Teardown reveals Chevy Volt's electronic secrets

[ecomodded]

The hydrogen car may not be done in yet, here's a link to a fleet of suv's being used in Hawaii with implications of a wider application.
Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles join the Army - Feb. 23, 2012

[SoobieOut]

Less than 7500 lines of code in the computer that ran Apollo 11.

Here's the open source site if you want to check for yourself.

Apollo 11 code goes

That's back when programmers were meaner and cleaner!

[user removed]

Pop started working with computers in 1961. They managed to process all of the USAF's Tactical Air Command payroll with 4k memory. Just like people who waste energy because it's cheap. People waste computing power because it's cheap. Apollo could get to the Moon on a limited amount of computational capacity because weight and space was at a super premium, with price secondary. We used to develop technology in the space program that made us leaders in many fields.

No we just suck, ignore new tech and wait for our dole, like the citizens of Rome waiting for their bread.

regards
Mech

[California98Civic]

Originally Posted by Ptero

Even more disturbing for EV advocates is recent evidence that hybrid and electric vehicle first adopters are returning to conventional gasoline cars in droves.

What specifically is the evidence for that? Where did that tidbit come from?

Originally Posted by Ptero

As Thomas L. Friedman said, "We are going to become a second-rate nation." Good luck.

I don't know what he means by "second-rate" since there are no rating agencies for nations, but I don't consider Friedman to be on par with the Oracle of Delphi, anyway.

I like the Volt. But I don't consider EVs or anything else to be the replacement for the ICE. Seems likely they are part of an emerging patchwork of automobile transportation systems. But I don't have "Oracle" credentials, either!

[tjts1]

Originally Posted by Old Mechanic

Pop started working with computers in 1961. They managed to process all of the USAF's Tactical Air Command payroll with 4k memory. Just like people who waste energy because it's cheap. People waste computing power because it's cheap. Apollo could get to the Moon on a limited amount of computational capacity because weight and space was at a super premium, with price secondary. We used to develop technology in the space program that made us leaders in many fields.

No we just suck, ignore new tech and wait for our dole, like the citizens of Rome waiting for their bread.

regards
Mech

Please stop wasting computer memory with this kind of post.

[Stan]

Originally Posted by California98Civic

What specifically is the evidence for that? Where did that tidbit come from?

He's probably thinking of the information in this article, which appeared last month in the LA Times (and probably other sources, as well).

Of course, as it says in the article, many of those who trade in a hybrid do so on full-electric cars. What it doesn't say is that none of them do so on hydrogen cars. Oops!

[California98Civic]

Originally Posted by Stan

Of course, as it says in the article, many of those who trade in a hybrid do so on full-electric cars.

Where does the article say this? I don't see it. Nor is the article specifically about first adopters. And it does not even mention the Volt. What it does do is specifically mention online cross-shopping data suggesting people shop simultaneously for conventional and alternative drivetrain vehicles. But the reasons for the choices made are sketchy, apparently, according to Edmunds.com.

Originally Posted by Stan

What it doesn't say is that none of them do so on hydrogen cars. Oops!

I'm not sure what you're trying to say. That hydrogen car-buyers never switch to another drivetrain? If so, what's the citation for that?

[Stan]

Originally Posted by Old Mechanic

People waste computing power because it's cheap.

Well, of course we do. The silver lining in this statement is that if we did NOT waste computer memory, the consumer-financed revolution that produced desktops, laptops and now smart phones would never have happened. And the closest you'd ever get to posting to a forum like this would be to type out assembler code on your TRS-80 to appear on a BBS to be downloaded at 300 baud.

[Stan]

Originally Posted by California98Civic

Where does the article say this?

Down where is says, "One reason is that about 17,000 people purchased electric cars last year, and other data shows that many of those were trading in a hybrid vehicle."

I'm not sure what you're trying to say. That hydrogen car-buyers never switch to another drivetrain? If so, what's the citation for that?

