Korea-based LG Chem is the lithium-ion battery supplier for GM’s Chevrolet Volt electric car.
GM has been working closely with LG’s Michigan-based subsidiary Compact Power Inc. since mid-2007 to first develop and then refine the Volts’ 16 kwh battery pack. In January of 2009 it was announced that LG had been awarded the Volt’s battery contract. Since then, hundreds of packs have been built, and GM has launched its own battery pack production facility which has been operational since January.
The lithium-ion cells have been manufactured on a line at LG Chem’s battery plant in Korea, where the cells for the initial production run of Volts will continue to come from.
The source of these cells will soon change to the USA.
Today LG Chem has announced it will invest $303 Million to build a lithium-ion cell manufacturing plant in Holland Michigan. The 650,000 square foot plant will create 400 jobs and be capable of producing from 15 to 20 million prismatic automotive cells per year, which is enough to sustain a production capacity of around 60,000 Chevy Volts per year.
LG Chem has already secured a $151.5 million DOE loan for the construction of the plan. It will match those funds with an additional $151.5 million.
Groundbreaking on the facility, which will be located on a 120 acre site in Holland Michigan, is expected to begin this summer and the plant will be fully operational in 2012.
The plant will be operated by Compact Power Inc, and though it is capable of making cells for other vehicles as well, initially it will only make the cells for the Chevrolet Volt. It is capable of from 50,000 to 200,00o vehicle battery packs per year, depending on their size.
“LG Chem’s selection of Holland to house the company’s battery cell facility was a balanced decision based on the city’s excellent infrastructure and proven, quality workforce,” said Jae Ham, senior vice president, LG Chem. “What’s more, LG Chem was impressed with Holland’s outstanding determination and sincere effort and commitment to be at the forefront of the new green energy economy which will result in Michigan becoming the leader in the electric vehicle industry.”
“Thanks to a bold vision and aggressive strategy, Michigan is now the leader of the U.S. advanced-battery industry,” Michigan Governor Jennifer M. Granholm said. “We thank LG Chem for its commitment to our state, and we are proud to partner with the company, the city of Holland and the Obama Administration to grow a new industry and new jobs here.”
And from a mere concept only three years ago, the Volt and our enthusiasm may well have helped steward the rebirth of the automotive industry in the United States. We are witnessing the first steps of a brand new era.
Source (LG Chem)
This entry was posted on Friday, March 12th, 2010 at 7:22 am and is filed under Battery, Production. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+15
Mar 12th, 2010 (7:23 am)I have a feeling we will be seeing more of these factories in our future. Very cool.
+13
Mar 12th, 2010 (7:26 am)“We are witnessing the first steps of a brand new era.”
Amen to that.
I believe that private investment in this technology says more about its viability than any think-tank study. And best of all: 400 more U.S. citizens will be taking home paychecks.
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (7:36 am)Although this is generally good news, the capacity of the plant is troubling. 60,000 EREVs a year is nothing in the scheme of things.
+14
Mar 12th, 2010 (7:44 am)First off, congrats to Michigan for the 400 job facility! Getting the jobs is a great first step – next we need US companies to step up! (But *already* I digress).
This is obviously great news in terms of the electrification of transportation in the USA (and Canada). Once we get a few thousand Volts’ wheels on the road, I know that the progrss will take on a life of it’s own. Till now, it’s been sites like GM-Volt.com that have kept blowing on the embers. Lately, I admit to getting a little short of breath, but we all need to keep workig toward that common goal!
Exciting times, and we are all a small part of them!
Be well and believe,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!
+5
Mar 12th, 2010 (7:46 am)At first blush, I thought the same, Dave. But then there is the plant overseas too. I don’t know what it’s capacity is.
Be well and believe,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!
+5
Mar 12th, 2010 (7:49 am)I expect this plant to be highly automated, but even still it will employ 400 people. If you figure roughly $100k/person (wages + plant overhead + benefits) = $40M / 60000 packs = $660 per pack in labor. I know this is very rough, but it gives a lower limit to add material costs to and arrive at an idea of how cheap these batteries could possibly become. Anyone know what material costs might be?
+4
Mar 12th, 2010 (7:53 am)I suspect this is a minimal capacity to start with only one shift. Adding 2 more shifts + expansion would quickly increase this number.
+3
Mar 12th, 2010 (7:54 am)I wonder if that capacity of 60K Volt packs per year is with one shift or with three shifts?
My assumption is that if the demand is there, the capacity will grow to meet it…..
NPNS
EDIT: It looks like Roy H and I were thinking the same thing at just about the same time!!!!
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (8:03 am)a company can’t operate without “partnering” with government. yikes
Mar 12th, 2010 (8:05 am)Great news. The more electric turbochargers there are out there, the more chance there is that somebody will somday produce a high performance “diesel-electric locomotive on tires” (thanks ZT), that can also be so fuel efficient it can go 40 miles with no gasoline. (Saab turbo on steroids)A car like that might sell a few hundred thousand dozen.
+6
Mar 12th, 2010 (8:07 am)I know what you mean, but local/state govts provide a lot of perks in order to draw in the jobs. It’s pretty standard practice and makes a lot of sense.
Be well and believe,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!
Mar 12th, 2010 (8:09 am)Just curious, but do you have a brother named “Bruce”? (g)
Be well and believe,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!
+14
Mar 12th, 2010 (8:12 am)This is Great News !
Now, when my wife wants to go to Holland for the Tulip Festival ( http://www.tuliptime.com ), I can slip away and tour the LG Chem plant !
+3
Mar 12th, 2010 (8:14 am)Any move to build more parts is a good thing.
I wonder if they got some government help with this build. The electric car industry has to get out on it’s own with no subsidy eventually. The end subsidy needs to come from other cars (CAFE average) rather than government subsidy so that the industry is sustainable. In other words an up-front gas tax for SUVs to support a more efficient fleet.
Interesting times. Isn’t that an ancient Chinese curse? “May you live in interesting times”?
+7
Mar 12th, 2010 (8:15 am)Anything that establishes more manufacturing on US soil with new jobs for Americans is fantastic news in my book!
Do you suppose any of this output might be available for smaller outfits focusing on vehicle conversions?
+3
Mar 12th, 2010 (8:23 am)Holland is quickly becoming a leader in automotive EV batteries, what with JCI in Holland also working on battery packs. There are plenty of engineering resources and expertise in the area. A great fit! And it will hopefully mean many Volts all around me and in my driveway. Can’t wait.
Mar 12th, 2010 (8:24 am)A twin brother, that there’s only one of. Better conveys the image.
+4
Mar 12th, 2010 (8:24 am)I’m wondering if our government has learned enough about outsourcing our jobs over the past decade…. If there smart they’ll smack a big fat import tax on each battery…..
That way between the tax, and the cost of shipping we can keep these jobs in the USA…
We (USA) are the ones pushing the electric car mainstream… We should benefit from the new jobs created by it.
On a side note… I don’t like the tone of the GM brass lately either but at this point it seems like the electrification of the automobile is in motion no matter what GM does. Hopefully they’ll take advantage of this revolutionary design to capture a huge chunk of the market share early on.
+15
Mar 12th, 2010 (8:25 am)One observation is that GM appears to be placing a lot of “Made in America” content into this vehicle.
The cells will be made Holland, MI.
The battery pack assembled in Brownstown, MI.
The 1.4L engine manufactured in Flint, MI (although, maybe not at first)
The motor/generators likely from Remy Int’l.
Tires from Goodyear.
Stereo by Bose.
Forged Aluminum wheels from Alcoa.
Then, the final assembly takes place at Hamtramck, also in MI.
The assembly site for the 2-mode FWD tranny is listed as Ramos, Mexico, but that could be changed possibly for the Volt’s transmission.
+2
Mar 12th, 2010 (8:26 am)Don’t be too harsh on the think tanks. This factory wouldn’t have been undertaken without in-depth studies on the economic, environmental and social viability of the operation.
+3
Mar 12th, 2010 (8:27 am)“Today LG Chem has announced it will invest $303 Million to build a lithium-ion cell manufacturing plant in Holland Michigan”.
“LG Chem has already secured a $151.5 million DOE loan for the construction of the plan. It will match those funds with an additional $151.5 million.”
***************************************************************************
What bothers me about all this is that LG is a foreign company. I thought the idea was for the US to manufacture batteries in American owned companies. Already, we are giving what is to be a very important new technology, to a foreign country. And half of that 303 millions that loan to them, is coming from our tax dollars. Does that make any sense? Am I missing something here?
+4
Mar 12th, 2010 (8:33 am)Great, great news. Now I hope they leave room for EXPANSION!
Mar 12th, 2010 (8:37 am)Did Tagamet change his Tag line?
Mar 12th, 2010 (8:39 am)Yes, but where will the profits be going? Korea. Does this matter? And I thought the US was going to be the leader in battery technology. Where does this put GM with that new battery factory in Brownstown Township?
Mar 12th, 2010 (8:42 am)No. I think they are the ones missing something.
Mar 12th, 2010 (8:45 am)BillR,
Are you saying you think the Volt will have the 2 mode??
+8
Mar 12th, 2010 (8:47 am)We are witnessing the rebirth of the great State of Michigan!
Mar 12th, 2010 (8:52 am)Ah, so they are both named Bruce, or not. (lol).
Be well and believe,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!
+12
Mar 12th, 2010 (8:53 am)For those of you concerned about the government’s involvement in all this, consider why Japan, an island country the size of California, can have 7 major automobile companies that sell cars worldwide.
Here is an excellent article that tells the story of how that happened and what America is up against:
http://www.uwsa.com/issues/trade/japanyes.html
+4
Mar 12th, 2010 (8:56 am)Way OT (but I’m just a cesspool of trivial info: (I knew this, but didn’t want to have to type it)
There is no such expression, “May you live in interesting times,” in Chinese. It is a non-Chinese creation, most probably American, that has been around for at least 30 or 40 years. It appears in book prefaces, newspapers (frequently in the New York Times) and speeches, as an eye- or ear-catcher, although I have not found it in Bartlett’s Quotations or other quotation sourcebooks. I speculate that whoever it was who first coined it attempted to give the expression a mystique, and so decided to attribute it to the Chinese.
