On January 12th 2007, when I started this site I couldn’t have predicted what these days nearly two years later would bring. Just as the Volt is finally coming very close to reality, GM is nearing the brink of collapse. What started out merely a a concept has now grown to become the most important last stand GM has to make.
The New York Times today published an article entitled “G.M.’s Latest Great Green Hope Is a Tall Order.”
The report describes the Volt fitfully as “straining under the weight of the entire company.” Despite the hopeful future the Volt represents, and the fact that its budget is about the only thing GM has left untouched, the car is derided in the following way by an obscure expert from Motorintelligence.com (never heard of it), “if you’re the affluent individual who wants to make a statement, it’s one thing, if you’re Joe the Commuter, you’re not going to spend $40,000 on an electric car. It’s insane.”
It is noted that despite GM’s overwhelming challenges, the Volt is not going to make any money for the company any time soon. This is true because the batteries are so expensive and the projected production volumes are so low, that even at $40,000 a piece, profitability is impossible until future generations when the battery costs come down.
David Friedman from the Union of Concerned Scientists said “the Volt is a risk worth taking: it’s just not a risk worth betting your whole future on.”
In the end, another point by our obscure expert may ring true:
“It isn’t what it’s going to do for G.M. tomorrow. It’s what it will do for G.M. for years to come. It’s an investment in the future.“
But, rather than be fatalistic I’d rather be creative. Since GM will be making its last stand in its application to Congress on or by December 2nd, lets try to think of ways the Volt can help save GM. Maybe we can publish a proposal.
Source (New York Times)
This entry was posted on Saturday, November 22nd, 2008 at 9:22 pm and is filed under Financial, Politics, Public Opinion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Nov 22nd, 2008 (9:28 pm)I would like to believe the Volt can save GM.
(A suspension of disbelief is required.)
Nov 22nd, 2008 (9:31 pm)No for sure
. GM needs emergency oxygen. Volt is like a long term medicine to get health back.
One Gap Question : Is there going to be open standards for the plugs ,I can imagine public pay parking with electric plugs – If they are not standard how pay parking works ?
10 plugs for 10 brands ?
Nov 22nd, 2008 (9:36 pm)Please Lets not turn over the entire auto industry to toyota and honda
GM is certainly as important to americas financial health as AIG
Nov 22nd, 2008 (9:38 pm)We hit $1 gas and all of a sudden “energy independence” becomes a thing of the past. This irritates me to no end. Capital Hill did not stress the importance of true alternatives to oil. I would gladly give up my cheap gas (today) for security of tomorrow.
On another note, if we had $6 gas, people would be screaming for this car. I tell you, GM, ask for deposits on Lyle’s waiting list in according order, and you will see demand.
Nov 22nd, 2008 (9:38 pm)Cheap oil killed the electric once before ,and it may just do it again.
Nov 22nd, 2008 (9:55 pm)Where does this $40,000 number keep coming from? Wagoner said the Volt will cost mid-to-high 30s, and that’s before the $7500 tax credit, so the final price will be about $30,000 after the credit.
In addition, Lutz said the price assumed replacing the battery for every car, but as battery testing progresses, it looks more like the battery will hold up OK. So GM could be profitable at this price, or even lower the price after sales volume ramps up.
Am I missing something here?
Nov 22nd, 2008 (10:00 pm)The Volt, or the same technology by another name, is essential to freedom and economic growth. It severs the link between a limited resource and transportation. The Malthusians use oil scarcity to play on people’s fears about population and energy. The Volt will help to destroy this absurd ideology.
The Volt increases energy security. The sheer number of ways there are to generate electricity significantly reduces any price volatility.
I believe it is in the national interest to ensure that this technology is developed. The bean counters can easily make the numbers work.
The batteries have the capacity
The engineers have the sagacity
To end our useless toil for oil
Deliver the Volt
Don’t let the momentum spoil
Nov 22nd, 2008 (10:12 pm)hi unni #2,
“… open standards for the plugs …”
______________________________
Hundreds of Volt should be on the street, in test mode, by winter 09′. Providing an opportunity for green interests and the consumer industry to improvise and gain sales energy.
One idea for business advertisement: “Shop here and charge your electric car”. The cost is minimal and greatly lifts a vendors image. I don’t have a problem with red, white, and blue lettering on the ad.
______________________________
Opportunity is fleeting. GM could easily have taken deposits on the Volt months ago. There is less chance of this happening now.
Advice for GM: Don’t just say you are “going to be transparent”, actually follow through on this statement. Why hasn’t a price been posted on the Volt? Many have done the math and the fuel tank looks to be 7 gallons, why not just say it? Why continue to say chapter 11 is ‘a fantasy’ and have no plan outlined?
Look what the Bush administration did with the power of patriotism. Patriotism provided the fuel for the oil war. When the Twin Towers collapsed, the entire world was “American” for a short while. Have you ever seen so many flags launch a strike and awe campaign?
GM…be transparent, be bold, be honest, be patriotic.
=D~
Nov 22nd, 2008 (10:13 pm)Will Ford’s Four Hybrid Models Using The Successful And Proven Nickel Metal Hydride Battery For 2010 Short Circuit The Chevrolet Volt With Its Short Range And Unproven Lithium-ion Battery?
http://www.glgroup.com/News/Will-Fords-Four-Hybrid-Models-Using-The-Successful-And-Proven-Nickel-Metal-Hydride-Battery-For-2010-Short-Circuit-The–28876.html
_________________________________________________
Interesting little article asking why Ford is the only one of the big 3 trying catch Toyota.
From my brief scan of the LA auto show, I have to say, the Hybrid Fusion grabs my interest more than most anything else as far as something actually attainable in the near future . . especially when you look at the list of tech innovations (new battery, 47 mph electric mode …..) and gee whiz toys (video display , voice command, 390 watt surround sound, ….).
Is this GM’s best effort in the hybrid category?
http://www.gm.com/vehicles/results.jsp?fuel=hybrid&&seo=goo_|_2008_GMBP_Retention_|_IMG_GMBP_GM_Hybrid_|_GM_Hybrid_DKI_1_|_gm_hybrids
Ford’s now approaching 40 mpg with a decent sized car. They might catch a few Prius shoppers with that one. Where is GM on this front? Are all the eggs in the Volt basket?
As for the rest of GM’s hybrids, the only thing that remotely interests me is the Vue hybrid. And that’s because of the impressive towing capacity. But to me it had a smaller more “car like” feel to it than the Escape, and with real world mpg in the mid to upper 20′s it’s hard to justify the hybrid price tag. The 3500 lb towing capacity is a huge bonus though. And would make me think twice for sure if going for a hybrid SUV. The only thing the Malibu “mild” hybrid has going for it over the fusion is looks. But it doesn’t look good enough to outweigh all fords tech features and mpg in the Fusion hybrid.
To be clear, I’m still a volt/ EREV and electric car fan. But (IMO) if you’re going to sell many cars in the next 5 or 8 years, you’re going to have to produce top notch hybrids. GM does not seem to be focused in that direction.
I guess they’ve got bigger things to worry about.
Nov 22nd, 2008 (10:17 pm)In some ways this is about values. The success of the Volt could be a sign of the changing of our values in this country of big, excessive, wasteful, rugged individualism, selfishness and self-centeredness that is making this country sick and part of why we are falling behind the rest of the world, to valuing compact, practical, conservation, efficiency, community, selflessness and caring about others.
It is time to shift from “every man for himself” to “keep rowing for we are all in the same boat together”. That is what could make us powerful as a nation again.
Nov 22nd, 2008 (10:19 pm)Personally, I didn’t like the “volt” when it was introduced and the fact that oil has become so cheap is not helping either, but I believe in the idea of the idea of the Volt and I will still buy one. Simply because it is the responsible thing to do. True the people living paycheck to paycheck will not be able to afford one right away, but as the price goes down more and more will be able too.
The government should clearly encourage out of the box thinking that GM has accomplished here and reward them appropriately.
No one will win if GM Ford or Chrysler go under.
Nov 22nd, 2008 (10:20 pm)hi Dave G. #6,
“Where does this $40,000 number keep coming from?”
_______________________________
Bob Lutz stated that GM is trying to keep the (pre tax credit) price of the Volt “South of $40,000″.
He didn’t say, “Our forecast of keeping the price comfortably below $40,000 is on track.”
And he didn’t say, “Keeping the price under $40,000 is very doable”.
_______________________________
GM…be transparent, be bold, be honest, be patriotic.
=D~
Nov 22nd, 2008 (10:30 pm)#10 Bearclaw,
You say “rugged individualism” like it’s a bad thing.
Believe it or not, lots of self -reliant/ rugged individuals care about fuel economy and the environment.
Nov 22nd, 2008 (10:43 pm)“if you’re Joe the Commuter, you’re not going to spend $40,000 on an electric car. It’s insane.”
I’m surprised the New York Times left out a pertinent fact,
but lets not forget the already signed into law, $7,500, bringing the price down to $32,500 roughly (I’m still going with $40,000). Since this applies to the first 250,000 qualifying vehicles, it seems certain that Volt II will be out before the credit runs out (assuming GM is still around). I’m also pretty sure the Dem congress will then pass another tax break to continue PHEV sales up to Obama’s “1 million by 2015 cars that we will work to make sure are built here in America”
I just read that the price of the average new car sold is just under $29,000. So a jump from 29 to 32.5 isn’t that hard to comprehend for many commuters, especially considering the savings of little or NO GAS.
But the real profit kicks in when E-Flex is used on the second, and third and so on line. The big expense has been engineering and designing a totally new vehicle, with so many new parts. Once these are tested and begin shipping in large numbers, everything will be going down in price, especially the largest single item, the battery.
I have been watching the PHEV movement since 04. There was little to no acknowledgment from the majors until the Volt’s introduction in Jan. 07. Even Toyota, who had the easiest road (90% of the way there with the Prius) was forever postponing PHEV plans, blaming battery technology and lack of public interest.
The Volt spurred everyone (except Honda, who wants to skip the PHEV “phase” and go right to fuel cell, always a decade away. If the Volt fails, look for the others to “extend” their delivery dates as well.
Nov 22nd, 2008 (10:45 pm)Did anyone see the movie, Tucker, the man and his car? It tells the story of how Washington killed something that was seen as a threat to those who funded campaigns. Notice how Washington has not really invested in the Lithium battery production facilities to bring the cost down. What would end our addiction to fossil fuel? Lithium battery production facilities, cars with an AER of greater than 25 miles, and nuclear power plants to handle the increased electrical demand and replace coal fired plants. But Washington appears to be bought by the oil and coal interests.
Nov 22nd, 2008 (10:52 pm)“But, rather than be fatalistic I’d rather be creative. Since GM will be making its last stand in its application to Congress on or by December 2nd, lets try to think of ways the Volt can help save GM. Maybe we can publish a proposal.”
___________________________________________________
Possible unseen (unsung) advantages for the GM volt:
1. Maintenance costs — Perhaps GM engineeers could (have) researched what the projected annual costs are for maintenance on the volt. If it’s substantially less than a regular piston car, this will entice buyers.
2. Vehicle to grid advantages. This could actually result in some payback for volt owners if the power companies adopt this technology, paying volt owners top dollar for kw’s taken back from the volt during peak power needs.
3. Pollution. There’s been so much talk of Global Warming the last few years I think everybody’s forgotten about smog.
disclaimer: I’m still not for the bailout but at least I’m trying to be creative.
Nov 22nd, 2008 (10:55 pm)Here is an actual idea. We have two major concerns in the upcoming administration: Budget and Security.
This will work for both. On the GOVERNMENT level, let’s propose that any new fleet purchases where such a vehicle as the Volt is ‘viable’, a nice broad legal term that covers most anything, the govt. will purchase it for the fleet use. This will serve both to help GM have a built in audience who CAN pay full price, AND will also give a useful buffer against future gas shortages. After all, remember how police services were cut in many areas when gas topped four dollars a gallon? How about response cruisers from the station be Volts? Or on the federal level, most short commuter cars (and there are a LOT) can easily be Volt-type.
On the consumer level, the govt. subsidy should also state that Volts, now paid for three times over by the American taxpayer, will be sold here IN America for the first few runs. This will allow the American taxpayer to find one easier while the tax breaks are available. In this way, the American consumer fleet moves to a gallon of gas less per day per person much faster. It’s not much but it’s still a major cut in our fuel. Add an extra tax bonus if the solar option is utilized or if solar is added to the home as the car is purchased to help further.
I, for one, could have made good use of a Volt last time we had major gas shortages. I could have cut my non-essential driving and just operated off electric for that entire month. I’m sure many thousands of others could do the same.
Nov 22nd, 2008 (11:00 pm)The Volt is powered for shorter commutes, and anticipates a future where global warming, fuel costs, compact design and public transit including inter-city rail will completely change how people use cars. If the Volt fails, another similar car will come along. The Volt (or….?) could/will meet personal/household needs as work/shop/live re-integrate, but battery technology needs to give the commercial/fleet users a 200-mile (or….?) range.
