The FTC said its complaint alleged that “GM used a misleading enrollment process to get consumers to sign up for its OnStar connected vehicle service and the OnStar Smart Driver feature.” Lina Khan, who is in her final week as FTC chair, said that “GM monitored and sold people’s precise geolocation data and driver behavior information, sometimes as often as every three seconds.”
Settlement not quite finalized
The proposed settlement was approved in a closed meeting by the FTC’s three Democrats, with the two Republicans recorded as absent. The pending agreement will be subject to public comment for 30 days after publication in the Federal Register, and a final FTC decision will be made under the Trump administration.
In addition to location data, the GM/FTC settlement covers “radio listening data regarding specific content, channel, or station; hard braking, hard acceleration, hard cornering, crossing of a designated high-speed threshold, seat belt usage, or late-night driving; and trip time and duration for such events.” GM and OnStar agreed to delete data collected before the settlement and ask third parties to delete data previously shared with them.
GM also “must allow consumers to disable the collection of Location Data from their Vehicles to the extent the Vehicle is equipped with the necessary technology.”
GM issued a press release on the settlement. “Last year, we discontinued Smart Driver across all GM vehicles, unenrolled all customers, and ended our third-party telematics relationships with LexisNexis and Verisk,” GM said. “In September, we consolidated many of our US privacy statements into a single, simpler statement as part of our broader work to keep raising the bar on privacy… As part of the agreement, GM will obtain affirmative customer consent to collect, use, or disclose certain types of connected vehicle data (with exceptions for certain purposes).”
Affirmative consent is not required for purposes such as providing driver data to emergency responders, responding to customer-initiated communications, complying with government requests and legal requirements, and investigating product quality or safety problems. While the ban on sharing driving data lasts only five years, the overall settlement would be in place for 20 years.
To fill a car with gas, you generally just need a credit card or cash. To charge an EV at a DC fast charging station, you need any number of things to work—a credit card reader, an app for that charger’s network, a touchscreen that’s working—and they’re all a little different.
That situation could change next year if a new “universal Plug and Charge” initiative from SAE International, backed by a number of EV carmakers and chargers, moves ahead and gains ground. Launching in early 2025, the network could make charging an EV actually easier than gassing up: plug in, let the car and charger figure out the payment details over a cloud connection, and go.
Some car and charging network combinations already offer such a system through a patchwork of individual deals, as listed at Inside EVs. Teslas have always offered a plug-and-charge experience, given the tight integration between their Superchargers and vehicles. Now Tesla will join the plug-and-charge movement proper, allowing Teslas to have a roughly similar experience at other stations.
The Electric Vehicle Public Key Infrastructure, or EVPKI, has a good number of the major players on board, and it builds on the ISO standard (15118) to make it faster and more secure for cars to be authenticated and authorized to charge at stations. A whole bunch of certificates are in place at every step of the charging process, as detailed in an EVPKI presentation, and the system includes a Certified Trust List. With an open standard and authentication system, there should be room for new charging networks and vehicle makers.
Enlarge/ Are you getting gas station vibes? Because I’m getting gas station vibes.
GM
Several years ago, General Motors and EVgo teamed up to build out a network of fast chargers for electric vehicles. As Tesla proved, giving your customers confidence that they won’t be stranded on a long drive with a dead battery really helps sell EVs, and GM’s sometimes-shifting target currently stands at deploying 2,850 chargers. Today, the two partners showed off their concept for an improved charging experience, which they say will come to a number of flagship charger locations around the US.
The most obvious thing to notice is the large canopy, co-branded with EVgo and GM Energy, similar to those found at virtually every gas station across the country. The gas station vibes don’t end there, either. Ample lighting and security cameras are meant to combat the sometimes sketchy vibes that can be found at other banks of (often dimly lit) fast chargers after dark, located as they often are in the far reaches of a mall parking lot.
And the chargers are sited between the charging bays the same way gas pumps are located, allowing a driver to pull through. Most fast chargers require a driver to pull in or back into the space even when the chargers are located to one side, a fact that complicates long-distance towing with an EV.
