General Motors: Who Needs Hybrids?

If concept cars are any indication, then General Motors Corp. is ahead of its rivals in the race to build hydrogen-powered vehicles. Exhibit A: The company's Hy-wire, a $5 million experimental car that powers down the highway by converting hydrogen to electricity and emitting water vapor exhaust. GM execs say the Hy-wire is a glimpse of what it's planning for hydrogen cars, which they hope will be street-ready in small numbers by 2010. Meantime, some of the concept car's electronic wizardry is already showing up in current models.

The most immediate difference between the Hy-wire and a conventional car is the lack of an engine or transmission. Instead, an electric motor powered by the hydrogen fuel cells turns the front wheels. With the bulky drivetrain gone, engineers were able to design an open cockpit with tons of legroom and cargo space, not to mention a windscreen that practically reaches the floorboards. That allows the driver to see the road directly ahead.

The other differences: There are no pedals or steering wheel. Instead, the driver navigates through traffic with hand controls like those found on an aircraft. To accelerate, he twists a handgrip; to brake, he squeezes. A computer relays those signals to the brakes, motor, and steering system. Such electronics suck a lot of juice -- power that the beefy hydrogen cells ably supply. But versions of the computer-aided accelerator are already in the Chevrolet Corvette and Cadillac XLR roadster, though with a conventional gas pedal.

What's so great about computer-aided controls? For starters, they respond faster than traditional controls do. Moreover, if the car starts to skid, the onboard brain automatically adjusts direction. Such stability controls could be a big advance, though they won't be ready for prime time for a while, says Nick Zielinski, GM's director of vehicle and technology integration.

Where GM has really excelled is in cramming all that technology into one roomy car. The fuel cells, hydrogen tanks, batteries and computer controls have been packed into an 11-inch-thick chassis. In most fuel cell concept cars, the storage tanks take up too much of the cargo space. The design of the chassis, which resembles a giant skateboard, solves that problem.

It will be years before GM masters the technology. For now, the Hy-wire's range is a scant 80 miles. Moreover, its fuel cells cost an estimated $50,000 a vehicle, 10 times what any company could afford in a production car. Still, it's a tantalizing start.

By David Welch in Detroit

http://www.businessweek.com/print/premium/content/03_43/b3855178_mz029.htm?mz

OCTOBER 27, 2003

EDITORIALS

It's Hybrid Time. Where's Detroit?

The U.S. needs to cut its dependence on Mideast oil. There is hybrid-engine technology that can help do just that. And there are consumers who want to buy cars powered by those engines. But the only carmakers willing to manufacture them are Japanese: Toyota ( TM ) and Honda ( HMC ). Ford ( F) has delayed the launch of its first hybrid-powered vehicle, the Escape SUV, until 2004, while Toyota is about to sell its next-generation hybrid, the new Prius sedan. It's time for Detroit to get on the stick.

The Big Three should stop spinning dreams of hydrogen-powered autos and embrace the hybrid gas-and-electric engine that can save fuel now. Detroit is correct in saying that hybrids don't yet make money: The technology adds about $3,000 to the price of every car. But greater volume will lower that cost, and there are clear signs that consumers want such cars. The Prius, which goes on sale in November, is already sold out at many dealerships. The sedan is the same size and price as a midsize Toyota Camry and gets about twice the mileage, 55 miles per gallon. J.D. Power & Associates Inc. believes demand could produce hybrid sales of 500,000 vehicles in five years.

Washington could compress that time line. To expand volume and drop the cost, the government could order hybrids for its own huge fleet of cars and trucks. The military could develop hybrids for its Humvees and armored vehicles. Washington already offers a $2,000 tax deduction to purchasers of hybrid cars. Turning that deduction into a tax credit would encourage corporate fleet owners to buy hybrids. Consumers would get a bigger tax break, too. Hybrid engines would allow Detroit to sell the big SUVs and vans that many Americans prefer while still increasing mileage. The proposed energy bill before Congress is mostly devoid of measures to conserve energy and raise mileage. By promoting hybrids, the legislation could do both.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/21/business/21AUTO.html

October 21, 2003

By DANNY HAKIM

ETROIT, Oct. 20 — King County, Wash., which includes Seattle, plans to buy 235 diesel hybrid buses for its transit system, one of the largest orders for city buses with hybrid technology.

