No Volt Batteries from a Plant that got $150 million tax dollars

[Pony Boy]

Plant that got $150M in taxpayer money to make Volt batteries furloughs workers

The facility, which was opened in July 2010 with a groundbreaking attended by Obama, has yet to produce a single battery for the Chevrolet Volt, the troubled electric car from General Motors. The plant's batteries also were intended to be used in Ford's electric

The 650,000-square-foot, $300 million facility was slated to produce 15,000 batteries per year, while creating hundreds of new jobs. But to date, only 200 workers are employed at the plant by by the South Korean company. Batteries for the Chevy Volts that have been produced have been made by an LG plant in South Korea.

The factory was partly funded by a $150 million grant from the U.S. Department of Energy. LG also received sizeable tax breaks from the local government, saving nearly $50 million in property taxes over 15 years and another $2.5 million annually in business taxes. Landing the factory was hailed as a coup when shovels first hit the ground.

“You are leading the way in showing how manufacturing jobs are coming right back here to the United States of America,” Obama told workers at the ground-breaking ceremony. “Our goal has never been to create a government program, but rather to unleash private-sector growth. And we're seeing results.”


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/10/08/lg-plant-that-got-150m-to-make-volt-batteries-in-michigan-puts-workers-on/

[Pony Boy]

Oh but don't worry plant workers who have never produced a battery and are on furloughs one week a month are eligible to collect unemployment for that week, and the company will cover the contributions to their individual benefits during the period.

[DBruleU]

...he really does just pick the losers.

[Rohirrim]

That's okay. Oil companies don't use their massive subsidies to do any extra drilling either.

[Pony Boy]

That's okay. Oil companies don't use their massive subsidies to do any extra drilling either.

I don't think the idea was to pay the battery company not to make batteries ROFL!

Oil companies will dill anything anywhere any time (kind of like Bill Clinton).

[The Lone Bolt]

A) The vast majority of DOE loan recipients have been successful. Tesla for instance will be paying back their loans ahead of schedule. Mitt's claim that the Obama administration "only picks losers" is false by a long shot.

B) Mitt wants to pour another 2 TRILLION into a military that doesn't need it and isn't asking for it. Who would waste our taxpayer money more? ???

[pricejj]

A) The vast majority of DOE loan recipients have been successful. Tesla for instance will be paying back their loans ahead of schedule. Mitt's claim that the Obama administration "only picks losers" is false by a long shot.


Tesla has never been profitable.

Please do some research before you spew out falsehoods.

[The Lone Bolt]

Tesla has never been profitable.

Please do some research before you spew out falsehoods.

I have. You're the one who needs to research:

Tesla is actually on the verge of becoming cash flow positive and will not have to spend any of the money raised, at least until we embark upon a major new vehicle program. In the public call with investors, I tried to make this point, but perhaps should have emphasized it more: we expect Tesla to become cash flow positive at the end of next month.

http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/update-elon-musk

Independent Report Review Confirms Energy Loan Portfolio is Expected to Perform Well

On October 28, 2011, the White House Chief of Staff directed an independent review of the current state of the Department of Energy (DOE) loan portfolio, focusing on future loan monitoring and management. The review was conducted by Herb Allison, who has wide-ranging experience in the finance, business, and government sectors during a career in public and private service that spans four decades and both Republican and Democratic Administrations.

This independent report on the DOE Loan Guarantee programs confirms that the loan portfolio as a whole is expected to perform well and holds less than the amount of risk envisioned by Congress when it created and funded the program. The report also includes a number of recommendations on how to improve the management of the Department’s loan program and ongoing monitoring of the loan portfolio. The Department of Energy is reviewing the recommendations to determine the best way to use them to further strengthen the program.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/02/10/independent-report-review-confirms-energy-loan-portfolio-expected-perform-well

But that's OK. You just keep believing Slick Willard's con job.

[Pony Boy]

A) The vast majority of DOE loan recipients have been successful. Tesla for instance will be paying back their loans ahead of schedule. Mitt's claim that the Obama administration "only picks losers" is false by a long shot.

B) Mitt wants to pour another 2 TRILLION into a military that doesn't need it and isn't asking for it. Who would waste our taxpayer money more? ???

Yes we do need to invest in Tesla who's top car the the Model S, which carries a sticker price of $50,000 to $100,000, and is not exactly a ride for the 47% but does seem to be a nice little toy for the Hollywood elite and the 1%.

[The Lone Bolt]

Yes we do need to invest in Tesla who's top car the the Model S, which carries a sticker price of $50,000 to $100,000, and is not exactly a ride for the 47% but does seem to be a nice little toy for the Hollywood elite and the 1%.

Tesla's business model is to start with the luxury car segment and work their way down. So far it's been successful -- the Model S is sold out for the first production year and is gathering universally rave reviews. Next up is the Model X crossover, and then the Model E economy car for the average-income consumer.

[Kaylore]

The problem is this "all of the above" energy idea. The idea that you should invest in everything to improve everything is ridiculous. They need to invest in better energy, but this is taxpayer money and you can't just "do it all" and hope some of it sticks. That's an irresposible way to invest money - especially public money and ESPECIALLY during a recession. Another Obama failure.

[BroncoBeavis]

Tesla's business model is to start with the luxury car segment and work their way down. So far it's been successful -- the Model S is sold out for the first production year and is gathering universally rave reviews. Next up is the Model X crossover, and then the Model E economy car for the average-income consumer.

Huh. Borrow from the grandkids to subsidize non-economically viable cars to prop up the eco-egos of the 1%ers.... Brilliant!

But don't worry. They're working hard to make those non-economically viable cars economically viable. One of these days. Details coming soon.

[lonestar]

The problem is this "all of the above" energy idea. The idea that you should invest in everything to improve everything is ridiculous. They need to invest in better energy, but this is taxpayer money and you can't just "do it all" and hope some of it sticks. That's an irresponsible way to invest money - especially public money and ESPECIALLY during a recession. Another Obama failure.

well there you go thinking again.. I wonder if the uber liberals will ever try it..

If this had all been a Conservative idea the dumos would be crawling all over their crap about wasting a measly $150,000,000.00..

But since it is a "GREEN" dumo idea is has to be great..

these morons are worried about cutting the budget but a $150,000,00.. is to little to worry about..

Go figure..

