Tag Archives: General Motors

Automotive Partnership Ecosystems Emerging Today Dictate Success Tomorrow

Posted on by

The automobile is at a turning point, unprecedented in its 100+ years of history. Rising gas prices, stricter fuel economy standards, a progressively more environmentally conscious customer base and forward-looking business models are all breaking the traditional automotive ecosystem. In response, OEMs are evolving their partnership webs in order to endure and compete.

This week’s graphic comes from a recent Lux Research report in which analysts examined the growing web of cross‐cutting industry relationships to see how automakers compared on the Lux Partnership Grid. Companies were scored on two metrics, partnership strength and technology diversity. Based on these scores, each automaker fell into one of the four quadrants in the graphic above.

Lone Wolves represent OEMs that are continuing business as usual, and have little footprint in the emerging technologies that threaten the status quo. The Dilute ecosystem quadrant encompasses automakers with a few partnerships scattered across a variety of technologies. The Siloed ecosystem includes OEMs that are putting their faith in a few, or in some cases one technology, while the Expansive ecosystem hosts OEMs who average nearly 16 partnerships apiece, representing an average of eight unique technologies.

A review of the partnership grid reveals multiple trends:

  • Small companies tend to cluster in the Lone Wolves region, while large corporations partner ambitiously in a variety of areas so they group more in the Expansive quadrant. One exception is Fiat-Chrysler, which has only three, unsubstantial partnerships to its name.
  • Daimler, GM, and Toyota lead the pack. All have formed strong partnerships in pursuit of technical diversity, placing them squarely in the Expansive ecosystem. Daimler has developed partnerships that span multiple key emerging technologies, including a JV with Toray to make carbon fiber reinforced plastics (CFRP) (Client registration required), a JV with Evonik (Li-Tec) to make Li-ion batteries (Client registration required), and participation in Europe’s Clean Energy Partnership for establishing fuel cell vehicles and hydrogen fueling infrastructure.
  • Meanwhile, General Motors (GM) has emerged from a low point in its corporate history to emerge as a future looking company by partnering in a variety of technologies, and investing in companies at a variety of stages. It has invested in battery start-ups like Envia Systems (Client registration required) and Sakti3 (Client registration required), and in the fuels space with ethanol companies Mascoma (Client registration required) and Coskata (Client registration required). In the materials space, GM also sees value in CFRP, forming a JV with Japanese materials company Teijin.
  • Lastly, Toyota is leveraging its leadership in hybrids, to position itself for advances elsewhere, such as advanced electrification (via its investment in Tesla). It also retains activity in hydrogen powered fuel cell vehicles and infrastructure, where it teamed with Air Products and Shell to install the first pipeline-fed hydrogen station in the U.S. In materials, Toyota has partnered with Toray to source CFRP initially used for the hood and roof of one of its Lexus models. As with Daimler and GM, these activities will prepare Toyota to profit from an ever changing landscape where the vehicle of tomorrow may not look like anything conceived today, but will no doubt carry key technologies in the areas of energy storage, increased connectivity, and new materials.

Source: Lux Research report “Under the Hood: Mapping Automotive Innovations to Megatrends.”

Share this
Facebook facebook   Twitter twitter   Email email   Linkedin linkedin  

Justin Bieber Problems: Electric Vehicle Makers Still at Odds on Charging Standards

Posted on by

A group of U.S. and German automakers demonstrated an electrical vehicle charging standard at Electric Vehicle Symposium 26 (EVS26) that used a single plug to support both AC charging (including ‘level 1″ at 120V and “level 2″ at 240V) and DC fast-charging. Ford, General Motors, Chrysler, Daimler, Volkswagen, BMW, Audi, and Porsche are all behind the new standard – which means they’re not behind the CHAdeMO DC fast-charging standard backed by Nissan and other Japanese automakers (or, for that matter, behind the separate DC charger offered by Tesla).

At stake is more than whether noted venture capitalist and chromed-out Fisker Karma owner Justin Bieber can plug in when he drops in on Elon Musk to talk investment strategies. Charging standards are widely, and rightly, seen as a key precondition for widespread market adoption. Issues of charging station availability and the resulting “range anxiety” are bad enough for would-be EV owners, without further doubts over whether or not the latest charging station will be compatible with their cars. Eventually good sense should prevail and send one approach the way of Betamax and the HD-DVD. In the meantime, the high cost of EVs is a bigger impediment, and >>the slow downward march of battery costs means that automakers have time to sort out their differences<< before EVs are ready for widespread adoption (see the report “Searching for Innovations to Cut Li-ion Battery Costs“).

Share this
Facebook facebook   Twitter twitter   Email email   Linkedin linkedin  

Ranking Li-ion battery developers on the Lux Innovation Grid

Posted on by

Li-ion batteries are the technology of choice for the first generation of all-electric and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, and the subsequent hype has attracted an increasing number of competitors to an already crowded market. Soon, it will be impossible for all of these companies to survive, making strong partnerships a necessity. This week’s graphic illustrates how developers of Li-ion batteries compare on the Lux Innovation Grid, helping to identify which will make the strongest potential partners as the electric vehicle market matures.

