Grab our RSS Feed

AND

Did Cost Play a Role in Why GM Chose LG Chem Over A123 for the Chevy Volt Batteries?

January 28th, 2009 | Posted in: Battery, Financial

Our recent post about GM’s decision to choose LG Chem over A123 to supply the Volts cells led some to speculate that price was an issue. This is not something I directly discussed with Denise Gray at that time. I did have the opportunity to now re-address it with Bob Kruse, GM’s executive director of EVs, hybrids, and advanced batteries.

Did pricing play a role in GMs decision to choose LG Chem over A123?
It was a “multidimensional” decision. Many factors were analyzed. Price wasn’t the overriding issue, although financial considerations were important. We looked at service, quality, performance, price, manufacturing capability, total cost of materials, landed cost, and warranty performance.

To say that price alone was the factor undermines the significant complexity of this decision and why it took so long. It wasn’t a matter of saying ‘lets just start quoting cells’ and ‘lets have an auction.’

It was an extremely complex and important business decision that was an extremely rigorous and fair decision to ensure the success of the Volt.

Of note, Bob wasn’t able to advise me on how cell pricing differed between the two companies or on really any other parameters. He said this information was proprietary, internal to GM, and not for public consumption.

Posted by: Lyle

67 Responses to “Did Cost Play a Role in Why GM Chose LG Chem Over A123 for the Chevy Volt Batteries?”

FME III Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 7:20 am

“Price wasn’t the overriding issue, although financial considerations were important. We looked at service, quality, performance, price, manufacturing capability, total cost of materials, landed cost, and warranty performance.”

No surprise here, given the primary importance of the battery to the Volt, and the fact that GM is betting the farm on this car. They need a battery that works, not one that costs less.

(Quote)
RB Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 7:27 am

“Price wasn’t the overriding issue, although financial considerations were important. We looked at service, quality, performance, price, manufacturing capability, total cost of materials, landed cost, and warranty performance.”
————————————————————

Stripping away the wrapping phrases, the second half of the first sentence says “financial considerations were important.” But I have no doubt that all the other items had to be there too, especially warranty performance. We know from earlier comments by Mr Lutz how great a factor that is in pricing the Volt.

That is, I wish the statement could have been “we looked for the best in performance and quality” and accepted the price necessary to achieve that. Whether GM’s decision will be the better in the long term, we will have to wait and see.

(Quote)
Jim I Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 7:54 am

Of course cost was a factor.

Not the only factor, but it had to be considered.

I should think that performance and life issues had a much higher degree of importance.

Lets not forget that this Gen-1 vehicle HAS TO WORK AS ADSVERTISED, or any future plans for any type of E-REV or BEV will go right into the toilet……

(Quote)
kent beuchert Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 8:09 am

Forget trying to obtain pricing info from battery makers – it’s impossible.

(Quote)
Guy Incognito Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 8:29 am

Does’nt cost always play a role?
Thus, you get what you pay for.

(Quote)
statik Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 8:47 am

Actually, Mr Kruse, is being fairly straight here I think:

“Price wasn’t the overriding issue, although financial considerations were important….We looked at service, quality, performance, price, manufacturing capability, total cost of materials, landed cost, and warranty performance”

The statement just sounds good, and think it’s because it rings of the truth. Sure GM wanted the cheapest price, but the financial and ‘going forward’ stability of the supplier was just as big a factor.

On top of those considerations, one of the most important questions to both of them at the end of the process from GM surely would have been, “hey what kind of credit terms can you give us…and how much do you need up front?”–something LG certainly has a advantage of A123 on. LG can afford to take a bit of a risk on this, whears A123…not so much.

(Quote)
RB Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 9:11 am

#6 statik said “Actually, Mr Kruse, is being fairly straight here I think:”
————————

Agreed all around.

(Quote)
Nelson Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 9:18 am

Would you choose the private company that announced it was going public soon? What do you think would have happened if GM chose A123 and latter a company like Exxon bought a controlling amount of shares?

NPNS in 2009!

(Quote)
$10k hidden profit Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 9:25 am

I would like to see more info regarding the warranty side of things.

Seems odd that a $10k battery would have a $10k premium warranty cost to it. To me, that doesn’t sound like a warranty at all. Instead, it seems the consumer is paying for a second battery they may never use…

At the end of 10 years, can I ask GM for that second battery since I’m already paying for it ?