[Rohirrim]

Rather than invest in companies, I'd like to see government money go into pure research. Find an alternative power source for cars. One that doesn't pollute. Replace our coal powered stations with natural gas while we research alternative energies. Then, when we find something promising, let companies use it in the ways they see as best.

[The Lone Bolt]

Huh. Borrow from the grandkids to subsidize non-economically viable cars to prop up the eco-egos of the 1%ers.... Brilliant!

But don't worry. They're working hard to make those non-economically viable cars economically viable. One of these days. Details coming soon.

Huh? Do you really believe that the technology will never get better or cheaper? Or that Elon Musk has no intention of pursuing a more affordable model for the broader market? Is that what you're suggesting?

[elsid13]

Statistics

The American Chemical Society (http://cen.acs.org/articles/89/i51/Long-History-US-Energy-Subsidies.html) cites a report by Double Bottom Line Venture Capital (http://i.bnet.com/blogs/dbl_energy_subsidies_paper.pdf) that explains how the oil industry has reaped benefits from subsidies. From 1918 to 2009, the average annual subsidy was $4.86 billion. By comparison, the nuclear energy industry gets around $3.5 billion per year.




When the study adjusted for inflation to 2009 dollars, the oil and gas industry received subsidies amounting to $1.8 billion per year in the first 15 years of the fledgling industry. The American Coalition for Ethanol (http://www.ethanol.org/pdf/contentmgmt/Oil_Industry_Subsidies.pdf) estimates that when combined with state and local government aid to large oil companies, subsidies amount to anywhere from $133.8 billion to $280.8 billion annually from all sources of taxpayer aid that goes to the oil and gas industry.



http://news.yahoo.com/history-u-oil-subsidies-back-nearly-century-215500548.html

[elsid13]

Pfund and Healey favor government investments in energy, and their research supports the view that over the years new transitional energy sources have spurred U.S. economic growth and innovation. But their study, “What Would Jefferson Do? The Historical Role of Federal Subsidies in Shaping America’s Energy Future,” also finds that federal support of renewable energy falls short of the aid the federal government has given to oil, gas, coal, and nuclear energy when they were new. In fact, they say, backing for renewable energy is trivial in size.



In comparing current support for renewable energy with past aid for today’s traditional energy sources, the report focuses on two types of assistance: funding during the first 15 years of support and annualized expenditures over the life of the energy source.



The first 15 years, the report says, are critical to developing new technologies. It finds that oil and gas subsidies, including tax breaks and government spending, were about five times as much as aid to renewables during their first 15 years of development; nuclear received 10 times as much support.



Federal support during the first 15 years works out to $3.3 billion annually for nuclear energy and $1.8 billion annually for oil and gas, but an average of only $400 million a year in inflation-adjusted dollars for ­renewables.


http://cen.acs.org/articles/89/i51/Long-History-US-Energy-Subsidies.html

[lonestar]

see lots of deflection.. going on ..

[barryr]

The government needs more money because Obama keeps throwing money at failures and wants to do even more if re-elected. He is a stubborn liberal/socialist who lives in what he feels the world should be like instead of reality.

[BroncoBeavis]

Huh? Do you really believe that the technology will never get better or cheaper? Or that Elon Musk has no intention of pursuing a more affordable model for the broader market? Is that what you're suggesting?

No, I'm suggesting that trial lawyers and law professors have no business guessing which technologies are going to be the ones that someday lead us to the promised land. When there's money to be made in more efficient transportation, the market will naturally move there.

Batteries are born losers. They're not efficient. They don't solve anything. The only thing they enable is off-siting the production of energy so the environmental costs are placed out-of-site, out-of-mind.

Coal-powered electric cars are good for a clean (ignorant) conscience. Not so much for a clean environment.

[ghwk]

Yes we do need to invest in Tesla who's top car the the Model S, which carries a sticker price of $50,000 to $100,000, and is not exactly a ride for the 47% but does seem to be a nice little toy for the Hollywood elite and the 1%.

I've seen these things on the road out here and they are damn nice cars, but they definitely aren't for your grandparents.

[The Lone Bolt]

No, I'm suggesting that trial lawyers and law professors have no business guessing which technologies are going to be the ones that someday lead us to the promised land. When there's money to be made in more efficient transportation, the market will naturally move there.

The market is moving towards plug-in vehicles. Pay attention.

Batteries are born losers. They're not efficient. They don't solve anything. The only thing they enable is off-siting the production of energy so the environmental costs are placed out-of-site, out-of-mind.

Coal-powered electric cars are good for a clean (ignorant) conscience. Not so much for a clean environment.

Bull. It's your own ignorance that's on display here.

FACT: Electric Vehicles Cause Substantially Fewer CO2 Emissions
Electric Vehicles Emit Less CO2 Even If Coal Supplies The Power. This chart from the Department of Energy shows that, even though coal is the source of nearly half the nation's electricity, all-electric vehicles (EV) like the Nissan Leaf, and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) like the Chevy Volt cause on average substantially less carbon dioxide emissions than conventional gasoline-powered vehicles:

http://mediamatters.org/static/images/item/evco2.jpg

In states like Indiana that are heavily reliant on coal-fired power, hybrid cars cause fewer emissions than plug-in EVs, but EVs still cause fewer emissions than conventional gasoline powered cars. In areas where electric car sales are high, EVs are significantly more environmentally friendly than the national average. For example, the Los Angeles area is projected by Pike Research to have the second highest electric car sales in the nation over the next 5 years, and carbon emissions for all-electric cars there are nearly half that of the national average:

http://mediamatters.org/static/images/item/evco2ca.jpg


http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/02/08/myths-and-facts-about-electric-cars/185798

In addition, EVs are run on 100% American-produced electricity, not foreign oil. And EVs are far more efficient in converting energy to motion than ICE cars:

Electric vehicle 'tank-to-wheels' efficiency is about a factor of 3 higher than internal combustion engine vehicles.[47]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_vehicle

And EVs require no tune-ups, oil changes, filter changes, etc. Much lower maintenance.

So yes, EVs solve a lot.

[BroncoBeavis]

The market is moving towards plug-in vehicles. Pay attention.



Bull. It's your own ignorance that's on display here.




http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/02/08/myths-and-facts-about-electric-cars/185798

In addition, EVs are run on 100% American-produced electricity, not foreign oil. And EVs are far more efficient in converting energy to motion than ICE cars:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_vehicle

And EVs require no tune-ups, oil changes, filter changes, etc. Much lower maintenance.

So yes, EVs solve a lot.