The King County Metropolitan Transit Authority plans to spend about $47 million more for the hybrids than it would have for conventional diesel buses. County managers say they think they will save $27 million over 12 years by using less fuel and oil and reducing maintenance costs, though savings from new technologies can be hard to predict.

The buses will be on Seattle streets by May.

The hybrid engine systems, which supplement internal combustion with electric power, will be made by General Motors for buses built by New Flyer.

New York City has also been a supporter of diesel hybrid buses, with 10 on the road and plans for 125 more starting in December and an additional 200 by 2005. The New York buses are made by Orion Bus Industries, a branch of DaimlerChrysler , with hybrid technology from BAE Systems of Britain.

Toyota and Honda have dominated hybrid technology in cars, with sales numbering in the tens of thousands each year. Toyota plans to sell hundreds of thousands within a couple of years.

G.M. and the Ford Motor Company have said they will eventually sell hybrids. G.M.'s most ambitious hybrid will be a version of the Saturn Vue sport utility vehicle, but it will not be sold until 2005.

"The experience G.M. is gaining here is very viable beyond mass transit applications," Mr. Stephens said. "Read that to be cars and trucks."

Buses running on compressed natural gas have been a much more common environmentally friendly technology in the past. Seattle, however, considered using natural gas buses but the range was too short, said Jim Boon, the county's procurement manager. In addition, buses spend much of their time in a 1.3-mile tunnel, where the fire department prohibits the use of natural gas, he said.

"The fire department won't allow you to take it underground," Mr. Boon said, because of the risk of a leak.

Mr. Boon said diesel hybrids, with a combination of low sulfur fuel and emissions filters, would burn as cleanly as natural gas.

The county expects to save 800,000 gallons of fuel and 39,000 quarts of engine oil each year. Mr. Stephens said the hybrid system would reduce emissions of smog-forming pollutants by 60 percent to 90 percent.

Home  >  Lifestyle  >  Vehicles

Vehicle of the Week

The World's Fastest Electric Car

Dan Lienert

AC Propulsion 's tzero roadster is a reason to not give up on the electric vehicle. The tzero does 0 to 60 mph in 3.6 seconds, according to the company, and it does it on only 200 horsepower because of its light weight and torque.

The San Dimas, Calif.-based company says the tzero (pronounced "tee-zero," not "chair-o") has compared favorably in acceleration tests to Corvettes ,Porsche 911s --and even a Ferrari F355 , which it claims to have "out-accelerated...by eight car lengths" in one-eighth-mile drag races. If for nothing else, the tzero's $220,000 sticker price puts it in exotic-car territory.

The low weight helps make the tzero so quick, but its torque--the turning force that pulls it off the line--is just as important, if not more. Conventional internal combustion engines need to rev to a certain rate before reaching their peak torque, but the tzero's torque peaks instantly, with 183 ft-lbs. available from 0 to 5,000 rpm.

Of course, AC Propulsion, a specialist in electric vehicles, must realize that demand for electric cars has toppled. Ford Motor (nyse: F-news -people ) recently announced plans to discontinue the electric version of its Ranger pickup, and hybrids, diesels and hydrogen cars now seem like more viable alternatives to electric cars, whose customers have complained about their golf-cart powerplant noise and limited range.

Indeed, the tzero can only go 280 to 300 miles at 60 mph without recharging--even if it can recharge on any 120- or 240-V power socket. And if you accelerate it like an Italian exotic, or even take it on a hilly route, that range can decrease by up to about 20%.

