Don, the $20,000 loss on each Prius must surely be a carry-over
figure from when they initially entered the market based upon
unknown limited production, along with hand-made production initially,
similar to GM.
If GM/Ovonic can reduce the cost of their EV battery packs to $4,000 at a production level of 20,000 per year, making EV's competitive with
gasoline in this country, why wouldn't this hold true in Japan, where
Toyota is currently Mfg'g 2,000 HEV's a month and receiving 3,000 orders per month? Remember, HEV's require considerably fewer NiMH
batteries on the one hand, while gasoline cost in Japan is far greater than the USA. And furthermore, whatever we can do, the Japanese can do it even better.
Toyota's rationale could be quite simple when they continually toss this $20,000 loss per vehicle figure around. It makes them look like they are giving their customers a big break in price, when in reality
customers are paying top dollar without knowing it.
The other part of this scenario is that auto mfg'rs are doing everything in their power politically and otherwise to delay mfg'fg
EV's. It is simply more profitable for the auto industry to continue
with internal combustion technology. Remember, forty percent of an auto dealers profits come from their service department, which in
turn reflects in higher parts profits to auto mfg'rs. Think if you will what we are talking about; maintenance free electric motors that do not require tuneups or repairs for 300,000 miles vs. your present vehicle with all of the hoses, belts, radiators, transmissions, complete exhaust systems and you begin to get the picture. In particular, when you have the support all the politicians receive from the petroleum industry who have nothing but money.
The statement made by the University of Michigan is totally understandable, when you take into account that the auto industry owns the University of Michigan.
It was the environmental problems in the world that initially brought
about the pursuit of alternative clean air vehicles, i.e., EV's. And,
I am completely convinced that the auto industry and the gov,t were
convinced beyond a shadow of doubt that no suitable battery technology
could ever be found much sooner than just prior to the world running out of petroleum some time way down the road. And, in particular since the auto mfg'g world could not conceive of anyone being capable of developing a new "advanced" battery other than themselves, with all of their billions of dollars they could afford to throw at a new "advanced" battery technology.
As they would say, who would of thunk it, that a little old, virtually unknown tiny little company, ECD, existed right in their shadows, that would develop the NiMH battery technology right under the noses of the The Big Three. But they did, much to the surprise of all.
So, now that the impossible suitable technology has been found in ECD's NiMH battery, the mfg'rs continue to bring up high costs as now holding up EV production. They will soon run out of excuses.
It will be interesting to see the market reaction to our first
GM/EV1 with our 80wh/kg NiMH batteries with a realistic 160-80 mile
driving range. This will be the first true test for EV technology.
Regards. |
