Source: CNN, fair use, low resolution image to identify the subject.

Ford CEO: Granting Wage Rises Could Prevent The Transition to EVs

Essay by Eric Worrall

h/t Breitbart; Imagine being told that you can’t have the cost of living increase you demanded, same percentage increase executives granted themselves, because Auto companies need the money to fund the EV transition.

… While discussing the pay raises demanded by the UAW in negotiations and pay raises for CEOs, Farley said that they have offered pay raises and are open to big pay increases, but the 40% that the UAW is asking for is too much and would put the company out of business, and “There’s a fine line here that we won’t go past, which is, we want everyone to participate in our success. But if it prevents us from investing in this transition to EVs and in future products like the ones we have now like a new F-150, the best-selling vehicle in the U.S., then everyone’s job’s at risk if we don’t invest. So, there’s a line. The line isn’t for us to go bankrupt. The line is somewhere in the middle, and the only way to resolve that is to actually negotiate.” …

Read more:

“I can’t afford any of the cars I’m helping to build” – one of the comments I saw online from an auto worker.

Latest news as of writing this article is United Autoworkers decided to strike. I’m guessing trying to persuade workers that supporting Biden’s EV transition is more important than them having enough money to pay their bills, a wage increase proportionally on par with the 40% increase management allegedly granted themselves, wasn’t quite the diplomatic coup Ford CEO Jim Farley hoped it would be.

5 19 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Joseph Zorzin
September 15, 2023 3:16 am

Filthy greed by the mgt. and the workers. Good, make the cars so expensive nobody will buy them. There are many other auto companies who will put Ford out of business.

As for those F-150 EVs, I wonder how well they’re selling? I had an F-150 back in the ’80s. Piece of junk.

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
September 15, 2023 3:33 am

Likely, automakers will seek government bailouts because EV mandates are uneconomical and unaffordable.

Bryan A
Reply to  Scissor
September 15, 2023 6:52 am

If granting the UAW a pay raise scuttles EVs, I’d say it’s well beyond time to Double their pay and save the world from a costly boondoggle that can’t replace the current global fleet of 2.2bn vehicles

Bryan A
Reply to  Bryan A
September 15, 2023 7:00 am

The Tesla has about 7104 batteries in its pack. Times 2.2bn gives you 15,628,800,000,000. If Trucks and Busses took as many as cars BUT they will take significantly more. Likely more than 30 Trillion batteries would need to be manufactured to replace the existing global transportation fleet

Reply to  Bryan A
September 15, 2023 7:08 am

And then repeated X years down the road when the originals have gone bad.

Erik Magnuson
Reply to  Bryan A
September 15, 2023 7:49 am

I believe you mean 7104 cells in its pack – the collection of 7104 cells is the battery.

Reply to  Erik Magnuson
September 15, 2023 8:56 am

The typical automotive battery has 6 cells.

Reply to  Bryan A
September 15, 2023 7:59 pm

THe problem is that granting a pay rise will make all cars more expensive, not just EVs.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Bryan A
September 17, 2023 3:31 pm

Yup, time to put a stop to the madness!

Reply to  Scissor
September 15, 2023 10:14 am

Government bailouts = more ‘money’ printing = more inflation = more government bailouts = more ‘money printing = poverty forever. And when the rest of the world no longer wants the worthless paper it is game over.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Scissor
September 17, 2023 3:30 pm

Nobody wants the product. Even with taxpayer funded subsidies, 95% choose a gas or diesel powered vehicle.

The product (BEVs) sucks. “Transitioning” to BEVs is for the auto industry the equivalent of a duck “transitioning” to “a l’orange.” (H/t to Donald Sutherland)

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
September 15, 2023 6:55 am

Sales of the F150 are in the 50,000 per month range, with the F150 EV a small fraction of that at 1,500 per month.

I have a 2008 F150 XLT 4×4 that I bought used in 2015.

September 15, 2023 3:18 am

Don’t think it’s the wages so much as benefits….cadillac health care plan, old style pensions, etc. Plus they know EVs need a lot less people on the assembly line. Some probably realize the “renewable” insanity will also be a headwind. They can’t compete with China and Henry Ford’s worker and company can’t build an EV the average American can afford. Doomed within 10 to 15 years irregardless of this contract.

