The EV/Hybrid Scam

Green vehicles wilt due to techno-obsolescence, like prior gasoline vehicles purposely obsoleted stylistically every year to attract new purchases.

All of us know that as soon as we drive our new car off the lot, it’s value has dropped significantly. But we could still resell it for something. And if we fell head over heels in love with it, we could keep it until servicing costs became too frequent and unreasonable.

With a pure Electric Vehicle, or a Hybrid electric/gas vehicle, your car becomes technologically obsolete as soon as you drive it off the lot. Once its battery system conks out (or catches fire), you will not be able to sustain the vehicle by buying a replacement battery. The car companies’ excuse is that battery technology is advancing so rapidly that the newer ones cannot be retrofitted to the older vehicles. Thus after a very few years, if your battery on your EV or hybrid fails, that vehicle is done for. You cannot purchase what is no longer being made. Such was the lesson I learned recently.

I bought a Chevrolet Volt in 2017 with great enthusiasm. I wanted a car that would run almost entirely on nightly home charging during my daily commutes and errands, yet would be worry free for long road trips. The Volt, a unique plug-in hybrid, fit my needs perfectly. The battery powered the car for 50 miles, slightly scant compared with other vehicles but completely adequate for my daily work needs and weekend errands. Because of its then-unique engineering design, the gas motor, not requiring a transmission and gears, would give me a solid 40-45 mpg even at highway speeds. The difference was GM’s replication of the technology used for years by many ships and almost all trains. In those cases the diesel motors drove an electric generator, not the ship or locomotive, and that generator powered electric motors that provide all the driving power of the vehicle. As a Swiss cruise ship’s chief engineering officer told me years ago, the diesel ran at it’s most efficient settings, thus there was no reason for smoke to be seen out the ship’s smokestacks. The Volt’s advantage was the ability to run for a short range without that motor-generator, or for the owner to use the motor-generator at will for longer trips. This unique, at the time, use of long-existing methods seemed an obvious and excellent use of GM’s prior background in EV technology.

GM had decades before successfully launched the first modern American EV, leasing it to thousands. Thus I believed they were well ahead of other American manufacturers in developing “green” personal transportation. This car, the GM EV1, was very successful and wildly popular for the scant years of its production, 1996-1999. Mysteriously, GM took back all these vehicles at the end of the leases, refusing to sell them out of the lease to many eager owners and fans. Over twenty years later I may have learned the reason. On a visit to the Peterson Auto Museum in Los Angeles I saw one of the GM EV1’s on display. I tracked down a docent, an older man, and asked him how it came to be there. He informed me that a few had been relegated to various automobile museums and such was this example. He told me the story of a GM engineer who had toured the museum years before and seen the EV1. That engineer told the docent that he, the engineer, had been one of the lessees, desperate to buy the car. The engineer had driven the car for 85,000 miles with only new tires being needed. That, the docent said, was the crux of the matter. The engineer admitted that GM realized their dealerships would be extremely opposed to continuing a car or a technology that required little or no service, as this was the financial lifeblood of the dealers. And so the car had to die.

My Volt seemed an excellent compromise to that dilemma, and for the seven years I owned it, so it was. I used pure electric mode for 85% of my driving, averaging around “250” equivalent miles per gallon as defined by the car’s energy efficiency computer. True to form the original factory 12 volt battery needed replacement after 3 years. That was an unpleasant surprise as the car one day refused to start or show any signs of life, with no warning by any of the complex electronics of the vehicle (for which I had purchased a separate five year warranty). Curious also, as I could not figure out why the design had not simply used the main battery for supplying the gasoline motor’s needs instead of keeping the classic configuration. And the replacement 12 volt (from the dealer) cost $250.00! Even so I really enjoyed the car, its comforts, size, rapid acceleration, and chameleon capability for longer trips. Other than the battery, new tires and an occasional oil change to the gas motor, as well as a fill up every six weeks or so was all that was needed for upkeep. I had asked the dealer that, when the main battery reached its expected lifespan around 8-10 years, about what could I expect to pay for a replacement battery? They noted that would be speculative, but thought it might be in the $15,000 to $20,000 range. Given that I truly loved the car, I thought this would be an excellent situation, and anticipated doing exactly that since the car’s looks and performance remained completely satisfactory.

The main battery’s expected gradual decline (as happens with all recharging batteries) did begin after six and a half years, with the range dropping from 50-55 miles to 48 miles or so. I expected and accepted this, looking forward to getting a few more years out of that original equipment. Meanwhile, unbeknownst to me—and perhaps many more Volt owners—GM’s technology was advancing and melting down simultaneously. Recalls had been issued of several years of the Volt due to battery fires. Although by my subsequent research online it appears that my car may have been one of those affected by those recalls, I was never notified. In reviewing that online information it is still unclear if those recalled Volts received newer technology replacement batteries or simply replacements. This was simultaneous with the early years of the all-electric Bolt, having multiple recalls of its own. I was aware of those because the dealer who sold me the Volt kept sending letters offering excellent trade-in for my Volt if I would only take a Bolt off their hands—sales had nose-dived due to the problems. Despite this obvious example of problems in GM’s EV technology engineering, I remained committed to my Volt.

