Behind GM’s shift to all-electric vehicles by 2035

TruckElectric

Well-known member
First Name
Bryan
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
1,809
Reaction score
2,414
Location
Texas
Vehicles
Dodge Ram diesel
Occupation
Retired
Country flag
Part 1

Marcus Day
a day ago


This is the first of a two-part series. Part two can be read here.

At the end of January, General Motors CEO Mary Barra announced that the company aims to transition to selling only zero-emission cars, SUVs and light trucks by 2035, phasing out passenger vehicles with gasoline- and diesel-powered engines. The company also said it had set 2040 as the target when all its US factories and facilities will be carbon neutral.

d7-6dc4-437e-8c82-7bf13f8e3866?rendition=image1280.jpg

GM electric cars charging at EVgo stations (GM Media)

GM had previously announced that it is investing $27 billion in electric vehicles (EVs) and self-driving vehicles over the next five years, up from $20 billion before the COVID-19 pandemic began. It is planning to offer 30 different EV models by 2025.

The company is already close to finishing the development of Factory Zero, formerly the Detroit-Hamtramck Assembly Plant, which is due to come online later this year. Once reopened, it will produce electric versions of the Hummer SUV and eventually the Cruise Origin self-driving vehicle.

While GM left itself ample wiggle room in its timeline to move to all-electric—calling the plan an “aspiration”—the announcement nonetheless reflects tectonic shifts in the global auto industry and world economy.

Throughout the 20th and into the 21st centuries, internal combustion engines have been deeply integrated into the vast and increasingly globalized systems of auto production, while also shaping transportation, economic activity and daily life for billions of people.

However, complex objective factors—particularly technological developments, including cheaper lithium-ion battery production methods—are accelerating the shift towards electric vehicles, in turn spurring a bitter struggle among the major automakers to dominate the technologies, supply chains and markets related to them.

Electric vehicles still make up a relatively small share of global sales. Around 3.2 million plug-in vehicles were sold in 2020, according to EV-Volumes, an industry consulting firm based in Sweden. However, that number is expected to grow dramatically, with a 70 percent increase projected for 2021 alone. Around 150 new battery electric and plug-in hybrid models are slated to come on the market this year, and total electric and hybrid vehicles worldwide could top 140 million by 2030, the International Energy Agency has stated.

Europe and China both saw substantial growth in EV sales last year, despite overall slumps in their auto markets due to the coronavirus. New plug-in EV sales in Europe grew 137 percent year over year in 2020, EV-Volumes reported, accounting for 10.2 percent of total sales, up from just 3.3 percent in 2019.

In China, sales of New Energy Vehicles (NEVs)—which include hybrid gas-electric, plug-in battery electric, and hydrogen fuel cell, among others—grew at a relatively slower, though still substantial, 12 percent in 2020. Sales of NEVs in January 2021 were up 239 percent from the same time last year.

China now has the largest auto market in the world—bigger than the US and Japan combined—and has aggressively promoted electric vehicles through state subsidies and other measures, in an effort to both position itself as the frontrunner in the sector and, more recently, to offset the negative impact of COVID-19 on its economy.

In the US, new electric vehicle sales grew at an anemic 4 percent in 2020, according to EV-Volumes, with EV upstart Tesla accounting for nearly 80 percent of the total.

In recent years, established US automakers such as GM and Ford have been increasingly falling behind in the EV race. Investors have exerted mounting pressure on the Detroit Big Three to cut costs and free up capital to make the significant technological, research and development investments required to produce electric vehicles at large scale.

The strategists for US imperialism have also looked with growing alarm at the swift growth of its foreign rivals, particularly China in the EV sector, with calls for a shift in approach away from that of the Trump administration, whose policies favored the prolongation of gas-powered vehicles.

Electric vehicles under the Trump and Biden administrations
Just days before the GM’s announcement, President Joe Biden announced plans to have the fleet of federal government vehicles transitioned to electric units built in the US. His announcement was made in the course of signing a “Buy American” executive order, which continues the reactionary economic nationalism and protectionism of the Trump administration, while at the same time seeking to shore up support for the discredited, pro-corporate trade unions.

The White House quickly praised GM’s announced intentions to shift to electric vehicles, with a spokesperson stating, “We applaud efforts by the private sector to further embrace renewable and clean energy technologies. The president and many others have said, efforts like this will help grow our economy and create good-paying union jobs.”

GM’s CEO Barra has been in regular communication with the Biden administration, joining a virtual meeting with the president-elect, corporate and union officials in November shortly after the election. The company is no doubt lobbying behind the scenes for only modest increases to emissions standards and regulations of the industry, following its aggressive rollback under the Trump administration, perhaps in return offering to help burnish the Biden administration’s image of “taking action on climate change” in its early days.