Michael S. Kelly
Reply to  missoulamike
September 15, 2023 6:05 pm

Ford would never provide its employees with a cadillac health care plan.

September 15, 2023 3:28 am

“Ford said its Model e business expects to report a full-year loss of $3 billion in 2023”

“Ford says its EV business will keep losing money until at least 2026.”

How on Earth can they afford to keep taking the hit?

“Ford agrees to $9.2 billion US government loan”
…as part of President Joe Biden’s push to bring more electric vehicle production to the United States.”

The feudal division between the elites and the working classes are equally starkly drawn over here in the UK. My favourite recent example is lucky old Alison Rose, the hansomely paid-off former CEO of Nat West bank. We know exactly what she and her ilk think of Farage, Brexit, the lower orders (us), and ‘populism’ (ie actually doing what we the people want).


Yes, I’ll have three…

But there is competition. The absolute cheapest EV is the Citroen Ami – a kind of toilet cubicle on wheels. That comes in at £7,695

If you insist on a two-seater, then the Smart EQ costs £21,870. Where you put any luggage is a mystery.

At the more normal end of the car market the humble e Fiat 500 will cost £28,195
And the petrol version? Only £14,498

The whole thing screams soviet command economy, the numbers back that up.

Reply to  strativarius
September 15, 2023 3:36 am


Tom Abbott
Reply to  strativarius
September 15, 2023 7:01 am

Biden is going to bankrupt everybody.

Randle Dewees
Reply to  strativarius
September 15, 2023 7:30 am

The Ami with a top speed of 28mph is not in any practical way, a car. Basically, it is an enclosed 2 seat golf cart.

Reply to  Randle Dewees
September 15, 2023 8:50 am

Or a toilet cubicle on wheels

Reply to  Randle Dewees
September 16, 2023 11:23 am

Sounds like the ideal city car where the top speed is not an issue – just hire a proper car when you need to. There is still the problem of charging it and the lack of materials to build them in large numbers.

Reply to  strativarius
September 15, 2023 8:59 am

I wonder how much that $3billion loss will increase if they give the workers the 40% increase they are demanding.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  MarkW
September 16, 2023 3:37 am

How much will the cost of a car increase if the workers get a 40 percent pay increase? The auto industry is about to price themselves out of business as it is.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  strativarius
September 17, 2023 4:18 pm

Every auto maker should be fighting tooth and nail against any BEV mandates and any unrealistic ICE model mileage “requirements.”

Any automaker NOT doing so should be inundated with shareholder actions.

Tom Johnson
September 15, 2023 4:19 am

I’m an auto engineer who has been living and still working in the Detroit area since 1966 (starting as a co-op student, not with Ford). For at least the past year, Farley has been on a local radio station in the mornings touting his (in my view irrational) plans to electrify all of his vehicles in time to meet the Biden timelines. Barra, from GM has been equally vocal about this. She has even reportedly told her executive staff that they must never voice comments that are not supportive of ‘the plan’. This would clearly sink both companies.

In the last couple of weeks, though, it’s like Farley has had a brain transplant. He actually stated on TV that Ford will continue with ICE vehicles indefinitely, particularly in its trucks. This is, clearly, a necessary and rational strategy. It’s just a new one. It’s likely important for dealing with today’s strike deadline. On radio, Farley comes across as confident and decisive. He seemed a bit more tentative on TV.

Reply to  Eric Worrall
September 15, 2023 5:17 am

Perhaps there will be a successful transition to manufacture pine boxes.

Reply to  Tom Johnson
September 15, 2023 4:28 am

“they must never voice comments that are not supportive of ‘the plan’.”

Or question the narrative in any way.

This is the post modern scientific method

Reply to  strativarius
September 15, 2023 9:03 am

Your employer can demand that if you want to keep your job, you have to support whatever management is saying. It is their right since their job, not yours.
Which is why scientists who are paid by the government (via grants) are required to toe the government line on climate change (among other things).

Dave Fair
Reply to  MarkW
September 15, 2023 12:30 pm

No, scientists sucking at the government tit are paid by the people. If they pander to the Leftist elites, venal politicians, activist academics, Deep State lurkers, crony capitalist profiteers & etc. they need to be cut loose; they are harming those that pay them.

Reply to  Dave Fair
September 15, 2023 8:01 pm

The people don’t decide which “scientists” get grants and which ones don’t.
The government does.