Really? You're asking me this after reading Ptero's wall-of-text rant about how much he loves hydrogen-powered cars? Okay, it's Saturday and everybody gets to sleep in and get a slow start, so I'll expand on my comments:

I was making a joke along the lines of, "Yeah, folks are trading their hybrids in on non-hybrids, but NONE of the cars they're trading for are hydrogen powered."

Hey, humor is not my strongest suit!

[mechman600]

Originally Posted by Ptero

I am an advocate of hydrogen cars. Hydrogen cars were essentially perfected (by GM and others) at the end of the last presidential administration. But hydrogen cars required a renewable energy source and a nationwide distribution network which would have worked like an Apollo program to bootstrap our nation into actual technology leadership again. Despite their blatant posturing, Republicans fought renewable infrastructure, gave little support to a hydrogen distribution network, and sold their political influence to international oil companies who realized vast profitability by using the military and State Dept to enable their seizing of resources overseas and transferring associated costs to incredibly gullible taxpayers.

Now the Democrats have stupidly trashed billions of dollars of taxpayer investment in automotive hydrogen research in favor of the dead end of non-refuelable batteries. The $45,000 Chevy Volt is a perfect example. GM does not dare allow the battery pack to charge or discharge beyond 60%. An incredibly complex electronic control system attempts to control charge and discharge cycles of 288 cells which the scientific literature states can burst into flames if overcharged or overheated.

Regardless of their sophistication, electric cars remain and will always remain city cars. Long-range EVs are up against physics limits with lithium-based technology. Future experiments with advanced battery types are driven by industry lobbyists, not promising science. Improvements will be incremental and inconsequential. And the fast-charge vs. cell degradation issue is not going away.

Of course, the Chevy Volt is a plug-in hybrid. But after a few dozen miles, without a recharge it is just a gasoline car lugging around a heavy battery as I zip by in my $14,000 50-mpg Smart Car. Below a few dozen miles, it can be an electric car but don't run a pay-back analysis unless you are a masochist.

Battery advocates ignore the well-to-wheels baseline. Lithium comes mainly from Peru. It is mined with diesel fuel. It is shipped to LG South Korea with bunker fuel (the dirtiest liquid fuel), assembled into cells, then shipped to Detroit with bunker fuel where the cells are assembled into the heavily subsidized $8000 battery packs. A recent study by EV skeptics claims that each Volt is actually subsidized to the tune of over $200,000 when component research, government cost-share or grants, and well-to-wheels analyses are included.

Then there is the issue that electric cars essentially run on coal. Yes, without aggressive government involvement in expansion of a renewable national infrastructure, neither EVs or H2 make sense. Hydrogen cars share similar prototype-to-market cost issues but consumers could drive them anywhere. And fuel cells had demonstrated significant year-on-year cost reductions. Hydrogen cars were a product targeted for the general automotive market. Electric cars, aside from city cars (which I have no argument with, if one can afford two cars), are merely toys. No one is going to choose a car that you have to wait for more than a few minutes to fuel. No one with only one car will choose an EV. EVs are targeted at a strange market segment: rich people willing to fork out huge amounts of money for a second car they can't drive to see Grandma. Even more disturbing for EV advocates is recent evidence that hybrid and electric vehicle first adopters are returning to conventional gasoline cars in droves.

We have lost the dream. It's over. Choosing EVs over hydrogen cars, watching the Space Shuttle go to the Smithsonian when we have a Space Station in orbit... We are done as a leader. As Thomas L. Friedman said, "We are going to become a second-rate nation." Good luck.

This is not a good website for tooting the hydrogen car's horn. Most people here are too intelligent for that. Even with coal power, electric cars are less harmful than ICE cars thanks to the magic of increased efficiency.

Where does your lovely hydrogen come from? From splitting natural gas molecules. Where does the waste CO2 go? Into the air. According to William H Kemp's "Zero Carbon Car: building the car the auto industry can't get right" (2007), making hydrogen to power a car produces six times the CO2 than if you powered the same car with gasoline in the first place.

The long tailpipe emissions of a hydrogen car are six times that of a gasoline car.

Electric is better in every respect.