Yes, it’s triple VBW day at TTAC, thanks to Beth Lowery, GM Vice President, Environment, Energy & Safety Policy. Over at the Fastlane blog, Lowery is proving that the more things change at GM, the more things don’t change. She’s still talking about perception gaps. And here’s the spin re: the Volt’s financial sustainability. [BTW: Whatever happened to GMNext?]
Electric vehicles have high up-front capital requirements. How are you going to make electric vehicles like the Chevy Volt profitably?
Introducing advanced technology is always expensive initially, especially in the early generations. It’s important to have the right incentives for customers, such as federal tax credits. Future generations of the technology will be less expensive, making it possible for us to turn a profit.
Build it and they will come. It worked for Kevin Costner in Field of Dreams. But then again Kevin didn’t ask $40,000 a ticket and have competition from others.
I find it humorous that the GM Fastlane blog header has a picture of a dead Penske-owned brand’s car.
Also, the only way I can see the Volt succeeding is if they make it service oriented rather than attempting to sell a product. You subscribe to the service for, say, 2 years, and for some monthly fee, you get a Volt and some GM-provided conveniences like battery swapping ala Better Place or, I dunno, solar panels for your house and some monthly allocation of gas. It could be a beefed up lease, basically. They could then sell the used Volts (refurbished) or assign them to another new customer.
Lowery: “It’s important to have the right incentives for customers, such as federal tax credits.”
That’s just so wrong.
“…making it possible for us to turn a profit.”
And I might buy a Volt someday. “Possible” but not “probable”.
maniceightball: “Also, the only way I can see the olt succeeding is if they make it service oriented…”
It seems to me that the typical GM car is already very service-oriented.
@Kixstart
ZING!
When I think “Ford Fusion” I think epic win.
I’ve believed the Volt was an EPIC FAILURE since the point I heard it was going to be a plug in.
In a Utopia with clean nuclear energy, maybe…but in this culture? forget it.
It’s important to have the right incentives for customers, such as federal tax credits.
Great, something else I can help pay for!
In a Utopia with clean nuclear energy, maybe…but in this culture? forget it
Plug-in power from a coal plant is still cleaner than your internal combustion engine, mainly because it’s easier to make the chemical-to-electric conversion more efficient on that scale than it is to do chemical-to-mechanical in your car (due to space, weight, and cost constraints).
Now that Tesla got its half a billion Dolares Americanos – get ready for Carmageddon II, the spin-out.
There’s an alternative drive-train in your future, apparently.
The Dem’s are in deep, and there’s no bottom.
maniceightball :
June 24th, 2009 at 5:45 pm
Plug-in power from a coal plant is still cleaner than your internal combustion engine, mainly because it’s easier to make the chemical-to-electric conversion more efficient on that scale than it is to do chemical-to-mechanical in your car (due to space, weight, and cost constraints).
——————————————–
That is very true. But there is another thing to consider: cost.
If the $20k premium of a plug-in is used to protect the environment, that will have enormous effect. I mean, you can hire some Mexicans to plant trees in California and those trees will trap gigantic amount of carbon from air in their trunks. That’s just one example of how to convert money to green. There are more effective ways.
Stein X Leikanger :
June 24th, 2009 at 7:41 pm
Now that Tesla got its half a billion Dolares Americanos – get ready for Carmageddon II, the spin-out.
————————————
I have a feeling. Chairman Obama likes mafia. First Fiat, now Tesla. Very shady companies that most won’t trust.