However, successive Democratic and Republican administrations, each beholden to US imperialism and capitalist profit interests, have proven incapable of enacting the scientifically guided and internationally coordinated changes in production and economic activity necessary to prevent a further disastrous warming of the planet.

Under rules enacted by the Obama administration, fuel economy standards were supposed to reach 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025, itself an inadequate benchmark to sufficiently rein in greenhouse gas emissions. But with less fuel-efficient vehicles such as SUVs and pick-up trucks constituting a growing share of automakers’ profits in the latter half of the last decade, many of the major auto companies seized upon the opportunity provided by the new Trump administration in 2017 to press for considerably slackened emissions standards.

aa-915b-4f05-ad0f-c9c4fff23bce?rendition=image1280.jpg

President Donald Trump gestures towards GM CEO Mary Barra, right, before the start of a meeting with auto executives, Tuesday, Jan. 24, 2017. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)


Not long after his 2016 electoral victory, GM CEO Barra met with Trump and agreed to serve on a White House economic policy panel, along with other corporate executives. She personally pushed to have the Obama-era emissions rules diminished, and they subsequently were in 2018, as part of a broad effort by Trump and congressional Republicans to gut environmental and other corporate regulations.

In September 2019, the Trump administration then moved to revoke California’s authority to set stricter emissions standards than those at the federal level, after automakers objected that the lack of uniformity in US regulations would lead to increased production costs. GM, along with then-Fiat Chrysler (now Stellantis), Toyota and others joined a lawsuit supporting the Trump administration in its legal battle against the state.

After the election of Biden last November, however, GM dropped out of the lawsuit, followed by Stellantis and Toyota just this month. Barra stated at the time, “We believe the ambitious electrification goals of the President-elect, California, and General Motors are aligned to address climate change by drastically reducing automobile emissions.”

Despite GM’s apparent about-face, the outcome is that the Biden administration is now floating 2026 emissions standards of about 51 miles per gallon, looser than the rules enacted under the Obama administration.

Nevertheless, the Biden administration, along with Democratic Party-aligned media such as the New York Times, has signaled that it views the development of a domestic supply chain for EVs as a matter of “national security,” i.e., the interests of US imperialism.

The New York Times followed GM’s announcement of its shift to EVs with an article with the worried headline, “G.M.’s Electric Car Push Could Put China in the Driver’s Seat,” expressing concerns over China’s current lead in battery production and the rare earth metals, such as lithium and cobalt, that they require. China currently accounts for roughly 80 percent of US rare earth imports.

In her confirmation hearing last week, Biden’s nominee for Energy Secretary, former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm, reiterated the administration’s economic nationalist stance, telling Congress, “We can buy electric car batteries from Asia, or we can make them in America.”

Behind GM’s shift to all-electric vehicles by 2035
Part 2

EV investments: Speculation and consolidation

As with every major technological development in recent decades, including the emergence of the internet in the 1990s, the electric vehicle sector is the vessel for massive levels of speculation on Wall Street. Companies producing electric vehicles have been the center of an increasingly frenzied stock market bubble involving sums of money that dwarf the actual investments being made in the technology itself.

Tesla is the most notorious example, with the run-up of its stock price roughly 800 percent over the course of the pandemic, even though it has only eked out relatively small profits in recent quarters. The company has a market capitalization of over $800 billion, larger than the next nine global automakers combined, in spite of the fact that Tesla, which produced fewer than 500,000 vehicles last year, controls much less than 1 percent of the global auto market. This has led to a surge of CEO Elon Musk’s fortune to the obscene amount of $177 billion.

b6-57ba-4a2c-bb5a-9dda883de191?rendition=image1280.jpg

A new sign is unveiled at General Motors Detroit-Hamtramck assembly plant, Friday, Oct. 16, 2020, in Hamtramck, Mich. The automaker is investing $2.2 billion at its plant to produce a variety of all-electric trucks and SUVs. GM's first all-electric truck will be a pickup with production scheduled to begin in late 2021. (AP Photo/Carlos Osorio)


In addition to Tesla, a number of start-ups, virtually none of which are actually producing and selling vehicles yet, have become outlets for the enormous amounts of money sloshing about in the stock markets due to the central banks’ multi-billion-dollar handouts and reduction of interest rates.

Many of these firms have been raising money through special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs), shell companies created for the purpose of acquiring another company. SPACs allow the acquired company access to share markets (and the current wild speculative investment) without the lengthy review process and stricter requirements of an initial public offering (IPO).

