With the electric vehicle market continuing its steady growth, a few potential snags remain on the minds of many potential consumers, such as range and the availability of public chargers. In an effort to help remedy these anxieties, General Motors has partnered with Tesla to secure access to the latter’s expansive Supercharger infrastructure. Now, GM Chair and CEO Mary Barra has revealed that this decision is saving the Detroit-based automaker $400 million dollars.
According to a report from CNBC, Barra went on record to say that the charging deal The General signed with Tesla will save the automaker up to $400 million of a planning investment in building EV charging stations in the U.S. and Canada.
For reference, GM announced back in 2021 that it will invest $750 million into electric vehicle charging infrastructure in the United States and Canada.
“We think we can save up to $400 million in the original three-quarter of a billion dollars that we allocated to this, because we’ve been able to do it faster and more effectively,” General Motors Chair and CEO Mary Barra was quoted as saying. “We’re really looking for ways that we can be more capital efficient, as we go forward.”
As context, General Motors recently announced that this new partnership with Tesla will allow GM EV drivers to access 12,000 Tesla Superchargers across North America starting early next year. In fact, beginning early 2025, GM electric vehicles will be built with an NACS (North American Charging Standard) inlet that will provide direct access to the Supercharger plug without the need for an adapter. Until then, GM EVs will require an adapter to access the Supercharger network.
Moving forward, General Motors will integrate the Supercharger network into its infotainment and mobile apps, allowing drivers to exploit the charging infrastructure more seamlessly.
Subscribe to GM Authority for more GM financial news, GM business news, GM EV news, and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
Comments
If they want to be more efficient then get rid of Mary and the crew.
Communist China started the false narrative that claims Earth will cease to exist within the next 25 years due to people driving ICE vehicles. In addition to every last drop of petroleum on Earth being used up during this time period, they also claim that the oceans will begin to boil, along with dozens of other doomsday stories. Their fix to this problem? Electric vehicles. They do not expel greenhouse gases, but instead use lithium batteries for power. Where does the US purchase almost all of their lithium to produce these batteries? China. You know, because having to dispose of millions of 2,000lb. batteries when they are spent is a much better alternative to burning fossil fuels.
If someone cannot connect the dots, they may want to seek professional psychiatric help.
Given the way you’ve connected the dots, you might consider taking your own advice….
I see you on here a lot and realize that you’re a hardcore liberal that plops himself in front of the television, listens to the talking heads and nods his head in agreement while in a pie-eyed stupor. That is your problem, not mine. As a civil engineer, my mind operates in terms of logic and rationale. I do my own research, compile a plethora of information from countless sources and eventually come to a conclusion. It is the way intelligent adults do business.
If you feel that the Earth is doomed within the next 25 years, 100 years, 200 years, etc. because of ICE vehicles, that is certainly your right, If you also feel that having to dispose of lithium batteries that weigh a ton or more is more Earth friendly than burning fossil fuels, that is also your right. I suggest posting an ad saying that you want these used lithium batteries buried in your backyard when they are dead. Good luck to you.
I have no problems with EV vehicles, but they are not the answer by any means.
I am a mechanical engineer and understand that converting to electric vehicles merely moves the emissions from the tailpipes to the smokestacks. Then add in the inconvenience of charging, the increased initial costs, and the whole battery problems and it is a scam.
A large portion of the power grid is already emission free, hydro, nuclear, solar and wind. But even the fossil fuel portion is better than internal combustion engines. Coal is already extinct on both coast and it’s being phased out everywhere else because running a coal plant requires vastly more people than running a gas plant. Fossil power plants are much more efficient than car engines, a gas power plant is about 60% efficient vs 25-30% for an ICE. If you want to see what the equivalent tail pipe emissions for an EV are at your zipcode use the following site,
https://evtool.ucsusa.org/
Where I live in Massachusetts a Bolt is effectively a 124MPG car., the Tesla Model 3 AWD is 135MPG equivalent. Even in the worst states an EV is better than a hybrid but for the majority of the populate they are vastly better.
As for inconvenience of charging that’s just wrong. As long as you can charge at home it’s much more convenient to own an EV, I wouldn’t recommend an EV for anyone who can’t charge at home but for everyone who lives in a house (60% of all Americans) all you have to do is install an EVSE (A Tesla Wall Connector is $425, I paid by electrician $650 to run a 60A 240V line and hook it up) and then you just plug in when you get home, takes 15 seconds. No weekly trips to the gas station. No oil changes, the only maintenance is tire rotations. Brake pads last longer becuase you don’t use them because of regen braking. There is much less to break, an electric motor has a hundred time fewer parts then an engine. There is no transmission, no emission system, no turbos, all of that goes away. The only wear item is the battery and those will last for several hundred thousand miles (minimum warranty required by law is 8 years, 100,000 miles). My Model 3 is four years old, it’s lost 9% of it’s range in that time.
