community. you all look very prosperous and wealthy to me. when you do to detroit and you go to ohio and you go to pennsylvania and indiana and illinois, where a good share of the auto industry resides, whole communities have been negatively impacted just by the downturn. it would have been significantly worse. president bush said 1 million jobs and $150 billion in tax revenue would have been foregone by the state and federal governments had it been allowed to fail. there is the infrastructure. the industrial infrastructure of the nation would have been severely damaged. i don't care how we got there. the question is did it work? chrysler is alive. we're alive. we are not just alive. we are prospering. around the globe and in this country. since the bankruptcy, we hired

1,700 employees in the united states alone. we invested $10 million. i know against a $1 trillion deficit sounds like peanuts. it's not. the ability to build new cars. we are focused on what is the evolution of the industry. we cannot afford to focus on the near term. what is it like in 2030? why are we spending money on the alternates? hybrids or hydrogen fuel cells. if i mentioned names of companies, you would all say wow? that german company is looking at your technology. it is this company which is a depository of property associated with alternative fuels as it evolves. this country now has an industry that has been totally revitalized that can make the necessary investments to transition our economy to a higher tech and more efficient and cleaner industry.

>> one way to separate politics back the remaining money that is lent by the u.s. treasury. do you have a time frame when the 30% stock is back? the stock is still below the 30% ipo price. >> you say lent. they lent us money. we paid all that back. they provided preferred interest with a preferred stock with a 9% coupon. we paid that back plus dividends and interest. we held the largest ipo in the history of the world. most of that went to the federal government. they own 27% on a fully diluted basis. they are just like every other shareholder. they can sell when they want. it is perverse.

i have some understanding of capital markets. we produce record profits, why isn't the stock at record levels? we have a big shareholder and we don't know when they will leave. as part of the bankruptcy, you heard the structure in the financial world. let's take the good assets of the bank and call it good bank and bad bank. we had liquidation motors. liquidation motors, we left the toxic assets behind, if you will. there were hundreds of millions of shares that went to -- there was a complicated -- i won't draw any conclusions or make judgments about who got a good deal or who didn't. it had to be done quickly. again, there are many paths to the solution. did it work? we had to give those several hundred millions of shares to the liquidation motor shareholders. some of those were largely bond holders. when the stock swooned was

because we dropped them and they flushes them to the market. so a lot at them look and say, when are they going to answer it. the answer is candidly, i don't know. >> you can understand the cry in congress if the u.s. government sold shares that were 30% below the ipo price. tax holders are getting fleeced. they sold at a loss. bad move. >> i won't tell you who i asked the question. is the federal government a private equity firm or acting on behalf of "we the people?" was our economy or citizenship properly served? what if we didn't collect that $150 billion in taxes? if we failed, we had a $24 billion pension shortfall which we now worked down to $13 billion. the government would have to take up that $20 billion liability. it is more complicated than you get in a 20-second blurb on the

evening news. or a quick thing in an article. >> sure. >> this is a complicated bankruptcy on a scale that i think the average citizen in this country doesn't have the interest, quite frankly. >> how would you like them to sell? >> how would i like them to sell? recognizing this may show up in washington, i think it ought to be a very controlled. a good way is come out and say we sell 5%. >> dollar-cost averaging? >> i would say they are not there to get the last dollar. by the way, there's -- when you say, owns. there is one company that owns the government any money. that's ford. we were offered $12 billion.

michigan delegation was working on our behalf. we could apply and i'm sure we would grant low-interest department of energy loans for clean and high tech. we nixed it. so did chrysler. i say the perverseness of it all. governments help their companies to kind of shape and mold without too much of a heavy hand. shape and mold the direction and technology and how the economy evolves. i don't see anything -- it is not a religious issue. it is something that is pragmatic and it's done for companies around the world all the time. >> another pragmatic issue for americans is high gasoline prices. you told cnn last year that gas sold at $4.50 would affect

