Yeah. I’m sitting on GM Credit but they won’t let me use it on a Vette. So I’m shopping Alfas and BMWs today. Gasoline engines. Will probably stick with BMW since my home garage is setup to service BMWs.

There are three decisions here to analyze:

1) develop a bunch more electric models

2) gave up trying to further improve gasoline powered models for introduction past 2034

3) announce, 14 years ahead of time, both of the above

Now, number 1...ok, I get that. It's hip, it's trendy. And holy guacamole, Batman, look at Tesla's stock price. So, yeah, Detroit and GM shareholders are paying attention to at least that.

The other two decisions? FUBAR.

The only point of number 3 is trying to affect the decisions of other market participants. Well that, and baring the throat to Uncle Joe and the AOC brigade.

quote:

Originally posted by TXJIM:
Like it or not, things are going this direction. Solid state batteries are likely less than 10 years away and will accelerate the EV adoption curve significantly. Smaller and lighter batteries with double the range and a 10 year 500k mile lifespan that are potentially hot swappable.

That's only part of the equation. Where's the power to charge them going to come from? In several large states, they can't keep the lights on in homes today with their current power arrangements. I'm not as optimistic as you are regarding battery tech, but we'll see how it develops, but the real issue if we ever get there is how the hell we'd charge all these electric toys.

And as for GM specifically, few people are buying their sub-standard products today, so my bet is few will line up to buy a new sub-standard product from them. Whoever said that we'll be bailing them out again in the future was likely right on target.

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:

And as for GM specifically, few people are buying their sub-standard products today, so my bet is few will line up to buy a new sub-standard product from them. Whoever said that we'll be bailing them out again in the future was likely right on target.

I think GM is doing pretty good.

“General Motors Company reported its third quarter 2020 financial results today. The GM Q3 2020 earnings are headlined by a $4 billion income on $35.5 billion in revenue. Compared to the third quarter of 2019, these results represent a 74 percent jump in income on equal revenue.”

We can argue back and forth if it’s going to work or be viable or not but the reality is that it’s going to happen. I have my own doubts about certain aspects but the reality is that the entire auto industry is moving that way for a reason and being much closer to the situation than any of us I would trust that they know more than our speculations.


I know one thing and that’s that they are not doing it to save the planet they are doing it to save money and become more profitable. The parts count difference I have read about is actually shocking because there are so many things we just don’t think about that goes into supporting an ICE engine. We tend to just think about the battery because that’s the biggest single cost item. GM stated recently that in the last 5 years the battery prices have been cut in half which is pretty incredible.

I’m just glad I have one big honking V8 that will last me the rest of my life since it’s not a daily driver. Some things just can’t replace the sound and feel of a thumping V8 and I would definitely miss that.

Uh...do they really want to tangle with Tesla?

Are they trying to destroy themselves?

quote:

Originally posted by RAMIUS:
Uh...do they really want to tangle with Tesla?

Are they trying to destroy themselves?

It’s not just GM it’s the entire industry. GM does a lot of things wrong but if you don’t think they have some excellent engineers you would be mistaken. Tesla is the darling right now but they essentially have zero competition. Once all these companies are doing full EV’s the shine will not quite be so bright on Tesla. With that said I would love to have one right now as a daily driver and it would have zero reasons based on saving the planet.

quote:

Originally posted by honestlou:
I don’t know if they’ll make it by 2035, but we’re definitely heading that way. If y’all haven’t noticed, it’s been a while since trains and ships burned wood or coal to create steam.

The thing to note is that going from wood to coal to oil, going from horses to internal combustion engines, wasn't done by gov't or corporate mandates. It was done by market forces. The same should apply to EV's. Mandating change before it's ready, for the sake of change, will only cause massive disruption and costs.

I love the idea of betting the farm ‘cause you are just so sure that the next big improvement in tech is just right there. Guaranteed. Except it’s not fucking guaranteed. At all.

You can promise solid state swappable batteries that weigh half use less hard to come by materials with double the range all day. What happens when it doesn’t just magically materialize like you are just so sure it’s going to?

Fucking stupid. Irrational. Produce the tech first then push all your chips in. This is betting on the inside straight if I ever saw it.

You know I’m right. Solyndra was going to change the world. Right up until it couldn’t.

So many problems to s9lve before this is even mildly realistic. Instead, let’s let the cool tech, fast cars, self driving, popular mechanics cover art form our policy. Fml

quote:

Originally posted by 1s1k:. . .
I know one thing and that’s that they are not doing it to save the planet they are doing it to save money and become more profitable. The parts count difference I have read about is actually shocking because there are so many things we just don’t think about that goes into supporting an ICE engine. We tend to just think about the battery because that’s the biggest single cost item. GM stated recently that in the last 5 years the battery prices have been cut in half which is pretty incredible. . . .

As to being more profitable, maybe thinking of Tesla as a model, I would like to see just how much taxpayer subsidies, on a local-state-national level, are provided to the EV industry. Is everyone going to switch to EV's because they are more effective-efficient-economical, or because the gov't manipulates the market?

Some states like CA are going to not allow new non-electric cars as some point. And with the Dems now in control, look for that decision to go national. The car companies can read the tea leaves. As some point they likely won't be allowed to sell new ICE powered cars if they wanted to.

There's also a hidden benefit to the car companies for doing this. Once the technology is worked out (think batteries) electric cars are simpler to build than ICE powered cars. They'll probably need less workers in less plants to build the same number of vehicles.

quote:

Originally posted by 1s1k:

quote:

Originally posted by RAMIUS:
Uh...do they really want to tangle with Tesla?