Nov 22nd, 2008 (11:02 pm)GM literally took the bull by the horns and began work on the Chevy Volt. Why Chevy? Because that is GM’s high volume line! Once they feel confident that the bugs are worked out, the numbers will be going into high gear.
So, what will 1,000,000 Volts on the road do for the US?
- 78% will displace gasoline. Roughly thats about $270,000,000 per year that won’t go overseas to countries who don’t like us.
- Helps our balance of payments deficit, which, in turn, supports a stronger dollar.
- It means NO TAILPIPE POLUTION for 78% of drivers. That’s no CO2, CO, Nx, Sulfur dioxide, etc. Which also means many fewer people who don’t smoke, will be getting lung cancer and other related diseases.
- Millions of workers will not be displaced who are in the auto, and auto support industry.
- Depending on the price of gas, it will put more money into peoples pockets. Does anyone think gas will be a $2.00 by 2011?
- It will help national security, should terrorists or a foreign country (not Canada) decide to choke our oil supply.
- It will encourage the oil companies to get into other businesses, like cellulosic ethanol, or solar. GM’s Coskata sub is extremely promising, with a plant coming on-line in ’09.
There would be a huge ripple effect if the Volt is not allowed to be produced, as it is currently scheduled.
Nov 22nd, 2008 (11:09 pm)Obviously the governments money…Well…OUR Money is best spent on GM by Owning the Volt technology, The battery facility. Cadillac, Chevy and Saturn. GMC Truck.
The rest can be sold off for pennies on the dollar.
Bye Bye UAW Blood sucking no talent chumps.
Bye Bye private Jets and ridiculous CEO compensation.
Yes for Generous bonuses for all that turn it around.
If GM wants to save facilities outside the USA let the non American governments put up or shut up.
Bye Bye Ricky….see ya.
Just get a team of us from here to DC.
Nov 22nd, 2008 (11:15 pm)It is not about building the car of the future. You build the car at the right price. $40K is too high, especially in a major recession. Masses cannot afford the Volt. That means that GM will not profit in the mid-term. That means GM failure will not be rescued by the Volt production.
GM may well go get it wrong again. They should build a kind of ‘old beetle’ four door, for $15K, electric. GM is not building anything new with the Volt, there are other electrict cars like the Th!nk City to be imported soon.
Nov 22nd, 2008 (11:17 pm)hi Van #15,
“… Washington has not really invested in the Lithium battery production facilities to bring the cost down.”
____________________________________
Government supplied batteries? Factories and new jobs? Replace the tax credit with a free battery (for life)? No Korean batteries?
++++++++++++++
The “Volt girl” explains the plug-in charger and the government tax credit. The Volt girl said “$7500 tax credit” about 8 times.
L.A. 11/21/08 http://garfwod.250free.com/Photos/LA%20Volt%20047.jpg
=D~
Nov 22nd, 2008 (11:33 pm)If anyone is reading this… the Saturday Night Live opening segment is the capital hill hearing on the bailout for the big 3…. probably the 1st time Rick Wagoner (and the other two CEO’s) have been parodied on SNL!
Nov 22nd, 2008 (11:44 pm)#5 (Randy) wrote “Cheap oil killed the electric once before ,and it may just do it again”
Not quite correct… it was more than once… at least twice before…. before the internal combustion engine (ICE) the electric vehicle ruled the roads 100 years ago (as far as self propelled vehicles, horses probably still out numbered all cars), and low gas prices didn’t certainly didn’t help in keeping CA’s ZEV mandate in place so indirectly helped kill those BEV’s (including the EV1).
Nov 22nd, 2008 (11:55 pm)#16 (carcus) regarding “vehicle to grid”….
Good idea on the surface, bad idea, at least for the Volt and in general the current battery technology….
The reason is it cycles the battery pack more than you would get from normal (for propulsion) use. That’s going to decrease the expected life of the battery…. which is why GM will NOT support it w/out voiding your warranty (at least on the battery).
Also the Volt’s pack is relatively small. Most owners of the Volt will use most if not all the 40 mile (city) range on a charge of the Volt in their round trip commute…. so what you sell back to the grid during peak hours (while you are at work) your Volt will end up needing to burn gasoline on your commute home for sure. V2G doesn’t make sense in this case.
Nov 22nd, 2008 (11:58 pm)#9 carcus:
“Ford’s now approaching 40 mpg with a decent sized car. They might catch a few Prius shoppers with that one. Where is GM on this front?”
________________________________
The Chevy Cruze, expected to launch in 2010, is projected to have ~40mpg. Also, the current Cobalt XFE gets mid-30s.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (12:40 am)As I have mentioned before.
Why not run a lottery?
Say $100 per ticket for a chance at a Volt … i.e. use some of
the FED money for promotion of the technology. It promoted enough it might even turn a profit.
But mostly it would get more cars on the road with more positive
publicity. That is what is needed now.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (12:55 am)Come on Lyle… “obscure expert”??? You seem to be shooting the messenger more than ever lately.
These “obscure experts” are being overly kind. The Volt was a bad PR stunt from a desperate company blinded by Prius-Envy. If they had really intended to make it a viable product it would have had half the range and been developed quietly. That would have resulted in a car that they could have made twice as many of and sold at a lower price (or sold for a profit).
What a fitting way for GM to go out. Smoke and mirrors instead of substance. The only surprising thing was how many people they sucked in on their last great con.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (1:11 am)there has to be a bridge between now and getting off oil, billions of dollars are being made from car parts and oil changes motor replacements and so on.
The only way to get all the car makers to start making cars that are green or high fuel efficient or the Volt is to stop buying NEW cars, keep the one’s you have and only buy used cars until they get the message.
That’s why me and others have been saying NO PLUG NO SALE, we mean it.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (1:58 am)The Volt will not save GM but it could help if the can make it affordable.
For one thing, the government needs to make that tax credit available at the time purchase. It will be a lot easier for people to go in and buy a car at $32,500 rather than $40,000 and getting the $7500 back up to a year later. Until the economy turns around and people have the extra money to spend on bigger items such as cars, a $32,500 car will not sell.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (2:12 am)Posted by Laura #21
It is not about building the car of the future. You build the car at the right price. $40K is too high, especially in a major recession. Masses cannot afford the Volt. That means that GM will not profit in the mid-term. That means GM failure will not be rescued by the Volt production.
GM may well go get it wrong again. They should build a kind of ‘old beetle’ four door, for $15K, electric. GM is not building anything new with the Volt, there are other electrict cars like the Th!nk City to be imported soon.
_____________________________________________________
You mean like a Cobalt? I’ll give you the fact that the look of it is not quite as original as an old style Beetle…but GM needs to make a little bit more profit than what compact cars will bring in at this point, and to be honest, Honda and Toyota really have that market cornered at the moment.
There are plenty of rich people in the country that can afford them. There are millions of doctors and lawyers and executives with $40k in the bank account right now just sitting there. A lot of people have liquified stocks and hedge funds recently and there is a lot of free cash. Besides that, there are millions of government employees that could drive these. There’s also taxis that would love getting 50mpg even in the most stop and go traffic. They probably pay $1000 a month on gas, and this could save them at least $500 a month. The premium cost for the vehicle will be eaten up in one year and I would guess there are many other people that I haven’t even thought of who could economically justify the few thousand extra.
The other thing to consider is that all of us paying $2 a gallon in the US may not be able to immediately justify the extra upfront cost (although I don’t think anyone is delusional enough to think we wont be back to $4 at least some time in the next 5 years (and some experts doubt the world oil production will ever be what it was at the end of 2006 even though demand is climbing exponentially), but anyone in Europe and most Asian countries are paying $6-9 a gallon already, they definitely would love the idea of no gas, and with a very strong Euro and pound conversion from dollars, the US is just a small portion of the market and England and France are very likely to follow suit in subsidies to promote cleaner health and energy independence. The Volt could be profitable for GM selling for 20k pounds in England and 30k in Europe. It’s a no brainer for European car shoppers.
This is on top of all the people that just want to save the environment (there are millions in California and Oregon alone) and…gasp, people who want to protect themselves from uncontrollable gas prices. There are people stocking up on gas right now, I think they would rather just buy a car that didn’t need it.
The sad thing that uninformed people don’t realize (I hope none of us could be categorized such) is that the real cost of gas per gallon when you take into account all of the money the government is paying to secure our oil future, fighting in Iraq, the ridiculous money we give Israel to make sure we have an ally there. Gas is probably more like $10 a gallon and we don’t even realize it because most of the cost is coming from taxes or bonds sold to China etc.
To come back to the objective given by Lyle in the article for us to come up with our plan to see if we can help GM…Basically I could come up with this kind of stuff all day. GM need only make this kind of argument above on capital hill and especially with a democratically controlled congress, there should be plenty of government officials willing to bend over backwards to keep GM on track with this project.
In my opinion, they should tax gas more and spend the money on funding American lithium ion battery research. A 10 cent tax per gallon would bring in about $12 million per day., with the price of gas falling every day, we wouldn’t even miss it.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (2:57 am)GM please release your head from your butt!!!
Make different models of the volt, 20 miles on battery, 40 & 60.
Create the technology that will give you a 2 door coupe. Yes peolple still do buy 2 door cars.
Make a battery only volt. Make a 2 seater coupe. Make a convertable volt. Just having 1 car that your betting the farm on is stupid. Making a car is not rocket science but the way you act its like your in a coma.
WAKE UP!!!!!!!!
Nov 23rd, 2008 (3:58 am)I think GM should be PRing the Volt like crazy right now. How it’s the future and they are in the lead. They should only be talking about advanced ICE technology that will put them in the lead and the electrification of transportation.
1) Massive PR. Make sure everyone knows about this amazing disruptive technology that is just about to come out.
2) Get the mules out and driven by the press (and Lyle) as soon as they are stable enough.
3) Keep as open and transparent about the program as possible. GM is doing an excellent job so far. The Volt just might save them after all. It IS their future viability. Time to show it in all it’s unfinished glory.
4) They should drive a Volt mule to the next hearings. Someone mentioned to truck it in close. This is also a great idea. It solves every problem and still helps GM with more PR. No, you can not do too much at this point. It’s all or nothing.
5) GM should talk about how the Volt program will be the last one to see cuts.
6) The viability plan should address the long term outlook on transportation. Clearly petroleum cannot be part of that (or only a tiny part). GM must transform from a company that produces fossil fuel burning vehicles to a sustainable transportation company. The opportunities are limitless. GM must also talk about their public transportation activities including their hybrid buses.
7) Both the government and GM should agree to move forward with these sustainable plans, even when the price of oil drops. That has been the failure of our past. We must continue with little regard to the price of oil. Powering our transportation with non-renewables is a losing strategy. If we hold the line we will see success. California is a good example of not stopping sustainable plans when the price of oil drops.
9) Talk about our global petroleum problems. Do not use the term peak oil. You will get the same response as when you use global warming. Talk about how our supply has been at a plateau for several years. How the growth in supply cannot keep up with historical increases. Talk about how when the price of oil drops it only slows down the needed oil investments that will keep us from having even slower supply growth. No need to talk about declines and peak oil. Only need to make people understand that when supply does not keep up with demand the price must rise to match. You can also talk about how we, as humans, have had to resort to tar sands, and deep water drilling just to keep up. For those who say we have unlimited reserves just respond, “If that’s true why don’t we just drill on land?” I think that is an obvious argument.
10) Have the UAW come up with a plan for how they plan to be competitive with the other competition in the U.S. The most important thing about the UAW is their power over the use of automation technology or the freedom of building where is most competitive. There is a classic battle between unions and companies. How can the two work together? Surely there must be a solution. If GM and the UAW can’t come up with something, most of us realize that GM will not make it, at least in the US.
11) Talk about what will happen if the money turns out to not be enough. We are all thinking it so not talking about it reduces trust.
However, if GM just comes up with a nice thick plan that looks like a lot of effort went into it they are likely to get the money. The democrats just performed a public lashing so they can give the money. As long as Americans are pleased by the lashing they will be ready to give another chance. Thus, the CEOs should do all they can not to look arrogant. We all know this is not real. The public, who don’t understand business, just want to see the CEOs scolded and humbled. Maybe use the word humbled.
Good luck GM. I’m 95% sure you will get the money. I’m far less sure the ship can be righted with the weight of the UAW on it. Look at the lessons that Britain went though. They kept throwing good money after bad and their auto operations still went under. Here is what was written:
“Unlike some other historians of the industry, Whisler thinks Edwardes’s confrontational approach to the trade unions was correct. `The history of bargaining … suggests that force was necessary to shift the entrenched work practices and labour institutions.’ But labour relations reform by itself was not enough. The bigger problems were in engineering, product development and quality control, and this was where Edwardes failed. The Metro, Maestro and Montego, all launched in the first half of the 1980s, were simply not good enough to re-establish British Leyland as a credible European mass-market manufacturer.”
Therefore it’s important not to put in protectionism and thus keep our industry isolated from global competition. That will only force us to fall more behind. We must reorganize and prepare for full competitive battle. Labor, design, quality, etc. We must attack on all fronts. Yes, this is war.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (4:31 am)Forgot to add : Volt looks last chance of GM
Reason : http://www.electrifyingtimes.com/gmprecept.html
GM Unveils Concept Car That Gets 108 Miles A Gallon – news in 2000. Now 2008 and still suffering to reach 40mpg. Making stories are cool from GM , How to make a story real is what happening now. No Fleet out for test till now sounds me like Volt may be the biggest scam GM run in lifetime.