Haha!!!
If it moves the emissions from tailpipe to smoke stack then the Coal Fired large central station mandated to be closed by my Woke State (a few years out of service at this point) a few miles from my house must be cleaner…
The only ’emissions’ from the plant were:
1). cooling water from the Niagara River a few degrees hotter. That trivial problem could be solved with District Heating in the winter time and Adsorbtion Air Conditioning in the summer time as the old Sears, Roebuck Store had downtown decades ago.
2). Plant food (CO2) which is such a big pollutant that whenever CO2 levels rise, deserts shrink in size, due to the fact that plants in very marginal conditions such as little water will thrive in atmospheres rich in CO2 in spite of minimal water.
3). Drywall after processing – which was done at a plant down the street from the Coal Plant.
4). Thimerosol (mercury vaccine preservative) – since the only things left are 2% oxides of Sulfur, and 10% of the original trace amount of mercury, since removal of 98% and 90% respectively.
We are still mining plenty of coal in nearby Pennsylvania and Ohio, but the vast majority of it is shipped out from Baltimore to Europeans to whom it is saving their bacon. They don’t have much electricity otherwise. We apparently use almost zero in NY State – a real shame since there are 250 years supply of it easily mined.
England is even dopier since Wales has a 5,000 year supply which is now untouched.
2,000 pounds of batteries in each car? You lot me right there.
If you do a little bit of research, (ON AVERAGE) EV vehicles contain ~1,500-2,000lbs. of batteries. On the low end, you have the Chevy Bolt with 1,000lbs. of batteries. On the high end, you have the Hummer EV with 3,000lbs. of batteries. Capiche?
The Model 3 and Model Y battery is about 1000lbs, the Bolt is just slightly less. Pickup trucks will have about 2000lbs (for now), we won’t talk about the Hummer because it’s ridiculous and it was supposed to be ridiculous. Batteries are getting lighter, expect the pack weights to drop in half in a few years.
A 50% mass reduction is a tall order for “a few years”. Care to elaborate on the engineering that would make such a dubious claim plausible?
The CATL condensed battery is 500Wh/KG, that’s almost twice as dense as the best batteries that are already in cars which are 270Wh/Kg. The new CATL battery will be in Chinese cars this year.
You’re putting the cart before the horse. CATL claims the batteries will be released this year but in pilot form. It’s going to be years before this will be available in a car. Cost is the main issue. There are all kinds of battery technologies out there with huge potential. But if it cost 10x more than current tech with only 2x the density, what’s the point?
“CATL developer stated that the battery giant is already working with several partners on a project for civilian electric aviation. The cell should meet the standards for safety and quality requirements in aerospace. Later, the battery could also be produced for electric vehicles.”
Do some research. China gets most of its electricity from Coal. They are continuing to build HUNDREDS of coal powered generating plants right now.
It is common knowledge that they are building countless coal-fired power plants. And by the way, their plants are much more of a pollutant that those in the US. Our plants have scrubbers and other technology that knocks the greenhouse gases to minute levels. That hasn’t stopped Biden from tearing them down, however.
China’s narrative has worked wonders for them so far. They have convinced the world that we are doomed in less than three decades. so countries are shutting down their coal-fired power plants left and right, while China builds their own. As a two-pronged effect, they also have the US and others gobbling up their lithium to build these “Earth Friendly EV’s”. They are laughing all the way to the bank. Marxism is alive and well.
Good move for GM and people with GM EV’s. Be prepared for angry Tesla owners who will be waiting in line behind GM drivers to charge their Teslas. LOL.
No different than CCS cars waiting for Teslas to charge at CCS stations. Works both ways as Tesla has been able to charge at CCS machines for a long time
There will be significantly more GM EV’s than Teslas.
Won’t slow my liquid refueling at all.
@Carl
As a Tesla owner I like the move a lot. Tesla builds so many Chargers per year that it most likely will be an issue in say California. Maybe some other huge Metropolitan areas but for the most part Tesla will have plenty of capacity.
As a matter of fact I think any automaker that sells in the US should move to NACS. It is so much more superior!!!
This seems like a no brainer and a win/win for everyone.
@Tom Habib
Completely agree
Sorry, I’m a liquid fuel user, won’t impact me either way.
Then why don’t you as well as other liquid fuel users shut up already?