people going into the showrooms. how is that impacting car buying? >> well, just in my tenure, we shifted -- if you look at the types of trucks, crossovers, suvs, sedans, we have shifted a huge amount of production from small to medium sized sedans. away from large trucks. that is a factor of energy costs and producing smaller cars and more fuel efficient cars. i remember president obama when i was in private equity and i think in an unguarded statement of exasperation with the industry and at the depths of recession say why can't they build a car like the corolla. we did. the best selling compact car in america today is the chevy

cruze. it is not just the corolla. all of them. it makes about 40 miles per gallon. >> do you make money on the cruze? >> yes, we do. >> the general prevailing wisdom is bigger cars, bigger margin. you can make money on the medium-sized cars? >> you make a lot more cruzes than others. we don't make money on the volt on an incremental. the volt, we sold as many volts in the first year as toyota sold prius in their first year. sometimes you have so shape and mold our own future. we will make investments where we think the long-term future is in our interest. >> last year you said $1 a gallon gasoline tax would be preferable to the standards talked about at that time.

it essentially became law in california. do you think the increasing the 18-cent a gallon gasoline tax is a good idea? >> i think there are a number of approaches to how you want to impact consumption. there are economic laws just like there are physical laws. one is you don't tax production. you tax consumption if you want to change behavior. there are a number of ways to get to that. that was an example. one of several. but i do think you can affect consumer behavior by a number of different ways. >> so maybe a gasoline tax increase? >> i think it ought to be on a list of potential alternatives, yes. >> we put this program on facebook and immediately got a

bunch of questions about an issue. i would like to read a question. please ask mr. akerson why gm funds the heartland institute. a group that tries to push climate change into our public schools. is this funding consistent with the company's message and marketing of the chevy volt? >> i am glad you asked me that. i wasn't aware of this until the last day or so. a couple of things in terms of good governance. i cannot sit on the foundation's board or steer anything. >> you are saying it was the foundation that gave the money to the institute? >> yes, not the company. let me say another fact. the first time i was interviewed by the press. the guy said do you believe in global warming. i said i do. executives said you don't say

that in public. this may surprise you, my underwear doesn't have gm stamped on it. i am an individual. i have my own convictions. sometimes they agree and sometimes they don't. i think it's actually healthy to have different perspectives around the table. let's talk about -- i always say actions matter more than words. just last week, the apa named us the star energy provider because of the mission controls. we are 60% more efficient in the use of fuel than we were just five years ago. landfill usage coming off our plants is essentially zero. you can pull it in a coffee can. [ applause ] >> most of our plants are completely run off of landfall methane.

they are zero emissions. we have plants that are the size of small farms. 200 or 300 acres under one roof. we put $40 million behind the chevy program with the cruze and said we would reduce 8 million metric tons of co 2 in this country in one year. we bought and paid for a forest the size of the state of connecticut. this is $15,000 that was committed to before i came in. i also think the heartland institute, i'm told, does other things. i find this interesting. i won't go any further. i'll take another look at it when i get back to detroit. i'll leave it at that. >> we had a lot of conversations here. will there be a price on carbon? a lot of prices around the country and the globe, europe has a price that is low. australia put in a carbon tax. when do you think there will be a price on carbon and how will

that affect your planning for selling gm cars around the world? >> when i was a midshipman at the naval academy, we were told, yes, sir, no, sir, i don't know. >> lots of people have metrics and scenarios. >> all i have to say is i try to be very pragmatic. we have to allow for all possibilities. we were an active participant in cafe standards this year. we will do our level best to be a responsible corporate citizen and if the wisdom of our political leadership is to put in a carbon tax, we will react to it and react to it as best we can in the interest of our

shareholders. >> in the past, california put through carbon emissions that governor schwarzenegger passed and signed and other members wrote. in the past, there was a lot of time spent against this sort of thing to meet these goals. so, the auto industry signed up for the current to increase mileage to 55 miles per gallon. >> we were parties to it. we could have. there were factions in the company that i -- this -- >> the lawyers wanted to go at it? >> this is the new gm. rather than sit in the corner and be extrapolate, we want to be part of the solution. we do not want to be part of the problem. we live in this country. i have grandchildren and children and i want them to inherit a better earth than we did.