Even there are PHEV conversion kits for Toyota ( http://www.eaa-phev.org/wiki/Prius_PHEV) and that may get more acceptance than GMs aliean technology ( i want to drive a car with proven technology because i cant risk my life for sake of car ). Toyota may modify 2010 prius t be a PHEV.
I love the looks of Flextreme rather than volt . Only things i didn’t like is the doors ( i herd they are not safe) and the back design ( i want more like vibe ) and looks to be a good utility one for normal people ( any way softroaders are getting more popular).
Nov 23rd, 2008 (5:13 am)If GM goes under all of you transplant buyers will be paying 40k for a crappy Toy corolla next year.
Buy a Cobalt with more HP and better mileage today to help save the VOLT for tomorrow.
http://www.chevrolet.com/cobalt
Nov 23rd, 2008 (6:59 am)Alright, here’s my crack at a proposal:
Whereas GM is the world’s largest automotive manufacturer with an unparalleled technology base,
Whereas extended range electric vehicles (E-REV) are likely to be more acceptable to the public than battery only electric vehicles, and
Whereas GM has a substantial lead in E-REV development, including exhaustive Li-Ion testing, and
Whereas no technology will be more effective at reducing tailpipe emissions than electrically driven vehicles, and
Whereas President-elect Obama may ratify the Kyoto Protocol, subjecting the US to billions of dollars of payments for non-compliance with greenhouse gas emissions standards, and
Whereas, no technology in the transportation sector has more capability to reduce greenhouse gas emissions than an electric vehicle, and
Whereas the Chevy Volt will have an EPA rating in excess of 100 mpg, no other vehicle will go further in reducing our dependence on foreign oil and improving our trade balance, and
Whereas the Volt will be manufactured in the US and exported to other countries, providing domestic job growth, and
Whereas it can be shown that technology advances a civilization, and the countries that have technology usually have better economies and better standards of living, and
Whereas the Chevy Volt represents the future of the automobile,
We respectfully submit that Congress approve the low interest loans to GM so that we may continue to define the future of the transportation, reduce emissions and greenhouse gases, provide jobs and security, and continue to help make America one of the technological leaders of the world.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (7:00 am)Personally, I think the use of E-85 is the path to energy independence. I’m on the waiting list for an E-85 Volt. Has our Gov’t made its position known on that important issue of biofuels. Biofuels have to be in the spotlight more than they currently are now. I’ll be interested in its use in the Auto Industry’s viability plans next month.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (7:34 am)Lithium Ion Battery production facilities should be viewed like an ordnance factory making smart bombs and the like. Every Volt cuts off the money going out of the country. Just as we ordered “jeeps” during WWII, we should be ordering lithium battery production facilities and vehicles with an AER over 25 miles right now. (Actually 5 years ago
)
Nov 23rd, 2008 (7:59 am)36 BillR……….
——————————————————————————————————————————
I agree with much of what you say in #36, although I would explain it a little differently, viz……
For GM to have any hope of approval of a bridge loan from Congress, they must by next week (Dec 2) present a specific plan to Congress to make use of that money. Our legislators are understandably worried (as am I) that without clear, practical, workable plans the car makers will most likely be returning again & again for more $billions (like AIG has done) …..in other words, without good planning, the “bridge” in these loans will likely turn into a “bridge to nowhere”.
I don’t disagree that an initial bridge loan, coupled with extensive restructuring, needs to be made to GM immediately. But without a viable plan to put that money to work, GM will simply be delaying their inevitable demise via Chap 11 (or eventually Chap 7 liquidation).
This why I first offered a proposal in a thread here a few days ago based on the lessons of history…. 1) the Great Depression of the 1930’s and 2) the “War to end all Wars” (WWII) immediately following the depression. Starting in the late 1930s (historians regard 1937-38 as the depression’s and the “New Deal’s” worst years), the FDR administration essentially forced Detroit to stop making cars & to retool to make tanks, trucks, airplanes & even guns. This massive undertaking by the automotive industry proved they could respond rapidly and effectively to crisis situations ….and the government contracts for the machinery of war helped revive both the automotive industry and the nation’s economy.
My proposal is for Congress to pass legislation necessary to fund the GSA (General Services Admin), who have long procured cars and trucks for most of the rest of the Federal Government (except for the Armed Services, of course) to place massive orders for Chevy Volts under government procurement contracts. These “government-spec” Volts would replace the government’s existing high-maintenance, low-mileage fleet of over 200,000 vehicles with new 4-door vehicles having very low maintenance, near-zero emissions and extremely high fuel efficiency.
This would give GM multi-billion dollar government contracts (which they should be able to borrow against). It would also get the “ball rolling” for new highly fuel efficient vehicles and let the average American know that highly-efficient cars would be a positive legacy of the current economic crisis (like the little Jeep was a legacy from WWII that still lives on). It would keep auto workers employed & factories busy, allowing both the industry & its workers to get back on their feet financially. And it would lead the way to E-REV car/truck designs that would eventually wean the US off of foreign oil.
After 3-4 years the newly restructured US auto industry should be pretty well on its own feet and producing millions of vehicles that represent the new state of the art among the world’s car makers (perhaps Cadillac could once again claim, without apology, to be the “standard of the world”).
It worked in the 30’s & 40’s ….in fact, the US rose from a desperate, financially-anemic economy in the 30’s to the world’s strongest economy after WWII!!! ….due primarily, I believe, to the multi-billion dollar government contracts placed with the big 3 for the machinery of war! We know it works. So let’s do it again!!!
Nov 23rd, 2008 (8:00 am)Randy Says:@5
November 22nd, 2008 at 9:38 pm
Cheap oil killed the electric once before ,and it may just do it again
*************************************************************************************
This cheap oil is only temporary. The worlds oil reserves has reach it’s peak and future demands will only increase. To get new oil out of the ground it will get costlier.The Volt is not in danger like the EV1 unless the oil companies purposely keep the oil price low to keep the Volt from being successful,
Nov 23rd, 2008 (8:00 am)GXT #28 (Bob Lutz: Chevy Volt Update: GXT #102)
Are you kidding? It could have been Winnie The Pooh giving the information and you’ld be saying the same thing.
Please correct me if I’m wrong but you are one of the last people posting here that should comment on biases. Have you had one single positive or even neutral based comment on the Volt?
Obsessive negatism without purpose is mindless.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (8:06 am)To Nasaman,
I think your idea is great! I hope Rick Wagoner reads your idea.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (8:23 am)I believe GM needs to let Congress know they are committed to hybrid technology and much more fuel efficient vehicles. The Saturn Vue plug in needs to be released as soon as possible, even though I realize it is now on a back burner.
GM really needs to announce plans for an affordable (less that 22 grand) hybrid vehicle with fuel economies equal to the Prius and the new Honda Insight. Actually, this should have been announced last January. How hard would it be to make a Cruze hybrid?
I think GM will get the money before all is said and done, but if they go into bankruptcy, I don’t think they can pull out of it.
http://oilfreenow.blogspot.com
Nov 23rd, 2008 (8:43 am)I think the Volt has the potential of saving G M if it can be affordable by the masses, which includes me. My suggestion, Make all Volts wired for and ready to accept the 40 mile battery but offer it with a battery that only starts the ICE, which still runs a generator to power the electric motor. Then have options for a 10, 20, 30, and 40 mile battery. This MIGHT result in a 18-20 thousand dollar Volt that could be upgraded in the future when the cost of batteries is consideribly less.
Think about it, if the Volt can get 50 mpg. hauling that heavy battery around than possibly 55 mpg without it is possible.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (8:52 am)hi Joe #43,
“I hope Rick Wagoner reads your idea.”
________________________
If CEO Rick isn’t finding 15 minutes to read the gm-volt comments then someone on his staff isn’t doing their job. Most of us here are allies to the Volt and supportive of some sort of solution for GM.
I would like to see the U.S. government get involved in direct battery production (jobs program). Or the buying of fleet vehicles for mail delivery and law enforcement use (infrastructure program). Either will give GM it’s spoonful of short term medicine during the voluntary internal restructuring.
The Obama plan to provide some sort of national medical coverage will take huge pressure off the employer/union compensation issue. Even if the new plan isn’t as good as the former insurance, it’s still medical coverage.
The short term goal is to have GM break even for a quarter. GM’s plant closings and senior employee buy outs will reap benefits over time. The new product line looks better than ever. We just need stability now.
stability=confidence=sales=Volt
=D~
Nov 23rd, 2008 (8:56 am)I’m looking forward to the new GM. GM will not go under, but the dealers will be in for a terrible time. Cars will be made, delivered and repaired but the services provided by the dealer network are going to change. I want to order my Volt on the Web directly from GM and pick it up, as delivered. I don’t need to pay the dealer $500.00 to wash the windows and vacuum the rugs.
When it comes time for service, I want to pay for the service, not the overhead associated with the beautiful showrooms and offices. Without the sales effort provided by the dealer network, sales volume will drop…so be it. GM doesn’t need to be the biggest, just the best. And they can be if they aren’t forced to be all things to all drivers.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (8:57 am)Regarding the tax rebate. Full rebate for the 40 mile battery and then progressivly less for each step down in battery only miles. BUT make the rest of the rebate allowable during a 5 year period to up grade to the 40 mile battery or however many miles the battery of that time can give.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (9:19 am)#39 nasaman….
I really like your idea.
I would just suggest that government contracts be tied to licensing of E-Flex to Ford and Chrysler. I’d like to see E-Flex become the new “American Standard”.
Replacing our ancient fleet of postal vehicles is the logical first place to start. No time like the present.
See….
http://www.federaltimes.com/index.php?S=3146545
Nov 23rd, 2008 (9:32 am)Quote: GXT (#28)
Come on Lyle… “obscure expert”??? You seem to be shooting the messenger more than ever lately.
These “obscure experts” are being overly kind. The Volt was a bad PR stunt from a desperate company blinded by Prius-Envy. If they had really intended to make it a viable product it would have had half the range and been developed quietly. That would have resulted in a car that they could have made twice as many of and sold at a lower price (or sold for a profit).
What a fitting way for GM to go out. Smoke and mirrors instead of substance. The only surprising thing was how many people they sucked in on their last great con.
____________________________________________________
ahhhhh…… ignorance is bliss. That truly made no sense whatsoever. Apparently no research was done on the Volt before making that comment, otherwise you would know why he is referred to as an “obscure expert”. If you do know what the Volt is about, then back to my original statement…..that truly makes no sense whatsoever.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (9:53 am)#26 Joe,
#9 carcus:
“Ford’s now approaching 40 mpg with a decent sized car. They might catch a few Prius shoppers with that one. Where is GM on this front?”
________________________________
The Chevy Cruze, expected to launch in 2010, is projected to have ~40mpg. Also, the current Cobalt XFE gets mid-30s.
_____________________________________
“Decent sized car” are the key words here, apples to apples and all.
Fusion: mid-sized car.
Prius: mid-sized cars.
Cobalt: subcompact car.
Cruze: compact car.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (10:00 am)This Pontiac G3 is pretty nifty.
http://garfwod.250free.com/Photos/LA%20G3%20034.jpg
MSRP: $14,335 – $14,335
Market Price: N/A
Invoice: $13,547 – $13,547
Basic Warranty: 36 months/36,000 miles
Fuel Economy Range: 34 mpg Hwy, 27 mpg City
Fuel Type: regular unleaded
=D~
Nov 23rd, 2008 (10:02 am)Lyle,
I hate extra taxes as much as any, but now is the perfect time—while prices are low– to impose an increase in the federal gas tax. The tax should be on a sliding scale to automatically decrease as the price at the pump increases. This will do two things: 1. create a basement price for gas, eliminating a variable that makes sustainable & domestically produced alternatives (ethanol, hydrogen, electric) less viable. 2. the government will have a vested interest in seeing prices of wholesale gas stay low. (currently, our governments make more money with higher gas prices. Our government should be aligned with the people. high prices bad, low prices, good.)
The money should be used to increase the overall fuel economy for government and quasi government agencies by an overall average of 10% every four years for the next twelve, starting today. The feds can provide a massive, long term lease order to the big three for vehicles which will attain this goal. The Plug-in VUE as postal vehicle, the electric Jeep for the national forest service, the hybrid escape for security detail. Hybrid suburbans for the secret service, hybrid malibu for police, the Chevy Volt for FDIC, Department of Agriculture, DOD, FCC, HUD, etc.
Every four years the vehicles are swapped out with models that are at least 10%, on average, more efficient. Not by law, but by consumer (or government in this case) demand. The gas tax increase would repay this pre-paid lease program. Its an exchange of goods for cash (capitalism) instead of a bailout. It will improve air quality, lower prices for some cutting edge vehicles (by increasing scale), decrease demand on foreign oil, and as much as I don’t like more taxes, increase gas to a price where Americans will place greater emphasis on alternatives, conservation, etc.
