Is GM Building the Volt Purely for Political Reasons?

23 Responses to “Is GM Building the Volt Purely for Political Reasons?”

1. 
   
   

   Matt986 Says:
   October 13th, 2007 at 10:41 am

   I think the Volt will do several things for GM, one of which WOULD be to satisfy political pressure to be more ‘green’.

   It will also alter the image of GM to a more environmentally conscious company.

   I also think the author is right, the Volt will likely not be profitable for GM for a while. They have to ramp up production, ensure a quality product and get them out in large numbers to bring the cost of components down (motors, controllers, battery packs).

   But, if the Volt does what GM wants it to, I believe they will sell very well, and could provide a platform upon which GM could regrow itself.  
   
   (Quote)

2. 
   
   

   kent beuchert Says:
   October 13th, 2007 at 10:48 am

   Off the subject but big news :
   Chinese automaker BYD announces a hybrid plug-in with a 300 mile electric range, recharge speed of 10 minutes at a high powered station, iron batteries that “start
   to degrade at 2000 recharges.” Price of
   $19,000 and top speed of 120 MPH. Will produce 100,000 copies next year – 2008.
   Link :
   http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2007/10/12/066678.html  
   
   (Quote)

3. 
   
   

   Don Says:
   October 13th, 2007 at 12:59 pm

   Clearly GM has learned from Toyota’s experience that it may be necessary to take a loss in year one and two in order to become the market leader.

   Yes, it is politically motivated. And public perception motivated. But most of all it is about the company being viable for the next several decades. The intersection of the curves is unavoidable: gas costs will, with sputters, continue to go up; the cost of battery technology in both dollars and weight will go down. The pressure to provide less dependence on foreign oil and to decrease greenhouse emissions will continue to rise. The profitability point may be in 2011 or 2014, but they want to THE market dominator, both domestically and in all international markets, in PHEV and EV when it hits.

   As kent’s post shows: if GM doesn’t then Chinese companies will. Let alone Toyota. Be the leader or be history. That is their current choice.  
   
   (Quote)

4. 
   
   

   Lyle Says:
   October 13th, 2007 at 1:09 pm

   Interesting Kent, an “iron” battery.
   I wrote to BYD, right now I look at it with guarded skepticism, but we shall see.  
   
   (Quote)

5. 
   
   

   noel park Says:
   October 13th, 2007 at 1:30 pm

   I think that Don nailed it.

   Somebody said just the other day, here if I’m not mistaken – “Innovate or die”.

   As the price of gas ratchets up, the demand for large SUVs and trucks as personal transport/fashion statements will inevitably decline.

   Forget CAFE, Congress, and all that stuff. If you don’t have products the public wants to buy, you cease to exist.  
   
   (Quote)

6. 
   
   

   Steven B Says:
   October 13th, 2007 at 1:56 pm

   I agree that it is politically motivated. But as everyone else seems to agree, it’s also about market supremacy. GM cannot continue in the way it has for the past several years. It cannot be seen as a villain in corporate America, because if political power is exerted against it, then the entire company will be left to the wolves. It is will then just disappear. It must be seen as a solution and not a problem. Because if it is politically considered a problem, politics will lead to its demise. GM’s role in the death of the electric car at the beginning of the decade was its unwillingness to comply to public policy. And if that continues, GM will be kaput. But it is not continuing. Bob Lutz said that ending the EV1 project was the worse mistake of his career. And now they’re fixing. For a least a couple of years, unless something remarkable happens, the Volt will be a loss-leader for GM. Politics is the only thing that will make a business lose money. Therefore, it is politics that is driving GM development of the Volt now. In the future it will be economics.  
   
   (Quote)

7. 
   
   

   K J White Says:
   October 13th, 2007 at 2:46 pm

   I think, even if they are doing it for political reasons, GM is not saleing it hi-fuel burning trucks, because the price of gas is so high. So if this is a political move to sale more low-mpg trucks, then, what would it buy for GM. LOW-MPG = LOW-SALES, and the new CAFE laws, can’t change that fact. As we look around more and more people are looking for ways to spend less on gas. I beleive this new volt will help in that are even if some indiviuals wish to buy 1 big truck and 1 volt for everyday travel.  
   
   (Quote)

8. 
   
   

   Dave G Says:
   October 13th, 2007 at 4:51 pm

   It’s worth noting that Toyota is selling a lot of SUVs and Pickup Trucks in addition to their Prius. Because of this, Toyota has also joined the fight against CAFE legislation.

   Car companies can’t really change the preferences of American car buyers. They just build what people want.