(Quote)
Dave Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 9:38 am

Why dont we go to the battery companies and get a general price range from them? Are these packs really 10k?

The warranty issue is shady I agree, if replacing the battery is factored into the price of each car then I will probably make my battery “have an accident” at the 150,000 mile mark to get my money’s worth.

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 9:45 am

Cost is not the only factor I consider when I buy a product.

(Quote)
RB Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 10:04 am

#10 Dave says “The warranty issue is shady I agree, if replacing the battery is factored into the price of each car then…”
—————————————————–

The plan is statistical, so in effect you are a part of an insurance pool. A 10-year horizon is required by CA.

There is not a plan to pay for a 2nd battery for every car, but there is a realization of the need to pay for replacements for some cars. Because of the necessary uncertainty (after all, there is no track record of claims) an important consideration is who sets the probabilities of failure, and who backstops the claims. I read into the post that the backstop company will be LG.

(Quote)
Jason M. Hendler Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 10:07 am

Lyle,

Do you have some bug in your colon about A123 not getting the contract? I don’t care to hear about this subject any further. A123 blew their chance to impress GM, and now must humbly submit themselves for another opportunity – get over it.

Meanwhile, the Department of Energy has created a catalyst for ethanol fuel cells, new EV competitors continue to emerge and multiple corporations are announcing layoffs, yet you continue to beat a dead horse about A123.

Enough! Move on!

(Quote)
Cautious Fan Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 10:15 am

#6 statik said “Actually, Mr Kruse, is being fairly straight here I think:”
————————

#7 RB Agreed all around.
__________________

I’ll pile on to that one. Sounds like a good answer.

Companies have to walk a fine line. At the end of the day, it’s all about the profits. But you can’t just come out and say it right. I like to think that GM is committed to me as a person, as an American, and that they truly do care about the environment, cool new technology, and public safety.

Truth be told….it’s the money! They care about quality, safety, public opinion, etc, insofar as it affects the bottom line today and tomorrow. That is the primary incentive they face.

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 10:26 am

#13 Jason M. Hendler

There is no need to be rude – it is not all about you.

(Quote)
N Riley Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 10:39 am

If price was the overriding consideration I would think less of the decision. I think the reasons stated made sense. Thanks, Lyle. Keep up the good work.

(Quote)
Cautious Fan Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 10:43 am

DARPA is funding algae based biofuels. Target is $3 / gallon. Competition is between SAIC and General Atomics.

I’m excited because the DARPA model gets results.

http://www.defensedaily.com/publications/dd/DARPA-Contracts-To-Boost-Biofuel-From-Algae-Efforts_5459.html

(Quote)
Adrian Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 10:50 am

Fairly good business practice by GM. I have been at a few places where price was the main thing, and we got what we paid for.

(Quote)
N Riley Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 10:52 am

Those of you who keep saying that you will get your battery to fail before the end of the warranty period may be in for a surprise. GM may very well have a pro-rated warranty. So, failing at the end of the battery means you have to fork out most of the cost of the new battery. I just don’t think they will easily give up that second battery to consumers even when the price was built into the original cost. But, who knows, maybe I am wrong. But, I don’t think so. Battery warranties may be more fair to the consumer after the first few years and after regulators have their input into them.

(Quote)
N Riley Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 10:59 am

#13 Jason

I don’t see where Lyle is “beating a dead horse”. We all, except for you, apparently, want to know more about the details of the battery contract. Lyle is just reporting on that information. I see no indication of Lyle favoring one contractor over another. This is a subject that will be discussed on this site more in the future. Maybe you are the one who “needs to get over it”. Lyle is doing what he should be doing. Keeping us informed as much as he can about all topics relating to the Volt and its technology.

(Quote)
unni Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 11:07 am

GM cancels contracts for Cruze/Volt engine plant from :

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/01/28/breaking-gm-cancels-contracts-for-cruze-volt-engine-plant/

and on the ICE engine volt uses :

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/09/26/tech-analysis-of-gms-new-1-4l-four-cylinder-engine/

Unfortunately we found out that GM has opted to stay with the less expensive sequential port fuel injection system for now. Chris Meagher, Chief Engineer for GM’s Family 2 engines explained that the engineers met the fuel economy targets for the engine without using DI.

Finally Is the expected Gold standard of EV/range extender is getting to bronze or below at time of building itself ?

One more Q : How much is the efficency of genarator part used in Volt ( in percentage ).