At the end of the twelve year lease program we will have improved average government fleet fuel economy by 30%, improved air quality, decreased demand on foreign oil, provided long(er) term viability to US automakers, and will have leveraged principals of capitalism instead of socialism to achieve it. Let freedom ring.
By the way, we tax the hell out of tobacco and alcohol to discourage the use. We need to do a little more of this with gasoline, So this would not only achieve the goal of funding the big three, but also modify our behaviors in very predicable ways. So, Lyle, that is my proposal–the Chevy Volt and its cousins plays center stage.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (10:13 am)Sometimes I wonder if GM has gotten too caught up in the lofty performance goals for the Volt (e.g., 40 miles electric, highly competitive 0-60 times, etc.). What if several varients were offered… e.g., let the consumer choose if they want 20, 30, or 40 miles electric range?
Nov 23rd, 2008 (10:14 am)Casey #29
“That’s why me and others have been saying NO PLUG NO SALE, we mean it.”
Good point. It would be interesting to find out how many people are waiting for next generation technology before buying a new car. I just bought a used Chevy to hold me over until the Volt is available. If there are a lot of people out there like you and I (The ‘Volt waiting list’ is about 40k right) is it possible that the Volt killed GM. Irony.
In Detroit GM is running commercials on the radio advertising the volt in 2010. Aren’t they telling us to wait? hmm, I’m beginning to think some of the Volt marketing might be backfiring.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (10:23 am)#53 Wolfmann
What if several varients were offered… e.g., let the consumer choose if they want 20, 30, or 40 miles electric range?
– – - – - –
At one point GM planned to have a ‘variant’ in the plugin VUE with a ten mile range, and available in 2009. Sadly they’ve pushed that back to 2011, http://gm-volt.com/2008/11/10/plug-in-saturn-vue-officially-moved-to-2011-cruze-and-volt-still-on-for-2010/
which means if I wait longer I can get something less desirable (at least for me, I prefer the simplicity of all electric with ICE generator)
Nov 23rd, 2008 (10:29 am)#53 Just a followup comment… It seems the optimal strategy may be much different when a vehicle may be “the lifeline” vs. it just the first iteration of a future business direction.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (10:38 am)Although i love the VOLT idea, A quicker way to convert america would be for GM to start converting Older models to electric for a price at their dealerships. Id pay 10-15 Grand to have my Pickup converted, im sure others would too.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (10:43 am)How can the Hummer save GM?
China’s Cars, Accelerating A Global Demand for Fuel
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/27/AR2008072701911_pf.html
Or did GM sell the Hummer off to a Chinese company already?
Nov 23rd, 2008 (10:53 am)I agree with you “old man” #44.
I think GM hasn’t done enough testing with E-REV variants. This kind of testing should be going on simultaneous to mule testing to get idea of the scope of possibilities. Smaller battery – smaller ICE, smaller battery – bigger ICE, load balanced fault tolerant smaller batteries, ICE placed in rear of car. All these ideas should be getting tested. I’m sure the competition is doing it to find the better combination and one up GM.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (11:00 am)It is so easy for other people to say anything new will fail just like any authority will often say ‘no’ because it is much safer than ‘yes’. If there is going to be a new explosive economic recovery in the US it
will have to be a revolution in energy use. Smarter updated grid, all non fossil fuel development, cleaner emissions, carbon credit trade for
industry, and all this driven by the public and government commitment to absolutely succeed and stay the course.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (11:20 am)#35 If U Fly the American Flag Says:
If GM goes under all of you transplant buyers will be paying 40k for a crappy Toy corolla next year.
Buy a Cobalt with more HP and better mileage today to help save the VOLT for tomorrow.
—————————————————————-
I says:
Buy a crappy Cobalt? – Please !
Only after GM learns to make cars with the same high levels of quality, fit, and finish as Honda and Toyota. GM gave up on the minivan segment because they couldn’t compete with the Toyota Sienna and the Honda Odyssey minivans. The people have voted with the only thing that counts – their money. They wanted quality, and now, GM is where it deserves to be – on the ropes. Maybe they’ll learn, but probably not, with Rick in charge.
But you – wrapping yourself in the American flag – that’s disgusting. America is about the choice (freedom) to buy the car we want, not have some wannabe Stalin Jr dictate what we should buy, be it you, Al Gore, or anyone else. Better wash your slime off of that flag you wrapped yourself in before you use it again.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (11:26 am)The Volt is hugely important for image reasons.
The reason why GM has such a “perception” problem is simply because people just don’t like GM. People may claim they don’t like Chevys because they are “unreliable” and “inefficient”, but you can show people the EPA numbers and reliability ratings and it has absolutely no effect on their opinion. That’s because reliability and efficiency are just excuses for people to like one company and not like another. Ultimately people are going to buy the Toyota because they like Toyota. They like the image.
The Volt is a huge step forward for the automobile and it’s a great opportunity to improve Chevy’s image. What concerns me though is GM’s marketing. It kills me when I see those Chevy volt ads, with all the vivid rainbow colors and “hick” narrator. That’s just not the way to market a futuristic car, or any car really.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (11:30 am)Lyle posed the question how can the Volt save GM. Another idea would be fleet pre-sales/leases. Get big players lined up with cash and demand. Companies like Google, IBM, AT&T, FedEx, Flowers.com, Walt Disney, Domino’s Pizza, who have cars on the road all the time (helping expose others to the vehicles) and also would stand to benefit significantly from reducing the cost of fuel.
As a kicker, offer to knock off $1000 per car to have a GM ad plastered across a door.
P.S. GM – Stop giving away cars on the Price is Right, Road Rules, or some other TV show. To make money you have to sell them; any idiot can give them away. Do you see Boeing giving away corporate jets, hoping you’ll lease one?
Nov 23rd, 2008 (11:37 am)hi Nelson #59,
“I think GM hasn’t done enough testing with E-REV variants.”
__________________________
Bob Lutz said that some of the E-REV mules are Cruze. Wait til’ the 2WD & 4WD E-REV Cruze hit the showrooms. The demand will be off the scale crazy. And CASH BACK with the tax credit!
http://garfwod.250free.com/Photos/Chevy%20Cruze%20red.jpg
=D~
Nov 23rd, 2008 (11:42 am)Dear Lyle,
This is an excerpt of an email I have sent to various congressional leaders and Obama leaders:
Additionally, I agree with your analysis regarding attaching Strings to a Federal Auto Bailout, but we need to take it one step further, by requiring GM and other Auto companies availing themselves of the bailout, that they must start retrofitting the existing auto fleet to lithium battery technology such as that offered by AFS Trinity.
The various auto dealerships need to be required to open 2-4 of their service bays solely to retrofitting, using their financing arms such as GMAC, (nearly bankrupted from sub-prime lending) to do $10k retrofits, with an additional $3k tax credit to the auto owners and finance the monthly payment to $100/mo, giving everyone a net $100-$200/mo saving or stimulus, generated from foreign petro dollars.
This approach, will create a vast new business opportunity for GM, based on the 240 million current auto fleet available for retrofit, that will allow GM some realistic hope of survival and ultimate repayment of tax dollars, creating massive numbers of new jobs, new battery plants, for the US to compete with new Asian investment technology. As well it will get us to our environmental goals much faster and restore auto asset, devaluation that has occurred in the US due to high fuel prices and the financial meltdown.
To achieve these goals it will require a much greater energy investment than what Barrack campaigned on, to the tune of a Minimum of $500 Billion in five years, in a WWll like effort. But the shift of the $700 billion in foreign oil expenditures to US investment in jobs coupled with the multiplier effect of the foreign petro dollar, infusion in our own economy will create a multi-trillion $ annual effect on our economy.
I know a lot of great minds are looking at solutions, but I am not sure how much thought is being given to retrofit of our current auto fleet. The 16 years it would take to turnover our new car fleet (under optimum conditions) is unacceptable, given global warming and the magnitude of our financial problems.
We need to be thinking of our WWll conversion of our peace time industrial base to a war time industrial base as the model to solve our interconnected problems. A WAR ON OIL!! The security implications are just icing on the cake.
I am not sure of your ability to influence policy, but I offer these humble thoughts for your consideration.
Thank You
Tim Gordon
Nov 23rd, 2008 (11:46 am)http://dev.evworld.com/news.cfm?newsid=19738
Here is what the competition is doing.
GM needs to be Bold and get a retrofitting model going to make some new cash to drive down costs on their new Volt like Models.
Thanks
Tim
Nov 23rd, 2008 (11:51 am)#62 Fred,
GM could use a guy like you in their marketing department. I don’t know when I’ve seen so much spin packed into so few words.
Good job!
Nov 23rd, 2008 (12:05 pm)Sorry Volt fans
Asian auto industry will be bringing an all electric car(7 gallon fuel tank) by 2010 to the states.The state of Oregan will create tax breaks for it to be possibly made there.
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/kulongosky-goes-to-shenzen-oregon-gets-nissan-wants-byd/#more-
163831 http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2008/11/kulongoski_lobbies_to_bring_ch.html
Gm had a great idea but took too long to bring it out. Now the Asian auto industries now will catch up and probally overtake GM’s Volt.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (12:18 pm)I had one helluva dream last night.
I dreamed Obama wanted all cars and trucks to be electric only. And here’s what he proposed: All roads and parking lots would have overhead power grids, like a cross between Amtrak’s power lines and the roof of a bumper car arena. Every vehicle, like a bumper car, would have a power pole high enough to reach the power grid. Grounded metal inch wide squares in the road provided the grounding. The overhead grid was under a roof – a roof covered in solar panels to help feed the grid.
Obama created a huge governement program to offer 100% employment to all who wanted to help build this monumental undertaking, just like the conservation corps. Every road, highway, bridge, tunnel, ramp, and parking lot would be electrified, under cover high enough to accomodate the largest commerical trucks, and have solar panels on top. To build a private parking lot, or a driveway for your home, it would have to include the overhead grid cost. Imagine all the traffic on your largest superhighway, under a roof, powered by an overhead grid.
Then my dream took a dark turn…
Your car would be checked one a month by the government to determine your power usage (for billing) and to check for power meter tampering (a federal crime). There were congressional hearings – the grid was drawing too much power, exceeding electrical capacity in areas like Chicago, New York, and Los Angeles, causing brownouts and intermittent power failures on the grid.
This would lead to rationing in heavy grid-use areas, and bans on unnecessary interstate travel during peak times of year. Any interstate travel would have to be approved in advance by government officials. Fines for unapproved travel would be stiff.
There would be hearings about building new nuclear reactors to generate more power, but all proposals would be shot down by Greenpeace and the Sierra Club, who now had more influence in Obama’s administration than ever before. No Hydro power – hydro power kills fish. No burning anything – no C02 emmisions, period ! The congress did nothing while the national travel grid began to fall apart from lack of power.
——————–
Then I woke up, had a beer, and tried to shake off the dream. It didn’t work, so I wrote it down here. I feel better now. At least I wasn’t being chased through dimly lit corridors by creatures with acid for blood. Damn that Ridley Scott !
Nov 23rd, 2008 (12:20 pm)GM should consider a public offering of a newly created propulsion subsidiary. The subsidiary would develop, own and license the technology used in the Volt (EREV), the Equinox (Fuel Cell), the dual mode hybrid, and biofuel solutions. The newly created company could sell to competitors (Ford already uses Toyota’s Hybrid technology for example http://www.green-energy-news.com/arch/nrgs2004/20040051.html)
20 years ago IBM made personal computers. Today they consult business on how to deploy them. Maybe GM needs to radically change the business model to go beyond manufacturing to selling the knowledge, expertise and human capital that they use to manufacture. Start ups like Tesla, Fiskar, etc could benefit from having the experts at GM consult on auto manufacturing.
The newly created company would not have any production elements (no UAW) have very little in the way of overhead and legacy costs. Conversely it would have at least one giant customer in GM, leasing the technology for the Volt, the Equinox, etc. The company would be an attractive investment for google.org, utility companies–if GM was in bed with big oil, the Volt is having an affair with utility companies, sierra club, PETA, average tree huggers and enthusiast like us.
GM has tried this before with parts supplier Delphi, so they know how this can be done, the benefits of doing so, and hopefully have learned from their mistakes, since that wasn’t the best spin off ever.
The IPO would give GM much needed cash on the front end while capitalizing on their most abundant and unwanted resource–people
If that is too aggressive, then Volt fleet sales to the utility companies; they stand to gain from the mass adoption too.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (12:26 pm)hi Fred #62,
“It kills me when I see those Chevy volt ads”
____________________________
The city of Santa Barbara is 100 miles North of Los Angeles.
S.B. and the surrounding area has a population of about 200,000 (besides thousands of tourists). One of the top three local radio stations plays a GM ad each morning at 0745 hours. Two out of five mornings we get a Volt ad. Two mornings are hybrid/30mpg ads. One morning is for the Malibu.
The Volt ad: “Drive the first 40 miles without using a drop of gas. The Chevy Volt, available in 2010″.
=D~
Nov 23rd, 2008 (12:28 pm)It is clear that a difference of opinions exists on the auto industry business model. If not the business model, the path forward.