Reply to  Tom Johnson
September 15, 2023 1:25 pm

Hi Tom,

who decided to put the ‘pot’ metal inside thread manifold connection, to the heater hose, on the 90’s Yukons? The fitting that corroded away within 3 years. 🙂

(thanks for commenting, it’s always nice to hear from people with direct knowledge.)

September 15, 2023 4:33 am

Sometimes I wonder what companies pay their CEOs to actually do. This one seems to be getting the big bucks to follow the (Democrat) party line on EVs. I wonder how much he is getting from them. And by the way, wouldn’t that be in opposition to his employees/unions interests in politics? Bottom line to me is that he is not doing what may be best for his company and its shareholders in the long run.

Reply to  starzmom
September 15, 2023 5:27 am

Those are good questions. Furthermore, overwhelmingly, union dues support dems, as well as union bosses, but now dem policies are destroying union jobs.

The goose that lays the golden egg is being plucked from two directions. CEOs, union bosses and dem politicians will do fine in the short term, but the whole system will eventually collapse. What is to follow is another important question.

Gunga Din
Reply to  Scissor
September 15, 2023 9:46 am

I retired from a Government job in a “Fair Share” state. Until the Janus decision, I had to pay full dues to AFSCME even though I never joined. However, because of a lawsuit, every year the union had to send out a little booklet about their finances and where the dues were going. We could “object” to what was being spent on politics and that percentage was deducted from the full dues. The percentage crept up over the years. In the last booklet before Janus they admitted to spending 48% percent of union dues on politics.

(In the Janus decision SCOTUS ruled that a Government union could not collect any dues from nonmembers.)

Gunga Din
Reply to  Gunga Din
September 15, 2023 11:07 am

PS That lawsuit I mentioned? When I started, if you didn’t join you didn’t pay. The “Fair Share” came in later. But the lawsuit had to do with the manner in which it introduced. No one was advised about the “objection” option. AFSCME lost and had to refund what they’d taken and then began to send out the booklets.
We had a 30 day window to “object”.
(I missed it by 1 day one year. I called them but, no mercy. The only year my money supported candidates I wouldn’t vote for if they ran unopposed!)

George Daddis
Reply to  starzmom
September 15, 2023 6:42 am

I was in management (but not an executive) for a well known consumer company. Our raises were based on some pretty hard nosed personal accomplishments but the kicker was that the total sum for all management raises was dependent on the amount of profits the company made that year.
It was possible to get an above average share of a ZERO pot of raises.

How the heck do executives of a company bleeding losses get a 40% raise?

Dave Fair
Reply to  George Daddis
September 15, 2023 12:37 pm

Show a little skepticism, George. Where did this 40% executives pay raise come from? I didn’t see any statistics cited, just a union assertion.

September 15, 2023 5:09 am

Well, now, seeing as Ford just announced they are slashing the price of F 150 EV because of such poor sales, and adding to that people are returning F 150 EVs in unheard of numbers it is clear Ford is twirling round the toilet bowl because of EV mandates from Xiden Admin. Good job, stupid twats.

Reply to  2hotel9
September 15, 2023 5:33 am

EVs are killing the rental car market also. In some cases, car rental prices rival hotel daily rates but I suppose that is in keeping with dem policies to get people to sleep in their cars.

Reply to  Scissor
September 15, 2023 5:44 am

Sleeping in an EV would be a bad idea, you could easily wake up on fire.

It doesnot add up
September 15, 2023 5:25 am

Imagine being told you are being made redundant because EVs aren’t selling and make massive losses.

That seems to be the reality across most of the Western auto industry.

It doesnot add up
September 15, 2023 5:31 am
September 15, 2023 5:38 am

If the workers making $65 per hour can’t afford their product, then what about the families already forced out of the new car market and housing market? Will they be better off with battery fires, higher insurance bills, and UAW workers making $90 per hour and overtime all day on Fridays?

Reply to  ResourceGuy
September 15, 2023 5:46 am

Bidenomics dictates that instead of sustaining 3 times as many $90 per hour jobs, 1/3 as many $30 per hour jobs will be created.

Reply to  Scissor
September 15, 2023 6:53 am

Even the marxo-democrats have gone sour on Creepy Joe.

