The government plans to provide $15.5 billion in loans and funding to hasten the EV transition, with a special focus on providing money for retooling factories, the U.S. Department of Energy just announced.
The EV grants and loans are a portion of the Investing in America initiative advanced by the Biden administration and also have the objective of preserving good-paying American auto industry jobs.
The $15.5 billion in EV funding is divided into three major sections. One is $2 billion in grants to convert existing, established auto manufacturing plants to production of EV components and EVs. The Department of Energy notes that “projects that commit to pay high wages for production workers and maintain collective bargaining agreements” will be given priority for receiving these funds.
Meanwhile, $10 billion in loans is earmarked for EV manufacturing projects “that retain high-quality jobs in communities that currently host manufacturing facilities.” The grants noted above are mostly intended for conversion of existing facilities. Meanwhile, the loans will also be made available for building new plants, provided that existing plants are kept open until the new facilities begin operation and that “high-quality” jobs are retained in the same community.
The final element of the announced EV funding is $3.5 billion for EV battery material and EV battery investment. The U.S. Department of Energy announcement says this money will include grants to develop the USA’s domestic EV battery industry. This will help to increase availability of the North America-sourced battery materials required for EV purchases to qualify for tax credits, and reduce American dependence on foreign battery and battery material sources such as China.
GM has already launched several partnerships to source battery materials and EV batteries from within the U.S. or Canada. It recently invested $60 million in Mitra Chem to develop affordable iron-based cathode active materials (CAM) that are compatible with GM Ultium battery technology.
The General also partnered with POSCO Future M to invest $1 billion in a new CAM and precursor plant able to produce cathode materials for 360,000 EVs per year. The automaker intends the introduction of 30 new electric vehicles globally by 2025, with EV models in one third of automotive segments by the same year. The segments in question are the best-selling and account for 70 percent of vehicle sales each year.
General Motors is aiming for annual EV sales of over 1 million units by 2025 in its two major markets, North America and China.
Subscribe to GM Authority for more GM business news, GM electric vehicle news, GM technology news, and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
Comments
I am pro EV, but I am not sure if I like this…
Bunch of hooey.
Another 15B. And please tell me again how renewable energy gets no tax incentives. LOL.
That’s all EV’s get is tax incentives! Just proves how little interest the public really has in them. Without the incentives no one would be looking to buy one period! When was the last time Apple got a subsidy from the government, never, which proves that if you develop something that the market wants you don’t need to subsidize it.
Yeah but when they buy that apple phone they want us to pay their school bills!
I still don’t want an EV, sorry Joe.
This bunch of clowns can’t seem to waste our tax dollars enough. I don’t care what they do, I’ll never buy anything except petro fueled vehicles. If they stop selling them, I’ll keep what I have.
I guess the ev crowd plans to eat all the spent batteries which might be a good plan for them because there’ll be no farmers left to grow actual food for them and they’re nowhere near intelligent enough to grow their own.
Hope GM, Ford and Stellantis continue building some ICE vehicles, not being interested in EV’s. Starting MSRP’s are high, I’m concerned about “range anxiety” and refuse paying to install charging system in garage unless it’s paid for.
BTW, is it my imagination or did Ford and Stellantis jump on EV bandwagon once GM claimed it will have 30 all electric vehicles by 2035? Feel all three are making a huge mistake, feeling eventual supply will outstrip demand.
So are you for or against the incentives? But you want the charger system installed and paid for…for you?
And now there are dealerships that are overloaded with EVs on their lots they can’t sell that they had told the manufacturer to stop sending them EVs . How long will the world listen to the Big Green Deal and Global Warming before we’ve destroyed our transportation system? Read up on your history and you’ll see we aren’t as bad off as it has been in the past! Our government as well as other nations are letting the tail wag the dog! WAKE UP AMERICA! Tomg
It’s like paying people to do business with you. And the rebates to get people to buy an EV do that Conjob very well.
I do not like Govt involvement in private/public companies. The Biden/Berra connection is way too close, and cause for concern !! Hopefully we will elect a 2024 president that works for free enterprise, The govt. tentacles need to retract in a lot of areas.
All they need now are willing customers! I see few EV’s on the road and I don’t know anyone who wants one.
Unfortunately Teslas, Bolts, ID4s, Mach-Es, Ioniq5s, and EV6s are becoming more and more common around here. People are getting roped into going EV. There is literally one public Electrify America charging station within a 30 mile radius of this area, and it is always full with people plugged in. The charging infrastructure isn’t keeping up with the demand. It’s also not uncommon to see people with their EVs plugged in in their driveways at home…most using Level 1 charging [that 3 miles of range per hour charging rate must be a real downer for many people.]
This is basically a handout to the Big Three presenting like a loan to protect our home turf manufacturing, jobs, and economy and to assist the Big Three before Chinese automakers hit our shores. Germany and France going to have to do a version of the IRA and or a so called loan/Bailout like this as well.
Some automakers in Europe are already claiming they need an IRA level bill as well to stay competitive and for Europe to keep investments in local manufacturing instead of losing them and they should do it as some Chinese Automakers are already selling there.
“Investing in America”…by investing in vehicles that rely on China for their main power source. They may be issuing grants to develop/manufacture batteries in the US, however that is going to require the issuing of permits to mine lithium in the US. Considering there is literally ONE lithium mine currently operating in the US, that is a tall order. There is a reason there aren’t more lithium mines in the US and no amount of grant money is going to change that. Ultimately, this $15.5B is going to find its way back to China in one form or another.
If the automakers want to play in the EV field, they should be spending the money on the R&D required to make it happen. Corporate America should be investing in the charging infrastructure needed to support it; the same infrastructure they will profit from. They stand to profit, so they should be the ones investing in it. My next car is going to be an ICE or mild hybrid. No plug in hybrid, no BEV. The push to BEVs to replace all ICE vehicles is a pipe dream that will never happen. It will always be a relatively low volume alternative to ICE vehicles.
If having Ms Baras email address, I’d send all above comments to her. Should GM begin having financial issues under her leadership, even if fired, the millions she was payed will provide lifestyle hourly employees can only dream about.
GM upper management doesn’t have enough financial stake in keeping GM a financially viable auto manufacturer, like blue collar workers do. Boardroom, stock holders and filling their pockets with absurd salaries appears all they care about.
No surprise here. Mary Berra said at the get go that GM will be all in with EV’s as long as government helps pay for development and manufacturing and then pays the customers to buy them. They are right on target to destroy the auto business. GM will likely be declaring bankruptcy within next 2 years.
If government money is involved it will not get repaid or they will file bankruptcy
I guess the government realizes the public is too stupid to understand global climate change is happening and fossil fuel emissions are a major reason. Worldwide wildfires, droughts, heat waves, flooding, hurricanes hitting California, melting artic ice,etc. is not enough to convince people that it’s not some far flung conspiracy between the world’s scientist and politicians to dupe us. I’m happy that our US government is taking it serious and trying to incentivize industry to make the change to electric zero emission vehicles (even while oil industry lobbyist bribe politicians). The car manufacturers make more money on gas burners, so they have no incentive to change on their own.
Car manufacturers are who they are because of previous attempts by politicians to prop them up in exchange for pursuing their interests. It’s people like you who are the most entertaining to those of us with superior intellect and a more pragmatic understanding of how things work, especially politics. You guys have a track record of latching yourselves on to naturally occurring things and then turning them into a political issue in which the end result is always the expansion of their power which is in turn used by them (politicians) to enrich themselves and further their interests all while the issue you used to justify said expansion is never addressed. It’s what fascists (Progressives) do, but unfortunately for them, their little Era is coming to an end as their monetary theory is nearing its late-stage, an inevitable result as the United States no longer has a near monopoly on global trade via their USD.
This is actual fascism.
You either subscribe to the idea that private-markets should be shaped via consumer-choice, or government regimentation. There is no in between.
I’m not against EV, or new technologies, but I am against government ushering in what they believe to be the viable future, effectively subsidizing the adoption of technologies prematurely and hindering any possible alternatives, or hurting those making the investment to bring these alternatives to market by dumping large amounts of money into the hands of already established providers.