Because he wants to pay for fuel instead of having free electrons from his roof. I can’t wait to hear him cry after Saudi Arabia cut’s oil shipments and gas or diesel goes through the roof! I’ll bet he will have something to say about that too. He also likes seeing his beloved vehicles being shown up in speed and almost everything they used to be so proud of! The only thing they can hold on to is the fact that they spend a little less time filling up. Although I do it while I am asleep!
Kinda tells you that EV isn’t ready for prime time.
The number one selling car in the 1st quarter of 2023 was the Tesla Model Y. Not just evs but all cars. Looks pretty prime time to me
GM is not ready….
Anything your cars can do our cars can do better.
Like more horsepower and speed leading to more accidents and deaths?
Funny how horsepower, speed, war, mining, and loving corporate America are now ‘agenda-wonderful’ to the same libbies who have been screaming about these things over the past two decade…
IDK, when I think Superchargers, that ain’t it.
Roger that! I’m picturing something under the hood and maybe even peeking out a bit.
Can’t wait to see that hummer pull plug in and hit that 50% charge as it slows down considerably on fast charging . Line ups are going to get longer and longer , just saying .
“…saving the Detroit-based automaker $400 million dollars.”
Mary must have done cart wheels when she heard she could save that kind of money.
It’s always harder to catch up when you are not the first.
She clearly said they were the leader a few years ago. Lol
Honestly though, GM and Tesla don’t compete in the same markets. If they didn’t do this and Ford did it would be bad for them. I’d rather see this than a hodge podge of proprietary chargers. Other manufacturers will follow.
Better Headline:
Elon Musk Takes Control of GM EV Future
Mary, it’s quite entertaining to read your opinion that you want GM to be more “capital efficient”. However, before you start short-changing GM’s future EV customers, you should lead by example by declining most of your $29 million annual salary bonuses you’re raking in every year.
While your salary bonuses may be a “drop in the bucket” compared to the $400 million savings on the path to being “capital efficient”, good manners begin at home, so to speak, don’t you think? IMO, I certainly don’t believe you’re worth anywhere near $29 million / per year.
What is most glaring in this article is the absence of any mention of how this will or will not affect the number of charging stations. Will there be more or fewer stations available?.
The more I read about these types of GM’s corporate decisions, the more inclined I become to cancel my reservation for the upcoming Blazer EV SS.
Any vehicle manufacturer that virtually completely bypasses hybrid / PHEV vehicles in favor of going all-electric has its head up its *ss. Among “mainstream” manufacturers, Tesla is the exception because there’s no way they would’ve been able to compete in the ICE market.
Thank you gpart! I couldn’t have said it better.
It seems weird that you say you may cancel your reservation on a Blazer EV when they tell you that you will enjoy an additional big network of chargers nationwide to the ones you already see operating, right by the time you will need it. Though the article does not state it, I’ve read enough for the past years to understand that GM and every other car company will need to keep building stations in order for this venture to survive. Besides, they need the money they can collect from their own stations and get other taxes benefits from states. About the plug, some comments state pointless arguments like “Elon being smarter than Mary”, “GM has become a follower of the leaders” and blah blah, I’m pretty sure nobody goes to the market to buy a toaster thinking that they will only buy from the brand that invented that type of plug; nobody cares and nobody will care in a couple of years who designed the plug that becomes standard for EVs. We all knew from the beginning that a standard plug for EVs is needed, so to adopt the type of whoever has been doing it successfully is rather wise. Oh, by the way, does anybody know who was a follower before becoming a leader?, almost every Japanese and Korean car company.
I agree on the salary topic though. It’s too much, but I’m sure no car company CEO earns peanuts and is willing to lead a multimillion company for less than that money which normally is approved by a board and stakeholders, not decided by themselves.
gpart:
That is true… Plug-in Hybrids with gasoline backup need no new electrical infrastructure at all. For the larger PHEVs if the customer desires something faster than the ordinary 110 receptacle, they can always give an electrician some work.
But if GM and Ford are throwing up their hands and saying let Tesla do it, that’s fine…. Auto companies survived in the past by letting others sell the gasoline and Diesel.
GM will never get rid of Mary Bara, she’s the largest shareholder of GM stock by far.
Tesla’s Superchargers aren’t the only chargers out there. What it does allow is GM EVs to charge at more locations. GM is still building out thousands of chargers with Pilot Flying J under the Ultium 360 brand. The current number of chargers is a drop in the bucket for the number needed if we truly are moving to EVs from ICE. Think about how many gas stations there are in the middle of nowhere compared to charge locations.
