Logically and empirically that is a rather vacuously self-serving announcement. It is blatantly circular since it justifies the claim that the electric car did not emerge with the observation that the electric car did not emerge. The circularity compounds itself with its refusal to ask WHY things happened this way; it thus willfully ignores the forces and hegemonic domination that a major corporate player like GM can (or at least could) impose upon the market under the ideological mask of market fundamentalism.

Toyota is already planning to undercut the Volt in the marketplace, and the Volt won’t be out for another 2 years.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/ news/ worldnews/ article-1221252/ Hurricane-Rick-Giant-storm-roaring-Mexicos-Pacific-coast-biggest-decade.html#ixzz0UMXxLP91

“Why are we attempting to replace gasoline driven cars by electricity driven cars? We assume that the electric cars will cause considerably less greenhouse gases that the oil driven cars. Hopefully that is the case, but we are not looking at the total picture.”

No, we don’t just assume that greenhouse gas will be reduced, it’s been studied extensively and the reductions are real and significant. This is true even if 100% of electricity is made from coal! If you care about global warming, then you know we need to get rid of the coal plants anyway. Already 9% of electricity is produced from wind. There are plenty of people looking at the big picture! You say on one hand that EVs will not be adopted by consumers, then argue that instead we need to increase the cost of gasoline with taxes. Why are these two things exclusive? Higher gasoline casts will increase EV adoption. Those two tactics are complementary, not exclusive at all!

“The batteries are high energy users, they are very costly since they use rare materials, (disposal problems?), are very complex to make, and it is also hard to achieve high safety levels with these complex batteries.”

Ok, lithium is not a rare material, does not have disposal problems, is not complex to make, and is not difficult to achieve high safety levels. Amazing how just about every word of that statement is wrong!

On the subject of battery weight, lithium batteries are much lighter than other types. Lithium is the third element after hydrogen and helium and is the lightest solid. While other batteries such as lead-acid and Ni-Cad have an energy to weight ratio of 40-60 Wh/kg (watt-hours/kilogram) the lithium-ion’s have a ratio of 100-200 Wh/kg so they’re 60%-90+% lighter for the same energy.

A few years back high purity silicon wafers were scarce with attendant shortages and price hikes. There were predictions by trade ‘experts’ that the ‘impending shortage’ would soon hamstring the Solar Build-Out. But as prices rose, new capacity was built. And someone invented a new process that makes solar grade silicon ingots much more cheaply. That is part of why First Solar’s manufacturing costs dropped below $1 watt.

Joe often points out that such changes are the sort we should expect. But unfortunately they are also ignored by many economic forecasts. Especially those which lock into projections based on a static market. Here is info on the new process -

RSI Silicon commences Solar Grade Silicon production – Reduced product price and energy use

Award winning RSI Silicon lowering the price of solar
Cost of plant – one tenth of present process. Building time – 1/2 to 1/3rd of present
V. nice Video interview (5 min)

Also, the 10/14 LATimes has a story on how concern over the availability of rare earths has caused Molycorp Minerals to begin reopening their mine in California.

So the Volt, because of its 16 kWh battery pack, would get the full $7,500 in subsidies, dramatically reducing its sticker price to $32,500. The Prius PHV would have approxiately (the kWh value does not have a linear relationship with miles of all-electric range (AER), and let’s assume similar weights) 4-6 kWh, meaning that the subsidy would range from about $2,500-$3,334. The question is then whether the larger cost of the battery pack of the Volt can be under $417/kWh so that a higher vehicle price per mile of AER does not occur. But the higher utility of being able to go further in all-electric mode will certainly be worth something to consumers.

The main point is that Stricker of Toyota is right to point out that there is a “sweet spot” for miles of AER and battery pack size. However, the subsidies (currently federal in the U.S., with state/provincial and municipal subsidies that may arrive in the future) must also be considered during this optimization.

I therefore disagree with Joe that the Volt’s battery pack is too big. I think that the jury is still out on the financial implications of this question, although I would stress that the well-to-wheel emissions of the Volt will be less (assuming the current distribution of sources in U.S. electricity production) than a PHV with a lower AER.