logo
GM slow-rolls its all-EV aspirations

GM slow-rolls its all-EV aspirations

E&E News2 days ago

General Motors quietly closed the door this week on a goal to make only electric vehicles by 2035.
The automaker announced Tuesday that it would spend $4 billion on mostly gasoline-powered vehicles. While GM is not retreating from EVs, the investment means the company is 'giving up any hope of achieving that [2035] goal,' said Sam Abuelsamid, an auto analyst at Telemetry, a Detroit-area research firm.
Asked Wednesday whether the goal still exists, GM said in a statement, 'We still believe in an all-EV future.'
Advertisement
GM's move away from the 2035 goal is less a singular failure and more a symptom of flagging support among many actors, including government, other automakers, charging companies and car buyers, analysts said.
Much has changed since GM set the EV target, just after President Joe Biden took office and amid a surge of confidence in the auto industry about widespread EV adoption. Four years later, the Trump administration is dismantling Biden-era federal support for EVs and implementing high tariffs, upsetting automakers' production plans.
Those federal moves, combined with a cooling desire for EVs among car buyers, has moved the sunset date for the internal combustion engine to a vague someday.
GM is still ramping up EV production. Earlier this week, it trumpeted the fact that it sold 37,000 EVs in the first quarter of the year, making it the number two EV maker in the U.S. behind Tesla.
The company's 2035 goal 'was aspirational. It was more an idea than a strategy,' said Alan Baum, an independent Detroit auto analyst. 'GM's doing a better job than many of their competitors, but there's obviously a relatively low ceiling because of the lack of supportive policy.'
GM's all-EV goal back in 2021 was one of the earliest and most prominent of a wave of automaker commitments to electric vehicles. At the time, GM CEO Mary Barra encouraged others to 'follow suit and make a significant impact on our industry and on the economy as a whole.'
Others did follow — and all of those promises have been tempered by new realities.
Last year, European automakers Volvo, Porsche, Volkswagen and Mercedes all dropped earlier goals that would have seen them producing all or mostly EVs by the early 2030s.
Back in 2021, GM also put an asterisk on its 2035 target.
'We say it as an aspirational goal, because to actually make that timing, we need some external things to come together also,' spokesperson Jessica James said at the time.
Barra reiterated last month that the company still wants an 'all-EV future.'
'EVs are fundamentally better,' she said at a Wall Street Journal event late last month. 'We have work to do to continue to get battery technology to give us greater density, so we have farther range. We need to have a robust charging infrastructure.'
Automakers, including GM, have been mostly mum in public as the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress seek to kill tax incentives that make it cheaper for manufacturers to produce batteries and consumers to buy EVs.
But through the main U.S. automotive lobby, the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, automakers have vociferously opposed California's plans to require all-electric auto sales by 2035.
The Republican-controlled Congress voted to kill that California 2035 all-EV sales goal — the same one that GM first set for itself — through the Congressional Review Act. The move came after the Senate parliamentarian told lawmakers they couldn't repeal the goal through the CRA.
The bill awaits a signature by Trump, after which the California attorney general has pledged to sue.
What GM is doing
GM's announcement that it would invest $4 billion in domestic manufacturing essentially shuffles production among factories in ways that will help the company dodge Trump's tariffs.
It is moving production of about a half-million gasoline-powered vehicles from Mexico to factories in the U.S., according to an analysis by Abuelsamid of Telemetry. Doing so will enable GM to avoid 25 percent tariffs that the Trump administration has placed on vehicles imported from Mexico.
For example, the production of several full-size SUVs and pickup trucks will transfer to GM's Orion plant, north of Detroit. The gas-powered Equinox, a strong U.S. seller, will move to the Fairfax plant in Kansas City. The gas-running Blazer will go to the company's Spring Hill plant in Tennessee.
Meanwhile, more EV production will move to GM's Factory Zero, a dedicated EV plant in metro Detroit that is running far below capacity. Electric versions of the Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra pickup trucks will now get made in the plant, alongside other large EVs made in low volumes, including the Cadillac Escalade IQ and the Hummer.
Other EVs will be made elsewhere. Other electric Cadillacs, for example, will be made at the Spring Hill plant, while a rebooted version of the Chevy Volt will be produced at the Fairfax plant, which the company described as the site for the 'next generation of affordable EVs.'
Those changes, combined with other recent moves, make it clear that GM is laying the groundwork to produce gas-powered vehicles well into the 2030s.
In May, the Detroit automaker said it would ditch plans to make electric motors at its Towanda Production plant in Buffalo, New York, and instead spend $888 million to make V-8 engines.
In 2023, GM put $579 million toward refurbishing an engine plant in Flint, Michigan. Electric vehicles don't have engines — they rely instead on batteries for propulsion.
Engine factories are large, fixed investments that are meant to operate for 15 years or more, according to Neal Ganguli, a managing director and auto-manufacturing expert at the business advisory firm AlixPartners.
Meanwhile, the manufacturing lines that make finished cars — like the ones GM unveiled this week — have shorter but still lengthy lives.
'When you put these [manufacturing lines] in, you are planning on a five- to seven-year time horizon,' Ganguli said. 'Maybe 10 years.'
Analysts said General Motors' swerve back into the gasoline lane — and away from the path to all EVs by 2035 — is not a surprise, given the market and policy realities.
'It was always a long shot at best,' said Abuelsamid.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump clears path for Nippon investment in US Steel, so long as it fits gov't terms