LG Chem Power clearly leads the pack, standing out even amidst its competition in the graphic’s Dominant Quadrant. A subsidiary of LG Chemical, LG Chem owes its strong technical value to its high-energy lithium-manganese-spinel-based cells and strong cycle life, both of which come at costs that are among the most competitive in the market. Its multitude of supply partnerships with the likes of GM, Eaton, and Ford, however, justify the company’s strong business execution score.

Significant enhancements in specific energy and a commensurate reduction in cell costhas garnered Envia Systems the attention of major investors including GM, Asahi Glass, and Asahi Kasei. Yet serious competition remains for Envia in cathode materials, including two major corporations in BASF and Toda Kogyo licensing the same Argonne National Laboratory technology that Envia’s materials are based on.

China is home to a number of top contenders, thanks to the Chinese government’s desire to keep the electric vehicle value chain inside China’s borders (Client registration required.). But batteries from China BAK, BYD, and China Aviation Lithium Battery (CALB) are undifferentiated technologically, and may not share the quality of cells manufactured outside of China.

Source: Lux Research report “Using Partnerships to Stay Afloat in the Electric Vehicle Storm.”

Share this
Facebook facebook   Twitter twitter   Email email   Linkedin linkedin  

BMW pushes the envelope

Posted on by

BMW generated a good deal of industry buzz when it recently unveiled its futuristic i-Series concept cars: the i3, a battery electric vehicle (BEV), and the i8, a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV). Both cars seat four passengers, but the i3 is designed for city driving, while the i8 is more of a high-performance luxury vehicle. The vehicles are constructed largely of carbon-fiber-reinforced plastic (CFRP), which is incorporated into BMW’s “LifeDrive” design system. The i3 is expected to launch in 2013, with the i8 coming the following year.

This move is not BMW’s first foray into the electric vehicle market – the company has already produced over 1,000 ActiveE and 600 Mini E electric vehicles – but it is by far a larger and more significant project. BMW plans to invest around €400 million in the production of the i3 by 2013, focusing on a production plant in Leipzig, Germany. Electric drivetrain developer AC Propulsion has been supplying BMW with Li-ion batteries and drivetrains for the Mini E line, which is seen as a precursor to the i3. Still, no official announcement has been made regarding the Li-ion supplier for either model.

The degree to which BMW becomes more involved in Li-ion batteries will be a key indicator of the potential for more traditional supply relationships in the growing EV market, where automakers have increasingly integrated battery technologies with the aim of capturing maximum value in the supply chain. If BMW goes the route of Ford, which sources drivetrains from Manga for its Ford Focus Electric, it could provide hope to suppliers left out in the cold by automakers like GM that source batteries and conduct drivetrain integration themselves. Furthermore, BMW can lessen the risk it faces in the event that the market for all-electric vehicles does not take off. (See the report, “Small Batteries, Big Sales: The Unlikely Winners in the Electric Vehicle Market.”)*

BMW has prepared itself for the massive amount of CFRP required for this bold undertaking. Back in 2009, BMW formed a €90 million joint venture with SGL Group in Washington state (U.S.) for the production of CFRP. SGL has also recently completed construction of an additional carbon-fiber plant in Germany.* SGL currently has an annual production capacity of roughly 8,500 metric tons of carbon fiber. Automakers are always looking at light-weighting to reduce fuel consumption. In this case, the reduction of weight also saves money by allowing BMW to use smaller battery packs than would be required by heavier vehicles.

There are a number of other forward-thinking initiatives being launched by BMW as part of its campaign, but the carbon fiber chassis may make or break the i-Series. There have been significant barriers in the adoption of composites in the automotive industry (See the report “Chasing Cars: Can Composites Catch Up to Steel?.”). But if BMW’s launch is successful it could prove the economic feasibility of incorporating CFRP into production automobiles, ushering in a new era of automobile manufacturing.

* Client registration required.

Share this
Facebook facebook   Twitter twitter   Email email   Linkedin linkedin  

Global market forecast for electrical storage technologies in transportation applications

Posted on by

Graphic of the WeekThe overall market for energy storage technologies that power electric vehicles is set to grow from $13 billion in 2011 to $30 billion in 2016, a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 18%. But, while prominent plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) like the Chevy Volt and Nissan Leaf grab most of the headlines, a recently released report (client registration required) from Lux Research finds that electrical storage for e-bikes and micro-hybrids will command the largest market share in terms of both GWh and dollars in 2016.

Specifically, the report finds that E-bikes carry minimal storage but compensate with sheer volume. Replacement batteries for the currently deployed base – largely in China – plus strong growth in new sales will drive growth from 84.2 GWh and $12.0 billion in 2011, to 156.6 GWh and $24.3 billion in 2016, a CAGR of 13% in kWh and 15% in dollars.

Micro-hybrids apply energy storage only toward start-stop and/or regenerative braking applications, and require neither the drastic redesigns nor the more expensive battery costs that all-electric or hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) do. Thus, they represent a shorter path to reduced emissions than hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) or PHEVs, and will drive market growth from 5.1 GWh and $495 million in 2011, to 41 GWh and $3.1 billion in 2016 – CAGRs of 52% and 44%, respectively.