GM has now subsidized it’s primary intended competitor int0 perpetuity. Not a smart business move. At least Mary is consistent.
GM is probably paying Tesla very little. The benefit to Tesla comes from the utilization of Supercharger locations. The more a location is utilized the quicker the payback.
Tesla’s issue with Superchargers was a chicken-and-egg problem. They couldn’t sell cars (chickens) without creating “enough” chargers (eggs). The problem is balancing the two. If they build out the chargers too much they are convenient for the user, but cost Tesla too much to maintain rarely used chargers. By adding Ford and GM to the mix they instantly have better utilization (revenue) from chargers especially since some Tesla owners have free unlimited charging.
GM had been working with outside vendors to supply the charging stations. GM really wants no part in owning a charging net work.
The trouble few companies want to invest in chargers at a time where there is still not enough cars to support them, Also technology can and will change fast so they could invest in these chargers and then have to adapt or change them out.
Add to this that most people now ands for a good while will charge from home 90% of the time.
This is a quick cheap way for GM to get chargers out there and not have to invest.
This is not the same as the Ford deal. Ford is short money and had to find a partner as they could not afford to do it themselves. The one director at Ford said they were at a $7 Billion dollar deficit over the other mfgs on EV Investments.
C8.R:
Thank you. As always, balanced and informed.
I wonder if this also gives Tesla access to the IRA money GM is getting to build a charging network?
How did the Irish Republican Army get involved in this?
What C8R said is true and is a positive in at least the short term for GM. On the other hand, this move delays and / or eliminates GM’s ability to create a recurring income stream from GM vehicles from charging $ (as they are planning to do with subscriptions) while putting this charging income stream in Tesla’s pocket. Seems like adding charging stations to GM’s large and well-distributed dealer organization (GM would pay for the chargers, dealers provide only the real estate) would have enabled GM to collect the ongoing charging revenue stream while providing floor traffic at GM dealers as people wait for their cars to charge. The charging infrastructure is still inadequate in the US and this move will help Tesla expand it profitably while creating a near-monopoly.
The market has spoken, and the superior technology won. Not like VHS vs. Beta!
VHS was the superior technology. It’s a myth that Beta was better. Sony undersized the cassette so it couldn’t record as much as a VHS cassette. Beta 1 only ran for one hour while VHS 1 ran for two hours. VHS then introduced a 4 hour long play mode and eventually an 8 hour extra long play mode, the quality suffered but people cared more about duration than quality. Sony copied the VHS long play mode in Beta II which got them to two hours but at the cost of quality, after they did this there was no significant difference in quality between between Beta an VHS, whats more they discontinued support for Beta 1 which was a little better than VHS 1. Sony was never able to match the play times of VHS.
Right at this moment I’m at Advent Heath training center, Orlando, Fl. There are several non Tesla charging stations in the parking lot and as I have mention a few times here is the problem A Tesla is parked on front of a charger and not charging at all. The power cord is on the charger as if it their personal parking slot. Their needs to be sensors when a vehicle is parked and not charging and after a certain amount of time after a charge there should be additional cost until the vehicle is remove.
Good move for GM. They never could have come up with 12,000 new charging stations in such a short time. Not only that, but it eliminates the most obvious sales advantage Tesla has had over its EV competitors. The playing field will be leveled out.
That was the reason why a lot of people that live in the Augusta, Ga. area were not buying EVs. Not many charging stations are available. Maybe now that will change. I would rather have a hybrid. Unfortunately, GM doesn’t make a hybrid chevy malibu.
Since GM will still deploy Ultium branded chargers I wonder if Tesla will provide the chargers now.
@Toney cross
Tesla already sells a CCS Adapter.
As a Tesla driver and former Volt owner I welcome GM and Ford to the Supercharger network. There are capacity problems in California but not in the rest of the country. I live in New England and aside from one 4th of July a couple of years ago I’ve never encountered a Supercharger that was near full. Tesla builds for the future not the present. New Supercharger sites have at least 12 chargers and lots of the old sites have been doubled to 16. As the standard there will be Federal money for Superchargers which will accelerate them. There will third party NACS compatible chargers also. EVgo had a handful of half assed Tesla plugs in CA, now they will be able to do it the right way and do it everywhere. ABB and Flo have both announced that they will have NACS plugs.
Does anyone really think that GM and Mary Bara are happy about sending their customers to a competitor along with their revenue? This is an admission of defeat, don’t sugar coat it. Does anyone think that Elon is doing this for free out of the goodness of his heart? I’m sure GM and Ford are paying Tesla and the GM customers are going to pay a surcharge to use his network. Sending your customers to a competitor isn’t something any company wants to do.
Not at all. GM, Ford, and the former Chrysler shared components for years. Besides, if Tesla doesn’t last as an automaker, it will be a manufacturer of chargers, Power Walls, and so on.
You’re much more like to own a car with a Panhard rod in its suspension than to own a Panhard automobile.
So Mary only figured this out lately? Talk about putting the ev before the 🐎. What did she think was going to happen? She needs Elon’s Co. to fix her mess.
If I was 21 again, today I’d be working to an electrician’s license. My first choice out of HS and a 2 year college was to be an electrician but I took a job with New York Telephone and I was hooked. At that time there was a shortage of phone service and for nearly 40 years I did telephony.
The future is still electricity, windmills, solar panels and now EV chargers will put more demand on the trade. Any young person that is not afraid of electricity, it looks to be a good future and career.
All worldwide auto manufacturers in the US, Canada, and yes, Mexico, should use one common Supercharge station. Not rocket science. Simple. Good job Mary, Mark and their teams.
Big oil is bigger than Tesla, GM, Ford, etc. They will convert gas pumps to chargers over time. They buy their power from wholesalers, like I do. You will see their street signs offering competitive charge rates, just like they do with gas prices.
I still like the sound of a V8 with duals. All you electrified people you better hope a republican doesn’t get into office and gas and prices dip.
Assuming EV sales and VIO continue to grow; Tesla doesn’t have enough chargers, many more will be built by all the companies GM was planning on using before, all this does is strokes Elon’s ego, and buys GM a couple years with a ready-make charging network.
The most significant thing about Tesla sharing its chargers is almost immediately, Tesla’s competitive advantage is vaporized! Tesla doesn’t have an answer for the onslaught of product coming by all of the competition, might as well make a few bucks charging non-Tesla cars…
With ICE engines you can use any gasoline brand you want, it needs to be the same with EV’s. It eventually should become competitive in pricing, but how can charging stations compete? Offer free coffee? Larger and cleaner restrooms while you wait. On the NJ Turnpike, Tesla charging stations are in front of Starbucks.
GM and Tesla are competitors in the building and selling of automobiles. GM does not compete with Tesla in providing electricity. Tesla sells electricity just as EVGo does. GM has a deal with charger supplier/electricity reseller EVGo and now has a deal with EVGo competitor Tesla to be able to provide (sell) electricity to GM EV owners. I don’t think if a GM customer goes to a Tesla Supercharger to buy electricity that they have been sent to a competitor. Tesla doesn’t show or sell autos at its Supercharger sites. This is a win-win for GM, Tesla (and Ford). Elon is being rewarded for his willingness to be the first to invest in 12,000 high quality charger stations. GM and Ford are saving money by not having to subsidize other charger providers (like EVGo). I think that Tesla is not yet receiving subsidies (federal govt. money) for its superchargers, but is trying hard to qualify them so it can qualify for some of that money. Who wins? Tesla, GM, Ford and the EV customers who have more available places to charge. Who loses? Maybe only charger companies who have more competition (i.e. Tesla)
Gas stations compete on price. I think charging stations will eventually need to compete on price. Right now the electricity you buy at home is a bargain compared to the cost of gasoline. Go to a commercial charging station, though and the cost of electricity is much higher, and no longer a bargain compared to gasoline. I have on PHEV and an EV on order, but I expect to buy electricity from a charging station only occasionally (on long vacation type trips). Right now if you have no ability to get your own home charging station, buying an EV is nice (if you prefer how it drives) but certainly is no bargain on fuel. Besides that, you come home from work or whatever, plug your car in and do whatever you want in your home. If you have to commercially recharge your 5 minute gasoline fill up becomes 20 to 50 minutes and while you wait you can look at your phone or daydream. No fun at all. Charging stations will need at least restroom access and maybe a way to buy a cup of coffee or hot dog to compete (or the electricity cost will have to come down to make it worth waiting the extra 15 minutes to fill up.
Charging stations will compete on amenities not price. They will never be as numerous as gas stations because we won’t need nearly as many. Right now 90% of charging is done at home, I don’t think that will change much except in inner cities where people park on the street. I’ve been driving a Tesla for four years and I roadtrip every weekend. We rate Superchargers by how close the bathrooms are, the chargers themselves always work so that’s never a concern. It’s just location and nearby amenities like bathrooms and takeout restaurants. It’s different than buying gas. There are three gas stations on every corner so it’s easy to choose based on price. And because you are fueling close to home you don’t care about anything except the gas. With an EV you only use them on roadtrips, after an hour or two in the car you want to get out and go to the bathroom or get a donut.