November 11th, 2010
09:15 AM ET

GE to buy 25K electric fleet vehicles

GE said Thursday it will buy 25,000 electric vehicles for its fleet through 2015 in the largest-ever purchase of electric cars.

GE will begin with an initial purchase of 12,000 vehicles from General Motor Co., starting with Chevy Volt in 2011. The conglomerate said it "will add other vehicles as manufacturers expand their electric vehicle profiles."

The first Chevrolet Volt is expected to roll off production lines later this month.

GM confirmed the announcement with

soundoff (383 Responses)
  1. cesar

    This keeps us from depending on oil from not so friendly places. It also helps the environment remain untouched from all that drilling; less polution and cost savings in the long run. I am anxious for this to be more common throughout our country and abroad as well.

    November 11, 2010 at 9:23 am | Report abuse |
    • Kile Anderson

      Cesar, the car is full of plastics and rubber that is made from oil. Most of the electricity used to charge these cars will be produced using fossil fuels, including imported oil. This is a typical liberal, feel good, move that actually changes nothing. The ONLY reason anyone will buy this car is because it is so heavily subsidized. It is just another Obama giveaway to the UAW. If the market wanted these cars, the government wouldn't need to provide a subsidy.

      November 11, 2010 at 9:36 am | Report abuse |
    • Perkin Hayes D'Amato

      And most of the materials, probably including the batteries, comes from a country who does a lot of sabre rattling too. And the creation of those batteries is very rough on the environment.

      November 11, 2010 at 9:51 am | Report abuse |
    • mkj350

      Not to mention the battery/electrical dangers to rescue workers trying to extricate people from the wreckage when there's an accident .

      November 11, 2010 at 9:52 am | Report abuse |
    • larryonLI

      cesar, have you given any thought to the fact that while you are charging the batteries in the volt you will be burning gasoline.also consider that charging the battieries at an electric source requires in most cases a fossil fueled generator.the wind doesn't blow all of the time nor does the sun shine all of the time.

      November 11, 2010 at 9:54 am | Report abuse |
    • Caesar


      Soon to be made in China...taxpayers money going to wonder Americans are mad as hell on Obama.

      China's SAIC close to GM IPO stake buy-sources

      November 11, 2010 at 9:56 am | Report abuse |
    • ReConUSMC

      This is a B/S cheap trick with ties between Obama and the far leftist that Runs GE .
      Stock Holders would have voted against it since Ford who took no Govt, money or gave the Unions part of the Co for free have far better Millage clean air Cars and trucks .
      The Volt gets 40 miles to a charge .. It takes 8 hours to recharge it .
      That recharge is done 91 % with Coal and Oil . Duh !
      While Obama is moronically closing Coal plants weekly .

      November 11, 2010 at 9:57 am | Report abuse |
    • garytzzz

      The Chevy Volt gets between 25 to 40 miles on a full charge before it goes to it's gas engine. This is pretty bad when you consider the list price is over 40K before the $7500 tax credit. I agree with Kile. If this car was so good it wouldn't need a tax credit. Maybe we could use the tax credit for research into a real alternative to oil instead of subsidizing the UAW.

      November 11, 2010 at 10:02 am | Report abuse |
    • John Wilder

      Physics, thermodynamics, and science will rule the day. A constant advertising campaign will not alter the results. The volt will prove to be a colossal failure. It will fail not because it is GM producing it or the UAW involvement but because it is much more expensive than alternatives. We transitioned from horses to autos for a reason. Keep a horse for awhile and you will see.

      The atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration is not increasing. This is a myth. It really doesn’t matter how often it is stated otherwise in the press. It is not increasing! A simple understanding of undergraduate chemistry is all it takes to understand this. However all of our students are trained in poly sci and underwater basket weaving. They then become the experts.

      Just my two cents worth.

      November 11, 2010 at 10:17 am | Report abuse |
    • Texan1

      I wonder which company will build the stations where the Volt will be recharged? If you haven't seen the commercials's GE!

      November 11, 2010 at 10:20 am | Report abuse |
    • Paul Revere

      Oops! What an embarassing comment, lol.

      November 11, 2010 at 10:30 am | Report abuse |
    • burke

      Cesar, you and others like you are dead wrong. This car will fail because very few people will buy them. The market place will pass judgement, not union thugs and marxists.

      November 11, 2010 at 10:32 am | Report abuse |
    • Dave

      Did you know electricity is energy; it does not magically appear at the wall socket? This means that every time you plug one of these bad boys in, the coal fired power plant has to produce that much more energy. So until all electricity is generated by nuclear, wind, solar, and whatever else, I wouldn't be running around claiming this is an emission free vehicle.

      November 11, 2010 at 11:14 am | Report abuse |
    • Brad

      It might reduce the need for foreign oil but does nothing for the environment. You are trading one energy source for another. Electricity is not free and must be produced. What is generating the electricity? Coal, not very clean. Gas fired plants? Or are we damaging the environemnt by building more damns. And buy the way, this car goes only 40 miles, then you use a gas engine. Still pumping gas.

      What about the environment when it comes to battery displosal, not to mention the price to replace. The only reason this car might help the environment is becuase of it's size, it a small death trap.

      Have you ever seen what one of these batteriy technologies (LIPO, LIFE) do when their structual integrity is damaged? Flames that will remind us of the Pinto.

      The Volt is a looser that will not save you money or the environment. I can't wait to hear about the electricity bills. They will remian low becuase the new owners will learn that their gas engine is more practicle and affordable.

      November 11, 2010 at 11:23 am | Report abuse |
    • Alan George


      To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

      38% of "greenhouse gases" are produced at electric power plants

      Cars emit 9%

      Therefore if cars emit 0%

      Electic power plants will assume the power generation created by combustion engines.

      So electric plants will create 48% of greenhouse gases.

      Where is the gain?

      November 11, 2010 at 11:29 am | Report abuse |
    • Burgher

      Where will the electricity to run the VOLT be produced?

      November 11, 2010 at 11:38 am | Report abuse |
    • BobNJ1

      As a GE stockholder, I see this move as almost criminal for the company. There can be NO cost basis calculation that results in this being good for the bottom line other than the payola GE may have gotten form the Administration of Obama. Any US company on their own would not make this cost-inefficient decision.

      November 11, 2010 at 11:54 am | Report abuse |
    • Matt


      If you had a time machine..... and could go back and tell your kooky left-wing friends to NOT protest the construction of all nuclear power plants in the U.S, then electric cars MIGHT makes sense from an environmental standpoint.

      But alas, that opportunity was destroyed by deep thinkers like yourself. The end result being that COAL generates the electricity that you will put into your beloved Volt. Thereby sparing the environment absolutely nothing.

      November 11, 2010 at 12:07 pm | Report abuse |
    • Bill Schwartz

      Just imagine all of us coming home after a hard days work (well, those of us that aren't living off the state or mom and dad) and plugging our car chargers in. What will that do to an already antiquated power grid? I don't know about everyone else, but here in central Ca. we're constantly being told we need to use LESS electricity. Will new power stations be needed? A new or upgraded grid? Yeah! U think GE might profit from building new power plants or upgrading the power grid? You think?

      November 11, 2010 at 12:07 pm | Report abuse |
    • Biff

      Ceasar General Electric bought the cars because they are the producer of the Electric Plug-in. Don't be a tuffish!

      November 11, 2010 at 12:12 pm | Report abuse |
    • nomad674

      kile is spot on.. these cars are a piece of crap and just as bad for the enviroment as any car you still have to use gas and the batteries are charged up with electricty mostly produced with fossil fuels.. this is a car only for liberals they show off at our cost. we normal people will end up paying for these stupid and dangerous ideas. global warming is not man made. its just a powerplay. when i was young it we were going to run out of water that was 40 years ago
      and then global cooling then we were going to loose the oceans. i say we exile all liberals to california and then give it back to mexico....

      November 11, 2010 at 12:16 pm | Report abuse |
    • Wayne

      It does nothing of the sort. How do you think electricity is made?
      I know exactly how it is made, as I work for a natural-gas generation facility.
      We have got to find a way to get completely away from electricity alltogether to do any good.
      Good luck with that.

      November 11, 2010 at 12:44 pm | Report abuse |
    • Vitolaw

      I'll stick with my VW Diesels. You all can keep that over rated glorified golf cart....

      November 11, 2010 at 12:44 pm | Report abuse |
    • obafgkm

      This deal was cut in the same smoke-filled room in which Obama all but promised GE untold billions to advance his "renewable energy" dreams. See
      for example.

      In any case, the U.S. will be dependent on its stalwart ally, Columbia, for the lithium used in it's lithium-battery-powered "green" automobiles. That just adds another layer of totalitarian thugs to the U.S.'s economic masters.

      November 11, 2010 at 12:44 pm | Report abuse |
    • Karma Smothers

      Buy one and let me know how you like it.

      November 11, 2010 at 12:48 pm | Report abuse |
    • Wayne

      And burning fossil fuels is by far the most effecient way to produce electricity. None of the other methods (solar, hydroelectric, wind, geothermal, etc.) even comes close. There's not enough wind or sunlight or flowing water in the world to power even one country. Nuclear is extremely effecient, but it's not without it's side-effects.
      So you go ahead and find a completely natural way to produce electricity without harming the earth in some way, and I'll be the first in line to get mine. Or better yet, come up with something other than electricity.
      Smarter people than you and I have tried and failed.

      November 11, 2010 at 12:49 pm | Report abuse |
    • Menticpolazi

      To all of you criticizing poor Cesar, claiming that the Volt does nothing for the environment, or our dependence on foreign oil, and that the public will not buy it, keep in mind that every new technology has to start somewhere. Yes, the Volt is expensive and there will probably be problems with the first generation released to consumers, but version 2.0 will build off of the Volt's mistakes. Nothing is perfect at first; it took over 100 years to get from the Model T to the F-150. But for those of you who think this sounds like too much work and is some big far-left conspiracy, then by all means continue to keep going to the gas pump and complaining about oil prices. A change in domestic energy consumption/production is a big change which will take years to complete, but we have to start somewhere.

      November 11, 2010 at 1:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • CBJ

      Are you serious? GM has not released full mileage specs on the Volt. Preliminary tests has it at high 20's low 30's per gallon of gas if you drive it over 50 miles.

      November 11, 2010 at 1:24 pm | Report abuse |
    • OrangeRush2112

      what a waste. its amazing that someone actually thinks that we are this stupid not to notice this criminal triad – GE, Obama and China.

      November 11, 2010 at 1:25 pm | Report abuse |
    • John

      The cap-and-trade bill, which will likely just be enforced via the EPA now, would give the government the authority to monitor your private energy usage in your home. New (now mandated in some states) outlets for specific appliances could be monitored and disabled should some unelected EPA bureaucrat decide you're using too much energy. There are plans for car charging monitoring as well, so as to identify "excessive travelers".

      Power and control, people. Fight it while you can.

      General Electric is no longer interested in competing in the open marketplace with new products and superior ideas. Instead, they are attempting to legislate their way to profit. They lobbied heavily for the ban on incandescent lightbulbs so they could sell those horrible squiggly florescents. Guess what, it worked. Better stock up on those incandescents before they're no longer available in 2012. Guess who's lobbying for cap-and-trade and owns a large percentage of the carbon trading exchange that would run it all? You guess it – GE. Who owns NBC and MSNBC who continue to push these carbon trading schemes and alternative energy boondoggles through their "we just care about the enviornment" propoganda? General Electric. Finally, who received billions of your tax dollars through the financial bailout in large part so they could continue to lobby, invest and push these initiatives? GE Capital.

      Don't believe me? Look it up for yourself.

      November 11, 2010 at 1:32 pm | Report abuse |
    • Victor

      You are correct, Cesar. These other guys trying to dismiss what you are saying are not. Worst case scenario, this vehicle (under regular use) or the Leaf would have about the same carbon emissions well-to-wheel as the Prius. Charging in the middle of the night in California, you'll be doing about 10% of the carbon emissions compared to a combustion engine vehicle.

      I will agree with Kile Anderson about the plastic use in the vehicle. Especially when there already exists alternatives to that from algae and natural materials that have greater integrity. However, people who are trying to say that your car would still be running on oil are a bit off. Unless you're living in Hawaii, it's very unlikely that any of the electricity from the grid you're plugged into is using any oil for fuel.

      November 11, 2010 at 1:39 pm | Report abuse |
    • Typical White Person

      Now we will overload the energy producing system providing electricity to charge the batteries. Our energy Czars need new brain implants.

      WE need cheap pruduction of energy from our own supplies – coal, gas oil, nuclear provided without subsidies.

      November 11, 2010 at 1:55 pm | Report abuse |
  2. junglejim123

    Yea it costs $30,000 – $40,000 battery runs for only about 50 miles and the batteries are about $10,000. 00 to replace.... This is the best they can come up with huh ? What a JOKE !!! YES WE CAN HOPE AND CHANGE YES WE CAN !!!!!

    November 11, 2010 at 9:39 am | Report abuse |
    • greg k

      I guess you would like American auto jobs to go to India or lets just keep foriegn economies cranking by buying thier crap. You are brilliant.

      November 11, 2010 at 9:55 am | Report abuse |
    • CBJ

      Hey Greg, point is that this will do nothing to cut our dependence on oil, and since it will not save the consumer money in the long run, it WILL NOT SELL!

      November 11, 2010 at 1:26 pm | Report abuse |
  3. abigail adams

    Let me get this straight...taxpayers bail out GM- taxpayers bailout GE-GE spends taxpayers money to buy 25K volts from GM (which are overpriced and forced by the Administration to build) is recycling taxpayer dollars from one broke company to another broke company...helping...where is the profit???? Not there.....

    November 11, 2010 at 9:40 am | Report abuse |
    • Morton Winterbean

      GE is using Tax Payer money? Taxpayers "bailed out" GE? Do you ever engage your brain before spewing nonsense?

      November 11, 2010 at 11:38 am | Report abuse |
    • abigail adams

      Morton it is a well known fact June of 2009 GE got a certainly do not have to be rude...just check sources before you comment and try to devalue someone's opinion .....

      The U.S. Treasury Department is considering closing loopholes that allowed General Electric to participate in a government bailout program, a spokesman said.

      GE Capital, the company's finance firm, qualified for assistance through the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program, due to its ownership of a modest savings and loan in Utah, The Washington Post reported Monday.

      The government has guaranteed $340 billion in debt through the program with a quarter of that issued by GE Capital.

      November 11, 2010 at 12:27 pm | Report abuse |
  4. cesar

    @Kile. OK, so you know enginering. I don't, but at least we won't burn so much pollution into the environment. I think even an engineer person as you can't negate this point.

    November 11, 2010 at 9:41 am | Report abuse |
    • Balto

      Cradle to grave. Cradle to grave. There was a study that said the most environmentally friendly car ever produced was the ugly old Toyota Landcruiser. Reason? It takes huge resources and energy to produce a car. If you crush it after 8 years, you waste all of that and fill a landfill. If it runs forever, you get more for your materials and energy.

      November 11, 2010 at 9:50 am | Report abuse |
    • Frank

      No, we will pollute even more. I am a Physicist and an Engineer. Everytime you convert energy from one form to another you lose some of it. So if you burn fuel in your car you have one conversion. With the electric car we burn fuel to make electricity, that's one conversion. Then the electricity is transmitted to your home, that's two conversions. Then the electricity turns the motor, that's 3 conversions. It makes things worse, not better.

      November 11, 2010 at 10:08 am | Report abuse |
    • Jim

      @ cesar; As Frank states you burn more energy by having more transfer points. The other problem is that it the power for the most part 75% is Coal and NG fossil fuels, with a little bit of Oil for power facilities. If the country were 90% Nuclear with the remaining being Hydro, wind & solar you could win the emissions pollution argument. Overall the batteries use some pretty toxic chemicals which come from countries that generally don't take care of the environment.

      But then you get to cost. $41,000+ for a 4 seat car is pretty stiff and most people won't buy. I bought a Honda Fit for about $16,800 and get 33 mpg consistently. $24,200 will buy a lot of gas even if it shoots up.

      November 11, 2010 at 10:29 am | Report abuse |
    • Paul Revere

      Seeing beyond phase 1 is so hard for liberals and other dimwits.

      November 11, 2010 at 10:32 am | Report abuse |
    • burke

      typical liberal thinking. Always wanting to get something for nothing.

      November 11, 2010 at 10:35 am | Report abuse |
  5. Rick

    GE is just using its govt funding from stimulus (aka our tax dollars) to buy cars from Govt Motors (and its unions propped up by...our tax dollars). And there is no cost savings in the long run...just a further drain on our fossil-fuel fired power plants. Maybe some environmental benefit down the road (no pun intended), if we use more nuclear power generation.

    November 11, 2010 at 9:43 am | Report abuse |
  6. Pete

    So now instead of oil powered fossil fuels we have cars powered by mostly coal and nuclear? For all you greenies that think the electric car is such a planet saving option for transport, don't forget where electric comes from, and that you have to manufacture and dispose of a whole bunch of batteries that are currently not recyclable.
    Oil, OTOH, burns clean and there is plenty of it here in the good ol' USA.

    November 11, 2010 at 9:44 am | Report abuse |
  7. Rob

    cesar...where do you think the electric comes from to power the car? If we are not aloud to build more nuclear plants electric cars are not a smart move. Instead of burning the oil in our car we will burn it in the power plant and loose power as it flows to my house for my car to be plugged in. GE buying "Green" cars no surprise, GE stands to gain alot of money through green technologies. Only makes since they would want to create demand for "green" cars.

    November 11, 2010 at 9:44 am | Report abuse |
  8. Balto

    Increasing consumption will never solve our environmental problems. Buying the newest consumer good, be it a Volt, a Prius, or solar-powered pants, will make someone else a bit richer, but do nothing for the environment. You know what would help? Simplify your life, ride an old bike that you maintain well, and drive an old honda when you have to. But that doesn't make anybody rich and doesn't stroke your ego. Some people would rather buy (environmental) indulgences.

    November 11, 2010 at 9:44 am | Report abuse |
  9. The Laws of Physics


    November 11, 2010 at 9:45 am | Report abuse |
  10. Rick

    So GE is buying 12k of these using a bunch of taxpayer money because the public won't buy them. There is no market for the pieces of junk so obama had to create a market.

    November 11, 2010 at 9:45 am | Report abuse |
  11. bruce

    As a GE shareholder, I am disgusted by this poor politically motivated business decision. It's time to get rid of Jeff Immelt and all this green garbage and get back to business.

    November 11, 2010 at 9:49 am | Report abuse |
  12. floridabob

    let's see...GE is in bed with this administration....the UAW is in bed with this adminsistration.....GM is in bed with this administration....."green technology" means never having to justify how much it costs, ( in the name of "saving the planet"), GM has a IPO coming out....on and on. Nothing to see here folks...move along.

    November 11, 2010 at 9:52 am | Report abuse |
  13. The_Rewd

    Spend a lot on an expensive car just to stay home more.

    This is nothing more than wearing an AIDS ribbon for the environment, a ribbon subsidized by tax dollars.


    November 11, 2010 at 9:53 am | Report abuse |
  14. nvrat

    cesar. I can, man made pollution is a scam on weak minded people. The scientific community still has not determined what causes Global Warming even if it exists.

    November 11, 2010 at 9:53 am | Report abuse |
  15. Perkin Hayes D'Amato

    This is shameless corporate cronyism, and as some of the other posters have already stated, its probably the borrowed money used for TARP and Stimulus that is funding it. It's a shell game, at best, and we taxpayers are the rubes.

    November 11, 2010 at 9:54 am | Report abuse |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15