Sorry, but you can't just flat compare the average electric vehicle to the average gasoline-powered vehicle. How does that study account for passenger/cargo capacity? Doesn't look like it does.

Sure a glorified golf cart may emit less than the old family SUV or minivan. But if you have to drive three of them to fit everything you need, it more than defeats the purpose. Not even getting into the environmental costs of all that battery and vehicle manufacturing.

When you start to look at similar vehicle types, the picture changes somewhat.

http://editorial.autos.msn.com/blogs/autosblogpost.aspx?post=267da915-ae85-409c-85ee-58c894b22e27

[Jetmeck]

Plant that got $150M in taxpayer money to make Volt batteries furloughs workers

The facility, which was opened in July 2010 with a groundbreaking attended by Obama, has yet to produce a single battery for the Chevrolet Volt, the troubled electric car from General Motors. The plant's batteries also were intended to be used in Ford's electric

The 650,000-square-foot, $300 million facility was slated to produce 15,000 batteries per year, while creating hundreds of new jobs. But to date, only 200 workers are employed at the plant by by the South Korean company. Batteries for the Chevy Volts that have been produced have been made by an LG plant in South Korea.

The factory was partly funded by a $150 million grant from the U.S. Department of Energy. LG also received sizeable tax breaks from the local government, saving nearly $50 million in property taxes over 15 years and another $2.5 million annually in business taxes. Landing the factory was hailed as a coup when shovels first hit the ground.

“You are leading the way in showing how manufacturing jobs are coming right back here to the United States of America,” Obama told workers at the ground-breaking ceremony. “Our goal has never been to create a government program, but rather to unleash private-sector growth. And we're seeing results.”


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/10/08/lg-plant-that-got-150m-to-make-volt-batteries-in-michigan-puts-workers-on/



Free market and free country.

Every one of Bain capital deals under Romney created jobs as well....right only in your stupid bubble.

This is low life BS.

[The Lone Bolt]

Sorry, but you can't just flat compare the average electric vehicle to the average gasoline-powered vehicle. How does that study account for passenger/cargo capacity? Doesn't look like it does.

Sure a glorified golf cart may emit less than the old family SUV or minivan. But if you have to drive three of them to fit everything you need, it more than defeats the purpose. Not even getting into the environmental costs of all that battery and vehicle manufacturing.

When you start to look at similar vehicle types, the picture changes somewhat.

http://editorial.autos.msn.com/blogs/autosblogpost.aspx?post=267da915-ae85-409c-85ee-58c894b22e27

Jeez your link supports my argument and not yours.

The good news is that electric vehicles do minimize emissions in most of the country. On the coasts, where grid energy is cleanest, charging an electric vehicle produces emissions equivalent to a gasoline-burning vehicle that gets as much as 50 miles per gallon. In Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Florida and parts of the South and Midwest, that number drops to 41 to 50 miles per gallon -- similar to what hybrids achieve. In most of the Midwest, the average is 31 to 40 miles per gallon.

That editorial only points out that in only the most extremely coal-reliant areas of the country will an EV produce emissions equivalent to a 33 MPG ICE car.

I also wonder if the study cited takes into account the emissions produced to explore for oil, drill for and extract oil, transport oil to refineries, convert it to gasoline, and then transport the gasoline to gas stations. At the very least the last two steps should be counted towards the emissions of ICE cars if you are counting emissions produced by coal plants for EVs.

Edit: I found the report and they do take that into account.

[The Lone Bolt]

So the link you provided cites a study by the Union of Concerned Scientists. I visited their website. Here's some more reading from them:

State of Charge: Electric Vehicles’ Global Warming Emissions and Fuel-Cost Savings Across the United States
Electric cars produce lower global warming emissions and cost significantly less to fuel than the average compact gasoline-powered vehicle.

Download: State of Charge--Executive Summary | State of Charge--Full Report | State of Charge--Technical Appendix
UPDATE June 2012: Report and infographic updated with new 2009 power plant data.

Electric Vehicles and Global Warming Emissions
Electric vehicles (EVs) burn no gasoline and have no tailpipe emissions, but producing the electricity used to charge them does generate global warming emissions. The amount of these emissions, however, varies significantly based on the mix of energy sources used to power a region's electricity grid.

For example, coal-fired power plants produce nearly twice the global warming emissions of natural gas-fired power plants, while renewable sources like wind and solar power produce virtually no emissions at all.

The UCS report, State of Charge: Electric Vehicles' Global Warming Emissions and Fuel-Cost Savings Across the United States, compares the global warming emissions from EVs with those from gasoline-powered vehicles and finds that:

Nationwide, EVs charged from the electricity grid produce lower global warming emissions than the average compact gasoline-powered vehicle (with a fuel economy of 27 miles per gallon)—even when the electricity is produced primarily from coal in regions with the “dirtiest” electricity grids.

In regions with the “cleanest” electricity grids, EVs produce lower global warming emissions than even the most fuel-efficient hybrids.

EVs charged entirely from renewable sources like wind and solar power produce virtually no global warming emissions.

Charging Up: How Clean is Your Electricity Grid?

The report evaluates regional electricity grids across the United States based on the global warming emissions produced from electricity generation, and then compares the emissions generated by charging an EV with those produced by gasoline-powered vehicles.

The report finds that:

Nearly half of Americans (45%) live in the “best” regions where EVs produce lower global warming emissions than even the most fuel-efficient gasoline hybrids on the market today (greater than 50 mpg).

Another third (38%) live in “better” areas where EVs produce emissions comparable to the best gasoline hybrid vehicles (41 – 50 mpg).

A minority (17%) reside in “good” regions where emissions from EVs are comparable to the most fuel-efficient non-hybrid gasoline vehicles (31 – 40 mpg).

http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/smart-transportation-solutions/advanced-vehicle-technologies/electric-cars/emissions-and-charging-costs-electric-cars.html

[BroncoBeavis]

So the link you provided cites a study by the Union of Concerned Scientists. I visited their website. Here's some more reading from them:



http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/smart-transportation-solutions/advanced-vehicle-technologies/electric-cars/emissions-and-charging-costs-electric-cars.html

Nationwide, EVs charged from the electricity grid produce lower global warming emissions than the average compact gasoline-powered vehicle (with a fuel economy of 27 miles per gallon)—even when the electricity is produced primarily from coal in regions with the “dirtiest” electricity grids.

