Volt No Jolt: LG Chem Employees Idle

The Prof · Oct 20, 2012

Workers at LG Chem, a $300 million lithium-ion battery plant heavily funded by taxpayers, tell Target 8 that they have so little work to do that they spend hours playing cards and board games, reading magazines or watching movies. They say it's been going on for months. "There would be up to 40 of us that would just sit in there during the day," said former LG Chem employee Nicole Merryman, who said she quit in May.

That employee says some workers are doing odd jobs around the building, including cleaning and maintenance, while others hang out in the cafeteria playing video games, Texas hold-'em and Monopoly or doing Sudoku or crossword puzzles -- all on company time. The employee said some watch movies. "There's no work, no work at all. Zero work," another current employee said. "It is what it is. What do you do when there's no work?"

Target 8 left a message at the plant's security station and left a message with the company's receptionist. The receptionist would not transfer the call to a company manager.

The Target 8 investigation has led the Washington, D.C.-based Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board -- an oversight agency for the federal stimulus program -- to take action. "We are sending this to the Inspector General, Department of Energy, for his review," said Ed Pound, spokesman for the board. The Inspector General's Office would decide whether to open an investigation. Pound refused further comment.

The plant all started with such great hope, and a presidential groundbreaking in July 2010. "This is a symbol of where Michigan is going, this is a symbol of where Holland is going, and this is a symbol of where America's going," President Barack Obama told a crowd at the groundbreaking.

The company's goal: 300 employees pumping out 15 million battery cells a year. Its biggest customer: The Chevrolet Volt.

The U.S. Department of Energy provided a $151 million grant, part of Obama's Recovery Act. The Korea-based company recently said it has 200 employees, and the company's most recent federal filing shows 100 of them are funded through the Recovery Act grant.

The company has spent $133 million so far, most for construction and equipment, records show. About 40% has gone to foreign companies -- mostly to Korea, a Target 8 analysis shows. The company also spent more than $533,000 of that federal grant for the groundbreaking, records show.

Volt no jolt: LG Chem employees idle | WOOD TV8

just this week, 2 more green energy projects funded by obama went under

Car battery maker A123 files for bankruptcy - Oct. 16, 2012

Satcon Technology Corporation - Investor Relations Portal - News Release

a123 in michigan cost the taxpayer a cool quarter B

19 stimulus-funded green companies have now filed bankruptcy

The Complete List of Obama's Taxpayer-Backed Green Energy Failures

and they don't even use shovels, at least not very many

Obama: "No Such Thing as Shovel-Ready Projects" - CBS News

why is the s-word suddenly so obscene?

Just don't call it a 'stimulus' - POLITICO

Obama wants to boost economy - just don't call it stimulus - CNN

Barack Obama's economic proposals: Just don't call it stimulus | The Economist

Don't call it a stimulus - Los Angeles Times

Obama's Next Economic Plan: Don't Call It a Stimulus - TIME

Don't call it a stimulus - The Washington Post

obama's most transparent administration is once again in violation of its own established reporting guidelines

Ahead of Election, Obama Stops Releasing Stimulus Reports

why?

maybe he shoulda put em in a binder

poweRob · Oct 20, 2012

Why in the hell do you people march in lockstep with this hate for new technology? Makes no sense. Oh.. by the way:

Chevrolet Volt Sales Redefine 'Failure'

Even if many transactions were bolstered by cut-rate lease deals and other incentives last month, with 13,497 units rolling out of dealerships through the end of August, the Chevrolet Volt “extended range electric” sedan is outselling about half of all cars marketed in the U.S.

If indeed the Volt is a “failure,” as some of its critics have contended, we’re sure there’s several auto executives out there that would like many of their slower-selling models to suffer the same fate.

...the Volt’s 133rd-place ranking placed it ahead of industry stalwarts like the Audi A6, BMW 7-Series, Porsche Cayenne and Mercedes-Benz S-Class, and it outsold most hybrids including the Toyota Prius plug-in, Honda Civic, Kia Optima, Toyota Highlander and Lexus RX 450h.

