(Sources:  White House.gov & Freep.com)

Watching GM turn the corner from a disastrous dud and morph into a Detroit’s Stud and a Wall Street darling, no could’ve been happier than President Obama and his team of economic advisors at the White House, who advised him on the bailout that rescued thousands of jobs and the iconic brand from a collapse.  The stunning turnaround culminated with a successful IPO debuting in the marketplace today. General Motors stock closed at $34.19 today, just above the $33 price of the initial public offering.

An elated President Obama convened a press conference this afternoon and shared his sentiment and belief in GM’s recovery strategy.

Today, one of the toughest tales of the recession took another big step towards becoming a success story.

General Motors relaunched itself as a public company, cutting the government’s stake in the company by nearly half.  What’s more, American taxpayers are now positioned to recover more than my administration invested in GM.

And that’s a very good thing.  Last year, we told GM’s management and workers that if they made the tough decisions necessary to make themselves more competitive in the 21st century — decisions requiring real leadership, fresh thinking and also some shared sacrifice –- then we would stand by them.  And because they did, the American auto industry -– an industry that’s been the proud symbol of America’s manufacturing might for a century; an industry that helped to build our middle class -– is once again on the rise.

Our automakers are in the midst of their strongest period of job growth in more than a decade.  Since GM and Chrysler emerged from bankruptcy, the industry has created more than 75,000 new jobs.  For the first time in six years, Ford, GM and Chrysler are all operating at a profit.  In fact, last week, GM announced its best quarter in over 11 years.  And most importantly, American workers are back at the assembly line manufacturing the high-quality, fuel-efficient, American-made cars of tomorrow, capable of going toe to toe with any other manufacturer in the world. Click here to read the president’s entire speech.

Freep’s awesome cartoonist Mike Thompson charts this wonderful recovery from a dud to a darling with a series of cartoons on his blog.  He also adds the following to go with his nice drawings:

As if this weren’t bad enough for auto bailout critics, the Ann Arbor-based Center for Automotive Research has released a report that validates the logic behind the bailout. As Free Press business writer Greg Gardner reported, “The CAR study says the federal government would have spent $28.6 billion more than it did on unemployment benefits, Medicare, Social Security and other programs had the automakers liquidated. So the entire rescue will pay for itself if the government can generate $38 billion from selling its shares.” But perhaps the most chilling details in the story were the report’s conclusions that liquidation of the two auto companies would have meant the loss of 1.4 million jobs and $121 billion in personal income.

Whew!  This above facts-full paragraph must be making many of the naysayers, like the conservative columnist Mr. George Will feel like throwing up.  A couple of days ago, he wrote an op-ed titled , Toxic Volt, on Washington Post saying a whole lot of negative things about the President’s Bailout for GM.  The President and Steven Rattner, the brains behind the execution of the bailout plan, should be chuckling over the phone talking about how bad they feel for George Will.  Sadly enough, the doubters still continue to find a way to question the legitimacy of success. Fox Business  News in an article on its website says massive dilution from existing shares, warrants and grants, as well as unfunded pension costs. And GM’s cash flow is still heavily reliant on tens of billions of dollars in tax breaks and taxpayer-backed loans from the Dept. of Energy.

Image Courtesy: Freep.com

If this is not victory enough for the President, today GM notched another impressive feat, which is more like a beautiful foil to the wonderful present inside – the IPO. The Detroit Free Press reports that the Chevrolet Volt extended-range electric vehicle has won Green Car of the Year, beating out the pure-electric Nissan Leaf, hours after General Motors returned to the stock market. The award, decided by judges that include environmental enthusiasts and Green Car Journal editors, comes the same week as the Volt won MotorTrend Car of the Year and Automobile Magazine’s Automobile of the Year.  How awesome could that for a man who was chided constantly by his opponents for the decisions he made to save the brand and the thousands of jobs associated with the existence of the brand.

I bet tonight the President of the United States will have a drink to celebrate one of his biggest victories since assuming office.  He will probably sleep a little better tonight with one less thing to worry about.

Related articles

• Obama Praises GM Bailout as Shares Gain 4% in IPO (dailyfinance.com)
• GM’s Chevy Volt wins Green Car of the Year (reuters.com)
• General Motors shares jump on Wall Street return (chron.com)
• GM’s Chevrolet Volt Named 2011 Green Car of the Year (dailyfinance.com)
• GM shares rise on return to Wall Street trading (washingtontimes.com)
• GM shares jump in post-IPO return to market (reuters.com)
• Chevrolet Volt wins Green Car of the Year award (theglobeandmail.com)
• General Motors Opens Up 6% Post-IPO >GM – Wall Street Journal (news.google.com)
• How General motors came back from the brink (independent.co.uk)
• Watch: Obama On GM: ‘The American Auto Industry … Is Once Again On The Rise’ (mediaite.com)
• Obama Hails GM Stock Sale as Policy Success- YOU DECIDE: Would You Buy GM Stock? (foxnews.com)
• President Obama on GM: “One of the Toughest Tales” Becoming a “Success Story” (whitehouse.gov)
• General Motors shares jump on Wall Street return (thenewstribune.com)
• Obama: GM Stock Sale a Success for His Policy (abcnews.go.com)
• GM IPO The Biggest In U.S. History (huffingtonpost.com)
• Obama: GM’s stock sale shows ‘tough decisions’ paid off (cnn.com)
• Obama to hail GM IPO (forexlive.com)
• CORRECTED – WRAPUP 4-GM shares jump in post-IPO return to market (reuters.com)
• RPT-(Nov 17)-UPDATE 12-GM IPO raises $20.1 bln biggest US IPO (reuters.com)
• You: How GM IPO Proves the Tea Party Wrong (newsweek.com)
• Good News on GM and the Auto Bailout, but Will Americans Care? (politicsdaily.com)
• Obama: GM Stock Sale a Success for His Policy (politics.usnews.com)

(Sources: Seattle PI via Autobloggreen)

With more and more electric car makers ready to blitz the market with Plug-in Hybrids Electric Vehicles and Plug-In Electric Vehicles, it is time the local communities took a stock of the supporting infrastructure necessary for feed these voltage-hungry vehicles.  The Seattle PI takes a look at the readiness of Seattle to handle the surge of electric vehicle.   Here are some interesting excerpts from the article:

Is Seattle charged for electric cars? Local electric car boosters think so, event though electric cars — other than such hybrids as the Prius — have not captured the fancies of more than a few people in the past 20 years.

“There’s a perfect storm this time around,” said Steve Lough, president of the Seattle chapter of the Electric Vehicle Association, who drives a 2000 Honda insight gas-and-electric hybrid.

On Aug. 5, the federal government announced that it will provide almost $100 million to install roughly 2,500 electric vehicle chargers each in the greater metropolitan areas of Seattle, Phoenix, Nashville, Portland and San Diego.

Roughly $20 million will go to Seattle for 2,550 chargers, Read said.

About 40 firms, including Nissan and eTec, will match the federal appropriations. Local governments will not be required to provide matching money, Read said.

This experiment is timed with Nissan’s planning to sell a new electric car — the “LEAF” — in late 2010. It hopes to initially sell 5,000 cars evenly split among the five metro areas.

This timing roughly coincides with General Motors’ plans to put possibly 10,000 of its all-electric “Volt” cars on the market in late 2010.

By comparison, Seattle has the nation’s largest chapter of the Electric Vehicle Association — with 230 members.

Local owners said recharging electric cars lead to different habits from refueling conventional vehicles.

“You basically plug it in whenever you park it,” said Dan Davids, owner of a 2002 Toyota RAV4-EV and president of the nationwide Plug-In America organization.

Fulling charging a car with a conventional 220-volt installation could take four to eight hours. So-called “fast” chargers with extra oomph could take 15 to 30 minutes to do the same.

But local electric car owners said those figures are misleading.

These cars rarely need full charges with the accompanying long repowering times, they said.

Electric cars are usually charged nightly at their homes. If recharged at business locations, the new power mostly “tops off” a battery usually containing most of its original charge, they said. The same “topping off” would occur when cars would be recharged at businesses.

Between the small amounts of electricity and the lack of wear-and-tear on moving engine parts, they estimated it costs about 2 cents a mile to operate their vehicles.

The three are optimistic that a major hurdle to owning electric cars could be finally conquered — the initial price tag. The Tesla Roadster — with about 700 sold so far — goes for $109,000. Many models of electric cars have been in the $50,000 to $100,000-plus range. “You’re financing the research and development for the next generation of technology,” Morrison said.

The Volt’s expected price tag is about $40,000 with a federal tax credit of $7,500 earmarked for early buyers. The same tax credits will go to buyers of the first LEAFs, which are expected to go for $25,000 to $33,000.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: via Autoinsane)

Have you ever wondered while sitting inside your car at an automated car wash, what goes on behind the scenes to test and design a vehicle so that it doesn’t leak while your car is drenched with gallons of water?  Or have you pondered driving through that pouring rain about how to stop that annoying sound of rain drops hitting the sheetmetal roof and the windshield? Here is a glimpse into that world of designing and testing a car for its “water worthiness”, courtesy of our friends at Auto Insane.

Development on the Chevy Volt continues to progress at neck-break speed and GM has been sharing bits and pieces of the vehicle’s testing and engineering along the way. This new video caught our interest for the sheer fact that it combines the “electric” Volt undergoing leak testing in GM’s Universal Water Chamber.

(Sources: Autoblog Green , Green Car Congress, NY Times Wheels, Green Car Reports)

The internet as well as the automotive world has been abuzz with a lot of discussions since this morning after General Motors CEO Fritz Henderson revealed what the company’s mysterious ‘230’ ad campaign was about.  It turned out to be the official mileage rating for GM’s upcoming 2011 Chevrolet Volt extended-range electric car.

GM must be basking in the new found glory (though it sounds more temporary as the intelligent folks around the web are starting to dig out the details behind this 230mpg claim). GM’s Twitter account was proudly re-tweeting a post that goes like this: 230 mpg city, great. More than 100 mpg combined, even better. Not being stranded after 300+ miles, priceless.   Mind you!  This is just a sample of what’s been such a flood of good PR for GM. after this 230 unveiling.

For many smart folks, a number like that seems outlandish, absurd. How can the US Environmental Protection Agency possibly measure fuel consumption that low? The answer, it turns out, is all in the assumptions.

Our friends at Autoblog says “Without access to the actual method that the EPA is tentatively going to apply to plug-in vehicles (we have requests for clarification out to the EPA), all that GM’s Dave Darovitz would tell us is that the number is “based on city cycles and we’re not really talking in detail yet.” Instead, the press release says that: Under the new methodology being developed, EPA weights plug-in electric vehicles as traveling more city miles than highway miles on only electricity. The EPA methodology uses kilowatt hours per 100 miles traveled to define the electrical efficiency of plug-ins. Applying EPA’s methodology, GM expects the Volt to consume as little as 25 kilowatt hours per 100 miles in city driving. At the U.S. average cost of electricity (approximately 11 cents per kWh), a typical Volt driver would pay about $2.75 for electricity to travel 100 miles, or less than 3 cents per mile.

Which leads to the big question: What assumptions should the EPA make in its emissions and gas-mileage tests about how the Volt is used (also known as the car’s “duty cycle”)?

For decades, gasoline cars (and ) have been testing using two cycles: city and highway. That gives us the two quoted EPA mileage ratings, and the EPA also calculates a “blended” number for overall usage. The distance driven doesn’t really matter.

But for the Volt, mileage assumptions become much more political.  If the EPA tests a Volt over a cycle of less than 40 miles, it will never burn any gasoline, and it’ll get that “infinite” mileage. The daily distance matters much more for the Volt than for a gas engined car.

The answer appears to be the EPA has adopted a cycle described by GM-Volt.com, among others, that assumes the Volt is driven until the battery is discharged–and then slightly more on gasoline power.

A similar test routine proposed by Mike Duoba at Argonne National Laboratories repeatedly drives the car on four EPA highway test cycles until the battery is discharged, then drives one city cycle–totaling 51 miles. (The EPA city cycle is roughly 11 miles, the highway cycle about 10 miles.)

If the engine runs for 11 miles at 50 mpg, that will use 0.22 gallons of gasoline. But that amount is used over a total travel distance of 51 miles, which works out to 232 mpg. Sounds like 230 mpg to us!

Jim Motavalli wrote on his Wheels column on  New York Times : The problem with claiming 230 miles a gallon was that to get at numbers like that you can’t simply measure its fuel consumption. The plug-in hybrid’s small gas engine is there to provide power for the electric motors, not drive the wheels, and the first 40 miles are on the batteries alone.

G.M. can plug its numbers into the E.P.A. city driving cycle and get stellar results, but, as they say, actual results — and planetary impact — will vary quite a bit. How and where you drive the Volt will matter quite a bit, too. “If you’re heavy footed, you’re not going to get 230 miles per gallon,” said Roland Hwang, transportation program director at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

In a detailed article published by Green Car Congress one can learn how this fuel economy rating is measured.  While the fuel economy (FE) for combustible fueled vehicles (such as gasoline, diesel, compressed natural gas, or an ethanol blend) can easily be expressed in mpg, and fuel economy for an all-electric vehicle can be expressed in miles per gallon of gasoline equivalent (mpge), the arrival of new technologies that can operate in all-electric mode, a conventional hybrid mode, or some combination of the two complicates the situation.

The EPA is revisiting the FE label provisions as they apply to those types of vehicles, and is working with automakers, the SAE, the State of California, the Department of Energy and others to address these issues. The EPA anticipates issuing guidance and/or a rule this year.

According to US Department of Transportation data, nearly eight of 10 Americans commute fewer than 40 miles a day. A Volt driver’s actual gas-free mileage will vary depending on how far he or she travels and other factors, such as how much cargo or how many passengers they carry and how much the air conditioner or other accessories are used. Tony Posawatz, Vehicle Line Director for the Volt, said that the Volt is delivering 40 miles all electric in both city and highway cycles.

However, Posawatz notes that since the Volt results are based on a single charge per day—and that given the recharge time of 6-8 hours on a standard 110V outlet or half that on a 240V charger, the Volt has the potential to deliver better than 230 mpg performance if it can charge multiple times per day.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Washington Post, Jalopnik, Autoblog)

Car can extend its range to more than 300 miles with its flex fuel-powered engine-generator.

Image Courtesy: Autoblog

In case you missed it this morning, General Motors CEO Fritz Henderson made some big news just one month after the “new” GM emerged from bankruptcy protection.

General Motors announced today that its forthcoming electric vehicle, the Chevrolet Volt, will achieve city fuel economy of 230 miles per gallon, under testing that used draft federal fuel economy methodology standards for plug-in cars.

The Volt will become the first mass-produced vehicle to obtain a triple-digit MPG rating, the company said.

“The Volt is becoming very real, very fast,” chief executive Fritz Henderson said. “The price of oil is going to go up.”

According to Frank Weber, vehicle chief engineer for the Volt, the number is based on combined electric only driving and charge sustaining mode with the engine running. He declined to get specific about the proportions, but did say that the urban cycle would be predominantly EV only. The EPA has been studying real world vehicle usage and is developing the formulas to try and provide a representative number of what most customers could expect to achieve. In addition to the composite number, the new EPA stickers will likely also get numbers for mileage in charge sustaining mode and electric efficiency in EV mode.

Initial prices for the car may be as much as $40,000, analysts said.

But company officials said the car’s price is expected to come down over time. They note, moreover, that gas prices will rise again, making fuel-efficient cars more valuable.

The Volt, which is scheduled to start production late next year, is expected to travel up to 40 miles on electricity from a single battery charge. The company says the car can extend its range to more han 300 miles with its flex fuel-powered engine-generator.

Assuming the average cost of electricity is approximately 11 cents per kilowatt-hour in the United States, a typical Volt driver would pay about $2.75 for electricity to travel 100 miles, or less than 3 cents per mile.

This story’s still developing, but if our sources are correct, it would blow the Toyota Prius out of the water. Heck, it’d blow every other vehicle currently on the market out of the water with the exception of the Tesla roadster — and that’s no four-door mid-size sedan. So for GM this represents a huge marketing coup — the ability to claim the most fuel efficient vehicle in the world and a big blow to detractors who claim the big, sweaty ‘merican manufacturer can’t build quality products.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Wired)

Image via Apture

The electrification of the automobile has been called the auto industry’s “moon shot,” an analogy that works because of both the technology involved and the cost to develop it. Automakers are pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into the effort with no promise that it will lead to affordable battery-powered vehicles anytime soon — or any guarantee people will buy them once they’re available.

All of the major automakers are racing to put EVs in showrooms as early as next year, and they’re spending money like sailors on shore leave to do it. General Motors has spent about $1 billion developing the Chevrolet Volt. Chrysler wants to invest $448 million in its electric vehicle program to build cars like the Circuit, pictured above at the Los Angeles Auto Show. Elon Musk’s personal investment in Tesla Motors tops $75 million.

The Apollo program cost more than $100 billion in today’s dollars, and as Ron Cogan, founder and editor of Green Car Journal and greencar.com notes, there was no imperative to produce a reasonably priced consumer product. Not so with electric vehicles – the whole point is to sell cars. The Obama Administration is betting heavily on the technology, having recently approved almost $8 billion to help automakers retoolfactories to produce EVs and other fuel-efficient vehicles. Another $16 billion will be doled out next year.

“What people overlook is that accomplishing ‘big picture’ programs like Apollo require accepting the concept of unlimited spending to achieve the mission,” Cogan says. “Current levels of unprecedented federal spending notwithstanding, electric cars are not an exclusive answer to future transportation challenges and consumers will not be willing to buy them at all costs.”

Early adopters and hardcore EV advocates will gladly pay that much, but will the rest of us pay $15,000 to $25,000 more for a car that runs on electricity? Cogan doesn’t think so and says EVs should be considered mid- to long-term solutions until automakers — and the battery makers they rely upon — can bring costs down to a level competitive with vehicles propelled by internal combustion.

Until then, he says, more efficient gasoline cars, clean diesel vehicles and hybrids will comprise the majority of cars sold even as EVs become an increasingly common sight in showrooms.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Detroit News via Autobloggreen)

 After driving the Chevy Volt prototype and sitting down for a number of discussions, the members of the president’s task force on the auto industry have returned to Washington. While the team was in Michiganover the past few days, they had a chance to see GM’s latest technology, look at what Chrysler has brewing, and spent time reviewing the viability plans of the automakers.

“We have been and will continue to work as hard and tirelessly as we can,” the official said. “This is obviously a very substantial undertaking and we want to move with all deliberate haste.”

The group spent most of the day in Detroit, visiting UAW President Ron Gettelfinger and other union officials in the morning before heading to Warren for meetings with GM and Chrysler.

Advisers to the task force visited Chrysler’s Warren truck assembly plant, meeting Chairman and CEO Robert Nardelli and other top executives, the company said in a written statement.

“In addition to meeting, the group toured the assembly plant and reviewed Chrysler current and future products, including electric and hybrid vehicles,” the company said. The meeting also included Chrysler Vice Chairmen Tom LaSorda and Jim Press and Chief Financial Officer Ron Kolka.

(Source: Treehugger)

(Source:  GM’s Fast Lane Blogs, via TreeHugger )

GM Defends the Volt’s Design
A recent Carnegie Mellon University study (pdf) challenged the real-world gasoline savings and cost effectiveness of plug-in hybrids like the Chevy Volt. GM’s Vice President Global Program Management, Jon Lauckner, who has been involved in the Volt project responded on the company’s blog. Find out what he had to say below.

All-Electric Range

The first thing is the electric range of the car. Somewhat strangely, the CMU study found that “for urban driving conditions and frequent charges every 10 miles or less, a low-capacity PHEV sized with an AER (range) of about 7 miles would be a robust choice for minimizing gasoline consumption, cost and greenhouse gas emissions.”

7 miles? Really?

Well, Jon Lauckner responds:

I’ll cut to the chase; for starters, the study’s endorsement of plug-in vehicles with only a “token” electric-only range (seven miles) overlooks the inconvenience of recharging for the vast majority of drivers (approx. 90 percent) with a daily commute that exceeds seven miles. I mean, honestly, how many customers are going to stop every seven miles and wait at least 30 minutes (if a car has a high-capacity charger like the Volt with the same level of electrical energy to match it) for their battery to be recharged? […] And, if customers don’t recharge during the day, these “token” plug-ins will run primarily on gasoline. How is that consistent with reducing green house gas emissions and our dependence on petroleum?

Click here to read the entire article.