1. Union – All I can get without bankrupting the industry….the company is another thing…taxpayer money does not hurt either. Beisdes, we are closer to Main St than AIG.
2. GM – We’re doing an excellent job with the limitations (union contract and laws, dealer contracts and laws) placed on the company and industry. (Of course, the same “limitations” protect the Big 3 from domestic startups). Besides, the AIG executives did not get this kind of public questioning.
3. Government – Nice…we had to give the “bank” away to the banks, but the auto industry troubles provides a way to redirect the news media from it. And of course, the war in…what was the name of that country again? And I seem to remember another country that got invaded.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (12:30 pm)#68 blkstne,
BYD is going to be tough competition for the Volt. If it is assembled in the United States (which is all anyone seems to care about) I can’t see how it won’t dominate this new segment, given the price.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (12:34 pm)hi blkstne #68 & D Lo #73,
It’s all good, bring it.
=D~
Nov 23rd, 2008 (12:37 pm)#71 Dave K
don’t forget all the ‘fine print’ that gets rattled off after that. Something to the effect of subject to dealer availability, specifications subject to change, drops of gas measured in metric, etc.
It sounds like a prescription drug commercial. Do you have gas? Take one Volt and call me in the morning.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (12:42 pm)From Popular Mechanics:
Nissan EV-02 Cube Electric Car Test Drive: Gunning for 150-Mile Range by 2010 With Super Quick Charge
http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/automotive_news/4276765.html
One of the big advantages is that the Nissan-NEC partnership, dubbed Automotive Energy Supply Corp., has found ways to produce flat, or laminate, batteries, rather than conventional, cylindrical cells. That saves space and weight, meaning there’s more energy stored and a longer range. How long? Nissan officials confer, quietly, in Japanese, when asked that question. Motohashi’s official answer? “Our goal is at least 100 miles by 2010,” he says first, then hints that something closer to 150 miles is what they’d really like to achieve.
That’s what many experts believe it will take to overcome the concerns of many a consumer. Even a 100-mi. range could more than handle the typical, daily drive for the majority of U.S. motorists, but studies show Americans drivers want to be able to make longer runs on the spur of the moment. A full charge will still require plugging in overnight, but here’s what could really enhance the appeal of the Nissan Cube EV-02: A quick charge from special high-voltage chargers—to the tune of an 80-percent range in 15 minutes. In a previous interview, Tom Lane, Nissan’s top global product strategist, insisted that would make it possible to run from Los Angeles to San Francisco with only an hour of extra time—compared to a similar gasoline vehicle—for a few quick charges.
__________________________________________________________
Can you imagine the impact if Nissan’s battery/battery charging technology turns out to be real and economically viable?
It seems to me more and more that the real battery push is going to have to come out of Japan. Historically speaking, Japan has no oil baggage. The U.S. (sadly) still has it in spades.
/ref #68 blkstne
Nov 23rd, 2008 (12:46 pm)GM does not have to go down the tubes or get rid of any of their brands, they need to down size, go chapter 11, renegotiate all contracts, and with the governments preprogrammed bankruptcy just start over.
With the new downsized retooled company, build any preorder car or truck they get orders for, build a bridge to the future with cars with as much high mileage and low cost as they can til the tech. catches up.
Some are saying they won’t buy a car from a bankrupt co. but some would, the new company will just have to make cars like the Volt, and other preordered cars.
Suggestion for GM, the battery is so expensive, scrap the Volt as it is now and build an inexpensive car around the battery, it would be a way to get it started, we’re all pulling for you GM but not in your present state of affairs
Nov 23rd, 2008 (12:59 pm)@D Lo and Dave K
Yeah I know the Volt is supposed to save GM but some of the new asian plug-in hybrid will gets 80+ miles to a charge and one of them will be available in afew weeks in China. Oregan governer is already paving the way for it to come here.
@ carcus #76 Thanks for the popular mechanics link. Good article. It looks to me as if GM’s volt might already been copied and may even been improved upon by the Asian auto industry.
GM’s Volt was a good car when it was going to be the only one out but now it will have competition.
Just found Volvo’s(Ford) plug-in
http://www.whatgreencar.com/news-item.php?Volvo-Plugin-Hybrid-Flexifuel-Unveiled
Nov 23rd, 2008 (1:12 pm)I’m still of the opinion that a sub $20,000 BEV with 100+ mile range and quick charge capability will have the largest impact on the automotive world. When consumers realize the $10s of thousands they’ll save in fuel and maintenance over the lifetime of the car, you could see one in the driveway of almost every multi-car household in the country.
NISSAN AND NEC JOINT VENTURE – AESC – STARTS OPERATIONS
http://www.nissan-global.com/EN/NEWS/2008/_STORY/080519-01-e.html
Automotive Energy Supply Corporation (AESC) will spend $115 million for a new lithium-ion battery plant
http://asianbiz.blogspot.com/2008/05/automotive-energy-supply-corporation.html
Nissan, Toyota locked in race to market zero-emission cars
http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2008/11/nissantoyota_locked_in_race_to.html
Nov 23rd, 2008 (1:22 pm)#37 Jan
Where you been? GM has already stated that they intend the Volt to be fully E85 compliant. In fact it’s Flex-Fuel design allows it not only to operate on E85 but any blend of regular unleaded and E85. It uses a patented fuel trim algorithm that alters fuel delivery automatically based on exhaust O2 content and other inputs to make adjustments to the required fuel being delivered in order to compensate for the lower energy (-34%) of any ethanol concentration from 0-85%.
GM already has numerous engines operating with this feature.
Curtis
Nov 23rd, 2008 (1:26 pm)#69 The Grump
Sounds like an Obama administration to me, are you sure you were dreaming?
Nov 23rd, 2008 (1:26 pm)hi blkstne #78,
“Yeah I know the Volt is supposed to save GM but… ”
______________________________
The title of this thread is, “How Can the Volt Save GM?”. This is a question presented for Volt enthusiasts and visitors to dwell on. We like to help with ideas that may bolster the production and success of the Chevy Volt. We like the Volt.
11/21/08 http://garfwod.250free.com/Photos/LA%20Volt%20019.jpg
+++++++
Just saw a subtitle on the TV news: “An Obama insider says…GM will need to restructure”.
=D~
Nov 23rd, 2008 (1:30 pm)Here’s my list of random ideas to save GM.
Put the Volt in the next Transformers movie. Bumble bee could transform into a Volt!
Or…another idea. Bribe Seth McFarlane with a free Volt to have Brian on “Family Guy” sell his Prius and buy a Volt.
Or come up with some other movie to product place the Volt in. Maybe the new Star Trek movie? It’s perfect. It’s just futuristic enough but not too futuristic that they don’t have transporters. There’s gotta be a million other movies. Basically you want to take advantage of little kids that go gaga over what they see on television and then they’ll tell their parents about how cool it is and pretty soon the parents will be looking it up and saving up for it when it comes out.
GM could partner with states that are big on keeping their air clean like California. Oregon has already agreed to further subsidize electric vehicles. Get CARB on this bandwagon.
Start commercial ads for the Volt now! Get people pumped up. Give us a date. Say Nov 12, 2010. If that date doesn’t happen, too late or too soon, what’s gonna happen? People are gonna be mad?
There are a lot of companies today that want to be viewed as environmentally friendly. Leverage this for fleet sales. Talk up the fact that these vehicles get 50mpg even after the first 40 miles with no gas!
And my last idea for this post….possibly my best…
Offer to give free Volts to every member of Congress (off the record would probably be the best idea)
Nov 23rd, 2008 (1:31 pm)Ultimately Congress needs to decide if it cares about having a US manufacturing sector. If it wants the US to be Mexico then it will let the Detroit automakers go under. If not then it will figure out a way forward. My suggestion since bankruptcy is not a good solution:
1. Management at all three resign, no golden parachutes
2. Pay freeze for all workers until the loan is payed back
3. Health care benefits to all retirees terminated
4. Existing union members take pay scales of new hires
5. Binding commitment to make 1 million EV or EV-Rs by 2015
6. Oh, yeah, the big one, all corporate jets sold
That will work. No idea if it can appeal to Congress since it requires a big hit for unions. Short of this I’m not sure what will work.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (1:50 pm)I am shocked and truly disappointed that congress might not provide our country’s auto industry a life-line. However it seems to me that congress wants assurance that the companies will become viable and also to see some sacrifice by the companies.
My suggestion (which is not actually tied to the Volt) is that if all of GM’s 300,000 or so employees contributed some money (maybe $1000 each) for the down payment of a loan, I think it could go a long way to help persuade congress to provide the loan. I think this would be in the best interest of the employees, it would show congress that everyone in the company is committed to GM’s survival, and it would certainly show that they are making tremendous personal sacrifice.
In addition, GM should request a loan amount that they can show will enable them to survive until the market is expected to improve and will be likely to solve their problems.
Then when GM returns to profitability and eventually pays back the loan, it should also pay back its employees.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (1:51 pm)#84 Don C,
“1. Management at all three resign, no golden parachutes”
I think most agree that Ford’s new president is doing as good of a job as any could. The fact that Ford is well capitalized relative to peers suggests this is true. Also turned a profit in Q1.. I don’t see how indiscriminately getting rid of people who know what they are doing help.
Similarly, if UAW is going to make staffing cuts, do it on merit like the rest of the free market. Seniority breeds the entitlement mentality that needs to go.
4. “Existing union members take pay scales of new hires” – Equally ridiculous. Some people have made sacrifices and work hard for their wage, albeit inflated. Again, any reductions should be based on merit. If people are performing at different levels, compensate them accordingly. UAW doesn’t support a meritocracy, so there is little incentive to improve quality, efficiency, or to separate the great from the good.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (1:52 pm)The root of the problem – cheap gasoline and diesel. Europe taxes gasoline and diesel to make it “expensive” enough to change behavior.
Energy independence has to be paid for by taxing the current “oil monopoly”. If we don’t change behaviors, we will always do the same thing. History does repeat itself. Carter warned us in 1972 to change what we do. Did anyone listen when oil prices fell? NO!
This will happen again, and the Volt will not sell 1000 units. Sadly, I am on the list but would most likely take my chances with a VW clean diesel and try to achieve 50+ mpg’s. We are middle class with two college students. 30 to 40 grand is out of the question.
Sorry GM- until the government sets a benchmark for gasoline at + $5.00 per gallon, the Volt will be a car for the rich, not the masses.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (1:57 pm)Tim #65,
This time I think we agree on a common proposition.
I often wrote on the GME blogs that I wanted them to retrofit my Opel diesel cars.
To this day no reaction.
Regards,
JC NPNS
Nov 23rd, 2008 (2:04 pm)This idea may work better on the West Coast, but I liked T. Boone Pickens adds promoting Natural Gas for fueling cars. Most homes in the west are plumbed for NG. Many gas stations now offer NG. While I love the Volt concept, perhaps a few eggs should go into the NG basket. It doesn’t cost that much more to produce cars that accept NG fuel. It is also very eco friendly and (at least here in the west) much less expensive than oil/gasoline.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (2:09 pm)@ Dave k
Yeah I was just showing eveyone how GM need to do something with the Volt NOW not in 2010 with so many other plug-ins cars coming out.
Now My idea to promote the Volt would be to Have Wagoner of GM drive a Prototype Volt from Detroit to Wasington for his next meeting with Congress to ask for Bailout money. He could have the whole thing documented and filmed as he goes from one small town to the next taking time to let people come take pictures and sit in it. He could have a spare Volt and an engineering staff ( and security staff)with him in case something breaks. What better image to show the public and the government than to drive up in front of the press and the senate in a Volt on the morning of his meeting. It would also make a great promotional comercial for the Volt.
Driving a prototype Volt would have been a better image than flying in on a Private Jet.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (2:18 pm)#80 Curtis
I realize that cars and Volt are E-85 capable. The point is our Gov’t and the oil industry aren’t getting product to pump. GM has done it’s part there and the Gov’t hasn’t. I know pilot plants are coming on line. I know lithium is now do-able. Our Gov’t sends mixed messages is my main point. 40 years with no energy policy, what’s a car company to do? Very bold of them to ask GM what is the plan for viability. Not to mention all the other unfair competition GM has to deal with.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (2:20 pm)Thing’s may change but $4.00 a gallon gas will stay in the minds of consumers for some time to come and the resulting resission . Will create the on going demand for the Volt and cars like it that give the consumer more control over the market and what they consume . I can make electricity from many diffrent things petrolium has limits . That is my driving factor . That I want change that makes a diffrence in the control I have in my life . God lets you choose your own path and I want that in my car as well .
God Bless
Nov 23rd, 2008 (2:38 pm)#86 D Lo – “I think most agree that Ford’s new president is doing as good of a job as any could … I don’t see how indiscriminately getting rid of people who know what they are doing help”
I agree with this in principle but as a practical matter you have to have something like a business hari-kari if you want to have credibility. Otherwise everything sounds like BS. Once you get into a performance based cut it all falls apart — can’t you hear Waggoner explaining what a great job he’s done (and he may be right I don’t really know). It’s the price you need to pay if you want to play in the political arena where image counts for more than reality.
