Subscribe: RSS
  • Biotechnology
  • Cities
  • Climate change
  • Credit crisis
  • currencies
  • Energy
  • Geopolitics
  • Globalization
  • Growth and productivity
  • Health Care
  • Innovation
  • Internet
  • job creation
  • marketing
  • Organization
  • Social Entrepreneurs
  • Social Innovation
Topic: Energy
Plug in and drive
23 February 2009
  • Comment on this articleComment
  • Print this articlePrint
  • Link to this articleLink to this
  • Bookmark and Share this article Share
  • Text size

One of the most pressing issues for consumers, the auto industry, and our entire economy is the question of which energy source will replace oil, and when the crossover will come. There is, however, no simple answer to that question. Consider for a moment the following facts:

  • The world economy consumes 1,000 barrels of oil per second.
  • Throughout the world, people rely almost exclusively on oil to fuel vehicles (in the United States, automotive transportation is 96 percent oil dependent).
  • The year 2007 marked the sixth consecutive year of record global auto sales.

Despite the current economic downturn, the automotive growth trend is expected to continue in the mid- and long-term. Today, there are 820 million vehicles around the world; by 2020, the number may exceed 1 billion.

What do these facts mean for the auto industry? That oil will be replaced— displaced might be a better way of putting it—by several different fuel sources over an extended period of time. As a business necessity and an obligation to society, we need to develop alternative means of propulsion, based on a range of fuel sources, to meet the world’s growing demand for automobiles. Even if we wanted to, we cannot continue to rely exclusively on oil going forward, for the simple reason that demand will outstrip supply.

At GM, we’re tackling this challenge in several ways. First, we’re making improvements to the internal-combustion engine and introducing more fuel-efficient vehicles every day. For 2009, we’ll offer an industry-leading 20 models in the United States that get 30 miles per gallon or better on the highway. Second, we are rapidly expanding the application of hybrid technology to our vehicles, improving fuel economy, and reducing gasoline consumption. GM currently has six hybrids on the road, with three more on the way by mid-2009.

Another important technology that could take a bigger bite out of oil consumption is biofuel. Today, there are more than 7 million flex-fuel vehicles (designed to run on gasoline, on 85 percent ethanol, or on any combination of the two) on the road in the United States. If all the flex-fuel vehicles currently in use today—together with the vehicles that US domestic automakers have committed to produce through 2020—were to run on biofuels, the country could save 29 billion gallons of gasoline annually, or 18 percent of projected petroleum consumption. No other technology can come close to having that kind of impact that soon.

But the technology that is generating the greatest interest is electrically driven vehicles. At GM, we’re focused on two basic types: battery-driven vehicles and fuel cell vehicles.

The Chevrolet Volt, our extended-range electric vehicle, is expected to come to market by the end of 2010. Since its debut at the 2007 Detroit Auto Show, the Volt has created more excitement, both in the United States and around the world, than I’ve ever seen from a concept car. When running off its battery, which customers will be able to charge in a standard electrical outlet, the Volt will operate as a traditional battery-electric vehicle with a driving range of about 40 miles, which exceeds the average daily commute of the vast majority of Americans. For those needing to drive greater distances, a small engine kicks in to keep the car going for hundreds of miles, eliminating the “range anxiety” associated with battery-powered cars. Those who drive fewer than 40 miles a day may never have to buy a drop of gas again. That will go a long way toward displacing our reliance on oil.

When it comes to fuel-cell vehicles, we’ve been making steady progress since introducing our first concept car in 2002. Our latest, the Chevrolet Sequel, is powered by our fourth-generation fuel cell. We’re in the process of implementing the Sequel’s technology by building it into the Chevrolet Equinox SUV, which has a range of 150 to 200 miles, refuels in five to eight minutes, and is a full-fledged, electrically driven, zero-emissions vehicle. In 2008, we delivered 100 of these vehicles to customers in the United States, providing GM with the world’s largest fuel-cell market test and a laboratory for making fuel cells commercially viable.

So, what will replace oil, and when? The answer is that over time, many alternative fuels will—but only if there is a commitment from every sector of the US economy. To reduce oil consumption quickly, we need to reach a consensus on which technologies to pursue and how those technologies can best achieve critical mass in the marketplace. The auto industry will need to take the lead in developing the technologies and driving their costs down. But, if this is going to work, government must play a huge role, supporting the development of alternative fuel technologies and then accelerating their adoption through tax credits, fuel subsidies, and other consumer incentives. Most important, America needs a comprehensive, consistent, long-term national energy policy that addresses both energy demand and energy supply.

As we move into an extended period of increased global energy demand and heightened environmental awareness, GM is aiming to remove the automobile from the energy and environmental debate. Doing so will go a long way toward reducing our dependence on oil. This is a goal that we can accomplish much faster and sooner than many think.

Back to top

  • Comment on this articleComment
  • Print this articlePrint
  • Link to this articleLink to this
  • Bookmark and Share this article Share
  • Text size
Increase text size Decrease text size

Comment [1]

Agree? Disagree? Let us know what you think. Please include your full name with your comment. Comments may be edited.

  • I concur with Mr.Wagoner’s view in that a very sustainable energy policy is required to help automakers develop alternate propulsion technologies and bring them to market in numbers sufficient to generate positive cash flow – unstable gasoline prices kill the incentive that these tech. provide.

    Posted 26 March 2009, 15:19 by Kannan Subramanian

Commenting is closed for this article.

Send an e-mail to let us know how we can make our site better.

14 Apr 2010 · 05:40:40 AM GMT
Communitization of the Power Houses is a nice idea and definitely looks like the Go-to way. And if We go a step further democracy lane then electron democracy can be at the individual home basis as well. I always had an idea of a energy self suff...
—Chandrika Rathee

In response to Electron-democracy

06 Jan 2010 · 06:21:10 PM GMT
I think that there is a big issue of more and more renewable sources producing irregular power transmission. The power generated by renewable sources is not controllable, and at best vaguely predictable. A system that has renewable energy at its hear...
—Naresh Ranvah

In response to Electron-democracy

12 Dec 2009 · 04:24:18 AM GMT
I can’t wait until half the desert is covered in parabolic trough solar thermal fields.
—Eric Kline

In response to Electron-democracy

03 Dec 2009 · 07:58:43 PM GMT
Since fossil fuel prices are going to be staggering high, especially after peak-oil, there would be a good reason to use those profits to invest in other durable energy sources. Either we have to nationalize the oil companies, or seriously taxate th...
—Rob Heusdens

In response to The end of the oil age

14 Jul 2009 · 01:57:03 AM GMT
The idea of a more democratized grid to be able to respond more quickly to the variations in demand for energy sounds like a viable option, but I belief that to be feasible only under the conditions of a more centralized control over the grid. In ...
—Henk Perdok

In response to Electron-democracy

20 May 2009 · 04:04:02 PM GMT
I really appreciate the thinking beyond oil. In Italy, where I live, the nostalgic desire of nucelar power stations has reached the irresponsible political level. But I’m asking: Does it make any sense to invest 10 billions Euros and 10 years t...
—Alex Colombo

In response to The carbon-free opportunity