The chargers will be rated for 350 kW so that 800 V EVs can minimize their charge times. And while the announcement did not mention charging plugs, given GM’s adoption of the J3400 (originally NACS) plug from the next model year and EVgo’s embrace of the new connnector, it seems likely to expect both J3400 and CCS1 plugs on each charger.
“The future of EV charging is larger stall count locations, high-power charging, and designing around features that customers love—such as pull-through access, canopies, and convenient amenities. Through this next evolution of EVgo and GM’s esteemed collaboration, the future of EV charging is here,” said Dennis Kish, EVgo’s president.
“Ensuring that our customers have seamless access to convenient and reliable charging is imperative, and this effort will take it to the next level,” said GM Energy VP Wade Sheffer. “Through our collaborations with industry leaders like EVgo, we continue to innovate and expand customer-centric charging solutions that will meet the evolving needs of EV drivers across the country.”
The first site opens next year
There won’t be a fixed number of chargers at each location—the companies say most sites will have “up to 20 stalls,” with some locations featuring significantly more. We also don’t know where the sites will be—GM and EVgo say “coast to coast, including in metropolitan areas in states such as Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, New York, and Texas” and that the first location should open in 2025.
2025 was the original time frame for the full deployment of the GM Energy/EVgo fast charging network, which was also supposed to total 3,250 plugs by then—at least, that was the goal when Ars wrote about it in 2022. It appears as if the reduction in plugs freed up funds to pay for these fancier flagships.
That said, the network is not vaporware. EVgo and GM Energy deployed their 1,000th charger last summer and say they’ll reach the 2,000th by the end of this year. Additionally, the two are working together with Pilot Travel Centers to deploy another 2,000 chargers across the US at Pilot and Flying J travel centers—by the end of 2023, the first 17 of these were operational, with the goal of 200 sites by the end of this year.
Enlarge/ The Cadillac V-Series.R is one of General Motors’ factory-backed racing programs.
James Moy Photography/Getty Images
It is hard to escape the feeling that a few too many businesses are jumping on the AI hype train because it’s hype-y, rather than because AI offers an underlying benefit to their operation. So I will admit to a little inherent skepticism, and perhaps a touch of morbid curiosity, when General Motors got in touch wanting to show off some of the new AI/machine learning tools it has been using to win more races in NASCAR, sportscar racing, and IndyCar. As it turns out, that skepticism was misplaced.
GM has fingers in a lot of motorsport pies, but there are four top-level programs it really, really cares about. Number one for an American automaker is NASCAR—still the king of motorsport here—where Chevrolet supplies engines to six Cup teams. IndyCar, which could once boast of being America’s favorite racing, is home to another six Chevy-powered teams. And then there’s sportscar racing; right now, Cadillac is competing in IMSA’s GTP class and the World Endurance Championship’s Hypercar class, plus a factory Corvette Racing effort in IMSA.
“In all the series we race we either have key partners or specific teams that run our cars. And part of the technical support that they get from us are the capabilities of my team,” said Jonathan Bolenbaugh, motorsports analytics leader at GM, based at GM’s Charlotte Technical Center in North Carolina.
Unlike generative AI that’s being developed to displace humans from creative activities, GM sees the role of AI and ML as supporting human subject-matter experts so they can make the cars go faster. And it’s using these tools in a variety of applications.
Enlarge/ One of GM’s command centers at its Charlotte Technical Center in North Carolina.
General Motors
Each team in each of those various series (obviously) has people on the ground at each race, and invariably more engineers and strategists helping them from Indianapolis, Charlotte, or wherever it is that the particular race team has its home base. But they’ll also be tied in with a team from GM Motorsport, working from one of a number of command centers at its Charlotte Technical Center.
What did they say?
Connecting all three are streams and streams of data from the cars themselves (in series that allow car-to-pit telemetry) but also voice comms, text-based messaging, timing and scoring data from officials, trackside photographs, and more. And one thing Bolenbaugh’s team and their suite of tools can do is help make sense of that data quickly enough for it to be actionable.
“In a series like F1, a lot of teams will have students who are potentially newer members of the team literally listening to the radio and typing out what is happening, then saying, ‘hey, this is about pitting. This is about track conditions,'” Bolenbaugh said.
