CO2 reduction of a battery electric vehicle, while emissions from traditional gasoline and diesel vehicles are relatively fixed. Therefore, the expectations of CO2 reduction from the deployment of electric vehicles must be analyzed along with the expected source of electricity to power the vehicles. California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard is a step toward establishing values for these upstream impacts. Another issue to note is that the CO2 reduction gained shifting from one technology to another, whether it is gasoline to gasoline-electric hybrid or gasoline to diesel, will vary depending on the vehicle platform and powertrain. … it is important to use all available technologies that contribute to GHG reduction now. I agree with that conclusion. For CO2 reduction electric does better but not by all that much until the US mix moves more off dirty coal; for energy independence electric does much better. Diesel offers more utility for more drivers however. Match your vehicle to your needs and priorities. ---
**Author:** ![Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/do_not_taunt/32/2968_2.png) [@Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Do_Not_Taunt)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/242 "2010-10-28T01:32:40Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > If we’re rewarding behavior with tax money then we should push technology that will deliver the best bang for the buck. The Volt is not price competitive Again, if your goal is to maximize a one-time, short-term decrease in CO2 emissions, you might do a little better subsidizing diesels. To change the game long-term, and actually get ourselves off CO2 emissions while keeping personal mobility, we have to look at electrics. > [@](#): > > plus it undercuts highway tax revenue. We should convert to a mileage based tax instead.(\*) Problem solved. (\*) We should separately tax emissions as well, but those should be earmarked for climate-change prevention and mitigation programs, not highways. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 3:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/243 "2010-10-28T03:17:57Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > What … in tarnation … are you going on about? what I’m talking about is that the 74.2 mpg UK Focus would get 60 mpg combined in the US with an automatic (adjusted from imperial gallons). It costs half as much as the Volt. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 3:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/244 "2010-10-28T03:21:29Z")
> [@Do\_Not\_Taunt](#): > > We should convert to a mileage based tax instead.(\*) Problem solved. So we bankroll a car that people can’t afford and then foist another layer of bureaucracy on the rest of the public to compensate for it? ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/245 "2010-10-28T03:22:25Z")
> [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > The first things about electric cars is that they don’t make a lot of sense with the current battery technology. Once newer battery technology, like the \*\*lithium-air \*\*battery becomes available, then it is a whole new ball game. IBM has a project to build an electric car with a 500 mile range. …and costs under $20,000, right? Where do I sign up? ---
**Author:** ![GreasyJack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/df705f/32.png) [@GreasyJack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreasyJack)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/246 "2010-10-28T04:10:09Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > what I’m talking about is that the 74.2 mpg UK Focus would get 60 mpg combined in the US with an automatic (adjusted from imperial gallons). It costs half as much as the Volt. You also have to adjust for the difference between the EPA and European drive cycle. I’m not sure exactly what the Euro drive cycle entails, but here’s an easy way to figure it out. The VW Golf 2.0 TDI is rated at 34 MPG combined by the EPA. VW’s UK site claims the same car does the 58.9 miles per (imp) gallon in combined driving. This is about 50 miles per US gallon. So assuming EPA MPG=Euro MPG \*.68, the diesel Focus would be rated at 40 MPG in this country. That’s better than anything sold here now (except the Honda Insight and Civic Hybrid), but nothing spectacular. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 4:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/247 "2010-10-28T04:32:37Z")
[Car Reviews: New Car Prices and Used Cars Classifieds | AutoGuide.com](http://www.hybridcars.com/electric-car) There are lots of EVs coming down the line. It is the future. It is too bad you people are so old and stuck in ancient technology. Buffet is investing in a Chinese electric with 200 mile range, zero to 60 in 9 seconds. ---