So now you know the REST of the story.(lol)
Be well,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!
+32
Mar 12th, 2010 (9:01 am)That may be true but I did read once that Confucius once said
“Man who drive Electric Vehicle without onboard generator not always get to destination”
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (9:09 am)I don’t know much at all about international trade, but I do suspect that it’s not as simple as slapping up high tariffs. If I remember my history, that’s what helped trigger the Great Depression. Aside from giving perks to lure in foreign mfgs (or American ones), I don’t know how we compete with the cheap labor and lower taxes in some other countries. JMO. I posted a little earlier in this thread, wishing that they were American mfgs.
Be well,
Tagamet
Np ER, No Sale!!
+5
Mar 12th, 2010 (9:17 am)Nuclearboy Says:
“Man who drive Electric Vehicle without onboard generator not always get to destination”
Nukey, that is classic!
+3
Mar 12th, 2010 (9:21 am)Yeah, I change it from time to time, in response to different “vibs” I’m getting. I have some concerns about the recent massive changes in the management ranks, and the loss of the “real” Volt team of engineers. It’s a little like our baby now has adoptive parents that I haven’t “met” yet. I’m just hoping that it’s normal, unfounded angst.
I really believe in the Volt as a necessary stepping stone toward electrification of transportation so “no ER, no sale!”.
Be well,
Tagamet
Np ER, No Sale!!
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (9:24 am)=============================
More on the quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_you_live_in_interesting_times
Are we all just passing the time today, until Lyle announces the winners of the contest???
NPNS
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (9:24 am)I think we all would agree that the Volt is essentially finished and just being tweaked at this point. The issues now are with supply of components and the build out and shake down of the assembly line. GM guys do this in their sleep so I don’t really have any concerns.
I just hope that the next generation of plugins of any type are moving along quickly at GM.
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (9:26 am)Now *that’s* a Chinese curse!
+1
Be well,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!!
+5
Mar 12th, 2010 (9:27 am)Oil is creeping up there, $83 a barrel today. Someday we’ll be watching the monthly totals of Volts and cousing EREV/BEVs being sold and we’ll be able to see the millions and then BILLIONS of dollars diverted from foreign oil and into our economy.
Just wish it could happen alot sooner. In 12 months we’ll see posts like 5,000 volts sold this month, 20,000 leafs. But it is still a year off and those amounts are still a drop in the bucket. Eventually spigot will open and EREV/BEVs will be POURING out.
As I’ve bee saying lately it is a 6 year process. We’re half way there. Last 3 years were design and development. We are now starting 3 years of ‘initial production and design enhancement’. By 2013 we’ll have mature products that virtually everyone will want on the market.
The transfer of money being sent overseas for oil and into our economy will help greatly, hopefully our economy can stay afloat that long.
Mar 12th, 2010 (9:36 am)Is there a contest? (lol).
wiki isn’t one of my favorite sources, but it often has interesting anecdotal info. That’s just me.
Thanks for the link.
Be well,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!!
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (9:41 am)Anybody who builds anything in Michigan needs to have their head examined. That state is bankrupt and under the total control of unions (which is WHY it is bankrupt).
+4
Mar 12th, 2010 (9:46 am)In 3 years we could be spending anywhere from 500 billion to a trillion a year on imported oil, and when the spigots open I truly believe a national awakening beyond our little group of GM-VOLT posters will happen.
Just like smokers and pedaphiles are socially ostracized, I thing a new paradigm will happen where society will look down on people who buy new ICE cars when they could just as easily buy a EREV/BEV and save the environment, save the american worker etc.
Thats why all along i’ve believe we are much closer to a total takover of personal transportation by EREV/BEVs than the experts think. It won’t be the goverment forcing these down our throats, it will be the American Conscience.
And when people see the positive impact it has on our economy creating jobs in the auto and electric power industry with money we used to give to our enemies, then that will lead to concensus to do similar things with home fuel oil and 18 wheelers.
Even though we are still many months away from the first retail sales, at least now we can see that the jobs are created before the first retail purchases, as today’s story illustrates.
+6
Mar 12th, 2010 (9:47 am)If the US Govt does not do everything in its power to make this new industry and others like it a home grown and home OWNED industry (as other countries do all the time) we are DOOMED as a nation and world Power.
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (9:47 am)Although I agree that the Volt is essentially “completed”, it’s success is in no way a done deal. There are *many* decisions yet to be announced that will determine it’s future course. For example, you’re assuming that there will be a next generation of plugins at GM. All of the folks who assured us of that are long gone. I could go on listing concerns, but that doesn’t do anything but generate negatives. I’ve just placed my optimism into “wait and see” mode for a bit. Who knows???? We could get a thread this afternoon or tomorrow, or this week, that allays all concerns!
Seriously, my concerns are just that – *MY* concerns, and everyone here *knows* that I’m not one to be burdened by reality.
Be well,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!!
+3
Mar 12th, 2010 (9:56 am)Great news that LG Chem is going forward with a large Michigan Li-Ion prismatic cell plant! Another “finalist” in the bidding for the Volt’s cells, A123, has also previously made commit- ments (& US Govt loans) to build large automotive cell manufacturing plants in Michigan. According to their press release of Jan 14, 2010:
“In December of 2009, A123 closed on its $249 million grant award from the Department of Energy (DOE) and is using the available capital to help fund its capacity expansion plans. A123 ended the third quarter of 2009 with final assembly capacity of 169MW hours per year. A123 announced today that it has begun to make investments in its 300,000 square foot plant in Livonia, Mich. to expand the final cell assembly capacity by up to 200MW hours once fully operational, inclusive of the previously announced 80MW hour expansion.
“These investments will expand the company’s global final cell assembly capacity to over 360 MW hours, with the incremental 200MW hours of capacity expected to be ready for production during the second half of 2010. The expansion in capacity will provide A123 with the overall ability to produce over 320,000 hybrid vehicles with 1.1 kWh battery systems, or over 24,000 PHEVs with 15kWh battery systems per year. A123 will continue to evaluate additional investments in production capacity in response to anticipated customer demand.”
This could mean A123 might be in the bidding for Volt Gen II or later. And having another major cell supplier in Michigan bodes well for all 3 US automakers as they continue electrifying cars —as well as for US customers for those future EREVs, PHEVs & EVs made in the USA!
PS: Tag, I like your new “tag line” —No ER, No sale!! ……oops, did I just violate his copyright?!?
Mar 12th, 2010 (10:00 am)I was wondering about that too!
On topic, another factory means fewer chances for the non-marketing VP to stop the Volt!
No ER, No Sale! Indeed!
+11
Mar 12th, 2010 (10:04 am)What I can’t figure out is why people are upset about this when oil imports are sending $ hundreds of billions a year out of our country.
What’s more, South Korea is a thriving democracy with a fairly open market. Compare that to the major oil exporters (Saudi Arabia, Russia, Iran, Venezuela).
And lastly, the fact is that the U.S. is far behind Asia in battery manufacturing. So we can either:
a) wait for the U.S. to catch up, or
b) use LG batteries in the mean-time.
By the way, the other company that GM considered for batteries (A123) has all their manufacturing in China, which is far worse than South Korea in my mind.
-1
Mar 12th, 2010 (10:04 am)George,
This was discussed in a November 2009 post.
“Engineering Design and Efficiency of Chevy Volt’s Charge-Sustaining Mode: Builds on GM’s Two-Mode Hybrid Technology”
http://gm-volt.com/2009/11/23/engineering-design-and-efficiency-of-chevy-volts-generator-mode-builds-on-gms-two-mode-hybrid-technology/
From the article:
“We took all of the model that’s in the two mode hybrid and we’ve basically been carving out pieces we don’t need, adding in pieces we do need for this architecture and optimizing that model for this particular vehicle. We didn’t build this from scratch, this is also software that we are using that is also on the 2-mode but we are modifying it for optimizing this architecture.”
Note that the Volt and Saturn Vue Plug-in that Lyle drove have the same power electronics. See this video. Good info from about 2:25 to 3:00.
http://gm-volt.com/2009/08/24/test-drive-gms-2-mode-plug-in-hybrid-wvideo/
I contend that the difference between the plugin and the Volt is primarily the battery pack and the software. The plugin pack can only supply 55 kW (enough for one of the 2-mode’s motors), while the Volt’s pack can provide 110 kW.
http://archives.media.gm.com/volt/eflex/docs/battery_102.pdf
So while not exactly the same as the 2-mode, I contend that the mechanical content is essentially the same, and some controls and software are modified to use the 2-mode as the Volt’s propulsion system.
Mar 12th, 2010 (10:08 am)Off Topic.
Lyle, did the 10 person contest to come to NYC and test drive a Volt die of lack of interest??
What is the status??
Mar 12th, 2010 (10:12 am)Interesting point about looking at the labor cost of the pack. I think the estimate is that 80% of the cost is in the materials, 12% in labor, and 8% in overhead. That’s why, IMO, most people are overly optimistic about cost reductions going forward.
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (10:14 am)==============================
bernie:
The deadline for video entries is today, so hopefully we will know who the winners are pretty soon………….
NPNS
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (10:14 am)Jim – Interesting Wiki article. Thanks. I was captured by the other two curses, especially:
May you come to the attention of those in authority (sometimes rendered May the government be aware of you). “Now *that’s* a Chinese curse!”
“May you find what you are looking for,” could be good or bad, as could “interesting times.” The middle “curse” seems to be pretty much *curse*.
-4
Mar 12th, 2010 (10:14 am)당신을 감사하십시오, 화학
Mar 12th, 2010 (10:23 am)That’s a fair point DonC.
So I think the REAL question is, what technology/development is in the pipe to lower those material costs? Labour and overhead costs are relatively fixed.