Instead of giving that to the internship kids, GM built a real time audio transcription tool to do that job. After trying out a commercial off-the-shelf solution, it decided to build its own, “a combination of open source and some of our proprietary code,” Bolenbaugh said. As anyone who has ever been to a race track can attest, it’s a loud environment, so GM had to train models with all the background noise present.
“We’ve been able to really improve our accuracy and usability of the tool to the point where some of the manual support for that capability is now dwindling,” he said, with the benefit that it frees up the humans, who would otherwise be transcribing, to apply their brains in more useful ways.
Take a look at this
Another tool developed by Bolenbaugh and his team was built to quickly analyze images taken by trackside photographers working for the teams and OEMs. While some of the footage they shoot might be for marketing or PR, a lot of it is for the engineers.
Two years ago, getting those photos from the photographer’s camera to the team was the work of two to three minutes. Now, “from shutter click at the racetrack in a NASCAR event to AI-tagged into an application for us to get information out of those photos is seven seconds,” Bolenbaugh said.
Enlarge/ Sometimes you don’t need a ML tool to analyze a photo to tell you the car is damaged.
Jeffrey Vest/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images
“Time is everything, and the shortest lap time that we run—the Coliseum would be an outlier, but maybe like 18 seconds is probably a short lap time. So we need to be faster than from when they pass that pit lane entry to when they come back again,” he said.
At the rollout of this particular tool at a NASCAR race last year, one of GM’s partner teams was able to avoid a cautionary pitstop after its driver scraped the wall, when the young engineer who developed the tool was able to show them a seconds-old photo of the right side of the car that showed it had escaped any damage.
“They didn’t have to wait for a spotter to look, they didn’t have to wait for the driver’s opinion. They knew that didn’t have damage. That team made the playoffs in that series by four points, so in the event that they would have pitted, there’s a likelihood where they didn’t make it,” he said. In cases where a car is damaged, the image analysis tool can automatically flag that and make that known quickly through an alert.
Not all of the images are used for snap decisions like that—engineers can glean a lot about their rivals from photos, too.
“We would be very interested in things related to the geometry of the car for the setup settings—wicker settings, wing angles… ride heights of the car, how close the car is to the ground—those are all things that would be great to know from an engineering standpoint, and those would be objectives that we would have in doing image analysis,” said Patrick Canupp, director of motorsports competition engineering at GM.
Enlarge/ Many of the photographers you see working trackside will be shooting on behalf of teams or manufacturers.
Steve Russell/Toronto Star via Getty Images
“It’s not straightforward to take a set of still images and determine a lot of engineering information from those. And so we’re working on that actively to help with all the photos that come in to us on a race weekend—there’s thousands of them. And so it’s a lot of information that we have at our access, that we want to try to maximize the engineering information that we glean from all of that data. It’s kind of a big data problem that AI is really geared for,” Canupp said.
The computer says we should pit now
Remember that transcribed audio feed from earlier? “If a bunch of drivers are starting to talk about something similar in the race like the track condition, we can start inferring, based on… the occurrence of certain words, that the track is changing,” said Bolenbaugh. “It might not just be your car… if drivers are talking about something on track, the likelihood of a caution, which is a part of our strategy model, might be going up.”
That feeds into a strategy tool that also takes lap times from timing and scoring, as well as fuel efficiency data in racing series that provide it for all cars, or a predictive model to do the same in series like NASCAR and IndyCar where teams don’t get to see that kind of data from their competitors, as well as models of tire wear.
“One of the biggest things that we need to manage is tires, fuel, and lap time. Everything is a trade-off between trying to execute the race the fastest,” Bolenbaugh said.
Obviously races are dynamic situations, and so “multiple times a lap as the scenario changes, we’re updating our recommendation. So, with tire fall off [as the tire wears and loses grip], you’re following up in real time, predicting where it’s going to be. We are constantly evolving during the race and doing transfer learning so we go into the weekend, as the race unfolds, continuing to train models in real time,” Bolenbaugh said.
One of the major data brokers engaged in the deeply alienating practice of selling detailed driver behavior data to insurers has shut down that business.