You just keep on cheering for American failure there true patriot.

poweRob · Oct 20, 2012

I'll let GM debunk the bunk:

Five myths used to bully Chevy Volt sales

Fletch · Oct 20, 2012

poweRob said:
Why in the hell do you people march in lockstep with this hate for new technology? Makes no sense.

It is not a hate for new technology. It is a rejection that the state should impose its aganda upon the American people by confiscating their wealth and using it to prop up politically connected and politically correct businesses to further a particualr agenda. If you want to invest in new technology, risk your own capital. Do not allow the state to confiscate mine and roll the dice with other peoples money. It is that simple.

Thrilla · Oct 20, 2012

doesn't seem like sound economic policy to subsidize an industry that has little or no demand for its products...at least not enough demand to justify the staffing levels.

if all those people are playing cards and such ( on the taxpayers dime), then they should be sent home, laid off, or simply fired.

GhostlyJoe · Oct 20, 2012

Thrilla said:
doesn't seem like sound economic policy to subsidize an industry that has little or no demand for its products...at least not enough demand to justify the staffing levels.

if all those people are playing cards and such ( on the taxpayers dime), then they should be sent home, laid off, or simply fired.

I'm not at all dogmatic on this issue, but it seems to me that subsidies can help create demand for products like electric cars, which will become more attractive as adoption increases. Not only will economies of scale make the price more attractive, as an infrastructure develops to accommodate electric vehicles and as marketing begins to promote them to the masses, I would expect demand to go way up. An initial subsidy could spur that process, no?

The problem as I see it is that direct subsidies to private firms create hazard. I wonder if research investments through, say, public universities, would be a fairer system. Technology advancements could then be sold on private markets.

poweRob · Oct 20, 2012

Fletch said:
It is not a hate for new technology. It is a rejection that the state should impose its aganda upon the American people by confiscating their wealth and using it to prop up politically connected and politically correct businesses to further a particualr agenda. If you want to invest in new technology, risk your own capital. Do not allow the state to confiscate mine and roll the dice with other peoples money. It is that simple.

Then we definitely shouldn't have ever gone to the moon. Or laid all those railroad tracks. Or petroleum exploration grants to oil companies. The list goes on and on... but the outrage is now to stop new tech and fight for the status quo tech that was built with the same kind of government backing.

Politics.

iguanaman · Oct 20, 2012

GhostlyJoe said:
I'm not at all dogmatic on this issue, but it seems to me that subsidies can help create demand for products like electric cars, which will become more attractive as adoption increases. Not only will economies of scale make the price more attractive, as an infrastructure develops to accommodate electric vehicles and as marketing begins to promote them to the masses, I would expect demand to go way up. An initial subsidy could spur that process, no?

You are trying to be logical when the purpose of the OP is to throw away logic and simply do what the oil companies want us to. Buy every drop of oil they can squeeze out of the ground, BEFORE we try anything else to reduce our consumption. U.S gasoiline consumption is still at 2000 levels and we are exporting 400 thousand barrels a day of refined gasoilne to S. America. We need to use more gasoline here to keep those profit margins rising.

GhostlyJoe · Oct 20, 2012

iguanaman said:
You are trying to be logical when the purpose of the OP is to throw away logic and simply do what the oil companies want us to. Buy every drop of oil they can squeeze out of the ground, BEFORE we try anything else to reduce our consumption. U.S gasoiline consumption is still at 2000 levels and we are exporting 400 thousand barrels a day of refined gasoilne to S. America. We need to use more gasoline here to keep those profit margins rising.

