Production Halted At GM’s BrightDrop CAMI Assembly Plant In Ontario
12
Sponsored Links
The GM CAMI Assembly plant in Ontario, Canada has been idled due to a battery shortage. The facility produces GM’s all-electric BrightDrop delivery vans, and employs around 1,500 workers. Production is expected to resume on July 31st.
According to a report from The London Free Press, which cites a local labor union chairperson, demand for the BrightDrop delivery vans is high, with four years of orders currently on the books. Big name customers include FedEx, Walmart, Hertz, Verizon, and DHL Canada. However, the bottleneck now seems to be the raw materials to produce the batteries that power the vehicles. The spokesperson indicated that EV batteries were in short supply across GM’s production facilities.
GM is currently operating its Ultium Cells plant in Lordstown, Ohio, with several other battery facilities currently under construction, including a facility in Spring Hill, Tennessee, and another in Lansing, Michigan. The Spring Hill facility is expected to begin operation in 2024, while the Lansing facility is expected to begin operation in 2025. Additionally, it’s reported that GM Canada will build a 400,000-square-foot addition to the CAMI facility for further battery production capacity.
GM became the second biggest seller of EVs in the U.S. in Q1 of 2023, selling 20,670 units. The General also sold 15,652 EV units in Q2. GM is forecast to sell more than 70,000 EVs through the 2023 calendar year. Tesla remains the biggest EV producer in the U.S.
Per The London Free Press, the production shutdown at the GM CAMI Assembly plant is frustrating for workers, which were previously operating on rotating shifts, with two weeks on and four weeks off. Looking ahead, the battery shortage is expected to be a short-term issue, despite huge demand for the raw materials required to produce EV batteries.
As a reminder, the GM CAMI plant produces the all-electric BrightDrop Zevo 600, as well as the smaller all-electric BrightDrop Zevo 400.
Subscribe to GM Authority for more GM production news, GM business news, GM electric vehicle news, and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
Sponsored Links
“It’s reported that GM Canada will build a 400,000-square-foot addition to the CAMI facility for further battery production capacity.”
CAMI doesn’t make batteries. Is the addition for more Brightdrop production?
The addition is for battery assembly. “Further battery production capacity” is a reference to the preceding sentences, which mention GM’s battery production efforts in Ohio, Tennessee, and Michigan
The writing is on the wall here and GM could very well be in big trouble. The basics first. Even if you don’t know much about EV’s, common sense will make this easy to understand. Just like gas or diesel engines, EV’s get the power and performance from displacement in the form of battery size along with some fancy electronic magic. Of course, that battery size also relates directly to range. So the bigger the vehicle and higher the performance they give it, the more battery capacity it needs. These large delivery vans most likely need rather large capacity, which in turn takes up a lot more material than say the Bolt EV. So GM stopping production of these vans is a sure sign that they are in trouble along with the fact that they can’t seem to get any Hummers or Lyriq’s in the hands of buyers. What’s more, with the Equinox, Blazer and Silverado/Sierra EV’s in the halls waiting to be built, this only gets worse for GM. Obviously GM is halting production at this plant to push materials/capacity to other models.
This is why I can’t stand the Hummers. They are obnoxious fat pigs that use up desperately needed materials for other more important products like these Brightdrop vans. The same goes for the Silverado/Sierra EV which isn’t going to sell to true truck buyers as they will mostly avoid EV’s like the plague. So the Hummers and trucks will be going to mall crawlers who can’t survive life without attention. This (IMO) goes 100% against the entire purpose of going EV. Vehicles such as those need to be put on the back burner until GM figures out their supply issues and the rest of the important EV’s are flowing smoothly into the hands of buyers. Even then, they need to reduce the capacity and weight of the Hummer/Silverado/Sierra and focus their efforts on efficiency and not speed and max range.
GM is getting what they deserve here.