time28 minutes ago

Trump clears path for Nippon investment in US Steel, so long as it fits gov't terms

WASHINGTON -- President Donald Trump on Friday signed an executive order paving the way for a Nippon Steel investment in U.S. Steel, so long as the Japanese company complies with a 'national security agreement' submitted by the federal government. Trump's order didn't detail the terms of the national security agreement. But the iconic American steelmaker and Nippon Steel said in a joint statement that the agreement stipulates that approximately $11 billion in new investments will be made by 2028 and includes giving the U.S. government a ' golden share" — essentially veto power to ensure the country's national security interests are protected against cutbacks in steel production. 'We thank President Trump and his Administration for their bold leadership and strong support for our historic partnership," the two companies said. "This partnership will bring a massive investment that will support our communities and families for generations to come. We look forward to putting our commitments into action to make American steelmaking and manufacturing great again.' The companies have completed a U.S. Department of Justice review and received all necessary regulatory approvals, the statement said. 'The partnership is expected to be finalized promptly,' the statement said. U.S. Steel rose $2.66, or 5%, to $54.85 in afterhours trading Friday. Nippon Steel's original bid to buy the Pittsburgh-based U.S. Steel in late 2023 had been valued at $55 per share. The companies offered few details on how the golden share would work, what other provisions are in the national security agreement and how specifically the $11 billion would be spent. White House spokesman Kush Desai said the order 'ensures U.S. Steel will remain in the great Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and be safeguarded as a critical element of America's national and economic security.' James Brower, a Morrison Foerster lawyer who represents clients in national security-related matters, said such agreements with the government typically are not disclosed to the public, particularly by the government. They can become public, but it's almost always disclosed by a party in the transaction, such as a company — like U.S. Steel — that is publicly held, Brower said. The mechanics of how a golden share would work will depend on the national security agreement, but in such agreements it isn't unusual to give the government approval rights over specific activities, Brower said. U.S. Steel made no filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on Friday. Nippon Steel originally offered nearly $15 billion to purchase U.S. Steel in an acquisition that had been delayed on national security concerns starting during Joe Biden's presidency. As it sought to win over American officials, Nippon Steel gradually increased the amount of money it was pledging to invest into U.S. Steel. American officials now value the transaction at $28 billion, including the purchase bid and a new electric arc furnace — a more modern steel mill that melts down scrap — that they say Nippon Steel will build in the U.S. after 2028. Nippon Steel had pledged to maintain U.S. Steel's headquarters in Pittsburgh, put U.S. Steel under a board with a majority of American citizens and keep plants operating. It also said it would protect the interests of U.S. Steel in trade matters and it wouldn't import steel slabs that would compete with U.S. Steel's blast furnaces in Pennsylvania and Indiana. Trump opposed the purchase while campaigning for the White House, and using his authority Biden blocked the transaction on his way out of the White House. But Trump expressed openness to working out an arrangement once he returned to the White House in January. Trump said Thursday that he would as president have 'total control' of what U.S. Steel did as part of the investment. Trump said then that the deal would preserve '51% ownership by Americans,' although Nippon Steel has never backed off its stated intention of buying and controlling U.S. Steel as a wholly owned subsidiary. 'We have a golden share, which I control,' Trump said. Trump added that he was 'a little concerned' about what presidents other than him would do with their golden share, 'but that gives you total control.' The proposed merger had been under review by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, during the Trump and Biden administrations. The order signed Friday by Trump said the CFIUS review provided 'credible evidence' that Nippon Steel 'might take action that threatens to impair the national security of the United States,' but such risks might be 'adequately mitigated' by approving the proposed national security agreement. The order doesn't detail the perceived national security risk and only provides a timeline for the national security agreement. The White House declined to provide details on the terms of the agreement. The order said the draft agreement was submitted to U.S. Steel and Nippon Steel on Friday. The two companies must successfully execute the agreement as decided by the Treasury Department and other federal agencies that are part CFIUS by the closing date of the transaction. Trump reserves the authority to issue further actions regarding the investment as part of the order he signed on Friday.