Verisk, which had collected data from cars made by General Motors, Honda, and Hyundai, has stopped receiving that data, according to The Record, a news site run by security firm Recorded Future. According to a statement provided to Privacy4Cars, and reported by The Record, Verisk will no longer provide a “Driving Behavior Data History Report” to insurers.
Skeptics have long assumed that car companies had at least some plan to monetize the rich data regularly sent from cars back to their manufacturers, or telematics. But a concrete example of this was reported by The New York Times’ Kashmir Hill, in which drivers of GM vehicles were finding insurance more expensive, or impossible to acquire, because of the kinds of reports sent along the chain from GM to data brokers to insurers. Those who requested their collected data from the brokers found details of every trip they took: times, distances, and every “hard acceleration” or “hard braking event,” among other data points.
While the data was purportedly coming from an opt-in “Smart Driver” program in GM cars, many customers reported having no memory of opting in to the program or believing that dealership salespeople activated it themselves or rushed them through the process. The Mozilla Foundation considers cars to be “the worst product category we have ever reviewed for privacy,” given the overly broad privacy policies owners must agree to, extensive data gathering, and general lack of safeguards or privacy guarantees available for US car buyers.
GM quickly announced a halt to data sharing in late March, days after the Times’ reporting sparked considerable outcry. GM had been sending data to both Verisk and LexisNexis Risk Solutions, the latter of which is not signaling any kind of retreat from the telematics pipeline. LexisNexis’ telematics page shows logos for carmakers Kia, Mitsubishi, and Subaru.
Ars contacted LexisNexis for comment and will update this post with new information.
Disclosure of GM’s stealthily authorized data sharing has sparked numerous lawsuits, investigations from California and Texas agencies, and interest from Congress and the Federal Trade Commission.
Have electric vehicles been overhyped? A casual observer might have come to that conclusion after almost a year of stories in the media about EVs languishing on lots and letters to the White House asking for a national electrification mandate to be watered down or rolled back. EVs were even a pain point during last year’s auto worker industrial action. But a look at the sales data paints a different picture, one where Tesla’s outsize role in the market has had a distorting effect.
“EVs are the future. Our numbers bear that out. Current challenges will be overcome by the industry and government, and EVs will regain momentum and will ultimately dominate the automotive market,” said Martin Cardell, head of global mobility solutions at consultancy firm EY.
Public perception hasn’t been helped by recent memories of supply shortages and pandemic price gouging, but the chorus of concerns about EV sales became noticeably louder toward the end of last year and the beginning of 2024. EV sales in 2023 grew by 47 percent year on year, but the first three months of this year failed to show such massive growth. In fact, sales in Q1 2024 were up only 2.6 percent over the same period in 2023.
Tesla doesn’t break out its sales data by region anymore, but its new US registrations were down by as much as 25 percent, month on month, as its overall marketshare of EVs closes in on 50 percent this year; by contrast, Tesla was 80 percent of the US EV market in 2020. (Overall, Tesla’s global deliveries fell by 8.5 percent.)
The other sick patient in addition to Tesla is Volkswagen. Despite local production of the ID.4 crossover in Chattanooga, Tennessee, the brand saw EV sales fall by 37 percent in Q1. It has also abandoned plans to bring the ID.7 electric sedan to North America, and the long-awaited ID. Buzz microbus has yet to reach US showrooms more than eight years after it was first shown here.
But all this noise has been enough to spook executives into action. Both Ford and General Motors took the embarrassing step of rolling back their electrification goals, all but admitting they bet on the wrong horse. Instead of turning away from new internal combustion engine products, we’re set for a new flurry of hybrids—just don’t expect any of them to show up before 2026.
GM’s difficulty in ramping up its new family of EVs built around the UItium battery platform has been well-documented. The end of production of the Chevrolet Bolt, which sold for less than $30,000, didn’t help; with the little electric hatchback (and the slightly stretched Bolt EUV) no longer contributing to the sales charts, GM’s Q1 EV sales fell by 21 percent.
The problems with assembling Ultium cells into battery packs appears to be in GM’s past now. Cadillac Lyriqs are starting to become a common sight on the road, and GM CEO Mary Barra told Bloomberg that GM expects to build between 200,000 and 300,000 Ultium-based EVs this year, a huge increase over the 13,838 it managed to ship last year.