“Some people have made sacrifices and work hard for their wage, albeit inflated. Again, any reductions should be based on merit.”
I again agree with you in principle but this is impossible to implement for factory workers. You can’t turn a system you’ve been refining for 100 years on its head overnight. Having worked in factories I’m not sure how it would be received. My reaction is that it would introduce more problems than it would solve for a host of reasons. Whatever you may think, better workers are rewarded under the current system, the rewards are just in hours and working conditions and assignments and so forth.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (2:41 pm)Just one last thing Christmass may be a little early this year . Do not let that stop what you have as your future is brighter with the Volt than you could find any other way .
God’s Blessing’s
Nov 23rd, 2008 (2:51 pm)I realize many here do not believe in the viability of a pure electric, but I would prefer one. You could outfit a Cruze with the electric parts, leave off the ICE and use A123 batteries allowing more of the battery use and it would not require all the temperature regulation so it would be cheaper then it could be sold for maybe the low to mid twentys. That would sell a bunch.
To show the government viability you can’t just talk the distant future, you need a plan to get there, so I would emphasize the 40+ mpg Cruze at a low price point transisitioning to an electric one in a couple of years. As they are using the Cruze as mules, it will be proven out before the Volt will be and should be available maybe six months earlier. Go for it. Think outside the box.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (3:54 pm)Hi Dave #64,
The red cruze looks to me like a 90s suzuki design.
There is soft roader concept in the new designs ( chevy is missing that )
Look at the new CRV ,volvo XC90 or Murano. Think who is target and design than copy some old designs.
don’t over do it (design for design ) .Think how convenient to the life style it is and use cases of a normal user.
Better words: GM should say “We are setting new standards and benchmarks and competitors are following it ” than saying they are
setting benchmarks and we are following. This attitude itself says we are inferior to competitors in innovating and performing.
NB: The worst part is they copy all suzuki designs except the good ones
( ex: swift :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzuki_Swift — look at the Indian one and Canadian one difference )
Gm has to understand one more thing : They have to give good designs all over the world and not only older ones to us.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (4:04 pm)The Volt, specifically the technology developed for it, is potentially the number one weapon for the US to reach energy independence. In GM’s own labs are potentially viable means to incre3ase battery energy density three fold. The original incarnation is only the beginning.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (4:24 pm)Why is a gov’t proposal needed. Let free people speak with their own money. I love the Volt, but my neighbor could care less. Why should I force him to support it with his money when he doesn’t believe in it. I’ll support EREV’s with my own money….once an EREV minivan comes out.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (4:28 pm)#39, nasaman
“This why I first offered a proposal in a thread here a few days ago based on the lessons of history…. 1) the Great Depression of the 1930’s and 2) the “War to end all Wars” (WWII) immediately following the depression.”
Minor point, but the “War to end all Wars” was WW One not WW Two. WWI was also known as the “Great war”.
I agree with your plan though, the Government could help the auto makers and the E-REV technology buy ordering this technology for the federal vehicle fleet.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (4:57 pm)Question :
Honda civic Hybrid : 50 MPG
Prius : 50+ MPG
Why GM is struggling to meet 40 MPG – for me something fundamentally wrong / missing else how all others are currently on 50 mpg and GM plans to meet on 2010.If they dont know what is missing , In 2010 they will be 150+mpg and GM will be again looking for TARP money.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (5:09 pm)Assuming GM gets its infusion of green from Washington, I would hope to see it come with a number of conditions that help us to help them – for one, the base price and rebates bringing the price down to 23-26K would work for me (same for Ford and Chrysler), another caveat would be that they cannot shift business outside the United States period, except for Canada.
I wonder under what conditions they would give this loan?
Nov 23rd, 2008 (5:14 pm)I have to agree with Unni #100. I would love to buy a Volt but not if there are better choices out there. I also don’t understand how GM can be taking so long while the imports seem to be putting out good hybrids right now and also working on putting out plug-in cars by 2010 also.
I still think GM CEO should drive a prototype Volt to Washington for his next bailout meeting with Congress. Gm needs all the publicity they can get before the imports start advertising their plug-ins.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (5:17 pm)Well Lyle, as I’ve said many times to anyone who would listen, GM has had a lot of help reaching this point. One of the biggest problems has been subprime lending that has crippled the credit markets.
But we can recover as can GM with the right leadership. Here’s hoping that Obama can turn things around. The man was a genius at pulling rabbits out of his hat during his run for president and maybe he’s got a few more. I think there’ll be a surge in American confidence and enthusiasm when he comes to power in January and then a recovery can start.
Once the things get going, and gas stays cheap Americans will buy enough GM products to keep GM and the Volt going. While GM is bleeding red ink, I think they’ve made the right choices to survive.
At least this is my take.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (5:24 pm)16falcon #99
I like your suggestion that the feds buy the Volt for their fleet. And they could buy a few Fords and Chryslers as well if they go electric.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (5:29 pm)#93 Don C,
Very valid points. I think we agree–essentially a need for an overhaul to the way they do business is necessary, but hacking at the people element–executives or rank and file–needs to be a deliberate and well thought through activity.
#98 Cautious Fan
“Let free people speak with their own money.”
In principal this sounds wonderful, but doesn’t address the problem. Maybe you can suggest a plan where the private sector or consumers can intervene–intervention is necessary–to save the automaker.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (5:34 pm)#101,
“another caveat would be that they cannot shift business outside the United States period, except for Canada.”
Period. Except for Canada. You sound like you must be a distinguished senator from that district. I think you could have left it at period.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (5:58 pm)I loved the IDEA of a cadillac version of the volt
That way GM could make it very fancy and charge a lot too.
Oh
GM bring back the car names dosent have to be Seville OR Deville.
But CTS STS is kinda booring.
Also g6 g3 bla bla.
Bring back the nice names. My first car was a seville I miss that line.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (6:17 pm)Come on Unni (#100) and blkstne (#102), research the Volt before posting on it. The Prius and Civic hybrids only get 7 to 8 miles off the electric system before the gas engine kicks in to give them that 50 mpg. The Volt DOES NOT get 40 mpg. It goes approximately 40 miles before its gas engine kicks in. The calculated mpg of the Volt at this point is supposed to be somewhere around 100 mpg when the ICE does run to extend the range of the Volt. You CAN hop in the Volt and go on a long trip and the end mpg result will far exceed the Prius and Civic hybrids. Research people!
Nov 23rd, 2008 (6:26 pm)What many fail to understand is that the Volt is not just a hatchback which happens to be electric. It has the quietness of a luxury car and the grunt almost of a V8. It is worth what it costs.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (7:06 pm)If Congress truly understood the Volt concept, they would be insane not to support its development.
This platform solves a huge domestic problems and it ushers in an entirely new and far superior mode of travel for America and the world.
So to me, this seems to be an educational process, not a fight. Superior information delivery could well save the Volt and GM.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (7:15 pm)#4 Dave B Says:
We hit $1 gas and all of a sudden “energy independence” becomes a thing of the past.
———–
I’m not sure about you, but I certainly don’t feel that way.
I want energy independence even more now.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (7:39 pm)Rashiid @ 111,
That’s exactly my point…I do want energy independence, which is THE primary reason why I support the Volt. But I ask, where are the masses that were screaming for EVs just 3 months ago when we had $4 gas?
Nov 23rd, 2008 (7:44 pm)112 Dave B asks,
But I ask, where are the masses that were screaming for EVs just 3 months ago when we had $4 gas?
————-
I honestly don’t know my friend. I have seen more Hummers on the road the last couple of weeks than I have seen over the last several months. Gas here is below $2.00 a gallon. Diesel is still over $3.00 a gallon. I want an EV and the Volt would be perfect for now, if it wasn’t for the high price of it. We need a major breakthrough in battery technology.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (7:50 pm)#112 Dave B
“where are the masses that were screaming for EVs just 3 months ago when we had $4 gas”
As much as I hate taxes too, establishing a gas tax as both a deterrent to gas and a way to generate additional revenue to fund energy sufficiency makes sense to me. We tax tobacco in part to discourage its use and to fund health care initiatives & education for the masses. I hope the next administration will consider doing this for gasoline.
Establishing a basement for gas prices with a tax will ensure predictable development of alternatives, as they will not be undercut by cheap gas yet again.
Don’t tax the oil companies, just tax the gas.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (8:04 pm)Maybe Exxon Mobil should buy GM as a hedge against oil’s eventual disappearance. Exxon is developing battery technologies and could just as easily accelerate fuel efficiency and fuel diversity as a transportation conglomerate with stakes on all sides of the equation. One of the Rockefeller heirs has gone on record as wanting to make Exxon Mobile a green company, not an oil company.
Skeptical? a good number of people are saying let GM fail–I can’t see how having it succeed under different ownership is any worse.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (8:44 pm)Congress already gave Volt a thumbs up by giving $25B in retooling loan.
The question now is – sine Volt actually contributing to GM’s cash flow in any meaningful way is a few years away – what is GM’s plan to reorg for a better future ?
I’m sure their plan will meantion Volt several times – because really that’s all that the big 3 together now have on the PR front. If the big 3 manage to get a bailout Volt would have already done its job for GM.
But they should really be concentrating on getting all their fuel efficient world cars to US – and asking congress to pass regulations that make it possible.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (8:54 pm)#113 How about to keep people on the right path we make up this simple (oil price free) bumper sticker:
SUPPORT YOUR TROOPS – DRIVE A SMALL CAR
or
MY OTHER CAR IS ONLY A DREAM – FOR NOW I AM SUPPORTING OUR TROOPS
or
IF YOU WANT TO BREATH DRIVE A TINY CAR
etc.
There are many reasons not to drive a Hummer. If we Americans live our lives by the price of gas we are in for some rollercoaster times!
Nov 23rd, 2008 (8:54 pm)GM fail on no fail : its one question
Electric car : second question
What of gm fails : OPEN Volt : check yankandpaste.blogspot.com , I have a post on OPEN Volt concept
Electric car/Volt : what GM is trying to do is impliment what happend on submarine systems back :
from : http://www.fleetsubmarine.com/propulsion.html
(The solution was to use full-time electric drive for the propeller shafts. Adapting a system originally developed for trains, the diesels were directly coupled to a large direct current generator. This power could then be used for charging the batteries, or powering the motors. Since there were four engines and generators, it was possible to use the full power output for the motors, charging the batteries, or a combination of the two.)
We dont need GM only to it because Toyota is making the same , Honda is doing the same. If worried on American company – yes its bad but companies happens, dies – its normal.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (8:59 pm)The Volt is THE platform of the future. The issue is how to make money now. Bailouts can’t last for 3+ years. I just read where a research company figured out how to make gasoline from recycling CO2 emissions from our power plants. That is a greenish solution too. Gasoline might not be the future but we sure need it today.
I hope GM survives. I also believe bailouts are wrong and won’t truly solve any of the US car makers issues.
In short, the way to save the Volt, is cheap gas and open access to loan money. We got cheap gas finally, now if congress would give us, the people of the USA, a tax write off for a new car that used to exist in the 60′s and early 70s (I remember my Dad telling me about it) then there is a solution. Give us the money to buy cars, not companies money to keep up the same old stuff. This would only need to last 4-6 years. Give it a sunset date like the income tax cuts Bush got us have (2010).
Nov 23rd, 2008 (9:04 pm)with all the new tech. coming (Nissan for one) out I don’t think cheap oil will stop anyone from buying an EV that won’t need a oil change or a tune up, I’d rather be electrocuted than burned up in a crash
which one would you want ? If it gives you all the things a gas car gives you without putting foreign oil in the tank is a no brain er, which one would the world want. Its coming its almost here now.
NO PLUG NO SALE, JGT(EV)WOTR =D~~~~~~~~~~(my volt)
Nov 23rd, 2008 (9:13 pm)Some people do not get it.
Volt is unfeasible at $35K-$40K. You cannot even count on the Volt as a platform to bring profit to GM in the next five years. The Volt is irrelevant as a revenue source to GM. That is especially true if gas prices remain lowe than $2.50/gallon.
If GM is to bring profit to the table, they need to do so without counting on the Volt. Not sure how that can be done though.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (9:14 pm)@BreatheEasy
I did do my research and my point was that with a lot of asian technology (hybrids) out there already and other companies(Ford,Nissan,Volvo etc) putting out electric plug-ins in the next year or so GM will have competition to sell the Volt.
GM shouldve put the Volt out by now to be the first but they can’t until 2010 with a half a dozen of other companies doing the same thing.
Oh by the way I am working on an electronic engineering degree and definately understand hybrid and electric car technology thank you very much.
The 40 mile range of the volt before it’s gas engine kicks in will already be beat by 2 Asian plug-in cars(one cars does 80 miles while the other will have a 120 mile range before a charge) coming out within the next year.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (9:43 pm)#21 Tim Tom wrote:
Some people do not get it.
Volt is unfeasible at $35K-$40K. You cannot even count on the Volt as a platform to bring profit to GM in the next five years. The Volt is irrelevant as a revenue source to GM. That is especially true if gas prices remain low than $2.50/gallon.
If GM is to bring profit to the table, they need to do so without counting on the Volt. Not sure how that can be done though.