i think, quite frankly, our generation, in 1970, the epa was put in the water. the air and water is cleaner than i was growing up in the '60s. it should be cleaner than the next year. we will not get there for free. i don't think a huge manufacturer such as general motors or any other company cannot be part of the solution and that's what our goal is to be. so, we were active participants. we weren't dragged to it. >> not because the government owns 27% of gm? you could not sue your boss so you had to go along? >> what he said. [ laughter ] >> so, cafe mileage standards were basically flat for 25 years.

from 2010 to 2025, they will double from about 28 miles a gallon to 55 miles a gallon. here in california, there is a law to decrease the carbon intensity fuels. lawyers are fighting that tooth and nail in court. i would like in our juxtaposition. auto companies increase 100%. the oil companies are fighting 10%. your response? >> i'm in a car company. you know, i respect they have to serve their owners as their owners want them to behave in the marketplace. you know, what i'm proud of is in our company, if you look back 25 or 30 years, we have taken

almost 99% of pollutants out of the emission of the car. it is still a lot. i don't know if it is a lot or too much, but we want it to be better. we are producing cars like the volt. we are producing cars like the b.e.l. the battery electric vehicle. this week, we came out with a new engine that will burn liquid gasoline as you see it at exxon or chevron or anybody else today. the same engine, not two engine, the same engine will burn compressed natural gas. we had to spend a little bit more on lifters and sealants and piston. i will not give you a number. it is not prohibitive. it allows us to migrate away to a cleaner form of energy over time. we want to be part of the solution. that comes in different levels. when we looked at cafe, you probably did not know this. if your mercedes, as long as you

produce 99,999, you were not subject to the gas tax. i don't get that break in germany. why in the hell did someone agree to that back in the old days? i said we're at the table and ready to talk turkey. why give an advantage to a foreign competitor. we are not getting it in germany. guess who did not show up at the announcements of the new cafe standards which i thought was a mistake? >> some of those european companies exceed the rules, they get a slap on the wrist and go on. >> we are pushing everything on cleaner energy, more fuel efficient. we have many cars now that are

epa rated at 40 and above. the eco cruze which is coming out. the collateral impact and positive impact of our work on volt, we are putting in what we call e-assist on trucks. we are putting them on mid sized sedans and small cars. the next generation, if you really want a good car that will get good mileage is the new malibu that is coming out. this car has gotten rave reviews. we put a battery string in the back in a congested city like san francisco or any big city in america. we estimate one in five minutes, you are sitting still or traffic or a stop light. you have the 12-volt battery that runs the radio and everything else. we go to a string of lithium batteries in the trunk and your

mileage jumps from 25 to 33%. it is cleaner and you are in the city in that mode. you are seeing the evolution here and you can see where it's going over time. the more creative we are and the greater energy density that we can get into a cell battery, the better off we're going to be. we are investing. this is the new gm. we put $100 million into gm ventures. it sounds like a private equity firm. we don't have all of the answers. you have the entrepreneurs with

their life and soul and their grandmother's inheritance. they invest everything and they live and die with that. i like that intensity. we get the opportunity to kind of walk around the technology and see if it has an auto application. the corporation was picked up in your papers here. that is a promising technology. we don't know if it is industrialized yet. >> it is a company that claims to have made a break through in energy density in car batteries. >> yes. lithium-ion. it is a lot of weight and gives 16 kilowatts of energy. what does that do? the battery can run a lot further. instead of 40 miles, maybe 140 miles. so, i believe in my lifetime and technology, there is an ever escalating improvement. you have to be optimistic about it that battery technology will improve in the next 20 to 25 years. >> a mix of fuels as opposed to one. >> yes. i think the crowning, the holy grail, if you will, is the fuel cells. we have a fleet. the technology works, it is just very expensive. the chemistry is very

complicated and quite frankly, it takes about two ounces of platinum. now we have it down to argue quarter ounce of platinum. when i was with general instrument, as you mentioned, we invented high definition television. the first copy cost us $450,000. now you are buying them wherever you are buying televisions for $200. it took a while. you will see costs of hydrogen fuel cells. we put 3 million miles on hydrogen fuel cells today. the cars cost $400,000. now we are down to 350. hopefully in the next ten years, we get it down to 35 or 40. >> dan akerson is ceo of general motors.