September 15, 2023 6:48 am

This from the rich person whose company is going to drop a cool $billion to fix a non-problem with a stupid over-priced non-solution that no one wants.

He should be sacked immediately if not sooner.

Tom Abbott
September 15, 2023 7:05 am

Donald Trump calls on auto workers union to make ending EV mandates priority in high-stakes negotiations

US auto industry ‘will cease to exist’ under electric vehicle mandates, Trump says

“”The best interests of American workers have always been my number one concern,” Trump said in his statement to More Perfect Union. “That is why I strongly urge the U.A.W. to make the complete and total repeal of Joe Biden’s insane Electric Vehicle mandate their top, non-negotiable demand in any strike.”

end except

Lee Riffee
September 15, 2023 7:25 am

The solution to Ford’s (and the other two US automakers) problems is staring them right in the face. These companies (and the unions) have a lot of clout, and can pay lots of lobbyists and lawyers (well, at least thus far). They could have told the US gov’t and pertinent alphabet agencies to FOAD with regards to forcing them to make vehicles that most can’t afford and don’t want to buy. In a nutshell they could have all got together (perhaps other automakers would have joined in as well) and sued the Dickens out of the EPA and the US gov’t.
It’s sad when someone (or something) has plenty of power to fight back hard, and yet they choose not to. The gov’t said to jump, and they asked “how high?”….. and now, they will eventually fall flat on their faces for choice.
It’s much easier to fight back early on, rather than in the end once you finally realize you have little left to lose. Kind of like the advice given to women and children who are being abducted. Fight back from the get-go, and don’t wait until the perp takes you off somewhere. As by then, it’s likely too late…..might also be too late for the big three as well. They are waiting to long to fight back, if they ever will fight. The more they commit to EVs, the harder it will be to recover and re-tool to make the ICE vehicles that people know and love….

general custer
September 15, 2023 7:38 am

I wonder if Biden has handicapped plates on his Corvette or is even allowed to drive it on the street. Of course with his rapidly failing mentality its obvious that he originates or understands no aspects of the insane transition to EVs. Others, a community of impractical dreamers with no scientific credentials, are in a position to create nightmares for the country. The cancellation of oil leases in Alaska and elsewhere is meant to raise the price of motor fuel to make the transition appear more rational. This affair is unprecedented in world history as an example of idiotic government policy.

Dave Fair
Reply to  general custer
September 15, 2023 12:52 pm

No, this has been repeated countless times in our history. We just never seem to learn from socialistic failures. The Soviet Union, Communist China, Eastern Europe, Venezuela, Cuba, Sir Lanka and any government project you want to examine.

September 15, 2023 8:44 am

Why such opposition to EV’s? No transmission, no oil changes, no spark plugs and serpentine belts. As someone who maintains my own vehicle, I welcome that. Once the battery technology is sufficient in terms of range and lifespan, I will buy one. For now, I will let early adopters buy them until all of the kinks are worked out. The same way $20,000 Plasma TV’s paved the way for 65″ TV’s for $500, electric vehicles in 10 years will be twice as nice for half the price.

As for the strike, the common theme we have among all of these strikes, whether it be Kellogg’s, John Deere, the rail workers, UPS, or the UAW, is that these workers already make a wage far in excess of what the average person makes. Many people would do those jobs for half the wages that these lazy union thugs are being paid. If they do not like their pay, find another job. Your pay is not determined by how profitable your company is, it is determined by your value and how easily you can be replaced. I hope the “Big Three” takes this opportunity to shed themselves of the UAW once and for all.

Reply to  timintexas1836
September 15, 2023 8:53 am

Why such opposition to EV’s

Why force them on people? Because you approve?

Reply to  strativarius
September 15, 2023 9:20 am

Who is forcing them? A few far-left states are enacting madates, but this does not force these companies to develop them. These 2030 and 2035 mandates will never be enforced and will inevitably be challenged and overturned in the Supreme Court. If private companies choose to invest R&D money into emerging technologies, the consumers ultimately win as the technology is improved?

I am a Capitalist, so I want the private sector to compete against one another to build better products, whether it be vehicles, TV’s, smartphones, or air fryeers. Right now, EV’s are not enticing to consumers, but as these companies invest into these alternatives over the next decade, groundbreaking discoveries will be made. Consumers ultimately decide what they want, and no amount of Government coercion or “tax incentives” are enough to alter the will of the people. What is the harm in letting it play out?

Dave Fair
Reply to  timintexas1836
September 15, 2023 12:58 pm

Do you not understand that the Federal government (not just Blue States) is writing laws and regulations that will destroy the ICE vehicle market? Unachievable mileage standards and tailpipe emissions limits will make ICE vehicles disappear. There will be no alternative to EVs even without EV mandates. Tell me that meets your demand for capitalism.

Reply to  Dave Fair
September 15, 2023 2:18 pm

The EPA is making “recommendations”, but these mandates will never go into effect because they will be challenged and overturned in the Supreme Court. I am against any intervention by the Federal Government into the private sector, whether that be minimum wage laws, CAFE standards, or even affirmative action policies.

The only way to challenge these policies is to actually challenge them. No matter what mandates come down the pike, automakers will ultimately make the vehicles that consumers want to buy. Right now, most people do not want EV’s because the technology is not there yet, but as the early adopters pay a premium price for them, the technology will improve, production will be scaled up, and prices will be affordable.

I do not think Ford is investing in this technology because of any Federal or State action, they are doing it because they see the success of companies like Tesla, and at least want to have a foot in the door. If your competitors are selling a product you do not have, you are a fool if you do not at least attempt to grab a piece of the market share.

Reply to  timintexas1836
September 15, 2023 8:21 pm

When has the Supreme Court ever overturned a EPA, CAFE standard?

Reply to  MarkW
September 16, 2023 5:09 am

When have CAFE standards been challenged at the Supreme Court? Four state AG’s have an ongoing case, but it hasn’t been settled. The Supreme Court struck down an EPA ruling last year on power plants. In this most recent session they put curbs on the Clean Water Act.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  timintexas1836
September 17, 2023 3:52 pm

The EV “tech” is never going to “be there.” Just how much electric generation and transmission and distribution line infrastructure do you think they’re going to build while trillions get wasted on worse-than-useless wind and solar generation that can’t even meet current demand?!

And what they’re doing to the grid will ensure they will basically be paperweights much of the time.

Reply to  timintexas1836
September 15, 2023 8:20 pm

The government is taxing all of us to subsidize these things.
The government is using regulations to make ICE vehicles more expensive.
The federal government keeps proposing a nationwide ban on ICE vehicles. They will impose them as soon as they believe they can get away with it.

Reply to  timintexas1836
September 15, 2023 9:13 am

The opposition is mostly to the subsidies and mandates.
Eliminate those and nobody would give a flip regarding electrics.
Of course without the subsidies and mandates there would be almost no electrics in the first place.
As to battery technology, that is pretty much maxed out already. It’s not going to get much better.
Batteries and electric motors are already mature technologies, both have been around for several hundred years.

Reply to  MarkW
September 15, 2023 10:20 am

The subsidies are less about EV’s and more about bailing out the automakers and UAW, which is why Tesla was initially excluded from the program despite having 4 of the top 6 selling EV’s on the market. It is not= different than the “Cash for Clunkers” boondoggle after 2008 or the Solyndra subsidies that were merely rewarding campaign donors.

The subsidies are counter-productive anyway. A few companies raised their prices in line with the subsidy, so it was a wash in terms of the cost to the consumer. Rarely does a subsidized industry improve.

Reply to  timintexas1836
September 15, 2023 8:22 pm

The subsidies still exist. The mandates still exist.

Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
Reply to  timintexas1836
September 15, 2023 9:33 am

The problems with EVs are in layers like an onion. Solve one and it simply reveals the next layer.

  1. Battery technology (a) energy density by weight, volume and cost are all too low by a factor of at least 4; (b) L-Ion batteries require materials which are both scarce and largely controlled by administrations not friendly to the US, or very restrictive on mining (hello California!); (c) L-Ion batteries are a major fire hazard — once started they cannot be extinguished. Solve the battery technology problem and you run into:
  2. Charging infrastructure: yes you can charge your EV if you own a home with a garage/carport and 200A service, but not if everyone else in your neighborhood is also trying to charge theirs — extensive upgrades to the residential distribution lines will be required. Roughly 50% of the population live in multi-family housing or have on-street parking such that at-home charging is not practical. For those people and anyone driving regularly beyond their home area the availability of public charging stations is inadequate even for the population of EV owners today. When I last checked roughly a year ago, there are more gas fueling spigots in the metro Atlanta, Georgia area than rapid charging ports in the entire world. Solve that problem and then you hit:
  3. Total US electricity supply. We would roughly have to double domestic electric generation to replace all ICE vehicles with electric. That’s a tall order in any circumstances, but if you insist on doing it with renewables it’s much tougher.

As an individual choice, EVs are practical for some people — if you like your EV you can keep your EV. But as a mandate for the entire US population they are insane.

Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
September 15, 2023 9:55 am

Most vehicles would be charged in the overnight hours, so it would not have as much of an impact on electric capacity as it seems at first glance. Here in Texas, last night, in the overnight hours, power consumption averaged about 45,000MW, and will hit 70,000 by mid-day. There is enough capacity.

I am not a special pleader for EV’s, and will likely not own one for at least a decade, but I want private money and innovative minds to explore all options, including EV’s. I am just questioning the resistance.

Dave Fair
Reply to  timintexas1836
September 15, 2023 1:04 pm

Leftist Federal and State governments are writing laws and regulations that will kill off ICE vehicles. How is that “exploring all options?”

Reply to  Dave Fair
September 15, 2023 2:27 pm

The Feds may not be exploring all options, but the automakers are. These dictates of Bureaucrats do not influence the actions of these companies. They pay lip service to them, but ultimately build what consumers want, which is why EV’s only represent a small percentage of their overall sales, with trucks and SUV’s flying off the lots.

If Tesla was selling 300,000 cars annually that ran off of puppy dogs tears, Ford and GM would have a factory that makes dogs cry, PETA protests be damned. The market determines movement, and if EV’s prove unprofitable, they will move on to something else.

Reply to  timintexas1836
September 15, 2023 8:31 pm

If government bans ICE, it doesn’t matter what “options” corporate execs follow, it doesn’t matter what the customers want, ICE will be banned.

Reply to  timintexas1836
September 15, 2023 2:21 pm

There is a niche for EVs, but they don’t meet most peoples needs. No one wants to be forced to purchase a high-priced product that is not fit for purpose.

It doesnot add up
Reply to  timintexas1836
September 15, 2023 3:36 pm

You might want to check out what happened with demand in Feb 21. It was extremely high overnight, because it was extremely cold.

Reply to  It doesnot add up
September 15, 2023 7:21 pm

Since then we have increased capacity by more than 30% while peak demand has only increased about 5%. We will be fine.

Reply to  timintexas1836
September 15, 2023 8:29 pm

Overnight is when power companies schedule routine maintenance.
Overnight is when power companies do things like pump water up to upper storage ponds so that it can be used to power generators during the day.

Overnight is when many people run equipment who’s runtime can be delayed in order to take advantage of cheaper prices.

There is not as much overnight power as you seem to think.

Also, with the incursion of solar power, there will be even less overnight power than there is now.

Reply to  timintexas1836
September 15, 2023 10:18 am

Once the battery technology is sufficient in terms of range and lifespan, I will buy one.

And the Search for the Magic Battery continues…

Reply to  timintexas1836
September 15, 2023 2:13 pm

There’s a big difference between electronics that process signals and generate a display and sound and electronics that control electrical power to a drive train. In the former, circuits can be miniaturized and display technology can advance to consume less power.

In the later, most of the power consumption concerns the conversion of electrical to kinetic energy (KE=1/2mv*2). Battery technology can improve via engineering to make them somewhat less expensive, more reliable, faster charging, etc., but don’t expect drastic improvements in weight (mass) as the theoretical limit is not that far away.

In sum, there will be incremental improvements in EVs, but there will not be order of magnitude improvements or cost reductions like that which is experienced in microchip dependent devices.

Reply to  Scissor
September 15, 2023 8:46 pm

The only way to decrease charging times will be to somehow make it easier to get the heat generated by the charging out of the battery.

There are only two ways to do this.
Make the batteries thinner, not possible for automotive batteries. If you halve the thickness of the battery, in order to keep the volume of the battery the same, you would have to double the surface area of the battery. The batteries are already the size of the cars they power, any increase in surface area is

Use more active cooling. Things like running water through thin pipes throughout the battery, then running that water through a radiator with a fan.
A huge part of the increased reliability is better ways to keep the batteries cool.
As you say, small improvements are possible, but the cost is not trivial.

general custer
Reply to  timintexas1836
September 15, 2023 6:11 pm

This guy’s executive compensation was a little above average but the reality is that what he could actually do in his position was so circumscribed by government agency regulations and legal prescriptions that almost anyone would have been able to make the possible decisions. The usual mantra is that these executives are rare creatures so in demand that their compensation must be extravagant. As soon as they move on to another company, are fired or retire their place is immediately filled. When the boss leaves town for a few days to meet with other honchos he isn’t replaced. But if the fellow that cuts the bevels in steel so it can be welded calls in sick somebody has to be found to do his job that morning. And they must know what they’re doing.

general custer
Reply to  general custer
September 15, 2023 7:29 pm

As a matter of fact, if any job is likely to be easily handled by AI it would be that of higher level executives. AI probably wouldn’t do so well with ditch diggers, electricians, butchers and candlestick makers.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  timintexas1836
September 16, 2023 3:49 am

“Why such opposition to EV’s?”

They are not ready for primetime. They are being forced on a public that does not want them.

That, and a dozen other things.

Gunga Din
Reply to  Tom Abbott
September 16, 2023 2:45 pm

People resist being forced into something.
If EVs were practical and economical for most people’s needs, they’d sell themselves even without subsidies.
But they are not.

Simon Derricutt
Reply to  timintexas1836
September 16, 2023 5:55 am

Timintexas – you won’t be able to maintain your EV, because you won’t be able to buy a new part that will just replace the old one. It’s more than likely that, like the current Mercedes ICE design, replacing a part will also involve telling the car firmware to recognise that the new part is there, and unless you are a franchised dealer you won’t have the kit to talk to that firmware. You won’t be able to get a working part from another scrapped car and install it yourself for the same reason.

It’s quite easy to make these apply for even stuff like brake pads, where once they have worn beyond a certain point the firmware puts up an error flag and stops you driving or limits the speed, until you’ve been to the dealer to replace the pads and reset the flag.

Of course, the other problem is that if anything electronic goes wrong, you won’t be able to repair it without the right tools (which are expensive and need skill to use) and then you still need to clear the error flags. Factory replacements could be bought, but again won’t integrate with the rest of the system without that bit of kit the dealers have. What’s the life of the electronics? Could be over 20 years if it’s designed for long life, but since this is automotive that’s unlikely and you get maybe 10 years before things start failing at a high rate. Boards that I’d be costing ex-factory at less than 20 bucks are going to cost you hundreds or thousands.

I’d expect your maintenance to be limited to wash and wax, and you’d probably be able to change the tyres without needing to take it to the dealership. It’s likely that you could change any lightbulbs yourself, and apply oil to the door-hinges if needed. For anything more, you’ll probably need to visit the dealer and pay their charges.

It’s a good idea to wait until the early adopters have encountered all the gotchas, and the designs have been improved. That might however take quite a while, so stock up on parts for your current car.

Reply to  Simon Derricutt
September 16, 2023 6:46 am

I’d expect your maintenance to be limited to wash and wax, and you’d probably be able to change the tyres without needing to take it to the dealership.

Or not, my experience is that modern lug nuts can’t be removed even by roadside services with lots of tools.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  timintexas1836
September 17, 2023 3:48 pm

Oh let’s see, they don’t go very far, take a long time to refuel, and have a propensity to spontaneously combust.

Minor accidents = total loss = insurance rates will skyrocket once insurers accumulate enough carnage frome these things.

Trade value = nonexistent after much mileage.

What a dumb question.

September 15, 2023 8:49 am

OK . . . forget the EVs.

September 15, 2023 8:55 am

I grew up in Anderson, IN. It was a General Motors town. HQ for Delco Remy and Guide Lamp Divisions were there. Nearly 1/2 of my graduating class from HS went to work for GM. Now there is not a single GM plant there.

My family’s business did a lot of work for those plants and so I did a lot of work for them. So I learned early on about the attitude of UAW workers and saw the waste that management allowed.

When I was 17 I drove a 20′ flatbed truck and sometimes made deliveries of steel for maintenance at Guide Lamp. I arrived on time to make a delivery at the docks at Guide Lamp Plant 1. Had 20′ lengths of angle, and flat bar and rounds, and 12′ lengths of various shapes of cold rolled steel. Back in those days we used chains with boomers to secure the load on 4 x 4 wood laid on the bed and not the straps that they use now.

