Is China GM’s real Volt target?
Will more be made in China than the US?
All about guzzling coal?
“China is the country that needs to move to electrification more than any other country and we know the government wants to move to electrification so we want to participate in that movement,” recently stated Kevin Wale, president and managing director of GM China.
And GM is aggressively moving forward to meet that Chinese electric demand by making the Chevy Volt price competitive in that country.
So, is China the most important Volt market?
Perhaps China does need to move to electrification more than any other country; however, since China uses much older and dirtier coal technology than in the US, is that a good thing? A number of studies have suggested that EVs in China will increase CO2 emissions, not decrease them, but that’s another story.
Anyway, if China is the most important market for electrification, does that mean China is GM’s primary Volt focus? Likewise, in order to compete in China, won’t GM have to produce Volts for the Chinese market in China? And, if the Chinese plug-in market accelerates faster than the US market, won’t that mean more Volts are produced in China than in the US? Thus, eventually, while Volts might still be assembled in the US, might not most Volt supplies be developed and manufactured outside the US?
Maybe that means little. Three-quarters of GM’s business is already outside the US. Thus, why shouldn’t its marquee car of the future realize greater production outside of the US? Isn’t that to be expected anyway?
Nevertheless, isn’t this inevitably a long term threat to GM’s US auto manufacturing? Already GM builds many made for US vehicles and parts outside the US. Since China builds everything else for America, why not cars as well?
no doubt we still have the potential for greatness, doug. let’s hope we find ourselves in time. an intelligent, new “vehicular Infrastructure” would certainly be a good path back to greatness!
hey, dach – what do you think? “vehicular infrastructure”? how’s that for a 2 dollar word?
i agree on the “not sustainable” point. can we adapt? hard to tell. probably not with entrenched interests like GM. those type of corporations will continue to operate at the behest of the shareholders and not much else. besides, as we know that GM is selling more cars in China than the US, they don’t give a rat’s ass about our market at this point.
we’ll have to look at the new kids on the block – 123 systems, coloumb technologies (yeah, canadians. whatever…), weego and the smaller makers, etc, to start rebuilding our vehicular infrastructure. only ford may have the wherewithall to give manufacturing a push, but they still have a back log of older models, trucks, etc, to sell off before they can get serious on altfuel vehicles.
of course, if something like the ghawar oil field suddenly turns to dust and gas jumps to 7 bucks a gallon, that’ll be THE game-changer and you can bet your ass GM will be back pushing their version of a Prius in the US.
still, i’m not counting out the good ol’ US of A just yet. we can still knock some good ideas out of the ballpark, given the right motivation.
then again, i’ll bet the Romans thought the same thing and look what happened to them…
i agree doug, but it seems to me that such an ‘american outlook’ is not sustainable. change is coming whether we like or not. my question is, can america proactively accept this inevitable change and flow with it, or is this ‘tyranny’ already the writing on the wall that the american empire is over, we just don’t know it yet.
Dach – All of this comes down to two separate corporate idealogies in regard to profits and accountability.
The Asian outlook is to the next quarter-century, slowly building a reliable and long-term customer base while increasing name recognition with harmonious feelings.
The American outlook is to the next fiscal quarter. Regard is given only to shareholder dividends with little to no recognition of the consumer perspective of the company. Make the bucks and let the PR department deal with any fallout.
Larry-
That’s GM’s statement about China needing to become electrified.
As for whether the Volt competes in China – it won’t if made in America for China. Likewise, I doubt that China would give the Volt tax credits if not made in China and that will be key.
As for the number of buyers, supposedly, it’s because of tax incentives. China is expected to sell several hundred thousand plug-in vehicles per year beginning within the next few years. Obviously, we’ll have to see what happens. According to a recent Pike report, for instance, more plug-ins will be sold in China than in the US in the next decade, which isn’t surprising considering that several million more vehicles are now being in sold in China compared to the US. Plug-ins might make up a greater percent of US sales, but volume could easily still be higher in China.
As for GM dislike, as the number one automaker in the world for decades, and one of the most important companies in America, GM showed little, if any, corporate leadership for many decades. Even after 9/11, what did GM do? Launch it’s most fuel-inefficient lineup of gas-guzzlers ever, and it was that fact that caused me to raise the bar on GM.
Yes, Nissan and Toyota sell SUVs and trucks in America, but they didn’t make the market, they just chose to compete in it. Nonetheless, both have higher Fleet fuel economy numbers than GM.
Certainly, shareholder value is important, but when it’s the only thing that matters, especially when it’s short-term, short-sighted shareholder value, then it seems to me questions have to be asked. In my opinion, higher expectations have to be demanded. Foreign oil dependence has caused far more harm to America than Japan, yet why are Japanese companies such much more fleet fuel efficient in America than GM?
For decades now foreign oil dependence has increased as a threat to US national security, but GM’s short term profits have been the only thing that has mattered. It’s the consumer, GM has said for decades while they pumped billions into marketing and lobbying the safety of large vehicles when, ironically, SUV rollover has been leading automotive killer. Likewise, take those SUVs and large trucks off the road and small fuel efficient vehicles become much safer.
I’ve said it before, check out The Hidden History of the SUV, which can be found at PBS, especially the lobbying done by automakers. It wasn’t just consumer demand that made the market for SUVs, etc. It was also shareholder value at the expense of national security.
Yes consumers have wanted larger vehicles, but automakers helped create that demand in many ways, such as inferior smaller cars and sedans compared to better equipped large vehicles. Sure, GM had that right under the law, a law which they helped create, such as the CAFE-credits GM received so they could sell more gas-guzzlers with flex fuel technology never used even once, but I expect more from leading US corporations, much more
In summary, had GM come out with a Prius-contender, especially since they helped develop the hybrid and the NiMH battery – with taxpayer money of course – and developed a marketing campaign around foreign-oil freedom fighters, they could have far outsold Toyota’s hybrids while reshaping the American auto consumer consciousness. After 9/11 they had the opportunity to be a great American company, they chose a new line of gas-guzzlers and eventually a several year long Volt marketing campaign as they tried to sell as many gas-guzzlers as possible.
this is a confusing post. First off… tell me again why China “needs” electrification if what that means is more coal plants?
Then I was not sure if the premise was that GM wants to attempt to sell the very un-competitively priced VOLT to Chinese consumers or if GM wants CHINA to make Volts so it would be cheaper…
Where are the rest of the hybrid makers in this scenario?
If the Volt had a market in China ( I cannot imagine more than a handful of buyers)… then why would the Prius not sell as well or better in China than it does in other countries?
I think if China wants to do anything – it would be to become a producer of cars in it’s own right – including hybrids but so far – it does not have a widely recognizable brand nor a reputation for quality.
but the Volt “connection” between GM and China seems to be a real stretch on just about any level… but what do I know?
GM does make cars worldwide – including fuel efficient versions – and seems to make money at it.
The US Market prefers SUVs and not only GM but Ford, and Chrysler ..as well as Toyota and Nissan make large SUVs – for THIS market even as they continue to make more fuel efficient cars for other markets.
GM has it’s share of mess-ups but I just don’t get the intense dislike of them.
It would have tremendously harmed this country, probably accelerated us into a full blown depression if GM had gone under – because it would have taken many other companies with it…
I just don’t see GM as doing much differently in the US market than the other auto makers.
The Toyota Sequoia and Nissan Armada are often seen next to GM Yukons and similar so what’s the big deal?
GM makes fuel efficient cars – worldwide right?
Fuel efficient GM cars do not sell as well as their larger cars in the US market – what are they supposed to do about that?
Toyota manufactures the obscenely-sized Sequoia and it sells well in the US market also but I’ve not seen a soul here criticize them on the same basis that GM get criticized.
hey…and don’t get me wrong.. the cars I’ve bought most of my life are Fords and Toyotas… with an occasional Honda an Mazda.
GM has no more interest in the United States. They showed their true colors a couple years ago when they started propping up China sales and ignoring US demand for fuel-efficient cars.
We should never had bailed them out. Should’ve given the money directly to the workers and let the execs tread water.