When do the patents on the GM-Impact Electric Car that they killed (see movie of same name) run out?

Question

I recently saw "Who Killed the Electric Car?" It is a complete and total outrage. Given the extreme probability that this Hydrogen Fuel Cell nonsense is all smoke and mirrors, and that by their vision at least we'll still be driving gas powered SUV's 15-20 years from now, when do the patents on the Impact run out so someone else can use them to make a 20 year old car that runs better than what they will probably have 15-20 years from now?

Answer 1

Patents are good for 20 years.  If you know the patent number you can find it on the patent office web site.  But, the electric car in question was totally unable to compete in the market so there is really no point in making one now or once the patents run out.

Answer 2

I remember the movie you are talking about.  I am not sure how long patents are valid.  I think GM shot itself in the foot for 'trashing' the EV1.  

JMMINNIC, I don't see how they, GM, could say it didn't hurt profitability.  Toyota has sold quite a few Prius in the US.  GM would have all but shut them out of the market if they had continued with their program.  On top of that, I think GM invested $1.2B into the EV1 program, to also include infrastructure.  Look at all the people that lost their jobs when the production line shut down.  It hurt their profits as well as their reputation.  

With GM's 'quest' to kill it's own product, it bought controlling interest in the company that invented the battery that would have expanded the range of the EV1.  I think they sold their interest to Texaco, Shell, Mobil,...just say an oil company.  Do you think the oil company would sell their controlling shares in a company that produces a product that would reduce oil/gas sales volumes?  I don't think so.  Hopefully there are other companies that produce an even better battery than the company that was 'paid off' so to speak.

My biggest question is why are only rail and minning using diesel-electric drive trains?  Big huge open pit minning dump trucks use a diesel-electric drive train.  Freight trains, the work horse of national commerce (along with the tractor trailer) uses a diesel engine that runs a generator.  The drive train or powered trucks are the electric motors that power the train.  We have all been held up by LONGGGGGG freight trains in the cities, or have seen them stretched for a mile or more in rural or open countryside....with only about 2 or 3 engines pulling well over 100,000 TONS.  Why can't a tractor trailer be designed to operate the same way?    

How come a small Briggs & Stratton engine connected to a generator can't be used to power big SUVs, HD pickup trucks, and delivery trucks? There are small gas powered generators on the market NOW that will produce enough electricity to power a home during power outages.  Better yet, a small diesel engine burning corn or vegetable oil.  Even if it were scaled down, a tractor trailer using the same 'means of movement' as a train would save thousands of gallons of fuel per year, capable of hauling more weight up steeper hills at a faster pace, and fewer moving parts.  Also, on the down hill side, just like a train, the power trucks/drive motors would moderate the speed (to an extent) and reduce brake wear.  A retarder may not even be needed anymore.  

Not many people realize that when the diesel engine was created, Mr. Diesel designed for and ran it on some type of organic oil (corn, vegetable, Canola, etc).  It's time to go back to the beginning.  

For a car, and even light trucks that don't have a high weight capacity using a gas engine, why isn't there a way to connect a light consumption electric motor to a high output generator?  The power from the generator would keep the batteries charged by producing more electricity than it consumes.  Even if current generators don't produce enough power to keep the batteries charged, it would definitely extend the range of the vehicle.  

If there are generators available that will fit into a car/light truck that can produce the same or more electricity than the car uses, then there wouldn't even be a need to plug the car in to recharge.  It would be self-sustaining.  This could't possibly be as complex as a combustion engine, or an automatic transmission.  

I remember seeing a show that put the spotlight on a group of college students that converted an SUV (Ford Explorer I do believe) to an EV.  They literally crammed as many students as they could into the SUV, and it STILL was able to smoke the tires.  This can't be done using the top of the line production engine for an SUV.  

As far as the hydrogen fuel cell car, I think that is to give us some sense of hope so we will shut up and wait on inventors to luck up.  All the while, a VERY good product called the EV1 has already blazed a trail and literally thrown away as though it was garbage.  GM threw a gold brick into the dumpster.

Answer 3

In the United States, under current patent law, for patents filed on or after June 8, 1995, the term of the patent is 20 years from the earliest claimed filing date. For patents filed prior to June 8, 1995, the term of patent is either 20 years from the earliest claimed filing date or 17 years from the issue date, whichever is longer. Extensions may also be had for various administrative delays. (See: Term of patent in the United States). The exact date of termination may be zealously litigated, especially where daily profits from a patent amount to millions of dollars, e.g., pharmaceuticals.

Answer 4

I don't think there are any specific patents that are overly usefull with them. Certainly not in the most important feature, the battery. They have better batteries already. Check out the Tesla.

Answer 5

According to GM Chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner, the worst decision of his tenure at GM was "axing the EV1 electric-car program and not putting the right resources into hybrids. It didn’t affect profitability, but it did affect image." According to the March 13, 2007 issue of Newsweek, "GM R&D chief Larry Burns . . . now wishes GM hadn't killed the plug-in hybrid EV1 prototype his engineers had on the road a decade ago: 'If we could turn back the hands of time,' says Burns, 'we could have had the Chevy Volt 10 years earlier.'

I think they plan on using the patents.

Look Here

http://www.chevrolet.com/electriccar/