   And if the federal government was really serious about fuel efficiency, they would increase the gas tax by $1/gallon or more – like they do in other countries, and stop posturing around CAFE standards.

   So the only real saving grace we have is a new and growing awareness of the problems associated with wasting energy (e.g. global warming, terrorism, etc.). This has caused a new energy conscience kind of status. If car companies can leverage this growing trend, they will be profitable.  
   
   (Quote)

9. 
   
   

   kent beuchert Says:
   October 13th, 2007 at 5:45 pm

   Lyle : that story, especially the 300 mile battery driving range, sounds fishy, but clearly that’s what the BYD article claims. 200 recharges (”before the battery starts to degrade” is unclear : do they mean there’s still a couple hundred recharges left?) and a 300 mile range, we’re talking about a battery pack lasting 600,000 miles (!!!). Unheard of. Even more reason to suspect the media
   lost something in the translation.  
   
   (Quote)

10. 
    
    

    kent beuchert Says:
    October 13th, 2007 at 6:28 pm

    In the world of schizophrenic corporations, one would have a hard time topping the WSJ. Not more than two months ago, when things were looking bleak
    for GM, the WSJ loudly proclaimed that GM’s problems was because “GM WAS NOT BUILDING CARS THAT ANYONE WANTED TO BUY.” Now they are saying that the problem is that “GM IS BUILDING VEHICLES THAT CUSTOMERS WANT
    TO BUY.” Namely, big SUVs and trucks. Actually, of course, they are building dual mode hybrid big SUVs and trucks and are upping mileage by 45%. Apparently those hybrids that the media was screaming for GM to build just 8 months ago, are suddenly no longer relevant.
    Is the WSJ dysfunctional, or simply unaware that GM will be building lots of dual modes? The WSJ is stuck in a
    technological time-warp, right along with Al Gore. Both falsely believe that conservation of energy is the route to low carbon. That’s totally absurd – the future will require more energy, not less. Just less carbon based energy. There is enough solar energy falling on just two counties in Arizona that can be collected using
    Ausra solar thermal technology to provide the entire world’s electrical needs, and with their solar thermal collection plants starting to commercialize, the idea
    that the world must use less energy becomes goofy, and those who hold it simply out of touch with modern energy technology. It obvious that the automobile will
    be electrified (at least electrified enough) in the not too distant future to virtually destroy the global crude
    oil market. Any regulations that imposes gas mileage limits are highly unlikely to accomplish anything significant before all-gasoline vehicles are rendered obsolete and can’t even be given away.
    And the VOLT isn’t the only, or even the first, plug-in hybrid GM will be offering, another fact avoided by the WSJ that would otherwise get in the way of their looney
    argument. The WSJ also seems unaware that there are two VOLT vehicles, not one, and there will be more to follow.
    Then there is this killer argument: Why would anyone care WHY GM is building the VOLT and Opel Flextreme? Does the WSJ really believe that the motives that led to the design and production of the VOLT and Opel Flextreme are of any importance? It’s apparently not good enough to be building the “correct” vehicles – now you must also
    build them for the correct motives, which, of course, are those that the WSJ approves of. Thus the WSJ claims to be able to read GM’s mind, but GM’s mind exists in the bodies of Wagoner and Lutz, both of whom clearly want to lead the way into the all-electric world of tomorrow.
    Now, do you think the WSJ ever considered Hitler’s motives in designing and building the Volkswagon when they recommended the car because of its superior economics?
    The WSJ uses the word schizophrenic, proving they don’t know any more about psychology than they do about the
    auto industry. The meant to say “multiple personality disorder” but are still mistaken – GM has flexibility – it can design and build a wide diversity of products. In a world surrounded by stock advisors, you’d think the WSJ would appreciate the value of a diversification.  
    
    (Quote)

11. 
    
    

    jbfalaska Says:
    October 13th, 2007 at 7:50 pm

    Looking forward to owning one. As an Air Force retiree, my fellow men and women spent far too much time in the desert defending gas for the tank. More than $1 trillion dollars fighting wars. This car will do a lot to help our country regain its vitality.  
    
    (Quote)

12. 
    
    

    jbfalaska Says:
    October 13th, 2007 at 7:53 pm

    My apologies – an ad logo for this car

    “American made, American driven, American fueled.” Thanks GM for allowing me to continue buying Union made great American cars. Please hurry this into production.  
    
    (Quote)

13. 
    
    

    Rashiid Amul Says:
    October 13th, 2007 at 8:13 pm

    Kent, that was an interesting read.
    600,000 miles, indeed. I wouldn’t trust anything the Chinese had to make.