Well, it's the oil companies' right to promote the oil companies' interests, and we do, in fact, depend on oil companies for vital services. I would expect them to act accordingly. However, I want the government to work in the public interest, and I can see how green-energy subsidies promote that interest.

poweRob · Oct 20, 2012

Thrilla said:
doesn't seem like sound economic policy to subsidize an industry that has little or no demand for its products...at least not enough demand to justify the staffing levels.

if all those people are playing cards and such ( on the taxpayers dime), then they should be sent home, laid off, or simply fired.

Myth 1: The Volt is a Sales flop, selling a fraction of what is required to make it a success.

Busted: The Volt is now selling three times the number needed to breakeven (see myth 4 for details). In fact in August the Volt was outselling 50 percent of all car models on the North American market and is now outselling every single hybrid model sold by BMW, Ford, Honda, and Volkswagen. The Volt is also well in front of the adoption curve of another “new kid” when they first arrived, the Toyota Prius.
link...

Myth 4: The Volt is selling for $49,000 less than it cost to make.

Busted, and busted again: This myth has been around for a while. The idea behind it is to present any Volts sales success as a bad thing that is costing GM big money.

...the Volt is actually on the cusp of break even at this sales pace. What this means is, excluding R&D costs GM is making money with each Volt sold, possible to the tune of $10,000 or more.

Thrilla · Oct 20, 2012

GhostlyJoe said:
I'm not at all dogmatic on this issue, but it seems to me that subsidies can help create demand for products like electric cars, which will become more attractive as adoption increases. Not only will economies of scale make the price more attractive, as an infrastructure develops to accommodate electric vehicles and as marketing begins to promote them to the masses, I would expect demand to go way up. An initial subsidy could spur that process, no?

we're going into our 3rd year of the Chevy Volt...I don't think we can hide behind the adoption process much longer.

can subsidies help spur demand?.. sure, if done correctly.
I'm not sure we can argue that handing out millions so workers can sit on their butts playing cards is effective subsidizing, though.

some other subsidized battery company just recently went under.. because of having little/no demand for their product.... now we hear about this heavily subsidized company having the same problem with demand.

when this car is selling less than 20,000 units a year... a huge, heavily subsidized battery infrastructure doesn't seem like a smart item to be spending federal tax dollars on.

.

Born Free · Oct 20, 2012

poweRob said:
Why in the hell do you people march in lockstep with this hate for new technology? Makes no sense.

No one is against new technology, just the wrong kind of new technology. You do know that there is not one green anything that can compete with coal or natural gas. So all this solar and wind is not competitive, nor are these electric cars or half electric. Billion of tax payer dollars are funding these none competitive green ideas, that cannot compete. T Boone proved that by loosing millions on windmills and is now promoting natural gas as the future energy. Obama's tax dollar companies are going bankrupt, why, they can't compete.

Now I am all for green, but I am only for putting dollars into science only to assist in accomplishing the real goal of replacing oil. Wind and solar only make electricity, and we have a thousand yrs of coal and natural gas to make electricity. Electricity will not fly our planes, push our ships, trains, heavy trucks, heavy equipment etc etc etc.

minnie616 · Oct 20, 2012

Just a reminder:

The first cell phones cost about $4,000 each.

"The brick" weighed 2 pounds, offered just a half-hour of talk time for every recharging and sold for $3,995.

Clunky and overpriced?

First cell phone a true 'brick' - Technology & science - Wireless | NBC News

Born Free · Oct 20, 2012

minnie616 said:
Just a reminder:

The first cell phones cost about $4,000 each.

First cell phone a true 'brick' - Technology & science - Wireless | NBC News

Just a reminder:

Electronics, computers, smart phones, tablets and the like, is not a replacement for oil.

Thrilla · Oct 20, 2012

poweRob said:
Myth 1: The Volt is a Sales flop, selling a fraction of what is required to make it a success.

Busted: The Volt is now selling three times the number needed to breakeven (see myth 4 for details). In fact in August the Volt was outselling 50 percent of all car models on the North American market and is now outselling every single hybrid model sold by BMW, Ford, Honda, and Volkswagen. The Volt is also well in front of the adoption curve of another “new kid” when they first arrived, the Toyota Prius.
link...