Over $6 billion has been raised for EV companies via SPACs, according to Bank of America. Companies which produce batteries for EVs are also eyeing SPACs to become the latest “landing pad for investors,” a recent report in TechCrunch noted.

One of the more significant EV startups is Lordstown Motors, which was formed in 2018 and acquired the site of GM’s Lordstown Assembly Plant almost for free after the plant closed in 2019. It effected a reverse-merger with DiamondPeak Holdings last October.

In spite of having yet to produce a single vehicle, as well as growing doubts among analysts that the company will ever be competitive in an increasingly crowded EV landscape, Lordstown Motors currently has a market capitalization of $4.44 billion, more than the 108-year-old luxury carmaker Aston Martin.

The markets responded favorably to GM’s 2035 EV announcement, with its share price jumping as much as 7.4 percent in intraday trading, closing up 3.5 percent.

The immense costs associated with the transition to EVs and other new vehicle technologies has at the same time been driving new waves of consolidation and shake-ups in the auto industry. In addition to the most prominent example, the transatlantic merger between Fiat Chrysler and PSA Group to form Stellantis, other major automakers have been racing to work out cost- and technology-sharing agreements.

Ford and Volkswagen and Daimler and BMW have each announced partnerships in recent years. Within days following GM’s 2035 EV announcement, Ford stated it would double its planned investments in EVs and autonomous vehicles, reaching $29 billion by 2025, and subsequently announced that it was partnering with tech giant Google, planning to use the company’s technology and services for a range of its operations.

For its part, GM revealed last spring that it would partner with Honda, announcing plans last month to build two electric crossovers for the Japanese automaker, one at its plant in Ramos Arizpe, Mexico, under the Honda nameplate, and another at its Spring Hill, Tennessee, plant for Honda’s Acura brand.

GM has also sought to make inroads into alternative energy models in the commercial trucking sector. It had initially planned to purchase an 11 percent stake in trucking startup Nikola, before that company’s founder was forced to resign under allegations of fraud (the two nominally still have plans to collaborate on the production of a vehicle). More recently, GM announced it was partnering with heavy-duty truck maker Navistar, along with logistics giant JB Hunt, to produce a hydrogen fuel cell truck.

The impact of the EV transition on the workforce
As with all significant technological advances under capitalism, the shift to EVs, along with the developments in artificial intelligence and autonomous vehicles, are not being directed at the betterment of society or the improvement of working conditions, but rather are being used to intensify the exploitation of the working class.

EVs require far fewer components than traditional vehicles. GM’s current electric model, the Chevy Bolt, has a motor with just three moving parts, compared with 113 in a combustion engine, according to the consulting firm PwC. A United Auto Workers whitepaper in 2019—which presented mass job cuts as an all-but inevitable result of the shift to electric vehicles—cited Ford and VW executives who stated that EVs would reduce labor-hours-per-vehicle by as much as 30 percent.

The reduced labor required for EVs will be used by the auto corporations to carry out a vast restructuring in order to increase their profits, with the potential for thousands of more layoffs and the increased misery for those who remain.

According to the website Autoblog, some 100,000 workers in the US alone are employed at factories that make transmissions and gas or diesel engines. A massive wave of bankruptcies and job cuts could sweep the already vulnerable auto parts industry. Roughly 75 to 100 of the biggest parts makers “face irrelevance” if they don’t secure a place in the move to EVs, Paul Eichenberg, an auto industry consultant, told Crain’s Chicago Business.

The UAW reacted to GM’s announcement of the transition to all-electric vehicles with its typical combination of lies and reactionary nationalism. “The important thing is that President Biden agrees with our position that these new jobs replacing (internal combustion) engines are union wage and benefit jobs that are created right here in the US,” UAW spokesman Brian Rothenberg stated.

What are the “union wage and benefit jobs” to which it refers? For over 40 years, the UAW has facilitated one concessions contract after another, bargaining away rights won by workers over decades of struggle, including pensions, the eight-hour day, annual cost-of-living raises and more. At the same time, it has allowed the companies to drive down wages and vastly expand their use of low-paid temps, resulting in working conditions more akin to the 1930s, in return accepting millions in bribes.