“goes 100% against the entire purpose of going EV”
If you’re GM, the entire purpose of going EV is to make money. I don’t think they care if it’s hippies or rednecks buying the vehicles, if they’ve got $100k for a Hummer they’ll take it
I do agree about having enough material to support all the coming EVs. The amount of earth you have to move to get enough copper/lithium/etc for an EV is mind boggling. It will be interesting as more and more people jump in the game how much production the mining industry can support
For GM and other companies, they are in it for the money. True. After all, they are a business and I don’t deny them that. But that’s a very different thing from the purpose of EV’s, which is to reduce burning fossil fuel, reduce tailpipe emissions, reduce our carbon footprint, to be able to continue our mobility in this world with less impact on the earth. The Brighdrop delivery vans are a very good example of that as they are replacing some of the dirtiest fuel consuming vehicles out there. The fact that GM is pushing Hummers and EV trucks that will consume much larger amounts of materials, instead of using those same materials to bring more EV’s to market that will make a real difference in the world, puts the profits above the better good. The overall carbon footprint of the Hummers will dwarf that of a Ford Maverick sized pure EV.
It must be stated that the production and charging of EV’s under our current ways is not ideal environmentally. It’s still better than ICE/Diesel and big oil companies, but way more research and improvements need to take place to reduce the negative impact of EV’s today. At the same time, they need to continue to search for ways to make ICE cleaner and better. Either way, huge pigs like the Hummers are not the right solution and they are nothing more than ego boosters for wealthy attention hogs.
ThEy alrEady figurEd it out but China, I mEan, thE U.S. govErnmEnt has alrEady dEcided othErwisE and automakErs arE following thE Easier monEy. Just likE votErs, companiEs cravE that “frEE” stuff from govErnmEnt. Plus ESG invEstors are pouring monEy into this stuff. I think companiEs arE saying thEy arE losing monEy on EVs, but thE pEoplE making thE dEcisions arE doing just finE and thosE gov’t subsidiEs will always kEEP thEm afloat sincE gov’t can just kEEp printing morE monEy.
AutomakErs havE alrEady bEEn producing solutions. Gov”t just nEvEr bought into thEm.
1. Production and charging:
AnswEr: FuEl CEll. SmallEr battEriEs rEquirEd with clEan onboard charging. If thE hydrogEn logistics is your concErn, it doEsn’t sEEm likE it would bE too much diffErEnt than thE charging logistics for EVs now.
2. MakE ICE clEanEr and bEttEr:
AnswEr: Natural Gas. I’m surE thErE arE othEr options but natural gas bEing thE biggEst onE. EfficiEncy, would bE thE “bEttEr” part. GEtting ICE EnginEs as EfficiEnt as ElEctric motors would bE awEsomE. FuEl milEagE would bE insanE comparEd to now but thE EnginE cost would most likEly bE insanE too.
@E-Hobzac62: I think I understand what you wrote. The problem is that what you do write is so difficult to read and understand since you insist on using the “E” in everything. I get that it’s your thing, but just know it make it much more difficult to read.
Yup and all of that equipment used to mine the battery materials is diesel powered which likely cancels out any benefits from the EV’s! It’s a scam people don’t fall for it!
Boomer59: Can I suggest something? There is a lot of neutral/non-biased and informative information in which you can read and study. One of the things that I look at is study after study from various sources that measure the carbon foot print of both EV/PHEV’s and ICE/diesel. In those studies, the conclusion is consistent that the overall carbon foot print with EV’s is well below that of ICE. The reason these studies are good is because it takes everything into account from the mining of precious metals (in which diesel power would be used) to the end of life of that same vehicle. I really encourage you to research some of that.
With that said and as I stated above, our current system of producing EV’s is not ideal and truly needs to get better. We need to continue to improve and clean the process for both EV’s and ICE. I’ve said it before and will continue to say it: EV’s are not for everyone and it would be stupid to think everyone must drive one. Yet knowledge is power and knowing more about the EV’s will help dissipate most anxiety around them and stop many of the rumors.
The part of the study that is misleading (as I read everything in the topic area ) are the lifetime of the vehicle Assumption . If an ev crashes and burns within 5 years , the lifetime emissions of the ice vehicle that last 5 years will be less . The data is twisted due to these assumptions . Same is true for wind and solar vs natural gas to create electricity . The wind turbine needs to operate efficiently and maintained well for 20 years to be lower c02 then natural gas
James: Understood. Question though. Wouldn’t the crash and burn scenario be similar in % on ICE to EV?
LOL, the future is here! ICE forever!