Are they trying to destroy themselves?

It’s not just GM it’s the entire industry. GM does a lot of things wrong but if you don’t think they have some excellent engineers you would be mistaken. Tesla is the darling right now but they essentially have zero competition. Once all these companies are doing full EV’s the shine will not quite be so bright on Tesla. With that said I would love to have one right now as a daily driver and it would have zero reasons based on saving the planet.

That’s exactly what Musk wants to happen. He openly welcomes the completion. His focus is on fundamentally changing the industry away from ICE vehicles. He’s admitted all this multiple times

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:. . . Solyndra was going to change the world. Right up until it couldn’t. . .

For years I drove by Solydra every Friday, had students who's parents worked for Solyndra. IIRC the taxpayers covered the ~$535M loan re the Solyndra bankruptcy, but the main shareholders (connected to Elon Musk) got their money out of the deal. Also, one of Solyndra's mfg plants was categorized as a hazardous waste site after the close down. But not to worry, solar electricity is reliable and economical.

I don't understand the fuzzy math behind all this

its going to have little or no effect on the overall climate, and in some locations may actually make the pollution worse

where is all the electricity for charging going to come from?

what is going to have to be changed in the overall grid and distribution to allow all these new loads to be handled by the aging infrastructure that is already in place?

and what is going to power the generating plants thats going to make all this electric energy for all these new cars?

Honestly, I'm okay with GM (or any of the others) going to all electric IF they can get me further down the road with comparable (or better) acceleration and better costs per mile, all at lower cost for the vehicle than current fossil fuel alternatives. Anything less is a losing argument and useless to me.

Bonus points if it has a mean battery rumble....

quote:

Originally posted by nhtagmember:
I don't understand the fuzzy math behind all this

where is all the electricity for charging going to come from?

and what is going to power the generating plants thats going to make all this electric energy for all these new cars?

Bingo! Eliminating petroleum from vehicles will more or less double our electrical generation demand. Existing power plants running on natural gas will have to run more during off peak hours when people charges their EV's at night. Problem is you can't really store power on a large scale so whatever the demand is at a given time, you have to meet it or you start rolling the blackouts. The charge at night strategy sounds good on paper, but it only applies to people who have chargers at home, and doesn't consider all the people stopping to "supercharge" during the day.

Considering we get most of our power from petroleum/coal the only real option is to keep fracking like there's no tomorrow and run the natural gas plants as efficiently as possible. But then that begs the question about powering the vehicles with natural gas and eliminating the "middleman/middleware". I haven't seen an analysis of natural gas electrical production, line loses, battery losses, etc. vs. natural gas ICE. But natural gas ICE would be a hell of a lot simpler from an infrastructure point of view.

quote:

Originally posted by slabsides45:
Honestly, I'm okay with GM (or any of the others) going to all electric IF......

..... it is done with PURE market driven innovations, IF it is NOT done with public money, IF it is done with NO Government participation by money, laws, coercion, intervention or direction .... IE: NOTHING by the Government.

What I fear is those who want the power and control over our lives will not let it mature naturally but will get involved for nefarious reasons.

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:

quote:

Originally posted by slabsides45:
Honestly, I'm okay with GM (or any of the others) going to all electric IF......

..... it is done with PURE market driven innovations, IF it is NOT done with public money, IF it is done with NO Government participation by money, laws, coercion, intervention or direction .... IE: NOTHING by the Government.

What I fear is those who want the power and control over our lives will not let it mature naturally but will get involved for nefarious reasons.

Bingo.

quote:

Originally posted by nhtagmember: . . . where is all the electricity for charging going to come from? . . .

Ignore the man behind the curtain . . . these aren't the droids you are looking for. . . .

Virtually nobody who drives a crossover cares whether their vehicles are gas or electric.

Give them a 500 mile range and 5 minute charging and the safety, cabin space, and road noise benefits will outweigh whatever emotions are left for gas engines.

quote:

Originally posted by Scoutmaster:

quote:

Originally posted by 1s1k:. . .
I know one thing and that’s that they are not doing it to save the planet they are doing it to save money and become more profitable. The parts count difference I have read about is actually shocking because there are so many things we just don’t think about that goes into supporting an ICE engine. We tend to just think about the battery because that’s the biggest single cost item. GM stated recently that in the last 5 years the battery prices have been cut in half which is pretty incredible. . . .

As to being more profitable, maybe thinking of Tesla as a model, I would like to see just how much taxpayer subsidies, on a local-state-national level, are provided to the EV industry. Is everyone going to switch to EV's because they are more effective-efficient-economical, or because the gov't manipulates the market?

'If' everyone eventually ends up in an EV, it will be because government destroyed the internal combustion market and forced people into vehicles they didn't want by offering up ridiculous subsidies and rebates. EV's cannot stand on their own today without government meddling, and that's the simple reality of it.

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
As some point they likely won't be allowed to sell new ICE powered cars if they wanted to.

And you don't see that, and many other unconstitutional overreaches causing an eventual major pushback by the citizens of this country. Not all of us are mentally retarded and believe things just happen because government decrees it.

quote:

Originally posted by caneau:
Give them a 500 mile range and 5 minute charging and the safety, cabin space, and road noise benefits will outweigh whatever emotions are left for gas engines.

Just as long as we agree that what you've pointed to is complete fantasy at this point with 'zero' confirmed innovations pending to change that paradigm.