Meanwhile, Ford’s EV “slump” is nothing of the kind. In May, it sold 91 percent more F-150 Lightnings than last year. E-Transit sales were up 77 percent. And the Mustang Mach-E showed growth of 46 percent. In total, Ford’s EV sales for the first five months of this year were up 87.7 percent on 2023, helped no doubt by the company’s price cuts.
High double-digit sales growth (in Q1 2024) has also been occurring at Hyundai and Kia (up 56.1 percent), BMW (up 57.8 percent), Rivian (up 58.8 percent), Mercedes (up 66.9 percent), and Toyota (up 85.9 percent).
“As anticipated, Tesla’s sales took a hit, influencing the overall market dynamics. However, a few brands saw significant EV sales increases, achieving over 50 percent year-over-year growth,” said Stephanie Valdez Streaty, director of industry insights at Cox Automotive. “As noted in January, we are calling 2024 ‘the Year of More.’ More new products, more incentives, more inventory, more leasing and more infrastructure will drive EV sales higher this year. Even so, we’ll continue to see ups and downs as the industry moves toward electrification.”
“We view the current headwinds that EV sales are experiencing in the US and Europe as short-term in nature. The buildup of charging infrastructure, availability of affordable EV models with a fall in battery prices, combined with government regulations, will drive sustainable BEV growth in the long run,” said Cardell.
Enlarge/ The Chevrolet Blazer was pulled from sale almost immediately after our first drive in December. Now it’s back on sale—with a price cut.
Michael Frank
General Motors appears to have solved the problem that was holding back the production of its Ultium-based electric vehicles. These are now rolling out of factories—you can expect to read about the new Silverado EV tomorrow and the (allegedly affordable) Equinox EV next week, to name but two. We got a first-blush drive of the Blazer this past winter before GM had to put a stop on sales due to some… glitches. Now, with the vehicle back on sale and the software debugged, it’s time to see if the fixes helped.
In reintroducing the Blazer EV and returning it to market, Chevy has also lowered the price pretty significantly, by an average of about $6,000 per model. The LT AWD now starts at $48,800, and there’s a $7,500 incentive for customers who aren’t eligible for the IRS clean vehicle tax credit. The RS AWD, which we tested, has an MSRP of $53,200, but with the delivery charge and GM’s cash on the hood, it came in at $47,095. Both have an 85 kWh battery good for 279 miles (449 km) max range per charge. The longer-range, bigger-battery 102 kWh RS RWD boasts a more impressive 324 miles ( 521 km) per charge and works out to $48,670.
These are pretty competitive prices when you consider the mid-sized EV SUV segment. An obvious comparison: The Ioniq 5 SE AWD costs $49,350 and cannot qualify for the federal tax credit (unless leased), and its range runs shy of the Chevy Blazer RS AWD, too, at 260 miles (418 km) versus the Chevy’s 279.
The Ioniq 5 is a pretty good comparison, too, in terms of being a wagon-ish ride, which is about where the Blazer lands. The Hyundai is too low to think of as an SUV, and ditto the Chevy. Both are very close in terms of interior dimensions, with almost the same hip, shoulder, and legroom front and rear—although if you get the sunroof package on the Blazer, rear seat headroom gets pinched pretty significantly. Our tester didn’t have a sunroof, and six-footers could sit back there without scraping their scalps.
The seats in the Blazer EV are surprisingly good. In fact, it was just a darn fine vehicle in terms of driving comfort, in marked contrast to the models we tested in December. Those cars may have suffered from preproduction glitches, but the Blazer EV RS we just spent a week with is comfortable for both fore and aft passengers over long distances, with about the only demerit that the 21-inch wheels feel as big as they are, so there’s a deadness to the steering. Also, if you’re still cross-shopping that Hyundai, the Ioniq 5 is a significantly lighter car, weighing 4,519 lbs (2,050 kg) vs. 5,337 lbs (2,421 kg) for the Blazer RS, and the driver will feel that weight in the form of sluggish transitions through tight corners. The RS stands for “Rally Sport,” via cars like the Camaro, but this isn’t a rig you want to “rally.”