**Author:** ![Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/do_not_taunt/32/2968_2.png) [@Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Do_Not_Taunt)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/248 "2010-10-28T04:35:41Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > So we bankroll a car that people can’t afford and then foist another layer of bureaucracy on the rest of the public to compensate for it? Imagine, hypothetically, that electric car technology improves to the point where it competes without subsidy. Sales of the liquid fuels plummet, and with them the taxes that pay for highway maintenance. But the need for highway maintenance continues unabated. Then what? Put another way, the first purpose of the gas tax is to shift responsibility for maintaining highways onto those who use them most. If a future where something other than gas and diesel is providing any substantial portion of highway miles is possible, we need to consider other sources of revenue to replace the gas taxes lost. It would be nice if the alternative form of revenue managed to also have the effect of shifting payment to the heaviest users. Do you have any suggestions for this possible future? Or do you want to argue it can’t possibly ever happen, and that liquid fuels will power nearly 100% of our mileage forever and ever? Here’s where I see we are right now: on the one hand, electric cars give us the possibility of weaning our personal transportation sector off of needing net positive CO2 emissions. On the other hand, it is not optimal for reducing said emissions over a time horizon of a decade or two, and complicates the highway funding issue, for which you are unwilling to discuss alternatives. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/249 "2010-10-28T04:35:57Z")
> [@GreasyJack](#): > > You also have to adjust for the difference between the EPA and European drive cycle. I’m not sure exactly what the Euro drive cycle entails, but here’s an easy way to figure it out. The VW Golf 2.0 TDI is rated at 34 MPG combined by the EPA. VW’s UK site claims the same car does the 58.9 miles per (imp) gallon in combined driving. This is about 50 miles per US gallon. So assuming EPA MPG=Euro MPG \*.68, the diesel Focus would be rated at 40 MPG in this country. That’s better than anything sold here now (except the Honda Insight and Civic Hybrid), but nothing spectacular. Hard to say. I suspect the Focus does better around town because it uses stop/start technology (which should be on every car with direct injection ANYWAY). ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 4:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/250 "2010-10-28T04:46:35Z")
> [@Do\_Not\_Taunt](#): > > Imagine, hypothetically, that electric car technology improves to the point where it competes without subsidy. Sales of the liquid fuels plummet, and with them the taxes that pay for highway maintenance. But the need for highway maintenance continues unabated. Then what? > > Put another way, the first purpose of the gas tax is to shift responsibility for maintaining highways onto those who use them most. If a future where something other than gas and diesel is providing any substantial portion of highway miles is possible, we need to consider other sources of revenue to replace the gas taxes lost. It would be nice if the alternative form of revenue managed to also have the effect of shifting payment to the heaviest users. > > Do you have any suggestions for this possible future? Or do you want to argue it can’t possibly ever happen, and that liquid fuels will power nearly 100% of our mileage forever and ever? > > Here’s where I see we are right now: on the one hand, electric cars give us the possibility of weaning our personal transportation sector off of needing net positive CO2 emissions. On the other hand, it is not optimal for reducing said emissions over a time horizon of a decade or two, and complicates the highway funding issue, for which you are unwilling to discuss alternatives. It will take a while. there are quite a few gas cars on the streets. But gas vehicles are on borrowed time. ---
**Author:** ![Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/do_not_taunt/32/2968_2.png) [@Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Do_Not_Taunt)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 4:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/251 "2010-10-28T04:48:27Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > It will take a while. there are quite a few gas cars on the streets. But gas vehicles are on borrowed time. I’m not sure how to take this post. Are you disagreeing with something I said? ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 4:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/252 "2010-10-28T04:54:06Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > what I’m talking about is that the 74.2 mpg UK Focus would get 60 mpg combined in the US with an automatic (adjusted from imperial gallons). It costs half as much as the Volt. I hate to get into this kind of triviality, but the issue had been your claim that: > [@](#): > > We can easily double fleet mileage without loss of utility to existing cars and without investing in any new technology. The responses you got in return, such as mine: > [@](#): > > Double? Nah. Not even close. “Diesel engines typically increase gas mileage by 30-35% over gasoline engines” Your defense of your claim: > [@](#): > > The Ford Focus diesel gets 74 mpg. The gas engine gets 35 mpg. … I’d say the diesel does more with less and is capable of doubling fuel mileage. And my correcting your mistake: you compared very dissimilar models. When comparing apples to apples for mileage the increase is not quite 38% (better than most), the CO2 reduction 23% (and decreased for total GHG emissions), and the change in oil use about 20%. My last cite, which makes a strong argument for diesels with these sorts of numbers, concurs in their different examples. Overall 35% better fuel economy and comparing the comparable versions of the same vehicle for well to wheel CO2 about 15% better for the diesel than the petrol version. One can make a good argument with those numbers, but they are not “doubling”. I think that if want to compare a diesel’s price in America to the Volt, your closest comparison is the [VW diesel Jetta](http://www.thedieseldriver.com/2010/07/2011-volkswagen-jetta-1/2/). True it is a smaller car but still. It uses “the same engine that gave Volkswagen a Guinness World Record for Lowest Fuel Consumption.” It gets 30 city/42 hwy and similarly appointed to a Volt runs $24,195. The mpg difference btw between the gas and the diesel VW Jetta is the gas getting 23 city/33 hwy - about 30-35% mileage increase - not doubling. The rationales behind a tax on GHGs and a mileage tax have only a little to do with EVs. Many believe that the first (even if it was exclusively a carbon tax) would be the best way to address the issue of global climate change. The second is motivated by the fact that cars are, in any case, using less gas per mile driven, will use less in the future, and the gas tax has been inadequate to fund the the Fed’s share of highway upkeep as it is. If EVs do take off they will drop even more. But EVs and diesels and other fuel efficient vehicles use these roads too; they should not have a free ride, so to speak. We’ve had debates on these things before if you want to search and find them. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 6:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/253 "2010-10-28T06:50:44Z")
A Ford Focus with air and automatic is $18,000. Add $2,000 for the diesel and it’s a $20,000 car that gets 60 mpg. ---
**Author:** ![GreasyJack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/df705f/32.png) [@GreasyJack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreasyJack)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 8:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/254 "2010-10-28T08:34:32Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > A Ford Focus with air and automatic is $18,000. Add $2,000 for the diesel and it’s a $20,000 car that gets 60 mpg. A TDI Golf is slightly more than $20K (though better apportioned too) and gets only slightly less than your hypothetical US-spec diesel Focus. I too would like to see more small diesels sold here (honestly an uninformed car buying populace is really all that’s holding them back) but it just really isn’t that different from what we’ve got. The Volt is a genuine step towards a new transportation paradigm. ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 11:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/255 "2010-10-28T11:57:53Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > It will take a while. there are quite a few gas cars on the streets. But gas vehicles are on borrowed time. When I was in highschool in the 1960’s, we had a visionary physics teacher who predicted, confidently, that by the time we had kids of highschool age, the internal combustion gas engine would be as obsolete as a Ford Model T was to us then. He wasn’t as confident as to the replacement technology, but thought a gas turbine was the most promising, followed by electric. Looks like he was way off the mark. Our kids have kids beyond highschool age, and his prediction has yet to come true. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/256 "2010-10-28T13:26:56Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > A Ford Focus with air and automatic is $18,000. Add $2,000 for the diesel and it’s a $20,000 car that gets 60 mpg. The Focus sold with automatic in America, the 2.0L gas one, [gets](http://www.fordvehicles.com/cars/focussedan/specifications/engine/) “25 City/34 Hwy” on the American cycle and 35.3 in the European combined cycle. The 2.0L diesel automatic sold in Europe gets 48.6 in the European combined cycle. It would get about 35 City/47 Hwy in the American cycle, about 38% better mileage than the gas model. NOT 60. Now assuming 12K driven a year and [today’s prices](http://www.eia.doe.gov/oog/info/gdu/gasdiesel.asp) of a national average of $2.82/g for gas and $3.07 for diesel that comes to 400 gallons a year of gas at a cost of $1128 and 293 gallons of diesel at a cost of $900. $228 savings a year at current prices so the extra cost would take almost 9 years to pay off. By the same purely economic analysis it doesn’t pay for most consumers at today’s prices, and that’s for a very mature technology with economies of scale. As established, electric doesn’t make economic sense at today’s prices either. The difference is that electric is an emerging technology that will get much cheaper. Gas and diesel however are unlikely too. The technology is mature and prices will rise. America has a long history of giving the emerging energy technologies a leg up, from research subsidies for nuclear (as well as loan guarantees) to help with renewables and energy to tax credits for hybrids up to a certain volume sold. Electric also increases our energy independence _today_ rather than maybe getting cheap enough biodiesel someday in the future. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/257 "2010-10-28T15:09:08Z")
About the [Golf TDI](http://www.autoguide.com/manufacturer/volkswagen/2010-volkswagen-golf-tdi-first-drive-1220.html) - > [@](#): > > Yes, the 2010 Volkswagen Golf TDI will do at least 41 mpg on the highway … How can a 2.0-liter dino juice-burning engine get mileage comparable to the (slightly less expensive) Toyota Prius? … Available in both three and five door versions costing from $22,189, standard … Fully loaded — with the “Sport Styling Kit” and optional 18-inch wheels — you’ll be out the door in a 5-door for a shade under $32,000. … Most will compare the Golf TDI to a Prius or Honda Insight, and the verdict is simple: if you want a conventional car and do mostly highway driving that you’ll keep for several years, the Golf wins every time. > > If you drive mostly in stop-and-go traffic and lease your vehicles — but still care about your fuel consumption — a hybrid is best. BTW that mileage is about 34% more than the highway mileage listed for the gas version. Very consistent thing that. Again, there really is no need for one vehicle to be the best choice for all people and all needs. If you need a car to travel long distances on the highway then a newer diesel is great. Relative to a gas powered car it produces significantly less CO2, uses less oil. And as prices go up, as they likely will, you’ll probably break even with the extra cost over enough years. If you are a city driver, or even a suburban commuter, and don’t do long distance driving (or at least won’t with the car you are buying) then a pure BEV may be the better choice. Compared to the diesel it does much better at CO2 reduction (complete “well-to-wheel” analysis, even assuming no improvement to the US electricity generating mix), doesn’t send money to foreign oil producers. Fully loaded the Leaf will cost you less than the fully loaded Golf TDI (or a fully loaded Prius), including the cost of the home charger. If you are mostly a commuter but feel the need to have the ability in that car to drive longer distances, then you may want to consider a Volt, at least at the lease price. If gas prices go up substantially it _may_ end up paying for itself. But even with substantial gas price increases buying it outright is foolish from a dollar and cents POV. Still … each consumer will have to decide on the value they put on the intangibles - the rarely stopping for gas, the satisfaction they get from knowing they are helping reduce GHG’s and decreasing our dependence of foreign energy sources. There is currently, and increasingly will be, no one size fits all. Especially as these batteries commoditize and people try to guess the risk of future gas price volatility. My household is a two-car family (actually three car as we are storing my eldest’s vehicle for him, a 127K mile Volvo wagon, while he lives out of country for a few years). I anticipate my next car to be a BEV for me to use for my daily commute and errands about the city. But when my wife’s car eventually also gets replaced I can see going with a diesel then. We will be having a kid in college most of the next 13 years and having _a_ car to take on highway trips outside of BEV range seems like something we should have. Another household will have different needs. Here’s a question that I wonder if anyone here can help me with: the potential market for true BEVs with our current infrastructure are households that either pretty much exclusively use a car for commuting, say 60 miles a day or less, or fairly rarely need to go much farther and have access to another car for those purposes (a two car family) and who have a garage; those who are not current potential market segment either need that car, with some non-insignificant frequency, to travel into range anxiety-provoking range or beyond (over 60 miles on cold winter slow traffic days when the heater will be at full draw), or don’t have a garage that they can use for charging. What are the sizes of each of those segments? ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/258 "2010-10-28T15:34:10Z")