*******************************************************************************
Oh, we get it. Yes, it is true that the Volt will not make money in the beginning. The million dollar question is: Do you think the price of oil will remain under $2.50 per gallon forever or even over the next 5 years (remember that the design cycle for a new platform is around 5 years). I believe the price of gas will not remain as low as it is right now. I believe it’s just a result of destructed demand. We are nowhere near the 85 mbd of global petroleum consumption that we were at since 2005. If the price of gas does remain this low we will be in a recession (or depression) or until we find a way around using so much gasoline or start to increase our oil supplies at historic levels (has not been the case since 2005).
Two bets:
1) We have unlimited petroleum reserves. We will use technology to find more and keep the economy rolling with cheap liquid fuels forever!
2) Petroleum is a non-renewable resource that will eventually run out. It looks like there are even supply problems today. We need to invest in technology that will shield us from this problem.
Two actions:
1) Do not invest in the electrification of the automobile and work to bring GM to profitability. Since the price of gas is now low there is not much need to improve fuel mileage all that much. Just need to keep up with government standards. Lobby hard! The best thing to do is to build better designed cars with more quality.
2) Keep investing strongly in the electrification of the automobile. Work towards getting the best fuel economies in every model class. Go green and go hard. The price of gas is probably temporary and thus we need to move on this as fast as we can.
Results of action:
A) Oil lasts forever:
1) Other reasons like global warming and oil independence come into play and the government and the people want to go electric to stop those problems. Complete failure and GM goes under for good. No chance for restructuring at this point. Other companies are far more ahead.
2)) Other reasons like global warming… The decision to electrify the automobile was the right one. The fleet has the best mileage numbers and both the government and the people are happy. GM is a leader once again.
B) Oil sees supply problems:
1) Complete failure going with option 1. GM goes into chapter 7.
2) GM is in the lead once again.
Thus, it seems to me that regardless of what the price of oil does, there are other reasons that are just as big for the government to put in regulations and taxes to prevent big cars from coming back. Thus, the electrification strategy has the best chance for GM’s survival. The government is much more likely to support GM in this decision. So will U.S. citizens. The government can order fleets of EVs to keep GM afloat until the global market supports electrified automobiles.
GM – Leader in the electrification of transportation.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (9:53 pm)#67 carcus
GM could use a guy like you in their marketing department. I don’t know when I’ve seen so much spin packed into so few words.
Good job!
———————————————————————-
Yeah, it’s an amazing talent. Telling things how it is.
Are you serious? Do you really think the reason the Toyota Camry sells 50,000 units a month while the Malibu sells 15,000 is unrelated to image? The Malibu is more reliable (j.d power initial quality), more fuel efficient, it drives better, it looks better inside and out, has better fit and finish, and comes better equipped.
Now why would the Camry sell better than a car that’s better in just about every way? I’m guessing all those things I just mentioned you were thinking “oh yeah right. more fuel efficient? drives better? I don’t think so”. I’m also guessing you probably like Toyota, and you think they make great cars… which would prove my point.
I’m not defending GM and I’m not bashing Toyota. I’m just bringing up a serious issue GM has and nobody is talking about it. GM definitely does have a perception problem and it’s not going to change until they can make people like them again. GM is going backwards and trying to become likable by saying things like “more cars than anyone else with 30 MPG or better”, which just isn’t going to work. It’s like Exxon and their ads talking about how green they are. No one listens to those ads because everyone hates Exxon.
Image is more important than anything when it comes to why one person buys one car over another. Pretty much all cars today are very similar. The fact that people will defend either Chevy or Toyota or VW and claim their brand is the best shows you how important image is. It’s a stupid human behavior that everyone has to deal with, and GM seems oblivious to it.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (9:56 pm)The Volt will save GM because it’s bail-out incentive. It will fail the same exact way the EV1 did (great idea, just came out at the wrong time- like when gas is approaching $1.50), except perhaps without the PR disaster that followed. GM will still go into a bankruptcy-like restructuring, but it will never be called bankruptcy. They will sell off what remains of their assets, thousands of jobs will be lost directly, and millions will affected indirectly.
The economy is collapsing very very slowly. We are far from approaching the valley floor, and much farther from the mountain. People can’t afford a $48,000 or even $30,000 car anymore. And people who once said “it’s cheaper than gas” have all shut up (even me). The Volt is a fantasy that only the rich will afford.
Life as we know it is not going to be the same as it was. We will all drive cheap cars (if any at all), struggle to pay for our basic necessities, and watch as the world follows and decides war is the best economic choice. And this time, the key players (Russia, India, Brazil, China) don’t exactly have an extremely limited supply of soldiers and resources like our adversaries in the last war did.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (10:05 pm)hi Unni #96,
“… like a 90s Suzuki design.”
____________________________
If GM had the time. And if GM had the money. They could continue making angular concept designs complete with gull wing doors. GM really needs a few good 300 hitters in the lineup. And GM needs to release a few players that just chew gum and take up space on the bench.
A basic E-REV Cruze with the RAV4/Suzuki body is a very strong player. The Camaro, plug-in Vue, Corvette, the 40 mpg ICE Cruze, Silverado truck, Pontiac G5, the Volt, the Solstice and a few Cadillac models.
I don’t see a problem with going with what works and cutting the ball-and-chain models. This pruning will leave plenty of growing room for the company. And GM will be able to get out of bed and start rehabilitation.
Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, GMC, GM Daewoo, Holden, HUMMER, Opel, Pontiac, Saab, Saturn, Vauxhall and Wuling.
People need to walk into a showroom and be excited about ALL of the great selections. The question should NOT be, “Should I look around to see if there is anything attractive and in my price range?. The question should be, “I would like one of each of there. Which model will work best for me?.
=D~
Nov 23rd, 2008 (10:18 pm)#125 kubel – “We will all drive cheap cars (if any at all), struggle to pay for our basic necessities, and watch as the world follows and decides war is the best economic choice.”
Always the optimist, eh?
Nov 23rd, 2008 (10:43 pm)Are you fools kidding me!! GM is done!!! Let the disolve into the trash heap of creative destruction. They haven’t made a decent car in 50 years, if ever!! All junk!!
Let Honda, Toyota and Nissan come up with a real car. Not some pipe dream baloney like GM is trying to pass off as viable.
What a Scam!!!!
Nov 23rd, 2008 (11:05 pm)blkstne says:
@BreatheEasy
I did do my research and my point was that with a lot of asian technology (hybrids) out there already and other companies(Ford,Nissan,Volvo etc) putting out electric plug-ins in the next year or so GM will have competition to sell the Volt.
GM shouldve put the Volt out by now to be the first but they can’t until 2010 with a half a dozen of other companies doing the same thing.
Oh by the way I am working on an electronic engineering degree and definately understand hybrid and electric car technology thank you very much.
The 40 mile range of the volt before it’s gas engine kicks in will already be beat by 2 Asian plug-in cars(one cars does 80 miles while the other will have a 120 mile range before a charge) coming out within the next year.
_____________________________________________________
Okay, so why didn’t you say that from the beginning instead of wording your initial post incorrectly? Apparently your engineering degree didn’t require a passing grade in english 101. YOU did say the Volt got 40 mpg – incorrect. And YOU compared it to the Prius and Civic getting 50 mpg TODAY, not the future. So you did your research…great. You may understand how things work, but you still need to work on communicating your point in print so that others know that you understand it. (I already have my degree – thank you)
Yes, GM shoulda, coulda, but didn’t do things correctly in the past. Now they may well be paying the ultimate price. But I hope not. I hope that they do come out of this, and yes, even if there are better cars available, I will buy the Volt. If there are cars available from other American manufacturers I will consider them also.
Nov 23rd, 2008 (11:10 pm)-The Volt will have no meaningful direct affect on GM’s near term profitability. I recommend GM resist an urge to present it otherwise. Now is the time fully disclosed truth for GM in these proceedings. Actually it always has been it is more magnified now.
-The Volt can, however, indirectly affect GM’s near term through perception leading to good will. They have been trying to capitalize this and should present how they will continue to do so. GM should point out how this helps “ready” the market for all forms of electric vehicles.
-The government isn’t (or at least shouldn’t be) only interested in GM near term viability. They must show plans for mid and long term viability. The Volt should be heavily touted here. Not because this one vehicle in one configuration will alone sustain GM, but rather because it is the FIRST E-flex EREV. This is a BIG deal. This drivetrain concept can be proliferated throughout their lineup in the mid term. This can be their future competitive edge. The should talk about some of the future enhancements they see possible for gen 2 and gen 3 EREVs. They should mention some specific areas of improvement.
Nov 24th, 2008 (12:10 am)I find it amazing – and ridiculous – that a company on the ropes and destined for banruptcy by end end of 2009 (their view from 2007) would throw $billions into a vehicle that had no chance of helping the bottom line in that timeframe.
When you’re two years from bankrupcty, you don’t launch a speculative project with no conceivable payoff. Remember, this thing is guaranteed to lose money through 2012 and make no significant positive impact to the bottom line through, in all likelihood, 2015.
It requires a platform they don’t really have, a propulsion system they don’t have and a battery that doesn’t exist.
Still, it’s the biggest, highest-profile project in this dying company.
It is easy to list 8 or 10 other projects that GM could undertake (back in 2007) to save themselves – and which they don’t appear to be doing:
Compact truck – there isn’t a good really small commuter truck on the market.
Decent automatics for their small cars.
MPG programs for all their vehicles (Toyota has left the door open here, they have no VCM engines, GM CAN do that). The recent intorduction of a decent transmission in the higher end of the Malibu line is LONG overdue (and, since it’s not on the LS, still a problem).
Enhancements to the BAS system that reduce the cost and make it worthwhile. Increased congestion makes a BAS system a sensible option for many drivers but GM’s system is high-cost and low-effect. Reducing the cost would be huge. Increasing the effect would be a help (electric A/C, for a start).
Instead, GM chooses to throw money into a project that will help sink themselves
I say… help them on their way. No bailout until after Chapter 11.
Nov 24th, 2008 (8:12 am)On the homeland security front, could the Federal Government also provide an additional DHS-sponsored tax credit for those individuals who invest in necessary equipment to allow Volt to be used as emergency power for the home, or as grid-connected source? I suppose that HM would need to make sure that battery is not fully depleted.
Nov 24th, 2008 (8:19 am)Lyle, Would you like to hear from an auto mechanic (30+ years)? I have watched the slide of GM for years. I fell in love with GM because of the simplicity of the cars (and trucks). At one time you could interchange parts from one car to another (Almost all engine parts on a small block Cheverolet would interchange). As a result, parts were plentiful and inexpensive. Everyone could drive one. The downfall, in my eyes, began when GM went away from this simplicity. Engines began to be changed in the middle of the model year and parts were not interchangable. The story is much deeper than I can possibly describe here but a partial answer may be to proivide the public with a vehicle that they could afford. KISS is one solution. We don’t really need to get rid of all the Buicks, etc. although that may help. Add to this the restructuring of management with the company (already discussed on this website) and you have a beginning. The third leg, not discussed in Washington last week, is a contribution made by the unions.
All of this will take time and the only way to buy time is through Chapter 11. I am a businessman and a GM stockholder. I would loose in the Chapter 11 deal but am willing to sacrifice. All this bologny about people not buying the cars and trucks is just that. Chrysler’s reorganization is a great example of how it could be successful. Someone needs to step up to the plate and be a leader like Iacocca did for Chrysler – we need to have hope that the company will survive for us GM fans to buy into the program.
Nov 24th, 2008 (9:02 am)#105 D Lo
My plan is simple. If GM can be profitable, I’ll go buy the stock, if they can’t, the same should happen to them as any other unprofitable company, big or small.
The whole “backbone” of the american economy is a little melodramatic and overplayed. I thought our backbone was agriculture, or technology, or airplanes, maybe steel, possibly finance….or maybe it just depends on whose asking for the money.
Nov 24th, 2008 (9:18 am)#133 Steve
I stopped buying GM after they designed an oil filter that was completly blocked in. I had to pry the exhaust pipe over a half inch to get the filter out. So you are right, and I was so angry that they were trying to force me back to the dealer for simple maint that my last four cars are jap engineered.
But I don’t care how low gas goes, they gouged me and pissed me off like GM did so Im just going back and forth to work and not using any extra. I’m buying the first electric vehicle I can. Because we all know gasoline will be going back up and higher. And I’m tired of our young boys and girls dieing for oil.
Nov 24th, 2008 (9:20 am)It seems to me that GM will have to push its batttery suppliers to ramp up production much faster than originally intended. Volume production is the key. There will be plenty of buyers at the $32,500 price point if the Volt has the performance, luxury and warranty that such an exensive care needs. (Is GM willing to give at least a 50,000 mile bumper to bumper warranty, including wear items such as brakes, that the luxury imports provide?) The price will come down as the volume goes up and the technology spreads to all the cars in the GM line-up. In fact, by 2016 many of these cars should have evolved to all electric 4 door sedans with ranges up to 300 miles. After all “hybrid” or “erev” cars are really only a “bridge” to the future. A national grid of quick chaging stations and recharging parking lot spaces is relatively easy to build- we already have electricity everywhere. Compare this to the investment that would be needed for the other oil free technology-fuel cells. Building hydrogen stations would probably be exponentially more expensive.
I believe that the Obama adminstration needs a fully functioning auto sector if it is to realize its goal of creating millions of “green’ jobs that cannot be exported. Therefore, as others have noted, much of what is happening now is ritual punishment of the the incredibly arrogant CEOs. We might have all saved time and worry if the CEOs had simply been required to strip to the waist. I think about 30 lashes each would have satisfied the need to punish them before they got our money!
Nov 24th, 2008 (9:41 am)Come on Unni (#100) and blkstne (#102), research the Volt before posting on it. The Prius and Civic hybrids only get 7 to 8 miles off the electric system before the gas engine kicks in to give them that 50 mpg. The Volt DOES NOT get 40 mpg. It goes approximately 40 miles before its gas engine kicks in.
_______________________________________
That is an extremely misleading statement. Care to retract it?
Repeatedly it has been pointed out that Volt will use a small quantity of gas when the system is started in the winter. The engine will be run for a little bit to warm the battery-pack. That means even with electric capacity at full, the engine will sometimes run anyway. In other words, well before 40 miles.
Nov 24th, 2008 (9:46 am)If this day of reckoning were to have occured 5-10 years from now, maybe the Volt would have saved them, but GM needs saving yesterday, so its fate will be decided based on its existing lineup of cars. To believe anything else is to be a denialist fanboi.
Nov 24th, 2008 (9:57 am)What is important to keep in mind is the loss of manufacturing in America is as scary as the loss in the financial markets. It is a fact that if you decide to let either sector fail, both will eventually return in some form or the other. The financial sector would return much faster because of world-wide investment in America. The auto manufacturing sector would return in bits and pieces and may never reach truly national levels or certainly global levels as reached by GM presently.
We can not say we would still have auto manufacturing here in the U.S. if GM, Ford and Chrysler were to fail. Just because Toyota, Honda and Nissan, among others, operate manufacturing plants here does not mean we could exert control over them in a time of national need. We do not need, nor is it desirable, to turn our manufacturing base over to foreign control. It is in our national interest to help GM, Ford and Chrysler.
Nov 24th, 2008 (10:04 am)The Volt by itself can not save GM. GM needs a concerted effort to build more efficient vehicles of which the Volt should be but one. It will be the leading vehicle for efficiency and would demand a higher price, but you cannot price it a price that would show a profit for several years. It is very important for GM to get the Cruze on the market and improve the efficiency of the Malibu and Impala, among others. With the Cruze, Malibu, Impala and Volt on the market, GM would have a very good line-up. Once they improve their two-more hybrid system where it really saves fuel at a much higher rate than now, it could be used in light duty and heavy duty trucks to bring that market back from the brink. GM must have time and financing to get it together for the next three years, at minimum. After that, GM should have vehicles on the market that could sustain their growth. All of this can not happen over night and it can not happen without the American people deciding to “buy American” again. We, as Americans, must try to purchase American cars and trucks where possible. We must insure the survival of our American auto companies.
Nov 24th, 2008 (11:00 am)Let’s suppose the Volt is available today and gasoline does not cost $1.62 per gallon as it does in Roanoke VA. Let’s say the volt is a great success and selling like hotcakes.
What keeps GM’s foreign competitors from using their financial advantages to out-Volt GM? Nothing lads. GM needs to rise like a Phoenix from the ashes to be able to compete. The hamstrung model of GM will cease to exist one way or the other, no matter how much gumminit money is thrown into the loo to preserve UAW contracts.
GM should spin off the Volt and its technology right now into something that can survive.
Do we have any idea what’s behind the card signing initiative of the Democrats? All that will accomplish is to push GM’s foreign competitors into Mexico instead of the southern US. It’s no long term help at all.
Nov 24th, 2008 (12:54 pm)John1701a (#137)
No. Why? The numbers I quoted are what have been reported from GM, and at this point I believe that the EPA sticker that will be on the car will back that up. The ICE running as you stated SHOULD have been calculated into the EPA estimate of the mpg. As the saying goes, “your mileage may vary”. If you live in North Dakota or some other northern clime, then no, I wouldn’t expect that you’d get the mileage that I will get in Florida. But it shouldn’t be that different. No one can say exactly how much mileage they will get because everyone drives differently. However, the broad-based analysis is that it SHOULD deliver on the numbers which have been reported. Again, lets just hope that GM survives to deliver. I am willing to find out if it will do as good as it says. Even if it doesn’t, it’s performance will at least be as good as what will be available at that time, and it will be American made. You can buy a Toyota if you like, I fought for your right of freedom of choice. It just sucks what choices some people make.
Nov 24th, 2008 (3:15 pm)I like that the federal government wants a game plan before releasing money. They should approach all expenditures that way. For example, the banks should have had to present their case in terms of how long it will take them to pay back their bailouts. AIG too. Similarly, government aid recipients could be required to show their plan to use their aid to get back on their feet and off assistance – and give progress reports.
Similarly, I’d love to see Congress’ plan to balance the budget and pay off the national debt before I give them any more tax money.
ONE DISTINCTION BETWEEN ALL THESE EXAMPLES… AT LEAST THE BIG THREE ACTUALLY MAKE A REAL TANGIBLE FRIGGIN PRODUCT !!!!
Nov 24th, 2008 (3:49 pm)[...] How Can the Volt Save GM? (none) Visit the original post at: Transportation News Bookmark It Hide Sites [...]
Nov 24th, 2008 (4:54 pm)The Volt is THE long term answer to American auto survival. At $60 a barrel for oil, this country cannot spend 400 billion dollars a year on foreign oil. Even if we could, oil is getting harder and more expensive to find. The Congress needs to tax escessive use of fossil fuel and use the funds to reward efficient use of electiric cars.
Nov 24th, 2008 (6:34 pm)I do believe that the Volt can be the catalyst for saving GM. True, it will not be a significant profit center for several years. On the other hand, Jerry has correctly reminded us at #136 that President-Elect Obama did say many times that he intended to revitalize the US auto industry by supporting ground breaking development of clean, fuel efficient, cars. This as part of his larger goal of creating millions of “green” jobs. I refer bloggers again to Thomas L. Friedman’s “Hot, Flat and Crowded”, which brilliantly supports this policy.
The Volt is clearly the most advanced existing program to support that policy. So, as many bloggers have said over the months, the Volt can provide the platform, and the cover, to allow the US government to step in and support the auto industry.
#139 N Riley:
Amen. As usual, I totally agree with you.
Many here have said that they are not going to buy another car until something of the level of sophistication of the Volt is available. Add my name to that list. Our current Chevy is 13 years old. It is running just fine. I have no doubt that we can keep it going for another 10 years. We have the cash put away to buy a Volt.
Unless and until the Volt, or something else comes along which we just cannot resist, we are not going to put out the money for a new car. We haven’t seen it yet. That is our challenge to the auto industry.
Nov 24th, 2008 (6:41 pm)My interest in owning an electric car skyrocketed after watching “Who Killed the Electric Car.” I began researching the web for models mentioned at the end of the movie and learned about the VOLT. While other EV cars exist today, only the VOLT technology stands out as truly practical. NO Range Anxiety!
No other EV technology makes the fun of the past possible. Remember the lyrics to Chevrolet’s ads in the ’50′s and ’60′s? Only the VOLT EREV technology makes this possible:
“See the USA in your Chevrolet
America is asking you to call
Drive your Chevrolet through the USA
America’s the greatest land of all
On a highway, or a road along the levy
Performance is sweeter, nothing can beat her
Life is completer in a Chevy
So make a date today to see the USA
And see it in your Chevrolet”
Some of those original ads could be shown to the folks in Washington DC when “selling” them about the VOLT. Only VOLT EREV technology will allow drivers to “Drive your Chevrolet through the USA” on vacation while enjoying electric driving at home.
Nov 24th, 2008 (6:53 pm)Well I started out to edit my previous comment, but now I have to take my hat off to Mark Z at #147. I can see in my mind’s eye, and hear in my mind’s ear, Diahna Shore belting out that iconic song. Well done Mark!
Here’s the edit:
NPNS!
I swear that the Aptera is looking better every day.
Nov 24th, 2008 (7:35 pm)Well now I guess I have to edit my edit. Something told me to look it up, and I guess it’s actually “Diana”. I would have bet that there was an “h” in there somewhere, the way it was pronounced, but I guess not. Sorry. Thanks again Mark for reminding us of that great piece of history.
Nov 24th, 2008 (7:51 pm)[...] do believe that the average Middle Class American has seen the light, and is going to start buying small, compact, efficient cars. Which the Big Three do not like making due to their lower profits. This was written by admin. [...]
Nov 24th, 2008 (8:28 pm)I like the idea of adding a tax to gasoline on a sliding scale to keep gas above $2-3 a gallon (Seen in another blog). (Or, charge the actual price as suggested by another blog. Add the cost of defense in middle east, and Israel to the cost, to get the true cost of oil. It would be interesting if the goverment would publish the TRUE cost of OIL.) Use this money to finance future technologies. This will reward those who buy electric cars at the expense of those who stick to the gasoline cars.
I also like the idea for the government to revitalize the USA auto industry by giving contracts to the US auto-industry to replace ALL its cars, with newer electric cars. Make a plan to get the US off foreign oil. (As another blog entry, during WWII, the conversion of auto industry to make guns, and bullets.)
This could follow Obama’s plan to revitalize the economy and put people to work. Create a new Green Economy starting with the auto industry. (Just imagine if Bush would have a clue, and would have re-vitalized the country after September 11, when the nation would have been completely behind getting off Foreign Oil. We would have been 6 years into a plan to remove our dependence on foreign oil)
Everyone is complaining about the price of the volt. With gas at $2 a gallon, and 12,000 miles per year, and using you current car at 25 miles to a gallon, you’ll save $700 a year in gasat . (500 gallons at $2/gallon at 25 mpg versus the $1 charge for the Volts 40 miles per charge)
Add to this savings, the $100 a year in Oil Changes.
Add to this savings, the $100 ($50/year) every other year to replace your brakes. (The Volt uses regenerative braking, and the backup breaks should never be used.)
Add to this savings, the tune-up every other year at $100. (50/year)
Add to this all the missing items which are replaced by the maintenance schedule in a gasoline engine. (I agree these will still have to be done, but at a much lower frequency since the gasoline engine is rarely used.)
Add all this up
$700(Gas) + 100(Oil change) + 50(brakes) + 50(tune-up) + 100 (Or more for other maintenance items)
And you get a savings of $1000+ per year, which can be applied to the down payment. Thats $85+ per month in down payment
—>>> this allows you to get a more expensive car in the beginning, so the $32,500 it not so bad.
So your $32,500 car at $440 / month for 60 months is really on $355 month. ($355 is a payment on a $26,000 car.)
So your $40,000 volt is actually $26,000 in todays money with maintenance and gas factored in.
I’d happily pay $26k for 40 MPG equivalent highway/city today.
Maybe GM should start selling the car, using this model of yearly costs, and the saving over your current car.
Nov 24th, 2008 (8:39 pm)I answered my own question on the cost of GAS, by searching for following “true cost of oil defense”
True cost of GAS is $7-8 dollars a gallon.
Read the information on this website.
http://www.energyandcapital.com/articles/oil-gas-crude/461
Everyone pays the other $5 a gallon in taxes, through defense spending and other spending/dependence.
At that price, $26k for an electric car is a STEAL.
Nov 25th, 2008 (11:50 am)How Much Does This Car Cost per kw?
Nov 25th, 2008 (2:09 pm)What GM should do….
I think GM should make Volt a new sub-entity, perhaps with a few other strong assets and then spin it off. Vote, divide the company with Chevy carrying the debt and Volt and a few other brands being allowed to continue debt free.
All GM stockholders would receive an equivalent share in the new entity. So Chevy would sink into the sea thanks to the weight around it’s neck (unions), meanwhile this newer splintered off company would rise like a Phoenix out of the ashes. Not bound by the unions, and the debts that have been accrued.
Nov 26th, 2008 (10:54 am)I would be willing to help GM, but only under the following conditions:
1. The company files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. It is time for GM to reorganize.
2. Union contracts are abrogated. New salary structure would be in line with what Toyota, Honda, BMW, Mercedes, and Hyundai are paying their American workers.
3. Excess plant capacity is eliminated, with certain brands dissolved. This will mean the laying off of tens of thousands of workers.
4. Management agrees to work for $1 per year until the company is able to return to solvency. Like Lee Iacocca did for Chrysler three decades ago, Wagoner, Lutz, and others should do the same. That shows leadership!
Then, and only then, would I consider lending money to GM for an amount and interest rate based on how seriously they take their current plight.
Dec 5th, 2008 (4:20 am)The correct link in comment 9 is http://www.glgroup.com/News/Will-Fords-Four-Hybrid-Models-Using-The-Successful-And-Proven-Nickel-Metal-Hydride-Battery-For-2010-Short-Circuit-The–28876.html. This can also be searched on google with: ford hybrid lithium-ion unproven