Neat comparison. Again, same game here. You're comparing a $50,000 compact electric with a compact gas-powered car that only gets 27 mpg?

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/02/25/2012-ford-focus-officially-certified-at-40-mpg-highway/

1999 called. It would like it's fuel mileage standards back.

Some more reading.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/electric-cars-may-not-be-so-green-after-all-says-british-study/story-e6frg8y6-1226073103576

Turns out churning out and stuffing a bunch of cars full of cells and cells loaded with heavy metals isn't quite so eco-friendly as it sounds. :)

[Pony Boy]

Update

Factory has yet to ship out a single battery
"It's really sad that all these people are sitting there and doing nothing, and it's basically on taxpayer money."

HOLLAND, Mich. (WOOD) - Workers at LG Chem, a $300 million lithium-ion battery plant heavily funded by taxpayers, tell Target 8 that they have so little work to do that they spend hours playing cards and board games, reading magazines or watching movies. They say it's been going on for months.

"There would be up to 40 of us that would just sit in there during the day," said former LG Chem employee Nicole Merryman, who said she quit in May.

"We were given assignments to go outside and clean; if we weren't cleaning outside, we were cleaning inside. If there was nothing for us to do, we would study in the cafeteria, or we would sit and play cards, sit and read magazines," said Merryman

http://www.woodtv.com/dpp/news/target_8/Volt-no-jolt-LG-Chem-employees-idle

[lonestar]

I have a 1997 Honda civic in the driveway that gets 37 MPG the last time I checked around town. Why the technology has not improved since then is beyond me.

Why would I get a hybrid spend 30K plus to get a car that gets me 10 MPG more. Not to mention the thousands of dollars in maintenance when it is time to replace said batteries and add disposal of same to the ecology.

Sorry folks but electric is IMO not the way to go.

[The Lone Bolt]

I have a 1997 Honda civic in the driveway that gets 37 MPG the last time I checked around town. Why the technology has not improved since then is beyond me.

Why would I get a hybrid spend 30K plus to get a car that gets me 10 MPG more. Not to mention the thousands of dollars in maintenance when it is time to replace said batteries and add disposal of same to the ecology.

Sorry folks but electric is IMO not the way to go.

EVs are the future. ICE technology is a dinosaur headed for the tar pit.

Battery technology is rapidly improving. Batteries are becoming cheaper, lighter, smaller, more energy-dense, and more robust. Rapid charging and battery swapping are becoming available.

By 2030 EVs will be cheaper, far more reliable, safer, and better performing than their ICE counterparts. By then consumers will view ICE cars as noisy, unreliable, under performing, polluting, expensive pieces of junk.

[lonestar]

EVs are the future. ICE technology is a dinosaur headed for the tar pit.

Battery technology is rapidly improving. Batteries are becoming cheaper, lighter, smaller, more energy-dense, and more robust. Rapid charging and battery swapping are becoming available.

By 2030 EVs will be cheaper, far more reliable, safer, and better performing than their ICE counterparts. By then consumers will view ICE cars as noisy, unreliable, under performing, polluting, expensive pieces of junk.

OK but until then I'm going to drive my honda till it stops..

NO sense in spending BIG money on a car that will marginally replace it..

you greenies just do not get it..

[barryr]

Update

Factory has yet to ship out a single battery
"It's really sad that all these people are sitting there and doing nothing, and it's basically on taxpayer money."

HOLLAND, Mich. (WOOD) - Workers at LG Chem, a $300 million lithium-ion battery plant heavily funded by taxpayers, tell Target 8 that they have so little work to do that they spend hours playing cards and board games, reading magazines or watching movies. They say it's been going on for months.

"There would be up to 40 of us that would just sit in there during the day," said former LG Chem employee Nicole Merryman, who said she quit in May.

"We were given assignments to go outside and clean; if we weren't cleaning outside, we were cleaning inside. If there was nothing for us to do, we would study in the cafeteria, or we would sit and play cards, sit and read magazines," said Merryman

http://www.woodtv.com/dpp/news/target_8/Volt-no-jolt-LG-Chem-employees-idle

This kind of crap is considered "progress" by the liberal fools. And they want the government to spend more on more of this and make sure they are unionized of course.

[lonestar]

This kind of crap is considered "progress" by the liberal fools. And they want the government to spend more on more of this and make sure they are unionized of course.

I guess those are some of the jobs Nobama has created.

Wonder if they get overtime if a card games goes long.

The lengths the moron in chief will go to to stay in office.

Just a small part of the overall picture.

[barryr]

I guess those are some of the jobs Nobama has created.

Wonder if they get overtime if a card games goes long.

The lengths the moron in chief will go to to stay in office.

Just a small part of the overall picture.

This and more "shovel ready" jobs he later had to admit don't even exist, but threw millions at these imaginary jobs anyway and where the money went and who is accounting for it is anyone'e guess.

[The Lone Bolt]

More evidence that EVs are the future:

Better Battery-Control Software Could Double Charging Speed: Research

New battery charge estimation algorithms developed by engineers at the University of California (UC), San Diego, are on the verge of vastly improve the capabilities of current lithium-ion batteries.

The changes center around improving charging times, potentially allowing for batteries that charge twice as fast as those currently available.

------------------

Essentially, the new methods improve virtually every aspect of modern batteries.

They'll be cheaper, for a start--as much as 25 percent less than current batteries. They'll charge quicker, the battery's size can be reduced, and they can be used with more powerful electric motors. And because the state of the battery is more closely monitored, none of the efficiency improvements come at the expense of safety.

Ultimately, that would mean quicker, cheaper, faster-charging electric cars, using technology little different to the batteries already used.

It's only one of many other battery technologies currently in development, but the bottom line is that electric cars are only set to get better.

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1079666_better-battery-control-software-could-double-charging-speed-research

[lonestar]

More evidence that EVs are the future:



http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1079666_better-battery-control-software-could-double-charging-speed-research

Thanks for sharing but it is not NOW.. if you want to tout the future start your own thread..

get back to topic about the existing folks sitting around doing nothing after getting $150,000,000.00 in tax dollars to start this plant that has not produced a DAMNED thing..

be as green weenie in your own thread as you want....

[lonestar]

This and more "shovel ready" jobs he later had to admit don't even exist, but threw millions at these imaginary jobs anyway and where the money went and who is accounting for it is anyone'e guess.

just like the lone bolt wants to talk about the future this is wasted money TODAY.. wonder if this plant will be able to produce the "future" products when they even become viable.. Or if they will need to rebuild it to make the new stuff..

they were supposed to build a battery for the volt.. which is not selling and costing near $50,000.oo per unit to build..