I backed into the dock and the foreman said “We’re on shift change, it’s going to be awhile before they unload you.” Sitting there on their fork trucks were three workers doing nothing looking at me. I had other deliveries to make, so I asked the foreman if I could unload it myself? He said I could.

I took off the chains, pulled that truck up and then drove in reverse at about 20 mph, timing jamming the brakes just right so I didn’t slam the dock too hard, And the steel slid off onto the dock leaving a pile looking like pick up sticks.

The dock foreman came over and I asked “Is that ok?. He smiled, signed my bill, and I was out of there.

I also delivered a lot to GM, some Chrysler, and some Ford during my last job as a driver. I know the attitude. I know what it is to sit for 10 hours in a hard plastic chair because they make you turn in your keys once docked. And because the UAW workers don’t give a damned about getting unloaded until the parts your delivering are actually needed on the line.

So I say go for it UAW! Drive yourselves into extinction and take “the big three” with you!

Reply to  Eric Worrall
September 15, 2023 2:26 pm

I never heard a thing about it.

Have you noticed how the old unions are shrinking? Yellow freight just went under. One after another the companies that have the teamsters are going under. Now those at UPS their Teamsters drivers just got a heck of a contract, but I’ve gotta think with advent of Amazon doing their own deliveries and FexEx being nonunion, UPS is eventually going to price themselves out of the market.

Reply to  rah
September 15, 2023 4:03 pm

UPS is eventually going to price themselves out of the market.

Remember Hostess?

Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
September 15, 2023 9:01 am

Re: cost of EV transition

This smells like a convenient excuse to not do what they don’t want to do anyway for other reasons.

That being said, the vast majority of US workers are not expecting 40% pay increases over the next 5 years.

If as alleged senior executives and managers at US automakers granted themselves a 40% raise, then they brought this on themselves and shareholders should be pissed.

Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
September 15, 2023 10:47 am

Meanwhile Toyota, Subaru, Volkswagen and others continue to make vehicles in the US in their non-union plants.

Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
September 15, 2023 5:58 pm

Be ironic if the unions bail the automakers out from a colossal mistake.

Me I’m depending on Toyota and the other Asian automakers to keep making ICE. Asia and the third world are.not going electric anytime soon, and they will be happy to keep making ICEs and keep heir production lines open.

Currently the automakers and dealers have a 54 day supply of ICE inventory, and almost double that for EV’s.

If the government tells you to drive off a cliff, do you really have to drive off the cliff?

September 15, 2023 9:08 am

My gosh the Ford stupidity continues since smaller wage makes it harder to buy EV’s

Coeur de Lion
September 15, 2023 9:10 am

And what are the stupid ignorant idiots doing about the ginormous. Danish twelve wheeler that’s just rolled past full of bacon? Makes EVs a bit irrelevant, eh?

September 15, 2023 11:00 am

Just make the cars sh*tty like Tesla (you know, without any interior fixtures on anything but the $100k+ models) and you’ll be fine, Ford.

Reply to  Tommy2b
September 15, 2023 2:29 pm

I haven’t looked closely at one recently but irregular gaps between doors, hoods and panels were common on most Telsas and condensed water droplets were present in about half of their taillight housings.

Reply to  Scissor
September 15, 2023 6:00 pm

Tesla seems to be doing poorly what no one else can do at all, at least at.scale.

Edward Katz
September 15, 2023 2:46 pm

It could be that the automakers are coming to realize that the consumer demand for EVs has been grossly overestimated despite all the government subsidies and the hype about these vehicles being one of the keys to saving the environment. The producers overpriced them from the outset believing that these rebates and future bans on the sale of gas/diesel types would force the widespread adoption of EVs Now they’re finding out that there’s growing consumer resistance to the removal of choice available to people wanting new cars so that too many EVs are sitting unsold on lots and EV plants are cutting shifts. Then when people hear of restricted cruising ranges, low resale values because of high battery replacement costs, expensive Level 2 home chargers, tendencies to catch fire and overall price/operating costs being not as great a difference from conventional cars/trucks, the manufacturers are having second thoughts about the long term profitability of EVs.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights