[Iron Lung Jimmy]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

Most automakers that are all in have gone all in for a combination of reasons. As tempting as it is to say “because A did this, B did that”. In the business world, especially automotive things aren’t so clean. If they were I wouldn’t have a job right now.

Legislation and government action is a factor in the shift from ICE to BEV, but it is not the defining reason. In GM’s case, they went all in on BEV before 2020, while fuel economy standards were being relaxed, during an administration that had walked away from the Paris Accord and was friendly to coal generated power.

One of the factors that helped move GM in that direction is the ability to reduce their structural footprint and costs associated with that. Today GM has Alpha, Gamma, Delta, Chi, Epsilon, ZERV, T2, and the Midsized Truck platform. They also have multiple configurations of CSS, HFV6, Small Block, GF, and Duramax engine families and FWD, RWD, and DCT transmission families. All of them require tens of millions of dollars annually in engineering and development costs. With their EV strategy they will have two basic Ultium vehicle platforms, five specific electric motors, all of similar design, and two or three drive units. They’ll save tons of money on vehicle development costs and can put multiple top hats on top of the same basic platform to get different brands and models of vehicles. The Silverado EV sits on the same skateboard as the HUMMER EV, with less battery capacity and less electric motor, but the tops are completely different. Ditto the Cadillac Lyriq and Blazer EV.

Add to that the fact that GM as a company committed to following the Paris Accord, regardless of what the US administration in place at the time chose to do and you can see that GM’s choices were not driven by government. The government now has the option to support or not support the direction GM (and Ford and now Stellantis) chooses to follow. The prior administration did not support. The current administration is strongly supporting. Fact of the matter is GM chose their path and aren’t wavering from it.

Good info and thanks, as always, for taking the time to provide it.

One small quibble, though, is that the Paris Accord is really just de facto government regulation. Maybe not every country, but enough countries to make a difference in GM's global strategy. So GM's decision to follow it is, I strongly suspect, weighed far more to the side of survival than it is to any kind of altruism.