But that’s fine. The Blazer EV is a family car, and as such, it’s pretty great, with 25.5 cubic feet (722 L) of cargo capacity with the rear seatbacks upright, and 59.1 cubic feet (1,673 L) with them flipped forward. The Ioniq 5 offers a couple of cubic feet more cargo volume than the Blazer EV with the rear seats in use, and with the Ioniq 5’s seats folded, it’s basically a wash.
The Chevy Blazer RS AWD EV delivers 288 hp (212 kW) and 333 lb-ft (451 Nm). This feels plenty muscular, if not “blazing,” with 0–60 mph times reported in the six-second range. However, the Ioniq 5 SE’s 320 hp (239 kW) and 446 lb-ft (605 Nm) make that car quite quick indeed, and right on the heels of the other elephant in the family-car throwdown, the Tesla Model Y.
It’s important to mention the Tesla Model Y because that’s another EV that doesn’t bake in Apple CarPlay or Android Auto. Tesla fans tend not to gripe about this, in part because the software in Teslas is very streamlined and pared back. It’s not lovable, but it’s not hard to pair a phone and play what’s on there. By contrast, one reason GM had to yank the cord on sales of the Blazer was that the car’s software was exceedingly glitchy; this wasn’t about GM switching to its proprietary Ultifi UI but that it wasn’t working. For our test drive week, it worked as promised—just not in a way that argues well for eliminating Android Auto or Apple CarPlay.
When GM went to its Ultifi system and ditched Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, the argument was supposedly in part about driver control and using the vehicle’s native UI vs. Apple’s. But if the native UI is worse than Apple’s, you have a problem. And both Android Auto and CarPlay—which are just constrained versions of their phone UIs—have been refined through testing with billions of consumers over hundreds of millions of combined hours of use. No carmaker can make anything like that claim about their in-house UI. Megacorp tech giants are by no means the answer to our prayers, but there is a reason these platforms have gained so much ground as infotainment structures in our cars and homes.
And you can get an “exhibit A” for why that matters when you try to tee up an audio source when driving the Blazer EV.
Enlarge/ GM used a Silverado EV to power a 10,000-square-foot house as a demo of its Home Energy system.
General Motors
LOS ANGELES—Let’s face it: The American power grid is a hot mess. The system is outdated and overstressed by amp-sucking appliances, air conditioning units, and extreme weather. Depending on where you live, it’s likely only a matter of time before your home will experience a blackout. GM Energy, a subsidiary of General Motors, is here to help.
At a demonstration in a swanky 10,000-square-foot mansion in Beverly Hills, California, where I counted 51 recessed lights in the great room, the new home products from GM Energy easily kept the electrons flowing, eschewing the grid and drawing power from the 200 kWh battery in a 2024 Chevrolet Silverado RST.
It all starts with the GM Energy PowerShift charger. On an 80 A circuit, the charger can charge your EV at a whopping 19.2 kW, and its bi-directional technology can push electrons from the truck’s battery into an inverter to convert it to the AC power your home requires. The happy little AC current then goes into the Home Hub that distributes the power to the appropriate circuits, and voilà—the lights are on.
But if the power goes out suddenly, how does the process start? GM Energy’s “Dark Start” battery holds just enough juice to get the whole thing running. At the demo, it took about 36 seconds from the main breaker being shut off to the system powering up, flooding the garage full of tech reporters and GM brass with steady, non-flickering lights. Oh, and of course, you can keep track of everything in the My Chevy app.
Enlarge/ MyChevrolet mobile app displaying charging status of 2024 Chevrolet Silverado EV RST in a residential garage with GM Energy products.
General Motors
Currently, the system only works with the Silverado EV RST. The company expects the EV versions of the 2024 Sierra Denali, Cadillac Lyriq, and Chevrolet Blazer and Equinox to come online soon, though some may require a dealership or over-the-air update. GM plans to include bidirectional technology on all its Ultium-based EVs by model-year 2026. As for the Honda Prologue and Acura ZDX EVs that were developed in partnership with GM—no dice. Owners of those cars will not be able to use this technology.
One further bugaboo was found on the GM Energy website, which says, in tiny print, that the products are only available in California, Florida, Michigan, New York, and Texas. However, the company says the tech will be available in all 50 states later this year.