Meanwhile, EVs, HEVs, PHEVs will see steady if not explosive growth. But their hefty battery packs will command a meaningful share of the markets for storage in GWh and particularly in dollar sales (the latter due to the higher cost of NiMH and Li-ion batteries. Sales will reach a cumulative 5.7 GWh in 2016, up 27% annually from 1.7 GWh in 2011, and revenues will expand 25% annually from $710 million in 2011 to hit $2.1 billion in 2016.

Source: Lux Research report “Small Batteries, Big Sales: The Unlikely Winners in the Electric Vehicle Market.”

Share this
Facebook facebook   Twitter twitter   Email email   Linkedin linkedin  

GM’s attractive leasing terms for the Volt won’t be enough

Posted on by

General Motors (GM) recently made its long-awaited announcement about the pricing of its messianic plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV). While the Volt will cost $41,000 in the U.S. – or $33,500 after a $7,500 federal income tax credit, the real news is that GM is offering a very attractive three-year lease for the Volt of $350/month with $2,500 due at signing. For comparison, Nissan announced that its all-electric vehicle (EV), the Nissan Leaf, will lease for $349/month for three years after an initial payment of $1,999. This, despite the fact that the Leaf’s sticker price is more than $8,000 lower than the Volt’s (see the April 7, 2010 LRPJ – client registration required). GM also recently announced that it will “increase U.S. production capacity of the [Volt] by 50 percent, from 30,000 units to 45,000 units, in 2012,” although production for the 2011 model year will be limited to about 10,000 units for its November 2010 rollout.

So is GM’s optimism misplaced? Edward Niedermeyer points out in a New York Times editorial – entitled “GM’s Electric Lemon” – that the Volt requires “premium gasoline, seats only four people (the battery runs down the center of the car, preventing a rear bench) and has less head and leg room than the $17,000 Chevrolet Cruze.”

However, the Volt’s primary competitor is not the Cruze, but the Nissan Leaf. Leasing terms are key here because, with lots of uncertainty around any new technology (the cycle life of the Li-ion batteries causes particular concern), many customers would prefer to lease than to buy. Since the Volt and the Leaf will be priced comparably and have similar warranties, the Nissan Leaf’s all-electric status will likely tip the scales in its favor among the eco-conscious minds of the early adopters. Moreover, Nissan has the advantage in that its lower sticker price will make it easier to convince lessees to buy the vehicles after three years, while GM risks having to take back heavily-devalued Volts. In addition to these unfavorable comparisons, the global electric vehicle market is likely to disappoint the overinflated expectation that the Volt will help salvage GM’s fortunes (see the Lux Research report, “Unplugging the Hype around Electric Vehicles” – client registration required). Unfortunately for the U.S. taxpayers who have billions of dollars riding on GM’s success, all signs point to another disappointment for the automotive giant.

Share this
Facebook facebook   Twitter twitter   Email email   Linkedin linkedin  

Toyota takes a shortcut into the EV market with Tesla partnership

Posted on by

Recently, the auto industry has been abuzz over the partnership formed between Toyota and Tesla Motors to develop a passenger all-electric vehicle (EV) for less than $30,000. Additionally, Toyota has committed to purchasing $50 million worth of common stock immediately following the closure of Tesla’s IPO, on the condition that Tesla completes the IPO by December 31, 2010. The unnamed vehicle will consist of Tesla’s powertrain technology, with the rest of the car comprising traditional Toyota hardware and design. This move is a change in course for Toyota, since the automaker has stated in the past that it is unsure of the market potential for EVs, citing that the cost of the battery packs make the vehicles economically unfavorable. It’s possible Toyota feels its title as the greenest car company is being usurped by Nissan Motor with the early sales and hype of its EV, the Leaf. With the Mitsubishi Motors i-MiEV planned for pricing above $30,000, it is likely that the early EV market in the United States, such as it is (see the report “Unplugging the Hype around Electric Vehicles” – client registration required) will be dominated by Nissan and Toyota, as they will have the cheapest EVs on the market for the foreseeable future.

This transaction with Tesla provides a fast, low-cost, low-risk option for Toyota to enter the EV market. For the small price tag of $50 million, Toyota can lean on Tesla’s experience and avoid much of the R&D expense of developing an EV on its own. This is a bargain for Toyota, considering that General Motors advertised that it spent upwards of $1 billion developing the Volt. In exchange, Tesla is receiving validation from the Toyota name, along with the manufacturing and marketing support that Toyota is likely to provide. Perhaps most valuable to Tesla, the jointly developed vehicle will most likely be sold through Toyota dealerships, allowing it significantly greater penetration into the market. Meanwhile, Panasonic, which provides batteries both for Tesla and for Toyota’s Prius (see the October 21, 2009 LRPJ – client registration required), will strengthen its position in the vehicle battery market. The announcement is a clear win for all three parties involved. However, this news by no means implies that the Toyota EV will sell, since like all EVs it still faces many economic and behavioral hurdles to mass adoption (see the February 3, 2010 LRPJ – client registration required).

Share this
Facebook facebook   Twitter twitter   Email email   Linkedin linkedin