RC Groups

RC Groups
    Batteries and Chargers
        Discussion A123 Systems & Chevy Volt

#1 jrb Sep 25, 2012 10:24 AM

A123 Systems & Chevy Volt
 
Clipped from here: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Governm...ompany-Failing .

Lithium-ion battery manufacturer A123 Systems was awarded $249 million in federal government tax dollars but ended up laying off employees despite the government's cash infusion. The plant might have closed entirely if China hadn't invested an additional $465 million in the plant. Even still, its future is murky.

And:

Two years ago, President Obama visited the LG Chem battery plant in Holland, Michigan. He then hailed the plant, saying, "You are leading the way in showing how manufacturing jobs are coming right back here to the United States of America."
But today, those LG Chem jobs Obama claimed were "coming back" are seeing intermittent layoffs instead of growth.
In 2010, the plant, which supplies batteries for the Chevy Volt, received $151 million in tax money from the U.S. Department of Energy, but it has been good money after bad.


UGH:

Worse, Reuters has reported that Chevy loses nearly $50,000 on every Volt sold, so higher Volt sales may not even signal relief for the struggling car company.

#2 grimbeaver Sep 25, 2012 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrb (Post 22829983)
Worse, Reuters has reported that Chevy loses nearly $50,000 on every Volt sold, so higher Volt sales may not even signal relief for the struggling car company.

I find that number a little hard to believe. Are they factoring in losses from the EV1 in the 90's or something?

Ultimately A123 Systems will eventually fail unless something drastically changes. No business model where the production cost is greater then the sales price can survive.

Love this quote from the EV1 article on Wikipedia:
Quote:

While customer reaction to the EV1 was positive, GM believed that electric cars occupied an unprofitable niche of the automobile market, and ending up crushing all their electric cars, regardless of protesting customers.

#3 RC Man Sep 25, 2012 03:22 PM

In order to be accepted by the general public electric cars need to be competitively priced. It’s not like a hobby where some are willing to pay more for the latest technology. Automobiles are utility vehicles used for transportation and have to be economical to purchase and operate.

I was actually looking forward to trying an electric battery automobile but I won’t be willing to pay more for it.

Apparently GM also sees it that way. There is just not enough market to make it profitable so it’s best to concentrate on what sells and wait for the technology to improve. Maybe a safer LiPo is the way of the future.


.

#4 grimbeaver Sep 25, 2012 03:30 PM

Until there's a decent break through in battery technology (or Mr. Fusion is invented) money spent on hybrids and EVs would be much better spent on clean diesel. Speaking of which why can't I get a diesel engine for my airplane?

#5 Ken Myers Sep 25, 2012 03:48 PM

If you want a diesel for your plane, they been around for many, many decades. My second model engine for an RC plane in 1962 was a diesel imported from England, if memory serves me correctly. I also did a couple of Davis diesel conversions to a couple of my engines in the early 1970s.

Here's a supplier
http://www.davisdieseldevelopment.com

#6 RC Man Sep 25, 2012 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by grimbeaver (Post 22832526)
Until there's a decent break through in battery technology (or Mr. Fusion is invented) money spent on hybrids and EVs would be much better spent on clean diesel. Speaking of which why can't I get a diesel engine for my airplane?


There are quite a few choices when it comes to Diesel. I use to fly a few of them before I converted to EP. http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1054975


:cool:

#7 TheWoodCrafter Sep 25, 2012 08:04 PM

Whenever you hear that the government is subsidizing an industry or offer tax incentives to buyers, the industry is doomed.
It means the product is not ready to be offered for sale because it is to expensive.
If the cost of the technology can't compete on it's own, forget it, it's doomed.

#8 bradley2j Sep 25, 2012 11:15 PM

I guess that's the end for the farm industry. Too bad. I really like eating. :D
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/fea...433916589.html

#9 Ohmic Sep 26, 2012 06:12 AM

I guess that's the end of public transportation too. Just what we need, thousands of more cars on the roads of our already crowded major cities. Oh wait, the auto industry is doomed too. I guess we'll all be stuck at home and hungry.

#10 LesUyeda Sep 26, 2012 09:23 AM

"No business model where the production cost is greater then the sales price can survive."

Unless like Government Motors, you are using tax dollars, not your own:-(((((((((((((((

Les

#11 RC Man Sep 26, 2012 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LesUyeda (Post 22838883)
"No business model where the production cost is greater then the sales price can survive."

Unless like Government Motors, you are using tax dollars, not your own:-(((((((((((((((

Les

Or the US Post Office LOL!


:eek:

#12 Beckler Sep 26, 2012 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheWoodCrafter (Post 22834705)
Whenever you hear that the government is subsidizing an industry or offer tax incentives to buyers, the industry is doomed.
It means the product is not ready to be offered for sale because it is to expensive.
If the cost of the technology can't compete on it's own, forget it, it's doomed.

Well but not necessarily. Maybe an incentive is partly just to encourage adoption of better alternatives, not just because they're too expensive. I see this as being the case with electric vehicles. In that case, I view incentives as an extreme measure. They understand that something needs to be done--and right away--about the ridiculous gasoline-burning paradigm and all the filthy, out-of-control mess that industry creates. I mean come on. Thick smog clouds surrounding entire cities? We don't realize how utterly moronic that is, since we're used to it I guess...

#13 jrb Sep 26, 2012 11:04 AM

Next we'll hear about global warming :rolleyes: !

Amazing the Canadian economy is doing better than the US; like ND it's oil!

A lot more than vehicles would be affected if all the taps were turned off.

#14 Beckler Sep 26, 2012 11:32 AM

Yeah that crazy climate-change talk. The stuff all the smart people say is real (i.e. scientists), and all the dumb ones or those with an agenda, deny. Who shall we trust? But that's a whole other debate! (I'm not calling anyone dumb by the way, it's for illustrative purposes only). :D There are plenty of reasons other than that to end massive oil use-- which must happen eventually anyway. And there are plenty of other ways to grow an economy other than oil absurdity.

#15 jrb Sep 26, 2012 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beckler (Post 22839982)

Who shall we trust?

The growing list of Scientist who are deniers too!

I only fly E; would love to have an E car (not Hyb) -- with minimum range of 120miles, AC, heat in MN's winter (w/o affecting range!), room for my 1/4 Cub and a few other planes, and @ a fare price!


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:52 AM.