How long can it last?
GM Energy engineer Brent Deep has been running the system for two years with no problems. He claims his family has not been trying to conserve power, instead running two air conditioning units, a hot tub, laundry machines, an electric range, an oven, and the myriad other appliances four people in Michigan would use to remain comfortable. In this case, a Silverado RST can power the house for four days.
Deep and his family are slightly heavy in their energy use, however. The US Energy Information Administration says the average house uses 899 kWh of energy every month, or about 30 kWh per day. By that math, the Silverado RST should provide juice for just over six days.
I, however, do not have a family of four. In fact, I’m a bit of an electricity miser, at least during the non-summer months. I live in the high desert of California but still keep the air conditioning at 80 degrees in my two-bedroom home during the hot season, turn off every light except the one I’m using, and if I can eke out another wear of a pair of jeans instead of throwing them in the laundry, I do it. How long could I power my house?
When I looked at my bill for the past 12 months, the least I’ve used was 126 kWh in April of 2024, for which Southern California Edison charged me $53.35. I used the most in July of 2023: 774 kWh for $325.
After public outcry, General Motors has decided to stop sharing driving data from its connected cars with data brokers. Last week, news broke that customers enrolled in GM’s OnStar Smart Driver app have had their data shared with LexisNexis and Verisk.
Those data brokers in turn shared the information with insurance companies, resulting in some drivers finding it much harder or more expensive to obtain insurance. To make matters much worse, customers allege they never signed up for OnStar Smart Driver in the first place, claiming the choice was made for them by salespeople during the car-buying process.
Now, in what feels like an all-too-rare win for privacy in the 21st century, that data-sharing deal is no more.
“As of March 20th, OnStar Smart Driver customer data is no longer being shared with LexisNexis or Verisk. Customer trust is a priority for us, and we are actively evaluating our privacy processes and policies,” GM told us in a statement.
Enlarge/ A 2024 Chevrolet Silverado EV WT at a pull-through charging stall located at a flagship Pilot and Flying J travel center, as part of the new coast-to-coast fast charging network.
General Motors
It’s understandable if you’re starting to experience AI fatigue; it feels like every week, there’s another announcement of some company boasting about how an LLM chatbot will revolutionize everything—usually followed in short succession by news reports of how terribly wrong it’s all gone. But it turns out that not every use of AI by an automaker is a public relations disaster. As it happens, General Motors has been using machine learning to help guide business decisions regarding where to install new DC fast chargers for electric vehicles.
GM’s transformation into an EV-heavy company has not gone entirely smoothly thus far, but in 2022, it revealed that, together with the Pilot company, it was planning to deploy a network of 2,000 DC fast chargers at Flying J and Pilot travel centers around the US. But how to decide which locations?
“I think that the overarching theme is we’re really looking for opportunities to simplify the lives of our customers, our employees, our dealers, and our suppliers,” explained Jon Francis, GM’s chief data and analytics officer. “And we see the positive effects of AI at scale, whether that’s in the manufacturing part of the business, engineering, supply chain, customer experience—it really runs through threads through all of those.
“Obviously, the place where it shows up most directly is certainly in autonomous, and that’s an important use case for us, but actually [on a] day-to-day basis, AI is improving a lot of systems and workflows within the organization,” he told Ars.
“There’s a lot of companies—and not to name names, but there’s some chasing of shiny objects, and I think there are a lot of cool, sexy things that you can do with AI, but for GM, we’re really looking for solutions that are going to drive the business in a meaningful way,” Francis said.
GM wants to build out chargers at about 200 Flying J and Pilot travel centers by the end of 2024, but narrowing down exactly which locations to focus on was the big question. After all, there are more than 750 spread out across 44 US states and six Canadian provinces.
Obviously, traffic is a big concern—each DC fast charger costs anywhere from $100,000 to $300,000 dollars, and that’s not counting any costs associated with beefing up the electrical infrastructure to power them, nor the various permitting processes that tend to delay everything. Sticking a bank of chargers at a travel center that’s rarely visited isn’t the best use of resources, but neither is deploying them in an area that’s already replete with other fast chargers.
Enlarge/ Much of the data GM showed me was confidential, but this screenshot should give you an idea of how the various datasets combine.