-4
Mar 12th, 2010 (10:31 am)Small point- Venezuela pretty darn democratic, run pretty clean elections. You might say, radically democratic. Thanks
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (10:39 am)I am with you. NO ER NO SALE
+4
Mar 12th, 2010 (10:40 am)The fact is that neither one of these factors is that relevant. To simplify, contrary to popular belief, trade doesn’t involve swapping pineapples for jet aircraft. Most trade occurs between countries of roughly equal levels of development and these countries have similar wage rates and similar tax structures. (Think the US, Germany, Canada). It’s a type of eco-system. Documenting how this pattern of trade works is what got Paul Krugman his Nobel Prize last year and is one of the reasons why there is an emerging consensus that Charles Darwin may have been the greatest economist of all time.
Batteries are something of a special case because they are so heavy. Shipping batteries around the world makes about as much sense as shipping concrete across the country. Tesla originally was going to import its battery packs but changed its mind once it saw the costs and decided to build them here. The same thing is at work with the Volt battery — LG is moving production close to the manufacturing facilities. This is BTW the reason why the Obama administration has wanted to use grant seed money to ensure that the cars assembled here — if they are, then related manufacturing, like battery production, will likewise be located here. Plus you build the ecosystem, and that builds on itself.
+3
Mar 12th, 2010 (10:41 am)True, BUT… We don’t want to see loss of momentum. I would say that the best thing for “round 2″ will be the Ampera and the Flextreme of Opel. If the commitment to electric cars continues with Opel/GM then momentum is building. That would be good.
+2
Mar 12th, 2010 (10:47 am)Lithium air would seem to be the best bet. That takes a huge amount of the materials out, but it’s a long way from being commercially viable.
The fact that materials constitute such a large part of the costs is not to say you can’t get some material cost savings with current battery technology. You can of course get some of the material cost out as you move up the learning curve and figure out what you can leave out. But that process is more of an incremental grind rather than a big breakthrough.
Technological innovation can also occur with processes, not just with the technology. For example, BYD has been very successful in cutting costs by substituting relatively inexpensive labor for expensive capital equipment. But I’m not sure whether that can scale across countries.
+5
Mar 12th, 2010 (10:49 am)I mostly agree with you with the exception of which vehicle(s) should be next.
A Voltec small pickup and van would be a better direction to go in my opinion.
Get the working world onto Voltec sooner rather than later.
+2
Mar 12th, 2010 (10:50 am)It is my understanding that A123 recently signed agreements to build two manufacturing plants in the Detroit area. Oh, also see posting #44.
Mar 12th, 2010 (10:51 am)Uncontested.
+4
Mar 12th, 2010 (10:57 am)A good way would be to drop all Corp income tax or better yet all income tax and go to a sales tax. this way all products would be tax the same but American made products would not have the 34% income tax added to the cost. Net resault would be higher tax on imports and lower cost for American made products sold here or exported. OR simply MORE AMERICAN JOBS.
Simple!
“NO ER, NO SALE” (Best Tag line yet)
Mar 12th, 2010 (11:08 am)+1 A Voltec could blow the wheels off of Ford’s Transit Connect Van in speed and cargo capacity if the generator and battery worked together to give the motor more power and not just be CS. Or with a light load, use no gasoline at all. I vote for this to happen just -after- a high performance Volt
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (11:09 am)Agree totally always have, but we’d need slow transition over 15 years or so to such a system as too much is tied up in what we have in place.
Sales tax and real estate taxing only leads to more savings and we need consumers to consume as best they can for now. Also that would put millions out of work in the IRS, short run bad, long run good.
But certainly this is what is best in long run.
We also need a health care system that the government doesn’t run and neither do the health insurance companies , but thats another story, but same logic applies.
+3
Mar 12th, 2010 (11:29 am)I would also prefer an American company. But they’re transferring technology to us since they’re teaching GM about battery assembly. Not the other away around. We are giving them an opportunity to scale up and apply new technology using US taxpayer funds. But it’s not like there were any American companies that were as advanced. And GM needed to use the best batteries they could source.
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (11:31 am)They already exist (in 8 months):
a) fold your Volt’s rear seats down – voila, you have a light delivery vehicle / pickup truck with covered bed version of Voltec. Yes, it would be great for slow and moderate speed towing due to massive low end torque – no, don’t do towing with it until a specialty app gen IV is out.
Four wheeler off-roaders who have ever used the front electric winch to get themselves up out of a bad situation or pretty much any tow truck operator will have the best understanding of what electric drive can do for you, such as lift the engine heavy front of a semi tractor trailer off the ground.
b) engage your Volt’s Sport Mode switch – voila, you have a higher performance version.
The Volt gen I really is an amazingly versatile, practical, peppy, world platform vehicle, straight out of the box, if you bother to learn all that it can do.
I didn’t apply for the NYC ride, ’cause I’d superglue my hands to the steering wheel. They’d never get that baby back from me once I touched it.
Wait until BMW finds out that all the redneck US mini E leasees have installed gun racks in their minis as an end of lease “I’d like to buy it and keep it as long as I want” negotiator.
-8
Mar 12th, 2010 (11:36 am)150 million in government money to a foreign concern in Michigan to support government motors – anybody see anything wrong with that?
I didn’t think so – you just want your freakin car, no matter the means.
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (11:37 am)It doesn’t even make sense since as far as I can tell, they’re all “interesting times.” It’s easy for us to look back and say things were easier then. Especially since we know how things turned out. But if you look at newspapers from the 30s or 40s–they were pretty alarming.
+2
Mar 12th, 2010 (11:40 am)If I’m not mistaken, GM’s new battery facility will assemble battery packs. LG’s new plant will manufacture the cells that will go into those packs.
+3
Mar 12th, 2010 (11:44 am)Old Woolsley (former Dir of CIA) agrees with you. His reasoning is that by replacing/retrofitting large vehicles, you displace more gas used. Makes sense, AND I think there’d be a market once the Macho Vrooom Vrooom MORE POWER guys learn that it CAN be done electrically.
Be well,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!!
+2
Mar 12th, 2010 (11:49 am)Before the great depression, the US had an enormous trade surplus. So starting a trade war was a really really bad idea. The ensuring trade war made things worse in the short term for everyone. But Great Britain, as a trade deficit country, recovered much faster than we did. Now, we’re the trade deficit country. So, if we want to restore balance, we should increase tariffs.
Besides, it’s not like we were starting from the same place we are today. At the time, every country had much higher tariffs than they have right now.
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (11:50 am)I resemble that remark!
+2
Mar 12th, 2010 (11:53 am)Income taxes are not added to the cost. They are paid net of all expenses. And they are owed whether the good or service is imported or not. I think BTW that what you’d want is a value added tax not a sales tax. Sales taxes have way too many theoretical and practical problems.
But worrying about corporate income taxes is a waste of time. Health care is a major problem for US manufacturing companies. Taxes are not a big issue. You can in fact see the negative effect health care has on jobs by comparing the relative growth rates of Canadian and US manufacturing.
It’s easy to understand why health care is more important. Health care costs can make your business unprofitable; at worst the corporate income tax reduces its profitability. Which do you think is a bigger problem? This is why, if you asked 1000 CEOs whether they’d prefer to eliminate taxes or their health care costs, you’d be lucky to find one that would say taxes.
Mar 12th, 2010 (11:54 am)I don’t think I’ve seen your funny side. I LIKE it! (lol). Love the image of a Mini with a gun rack. Soooo Pennsylvanian!
If we’d both gotten to go, I could have staged a coronary diversion so you could escape with your hands glued to the wheel. (Don’t forget to disable the OnStar).
Be well,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!!
+3
Mar 12th, 2010 (11:56 am)Wow, amazing that folks can find something to complain about in this good news. Yes it would be nice if it were an American company building the plant, but all of the American companies have pretty well vacated the industry. Making lipos is a bit more complicated than making muffins, you can bet there are many patents involved, not to mention the proprietary “black art” tricks each company uses in cell construction.
Note (yet again) that the cell construction and the pack construction (Brownstown) are two different things. The cells are the shiny silver things you can hold in your hand…
I still cringe when electric cars are lovingly called “green”, when 75% of our electricity is made from fossil fuels. Oh well it’s a start (not that I am at all a tree hugger). “Free us from OPEC”, OK, I’ll buy that one.
Just be glad that South Korea is a friendly, democratic allied nation. FWIW they were the leaders in the early days of lipo cells, at least for hobby use (Kokam, etc). They’ve also been on our side helping out in Vietnam and Iraq.
-1
Mar 12th, 2010 (11:58 am)Great, Lucky Goldstar making batteries for my American car……..
Hope they are better than the Goldstar Electronics line.
+2
Mar 12th, 2010 (11:58 am)LOL, you obviously haven’t been reading the posts too closely.
Pay attention,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!!
Mar 12th, 2010 (11:59 am)Have a great day all, I’m off to the Calgary auto show.
Hoping to see a Volt, but we’re a backwater with these shows, so I’m not confident!
+7
Mar 12th, 2010 (12:04 pm)I want to drive an American made Volt! I can’t wait to get rid of my Prius – even though it’s been a runaway success!
L
L Sorry
RECHARGE! James
Mar 12th, 2010 (12:08 pm)Do we really have to insult pedophiles?.. dont they suffer enough?
+3
Mar 12th, 2010 (12:09 pm)Agreed. But those “ecosystems” don’t form by themselves. Contrary to popular belief in the “free markets” you need an industrial policy. And tariffs can be an important, even vital part of forming that “ecosystem.” They don’t form by themselves. Although I agree that they should be targeted at specific strategic areas.
By the way, the point is to fix imbalances. Not to run a structural long term trade surplus. That can be just as destructive as our current situation of long term structural trade deficits. The point is to minimize imbalances.
+4
Mar 12th, 2010 (12:11 pm)What? Of course a company adds the income tax to the price of everything? So it is added to the cost of everything made in America.
Without a Corp income tax Made in America products would be much more compitive. One of the highest if not the highest Corp income tax rate in the world is our biggest problem as well as eco laws.
Imports do not pay US income tax on the manfacture of the product. They sell it to a us company the us company pays income tax only on the profit or mark up. but no US tax is paid by the manfacture of the poduct on their profit. Yes the importer pays tax but only on the profit from markup.
sales tax is much more fair and easy. Plus it applies to the total sales price on all products.
Mar 12th, 2010 (12:14 pm)So in your eyes, you seem to believe we Americans can not longer compete and we should just give up. With that kind of thinking, the future of this country is in grave danger of becoming a second rate nation. I’m glad not everyone thinks the same way.
+2
Mar 12th, 2010 (12:18 pm)Warren Buffet proposed this solution.
http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/growing.pdf
+2
Mar 12th, 2010 (12:20 pm)Many of us could care less about being green, but some of us want to be independent of foreign oil.. and why not use fossil fuel (and wind, solar, nukes) we have plenty of it.. enough for hundreds of years.
The Koreans, Chinese and Japanese are fighting it out for battery production dominance.. its time the Americans joined in. Japan does not have cheap labor yet they can make cells profitably.
+2
Mar 12th, 2010 (12:20 pm)+1 Smashingly good, that one.
+2
Mar 12th, 2010 (12:20 pm)And probably more than that. These things tend to snowball in the auto sector especially. Good or Bad usually affects several players.
+3
Mar 12th, 2010 (12:23 pm)South Korea does not have an open market. They don’t buy any American cars. In fact, they don’t even buy any Japanese cars, which should say something. Although, obviously, we’d be better off trading with them than China from a human rights, environmental, consumer safety, and political perspective.
In terms of trade balances, I agree that we can’t just look at where the company in question is headquartered. The point is to look at the net inflows and outflows of money. And how likely the country in question is to buy American exports. And actually let us pay for our imports with exports rather than debt.
Mar 12th, 2010 (12:29 pm)YES! (Pumps fist) I needed something to get me out of the funk I was in after yesterday’s article/interview.
The more American content the better. I haven’t driven an American made car for a long time-it made me smile when I bought my Toyota pickup and it had a GM radiator.
Jobs in America – what great news! South Korean companies rock – and American companies ROCK THE HOUSE! A123 factories pumping out latest gen batteries, what could be better?
RECHARGE! James
+2
Mar 12th, 2010 (12:31 pm)“A rising tide, lifts all boats”
Be well,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (12:33 pm)Personally, the ICs don’t sound like a workable solution to me. Too many transaction costs. I like simple solutions like targeted tariffs, much better. But that’s me. But I completely agree with his thriftville vs. squanderville thesis. And he wrote that well before our current account deficit hit 7% of GDP.
You can never really tell when imbalances will correct themselves. But they always do. And the longer they take to correct, the worse it is when they ultimately do.
-1
Mar 12th, 2010 (12:34 pm)IMHO, the biggest problem here in the US for battery cell manufacturing is that the Greenies and Earth saviors will always say “Not in my backyard” or they will impose so much environmental criteria/restrictions to operate that it will make it completely financially unfeasible to operate. If you do not manufacture them here and buy elsewhere, they’re perfectly quiet about it. Hence our current import scenario is to rely on other countries and import it. Seems to be OK for someone else’s backyard though.
+2
Mar 12th, 2010 (12:38 pm)There are large profitable markets where EREV makes alot of sense. Sales of Mercedes/Dodge/Freightliner Sprinter diesel commercial vans are through the roof.
An EREV van large enough to compete with Sprinter would be my first target. Fleets all want to cut costs and the eco PR return is also a definite benefit. Small vans (Transit Connect) are a great BEV target market, as they tend to cover shorter routes.
“Build it and they will come”.
RECHARGE! James
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (12:39 pm)How about A123Sytem when everyone thought they had superior lithium cells and that GM would pick A123System instead of LG to supply the Volt battery? Now, what is it, that makes LG better?
I think our government should give loans to American owned companies and not to foreign ones. You would never see Japan give loans to an American company on Japanese soil. First of all, Japan would not allow a US company to build on their soil, even less to help such a company.
When are we going to learn???
Mar 12th, 2010 (12:46 pm)I assume there were reasons GM picked LG chem. Including more prompt delivery, better cells, etc. Given that the VOlt was already an ambitious undertaking, they need a reliable partner, and the best cells possible.
Even if the deciding issue was cost–the Volt is already too expensive for many people. And it’s not like LG was cutting costs by using cheaper labor. They’re making the cells in Michigan.
-1
Mar 12th, 2010 (12:52 pm)BEVs should be chemistry agnostic.
+2
Mar 12th, 2010 (12:55 pm)Leave it to Warren Buffet. I like this idea. Even if every country did it. It forces fair trade.
Mar 12th, 2010 (12:57 pm)CPI has two plants in Korea and one in China:
http://www.compactpower.com/faq.shtml#6
and “has the capacity to manufacture 40 million small-format cells per month.”:
http://www.edf.org/page.cfm?tagID=48959
I’m not sure that small format cells are used in the Volt battery pack. This statement, “CPI is thus moving slowly before taking advantage of incentives to expand their domestic lithium-ion cell manufacturing capabilities, taking care not to put in place excess capacity that would then have to sit idle until there was a congruence of demand.” is an indication that they will build new plants when it is clear that they will be needed to meet demand. This new plant to be constructed in Holland, Michigan is one of four. The other manufacturers are:
Johnson Controls-Saft Advanced Power Solutions LLC has partnered with Ford and plans to build its plant in Holland, MI
KD Advanced Battery Group LLC, a joint venture between Dow Chemical, Kokam America and Townsend Ventures
A123 Systems Inc plans to build a plant in Livonia to provide lithium ion packs for Chrysler
http://green.autoblog.com/2009/04/14/four-battery-makers-announce-plans-to-build-battery-plants-in-mi/
The new battery cell manufacturing plant in Holland will most likely supply CPI,s pack assembly plant in Troy, Michigan as well as GM Brownstown Township pack assembly plant.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Mar 12th, 2010 (1:00 pm)How weird…..
I got that same message in a Fortune Cookie at lunch today.
Mar 12th, 2010 (1:02 pm)I totally agree on all points.
The only thing better than pumping out the latest gen batteries, would be GM pumping out the latest Gen Volts!
(Funk & Content sounds like a Law Firm, or something “off color”)(g)
Be well,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!
Mar 12th, 2010 (1:04 pm)turns out, “The planned automotive lithium-ion battery manufacturing system is expected to be U.S-based and vertically-integrated. Utilizing Michigan’s talented workforce, it is expected to span the full production process including: research and development, manufacturing of high value components such as A123Systems’ proprietary Nanophosphate™ cathode powder, electrode coating, cell fabrication, module fabrication, through the final assembly of complete battery pack systems ready for vehicle integration.”
A123 Systems Under Way With Construction of $600 Million Battery Plant in Michigan
“A123 Systems is currently constructing a $600 million lithium ion battery manufacturing plant in Livonia, Michigan, about 20 miles from downtown Detroit. The project is one of the largest Industrial Manufacturing Industry projects under way in the Great Lakes region.
think this is dated march 5. Good on us. thanks
-8
Mar 12th, 2010 (1:05 pm)TO BAD IT IS ONLY 40 MILES !!! 100 miles should be minimum !
Mar 12th, 2010 (1:06 pm)LauraM,
They will be making the cells in Michigan after the new plant in Holland, Michigan is complete in 2012. They currently assemble packs in Troy, Michigan.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
+2
Mar 12th, 2010 (1:09 pm)You know, the next few years has to be one of the most exciting times for both car buyers and car manufacturers. For several decades, automotive improvements have been incremental – fuel injection here, turbocharging there, etc. Now look what’s on the horizon. Engineers are looking at electric motors, batteries, power controls, computerization, energy reclamation, extended-range generators, etc. Think about this for a minute – take a Chevy Volt and a Chevy Cruze, and project both of them out for, say, five years. Is there any doubt that in five years, the 2016 Volt will sport improvements over the 2011 Volt that are orders of magnitude better? To contrast, how will the 2016 Cruze compare with the 2011 Cruze? My guess will be small, incremental improvements.
+5
Mar 12th, 2010 (1:23 pm)_____________________________________________________________
“LG Chem Announces $303 Million Investment to Build Volt Battery Plant in Michigan”
That’s the same thing as saying:
LG Chem is placing a $303 Million vote of confidence that the Volt will be a success.
______________________________________________________________
Mar 12th, 2010 (1:29 pm)I thought it sounded like an encyclopedia (funk and wagnalls)
Mar 12th, 2010 (1:32 pm)Or that LG Chem is placing a $303 Million vote of confidence in GM placing a vote of confidence in the Volt, or both.
Believe and Be Well, (since it’s available again)
Michael
Mar 12th, 2010 (1:34 pm)That works too (g). Are you getting adjusted to being “back at altitude”?
Be well,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!
Mar 12th, 2010 (1:42 pm)Also something to consider: Nowhere is it written that this will be the last plant built. I’m sure more will follow.
+2
Mar 12th, 2010 (1:43 pm)It’d be interesting to find out how many automated battery caddies there are in that factory in the picture and what company makes them.
NPNS!
Mar 12th, 2010 (1:55 pm)“I thought we went through this before! It’s not a toomah–
Uh… I mean, it’s not a two-mode.”
+2
Mar 12th, 2010 (1:57 pm)One of the ways American corporations currently avoid corporate income taxes is by shifting production overseas. So, yes, I think we should eliminate the corporate income tax. A VAT would be a great substitute.
I agree that health care is also a huge cost. Although I’m not sure that the current legislation will reduce the burden on employers. But fixing one does not preclude fixing the other.
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (2:00 pm)That might work for BYD given the low cost of labor in China. But in the United States, we need to replace replace expensive labor with relatively inexpensive capital equipment.
Mar 12th, 2010 (2:11 pm)There was a time BEFORE the dangers of cancer from smoking was discovered that it was the ‘social norm’ to be a smoker. I’m a bit confused on your second point: Are you saying that in the time BEFORE the Catholic Priests little club was found out that IT WAS acceptable to be a Pedophile?
Mar 12th, 2010 (2:30 pm)Laura — We’re on the same page.
Hard to know where to begin. No, income taxes are not added. It’s not a cost because by definition if there is no profit there is no tax. That’s one of the theoretical benefits of an income tax BTW. I don’t know how to explain this any better. May be my bad.
Mar 12th, 2010 (2:34 pm)You have got to start somewhere.
Mar 12th, 2010 (2:37 pm)Timely article in the WSJ about the location of manufacturing jobs. There is a new trend called “onshoring” where manufacturing is being brought back to the US. This is being done primarily because of currency changes and transportation costs, but efficiency, lower supplier prices, and lower labor costs are also factors. In this regard, if the Chinese let the Yuan float the US-Chinese trade deficit would doubtless change in a fairly dramatic fashion.
Should be encouraging for those worried about battery production moving overseas. Read and enjoy:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748703625304575115922854225564.html
Mar 12th, 2010 (2:46 pm)Nelson,
From the shape of the battery pack, I assume that it is for a Volt. Therefore, the plant has to be Brownstown GM Battery Pack location or the Compact Power Inc. Troy, Michigan location (if they were the source of the original LG Chem supplied packs).
Update: The picture in this article is the same one used on a report: “GM Builds First Lithium-ion Battery for Chevrolet Volt”:
http://www.gm.com/corporate/responsibility/environment/news/2010/voltbattery_010710.jsp
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
Mar 12th, 2010 (2:55 pm)This is actually good news: add the Brownstown GM battery pack plant’s 70,000, it’s more than double the 50,000 to 60,000 production projection for year two. It appears GM will be able to ramp up production beyond their stated second year projection.
Happy trails to you ’til we meet again.
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (3:10 pm)How about just saying over time socially accepted norms change, maybe not the best examples off the top of my head. But now people buy cars and there are no other real choices. Soon there will be a choice. Really it is more comparable just to currently people who feel strongly about buying American. Because many like to buy American Products to save American jobs. Well buying EREV/BEVs will become an even STRONGER feeling then just buying American because there is even more at stake then just American jobs.
1) An American Made EREV/BEV also creates 100% jobs for the fuel of that car as all electricity will be produced domestically, no imported electricity. So even more American jobs are at stake.
2) ZERO emissions is something that all people who breathe air must care about to some degree.
3) Stopping imported Oil means not sending money to our enemies, and we don’t have to fight wars to protect the oil lanes and we certainly can retired whole Navel Aircraft Carrier task groups. Saving lives and Defense money though requiring some connecting of the dots is something everyone can understand.
So my point is EREV/BEVs will have a social conscience factor that is very strong. It is irrelevant now and hard to measure because the option does not exist. But I’m very confident then when people see a Volt in their neighbors driveway, and that Volt owner tells his neighbors and friends these reasons, that this social consciessness will spread and become the new paradigm. A much stronger feeling than just BUY AMERICAN, but BUY EV will incorporate many strong feelings. And as soon as EV/EREVs are cost competitive with ICE cars, I can’t really see people wanting and ICE any longer. The choice will be EREV or BEV, NOT ICE.
I can’t wait. Of course this leads to the whole argument of when the cars will be cost competitve, but I feel thats already the case. The demand is already there to eat up all the supply over the next few years while the total operational costs of EV/EREVs come down, and I think 2013 is when the paradigm shift I’m talking about will occur, when the way many of us feel on this website becomes the societal norm.
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (3:12 pm)Laura I agree mostly with what you said. I like a simple sales tax better then a VAT.
Donc: Let me try again if a company expects to net X amount from the manfacture of a product they add in what they will pay in income tax. Or simply they add what they expiect to pay in income tax to the price of the product. So yes it effects the price or the cost to the buyer.
Any business plan includes estimates of the income tax. Why? so they know how much to charge for a product to make X after tax profit.
Each supplier will do the same and yes income tax is in the final cost to the customer.
Example if I make Y for $100 and sell it for $200 I will make about $66 after tax but with no income tax I could sell or export it for $166 and and still make the same after tax profit.
Not sure how much simpler it can get. Lower Income tax more jobs.
Mar 12th, 2010 (3:40 pm)I’ve read about that trend. The problem is that a)as the guy said, they’re still moving more production offshore than they are onshore. b) It looks really good politically to bring jobs back to the United States, so everyone involved has every incentive to exaggerate the trend. and c)the dollar is already getting stronger, and may continue to do so depending on what happens with Greece/Spain/Italy/Ireland, etc.
Mar 12th, 2010 (3:49 pm)That’s the corporate income tax. Not the personal income tax. Which isn’t exactly the same thing. You could argue that you have to pay higher wages to compensate for income taxes, but I doubt that’s a major factor in most production.
+2
Mar 12th, 2010 (3:54 pm)If you are an American, go to http://www.fairtax.org and do some reading around. Also, may I recommend “The Fairtax Book” by Neal Boortz and Congressman John Linder (and also it’s follow-on, “Fairtax, The Truth: Answering the Critics” by the same authors).
If all you know of the Fairtax is the political misinformation from both main US political parties, you owe it to yourselves and our country to check this out.
If you are not an American, never mind (we need to be the ones to implement this, first)!
Mar 12th, 2010 (4:05 pm)Corp income tax is what this was all about go back to #62 and you will see I was talking about Corp income tax all along.
Mar 12th, 2010 (4:06 pm)Hey a new EV “All-electric Atomik 500″, never heard of them before but if “Lord Voldemort” ( http://www.fabbricantidiuniversi.it/harrypotter/immagini/voldemort1.jpg ) from Harry Potty were to have an EV this one would be his…
http://www.blogcdn.com/green.autoblog.com/media/2010/03/atomik-500-moon-630–1268396756.jpg
lol… the “Voldemort” car!
http://green.autoblog.com/2010/03/12/all-electric-atomik-500-sends-us-to-the-moon/
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (4:08 pm)I could not agree more. I think the “fair tax” is a great idea. Everyone should go to the link you gave.
(for Zacs eyes only) I have been to that site before.
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (4:11 pm)Hey…. huh?!?!?!?
Bruce? ECO_Turbo”
ECO_Turbo? Bruce?
Mike-o-matic Avatar???
And Tag…..”No ER, No Sale!”
Great Googly Mooogeley! Wht’d I miss?
/cue Twilight Zone theme song……
//run’s out building screaming, hands flinging in the air……AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!
Mar 12th, 2010 (4:19 pm)This is good news.
After a couple of my recent posts, many of you may find this surprising. Granted, if we knew that “a [cell] production capacity [capable] of around 60,000 Chevy Volts per year” represented a single shift, or 24/7 shifts, it might qualify this news. Still, when you add in the possibilities of adding the output of LG / CPI plants in Asia, and the A123 plants coming on-line, it appears that GM will be set for an increase in Volt demand beyond their stated production target. And as others have said, there’s no reason why LG or some other manufacturer couldn’t open a second (or third!) plant.
This is evidence that GM has, with the Volt, lit a fire too large to put out.
I just have one request: Could one of the follow-on cell plants be located in the Southeast US? Please?
Mar 12th, 2010 (4:24 pm)-3? Wow, there sure are a bunch of chemistry haters on this site.
Mar 12th, 2010 (4:27 pm)This is great news for Michigan and American automakers. Making battery packs at home is a key part of reinvigorating American manufacturing. We need more OEMs to return to the U.S, to build a new, leaner manufacturing base. We should be able to compete with any product anywhere on quality and reliability. Especially in the new areas of green energy products, the U.S. should look to take the lead in manufacturing processes.
Will LG be returning any of the $151M grant in the form of shares to the U.S. taxpayer??
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (4:28 pm)THAT’S what you get for going drinking without me!!!
ZT
Mar 12th, 2010 (4:29 pm)Translate 4 my small mind.
Mar 12th, 2010 (4:30 pm)Dude! I was just yanking your chain. I know what you meant.
I would have used smokers and people who wear “fur skins” as a better example.
We’re cool.
Mar 12th, 2010 (4:33 pm)WOW!!
Serious Twilight zone going today……lol.
Went to a by bye lunch for folks that got the pink slip here. Went for Pizza and MGD!!!
+2
Mar 12th, 2010 (4:38 pm)Aw see….
Look at u stirrin sh|t up!!!
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!!!!
/man, subjects are all over the place today, Priests, Pedosomethings, battery cells, smokers the only odd thing missing is EEStor.
BLAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!!!!!!
Mar 12th, 2010 (4:43 pm)Back from the Calgary auto show…
NO VOLT… sigh…
There WAS a Cruze and while it’s not quite what I’m looking for it IS a nice little car.
Certainly at least as nice as the other cars in it’s category.
I did really like the LaCrosse though! Gettin’ a bit older, want/need more cushy seats!
More Diesels seem to be showing up, but no diesel and AWD combo’s…
WHY is that???
Mar 12th, 2010 (4:52 pm)Hey DirtyDawgRob!
Congrats on the new job!!!!
/read a few threads back…..
Mar 12th, 2010 (4:52 pm)Since we are expecting GM to encounter far more Volt demand than they anticipate, I won’t point out that plug-in 2-mode is apparently a fallback position for the LG plant’s output (see bolded text in the quote). However, since that Volt demand would prevent the plant’s output from being used to make the smaller packs, it could be an opportunity for GM to strengthen a relationship with A123; and maybe try some different manufacturer’s cells in those cars. This could eventually lead to a greater proportion of US-made cells going into Volts.
Mar 12th, 2010 (5:00 pm)Thanks Bro!
It’s quite a relief after 4 months off work.
It IS on the oilsands, but as least there are no guns required to get that oil.
Mar 12th, 2010 (5:02 pm)That would be awesome. Though in the meantime we have some of those right now, on rails. If you’re near any try ‘em, it’s a nice change once in a while.
Mar 12th, 2010 (5:05 pm)Shoot. The Mayan calendar says 2012 is pretty much when time runs out. Just our luck (g).
Be well,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!
Mar 12th, 2010 (5:08 pm)I have nothing against chemistry, but I’m getting tired of people posting here in other languages. This is a US-based site, and if such posters expect to interact at all, they should at least attempt a translation.
YES, I know that EVO is probably just cutting up; but we have another visitor who quite seriously posts only in Spanish, and there are some other inscrutable comments that pop up here regularly (thread title, avatar, no comment text, for example). They shouldn’t expect positive votes, lol.
Mar 12th, 2010 (5:14 pm)Spoken like a true President.
Be well,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (5:18 pm)Hey guys, it *worked*!
(Just kiddin Captn).
Be well,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!
Mar 12th, 2010 (5:23 pm)Didn’t they tell you that the batteries were for Goshn? (g)
Be well,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!
Mar 12th, 2010 (5:26 pm)There is definitely a place for a performance-emphasis EREV, IMO. The public needs an attainable Tesla Roadster wanna-be to give the technology a high-test reputation. This is what we all hoped the Converj would be. Unfortunately, GM is at both an advantage and a disadvantage where this idea is concerned: the advantage is that they own EREV at this moment; but they have the disadvantage is not having a “sporty” division (such as Pontiac) which might’ve provided a plausible venue for such a car. GM must have found the idea of sporty Voltec inconsistent with their reading on typical Cadillac customers, at least within the technology’s current limitations.
GM has two luxury-car divisions, vs one “for the rest of us.” It seems to me that they will be forced to stretch the definitions of what a Buick or Cadillac customer is, or risk having two divisions in direct competition with each other. The remaining Chevrolet marque risks becoming as model-crazy and wide-ranging as Toyota. How many models are there under the “Toyota” name? The way things stand now, the Volt, the sporty EREV (whatever form it takes), the EREV CUV and light truck, and a lower-cost counterpart of the Cadillac plug-in 2-mode will likely all be Chevrolets; on top of all the current Chevrolet models. (I think GM’s reading on GMC is as a name for pro and semi-pro trucks, though I could be mistaken).
I’ll admit that I’m in it more for the economy, and suspect that this represents most of us here. On the other hand, there are others on this site (such as EVO and prowler) who will quickly point out the performance aspect of the EV. If provided, I’m sure that many power-hungry drivers would take to a beefed-up, high-torque version of Voltec. Trouble is, it looks like you’ll be in for a long wait.
… Bruce ?!
Mar 12th, 2010 (5:29 pm)Let’s use an example a US company that manufactures goods in India and sells them in the US (or elsewhere, makes no difference):
1. The US company pays federal income tax on its world wide income. Doesn’t matter where the goods are made. Doesn’t matter where they are sold. It also pays income tax in the country in which it does business. The specifics are controlled by tax treaties but essentially it will get a tax credit against US taxes for income taxes paid overseas.
2. This means the tax rate in India can increase but not decrease the amount of taxes owed. If the effective US rate is 6%, then it will pay a minimum of 6% UNLESS the Indian tax rate is higher, say 15%, in which case it will pay the higher 15% Indian rate.
So how exactly would the federal tax rate influence whether a company manufactures onshore or offshore?
When I see statements like “lower income taxes lower jobs,” my thought is that someone is drinking way too much Fox News/talk radio Kool-Aid, because the claim on its face is oversimplified at best and just plain crazy at worst.
Mar 12th, 2010 (5:29 pm)How are we paying for oil imports? This far outweighs all other factors. I’ll gladly buy batteries from South Korea in order not to buy oil from Saudi Arabia.
Mar 12th, 2010 (5:31 pm)I thought you wanted to eliminate both? I agree that we should eliminate the corporate income tax. But the regular income tax–not so much.
The major “problem” with a progressive income tax is that at some point it discourages additional work. It does lead to some inefficiencies. It might be a problem if the people getting the highest wages were scientists and researchers. But, given who’s currently getting the highest wages in America, I don’t think that it’s a big deal.
On the other hand, the abrupt elimination of many subsidies at a very low level of income is a major problem IMHO. Since it keeps people trapped under a certain income level. (If they make more, they often wind up taking home a lot less.)
Mar 12th, 2010 (5:35 pm)Huh, I thought he was referring to the Volt.
Be well,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!
Mar 12th, 2010 (5:35 pm)Holland has the largest 4th of July celebration outside the US. Holland is the only country besides the US where Caddy Shack was a big hit. I hope a lot more can go back and forth between the two, especially regarding transportation innovations.
How on earth are CPI (LG Chem), and A123 both able to build plants under such an outrageously restrictive greenie and green earth savior NIMBY environment? ..and how have so many made the grevious mistakes of blaming China labor costs at a dollar an hour, and holding the Yuan artificially low and lowered shipping costs with containerization and automation for this when it’s the greenie and green earth savior NIMBY environment?
Mar 12th, 2010 (5:36 pm)You should at least respect the office, Dr. Tagamet.
Mar 12th, 2010 (5:37 pm)Photoshop ! Vaporware !
Mar 12th, 2010 (5:40 pm)Note: not Holland MI above.
Mar 12th, 2010 (5:42 pm)I read somewhere those are pretty cool too, you plug em in or somethin right?
Mar 12th, 2010 (5:45 pm)I always heard it was Denmark that had the largest foreign 4th fest… am I wrong? Do they have competing claims?
Mar 12th, 2010 (5:46 pm)So much for the shortage of Lithium…
Mar 12th, 2010 (5:50 pm)LOL. But in all seriousness, the NIMBY faction is a huge problem. It gets in the way for all sorts of things that we need to do in order to both maintain a competitive economy and conserve natural resources for future generations. Like solar energy plants. And windmills. And solar panels on roofs. Native plant gardens that use less water. High speed trains. Public transportation. Etc.
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (5:54 pm)It’s not one or the other. There’s no reason we can’t produce our own batteries instead of importing oil.
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (5:55 pm)I hope this new battery plant is about as high tech as it gets and it will make super high quality batteries at the lowest possible cost. That’s going to be the key … especially in the first couple of years.
The batteries need to be very reliable, very durable, and as inexpensive as possible. I hope that GM shocks the world at how inexpensively they can make batteries for the Volt in the next year or so. Selling the Chevy Volt for around $26,000 or so (with the tax credit) would be awesome.
No doubt about it … GM would have a lot of trouble keeping up with demand if you could get a Volt at that price in 2011 or 2012. I wouldn’t hesitate to buy a Volt at that price. It’s a no brainer … especially if GM can also surprise us by programming the Volt to go 0-60 mph in around 7 seconds when you are in “performance mode”.
Mar 12th, 2010 (5:58 pm)Because, due a rather large loophole in the tax law, they don’t have to pay taxes unless and until they repatriate their profits.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a4.7CIfqd5h0&refer=home
Mar 12th, 2010 (5:59 pm)Yes, I think you are. It doesn’t really matter all that much these days where a company’s corporate headquarters are. Most of the money the company brings in goes to suppliers, salaries, facilities, taxes, and (if the company makes money) investors. When LG opens a plant in the US, many of its suppliers will be in the US, and others will be places like Canada and Venezuela, where the Lithium is. Salaries, facilities, and taxes will mostly come back to the US. Investors are worldwide and, like suppliers, are only somewhat related to to the particular nation where the company started. The truth is that most corporations, including GM, are really international now.
Mar 12th, 2010 (5:59 pm)You’ll probably have to wait* for the Chevrolet Lightning (but 0-60 will be closer to 5 seconds).
*at least five years.
Mar 12th, 2010 (6:04 pm)A perfect description of Moi. Oops, Zack doesn’t like foreign language posts, so I guess I mean “me”.
Oh, BTW, you got the “lower income taxes, lower jobs” quote wrong. He said higher jobs. (g)
For all the fiscal intelligentsia comments today: yes, I do see the relevance, and yes, I admire your knowledge of *some* of the factors in play. I only know enough to comment that the issues are, in fact, so complex, that you are all probably right about something.
Personally, I’d like to see a traditional American solution employed.
Tax the Bejeebers out of the UAE. They have a lot of money and can afford it. Heck, they’d probably never miss it. Once we we’re out of the hole we’re in, continue to tax them. After all, taxes aren’t supposed to go down, and we could use the money.
/jest off
Be well,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (6:05 pm)New “Why I want a Chevy Volt video”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5SQRfF8CIQ
competition at last…
-1
Mar 12th, 2010 (6:08 pm)나는 제네럴 모터스가 함축하는 것을 화학를 가진 공동체정신이 보이는 국제적인 존재가 있는에 흥미있던 경우에 이 널이 다른 상승하는 중요한 전략적인 힘의 언어의 그들의 자신의 번역을 하기 취급할 수 있던, 그것을 생각했다. 나는 정정해 서 있다. 계속하십시오 완전히 관여된 당신의 곁눈 가리개를…
I thought that if GM was interested in having an international presence, which a partnership with LG seems to imply, that this board could handle doing their own translations of languages of other ascending major and strategic powers. I stand corrected.
Carry on with your blinders fully engaged…
I deeply apologize for my horrendous translation of that into Korean. I’m still learning so I can get those good jobs…
Mar 12th, 2010 (6:09 pm)LOL. You do realize that you just endorsed the gasoline tax?
Mar 12th, 2010 (6:13 pm)Sorry Sir, I was! I’ll try harder next time.
Be well,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!
Mar 12th, 2010 (6:16 pm)Yeah, but they only go 40 miles.
Be well,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!
Mar 12th, 2010 (6:19 pm)And nuclear plants.
Be well,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!
Mar 12th, 2010 (6:21 pm)También, usted aprende mejor que español si usted quiere consiga a la fuente de nuevos mercados en los Estados Unidos.
Also, you better learn Spanish if you want get to source of new markets in the United States:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_in_the_United_States
And yes, I’m just trying to stir the pot in a friendly way, as always.
Mar 12th, 2010 (6:22 pm)LOL, Sorry, I just meant the bold to be around the word “all”.
Be well,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (6:25 pm)Cool, for some reason I think that is the answer. Start with 2 cents a gallon. Then every month go up another 2 cents.
Mar 12th, 2010 (6:27 pm)NO! I DIDN’T! NEVER! (g). Well, I guess if it was levied at the *well*. No, THAT doesn’t work either. Hmmmm. I’ll get back to you (er, not).
Be well,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!
Mar 12th, 2010 (6:29 pm)Wow, and I have trouble finding the keys on MY keyboard! Yours would be TOUGH!
Be well,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (6:30 pm)OK, OK, I finally posted a video on YouTube. Tell me what’cha think.
I really really WANT A CHEVY VOLT!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5SQRfF8CIQ
RECHARGE! James
Mar 12th, 2010 (6:31 pm)They’re making the lion cells at LG-CP and shipping them over to GM to be assembled into a battery pack. You’re counting the same cells twice, I think.
Mar 12th, 2010 (6:36 pm)I’m not advocating another model, far from it. That would require more money to be ponied up. All I want is an App for that. A need for speed Icon on the Dashtop, for days when you felt like being a little rebelious. Of course I haven’t driven a Volt, (hint,hint) hell, the button they already have may be enough to get the juices flowing.
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (6:38 pm)Biting tongue:
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/oog/info/gdu/gaspump.html
Look at tax as a percentage of retail gas price over time. Compare average during current admin with W’s first term.
Mar 12th, 2010 (6:45 pm)Real pro and semi-pro trucks and commercial vehicles use diesel (and/or LPG, CNG and electric drive).
GMC, as is, is for uninformed wanna-be contractors and subs that are currently unemployed and those looking for a dirt cheap (for a reason) used vehicle .
\snarky harshness off
Mar 12th, 2010 (6:46 pm)I have to part ways with you on high speed trains… For the population density we have, I think highways are good enough. High speed rail is mostly for city to city transit, and, at least here in California, I think we have carved up enough of the countryside for transit works. It takes the population density of a Europe to make it make sense, and, frankly, I hope we stay a bit more on the wild (natural) side of the balance than Europe, the garden continent.
Mar 12th, 2010 (7:03 pm)It’s a loan not a grant.
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (7:11 pm)It’s still too early to pick a winner in the battery technology race. It is better for GM to concentrate on all the other aspects, such as packaging, electric motors, battery management, controller etc. When the battery tech gets more mature, then GM will move into that business too.
Mar 12th, 2010 (7:14 pm)That is a funny(and I am being charitable) chart that say nothing but gas was cheaper under Bush’s first term. The Fed gas tax has been 18 cents a gallon since 1993. We are subsidizing imported oil. I am sure that is a smart idea! No wonder he have to borrow money from overseas to pay for our own roads. now we all need 4WD to drive over our own crumbling infrastructure. To do so we buy even more imported oil. Hence Why I want a Volt.
Link on the history of the gas tax:
http://www.taxhistory.org/thp/readings.nsf/ArtWeb/5DDB79194769C2BF852574D5003C28D5?OpenDocument
Cheers
+2
Mar 12th, 2010 (7:15 pm)That may or may not be true. So far no one has been able to back it up. Theory is silent on the question. On the one hand it may be that higher tax rate causes people to substitute leisure for work. That’s where you seem to be going. But the a priori, equally plausible, argument is that a higher tax rate spurs people to work harder because it effectively makes them poorer.
How about the empirical evidence? Well over the last forty years there have been hundreds of studies designed to show how high taxes cut growth. The results? Not much. As you may know, an exhaustive review of the literature by William Easterly of New York University and Sergio Rebelo of Northwestern, concluded in a joint paper that “the evidence that tax rates matter for growth is disturbingly fragile.” Looking at past history doesn’t make the argument either. If you want to look at the recent past in the US you’d have to conclude that higher taxes lead to higher growth rates. It’s not hard since the basic question, “Did real wages rise faster during the Clinton or Bush Administrations”, is fairly easy to answer.
Trying to link taxes to poor growth reminds me of all the studies trying to link coffee to poor health. In both cases you have people who start with a conclusion and then look for the evidence — any evidence — to support their pre-conceived narrative. When they can’t find the evidence they don’t change their minds, they just commission another study. Because since the conclusion is “obviously” right, if the data doesn’t support their narrative, then the study was flawed and all you need do is continue torturing the data until it confesses.
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (7:19 pm)The best high-speed trains have a wing and a cockpit, and they go wherever they want to, without spending a single nother billion dollars.
Mar 12th, 2010 (7:20 pm)LauraM – Speaking of NIMBY…I currently reside in an “active adult” community, one of those places with extensive covenants about what a resident can / cannot do. Heaven forbid one should want to install solar panels on one’s roof! How unsightly (did you hear Mildred’s Grandson has deployed to Iraq for the fourth time!?!).
However – a solution is on the way. National Roofing Contractors Association reported recently that DuPont is rolling out a new roofing shingle product with solar cells embedded in the shingles, which all link up to produce the electric ion police output similar to a traditional solar power setup. They are designed to be installable by traditional roofing crews with just modest additional training. So the homeowner association fashion police won’t be offended, and the residents can do their bit to wean the nation from fossil fuel dependency (and partially charge their Volts of course)…
Technology in this case rendered NIMBY moot.
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (7:23 pm)It’s really quite good. You think you know where it’s going and then, BLAM, it goes in a completely different direction. Nice job!
Mar 12th, 2010 (7:28 pm)I am also suspicious of the price run up of oil before the election. Good money was being paid to keep the oil *OFF* the market, hence the run up of the cost. Somehow I do not think the party in power would run up the price. As a percentage the gas tax is way down and the tax on cigarettes is way up. (Not that I smoke or encourage smoking, I don’t) But how is burning cigarettes any different than burning gas? May be a bit odd, but they could both be considered sins?
Mar 12th, 2010 (7:35 pm)Oh, more on State gas taxes.
http://www.gaspricewatch.com/usgastaxes.asp
/end rant
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (7:39 pm)Dangit people, quit using acronyms without defining it foe me first.
lol…
I had to google “NIMBY”.
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-nimby.htm
lol, those are the same folks that didn’t want wireless cell tower in their neighborhoods because they look so dang hideous.
MuddyRoverRob should remember those days when NorTel and Qualcomm wanted to install more towers to improve reception. Now there a ugly wannabe trees standing around.
And guess what, they (NIMBY) all had cell phones.
Mar 12th, 2010 (7:48 pm)I finally put 2 and 2 together. Thanks!
-1
Mar 12th, 2010 (7:59 pm)With more than 32 million illegals in this country (note: you can discard the media’s 12 million lying dogs number) I gotta believe at least 100 of the jobs will not be going to actual United States citizens. Also, if these are unionized jobs that number may be even higher. This is just the times we live in.
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (8:19 pm)More from Mark Reuss:
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/03/12/gm-president-mark-reuss-chevrolet-cruze-coupe-may-show-up/
How about that Converj styled Volt Coupe?
Mar 12th, 2010 (8:27 pm)Already have room cleaned out in the garage for an American-made, American-FUELED car. Go GM!
Mar 12th, 2010 (8:56 pm)Lyle (who has driven the Volt) reports that there is a noticeable pickup in pep with the sport mode engaged. Whether it is potent enough to get your juices flowing or not, it will have to be enough, for now. There are limits to what can be done through software alone.
I stand by what I said. Anything beyond that button on the Volt will be accomplished with a bigger pack*, motor and generator.
*or, the same size pack with a much lower All Electric Range.
Mar 12th, 2010 (9:06 pm)Like I said, this is GM’s read. In the belief that GM should diversify as much as possible across it’s brands, I think that the largest Chevy truck should be the S10, or maybe the Colorado. For anything bigger, go to a GMC dealer.
As for snarky harshness (and in the spirit of your language observations earlier), I sometimes feel that you should learn the vocabulary of silence.
Mar 12th, 2010 (9:06 pm)I believe the Brownstown GM plants assembles the battery cells into packs. LG’s Holland Michigan plant will produce the battery cells. So these two don’t add together. One feeds the other in series.
Mar 12th, 2010 (9:09 pm)Thanks for the link. The reader comments were certainly unkind.
Be well,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!
Mar 12th, 2010 (9:17 pm)Interesting — I think I may be with you on this particular case, despite being an enthusiast for rail travel, and even despite the proposed station ten miles from my home in the Bay Area and the one south of LA only fifteen miles from my daughter’s home. It sounds wonderful, from a personal selfish viewpoint, but right now I think California has much more urgent needs and no money even for those.
[Do you suppose they could produce a special California Volt with extra deep pothole tolerance?]
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (9:35 pm)Didn’t we scale up to this back in ’08?
Mar 12th, 2010 (9:54 pm)Boy, that would really sell well in Penna, too! You have potholes in Calif? Ours are so large that you have to drive *into* them and drive *out* the other side. I always thought that potholes were the result of freeze/thaw cycles. I guess I never pictured Calif having a lot of hard freezes. Mountains maybe?
Be well,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (9:56 pm)Wow, you can get em for free?
Mar 12th, 2010 (10:07 pm)OK then – 40 + ER or no sale?
Mar 12th, 2010 (10:09 pm)Really? I thought jets, international airports, and all the people infrastructure managing the whole aviation industry are high costies.
Mar 12th, 2010 (10:20 pm)I think you may be right, my rambles aren’t always rational.
Mar 12th, 2010 (10:48 pm)Hmmm, I’ll have to think this over. Technically, my Jeep has a Range Extender, just no AER. Then again, I think that the Gen I Volt will do *better* than 40 AER….
Be well,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!
Mar 12th, 2010 (10:51 pm)LOL, take a number!
Be well,
Tagamet
No ER, No Sale!
+1
Mar 12th, 2010 (10:57 pm)Bingo, finally someone who get’s it. Talk about Income Tax all you want, the income tax never made a car company go bankrupt (See GM, they haven’t paid income tax since?????). Of course you could make the argument that health care costs did cause bankruptcy (along with a dozen other factors of course)
Mar 12th, 2010 (11:01 pm)But you have to add in that we have the lowest individual tax rates in the developed world. Looking at the corporate income tax is only one side of the picture. Corporate taxes are much lower in Canada, but individual income taxes are much higher. It is Individuals who own corporation. Said another way, only people pay taxes (because people own corporations). We could get rid of corporate income tax and that would not do anything for our competitiveness if we correspondingly raise our individual tax rates.
Mar 12th, 2010 (11:10 pm)Right, and they structure the deals so they get Long -Term Capital Gain treatments at the end of the project life (or when they sell it). Then throught transfer pricing techniques all the income ends up in the Cayman Islands (remember TYCO). Now in Canada everyone is using the “Luxembourgh burrough” strategy, before that it was the ULC. Etc Etc There is always something to keep the accountants and lawyers busy (I’m an accountant).
+2
Mar 12th, 2010 (11:12 pm)When I was a city planner I found that just about everyone that touted their single sacred issue would work to block stall or slow any and every effort that would have a positive affect for most people. No one looks at the overall mix, and only the issues that emerge in a crisis nature have a good chance of being supported. Or projects that get politicians more money or political power get passed, these are often presented as quietly as possible.
1)Visualize liberals thinking some groups will be left out and it’s not comprehensive enough and far too exclusive.
2)Fiscal conservatives saying it’s gold plated and too expensive, it will raise taxes and scare away business.
3)Social conservatives saying it will attract undesirables using my tax dollars.
4)Progressives and avant gardes saying it’s only business as usual and too little too late, and ugly.
5)Preservationists saying it destroys everything that has value and disrepects whats left.
6)Environmentalists saying it doesn’t follow environmental regulations to the bitter unintended end and the regulations are far too weak anyway.
7)Neighborhood groups say it ruins all the amenities that drew them to the area.
8)Libertarians, individual liberty advocates and others saying either government is too big and not one more dime for this or anything else, or simply if this idea is so great the people that want it should open their wallets and do it themselves.
9)Liberals; This was proposed by conservatives, something must not be right
10)Conservatives; This was proposed by liberals, something must not be right
11)Gridlock.
finally 12)And several special interest and lobby groups will inevitably swear it will destroy the greatest thing about America, which is obviously, as every one knows, represented solely by them against the advancing hordes.
This happens for every conceivable proposal. Democracy at work, it’s a beuatiful thing.
-9
Mar 12th, 2010 (11:21 pm)What is this Volt car really about. Is GM want publicity. EV1 was killed already. Nobody believes the Volt will actually be made. SMOKE SCREEN. SMOKE SCREEN. Has anybody actually SEEN one of these cars in person (no pictures or videos) ??????
The Volt is an illusion by some national automotive conspiracy group contracted by the CIA to subvert green tech to the masses. Am I right ? Bet I be closer than you think.
Mar 12th, 2010 (11:59 pm)Kamsa hamnida from Korea!
Mar 13th, 2010 (12:47 am)No hard freezes here in the Bay Area, but rain and trucks can do the job if you give them long enough. Streets and highways need upkeep, and with the state budget mess … suffice it to say they may have gotten the deficit down to 20 billion with some accounting sleight-of-hand. The fact is, the roads haven’t been maintained since Gov. Moonbeam* slashed the highway budget more than thirty years ago.
* (Google it if you’re puzzled)
Mar 13th, 2010 (12:53 am)You’re not supposed to say that. The approved double-speak term is legacy costs.
Mar 13th, 2010 (1:19 am)LOL, as soon as I saw “Moonbeam” I thought “60′s”!
Be well,
Tagamet
/Night all. Getting late on the Right coast.
No ER, No Sale!
Mar 13th, 2010 (1:56 am)Oh, I’m all in favor of a gas tax. But Tagamet most definitely isn’t. So I just thought I’d point out the logical implications of his joke.
Mar 13th, 2010 (2:12 am)Not to mention all the indirect costs of using jet fuel….
Here on the east coast, it’s already easier and more convenient for me to take the train from New York to DC or Boston. And, between getting to the airport, going through security, boarding, etc, it’s actually faster. It would be faster still if they would build a real high speed rail. (As opposed to Acela which is a joke, IMHO.) They might even make a return on their investment. (Amtrak makes a profit on the east coast line.)
As far as the rest of the country (where rail currently needs to be subsidized), the government spends a fortune on roads, without getting the money back. It pays off because transportation is the backbone of a functional economy. Why not invest in rail, which is much more energy efficient, and emits less pollution? And, if they invested in high speed rail, people might use it more, and it might actually make money.
Mar 13th, 2010 (2:15 am)Sorry. I’ll try to cut down on my acronym use. It’s a habit, so I often don’t even realize I’m doing it. It’s all that texting…
Mar 13th, 2010 (2:30 am)I don’t think it affects growth in aggregate. (Well, not any more than any fiscal stimulus would regardless of what the money is spent on.) It would if we had 90% income taxes across the board. But not at current income tax levels. My point was that it leads to inefficiencies at the margins. If, when you make an extra thousand dollars, you have to pay an extra $1000 in taxes, you have no incentive to make the extra thousand dollars. And there’s lots of anecdotal evidence that this happens. While anecdotal evidence is the weakest form of evidence, this is a case, where I’d find it really hard to believe that it doesn’t make a difference. That said, I don’t think it’s a huge problem, at least as far as the income tax is concerned.
For poor people, losing all their subsidies at a given income level, can mean that making more money means less take home pay. That makes it a lot harder to get ahead, and escape the cycle of poverty. (Since wage increases usually happen relatively gradually.) But that’s not about the income tax.
As far as the difference between growth under Clinton and Bush, I think that has a lot more to do with the tech bubble bursting, the rapid increase in outsourcing and the decline of American manufacturing than any difference in tax policy. I’m not saying I approve of Bush’s economic policies. I don’t. But there’s way more to the story than just the income tax differences.
Mar 13th, 2010 (2:32 am)In general, corporations locate their production facilities in places where it minimizes their own corporate taxes. Not where it minimizes their employee’s taxes.
Mar 13th, 2010 (5:07 am)http://garfwod.250free.com/volt_b%20bros_rawhide_clip.mp3
=D-Volt
-1
Mar 13th, 2010 (5:28 am)The claims of it not being made have already been satisfied. What they call Volt now looks absolutely nothing like it did then, efficiency of CS will be considerably lower, and price will be quite a bit higher.
What’s actually in question now is volume.
GM is very good at producing niche vehicles, those objects of envy that few get the opportunity to actually buy. Delivering a mainstream product is an entirely different matter. Meeting that minimum criteria of 5,000 per month (60,000 annually) is going to be a challenge.
Mar 13th, 2010 (7:22 am)Yes, I think you are right.
Mar 13th, 2010 (7:45 am)No research on the impact on work choices of people on SS out there? When the govt *confiscates* half of every extra dollar that is earned (after a certain threshold is met), people just continue to earn as much as they can? I have no interest in reviewing the literature on it, but I’ll wager (just based on the psychology of it) that they don’t work harder to keep as much as they can)! Well, maybe if the retiree is working so that the cat doesn’t starve, but not voluntarily. That part of your post was a real “eye-roller” (lol). It smacks a *lot* of the view from the ivory tower looking down on the data sets – rather than on people and their behavior. JMO.
Be well,
Tagamet
No, ER, No Sale!
Mar 13th, 2010 (7:46 am)Instead of building railroads in everybody’s backyard, why not spend it on more efficient aircraft
http://www.eas.slu.edu/People/DJCrossley/energy/powerpoint/5-planes.ppt#310,12,Slide 12
Mar 13th, 2010 (8:42 am)Trying to make propulsion lofted flight compete in efficiency with rail transport is pissing up the physics rope. Rail is by far the most efficient transport between two discrete points. The issue is not in the efficiencies since rail blows air transport away, but rather in the freedom of movement. If suficient mass needs to be transported between two discrete locations with sufficient frequency, then rail becomes the most economic method. This is a good thing and should be embraced intelligently. Why so many people are so adamantly against rail under any circumstances is a big head scratcher for me.
Mar 13th, 2010 (4:14 pm)Speaking of freedom of movement, if you have ever had the pleasure, as I have, of traveling long distances on Amtrak, future trips on a cramped airplane are likely to leave a bad taste in your mouth. But, yeah, I do recognize the severe limitations of the passenger rail system in the US.
Mar 13th, 2010 (4:31 pm)The world is not a simple as you make it out to be. If the US company buys the product from a company from China and imports it the only US income tax it pays is on the mark up. No Us tax is paid by the Manfacture of the product.
All our exports are subject to our US income tax. Bottom line as I showed clearly in my example Corp income tax effects the price of a product.
I can see you and I will never agree on this so lets just agree we disagree. When ever I hear the kind of arguments your making the person has likley been watching way to much MSNBC.
Mar 13th, 2010 (4:45 pm)I’m Sorry I shouldn’t blame MSNBC. You could be a government worker many of them do not think Corp income tax effective the cost either. Run a business and you will learn very quickly to include the cost of income tax.
Mar 13th, 2010 (8:16 pm)The Mayan calendar is written on a cube of stone.
Just tip it on the side, and then you have a whole (probably) blank facing for the writing of our own futures (LOL) (/”thinking out of the box” (lol).
Mar 14th, 2010 (6:48 am)Two questions come to mind:
1. Are you volunteering your backyard for a high speed rail?
2. A logical progression of your thinking would be to replace Volt and Malibu type vehicles with subways and buses. Is this what you are advocating?
Mar 15th, 2010 (7:54 am)What will the VOLT cost in Korea?
Will GM be able to build plants is Korea?
Would the Korean government give GM 150 million to build a plant in Korea?
How much money will be sucked out of our economy by these plants?
How many American jobs will be lost by this money going to Korea?
Why doesn’t DOE support American companies?