The range has actually increased over time. AC Propulsion had made the tzero with lead-acid batteries since 1997, but this year released a revamped version with the kind of lithium-ion batteries used in laptop computers. The range, which increased to 280 to 300 miles from 100 miles per charge, now compares well with fuel cell cars.

But even if AC Propulsion claims the vehicle has efficiency equivalent to 70 mpg (and zero emissions), the tzero is, to a certain extent, an exercise in automotive fantasy. Its Spartan interior looks like a science project, in which most of the controls apart from the CD player are gadgets to monitor the battery and tiny 110-lb. motor. Drivers get an analog current meter, voltmeter, altimeter, and battery-voltage display with LED lights that measures temperature and charging limits.

Remember, though, this is more of an experiment than a traditionally appointed car. The tzero does not come with air-conditioning. And to lower its top and windows, you detach them and store them in the trunk. Talk about alternative energy expenditures.

Alan Cocconi , founder and president of AC Propulsion, designed and built the controller for General Motors '(nyse: GM -news -people ) original electric vehicle concept, the Impact , which the company introduced at the Los Angeles auto show in 1990. The Impact evolved into the EV-1 , GM's now-famous first electric vehicle that went into production.

NY Times editorial

[Oct 15, 2003]

The actor who owns Hummers that average 10 miles to the gallon has now been elected governor of a state that has long provided national leadership on environmental issues, especially those like clean air and more fuel-efficient automobiles. Can Arnold Schwarzenegger and California's environmental impulses coexist?

The prospects are better than one may have thought. Much will depend on the people he chooses for key posts, not least the chairmanship of the powerful California Air Resources Board, whose mandates over the years have driven Detroit to make cleaner cars and the refiners to make cleaner fuels. As with all politicians, much will also depend on whether he means what he says and acts on it. Still, his comments and campaign literature not only hearten conservationists but put him sharply at odds with the Bush administration.

The biggest difference is on global warming, an issue the administration has been slighting for three years. A new California law will require automakers to meet lower targets for emissions of carbon dioxide, the main global-warming gas. The automobile industry, joined by the White House, complains that the law is a backdoor way of increasing fuel economy, historically a federal prerogative. Mr. Schwarzenegger has embraced the new law and says he will defend it against all legal challenges.

Meanwhile, he promises that by 2020 one-third of California's power will be generated by renewable sources like wind and solar power. The Bush administration, in contrast, has been lobbying fiercely against a much weaker provision contained in the energy bill now before Congress. Mr. Schwarzenegger also says he is not at all pleased with the administration's recent efforts to weaken the Clean Air Act.

The differences on issues other than clean air are equally pronounced. Mr. Bush supports measures that could lead to oil exploration and drilling in sensitive coastal areas. Mr. Schwarzenegger is firmly opposed. The administration would greatly increase logging in California's Sierra Nevada, thereby upending a carefully drafted agreement to balance the needs of nature and commerce. The governor-elect would leave the deal undisturbed.

There have been missteps. A sloppy answer left the impression that Mr. Schwarzenegger would abolish California's Environmental Protection Agency to eliminate bureaucratic duplication. This was quickly corrected. Parts of his agenda are naïve. Like Mr. Bush, he seems fixated on hydrogen as the fuel of the future. He may well be right over the long term, but his vision of a network of hydrogen fueling stations along California's highways by 2010 is unrealistic, if not utopian. He is not above gimmickry, promising to retrofit his Hummers with hydrogen, something only a Hollywood star could afford. The leader of his transition team, Representative David Dreier, has a dismal voting record on environmental issues.

So far, however, there is much to like, and, unlike Mr. Bush, Mr. Schwarzenegger comes to office unbeholden to corporate interests. It will be intriguing to see how this plays out, especially with the governor's fellow Republicans in Washington.

By Mark Grossi

The Fresno Bee

Published 10/13/03 05:00:29

Here's a tale of two cities with populations under 50,000 that lead the San Joaquin Valley in cleaning up air pollution from their buses, dump trucks, street sweepers and other fleet vehicles.

Madera and Tulare, with a combined population of less than 25% of Fresno's population, have more than 100 clean-fuel vehicles between them -- about 25% of their respective fleets. Most Valley cities nudge 10% at most.

But, with air quality topping Valley political agendas and opinion polls, many cities are following Madera and Tulare. The cleanup message is becoming more urgent.

The Valley is the second-worst place in the country for dirty air. And when federal smog standards change in the next few years, the Valley will become the worst.

That prospect makes city leaders look hard at cleaning up older diesels, which are among the main contributors to the dirty air.

Madera and Tulare lean on natural-gas power, although clean, "alternative fuels" include such options as all-electric, propane, ethanol, biodiesel, chemically altered diesel, hybrid-electric and, in the future, hydrogen.

Tulare has about 70 natural-gas vehicles, including 26 police cruisers, and a $2 million natural-gas fueling station. Madera, with 38 natural-gas vehicles, won a national award this month from the Natural Gas Vehicle Coalition.

"We're proud of it," said Madera City Council Member Sam Armentrout, who also sits on the governing board for the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. "Whenever it makes sense for the city to buy these vehicles, you can be sure we will."

Armentrout's mantra sounds like an echo coming from Tulare.

"If it's a street sweeper, garbage truck, you name it, any vehicle available in an alternative fuel, we buy it," says Lew Nelson, assistant public works director in Tulare. "We've been doing it for years."

Though Tulare jumped into alternative-fuel vehicles six years ago, ahead of most cities, Madera is catching up. The Madera fleet will add $450,000 worth of natural-gas vehicles this year, including two more street sweepers.

"We're very conscious of our opportunities to buy alternative-fuel vehicles," said Armentrout.

The cities of Fresno, Clovis, Bakersfield and Lodi are on the same page. They are also gradually phasing out gasoline- and diesel-powered transit buses, trucks and cars.

Fresno, the Valley's largest city, will soon replace 33 diesel garbage trucks with natural gas. The city fleet has 1,800 vehicles, which already include 49 alternative-fuel vehicles. Fresno's 102-bus transit fleet has 25 natural-gas buses and two hybrid diesel-electric buses.

Bakersfield, which has been using natural-gas vehicles for five years, has 80 alternative-fuel vehicles and plans to purchase 11 more this year. The city opened a new natural-gas fueling station in May.

This clean-air groundswell in the Valley mirrors a national campaign that has been debated among diesel manufacturers, environmentalists and lawmakers for many years.

Diesel manufacturers say their engines will be as clean as any on the road in the next several years. Environmentalists argue it makes more sense to shift investment into the alternative fuels and phase out diesel.

When Madera caught this national wave in the last few years, there was some anxiety about choosing to eliminate diesel. David Chumley, Madera director of public works, said people were skeptical of natural-gas technology, not knowing the track record for such engines.

"But it has proven to be reliable," he said. "It works fine. We buy dump trucks, street sweepers, vans and 1-ton pickups. Our next purchase will probably include a truck with an aerial bucket lift system."

Tulare officials said breakdowns and maintenance costs have been similar to diesel and gasoline vehicles, but natural-gas vehicles require fewer oil changes.

Natural gas has disadvantages as well. Vehicles don't go as far on a full tank with natural gas as they do with diesel and gasoline. When it's time to fill up, fuel is not available everywhere.

And a natural-gas vehicle is not a cheap alternative. A natural-gas bus can cost $190,000, about $50,000 more than the diesel version.

Cities must pursue government grant programs, both federal and state, to make up the difference. Since 1997, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District has provided $2.7 million to help replace older, polluting vehicles with cleaner ones.

The biggest chunk of the money -- $1.25 million -- has gone to Fresno.

"We're chasing these grants as much as possible," said Bruce Rudd, Fresno transit general manager.

The money is well-spent, according to air district officials. The new engines, which are overwhelmingly natural-gas powered, will remove more than 600 tons of smog-forming pollution during their lifetimes, said Todd DeYoung, senior air quality planner.

"It's a cost-effective way to reduce pollution," DeYoung said. "We're very pleased to see more and more cities investing in alternative fuels. The smaller cities are recognizing the benefit."

The alternative fuels aren't the only ones cleaning up the air, said Fresno fleet manager John Hunt. He said many new and future gasoline and diesel engines are much cleaner than they were even three years ago.

He said Fresno owns 59 "ultra low-emitting vehicles," gasoline-powered cars that emit substantially lower amounts of smog-making chemicals than most new vehicles.

Fresno's natural-gas replacement program is aimed mainly at the garbage truck fleet, Hunt said. He also said the city uses ultra-low sulfur diesel and installs devices to cut down particle pollution.

"We use 1 million gallons of diesel each year," Hunt said. "Seventy-five percent goes to refuse trucks. The heavy-duty diesel engines is where you're going to get the biggest bang for your buck in pollution reduction."

In the smaller cities with more modest fleets, such as Madera and Tulare, the push is much broader, aiming at vehicles of all shapes and sizes.

Tulare started switching to natural-gas vehicles when Diane Mathis, a former Tulare City Council member, became intrigued with the idea. Other city leaders joined in.

Now Tulare has a fueling station, dispensing compressed and liquefied natural gas. It provides an opportunity for natural-gas-powered cars and trucks to fill up along Highway 99 between Los Angeles and Sacramento.

The city's 70 clean-air vehicles rival the number of similar vehicles in Fresno, a city 10 times larger.

"We've got 60% of our police force driving natural-gas cars," said public works official Nelson of Tulare. "It makes sense. They're cleaner engines and they last longer."

The reporter can be reached at mgrossi@fresnobee.com or 441-6316.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61508-2003Oct21.html

The Electric-Car Slide

Automakers Have Pulled the Plug on Battery Power

By Greg Schneider

Washington Post Staff Writer

Wednesday, October 22, 2003; Page E01

Steven Dibner drove the thinking man's hot rod. Instead of roaring with power and guzzling gas, his car whispered along on rechargeable batteries.

But make no mistake, Dibner's all-electric GM coupe could zoom away from a stoplight with drag-strip speed. He was saving money on fuel, causing no pollution and "driving the coolest, sexiest, most interesting car on the road," said Dibner, a bassoonist with the San Francisco Symphony.

General Motors Corp. built 1,100 of the two-seater EV1s beginning in 1997, pushing electric-car technology further than it had ever gone in a mass-produced vehicle. But to the dismay of Dibner and other alternative-fuel advocates, GM has canceled the program and is confiscating all the cars.

The auto industry's electric-car movement -- which gained momentum in the 1990s thanks to a push by California regulators -- is now all but dead. GM and other major automakers are abandoning their efforts to produce a battery-powered car for the mass market.

Instead, they are focusing on hybrid vehicles that boost the mileage of a gasoline engine with the use of some electric power. Ultimately, the industry hopes -- perhaps decades from now -- to offer vehicles powered by hydrogen fuel cells, a fledgling auto technology that delivers power by converting hydrogen to water.

The death knell for pure electric cars sounded this summer when California's regulators, responding to industry arguments that battery power wasn't economically feasible, backed away from stringent antipollution rules that had accelerated the vehicles' development. Toyota Motor Corp., Honda Motor Co., Nissan Motor Co., Ford Motor Co. and DaimlerChrysler AG all have canceled electric-car programs this year.

GM is now taking back EV1s as their leases run out. Battery-power enthusiasts staged a mock funeral for their cars in July in a Hollywood cemetery, complete with a hearse and bagpipes.

Dozens of EV1 drivers have sent GM $500 checks to beg for more time, but the company returned their money. About 100 of the cars will go to the state of New York for research on battery performance in cold weather. A few others are going to museums, and the rest of the EV1 fleet will be scavenged for parts or scrapped.