The reckoning arrived in late November 2024. Suddenly the car, which normally ran primarily on full EV status until the battery was exhausted or I switched manually to gas power via the generator, would frequently and then persistently switch to gasoline motor power only, without any additive energy from the fully charged battery. The performance of the car in that state was dangerously poor. The “check engine” light had come on, but the engine, or gas motor, worked fine. The energy flow diagram on the dash showed the problem—the connection of the power train from the battery to the electric motor was absent or at best intermittent. Irritating, I thought, but probably just a relay—one of those computer-based components for which I had bought the extra warranty. I duly made an appointment to take it in to the dealer for service and turned it in on December 2, 2024. The service representative noted that, at least at the time I brought the car in, the check engine light was no longer lit. He felt they would not be able to determine what was wrong, since plugging into the car’s diagnostic system would not show an error code if the light wasn’t lit. I spent some time patiently explaining what the problem was, and what the energy flow screen was showing, which he carefully wrote down on the service request. He noted one hitch. The one technician certified to work on this type of vehicle was only at that dealership a couple of days a week, so there would be some delay. Since this had been the case with other minor services I was not discomfited, now being retired and having my wife’s time and second car to provide temporary support. A week later the situation, like the car’s technology, melted down.

The service representative informed me that two cells in the main battery had failed and would need replacement. The problem was that GM would not be able to provide the dealer with the battery cells until mid-January. He stated that this was a routine problem with poor support by GM for battery service or replacement on all their EV or hybrid vehicles. I asked for a courtesy car or rental since I would be without transportation for six weeks, and he explained that although the replacement cells were under GM warranty, a temporary replacement car was not. Very inconvenient and unpleasant but I would have to deal with it, especially since I intended to keep the car indefinitely.

That intention rapidly faded during the six week hiatus. I realized that if two cells had failed well short of expected life span then this would probably recur. Although replacement would still be under warranty for several years, a recurring loss of the vehicle for six weeks at a time was not acceptable. I began to believe I should sell the Volt as soon as the battery cells were replaced. Then came the ultimate betrayal, perhaps of the dealer as well as me. Calling back in mid-January, I kept getting a run-around, as the service rep was not available or out of the office or didn’t return my voicemail messages. When I finally got the representative, he claimed he had returned my calls. Not possible, I informed him. I had given them my cell phone number, and being a retired physician always carried it and always attended to text messages or phone calls. There was no record of any contacts from him. After a few days, the “service manager” called me to let me know that, contrary to what I had been told originally, GM would not deliver the parts until “sometime in the first quarter” of the year. As in, sometime hopefully before the end of March, 2025! But there was good news—the dealer had approved a rental car for me. I reminded him that this was now two months since the dealership took possession of my car, and they had turned down my request for a replacement vehicle at the start. Furthermore, partly out of necessity, we had purchased another new vehicle (not a GM product). I explained that I would prefer the dealer or Chevrolet to buy the car back, otherwise if and when it was repaired I would be selling it immediately. And not as a trade-in on a GM product. He then referred me to General Motors Customer Service office.

The round robin of explanations, document provisions, and unanswered voicemails, along with emails, began again. After another two weeks or so, GM informed me that they had approved buying back my Volt, but with no details as to price or process. I was referred to another company that “investigates” such issues for GM, and again the same process recurred. Despite referral of the case from GM, the new agency had none of the records I had provided, and of course assigned a separate multi-digit case number to my situation. Only another two weeks or so passed, however, before I had final approval for the repurchase under California’s Lemon Law, with a quoted value that was surprisingly good, well above Blue Book. I signed an agreement and returned it by email. I was notified that the dealer would have the paperwork for surrender of the automobile as of a certain date. Several days after that date passed as I called the dealer to arrange the surrender and my retrieval of personal items from the car. Initially I was told that only one person at the dealership could handle the turnover, but that he was off for several days. Finally I was able to contact him, and arranged to come in that same day for the turnover. One last violation of common sense occurred.

I arrived at the dealership and asked to see the person with whom I had spoken. Two or three people at the dealership were consulted, and finally they indicated they knew of no such person, or of the surrender event. On viewing my paperwork, one of the dealer’s back office folk realized that the individual was at an allied dealership around the corner and down the street! Driving there, I was finally able to find the surrender agent. In the process of filling out paperwork to receive the check, he informed me that he had had the same problem with his Cadillac CT6, a dying battery that GM could not or would not replace! The excuse was the rapid progress of technology. As EV and hybrid vehicles were rapidly developed and improved, so were their battery technologies, and no provisions were made for retrofitting new batteries to older vehicles. Thus, as a category, he was telling me that any EV or hybrid was essentially obsolete once it rolled off the showroom floor. Such are the benefits of the Green New Deal for automobiles—the dealer gets the green, and the owner gets what will, after a few years, become a useless, unsellable, and potentially hazardous (no provisions have been made to deal with defunct car batteries) piece of industrial trash. He escorted me to their long term storage lot. Unsurprisingly, five other Volts sat there awaiting processing and/or repurchase.

I pulled the plates, gathered up personal belongings in what was my favorite automobile in fifty years of driving experience, loaded up my well-used, completely dependable, gas-powered SUV, and left GM’s newest EV disaster in the dust of my disgust.

Caveat emptor electron…..