Worse, the UAW has worked hand-in-glove with the auto companies during the COVID-19 pandemic, colluding with the companies in ensuring a premature reopening of plants and then covering up the spread of cases, which has resulted in the deaths of dozens of autoworkers.

b6-b4d0-49d4-b28c-aa3fa3a4829c?rendition=image1280.jpg

Striking plant workers cheer outside the General Motor assembly plant in Bowling Green, Ky, Monday, Sept. 16, 2019. (AP Photo/Bryan Woolston)

The UAW is playing a key role in GM’s restructuring of its workforce in preparation for new technologies. In 2018, Cindy Estrada, the UAW’s then-vice president for GM, signed a secret memorandum of understanding allowing the company to replace much of the workforce at its Lake Orion Assembly Plant with subcontractors. Lake Orion, which produces experimental autonomous vehicles, is a major test-bed for the company’s workforce of the future.

The UAW then sold out a 40-day strike by GM workers in 2019, forcing through a contract which allows for the expanded use of temps and approved the closure of three US plants, including Lordstown Assembly.

Where jobs may someday return at the automakers’ plants producing EV parts, such as GM’s planned joint venture with battery maker LG Chem in Lordstown, they will be fewer in number and earning lower wages. Meanwhile, the relentless effort to drive up profitability for GM’s wealthy investors will result in the “Amazonification” of working conditions throughout its operations, with high-tech means of monitoring workers to enforce speed-up and the maximum possible output. These conditions are in the works throughout the auto industry and more widely.

Technology, capitalism and the fight for socialism
The social and economic implications of electric vehicle technology presents one with a paradox. In and of itself, the new technology is a positive development. It will make automobiles cheaper to produce and more efficient. Autonomous vehicles, which are not much further down the road, have even more potential.

And yet the benefits of this technology, under the present social system—capitalism—will accrue only to a tiny minority in the form of soaring profits and share values. Meanwhile, workers can expect layoffs, poverty and the destruction of much of existing industry upon which they rely for their livelihoods.

Moreover, EV technology is already turning into another flashpoint in the conflict between the United States and China, as well as in the growing conflict between the US and its erstwhile allies in Europe. Instead of using this technology for the common betterment of humankind, the United States and the other major powers are seeking to dominate this powerful new technology at the expense of its rivals, raising the danger of catastrophic military conflict.

This is not the result of EV technology itself, or of technology in general. Rather, it is the product of the irrational and outmoded character of the capitalist system. Every new technological advance, including not only electric vehicles but faster 5G cellular networks, artificial intelligence and, dreadfully, vaccines against COVID-19, aggravates the contradictions at the heart of the capitalist system. These are between the socially-coordinated character of the labor process and private accumulation of surplus, in the form of profits, by the capitalists, and between the globally-integrated world economy and the nation-state system, which leads inevitably to war.

An entirely different outcome is possible. Electric vehicle technology can and should be used to shorten the working day in the auto industry, improve access to transportation and form part of a global strategy to dramatically curb carbon emissions.

But in order for that potential to be realized, workers internationally must join together to take control of the colossal resources hoarded by the private corporations and their parasitic billionaire investors, and instead harness them to the needs of society. This is the program of socialism.



SOURCE: WORLD SOCIALIST WEB SITE
Advertisement

 

Crissa

Well-known member
First Name
Crissa
Joined
Jul 8, 2020
Messages
6,029
Reaction score
7,950
Location
Santa Cruz
Vehicles
2014 Zero S, 2013 Mazda 3
Country flag
I like places that post from a viewpoint, but... I prefer if they'd back it up with actual evidence?

*sigh*

-Crissa
 

LoPro

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
253
Reaction score
343
Location
Norway
Vehicles
Tesla Model 3 DM LR
Country flag
I like places that post from a viewpoint, but... I prefer if they'd back it up with actual evidence?

*sigh*

-Crissa
I too enjoy a Marxist analysis from time to time, but this was a lot of assumptions I don’t necessarily hold as truths and would like to see elaborated on.
 

Crissa

Well-known member
First Name
Crissa
Joined
Jul 8, 2020
Messages
6,029
Reaction score
7,950
Location
Santa Cruz
Vehicles
2014 Zero S, 2013 Mazda 3
Country flag
I wasn't even talking about the Marxist assumptions! The text said the union had capitulated... but didn't say how and the quote didn't say anything, either.

It's like the unionizers at Tesla, one of their cases was that they wanted to wear pins. Okay, they should be allowed to show their union affiliation. That makes sense. But pins in a 'no riveted clothing' area? Geez. At least keep your challenges logical.

-Crissa
 

Cybertruck Hawaii

Well-known member
First Name
Michael
Joined
Apr 24, 2021
Messages
106
Reaction score
47
Location
Honolulu
Vehicles
Sienna
Occupation
Retired
Country flag
I’ve already gone green with my lawn mower and string trimmer with a battery type. Now, my Cybertruck will complete my environmental responsibility for the environment.
 
Advertisement

 
Advertisement
Top