    Frankly, I could care less what GM’s motivation is for building this car. I just want them to build it. I said before and I’ll say again, the CAFE is a waste of time when you have the hybrids on the verge of making a revolutionary change in transportation. Forget CAFE and let the change happen naturally.  
    
    (Quote)

14. 
    
    

    SRSCHRIER Says:
    October 13th, 2007 at 10:15 pm

    What about the Lionev.com company on the east coast of the U.S.? Their site advertises two new 100% plug-in EVs with a range of up to 400 miles with a cost of around $40,000.(US). Is this competition for the Volt?

    The recently announced BYD-F6 Chinese dual engine plug-in, said to have a range of 400 km (240 miles) on electricity alone and a top speed of 160 km/hr (96 mph) on battery power alone uses a new type of iron battery. A separate gas engine apparently can power the car also. Anyone care to guess if BYDs will appear in the U.S. anytime soon?  
    
    (Quote)

15. 
    
    

    Questions Says:
    October 13th, 2007 at 10:27 pm

    This wouldn’t be surprising.

    Our government is so large, unwieldy and meddlesome now that nobody is safe from it’s “fixing”.

    Too bad many voters do not see this for what it is.  
    
    (Quote)

16. 
    
    

    ug Says:
    October 14th, 2007 at 2:50 am

    “What about the Lionev.com company on the east coast of the U.S.? Their site advertises two new 100% plug-in EVs with a range of up to 400 miles with a cost of around $40,000.(US). Is this competition for the Volt?”

    No. They are merely conversions of existing cars and they are not series hybrids.  
    
    (Quote)

17. 
    
    

    omegaman66 Says:
    October 14th, 2007 at 8:43 am

    [quote]Rashiid Amul said I could care less what GM’s motivation is for building this car. I just want them to build it. I said before and I’ll say again, the CAFE is a waste of time when you have the hybrids on the verge of making a revolutionary change in transportation. Forget CAFE and let the change happen naturally. [/quote]

    Well said. But I want to say that GM is not building this car just for political reasons. I am not one to tout the smarts of upper management or politicians but do any of you really think that anyone at GM actually thinks the Volt is NOT the wave of the future?  
    
    (Quote)

18. 
    
    

    Estero Says:
    October 14th, 2007 at 9:34 am

    GM likely has several motivations for building the Volt, including the matter of “survival”.

    I agree with Rashiid Amul when he said “I could care less what GM’s motivation is for building this car. I just want them to build it.”  
    
    (Quote)

19. 
    
    

    noel park Says:
    October 14th, 2007 at 2:25 pm

    SRSCHRIER:

    According to this week’s Autoweek, BYD is going to have a display at the Detroit auto show. I wonder what they will be bringing?

    Several other Chinese car companies are scheduled to appear as well.

    I am as dubious as anyone about these claims, and the “iron” batteries. On the other hand, if they actually can do something like this, let alone with a price point of $19,000, it’s going to be game over in Detroit.  
    
    (Quote)

20. 
    
    

    Mark Bartosik Says:
    October 14th, 2007 at 9:00 pm

    RE post #14
    On their news page http://www.lionev.com/News_releases.html
    they state $400 per KWh

    For 16KWh that’s $6400!

    Also for $29K a new Hyundai accent EV with 200 mile range. I think a similar physical size to Volt, although a lot less sexy.

    Or for $33K a new Hyundai Tucson EV a 120 mile range (smallish SUV).

    That’s about $16K on top of the cost of the original ICE Hyundai vehicles.  
    
    (Quote)

21. 
    
    

    Jeff M Says:
    October 15th, 2007 at 11:00 am

    The Chinese BYD for $20k… remember that is for the Chinese market… I would imagine it would cost significantly more to meet our road safety standards.

    In any case, there are lots of EV makers out there world wide… I suggest folks see (though it appears to need updating) http://www.evworld.com/evguide.cfm and http://evfinder.com/full_sized_evs.htm  
    
    (Quote)

22. 
    
    

    John FK Says:
    October 17th, 2007 at 8:35 pm

    Politics involved. Don’t forget it was Bush who called the conference meeting with the auto execs a while back and let them know where he stood. Apparently, contrary to popular belief, he doesn’t support invading every oil producing country around in order to steal their oil for our SUVs and trucks.

    Those who think the Volt is being produced solely for political reasons and that the technology won’t be refined for trucks and SUVs have been giving too much weight to Hillary Clinton’s notion that there is a vast right wing conspiracy in this country.  
    
    (Quote)

23. 
    
    

    Deiene Russo Says:
    March 14th, 2009 at 1:01 pm

    Wow! Thank you! I always wanted to write in my site something like that. Can I take part of your post to my blog?  
    
    (Quote)

Leave a Reply