Automakers say that electric vehicles cost too much to manufacture and that batteries will never provide as much driving range as a full tank of gas. The internal-combustion engine simply has a lock on American driving habits -- it is the rare car buyer, the reasoning goes, who will accept having to tether a vehicle to a power outlet for hours to refuel it when a quick visit to a gas pump is still possible.

But scientists who have spent careers working on batteries say the auto industry is retreating just as progress in battery technology is finally pushing toward a breakthrough. Battery life is extending rapidly, and electric cars' performance and styling have edged ever closer to their gas cousins. The mass market "could have battery-powered cars in five years or less," said Tom Gage, president of AC Propulsion Inc., a California company developing technology for electric cars.

What's needed, Gage said, is a commitment from just one major corporation to use its might to shove past the last few hurdles, such as manufacturing new batteries in big enough numbers to bring down their cost.

Battery supporters, whose ranks include major names from industry and science, insist that the promise of electric will yet bear fruit -- in future hybrid vehicles that rely more on electricity than gasoline, in commercial uses such as fleets of delivery vans, and ultimately in a return to mass-market battery-powered cars.

"Some of us still believe in electric drive and pure battery power," said Robert C. Stempel, the former GM chairman and chief executive who helped start the EV1 program. Forced out in the early 1990s, Stempel now runs a company that develops batteries and alternative automotive technology.

"What goes around comes around," he said. "We'll see where they wind up eventually."

Electric cars are nothing new. In the late 1800s, electricity vied with steam and internal combustion for the top spot in new automotive technology. Henry Ford's wife drove electric cars, and the clean, quiet vehicles were cast as products for genteel society women.

But there was a problem that even Thomas Edison couldn't solve, and it has continually held back electric-car development: Batteries haven't been able to compete with the driving range of a full tank of gas.

In the late 1980s, GM seemed to find a way around the problem when it teamed with a California company called AeroVironment Inc. to build a solar-powered electric car for a race in Australia. Founded by legendary inventor Paul MacCready, the man whose Gossamer Albatross and Gossamer Condor aircraft set records for human-powered flight, AeroVironment helped design a vehicle so aerodynamic and energy-efficient that it blew away the competition and made world headlines.

The partnership eventually led to the design for the EV1, which current GM research-and-development chief Larry Burns said "remains the world's most efficient production vehicle."

The EV1's rear wheels were set closer together than the front, creating a teardrop shape with little wind resistance. Combined with new lightweight materials and electronic controls, the design overcame battery limitations to result in a vehicle that could go roughly 100 miles on a two-to-four-hour charge.

It also had no gears to shift and delivered full power instantly, so the EV1 accelerated from zero to 60 mph in 8.5 seconds -- comparable to some Mustangs and performance cars. Test versions reached nearly 200 mph.

While the EV1 was being developed, the state of California was drawing up the nation's most stringent clean-air requirements -- requiring that 10 percent of new cars be emission-free by 2003. That pushed all automakers to develop electric vehicles, and quickly.

The backlash from the industry was ferocious. Car companies -- and the oil industry -- fought California's electric-car mandate "every way you can think of," said Jerry Martin, spokesman for the California Air Resources Board.

The firms lobbied state and federal lawmakers. They ran ads in newspapers and on television, warning consumers that the electric car mandate would drive up prices on all vehicles. Executives testified before the state board that battery technology wouldn't work. GM filed suit in 2001 to stop the state's plans and then embarked on a campaign of media interviews and statehouse lobbying to claim that electric cars wouldn't meet safety standards, wouldn't really contribute to clean air and had no viable consumer market.

"There is that whole collection of business interests that certainly don't want to see the gasoline-powered car disappear," said historian Charles Hyde, a professor at Wayne State University in Detroit. "I have a gut feeling that if electric cars really became more and more viable, you'd suddenly start to see gasoline prices really go down, to keep people in tow."