General Motors
Which is where the ML came in. GM’s data scientists built tools that aggregate different GIS datasets together. For example, it has a geographic database of already deployed DC chargers around the country—the US Department of Energy maintains such a resource—overlayed with traffic data and then the locations of the travel centers. The result is a map with potential locations, which GM’s team then uses to narrow down the exact sites it wants to choose.
It’s true that if you had access to all those datasets, you could probably do all that manually. But we’re talking datasets with, in some cases, billions of data points. A few years ago, GM’s analysts could have done that at a city level without spending years on the project, but doing it on a nationwide scale is the kind of task that requires the amount of cloud platforms and distributed clusters that are really now only becoming commonplace.
As a result, GM was able to deploy the first 25 sites last year, with 100 charging stalls across the 25. By the end of this year, it told Ars it should have around 200 locations operational.
That certainly seems more useful to me than just another chatbot.
Enlarge/ A GM Ultium battery pack like that found in the Lyriq.
Santa Fabio for General Motors
General Motors ended 2023 as the number one automaker in the United States, selling 2.6 million new vehicles during those 12 months. That’s a 14.1 percent increase from its performance in 2022, and comfortably eclipses the 2.3 million cars that Toyota sold during the same period. It had a strong year in terms of electric vehicle sales too—up 93 percent year-on-year.
But a quick look at the data reveals a somewhat less rosy picture. Yes, it was a banner year for GM EVs, with 75,883 deliveries in 2023. But only because of the Chevrolet Bolt EV and Bolt EUV. Chevy delivered 62,045 Bolts in 2023, a 62.8 percent increase on the 38,120 Bolts it sold in 2022.
But as Ars has detailed in the past, the Bolt is no more. Production ended at the Orion Assembly plant in Michigan on December 18, and GM is laying off 945 workers at the plant as it retools the factory to make electric trucks like the Chevy Silverado EV and GMC Sierra EV.
GM CEO Mary Barra has promised a new Bolt EV, this time using GM’s newer battery platform, known as Ultium. But the second-generation Bolt isn’t scheduled to appear until 2025 at the earliest.
Cheap, mass-produced cells?
GM has bet big on Ultium. In 2020 it revealed the new battery platform and told us that the new cells, developed together with LG Chem (which also produced the packs for Bolt) would drop below the $100/kWh barrier “early in the platform’s life.” $100/kWh is the point at which an EV powertrain reaches price parity with an internal combustion engine powertrain, at which point an EV should no longer cost several thousand dollars more than an equivalent conventionally fueled vehicle.
A spokesperson for GM told Ars that “cell production is going great, but the automation we use to pack cells into modules was not able to keep up,” and that “things are definitely improving.”
During the automaker’s Q2 2023 call with investors, it said that it had “deployed teams from GM manufacturing engineering to work on site with our automation supplier to improve delivery times,” and that it had added manual module assembly lines and was installing “more module capacity at all of our North America EV plants, beginning with Factory ZERO and Spring Hill this summer, Ramos Arizpe in the fall, and CAMI in the second quarter of next year.”
Three months later, GM told investors that “our battery module constraint is getting better, which helped us more than double Ultium Platform production in the third quarter compared to the second quarter. We are now in the process of installing and testing our high-capacity module assembly lines, which will continue into the first part of next year.”
GM also said that it believes the production constraint will have been overcome by mid-2024.
Software is hard
Unfortunately for GM, a lack of Ultium cells isn’t its only headache where new EVs are concerned. Last year the automaker revealed that it was dropping support for Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, the extremely popular phone-casting apps, from its EVs from model year 2024. Instead, its Ultium-based EVs would ship with a new infotainment system called Ultifi, built using Google’s Android Automotive OS (not to be confused with the phone-casting Android Auto).
Enlarge/ The infotainment system crashed more than once during our drive of the Blazer EV, and the problem is serious enough that GM issued a stop sale for the SUV as a result.
A spokesperson for the company told Ars that “GM is working quickly to address these issues and to implement a fix. Customers will be able to bring their Blazer EVs to Chevrolet dealers once they are notified that the related software update is available. Our engineering teams are working around the clock toward a solution.”