> [@Musicat](#): > > When I was in highschool in the 1960’s, we had a visionary physics teacher who predicted, confidently, that by the time we had kids of highschool age, the internal combustion gas engine would be as obsolete as a Ford Model T was to us then. > > He wasn’t as confident as to the replacement technology, but thought a gas turbine was the most promising, followed by electric. > > Looks like he was way off the mark. Our kids have kids beyond highschool age, and his prediction has yet to come true. You really don’t see the difference? The cars are actually about to be sold. Many manufacturers are bringing them out. I don’t care to debate your high school teacher as being relevant. He was not. I also made no claims the ICE was going to be switched off. It will be a long process, but it is starting. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/259 "2010-10-28T16:05:49Z")
Turbines [may yet](http://www.gizmag.com/gas-turbine-electric-vehicle-project-funding/13995/) be viable. > [@](#): > > The UK government-backed Technology Strategy Board recently announced the recipients of carbon reduction technology research project funding which sees a consortium made up of Jaguar Land Rover, SR Drives and led by Bladon Jets taking a GBP 1,103,392 (about US$1,790,000) slice of the multi-million GB-pound cake to develop “the world’s first commercially viable - and environmentally friendly - gas turbine generator designed specifically for automotive applications.” > > The consortium’s project is amongst 16 successful applicants to receive the funding for proof of concept and six for research and development studies, the aim being “to develop an ultra-lightweight, gas turbine powered, electric vehicle range extender that will enable vehicle weight savings of 100kg or more and a modest reduction in CO2 emissions on the UNECE101 drive cycle. More substantial CO2 savings can be achieved in real world use. The small size, multi-fuel capability and potential low cost of the Ultra Lightweight Range Extender (ULRE) could also help speed adoption of electric vehicles.” … > > … Most of the big car manufacturers have been looking into implementing gas turbines in automobile engines since the 1950s and have invested millions of dollars in various projects but “these early efforts were thwarted by the dual problems of turbine lag (the 1 to 2 second delay from ‘stepping on the gas’ to the car accelerating) and poor fuel efficiency at low speed and idle.” > > As a result, the gas turbine engine has yielded numerous concept pieces but never really made it out of the testing environment which, given that the technology is independent of vulnerable petroleum fuel production (being able to run on a host of fuels,including natural gas and bio-fuels), is nothing short of frustrating. Perhaps it was just waiting for the day when technology could overcome its numerous niggling problems. > > The consortium led by Bladon Jets hopes that its research into the use of gas turbine technology in electric and hybrid vehicles (which offer both high torque at low revs and improved efficiency) could realize that potential [Capstone](http://www.greencarcongress.com/2005/09/capstone_microt.html) and an Israeli company [ETVM](http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009/04/ietvm-20090425.html) - are developing the concept too. They are beginning to be used as range extenders for plug-in hybrid electric [buses](http://www.allbusiness.com/energy-utilities/oil-gas-industry-oil-processing-products/6084541-1.html). ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643/260 "2010-10-28T17:56:41Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > The Focus sold with automatic in America, the 2.0L gas one, [gets](http://www.fordvehicles.com/cars/focussedan/specifications/engine/) “25 City/34 Hwy” on the American cycle and 35.3 in the European combined cycle. The 2.0L diesel automatic sold in Europe gets 48.6 in the European combined cycle. It would get about 35 City/47 Hwy in the American cycle, about 38% better mileage than the gas model. NOT 60. You’re being disingenuous in your argument. The gas mileage for the high mileage manual focus is 62 mpg. You’re trying to dilute the argument with an automatic transmission and then substituting different engines to make a point. If the European focus is brought to the US it would get 62 mpg with a manual and 60 mpg with an automatic. It wouldn’t suffer the winter efficiency losses the Volt has shown (30%). It wouldn’t lose the bulk of it’s efficiency after 40 miles. The car would be half the cost of a Volt. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chevrolet-volt/557643.md?page=14)