i'm greg dalton. the chevy volt is the centerpiece a lot of gm strategy right now. it has brought something of a halo effect to the company. recently the company announced it was suspending production. you sold less than you wanted to last year. are you disappointed with the volt or is this natural with new technology in the marketplace? >> i hope the audience understands what i'm about to say. you never have perfect knowledge of what the market is going to do and how well it will receive your product. the cruze, we closed the plant for two weeks last november. you didn't even know that. there was so much intensity around the volt because although it was designed probably when president obama was in the senate, it is now his car. >> he said he would buy one. >> you know, i'm happy to hear

that. i wish he would buy one this year. he's not. not this year, i don't think. it's become somewhat politicized. the volt is always in the background. we are going to match production to inventory. that is what -- if you were owners of this business and it was your company, that is what you would do. whether it is the cruze or the truck. you know, the average guy on wall street says look at the building inventory. we will shut the plants down for 26 years this year. you have to accept some intelligence behind our decisions. the volt we shutdown and we wanted to get it in demand with the marketplace. >> we want to show a brief ad about the chevy volt. this is an ad that chevy volt that has been running. we can certainly hear it.

>> for our town, for our country, for our future. this isn't just the car we wanted to build, it's the car america had to build. the extended range electric chevy volt from the heart of detroit to the health of the country. chevy runs deep. >> from the heart of detroit to the health of the country. why is this good for america? what are you trying to say? >> the great thing about the

volt is that it represents american innovation, american ingenuity and clean technology. it is a statement about what the company represents. the best that america can produce. it is clean and reduces our dependence on oil, especially foreign oil. >> okay. dan akerson is chairman and ceo of general motors. our guest today at climate one. last year, toyota downscaled its profit expectations for the year because of supply chain disruption in thailand. intel did the same thing. >> we did it, too. >> you had something related to japan. >> we had it in thailand. >> the floods that struck thailand are precisely the

extreme weather events that climate scientists said earlier say it happened with increased intensity and frequency. my question is if you run a global business, how do you plan for the supply chain disruption that hit you from the other side of the world? >> we have operational risk management function within the company. when i came in, i said give me the 25 biggest things that could happen to you. and you want to lay awake at night worrying about all of them. i said what the hell. i can't do that. it is tragic what happened in japan. an earthquake, tsunami and nuclear disaster. what it tells you is you have to diversify your supply chain.

we are actively doing that and, you know, to be honest with you, depending on how far your supply chain went around the globe, some manufacturers were impacted with what happened in thailand than what happened in japan. so, we have taken a hard look at that, as i'm sure all of our competitors have. it has been a lesson learned and i will tell you we were very concerned in both instances. we marshaled our resources as best we could. we shut our shreveport down for four or five days to ensure we had supply to a different set of issues we had. we were lucky that is all the impact we had with the two natural disasters. >> so climate-driven weather can be a business risk? >> oh, yeah. in the case of the climate wasn't the issue. >> thailand. >> thailand was probably more likely. i would like to think it was more likely than what happened in japan. >> you mentioned gm ventures.

gm ventures invested in car sharing, i believe, with relay ride. i would like to talk about the future of car sharing and automobiles as a service and mobility as a service. >> you don't know what shape or form that mobility will take place. we are looking at autonomous cars. you know what i mean? we are trying to look at everything now. we can't afford to run around with blinders saying we are going to build just trucks. we are going to build every segment of the market and be efficient as we can in every segment of the market. if it evolves to a zip-car type or a peer-to-peer type that relay cars are involved, we want to be part of it. we have an onstar that enables that. if yout