GM-VOLT : Chevy Volt Electric Car Site

GM just received last night an additional $5.4 billion in government loans bringing the total so far to $9.4 billion. They are expected to receive an addition $4 billion on February 17th.

While in Detroit, I had a chance to ask one question to Ray Young who is GM’s CFO. Ray noted that GM has to submit a plan to the government on February 17th showing its progress on how it will be achieving viability in exchange for the loans that have been received.

A major factor in GM being able to be viable in the future is for them to shed the massive debt they owe bondholders and the retiree healthcare pension or VEBA fund. They are trying to reduce unsecured bondholder debt from $28 billion to $9 billion, and a halve the $20 billion VEBA debt by turning it into equity.

My question to Mr. Young was as follows:

How confident are you that debtholders will accept their haircuts for reduced payments on the dollar, and that the UAW will agree to swap VEBA debt for equity?

On the UAW issue Ron Gettelfinger has indicated that they (the union) will come to the party and support the restructuring of our industry. They also indicated they wont be the only ones coming to the party and we need to make sure other people including the bondholders will too. So therefore we’re working on the different structures as to how to effect a debt to equity conversion or a debt to debt conversion or a capital restructuring of the company. And while its going to be challenging, its not going to be impossible.

We’ve actually got the smartest brains on Wall Street working with us on that. I spent 3 days in NY last week working with these folks and I’m confident we’re going to get something done here. The debtholders understand that this needs to be done and that the government wants this to be done too.

At the Detroit Auto Show GM finally announced that they awarded the Chevy Volt lithium-ion battery contract to LG Chem of Korea. They also shocked us with the revelation that GM itself would assume the role of pack-maker.

In so doing, they would have to build a free-standing advanced automotive battery pack plant, the first in the United States. The plant is intended to be in southeast Michigan.

GM’s Executive Director of Global Vehicle Engineering Hybrids, Electric Vehicles and Batteries, Robert Kruse told me that the plant will not be a new building, nor will it piggyback the Hamtramck Volt assembly plant as the CEO of Compact Power Inc. had previously suggested.

Instead, Kruse said there are “plenty of facilities in southeastern Michigan that we can make into battery pack facilities. I do not envision that this will be a new plant.”

Also, Chevrolet manager Ed Peper said building the plant will require an investment from GM of $30 million and that it is scheduled to open in 2010.

Peper also confirmed the mainstream goal of the Volt saying “We chose Chevy because we can’t be niche with the Volt. We have to make it a mass-production vehicle.”

Source (Automotive News) subscription required

At the Detroit Auto Show GM finally announced plans to bring two concept cars to reality, and bring them to the USA.

The Chevy Spark is the production name that will be given to the mini-car previously known as the Chevy Beat. Over the months we heard it was coming then that it might not. Now GM has offcially announced that the Spark will arrive in the US in 2011. It is expected to get 50 MPG fuel efficiency on highway driving.

The second vehicle they said has also been greenlighted for a US launch in 2011 is the Chevy Orlando. This is an MPV or multipurpose vehicle that will be built on the compact delta platform, the same one used in the Chevy Cruze and the Chevy Volt. The vehicle is built for diversity and utility and is able to carry 7 people. This class of vehicle is sometimes referred to as a microvan, though it will not have sliding doors I have been told.

Jon Lauckner who is GMs VP of global program management was asked whether that car would also get the Voltec extended-range electric vehicle drivetrain.

Lauckner said “I would point out that the Chevrolet Orlando is built on the same basic vehicle architecture and component set as the Chevrolet Volt, so if it makes sense, it’s certainly something we can take a look at.”

Not exactly an overwhelming yes, but hey you never know.

Source (Automotive News )

While at the Detroit Auto Show I had the chance to meet GM’s CEO Rick Wagoner in a group discussion with about ten journalists. It sort of reminded me of the film Roger and Me, here I am some bumbling Michael Moore-type winding my way through months of effort to finally stand next to GM’s CEO, although in my case I was actually invited to do so.

We each had the chance to ask one question. Here’s how mine went:

First I wanted to express to you some of my reader’s and my best wishes to you in these trying times.

Thank you.

It seems the Volt is a very important part of GM’s viability plan and yet cost is high, volumes are low, and profit margins are thin or nonexistent. So I’m wondering how you reconcile the Volt and GMs viability at the same time in GMs immediate future?

Lets face it for a while you have to look at it as investment in the future and we spend R&D money every year and we spend on advanced engineering and advanced design. I think in the very early stages you have to recognize that you have to invest and sometimes the investment cost is higher than the market will bear.

Obviously were hoping for and we will get some good government incentives to consumers for products like the Volt which will help to cover some of that cost shortfall. The other thing is we have to work like crazy to get the cost down. This is where if the EV market in the US grows very gradually it makes the risk of it being unsuccessful much greater than if it can grow rapidly. If it grows rapidly you will see the suppliers investing and people putting R&D into the next generation technology, improving the manufacturing processes and being able to get the costs of the battery down much faster. This is where proactive government policy in this area will make all the difference.

There’s a reason today why most of all of those lithium batteries that we use in our cellphones and computers come from Japan. Its that when it wasn’t financially viable for private enterprise (to manufacture them), their governments were supporting it 15 or 20 years ago. We need to recognize in certain areas that proactive government engagement, clear directional policy, and in some cases support for R&D is going to be critical to move towards energy independence and leadership in battery technology.

Wouldn’t it be a shame to go to this massive effort to shift reliance from oil to diversifying the use of batteries, and we wind up having to buy our batteries from somewhere else.

As we know, GM has coined a term to describe the specialized architecture of the Chevy Volt and its Voltec drivetrain. It is important to make the point that the car is first and foremost an electric car. But in addition that has a gas generator to allow the car to continue past its electric range limit and avoid range anxiety. Thus they have called it an “extended-range electric vehicle” or E-REV. When I first heard the term from Volt vehicle line director Tony Posawatz he said GM like the term because it sounded like e-revolution.

Since then, other automakers have come out with similar concept cars. One that has adopted the model almost exactly down to the same 40 miles is Chrysler. First they showed us concepts based on a Jeep Wrangler and a Town and Country minivan. At last week’s Detroit auto show they unveiled a sporty 4 seat, 4 door vehicle called the 200c thats essentially a twin sister for the Volt. The automaker confirmed one of their cars will go into production in 2010 too.

But guess what they’re calling it, a “range-extended electric vehicle.”

The problem here is that these cars’ technology could already be a little confusing for the general public, and will have a bit of learning curve. But changing the name its called only makes matters worse.

Since we are on the verge of an automotive revolution, within which many stakeholders have to play a role, including the general public, we should insist this new class of car has a standard name?

What do you think?

Source (M-Live)

Larry Burns is GM’s VP of R&D. After the Converj unveiling, he wrote a post asking the public to help GM make the Voltec drivetrain a widespread reality.

He indicates there are challenges to do so.

His solution is to create a partnership between automakers, suppliers, utilities companies, and the government to ensure electric transformation of the US automotive fleets.

He directs us to detailed remarks he made to the Transportation Research Board.

Those remarks are here and summarized as follows:

Burns says we now have a “once in a century” opportunity to change the way we drive, and directs us to the problems of pollution, dependence on foreign oil, and greenhouse gas emissions as some reasons for enacting this change. He notes nothing has to be invented for this to happen but all we have to do is exchange the “DNA” of current cars, by switching from combustion engines to electric motors, from petroleum to electricity, and from hydraulic controls to electronic ones.

He presents the Chevy Volt and how it works, and says of the car “we expect to announce an impressive combined city/highway fuel economy very soon.”

He also notes the Volt will cost 80 cents or less per day for most people to operate, and that renewable sources could create its electric energy.

He says that electric car manufacturing has to mature and that they actually use 60% less parts and 1/10th the number of moving parts.

To make electric vehicles the norm he recommends an agenda be set and that 5 steps be taken:

1. All parties should act with a collective will to transform holistically.
2. Develop a comprehensive transportation blueprint among all stakeholders
3. Focus on attain market tipping point in favor of electrification
4. Embrace a portfolio of solutions, not “a silver bullet,” i.e. E-REVs, BEVs, and fuel cells
5. Set ambitious goals and hold ourselves to attaining them

He concludes “General Motors, therefore, is urging the creation of such a partnership that would involve the U.S. government, auto manufacturers and suppliers, the energy and infrastructure industries, and other key stakeholders.” and says “This is also a promising time. President-elect Obama’s initiatives regarding transportation infrastructure and technology and his commitment to science and fact-based decision-making are very encouraging.”

Source (FastLane)