The political winds also turned against battery power. The Bush administration, where White House chief of staff Andrew H. Card Jr. is a former GM lobbyist, last year joined GM and Chrysler in a lawsuit against California's mandate. Also last year, the Department of Energy absorbed a battery research project into a bigger program to develop hydrogen fuel cells.

Even as they fought California, though, carmakers had to begin offering electric vehicles to meet the state's emissions standards. The programs were small -- Toyota leased or sold fewer than 300 RAV4 EVs, and Nissan leased just over 200 Altra EVs -- but drivers who sought them out often became big fans.

"My wife and I both loved that car. It was the best car we ever had, for sure," said former EV1 driver Tom Dowling, 66, a retired bank worker from Folsom, near Sacramento.

Dibner, the San Francisco bassoonist, said he waited four years to get his EV1, which GM only leased out, not wanting to sell something it considered experimental.

"It was there, it was basically there," he said of the EV1's technology. "The quick acceleration was a miracle, a marvel."

But GM executives viewed the cars as a liability. One industry official said each EV1 cost the company about $80,000, including research and development costs; leasing them out at $350 a month was a money-losing proposition.

Building the EV1 was "so prohibitively expensive that to continue to market them at that level was financially untenable," said Chris Preuss, GM spokesman

Gradually, California gave in to the industry's arguments. In April, the state's air quality board said it would accept large numbers of low-emission cars in place of a few with zero emissions. When GM and Chrysler dropped their lawsuit against the state's emissions policy in August, battery advocates saw the end of an era.

Burns, the GM research chief, said the company simply can't wait around for battery technology to improve. While there may be thousands of people who would be happy to overlook an EV1's limitations, he said, "you've got to get on a pathway where you can be thinking millions and tens of millions of vehicles."

Battery-powered cars may never reach that level of appeal because "gasoline is so very inexpensive," he said.

But MacCready, the AeroVironment scientist, said advances in a promising new area of battery technology could change that equation. Most electric cars have used ancient lead-acid batteries, and some progressed to nickel-metal hydride. The new frontier is lithium-ion batteries -- the kind that power cell phones and laptops.

"Lithium [ion batteries] will eventually be found to be the good substitute for gasoline-powered cars," MacCready said. Thanks to mass production in Asia, "the price is going down and the capability is going up, and researchers think that in another year they'll be up 50 percent from what they produce now in terms of energy and maybe double in two years," he said.

Lighter and more durable than their predecessors, lithium ion batteries have not yet been scaled up to car-battery size, but AC Propulsion has found a way around that. The San Dimas-based company, whose founder, Alan Cocconi, developed electric drive technology for the EV1, has built a car called the Tzero that's packed with 6,800 tiny cell phone batteries.

Designed for sports-car performance, the Tzero has a range greater than 300 miles, can go from zero to 60 mph in a neck-snapping 3.6 seconds -- and costs $220,000. It's not a mass-market vehicle, but its designers believe it's a start.

"Originally, we had thought that with the car companies involved we could develop technology they'd be interested in buying. Now that they've essentially abandoned the market, we're looking at the possibility of marketing electric vehicles in low volume," said Gage, the AC Propulsion president.

At the same time, the Northern Virginia-based New Generation Motors Corp. is poised to announce a contract to mass-produce electric vehicles in India. While those cars will have a range and speed suitable for the average Indian's 15-mile commute, the technology could scale up to an EV1-like level, said Eric Takamura, director of manufacturing and engineering at New Generation.

"I think the battery technology is already there, as far as being practical for a typical commuter car," Takamura said. "It is really more of a costing issue. Without people actually going out there and buying it, you can't get the volumes up enough to bring down the cost."
http://www.latimes.com/classified/automotive/highway1/la-hy-tokyo29oct29,1,6726433.story?coll=la-headlines-highway1-manual

RUMBLE SEAT DAN NEIL