backtop


Print 20 comment(s) - last by HikingMike.. on Apr 11 at 10:47 AM

The money will go toward two plants

General Motors Co. (GM) is investing $449 million USD in two of its Michigan-based plants to up its electrification game. 
 
According to GM, it will invest $384 million USD into the Detroit-Hamtramck plant that builds autos like the Chevrolet VoltCadillac ELR and Opel Ampera. The money will go toward new body shop tooling, upgrades and equipment to build the next-generation Volt and two other upcoming vehicles (which are currently unknown to the public). 
 
As for the other $65 million USD, it will be put toward the Brownstown plant, which makes lithium-ion battery packs for many of GM's EVs. Production of the company's next-generation of lithium-ion batteries and future battery systems will benefit from this investment.
 


[SOURCE: Green Car Reports]

“General Motors is committed to building award-winning products and developing technologies in America, which helps to grow our economy from a resurgent auto industry,” said Gerald Johnson, GM North America Manufacturing vice president. “These investments will help the next-generation Chevrolet Volt build on its position as the leader in electrified propulsion.”

There doesn't seem to be a set timeline for when the investments will begin, but it will likely further GM's position in the EV and future auto technologies realm while also potentially putting the state of Michigan in a better economic spot. 

Source: General Motors



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Bounty!
By DukeN on 4/9/2014 3:36:07 PM , Rating: 1
500 dogecoin for the best "but they couldn't afford a $0.57 ignition switch?" joke.

GoGoGo!




RE: Bounty!
By Solandri on 4/9/2014 4:51:44 PM , Rating: 4
Actually, for the number of incidents traced to those switches over the number of years (31 crashes in 11 years), it would've taken nearly this long just for the data to become statistically significant. i.e. To determine that there actually was a problem with the switch design, and not in manufacturing variance, or poor estimates of wear, or improper installation, or user misuse, etc. Figure an average 1400 trips per car per year across 2.5 million cars, and we're talking about a 0.00000008% incident rate.

We don't live in a perfect world where parts are either perfect or imperfect. They span a continuous range between the two. Figuring out where something sits in that range can take years or decades of data collection for low-frequency events. It's why aside from some exceptional cases, the government does not say which models of commercial airliners are safer. The accident rate is just so low that even after decades of use the difference between the aircraft is not statistically significant (i.e. random chance plays a larger role).

It would seem that because changing the design was so cheap, GM did so just to eliminate that as a possible cause. But the statistics did not confirm the old design as the cause, so a recall wasn't warranted. Unfortunately, nuances like this don't sell well, so the media likes to prematurely or incorrectly cast everything as a good/bad or right/wrong dichotomy. Suddenly this becomes a case of GM "knowing" the switches were "bad" but "refusing" to recall them.


RE: Bounty!
By owcraftsman on 4/9/14, Rating: 0
RE: Bounty!
By RDO CA on 4/9/2014 7:37:43 PM , Rating: 2
I see you forgot to mention a few sources to slant your side--Maybe some also comes from Hydro/wind/solar/natural gas and the oil is less than 1% by the way.


RE: Bounty!
By Mint on 4/10/2014 11:33:53 AM , Rating: 3
Yup, clearly he has no interest in the truth.

The 13% of US electricity generation from hydro/wind/solar and 20% from nuclear has minimal atmospheric pollution. The 28% from natural gas is way cleaner than coal (half the CO2 emissions and - much more importantly - far less real pollution like particulate matter and sulfur dioxides).

And even the remaining coal pollution is far from urban centers where gas has the biggest effect.

So it's not even close to suggest that 10-15 kWh of electricity is as polluting as a gallon of gasoline.

On top of that, if a family cuts 1000 gallons/yr of gas out of their lives, that's coming entirely out of OPEC imports, not domestic production (or even Canadian oil).


RE: Bounty!
By Solandri on 4/9/2014 7:50:12 PM , Rating: 2
OP was talking about GM's recall of 2.5 million cars sold between 2003-2011 for ignition switch failures. It has nothing to do with the GM Volt. I probably shouldn't have responded to an off-topic troll. But like McDonalds coffee (you are more likely to die in an accident driving to McD's than you are to injure yourself spilling the coffee), the whole thing really was completely blown out of proportion by the lawyers and families of those injured/killed.


RE: Bounty!
By Mint on 4/10/2014 10:37:54 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I probably shouldn't have responded to an off-topic troll.

It was off topic from the discussion, but then again the ignition switch talk isn't really related to this article either. FWIW, I thought you had an excellent post on that matter.