I know that NObama is propping it up by buying the and sending them to Europe for embassy no bodies to drive.. because they had to divert $105,000.00 for a charging station in IIRC Belgium.. from there budget that was hard pressed enough to cut back on security for embassies..

just noticed this little blurb..

Is The Volt In Danger Of Becoming The Next Edsel?
Is the house of cards falling around the Chevrolet Volt? If you remember when GM was restructuring just a few years back, they described the Volt as a Must Have Item to be competitive.
An all electric wonder machine no less.

As the Volt came to reality one of the first big shockers we ran into (pun intended) was the addition of a gasoline motor to help the Volt along if battery power ran low. While there was an initial outcry at first, it soon died down as this was seen as a last resort assist from the pure EV experience. That was until we found out the Volt has the average range of a golf cart. That "assist" motor obviously would be used far more often than we were originally led to believe. But the hardcore fan said "hey we were still saving on the cost of fuel right?", so it all works out in the quest of leading edge technology.

That kept many of the skeptics quiet until the reality of sticker shock set in. There was simply no way to recoup any of the investment in fuel savings. If you wanted the keep the green in your wallet you had to lease and let the taxpayer foot the bill. Being "green" was going to cost both you and you neighbors

So now we look at the facts. While the Volt is selling better, than it used to, it can in no way be classified as a volume seller and recent reports indicate that this"must have" for GM is costing almost $50K per unit "sold". Do you really want such a money loser in the lineup? How long will the burden continue. Will sales ever increase? Has the Volt become the Edsel for this generation?


http://www.autospies.com/news/Is-The-Volt-In-Danger-Of-Becoming-The-Next-Edsel-73014/

let me add..

Mon Sep 10, 2012 1:14pm EDT

(Reuters) - General Motors Co sold a record number of Chevrolet Volt sedans in August — but that probably isn't a good thing for the automaker's bottom line.

Nearly two years after the introduction of the path-breaking plug-in hybrid, GM is still losing as much as $49,000 on each Volt it builds, according to estimates provided to Reuters by industry analysts and manufacturing experts. GM on Monday issued a statement disputing the estimates.

Cheap Volt lease offers meant to drive more customers to Chevy showrooms this summer may have pushed that loss even higher. There are some Americans paying just $5,050 to drive around for two years in a vehicle that cost as much as $89,000 to produce.

And while the loss per vehicle will shrink as more are built and sold, GM is still years away from making money on the Volt, which will soon face new competitors from Ford, Honda and others.

GM's basic problem is that "the Volt is over-engineered and over-priced," said Dennis Virag, president of the Michigan-based Automotive Consulting Group.

And in a sign that there may be a wider market problem, Nissan, Honda and Mitsubishi have been struggling to sell their electric and hybrid vehicles,

GM's quandary is how to increase sales volume so that it can spread its estimated $1.2-billion investment in the Volt over more vehicles while reducing manufacturing and component costs - which will be difficult to bring down until sales increase.

But the Volt's steep $39,995 base price and its complex technology — the car uses expensive lithium-polymer batteries, sophisticated electronics and an electric motor combined with a gasoline engine — have kept many prospective buyers away from Chevy showrooms.

Some are put off by the technical challenges of ownership, mainly related to charging the battery. Plug-in hybrids such as the Volt still take hours to fully charge the batteries - a process that can be speeded up a bit with the installation of a $2,000 commercial-grade charger in the garage.

PLANT SHUTDOWN

The lack of interest in the car has prevented GM from coming close to its early, optimistic sales projections. Discounted leases as low as $199 a month helped propel Volt sales in August to 2,831, pushing year-to-date sales to 13,500, well below the 40,000 cars that GM originally had hoped to sell in 2012.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/10/us-generalmotors-autos-volt-idUSBRE88904J20120910

[The Lone Bolt]

Thanks for sharing but it is not NOW.. if you want to tout the future start your own thread..

get back to topic about the existing folks sitting around doing nothing after getting $150,000,000.00 in tax dollars to start this plant that has not produced a DAMNED thing..

be as green weenie in your own thread as you want....

It's relevant to you righties who claim that investments in EV research and tax credits for EVs are a big waste of taxpayer money. This is not the government picking winners and losers. This is the government investing in a promising tehcnonlogy that can end our dependence on foreign oil and clean up our environment.

As for those few green DOE investments that have not panned out, no investment portfolio has a 100% percent success rate. But you focus on the few failures while ignoring that the overall portfolio is doing very well.

[lonestar]

It's relevant to you righties who claim that investments in EV research and tax credits for EVs are a big waste of taxpayer money. This is not the government picking winners and losers. This is the government investing in a promising tehcnonlogy that can end our dependence on foreign oil and clean up our environment.

As for those few green DOE investments that have not panned out, no investment portfolio has a 100% percent success rate. But you focus on the few failures while ignoring that the overall portfolio is doing very well.

I do not care.. about what you believe this thread is about

No Volt Batteries from a Plant that got $150 million tax dollars..

want to talk about the future start a thread I'm sure you will have loads of nerds follow you there.. and y'all can have a nerd circle jerk..

Do I think we need to get more green? Hell yes just not with TAX dollars..

Let business invest their money while giving them some tax incentives..

that means to the far left IF they come out with a product that does make us more green they do not have to pay the full tax rate on them. they can make more PROFIT on those products.. it is win win for everyone..

YOU get green products and I do not have to pay for them..


ON a side note..
I drove by a home in So Cal last year it was on a hilltop, all the way up the hill were vineyards no road to the top that I could see.. but it had a heli-pad.

the guy that owned it all invented those foam rubber ear plugs most commonly seen at airports used by the ground crews..

his invention did not cost me a DIME yet, I get pay back because he is paying taxes on his wealth.. Thus keeping my taxes lower..

California makes money of the things he buys with his wealth in sales taxes.. the stores he buys at make money off the purchases he makes, there by employing more people who also pay taxes.

All of which do not cost me a DIME..

You want to invest in these green weenie companies be my guest just do not spend my tax dollars on it until we are out of debt..

BTW lots of those companies that got US dollars to start up green weenie companies were huge Nobama contributors so let be honest about the government picking and choosing winner or losers.. the only ones we are hearing about are Nobamas losers..