(Quote)
noel park Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 11:30 am

#11 ThombDbhomb:

Yeah, if price was the only consideration, I wouldn’t be looking to buy a Volt, LOL.

#12 RB:

I have to agree that I cannot see how two $10K batteries can be factored into the price of a Volt. Even at a MSRP of $40K, I can’t think that there is enough room in the cost/price of this very high tech and limited volume car to suppor $20K worth of batteries.

#17 Cautious Fan:

SAIC and General Atomics? Sure gives me a warm fuzzy feeling.

#21 unni:

How sad.

(Quote)
Cautious Fan Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 11:49 am

#21 Unni

Great links

(Quote)
Rashiid Amul Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 12:04 pm

#11 ThombDbhomb says,
Cost is not the only factor I consider when I buy a product.

—
Agreed. Quality plays a huge role. GM needs to be spot on. I just hope they are capable of doing it. It is a hard place to shoot for, but I hope they can do it.

(Quote)
Rashiid Amul Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 12:07 pm

#13 Jason M. Hendler

I strongly disagree with your handling of this thread.
It is okay if you are tired of it. You don’t have to read it.
But to attack Lyle is wrong. He owns this site, and can post whatever
he wants. He can also take it down whenever he wants. I, for one, am thankful it is here, and have met some very nice people along the way.
You included. Please don’t abuse Lyle like that anymore. He is a good guy doing his best.

(Quote)
Jason M. Hendler Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 12:18 pm

Thomthumb, N Riley, Rashid and any of the other usual suspects,

It is no surprise to me that you leap to Lyle’s defense, as you have your respective agendas on this site. Trust me, other posters are watching your behaviors and taking note.

The battery contract has been a done deal for months, yet even over this past week we still have a few main page articles on the topic. There is nothing more to wring out of this situation.

Tesla Motors has shipped 150 vehicles, Fisker has taken orders for 1,300 and lined up 25 dealerships on their way to 40, while Ford only offers a 3rd party EV conversion. There is far more important news out there than rehashing this same story.

Lyle, regardless of how you choose to rephrase the question, the GM execs are too disciplined to give you any other answer than the one prepared – give THEM a break.

(Quote)
Gsned57 Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 12:31 pm

Thanks for the site Lyle, I thought your question was a good one and it was nice to hear some rational answers coming out of GM about the decision process. Just because it wasn’t provocative doesn’t make it unimportant.

(Quote)
Rashiid Amul Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 12:32 pm

#26 Jason M. Hendler:

When I post comments, I do expect others could read them.

The only agenda I have is seeing the Volt succeed.
If my agenda is different than that, I don’t know what it is.

But as ThombdhBomb says, there is no need for you to be rude.

(Quote)
Lyle Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 12:33 pm

Jason

The battery contract is one of the biggest and most significant milestones in the Chevy Volt saga. I’ve written dozens of posts on the topic in the past two years.

I simply asked the price question because people here asked about it.

I am only a reporter

I don’t get a read that GM finds me annoying, after all we are helping their cause a lot here.

Thanks for your longstanding support.

(Quote)
John B Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 12:36 pm

Cost is always one of the most important factors in any supplier decision of course. Especially when you are trying to come from the the brink of bankruptcy. If it wasn’t considered, GM has no chance in the future.

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 12:37 pm

#26 Jason M. Hendler

Perhaps you should start your own daily blog. I’m sure you could please all the people all the time.

…or maybe it is easier for you to complain.

BTW, Lyle, keep up the good work.

(Quote)
GM Volt Fan Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 12:51 pm

21. Unni

This has got to sting for the autoworkers in Michigan.

It might be the best thing for the Volt in the short run though. GM really does need to max out their existing plants around the world in order to keep costs reasonable for all the vehicles they make … including the Volt. I bet Michigan will get a 1.4 liter Volt IC engine plant later on … once this damn recession that Wall Street schemers caused has run its course. They’ll probably need the capacity in a couple of years.

Let’s hope that these 1.4 liter engine plants in Europe are well staffed and have a reputation for QUALITY work. Having high quality/reliable parts going into the Volt (at a reasonable cost) is going to be VERY important. Especially for Volt 1.0.

Volt 1.0 is going to have to deliver a lot of “bang for the buck” in order for future “Voltec” vehicles to take off. A good first impression of these newfangled GM electric cars by “average Joes” is going to be crucial. The best marketing you can get is good “word of mouth”. That and good TV news coverage. Bottom line … it’s gotta be a high quality car at a reasonable price. That’s what the people want. That’s what will rack up the sales Year 1 of the Volt life and open the door to a LOT more vehicles with Volt technology down the road.

(Quote)
RB Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 12:52 pm

#26 JMH — As one of the people who has made numerous comments and asked numerous questions about the batteries and the battery contracts, I personally find today’s comments interesting and helpful. I am glad to know the reasoning that GM is presenting, and I appreciate Lyle getting this information for us.

I realize that we who read this blog are a big group, and that some posters will find today’s topic uninteresting, just as I have found some other day’s topics uninteresting. As this is true for you, please simply take a vacation today and come back tomorrow.

For sure this saga has had all kinds of expected and unexpected twists and turns, such as today’s sad cancellation of the contracts for the engine plant (unni #21), so I’m sure there will be future topics that you find attractive ones.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 12:58 pm

Having been in mfgr industry I have seen how some things go when it comes to quality & qualifying testing of parts. Two main things come to mind, who delivered first to the test bench and who bent over backwards to help us if a spec change occurred. It’s those qualities that really helped make the decision. Being that LG Chem is bigger and already had a good footprint in the industry I think they were selected because they were able to meet/adapt the unexpected spec changes to meet GM requirements. Cost isn’t everything when the “Part” is the heart of the product. We built products the size of 1″ X 3″ X .5 that cost in excess of $5500 and yes they were built in bulk and yes they were purchased.

Oh yeah, “Schmoooozing” also works. lol…..

(Quote)
statik Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 12:59 pm

#21 unni said:

GM cancels contracts for Cruze/Volt engine plant from :

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/01/28/breaking-gm-cancels-contracts-for-cruze-volt-engine-plant/

and on the ICE engine volt uses :

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/09/26/tech-analysis-of-gms-new-1-4l-four-cylinder-engine/

Unfortunately we found out that GM has opted to stay with the less expensive sequential port fuel injection system for now. Chris Meagher, Chief Engineer for GM’s Family 2 engines explained that the engineers met the fuel economy targets for the engine without using DI.

Finally Is the expected Gold standard of EV/range extender is getting to bronze or below at time of building itself ?

======================================

Nice pick up.

This may call into question the Volt’s ability to put up the 50MPG after the electric range is out…I mean, if the standard old ‘fanily o’ that has been around for awhile can do the job as is, why even think about putting up a new factory…especially with worldwide volumes so low, there had to be tons of extra capacity in this engine.

I would say for sure there is extra pressure/cost put on the MSRP of the Volt and even moreso on the Cruze (as it is harder to hide/swallow added expenses on lower end vehicles).

(Quote)
statik Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 1:04 pm

#13 Jason M Hendler said:

“Lyle, Do you have some bug in your colon about A123 not getting the contract? I don’t care to hear about this subject any further. A123 blew their chance to impress GM, and now must humbly submit themselves for another opportunity – get over it”

“Enough! Move on!”

#25 Jason M Hendler said:

“Thomthumb, N Riley, Rashid and any of the other usual suspects
It is no surprise to me that you leap to Lyle’s defense, as you have your respective agendas on this site. Trust me, other posters are watching your behaviors and taking note.”
========================================

I think that is a little over the top. I have no idea what agendas you think they have…we have all known each other for a long time here, yourself included, lets all just be friends.

I would think about maybe taking a step back to evaluate how out of hand this seems to have gotten in such a short time…over what?

/to world peace

(Quote)
statik Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 1:13 pm

TTAC has a story that Texas Gov. Rick Perry just promised to dole out $5,000 incentive towards a purchase of Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles…in the non-attainment areas.

I assume that means a cumulative $12,500 of the Volt as long as the gov’t subsidy lasts.

Of course as TTAC mentions, you can’t actually buy any Plug-In Evs right now, and they may just being doing it to satisfy the EPA…and to use all kinds of money to build new infrastructure, and swipe up some land.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/texas-governor-wants-epa-off-its-back-to-the-tune-of-5kvolt%e2%80%8f/#more-230482

/I’m assuming thats good for you Texas…provided you don’t have a big patch of land the gov’t has been lusting after

(Quote)
Cautious Fan Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 1:13 pm

#26 Jason Hendler

Calm down man. Other posters do take notice.

Folks on this site tend to be fairly gracious. I’ve sure said dumb things in the past, and posters that I respect have said dumb things too. But when someone attacks you….it gets tough to move past that.

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 1:14 pm

A crowd of people get together to discuss their common interest. Everybody gets along respectfully. One person in the crowd (there is always one, isn’t there?) blurts out, “don’t talk about this!” Nobody defends the blurter.

(Quote)
JEC Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 1:15 pm

GM’s response was as I, and likely most everyone else on this blog, expected. They looked at many factors and made a decision, weighted with each factor. Fairly straight forward, and typical good business practice.

For most of us we just said, “yep, that makes sense.”. But, if this post was not made, how would we know if GM really did perform its due diligence wrt the battery contract.

How Lyle keeps finding new subjects to post on a nearly a daily basis, amazes me. Where he finds the time, I have no idea. I spend to much of my time just reading the posts and blogs, I cannot imagine having to do all the leg work and research into creating them.

Thanks for all the late nights, Lyle! I appreciate it.

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 1:18 pm

#37 statik
Everything is bigger in Texas

Arnold? You can’t be outdone, can you?

(Quote)
JEC Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 1:19 pm

#37 Statik
“Of course as TTAC mentions, you can’t actually buy any Plug-In Evs right now, and they may just being doing it to satisfy the EPA…and to use all kinds of money to build new infrastructure, and swipe up some land.”
——————————————————————————————————-
Always the optimist! “Screw that silver lining, I know there has to be some dark cloud in their…”
That’s what I like about you the most

(Quote)
k-dawg Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 1:21 pm

GM laying off 2000 people, 1200 workers at the Delta (Lansing MI) Plant. They are rotating shifts between the day shift and the night shift.

http://www.freep.com/article/20090127/BUSINESS01/901270330/1014/GM+to+slash+2+000+more+jobs

(Quote)
Cautious Fan Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 1:21 pm

Obama allowing state-to-state mileage regulations ought to be a big boost for the EREV and other high-mileage concepts. Lyle….how about an article on it.

(Quote)
statik Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 1:23 pm

#42 JEC said:

Always the optimist!
That’s what I like about you the most
====================================

It just wouldn’t be the same if I wasn’t, hehe.
(=

(Quote)
ziv Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 1:24 pm

Hear, hear, Statik! A little civility goes a long way.

Just saw that GM announced that they are ending the jobs bank, one more small step in the right direction. Just get GM through the recession and then deliver the Volt on, or near, the time they have announced.
I doubt that the Volt as we see it now will ever be built in huge numbers, but if the Orlando uses similar Voltec and the Converj, etc., eventually we will begin to see a substantial, and continually growing, percentage of cars using domestically produced energy, which is what this site is all about in my book. GM, Mitsubishi IMievs, Toyota PHEV’s, Fisker, Tesla, bring them all on, the more the merrier!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090128/ap_on_bi_ge/gm_jobs_bank;_ylt=AhTADYhWzIGO0If.DF0P5p6yBhIF

(Quote)
statik Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 1:27 pm

#43 k-dawg said:

GM laying off 2000 people, 1200 workers at the Delta (Lansing MI) Plant. They are rotating shifts between the day shift and the night shift.

http://www.freep.com/article/20090127/BUSINESS01/901270330/1014/GM+to+slash+2+000+more+jobs
======================================
The job bank also dies on monday.

There is currently 1,600 ‘workers’ in the program…under the deal, current job bank employees will still get the state payout a top up..to about 72% (down from 85%). The max in any state for unemployment is 48 weeks…then they are out.

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/090128/gm_jobs_bank.html?.v=14

EDIT:
#46 Ziv:
+1 on the jobs banks…beat me by ‘that’ much,’ hehe…nice link you got there too, lol

(Quote)
DonC Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 1:29 pm

#17 Cautious Fan says “Competition is between SAIC and General Atomics.”

The Blues Brothers (General Atomic) seem serious about algae — they’ve bought a bunch of land in Texas and Australia on the theory that algae grows best there. Not sure how much sense that makes but they’ve done it. Not sure about SAIC.

(Quote)
JEC Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 1:30 pm

#44
Cautious Fan
“Obama allowing state-to-state mileage regulations ought to be a big boost for the EREV and other high-mileage concepts. Lyle….how about an article on it.”
——————————————————————————————–
I suggest running this by J. M. Hendler first, to be sure it’s post-worthy.

Sorry Jason, I just could not help myself.
I promise to stop the silly prodding now.

Enjoy the day (the sun is actually shining today…spring is near!)

(Quote)
k-dawg Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 1:37 pm

If the workers are collecting unemployment, why are they still getting suppliments from GM? Aren’t they required by the Fed not to give any money to any laid off worker???

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 1:37 pm

“Can’t we all just get along?” (g)

One of the neatest things about this site is the level passion we all own about the Volt. The thing that makes the site a very unusual experience (possible unique) is the relative civility of our members.
We’re within MONTHS of the Volt’s release! (ok,ok, a lot of months). Let’s try to hang together.
Be well,
Tag
LJGTVWOTR!! NPNS

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 1:50 pm

Personally, I resent any implication that I might ever have been gracious, or civil

And now for something completely different: a link to an article about how important an intelligent grid management system is for alternative energy (plug-ins mentioned on page one, at least):

http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/21747/

Of course, I still think that a superconducting grid is an eventual necessity.

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 2:06 pm

Re Jackson @ 52

BTW, that MIT site also has a free daily email that covers a broad range of technology.
The last actual “study” I’ve read (quotes because it was done by the govt) stated that the grid would not need extra generation until the number of plugins exceeded 250,000 (as long as they were charged at night). After the implementation of a smart grid, things get REALLY interesting.
Be well,
Tag
LJGTVWOTR!! NPNS

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 2:08 pm

Aw man, guys, just have a beer and get your thong out of the Wad.
When it comes down to it….
It’s only text.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 2:38 pm

In other news, the PHEV Tax credit is being lobbied to increase from 250,000 to 500,000 units…

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/01/28/senate-proposal-would-double-phev-tax-credit-to-500-000-units/

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 2:41 pm

Here’s one for the Tesla lovers…
Sure, go put your $$$ down on a car since it’s “Better” than the Volt as you Tesla lovers perceive….

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/01/28/tesla-holds-customer-town-hall-to-explain-price-increases/

Then bend over because this high tech company couldn’t seem to keep count of it’s funds.

(Quote)
GM Dealer Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 2:45 pm

…..watching behaviors and taking notes…….

(Quote)
David K (CT) Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 3:34 pm

#57 GM Dealer Says: …..watching behaviors and taking notes…….

No need, everybody left.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 3:36 pm

@David K (CT) 58

I’m probably plasterd in his notes anyway….
lol
p

(Quote)
RB Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 3:38 pm

#21 unni said “Unfortunately we found out that GM has opted to stay with the less expensive sequential port fuel injection system for now.”
———————————————————————

While my heart is always with the most cutting edge technology, the Volt has so much new going on already that it may turn out to be a benefit for the engine to be a well established tried-and-true system.
While the decision likely was taken for financial reasons, it may be ok or even better, at least for gen 1. The Volt may lose a little bit of ICE gas mpg, but it will not be a lot.

(Quote)
N Riley Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 4:10 pm

#26 Jason

I have been off the site for several hours and am just now picking up where I left off. Jason, you are absolutely correct in there being many other subjects to discuss on this blog. Lyle posts what he has time to research and place on the site. His primary interest, as is most of ours, is the Chevrolet Volt. I agree, I too would like to see more about Tesla, Fisker, Ford and other EV, BEV, PHEV and EREV developments. If you have access to articles, email Lyle. He has posted articles suggested by others and will continue to do so, I am sure. Lyle is a busy man. He does not devote 100% of his time to this site. He would certainly appreciate any suggestions. (Sorry, Lyle, if I am speaking out of place for you.)

Jason, you have been a good member of this community devoted to the Volt. Please continue.

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 4:59 pm

#57 GM Dealer

ROFL

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 7:43 pm

GM chose LG because big companies like to do business with other big companies.

For example, let’s say GM went with a smaller company like A123, and then A123 got into some financial trouble. A123 might then say “we need to raise the price we quoted or we’ll go bankrupt – you’re a big company – it wouldn’t hurt you to help us out”. This kind of stuff happens. With LG having $100 billion in annual sales, GM can rest assured that they won’t go have to go through this.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
January 28th, 2009 at 7:49 pm

#55 CaptJackSparrow Says: “In other news, the PHEV Tax credit is being lobbied to increase from 250,000 to 500,000 units…
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/01/28/senate-proposal-would-double-phev-tax-credit-to-500-000-units/
————————————————————————————–
Great news! Let’s hope it goes through.

(Quote)
Jake Says:
January 29th, 2009 at 6:11 pm

Hi Folks,

Just stopping in to take note of the behavior and agendas of all you posters on here.

I am very interested in the Volt’s battery, and I do admit I was rooting for A123 (probably because I know and like their product and know nothing about LG). But may the best battery win!

Has anyone else noticed how STILL, in all the latest media reports about the Volt or electric cars in general, including from very respected news sources, reporters can’t resist describing new EV Li-Ion batteries as being “like laptop batteries?” Normally I don’t nitpick this stuff but the Volt has been around long enough now for people to figure out (I thought) that its batteries are NOT like laptop batteries in any way other than general chemistry! Sure it’s Li-Ion, but it is in a whole ‘nother league compared to the battery in my Thinkpad right now. Power density, durability, cycle life…there is no comparison! Every time someone in the media mentions “Volt” and “laptop” in the same article I cringe, because people are instantly connecting the dots between the name of the chemistry and the exploding Sony laptops of a few years ago. Sigh.

(Quote)
stas peterson Says:
January 29th, 2009 at 7:57 pm

#32 GM Volt Fan,

It wasn’t real “Wall Street Schemers”. It was self centered, Washington “K” Street politically-connected Democratic politicos, that fashioned themselves Wall Street magnates, that did all the damage.

Specifically, Fred Rains who used his Democrat political connections to get himself appointed in charge of the semi-governmental agency Fannie Mae. It was the Jim “Tim” Johnson who used his Democrat political connections to get appointed to head Freddie Mac. And it was Jamie Gorelik, who used her Democrat political connections to get herself selected as head of E F Hutton.

It was these three miserable political ph..cks who looted their organizations. They forced the rest of the Banking establishment to buy the waste paper that they made of “mortgage based securities” under threat of government investigating them for “not helping the poor buy houses” Thus lots of Banks had to purchase that waste paper as Assets, ruining their Balance Sheets when the waste paper securities became recognized as worthless.

These crooks had help from Senator Chris Dudd and Representative Barney “Fife” Franks, to enforce their threats. They each paid a million dollars or so, of campaign contributions, to the various Democratic campaign comittees for protection. And walked away with tens or hundred of millions in their own pockets, after creating this financial mess.

Interestingly, Obama used their “sage” transition-team advise to select that Tax cheat, Gietener as the new Secretary of the Treasury.

These were not real Wall Street professionals. They were, and are, politically-connected crooks. Meanwhile have you heard a single one of them being under threat of indictment? Of course not.

(Quote)
Andrew Says:
February 2nd, 2009 at 9:58 pm

We all know Barney Franks likes getting it at both ends. At least he’s not Secretary of State although the current one is beholden the almost every hostile foreign government thanks to her slut husband.

(Quote)

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts

New video: Volt drive in Detroit November 19, 2009
November 19, 2009 Detroit Free Press story with video featuring a Volt drive with Andrew Farah in... […]
srschrier
New Video: Volt Corrosion Testing November 18, 2009
From GM VoltAge, the Volt's corrosion... […]
srschrier
Th!nk picks Indiana for U.S. factory November 18, 2009
Th!nk picks Indiana for U.S. factory: _Link_ (http://www.allcarselectric.com/blog/1038564_thnk-picks-indiana-for-u-s-factory) […]
Jason M. Hendler
FIRST ALL-ELECTRIC APTERA 2e PUSHED BACK TO 2010 November 18, 2009
FIRST ALL-ELECTRIC APTERA 2e PUSHED BACK TO 2010: _Link_... […]
Jason M. Hendler
Any news about the NiMH battery? November 18, 2009
Now that there are new owners of the patent, is there any indication that they will allow its use for electric cars? Like many others, I believe that... […]
Desertstraw
energy requirments of modern electric vehicles November 18, 2009
does anyone know any credible sources of information concerning the electricity requirements of modern electric vehicles per mile of travel and the... […]
crubkings
30% reduction November 18, 2009
The Belgian governement decided that if you buy a car with less then 60g/km emmision you get a 15% tax reduction and you can write it off for 100% if... […]
filiep

Did Cost Play a Role in Why GM Chose LG Chem Over A123 for the Chevy Volt Batteries?

67 Responses to “Did Cost Play a Role in Why GM Chose LG Chem Over A123 for the Chevy Volt Batteries?”

Leave a Reply

Recent Posts

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts