GM-VOLT : Chevy Volt Electric Car Site

In this inspired video clip, Frank Weber, GM’s Volt vehicle line executive, discusses public acceptance for electric propulsion.

He notes people will see the obvious benefits of petroleum free driving; no emissions, and quietness, but also goes on to extol that electric propulsion “opens a new dimension in driving performance and experience.”

He says electric propulsion gives you torque at zero RPM and sheer propulsion with no noise.

He analogizes driving the Volt to driving a “high-end luxury car with a massive, noise-isolated, combustion engine.”

He also says environmental friendly cars were sacrificial in performance, but that the Volt breaks that paradigm.

The Volt’s torque, he notes, is equal to a 250 hp V6 engine, despite it actually being 150 hp. He says “it is like flying,” and people, he feels, will learn about it and be surprised.

He talks about the current production-intent Volt/Cruze mules driving around, and the eagerness of the GM senior leadership to drive them, and when they do, initial smiles are seen within 30 seconds.

Weber is certain that electrification is the future not just for petroleum independence but for driving performance and advised that GM has positioned the Volt “rather on the sportier side” to make the transition to electric vehicles as easy as possible for people to accept.

[flash http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkTCAED7s5A]

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)

L to R: Bob Lutz, Bob Kruse, Jon Lauckner, Andrew Farah

GM vice chairman and father of the Volt chose today to give us an online update on the object of our affection. on his blog.

He declined to get into financial matters but instead just gave us good clean Volt fun.

He noted that he had personally driven the newest vintage of Volt mules which have production-intent parts and are based on the Chevy Cruze, using the same global compact platofrm that the final Volt will have.

Lutz said GM is making “great progress” on Volt development.

He said in driving the Volt “the relative quiet and absence of vibration stand out,” he also noted the chassis integrity was “outstanding” and he was pleased with braking and steering.

He described going for a drive at 30 degrees for 19 miles when the generator kicked in, it was so “quiet and non-jarring” that he didn’t even notice it. Overall he drove it for 30 miles and “couldn’t be more pleased” with the powertrain and vehicle.

He mentioned that there was some cutting in and out of the engine at low sppeds but that further testing would lead to correcting that.

In the end he assured us that his team “will continue to work round the clock to further refine the Volt and get it on the road — and in your hands — year after next.”

Source (FastLane Blog)

Fisker Automotive, based in LA, has been displaying their extended range electric vehicle called the Karma for sometime. Recently they announced plans for production.

In a dribble of good news coming out for GM today, Fisker announced it will be buying the engines for its EREV Karma from none other than General Motors. Fisker plans to buy a 2.0-liter, direct-injection, turbocharged 4 cylinder that generates 260 hp.

The Karma operates similarly to the Volt in that the engine only serves to generate electricity once the rechargeable on-board pack has become depleted, which will be at 50 miles.

The Karma is a luxury car that is expected to reach North America next year and sell for $80,000.

GMs VP of powertrain Tom Stephens said: “GM is proud that Fisker Automotive has selected one of the world’s best powertrains for installation into the new Karma. The advanced design of this engine offers a superior performance-to-weight ratio that makes it the right choice for the Fisker Hybrid Electric Vehicle. As a leader in the automotive industry in the development of fuel efficient and energy diverse powertrains, GM sees significant opportunity in working with Fisker Automotive, a visionary company developing products that embody both exciting vehicle design as well as technology friendly to our environment.”

Fisker’s CEO Henrik Fisker said “Given General Motors global leadership in the parts and accessories space, the fact that it is already engineering parts for extended range electric vehicles, and its commitment to helping the environment, it was clear that this was the right partner for us.”

Source (MarketWatch)

Automakers will have to submit their viability plans by December 2nd and Congress will decide whether to give them the funds on the week of December 8th.  The loans will then be made within 15 days.

A statement in the bill of particular interest to us is that each plan must “improve the capacity of the company to pursue the timely and aggressive production of energy efficient advanced technology vehicles.”

The following summary is supplied by Senator Carl Levin (D):

Summary of the Auto Industry Emergency Bridge Loan Act
The Auto Industry Emergency Bridge Loan Act provides the necessary short-term assistance to the U.S. auto industry as it weathers the current economic downturn. The measure provides the following:

• $25 Billion in Bridge Loans. Directs the Secretary of Commerce to establish a program to provide up to $25 billion in direct loans to automobile manufacturers and component suppliers whose failure would have a systemic adverse effect on the overall economy.
• Funding. Any costs of the loans would be covered by funds previously appropriated for auto industry retooling loans under Section 136 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-140). However, Section 136 is left completely intact, which means the environmental standards, including strengthened fuel economy and emissions standards, are preserved.
• Replenishment. Loan repayments and proceeds from the sale of company stock will be used to replenish funding for Section 136.

The following robust oversight provisions are included:

• Plan to Ensure Financial Viability. Requires loan recipients to detail how they would use the funds to ensure their long-term financial viability and improve their ability to produce energy-efficient, advanced technology vehicles. Requires cost control measures and performance goals and milestones.
• Tough Oversight Board. Establishes Oversight Board comprised of the Secretary of Commerce, Secretary of Energy, Secretary of Transportation, Secretary of Treasury, Secretary of Labor and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. The Board will review and provide advice, and recommend changes, as necessary, for meeting the goals and milestones under the Financial Viability Plan. The Board also has authority to review significant company transactions and to give direction to the company with respect to such transactions.
• Taxpayer Protections.
  • Warrants. Mandates the government get an equity stake in firms that get loans.
  • No Dividends. Prohibits firms who receive loans from paying dividends to common stockholders for the duration of the loan.
• Terms of the loans. The companies will be charged 5 percent interest for the first 5 years and then 9 percent interest after that.
• Executive Compensation Limits. Requires companies that receive the loans to place limits on executive compensation, including prohibiting golden parachutes. In addition to all of the limits placed on EESA beneficiaries, prohibits bonuses to executives whose base pay exceeds $250,000 annually.

The full text of the bill may be downloaded here.

Source (Senator Carl Levin)

Press Conference Video:

[flash http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2-rRl8dYlQ]

Congressional leaders from the House and Senate today gave a press conference on the how they plan to move forward with the Detroit 3 bailout.

The congressional leaders indicated they are unanimously committed to helping the automakers, in a non-partisan way, but not immediately, and on conditions.

The leaders said GM, Chrysler, and Ford would have to provide congress with detailed plans on how they would use loan money in order to achieve future financial viability, stability, and profitability.

Those plans have to be submitted by December 2nd and will be reviewed and decided upon by the Congress, with funds being issued immediately upon approval. Congress will reconvene for this after Thanksgiving.

There will be taxpayer protection and equity. The funds will come from the retooling loan provisions, but not take away from those loans. Instead the money will come from that fund called section 136 and what is left will still be used for retooling. Furthermore stock will be held by the government and when sold back to the automakers at a profit (hopefully), it will go back into those funds.

Lawmakers indicated there is a significant risk in delaying this, but stated that if there is an emergency prior to December 8th, Pauslon and the administration will have the authority to use the TARP funds to give an emergency infusion. Paulson and the Bush administration though have clearly stated they did not feel the TARP funds were appropriate for the automakers.

The plan also stipulates strong congressional oversight once the loans are made.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi summarized the plan in the following way “Until we see the plan…we cannot show them the money.”

GM spokesperson Greg Martin has issued the following statement in response:

We appreciate the Congress’ recognition of the auto industry’s vital contribution to the nation’s economic strength and national security. We intend to deliver a plan to Congress that shows them a viable General Motors. We agree completely that there must be accountability to U.S. taxpayers for government support that enables automakers to continue their restructuring and to ensure a stronger, more competitive auto industry. We will continue to work vigorously with the Congress and the Administration during the next few weeks to address their concerns and to arrive at a solution that provides immediate aid to the auto industry.