Had any of them been big winners well he would be touting left and farther LEFT..

[The Lone Bolt]

So I see you've trotted out the latest right wing horsesh-t on the Volt. Allow me to correct your misconceptions:

The Volt is selling very well -- over 16,000 units this year, far surpassing last year's total.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505145_162-57527745/chevy-volt-sales-race-ahead-of-nissan-leaf/

Not as well as their most optimistic projections but Volt sales are climbing.

And that crock about the Volt costing $89,000/unit to produce? They are counting the development costs toward the number of units produced so far, not for the total planned production for the Volt (and all of the other cars that will use technology developed for the Volt). That's like saying that an investor is losing 1 million per tennant on a highrise that cost $100,000,000 to build by counting only the first year's rent collected.

[The Lone Bolt]

I do not care.. about what you believe this thread is about

No Volt Batteries from a Plant that got $150 million tax dollars..

want to talk about the future start a thread I'm sure you will have loads of nerds follow you there.. and y'all can have a nerd circle jerk..

Do I think we need to get more green? Hell yes just not with TAX dollars..

Let business invest their money while giving them some tax incentives..

that means to the far left IF they come out with a product that does make us more green they do not have to pay the full tax rate on them. they can make more PROFIT on those products.. it is win win for everyone..

YOU get green products and I do not have to pay for them..

I drove by a home in So Cal last year it was on a hilltop, all the way up the hill were vineyards no road to the top that I could see.. but it had a heli-pad.

the guy that owned it all invented those foam rubber ear plugs most commonly seen at airports used by the ground crews..

his invention did not cost me a DIME yet, I get pay back because he is paying taxes on his wealth.. Thus keeping my taxes lower..

California makes money of the things he buys with his wealth in sales taxes.. the stores he buys at make money off the purchases he makes, there by employing more people who also pay taxes.

All of which do not cost me a DIME..

You want to invest in these green weenie companies be my guest just do not spend my tax dollars on it until we are out of debt..

BTW lots of those companies that got US dollars to start up green weenie companies were huge Nobama contributors so let be honest about the government picking and choosing winner or losers.. the only ones we are hearing about are Nobamas losers..

Had any of them been big winners well he would be touting left and farther LEFT..

I don't give a flying f-ck about rubber earplugs. Rubber earplugs don't get us off foriegn oil. Rubber earplugs don't clean up the environment.

Taxpayer money is appropriately spent in the public interest. It's in the public interest to accelerate the development of green technologies -- even if a few of these investments don't pan out.

Yes the government should be cautious. But a handful of failures doesn't prove taxpayer money is wasted on these investments overall.

[lonestar]

I don't give a flying f-ck about rubber earplugs. Rubber earplugs don't get us off foriegn oil. Rubber earplugs don't clean up the environment.

Taxpayer money is appropriately spent in the public interest. It's in the public interest to accelerate the development of green technologies -- even if a few of these investments don't pan out.

Yes the government should be cautious. But a handful of failures doesn't prove taxpayer money is wasted on these investments overall.

see you completely missed the point..

A guy that had an idea as simple as ear plugs is now a multimillionaire.


just because NObama is throwing billions at green weenie stuff does not make it happen any faster..

those companies have Zero incentive.. other than to spend the money they were given they have nothing invested in it themselves..

they are not out of pocket. have not lost their savings on an Idea..

the ear plug guy did and was rewarded..

you ****ing liberal green weenies just do not get it.

it is not big government that drives a good business man..

Even during the space race where trillions were invested.. most of the great ideas that came out of it were made from private enterprise..

Transistors, Velcro.. some of the by products of Kennedy telling us we would put a man on the moon..

He inspired us Nobama is giving money away and so far looks like most was wasted..

[lonestar]

So I see you've trotted out the latest right wing horsesh-t on the Volt. Allow me to correct your misconceptions:

The Volt is selling very well -- over 16,000 units this year, far surpassing last year's total.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505145_162-57527745/chevy-volt-sales-race-ahead-of-nissan-leaf/

Not as well as their most optimistic projections but Volt sales are climbing.

And that crock about the Volt costing $89,000/unit to produce? They are counting the development costs toward the number of units produced so far, not for the total planned production for the Volt (and all of the other cars that will use technology developed for the Volt). That's like saying that an investor is losing 1 million per tennant on a highrise that cost $100,000,000 to build by counting only the first year's rent collected.


Reuters is hardly a right wing source.. it is one of the most respected news sources in the rest of the world if anything tends to lean left IMO.. But hardly a CBS,NBC,ABC, CNN left....

in the real world that is how they measure the true cost of building things.. not in your left wing fantasy land..

so far they had sold 13,500 through sep IIRC and much of those sales were at a very low interest rate for that month prior to that it really sucked donkey balls.. and the promise of a $7,500 government rebate..

Believe in your own little fantasy world about how great NObama has been for the green weenie world and dream little life is good dreams tonight..

[The Lone Bolt]

see you completely missed the point..

A guy that had an idea as simple as ear plugs is now a multimillionaire.


just because NObama is throwing billions at green weenie stuff does not make it happen any faster..

Yes it does.

those companies have Zero incentive.. other than to spend the money they were given they have nothing invested in it themselves..

they are not out of pocket. have not lost their savings on an Idea..

All startups need investors to begin production. Doesn't matter if it's from the government or the private sector. And those startups are motivated to make a profit no matter who has provided the initial investment.

The Obama administration just stepped in to help out companies developing technologies that also serve the public interest.

the ear plug guy did and was rewarded..

you ****ing liberal green weenies just do not get it.

it is not big government that drives a good business man..

Even during the space race where trillions were invested.. most of the great ideas that came out of it were made from private enterprise..

Transistors, Velcro.. some of the by products of Kennedy telling us we would put a man on the moon..

He inspired us Nobama is giving money away and so far looks like most was wasted..

It looks that way to you because you are blindly buying into right-wing propaganda bullsh-t.

Here, allow me to educate you:

Here are 10 findings from Bloomberg’s report on the DOE’s loan guarantee program you should know:

1. Clean power generating projects. Bloomberg found 87 percent of the DOE’s loan guarantees were for power generation projects and the likelihood of default is much lower for those projects because they already have committed buyers (e.g., PG&E for the BrightSource solar thermal plant). Manufacturing, fuel production and storage projects made up the other higher-risk 13 percent.

