| Back to main menu? | Back to Index of Entries? |
"GM can save itself: resume production of EV1"
| General Motors (GM) has been hurt by not having the right cars to sell ("U.S. car firms flat-out hurting", June 27). GM story in Times GM has been seriously looking for options for getting more fuel-efficient cars on the market quickly, because there is some question about its financial health after 2008. Rebranding foreign cars has become more expensive as the dollar falls, and new vehicles require years-long development cycles. GM has proposed producing the VOLT, described as an Electric car with a range-extender, but it isn't planned for earlier than 2011. The VOLT depends on Lithium batteries which are not yet proven successful in an Electric car, as Lead and Nickel batteries were perfected over millions of test and customer miles in actual all-electric EVs. There is one option GM has not considered, which would turn things around, both in image and in reality. It's simple, not dependent on a gamble, will work right now, and won't exclude the possibility of some day producing the Lithium VOLT or other EVs and serial hybrids. GM could resume production of the 1999 EV1, using Panasonic EV-EC-1260 lead-acid batteries. These were leased in Arizona in 2000, and regularly attained a range of over 100 miles on a charge. The life-cycle cost is the lowest of all battery options. GM claims they were "unable to sell" the EV1; typical of GM's current disconnect with reality, GM never offered even one for sale, explaining why the EV1 didn't sell. If you refuse to sell a car, don't be surprised if it doesn't sell. Is this an example endemic to GM's current failure, as noted in financial articles, with a Market Value less than Starbucks? Resumption of production would be simple; the EV1 plant is empty, the former assembly workers have been laid off and are idly drawing "jobs bank" salaries, the batteries are available off-the-shelf in any quantities over 1000, and the design is proven successful. Production of the EV1 does not depend on an expensive product design cycle, new engineering, questionable battery testing and recalls; it's a proven winner. This is the GM car that fans watched over in a rain-plagued vigil for 28 days. Here's an example where would-be purchasers clamored for a chance to buy GM products, hoping for the faint chance that GM would sell six-year-old used versions for $25,000 cash. According to one GM exec, each EV1 cost "well over $80K to produce". If so, that would make GM's relentless confiscation and destruction of each and every EV1 even more difficult to understand. However, the 1150 EV1 were hand-built in batches, instead of using GM's traditional manufacturing excellence; in mass production, the cost would come down, by one estimate, to less than $11,000, leaving GM a signficant profit margin -- and allowing GM to scoop the competition. GM is now bemoaning the lack of enthusiasm for its current products; why not re-activate the EV1 fan club, recharge the excitement of the "21st century test pilot" GM fans, and turn GM around? Spend scarce engineering dollars on new versions of the EV1: four-passenger, pickups, serial hybrid with range-extender; but the current version could be in showrooms in six months. Even if it didn't sell, it would draw in floor traffic. While Lithium may pan-out, as GM's Bob Lutz claims, there's a lot to life-cycle costing of batteries that so far has precluded Lithium's practical use in Electric cars. To date, no Lithium-powered EV has gone more than 50,000 miles without significant battery degradation. Lithium is unproven, as one recent story has pointed out, while the batteries used in the EV1, both Lead-acid and Nickel, were tested and proven successful. Nickel batteries are running well over 100,000 miles in the Toyota RAV4-EV. All successful Electric cars, such as the Toyota RAV4-EV and the GM EV1, started with Lead batteries and were later upgraded to Nickel. Why not repeat past success, and start now with lead or nickel, later upgrading to Lithium when it is proven? GM, according to CEO Wagoner, has enough liquidity to last through 2008, but he refused to comment on 2009. GM may not last long enough to fund the perfect electric car it now spends a fortune advertizing it will some day produce. If GM had re-started the EV1 line at the same time it starting design work on the VOLT, the EV1 would already be generating revenue right now. Fresh off the assembly line, these cars would sell for no less than $35,000, perhaps as much as $50,000 or more. But the morale value would be even greater. Revival of the EV1 would quiet GM's critics, make GM some money, and attract new customers as well as increase floor traffic for other models. New and improved versions of the basic Electric car, year after year, would expand GM's footprint on the world market, leveraging scarce investment dollars, maximizing profit and leading the way forward. And we could say once again that our cars were "made in America and fueled by American Electrons". Is it a measure of GM's past failure that resumption of EV1 production is not even under consideration? /Doug 562-430-2495 1020 MarVista Seal Beach, CA 90740-5842 |
| Back to main menu? | Back to Index of Entries? |