Dude, they've been working on products that actually make money. You can spend billions on something just for the sake of development. There has to be an ROI that can benefit them in the future. The Volt is still a gamble, so is the Telsa model S. The model S is doing OK, because of it's price point. Even if GM bought out Tesla and continued to develop their battery tech, it still doesn't eliminate the cost of the raw material and precious Earth metal that go into the average battery. Auto manufacturing can't be compared to things like cell phones. It just doesn't work that way. If you people fully understood the process and amount of time it takes to bring a regular internal combustion vehicle to market, they would know why a battery powered vehicle is no simple proposition. In a nutshell the electric car is coming, but it won't be because we have the tech, it will be based on market conditions. Gas is at $4+ which is start, but you need a grid, faster charging and ultimately charging stations that can support this tech. It's coming, but you can't have a pie in the sky outlook on this stuff.
You have basically proved my point. Yes, an electric car is not as profitable as a combustion engine driven vehicle. The ROI will always be greater for a gas auto. The maintenance costs for an electric car will be considerably lower due to no engine, no transmission, no radiator, no oil changes, no tune-ups, and less moving parts that could fail. Your point about development costs would be believable if 17 years hadn’t passed since GM introduced such an excellent starting point for the electric car platform. Maintaining vehicles is a huge revenue stream for auto companies and they don’t want to cannibalize existing revenue streams with the introduction of new products. It is no secret that the Auto and Oil companies work together to promote their best interest. This is why electric car technology has remained stagnant. Without gov’t involvement, the rules of capitalism will always win, and the greater good for society will always lose.
Tesla Motors was founded in 2003, it took them five years to produce the 2008 Tesla Roadster. They just released the Model S with a base price of $52,000. GM is huge and over 100 years old, they came out with the EV1 in 1996, how is it that a start up like Tesla can outshine GM in such a short time? You cant tell me this doesn’t seem fishy to you….
Auto companies build these vehicles with the purpose of planned obsolescence…as in they need the vehicle to stop working at some point so the customer can purchase a new one. Over 100 years ago, people had the ability to produce light bulbs that would last well over 3,000 hours, the big light bulb companies got together and made 1,000 hours to be the standard lifespan so all of them could make a profit instead of steadily spending money trying to 1up each other. In a combustion driven vehicle, eventually the cost to maintain all those moving parts (in engine, in transmission) and cooling systems will be higher than the car value and the customer is forced to buy another one.
In an electric car, all you have is the battery and a few electric motors to power the car and the auxiliary systems like power steering and brakes. I believe we are all familiar with how resilient electrical motors are made today. How often does the motor in a refrigerator need to be replaced or how often does a ceiling fan motor go bad, them shits can run for a long ass time.
The only major concern is how long the battery will last before needing replacement. I believe paying a few grand for a battery every 75K or 100K miles is acceptable, considering you won’t be paying for gas and to maintain all the shit on a combustion engine driven vehicle. You really don’t need a grid or charging stations for a practical electric car when you can charge it at home, all that can come later…unlike a fuel cell car which would need an infrastructure of hydrogen fueling stations immediately.