2. An insurance fund covers the losses (and then some). The DOE allocated $2.47 billion in credit subsidies to act as insurance to cover project losses, and the fund more than covers both Solyndra and Beacon losses (and Beacon is selling its plant to pay back the loan). Bloomberg found that even if all of the eight remaining high-risk manufacturing and fuel production projects default, the insurance fund would cover all of them. In addition, the DOE actually budgeted for a failure of 15 percent of the total value of the loan guarantees, which is pretty high for a federal program, and in comparison, Bloomberg notes that commercial banking projects set aside 2.8 percent of the value of loans.

3. Cutting the program won’t help the budget. The report found “ending DOE’s loan-guarantee authority would have no budgetary impact and may jeopardize the remaining projects under review.” That’s because the commitments from the program aren’t included in the federal budget, which only encompasses direct expenditures. Though the report notes that defaults on the guaranteed loans can be costly.

4. The default numbers to date. So far, two of the 28 projects from the 1705 loan guarantee program have defaulted: Solyndra for $535 million and Beacon Power for $43 million. The Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing program has five loans that equal $8.4 billion and one outstanding conditional commitment. The 1703 loan guarantee program has four projects in the conditional commitment stage for $10.6 billion.

5. U.S. government loan guarantees aren’t new. Bloomberg notes that U.S. federal loan guarantees were first used during the Great Depression to help families buy homes. History lesson!

6. The DOE’s loan guarantees are a small piece of the pie. The U.S. government has $947 billion worth of loan guarantees across various sectors of the government like Agriculture and Treasury. The DOE’s 1705 loan guarantee program is only 1.7 percent of the government’s total loan-guarantee commitments, and the other loan guarantee commitments include high risk programs like the Treasury’s Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), mortgage-backed securities and individual home mortgages by three agencies (Agriculture, Housing and Urban Development, and Veterans Affairs).

7. Solar dominates DOE loan guarantee program. For the 1705 program, which has 28 guarantees, the DOE issued 16 to solar companies.

8. Other solar manufacturers with DOE loan guarantees face the same risks as Solyndra. Abound Solar, which received a $400 million loan guarantee; SoloPower, which received a $197 million loan guarantee; and 1366 Technologies, which received a $150 million loan guarantee, are subject to the same market conditions and risks that led to the bankruptcy of Solyndra.

9. Ways to de-risk future loan guarantees. Bloomberg says one way to lower the risks for future DOE loan guarantees is to make sure they all have “off-take agreements”: essentially, the project has a secured buyer. The power-generating projects (like a large solar thermal farm) already have this, and that makes them lower risk. But Bloomberg says perhaps manufacturing loan guarantees should have this component too, and should include agreements like having federal, state and local buildings agree to buy the solar panels created with the loan guarantee.

10. Solyndra was three percent of the DOE portfolio. This number has been bandied about before, but worth mentioning again. Solyndra represented three percent of the DOE’s entire loan guarantee portfolio.

http://gigaom.com/cleantech/10-things-you-should-know-about-the-doe-loan-guarantee-program/

[lonestar]

Let me add from YOU source..

Car shoppers continue to prefer the Chevrolet Volt with its back-up gasoline engine to the all-electric Nissan Leaf, Raising questions about how big the U.S. market for pure electric cars can be.

considering that the volts batteries get you about 50 miles total..and it requires a gas engine to go farther..

if you will note that last line in that quote..

NO-BODY but you green weenies care..


Despite their lock on the EV market, the Leaf and Volt are failing to meet Nissan and General Motors' respective sales goals. GM had once hoped to sell 45,000 Volts in 2012, a number the car is not close to reaching despite being the number-one selling plug-in in America. Nissan, meanwhile, is also not on track to sell the 20,000 Leafs it had hoped for this fiscal year.

But they're not growing at a rate that corresponds to the rate of product introductions."

That means before plug-in car sales take off the price of gasoline will have to rise sharply or the cost of electric car batteries -- the costliest component of the car -- will have to fall, said Libby. So far, it's not clear when, or if, either will happen.
http://money.cnn.com/2012/10/19/autos/electric-car/?source=cnn_bin

even the Clinton News Network CNN sees it as a failure..


President Obama has put $5,000,000,000.00 (billion) in taxpayer money behind his goal of having 1 million electric cars on U.S. roads by 2015.

Whether the technology itself is a loser or consumers are merely slow to adapt to new things, car buyers so far haven't embraced electric vehicles in numbers close to Obama's goal. Electric-vehicle sales since 2011 totaled fewer than 50,000 through September, just 5 percent of the president's target.

Obama's $5 billion investment in electric cars includes loans and grants to car and battery producers, spending on charging stations and $7,500 tax credits to car buyers. Recipients of loans and grants include Nissan Motor Co., which got a $1.4 billion loan to build the Leaf and its battery pack in the United States; Fisker Automotive,



Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Electric-car-sales-falling-short-of-goal-3954153.php#ixzz29sN5bOgT


GM’s addition of a discounted lease for the Volt, currently $299 a month for a car with a $39,145 base price, is boosting demand for the model, Jesse Toprak, an analyst at TrueCar.com, a vehicle pricing and data provider, said yesterday.

President Barack Obama’s administration, which targeted a market of 1 million such vehicles by 2015.

Buyers in markets such as California can now lease a Leaf SV hatchback for $199 a month for 36 months,




http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-10-02/gm-volt-toyota-plug-in-prius-buoy-u-dot-s-dot-rechargeable-car-sales

the only reason these cars are being leased not even sold are because of incentives they have to have to do so..

Which means in2 or 3 years all of these unit will come on the market FURTHER DILUTING the sales base for them.

The demand is NOT there..

[The Lone Bolt]

Reuters is hardly a right wing source.. it is one of the most respected news sources in the rest of the world if anything tends to lean left IMO.. But hardly a CBS,NBC,ABC, CNN left....

in the real world that is how they measure the true cost of building things.. not in your left wing fantasy land..

In the real world that is NOT how they measure the true cost of building things. In the real world the cost of developmment is spread out over the total planned production. Your ignorance is astounding.

so far they had sold 13,500 through sep IIRC and much of those sales were at a very low interest rate for that month prior to that it really sucked donkey balls.. and the promise of a $7,500 government rebate..

Believe in your own little fantasy world about how great NObama has been for the green weenie world and dream little life is good dreams tonight..

Yeah yeah yeah. And when Volt sales continue to rise I wonder what your new excuse will be... ::)

[lonestar]

Yes it does.



All startups need investors to begin production. Doesn't matter if it's from the government or the private sector. And those startups are motivated to make a profit no matter who has provided the initial investment.

The Obama administration just stepped in to help out companies developing technologies that also serve the public interest.



It looks that way to you because you are blindly buying into right-wing propaganda bullsh-t.

Here, allow me to educate you:



http://gigaom.com/cleantech/10-things-you-should-know-about-the-doe-loan-guarantee-program/

Not all start up companies require BILLIONS to get going..

as far as buying into the ear plug guy.. Yes I am a capitalist.. I believe in free enterprise..

not free handouts.

SO far I see in this thread alone with the volt battery maker

$150,000,000.00 LOST

[The Lone Bolt]

considering that the volts batteries get you about 50 miles total..and it requires a gas engine to go farther..

if you will note that last line in that quote..

NO-BODY but you green weenies care..

SMDH. :notthissh

The Volt is designed to go only 40 miles all-electric because according to Dept of Transportation statistics 40 miles will cover 70% of all driver's daily transportation needs. And indeed Volt statistics back this up. The latest is that 60% of Volt owner's driving is all-electric. That has already saved over a supertanker of gas.

http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/news.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2012/May/0517_volt.html

The gas engine is to eliminate "range anxiety", so Volt owners can drive long distances when they need to.


even the Clinton News Network CNN sees it as a failure..

That's your spin. They are citing the highest projection, not what GM expected to sell.


the only reason these cars are being leased not even sold are because of incentives they have to have to do so..

Which means in2 or 3 years all of these unit will come on the market FURTHER DILUTING the sales base for them.

The demand is NOT there..

The demand is there or they wouldn't be leasing them. And by your standards Toyota should have given up on the Prius. They were slow sellers the first few produciton years. Now they are Toyota's best-selling models.

[The Lone Bolt]

Not all start up companies require BILLIONS to get going..

as far as buying into the ear plug guy.. Yes I am a capitalist.. I believe in free enterprise..

not free handouts.

SO far I see in this thread alone with the volt battery maker

$150,000,000.00 LOST

Jeez tone it down.

We have yet to see how this plays out. They may go back into production. The government may be able to recover losses if they don't. We don't know what amount, if any, has been "lost."

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

So I see you've trotted out the latest right wing horsesh-t on the Volt .

You should know by now that lonestar trafficks exclusively in right-wing horsesh*t no matter what the topic of discussion.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Yes I am a capitalist.. I believe in free enterprise..



:bs:

You're a corporatist - not a capitalist.

Big difference.

Capitalism thrives on competition.

Corporatism thrives on monopolies and increasing concentration of power and wealth.

[lonestar]

SMDH. :notthissh

The Volt is designed to go only 40 miles all-electric because according to Dept of Transportation statistics 40 miles will cover 70% of all driver's daily transportation needs. And indeed Volt statistics back this up. The latest is that 60% of Volt owner's driving is all-electric. That has already saved over a supertanker of gas.

http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/news.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2012/May/0517_volt.html

The gas engine is to eliminate "range anxiety", so Volt owners can drive long distances when they need to.




That's your spin. They are citing the highest projection, not what GM expected to sell.




The demand is there or they wouldn't be leasing them. And by your standards Toyota should have given up on the Prius. They were slow sellers the first few produciton years. Now they are Toyota's best-selling models.

Gas engine is a gas engine is a gas engine..

DOT projections yea sure.. I believe them even less than I believe YOU they have vested interest in keeping NObama in power..

The demand is there because in 2-3 years they can walk away from it and they still get the $7,500.oo tax break..

as for the highest projections those were what GM hoped to sell each year..

one of the reasons this plant was built, but I guess when you can't sell the car they have no need for batteries..

Me thinks the green weenie has invaded your brain..

[The Lone Bolt]

Gas engine is a gas engine is a gas engine..

DOT projections yea sure.. I believe them even less than I believe YOU they have vested interest in keeping NObama in power..

The demand is there because in 2-3 years they can walk away from it and they still get the $7,500.oo tax break..

as for the highest projections those were what GM hoped to sell each year..

one of the reasons this plant was built, but I guess when you can't sell the car they have no need for batteries..

Me thinks the green weenie has invaded your brain..

Actually I'm more concerned about ending dependence on foreign oil.

And the dealerships get the tax break. They're the ones who buy the cars.

Regardless of whether or not you believe the DOT, the fact remains that Volt owners drive all-electric 60% of the time.

[The Lone Bolt]

Update from LG Chem:

LG Chem Michigan provided a statement to the Business Journal today but would not answer any questions. The statement is in response to broadcast reports about the lack of production at the plant.

“Taxpayer money has not been wasted, because when the market demand justifies production, the facility will be utilized. More than 1,000 construction jobs were involved in building the facility, and 200 company jobs have been created, adding a solid boost to the local economy. LG Chem has the strongest motivation to operate the plant, because it has invested more than 50 percent, over $150 million, of the cost to construct the facility, so it will utilize the plant when the time is right,” according to the statement.

Almost 200 employees are working the “rolling furloughs,” which is 75 percent of their normal work schedule, and they are still reporting to the plant for their scheduled hours even though the plant is not in operation, according to the company.

The LG Chem statement said employees are still reporting to work at the plant, because “LG Chem feels a duty to take care of the people and to keep them on the team, so they can be ready for production. The company will not use (Department of Energy) grant money to pay for any idle time. It will review prior billings, and if any has been used, then that money will be refunded to the DOE.”

The employees are engaged in maintenance and cleaning of production equipment and the plant “and in process documentation efforts to ensure they supply an excellent product to their customer.” The high-tech clean room at the plant requires almost constant cleaning “to maintain proper conditions.”

http://www.grbj.com/articles/74668-production-delayed-indefinitely-at-lg-chems-holland-plant

[DAN_BRONCO_FAN]

Rather than invest in companies, I'd like to see government money go into pure research. Find an alternative power source for cars. One that doesn't pollute. Replace our coal powered stations with natural gas while we research alternative energies. Then, when we find something promising, let companies use it in the ways they see as best.

how about instead of government paying let private enterprises invent and find alternatives to fuel oil gas what have you .it seemed to work for ford edison eli whitney i dont think the gov paid them to invent did they

[DAN_BRONCO_FAN]

also no to goverment paying companies to make electric or gas powered or lover powered crap powered cars let private enterprises do it .just dont go taxing them til they are poor