Myth 4: The Volt is selling for $49,000 less than it cost to make.

Busted, and busted again: This myth has been around for a while. The idea behind it is to present any Volts sales success as a bad thing that is costing GM big money.

...the Volt is actually on the cusp of break even at this sales pace. What this means is, excluding R&D costs GM is making money with each Volt sold, possible to the tune of $10,000 or more.

well, if a Commercial pilot instructor says so.. it must be true :lol:

Thrilla · Oct 20, 2012

So, Rob.. explain how all these workers sitting around on their asses playing cards on the taxpayers dime is a good thing.

I'm dying to hear this.

Dickieboy · Oct 20, 2012

Just some random thoughts on this…for years cars were basically four owner endevours. The ‘I like brand new cars ($25k+)’, the ‘one owner buyers (40-60k miles, $15-20k), the ‘good deal folks’ ($8-15k) and the ‘beaters’ (what ever is cheap, runs) who will run the wheels off. As manufacturing got better (engines, tires, bodies) the ‘one owners’ and ‘good deal folks’ consolidated. These classes of auto buyers also follow socioeconomic classes somewhat. I’m not sure how this works out for the adoption of the electric car from a durability standpoint. For instance after the middle class folks ‘use up’ their utility in an electric car will it still be serviceable for the ‘beater’ class? How will the ‘beater’ class be able to afford the ‘middle class’ prices when they can’t now? If gas prices get higher how will the ‘beater’ class be able to save enough to move into the ‘middle class’?

As to the battery manufacturers…one of the major drawbacks with wind/solar power is storage. It would seem that there should be a market niche for them to produce more battery product thus with the volume increase reduce the unit cost thus helping make wind/solar more affordable AND workable and in turn assisting reducing the elec car prices also. IF we are going to continue to subsidize (which I am firmly against) this we should be smart enough to make it sustainable or are neither EC or wind/solar just so unpopular to support our manufacturing capacity?

minnie616 · Oct 20, 2012

The government is investigating the LG worker claims:

But at least two federal agencies within the Obama administration -- the Energy Department itself and the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board, which oversees the stimulus program --
forwarded the case to the Energy Department's inspector general for review, FoxNews.com confirmed late Friday.

"The Energy Department takes these allegations very seriously and has asked the Energy Department's Inspector General to investigate the matter to determine whether the company's requests for partial reimbursement of expenses under the grant have been legitimate," an Energy Department spokeswoman said in a statement. "The department is committed to ensuring that every taxpayer dollar is spent appropriately to achieve the goal of building a competitive, advanced battery industry in the U.S."

The spokeswoman said any expenses found not to be "legitimate work" under the grant will have to be reimbursed to the government.

It's unclear how much of the $150 million grant has been tapped to date. Under the terms, the company is supposed to match its federal grant money dollar for dollar, and is reimbursed in increments.

The facility has been supported in the past by members of both parties.

It also has received sizeable tax breaks from the local government.

A spokesman for the LG Chem plant told FoxNews.com last week that battery production is expected to pick up once Volt assembly lines in Detroit resume production this month. He said the facility has spent the past two years building infrastructure and conducting pre-production "test runs."

"The market conditions haven't been as favorable, but this hasn't slowed down plans one bit," Randy Boileau said.
"LG Chem has repeatedly said that this facility is a critical component for them globally."

Read more: Watchdog asked to investigate stimulus-backed battery plant after claims of idle workers | Fox News

poweRob · Oct 20, 2012

Thrilla said:
So, Rob.. explain how all these workers sitting around on their asses playing cards on the taxpayers dime is a good thing.

I'm dying to hear this.

I don't think that's a good thing. People are looking for any reason to torpedo the Volt and I'm not buying into that. I think they should keep that crap from happening but nit-picking for any reason to sink everying altogether... I'm not about that.

Thrilla · Oct 20, 2012

poweRob said:
I don't think that's a good thing. People are looking for any reason to torpedo the Volt and I'm not buying into that. I think they should keep that crap from happening but nit-picking for any reason to sink everying altogether... I'm not about that.

yeah, I can get behind that.

but ,really, that's what's going to happen when it becomes a political issue ( on many fronts)

I don't see much sense in torpedoing the Volt... and I don't see much sense in overstating it either.

the Volt is a pretty cool car... it has promise... but it's ownership costs are way too steep.
it makes no economic sense to choose a Volt over a Prius or even the Leaf ... none.

Born Free · Oct 20, 2012

Thrilla said:
yeah, I can get behind that.

but ,really, that's what's going to happen when it becomes a political issue ( on many fronts)

I don't see much sense in torpedoing the Volt... and I don't see much sense in overstating it either.

the Volt is a pretty cool car... it has promise... but it's ownership costs are way too steep.
it makes no economic sense to choose a Volt over a Prius or even the Leaf ... none.

And everyone of those cars in bold are subsidized by tax payer dollars. Let them stand on their own without tax payer help and they all would die. How about taking away all subsidies?

Thrilla · Oct 20, 2012

Born Free said:
And everyone of those cars in bold are subsidized by tax payer dollars. Let them stand on their own without tax payer help and they all would die. How about taking away all subsidies?

be careful.. don't confuse tax credits with subsidies...

Born Free · Oct 20, 2012

Thrilla said:
be careful.. don't confuse tax credits with subsidies...

A tax credit is a subsidy. You take the credit and deduct that from the taxes you owe. Is that not tax payer dollars going to subsidize the purchase of a car. Let me ask you, who makes up those dollars that the person keeps in the form of a tax credit. Never mind, I'll answer that, the tax payer. The oil companies that everyone bitches about, what do they call it when they get a tax credit, "subsidy."

Thrilla · Oct 20, 2012

Born Free said:
A tax credit is a subsidy. You take the credit and deduct that from the taxes you owe. Is that not tax payers dollars going to subsidize the purchase a car. Let me ask you, who makes up those dollars that the person keeps in the form of a tax credit. Never mind, I answer that, the tax payer. The oil companies that everyone bitches about, what do they call it when they get a tax credit, "subsidy."

subsidies are when the government gives you money as a payment
tax credits are when you pay the government less in taxes.

there is a difference.

I'm all for tax credits... i'm not really kosher with subsidies.

Born Free · Oct 20, 2012

Thrilla said:
subsidies are when the government gives you money as a payment
tax credits are when you pay the government less in taxes.

there is a difference.

I'm all for tax credits... i'm not really kosher with subsidies.

A subsidy can take different forms, it is not just a direct payment. Oil companies get subsidies in the form of a tax credit. A subside could be in the form of a guarantee of credit. When you subsidize a company you are aiding and assisting that company. Sorry but a subsidy is a tax credit. Either way you don't pay the government 100K that you would owe otherwise, which creates a loss for the government of a 100K, or it gives you 100K which the loss to the government is the exact same amount.

Volt No Jolt: LG Chem Employees Idle

The Prof

poweRob

USMC 1988-1996

poweRob

USMC 1988-1996

Fletch

Thrilla

GhostlyJoe

poweRob

USMC 1988-1996

iguanaman

GhostlyJoe

poweRob

USMC 1988-1996

Thrilla

Born Free

minnie616

Born Free

Thrilla

Thrilla

Dickieboy

minnie616

poweRob

USMC 1988-1996

Thrilla

Born Free

Thrilla

Born Free

Thrilla

Born Free

Volt No Jolt: LG Chem Employees Idle

USMC 1988-1996

USMC 1988-1996

USMC 1988-1996

USMC 1988-1996

USMC 1988-1996

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency