Could GM one day stand for “Green Motors”?
According to a recent Associated Press piece, the soon-to-retire Bob Lutz said that GM needs to hybridize its fleet to keep up with increasing fuel economy standards. This we already know, and there are plans in the works for hybrid rear-wheel drive vehicles, as well as the upcoming Volt.
But Lutz also let slip that GM was working on a line of all-electric vehicles, something the General hasn’t openly committed to yet, despite having more experience than other companies thanks to the short-lived EV1 program. Lutz’s statement seems to corroborate a recent remark by GM’s North American President that the Volt is a stepping stone to all-electric cars.
Most of us have heard about the EV1, or at least the documentary “Who Killed The Electric Car?” Long story short; GM did. While it isn’t what I would call an unbiased portrayal of the short life of the EV1, after that brief affair hybrids and electric cars disappeared from GM’s portfolio until the gas crunch made everybody step back from thirsty SUVs.
The Volt was pitched by Lutz as an alternative to range-limited all-electric cars, even though GM put out the Impact electric car concept (pictured above) back in 1990. It is a bit disheartening to consider what might have been if only GM had found the wherewithal to stick with the EV1 program.
GM did spit out a flurry of half-baked hybrids in the past two years, like the Saturn Vue and Malibu Hybrid, most of which have disappeared from their lineup quite mysteriously. For 2010 they offered just three hybrids; the Cadillac Escalade, Chevy Silverado, and Chevy Tahoe which offer 2-3 mpg better than their conventional counterparts for between $40,000 and almost $90,000. Not cheap! GM seems to have gone back to the drawing board for something more feasible, though the sexy Cadillac Converj was recently killed for not being cost effective.
When GM will come out with an all-electric car, I certainly do not know. But with all of its competitors throwing their hats into the ring, GM had better be working on something.
Source: Associated Press
PDF 
About Christopher DeMorro
GM brags about spending $1.6 billion on fuel cells, but complains that developing the EV1 cost $1 billion.
GM also claims that producing each EV1, which were made in batches by hand, cost $80,000 each.
But the same bad management that led GM into bankruptcy failed to do the numbers, here.
Imagine if the $1.6 billion had been spent on PRODUCING EV1, and the production cost had fallen…perhaps to $8,000 per EV1, perhaps even less.
Even at $100,000 per EV1, that would be 16,000 EV1 that GM could GIVE AWAY for free.
If GM sold them, perhaps for $25,000, they could make even more. To put it into perspective, the only EVs still around are the 1000 Tesla, 300 owned Toyota RAV4-EV, and about 500 fleet RAV4-EV.
The only fuel cell cars are about 200 test models, all leased, none sold, and from what I’ve seen, none doing more than 5,000 miles on the same fuel cell stack. And fuel costing $17/gallon-gas-equivalent to manufacture, that’s the cost of electric and compressers and tanks to make and store H2.
So if the cost of the EV1, in production, had fallen to, say, $10,000, easy to see that, GM could actually have MADE MONEY selling them at $25,000, and there would be MILLIONS on the road.
As for batteries, no one has thought about lowering the cost by “rewinning” old batteries, using the same metals, into NEW batteries that don’t need mining. The only expense is melting them down, after:
100K to 200K for NiMH
50K for Lithium
50K for Lead
Nickel is non-toxic, non-explosive.
Lithium is non-toxic but explosive.
Lead is toxic but not explosive.
Naturally, reluctant car companies are using the WORST battery, Lithium!!
Moreover, releasing the so-called “VOLT-hoax” in November, the WORST time for launching a new car, allows oil companies to lower the cost of gas to try to kill the launch.
GM used the SAME tactic when it tried to show CARB that the EV1 would fail, releasing it in November 1996.
GM brags about spending $1.6 billion on fuel cells, but complains that developing the EV1 cost $1 billion.
GM also claims that producing each EV1, which were made in batches by hand, cost $80,000 each.
But the same bad management that led GM into bankruptcy failed to do the numbers, here.
Imagine if the $1.6 billion had been spent on PRODUCING EV1, and the production cost had fallen…perhaps to $8,000 per EV1, perhaps even less.
Even at $100,000 per EV1, that would be 16,000 EV1 that GM could GIVE AWAY for free.
If GM sold them, perhaps for $25,000, they could make even more. To put it into perspective, the only EVs still around are the 1000 Tesla, 300 owned Toyota RAV4-EV, and about 500 fleet RAV4-EV.
The only fuel cell cars are about 200 test models, all leased, none sold, and from what I’ve seen, none doing more than 5,000 miles on the same fuel cell stack. And fuel costing $17/gallon-gas-equivalent to manufacture, that’s the cost of electric and compressers and tanks to make and store H2.
So if the cost of the EV1, in production, had fallen to, say, $10,000, easy to see that, GM could actually have MADE MONEY selling them at $25,000, and there would be MILLIONS on the road.
As for batteries, no one has thought about lowering the cost by “rewinning” old batteries, using the same metals, into NEW batteries that don’t need mining. The only expense is melting them down, after:
100K to 200K for NiMH
50K for Lithium
50K for Lead
Nickel is non-toxic, non-explosive.
Lithium is non-toxic but explosive.
Lead is toxic but not explosive.
Naturally, reluctant car companies are using the WORST battery, Lithium!!
Moreover, releasing the so-called “VOLT-hoax” in November, the WORST time for launching a new car, allows oil companies to lower the cost of gas to try to kill the launch.
GM used the SAME tactic when it tried to show CARB that the EV1 would fail, releasing it in November 1996.