Appeals court upholds approval of Willow project on Alaska's North Slope
Appeals court upholds approval of Willow project on Alaska's North Slope

Yahoo

time28 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Appeals court upholds approval of Willow project on Alaska's North Slope

The ConocoPhillips Alaska Inc. building in Anchorage is seen on June 28, 2023. The company has said it will spend at least $7 billion to develop the huge Willow field and that first production is expected by the end of the decade. (Photo by Yereth Rosen/Alaska Beacon) A federal appeals court on Friday upheld the Biden administration's approval of a major oil development on Alaska's North Slope, even though it identified one flaw with the action. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in a divided decision, said the U.S. Bureau of Land Management largely abided by federal laws when it granted approval to ConocoPhillips to develop the huge Willow project. Despite one problem that the ruling characterized as 'minor,' the approval shall stand, said the majority opinion, written by Judge Ryan D. Nelson. The ruling allows ConocoPhillips to keep developing Willow, which holds about 600 million barrels of reserves and is slated to produce up to 180,000 barrels per day and be the westernmost operating oil field on the North Slope. And it rejects arguments from environmental and Native plaintiffs who said the BLM approval violated requirements for considering the cumulative and climate impacts of the huge development, impacts to endangered species and other issues. The identified flaw stems from the BLM's decision to approve a Willow development plan with three drill pads rather than the five ConocoPhillips had proposed. The scaled-back plan approved in 2023 also required ConocoPhillips to give up leases on about 68,000 acres, almost all of that in the ecologically sensitive Teshekpuk Lake area. During the environmental study process that led to the approval decision, the BLM had expressed the position that it needed to consider full field development rather than piecemeal development, the ruling said. 'And then when it came time to issue the final approval, it never explained whether its adopted alternative satisfied the full field development standard,' the ruling said. But that was a 'at heart, a procedural, not a substantive violation,' the ruling said. The development approval is to remain in place, the decision said. Overturning the approval is 'unwarranted because the procedural error was minor and the on-the-ground consequences (of vacating it) would be severe,' the decision said. In a dissenting opinion, Justice Gabriel Sanchez said the flaw was serious enough to justify overturning the permit. 'BLM's errors were more fundamental than simply failing to explain how it applied the full field development standard among the alternatives it reviewed,' he said. The agency wrongly excluded consideration of smaller alternatives when it was deciding whether to allow 'the largest domestic oil drilling project on federal public lands,' he said. Willow has been the subject of heated national debate. The discovery, on federal leases that date as far back as 1999, has inspired other exploration in the area, as well as hopes for state officials for a development renaissance on the North Slope. Oil production in the region is now less than a quarter of the 2 million-barrel-a-day peak hit in 1988. Environmental activists, however, have described the project as a 'climate bomb' that will pour substantial new amounts of planet-heating carbon gases into the atmosphere. Friday's ruling is the latest in a yearslong series of legal challenges that have created roadblocks to Willow development. In 2021, U.S. District Court Sharon Gleason overturned a prior approval of Willow. She ordered the BLM to complete a formal supplemental environmental impact statement to better analyze climate impacts and impacts to threatened polar bears. The 2023 project approval is the product of that supplemental study. ConocoPhillips, which is already well into Willow construction and plans to spend at least $7 billion on development, described Friday's ruling as good news. 'ConocoPhillips welcomes the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision, which allows construction on the Willow project to continue. We recently completed another significant winter construction season, and the project remains on track for first oil in 2029,' company spokesperson Rebecca Boys said by email. 'We look forward to continuing the responsible development of Willow, which will enhance American energy security while expanding local employment opportunities and providing extensive benefits to Alaska Native communities and the State of Alaska.' Over the past winter season, crews delivered modular structures and worked on road, pad, bridge, work camp and pipeline construction, Boys said. That work was allowed to proceed because the 9th Circuit Court in December denied the plaintiffs' motion for a restraining order blocking it. Lawyers for the plaintiffs in the case had mixed responses to Friday's decision. Some were highly critical. 'This decision is bad news for the planet and anyone who cares about the impacts of industrialization on communities now and in the future,' Bridget Psarianos, an attorney with the environmental law firm Trustees for Alaska, said in a statement. 'The bureau is required under the law to protect the western Arctic's sensitive ecosystem and the subsistence users who rely on them. But the agency did not minimize the harm from this project on the Arctic's people, animals, habitat, and the planet in a real way, in violation of the law. There is too much at stake to gloss over the harm this project will do,' said Psarianos, who is representing some of the plaintiffs. It will probably be fairly simple for the BLM to address the court-identified flaw, Psarianos said in a follow-up email. The agency could submit a report or a memorandum explaining its reasoning, leaving the approval unaffected, she said. Other plaintiff representatives portrayed the ruling as a vindication, albeit a partial one. 'Today's ruling is a significant step forward for Alaska's North Slope,' Hallie Templeton, legal director for plaintiff Friends of the Earth, said in a statement. 'We hope that this will push BLM to heed the significant risks that Willow poses and deny it for good. While this should be the final straw for the doomed Willow Project, we will continue fighting to prevent this carbon bomb project from destroying one of our last remaining wild places.' A spokesperson for the BLM declined to comment, citing the agency's policies on litigation. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE

AG Brown sues 5 WA apartments for ‘deceiving' senior tenants
AG Brown sues 5 WA apartments for ‘deceiving' senior tenants

Yahoo

time28 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

AG Brown sues 5 WA apartments for ‘deceiving' senior tenants

The Brief Five Western Washington apartments and its management company are being sued by Attorney General Nick Brown. The lawsuit claims that the complexes have deceived its primarily low-income senior tenants. The complexes have allegedly deceived future and current tenants of rent increases, property quality, amenity quality and building safety. SEATTLE - Attorney General Nick Brown sues five apartment complexes in Western Washington he alleges "deceived" low-income senior tenants. Brown filed a complaint Friday in Snohomish County Superior Court against the apartment complexes and property management firm, FPI Management, for deceptive practices against senior tenants. What we know The following Western Washington apartment complexes are part of the lawsuit: Vintage at Everett Vintage at Mill Creek Vintage at Sequim Vintage at Tacoma Cedar Pointe Apartments FPI has been allegedly violating the Consumer Protection Act over the last several years, after the management company and the property owners failed to disclose rent increases, apartment unit quality, property safety and the quality of apartment amenities like pools and gyms. FPI markets its apartments to tenants 55 years and older who are also low-income. Brown claims that the company does not inform future tenants that their rent will be decided on Area Median Income, resulting in seniors paying more than the Social Security or pension incomes they live on. What they're saying "Housing is particularly important for older Washingtonians, and it's hard for them to move once they've signed a lease," said Brown in a statement. "It's egregious to convince vulnerable populations they're getting quality living when in reality they are stuck with properties in disrepair that also end up costing more than they expected over time." Additionally, FPI has allegedly deceived tenants of the quality of their apartment units, building quality and amenity qualities. FPI markets the quality of its buildings as "luxury" and "resort style" but photos of the buildings show broken appliances, mold, leaks and other building damage. Some amenities the apartments promised to tenants were either nonexistent, shut down or broken. The apartment complexes also raised concerns around safety, as many did not have anyone monitoring people or vehicles entering and exiting the property, which has led to trespassing, theft and vandalism. What's next Brown's complaint calls for an injunction that prevents FPI and property owners from continuing the alleged unlawful activity. It also seeks a civil penalty of $12,500 for each Consumer Protection Act violation, restitution to impacted tenants and coverage of legal costs. The Source Information in this article is from a Washington State Attorney General's Office press release. Seattle traffic to be impacted from upcoming protests Authorities shift tactics in search for WA triple murder suspect Travis Decker Manhunt for Travis Decker moves to WA's Kittitas County Anti-Trump 'NO KINGS' protests planned for Seattle this weekend Seattle police disperse 'ICE OUT' protesters after fire breaks out downtown Everything you need to know about Seattle Pride Parade 2025 Things to do for Father's Day in Seattle To get the best local news, weather and sports in Seattle for free, sign up for the daily FOX Seattle Newsletter. Download the free FOX LOCAL app for mobile in the Apple App Store or Google Play Store for live Seattle news, top stories, weather updates and more local and national news.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store