RE: Bounty!
By Kazinji on 4/10/2014 5:10:36 AM , Rating: 2
Business has to go on as usual, and investing in plants in one of those.


RE: Bounty!
By Dr. Kenneth Noisewater on 4/10/2014 11:22:19 AM , Rating: 2
And 0 of those Volts had such a switch.


what a joke
By Argon18 on 4/9/2014 3:44:28 PM , Rating: 2
Electric cars. Lol. The answer to a question no one asked. You'd think with the abysmal Chevy Volt sales, they'd be running away from these disappointing electric toys.




RE: what a joke
By aurareturn on 4/9/2014 3:59:40 PM , Rating: 2
The Volt isn't a 100% electric car.

Electric cars are superior to gas cars in almost every way including acceleration and crash safety.


RE: what a joke
By DukeN on 4/9/2014 4:10:34 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah

But
Electric CArs
Negatively
GayMarriage
Homosexuals
Against
Zealots
Intentions


RE: what a joke
By Reclaimer77 on 4/9/2014 10:07:01 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Electric cars are superior to gas cars in almost every way


LMAO!!!! So funny it's insane.


RE: what a joke
By Kazinji on 4/10/2014 5:16:50 AM , Rating: 2
Really that funny? Other than refueling/charge time and overall cost. They seem to be doing well. With the push for better cheaper batteries, more demand more research more money.


RE: what a joke
By Reclaimer77 on 4/10/2014 12:28:25 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Other than refueling/charge time and overall cost.


Yeah you know, those little things....


what a deal
By DocScience on 4/9/2014 6:09:55 PM , Rating: 2
GM is leasing Volts for $222/month (3yr), $3900 at signing.
Compare this to the same priced Impala $307/mo, $4300 at signing.

They apparently can't give Volts away.




RE: what a deal
By flyingpants1 on 4/9/2014 9:15:38 PM , Rating: 2
That's a real shame. That's like $330/mo and you don't pay for gas.

The car itself is a marketing problem. The interior is tiny and it looks like crap.

If it looked like a Model S and accelerated a bit faster (the torque motor is capable of 0-60 in <6s, IRL it does about 9s) it would sell like crazy.

Hopefully the Volt 2 doesn't suck.


RE: what a deal
By Kazinji on 4/10/2014 5:20:01 AM , Rating: 2
Model S is almost double the price, and to get it to accelerate faster than the Model S, would put it as a sports car not a eco friendly car. Model S's have been taken to the drag strip.


RE: what a deal
By Mint on 4/10/2014 11:09:33 AM , Rating: 2
An Impala is not a Volt substitute. It's a full-size car. You should be comparing it to a well equipped Cruze. The latter will probably be cheaper per month, but anyone willing to do a tiny bit of math should be taking into account the gas savings.

The Volt has an image problem. Part is GM's fault for overpricing it early on and having that reputation stick, and part is the inane anti-GM media bandwagon that decided to focus on this car.

They also should have made it faster. The fact that performance doesn't change when using the engine-generator is proof that they held back. An electric motor's biggest strength is high performance with minimal material cost.

You have to be nuts to design an EV without taking advantage of that. Same with the use of permanent magnet motors when induction motors just need a little more software to be as good or better.


Such pessimism, not so for me
By HikingMike on 4/11/2014 10:47:04 AM , Rating: 2
I think the Volt gen 1 was a success. Maybe they sold less than expected (though I see a bunch around me), but they are selling despite their fairly high price. They also proved the car can be very acceptable to the regular joe as it doesn't have huge difference in how it drives. The early adopters are helping us all out. I have pretty high expectations of the Volt gen2, with much better batteries and lower overall cost expected, and I've been looking forward to the gen2 ever since the gen1 was announced. There is a big difference between the first gen of a pretty new tech and end-product with a 3rd party manufacturer for batteries, a relatively small production run, etc. and a second gen. I think GM has a pretty strong hand now in this market.

I think it's a very big deal for the country as well, with our vastly improved energy independence lately, and cleaner power sources advancing steadily. A solid shift to EVs and higher MPG cars will be an important step for the US. We all know the story of peaks and valleys in electric grid power consumption and resulting price fluctuations. With consumers gaining more power and knowledge in this bit as well, the whole system can gain efficiency as people start trying to use more of their energy during off-peak hours. It is actually a national advantage for people to adopt Volts and EVs.




"You can bet that Sony built a long-term business plan about being successful in Japan and that business plan is crumbling." -- Peter Moore, 24 hours before his Microsoft resignation














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki