Heneghan Peng's University of Greenwich building Source:&nbsp Hufton + Crow EXCLUSIVE: Lecturers at Greenwich University’s architecture school have been left ‘angry and disillusioned’ by plans for a restructure that put over 300 university staff at risk, including dozens in the department The south-east London university informed staff last month of its plans to make 319 redundancies, including all casual staff known as hourly-paid lecturers (HPLs) within the Faculty of Liberal Arts and Sciences (FLAS) and Greenwich Business School (GBS). A consultation document for FLAS, sent out to staff last month and seen by the AJ, reveals the university intends to replace 151 HPLs with just 50 academic teaching posts, which would mainly be part-time positions, equating to 17 full-time equivalents. It also wants to set up a ‘pool’ of associate academic staff for ad-hoc cover, which it is understood will work on zero-hour contracts.Advertisement The School of Design, which includes the architecture department and is based at a Heneghan Peng-designed building in Greenwich town centre, is one of the worst-hit departments. Within architecture, the AJ understands 50 of the 70 teaching staff could be made redundant, with 20 then hired back. It is believed that 31 full-time academics will also be made redundant in the Faculty of Engineering and Science. According to the consultation document, the faculty’s rationale is to claw back staffing costs, with the university forecasting it will spend £1.7 million on HLPs in 2024/2025. It says it needs to reduce staff costs by 4 per cent (around £800,000) to operate within budget. ‘Staff cost savings measures need to be fully implemented no later than 31 August 2025 to have as close to full-year effect,’ the consultation states. However the restructure of FLAS, which since last year has been under the leadership of pro vice-chancellor and executive dean professor Natasha Vall, is facing opposition from lecturers, students and the University and College Union (UCU).Advertisement A letter heavily criticising the plans, and seen by the AJ, was sent to senior management last week and signed by more than 30 teaching staff in the architecture school. Describing the plans as ‘hugely damaging to the faculty and its students’, the letter includes calculations that suggest the proposals will reduce student teaching time by 40 per cent. It also warns that the reduction in staff-to-student ratios could mean the courses could come under scrutiny from accrediting bodies such as the RIBA and the Architects’ Registration Board (ARB). ‘There is a real risk that affected courses will lose their accredited status or be put on to special measures,’ it said. The lecturers’ letter also raises concerns that the ‘associate academic’ positions could essentially become zero-hour contracts at a lower remuneration, classifying staff as workers rather than employees and removing basic rights such as sick pay and maternity pay. It adds that staff are ‘incredibly angry and disillusioned’ by the way the proposals have been presented, and especially that the redundancy plans were announced during the Easter break, after many HPLs’ teaching involvement for the year had ended. This meant that any HPLs who wanted to take part in the consultation had to do so at a time they were not employed by the university. Explaining the rationale for axing HPLs, the consultation said that while the casual lecturers had played an ‘important role’ in providing specialist teaching and cover for sickness absence, they had also been used to ‘meet core teaching needs’. It added: ‘The faculty considers that, however able and committed individual HPLs are, it is important that core teaching should be provided by members of staff with a longer-term commitment to, and stake in, the university.’ However, the lecturers’ letter said the comparison between full-time and HLP staff denigrates and discriminates against employees on HPL contracts, many of whom have worked for the university for years. What is an HPL? Hourly paid lecturers are teaching staff paid a specific rate per hour and often work on a contract basis, which may be for a specific academic year or even a term without a guarantee of ongoing work. While hourly-paid roles are often taken up by postgraduate or PhD students, many are also professionals who come in to teach alongside their main jobs. This is especially the case in the school of architecture, where architects teach alongside working in practice. Students are also opposing the cuts. A letter sent by the Greenwich Landscape and Architecture Society to School of Design head Chris Pallant and associate head Rashesh Ram said the proposed changes would ‘damage the credibility’ of the course and reputation of the School of Design. ‘Students are concerned that being taught in larger groups by multiple full-time tutors will not only prevent them from learning from real-life practitioners, but also create problems with design process as no one will fully know their project and be able to provide them with the guidance equivalent to 1:1 tutorials we currently have,’ it said. Lecturers have also urged the university to explain its justification for the cuts, given that the university is in good financial health. Last year, financial records show that Greenwich University made a surplus of more than £33 million. In a statement issued on the cuts at Greenwich, UCU general secretary Jo Grady said: ‘Students are having their fees hiked, yet the University of Greenwich wants to sack hundreds of their teachers and instead bring in a pool of zero-hour academics, all while the vice-chancellor's pay continues to soar. These are the actions of the very worst type of rogue employer, not a public institution of Greenwich’s standing. ‘There is no financial justification to force through these cuts, and if the university continues to do so, impacted courses will be stripped of their academic value. It must think again.’ The spokesperson said the UCU had taken steps to raise a dispute with the university and was moving to consultation on a ballot for strike action. Greenwich University has been approached for comment. 2025-05-15 Ella Jessel comment and share

Electric vehicles are often seen as sleek, high-tech machines with price tags to match. But what if you stripped away the luxury – and kept the electric? A new startup called Slate is doing exactly that, introducing a back-to-basics electric vehicle that’s not only affordable but fully customizable, starting at a potentially groundbreaking price of just $20,000 with federal tax credits. The company’s name, Slate, plays on the idea of a “blank slate” – a vehicle that’s as bare-bones as it gets, but designed to be tailored to your lifestyle. Built on a single modular EV platform, Slate offers three distinct body styles: a compact truck, a no-frills SUV, and a practical hatchback. Each version is minimalist by design, aimed at urban drivers and first-time EV owners who prioritize function and affordability over premium features. At its core, the Slate EV is about choice. Buyers can start by selecting the body style that best suits their needs, and then move on to customizing exterior elements. The base model ships in a neutral matte gray, but users can opt for custom vinyl wraps or partial graphic kits for a personal touch. The interior continues this modular philosophy – buyers can add only what they need and skip what they don’t. And yes, that includes audio. The standard model doesn’t come with built-in speakers. Instead, buyers can either purchase Slate’s own speaker system or choose a simple mount for a portable Bluetooth speaker they already own. It’s one of many examples of how Slate is redefining the essentials in favor of cost savings and flexibility. Inside the cabin, drivers will find a digital instrument display that doubles as a backup camera monitor. There’s no infotainment system – no navigation, no Netflix, no oversized touchscreen. Instead, drivers are encouraged to mount their phones and use their own apps for navigation and entertainment. Slate includes physical climate controls, a design choice that keeps costs down while appealing to drivers who appreciate tactile feedback. The focus is on practicality. Everything included in the base model is there because it serves a clear purpose, not because it looks futuristic or checks a box on a spec sheet. Slate’s most disruptive feature isn’t its modularity – it’s the price. The vehicle is expected to launch with a starting MSRP of $27,000. But with available federal EV tax credits, that price could drop as low as $20,000, making it one of the most affordable electric vehicles in the U.S. market. For context, many EVs still hover in the $35,000–$50,000 range or higher, even after incentives. This affordability is crucial in the broader push toward widespread EV adoption. While many automakers have focused on luxury or performance EVs, Slate is targeting an underserved segment: drivers who want an electric car that gets them from point A to B without the frills or financial burden. Slate isn’t trying to impress with horsepower or luxury interiors. It’s trying to change the conversation around EVs entirely – making them approachable, adaptable, and most importantly, affordable. In an industry where the average EV price continues to rise, Slate’s back-to-basics approach might just be what the market needs. As Slate moves closer to production, the EV world will be watching closely. If it can deliver on its promise, the Slate EV could be a game-changer – not just for budget-conscious drivers, but for the entire electric vehicle movement. For more information or to reserve one, head to slate.auto. Imagery courtesy of Slate.

By Matt Novak Published May 14, 2025 | Comments (0) | A Sherman Tank crushes a Tesla with the license plate "FASCISM" in a YouTube video. Screenshot: YouTube / Led by Donkeys Tesla CEO Elon Musk gave two Nazi-style salutes the day President Donald Trump was inaugurated back in January, giving the public explicit confirmation of what everyone knew already. The billionaire oligarch was aligning himself with some of the most evil people in history. And a new viral video sends a hopeful message about who will ultimately land on top. Ken Turner, a 98-year-old veteran of World War II, is featured in a new video showing exactly what he thinks of fascism. Turner served in the British Army and the video shows this hero rolling a Sherman tank over a Tesla. “I’m old enough to have seen fascism the first time around, now it’s coming back,” Turner says in the video while sitting in the U.S.-made tank. “Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, is using his immense power to support the far right in Europe and his money comes from Tesla cars,” Turner continued. “Well, I’ve got this message for Mr. Musk: We’ve crushed fascism before, and we’ll crush it again.” The video, which was created by a British political group Led By Donkeys, is available on Bluesky and YouTube. The Tesla Model 3 has a license plate that reads “fascism” and gets absolutely crushed by the tank. It’s pretty satisfying to watch. Hilariously, defenders of Musk and his companies seem to think the video demonstrates something positive for Tesla. Teslarati, a pro-Tesla blog, wrote that the video is actually good for Tesla. The website seems to think it demonstrates just how durable the vehicle is. “As could be seen from the wreckage of the Tesla Model 3 after its Sherman encounter, only the glass roof and windows of the all-electric sedan were crushed,” Teslarati wrote. “Looking at the wreckage of the Model 3, it seemed like its doors could still be opened, and everything on its lower section looked intact.” You’ll notice the website only focused on the durability of the Tesla without acknowledging Musk’s embrace of fascism. Because the billionaire oligarch not only spent a quarter of a billion dollars to help get Trump elected, he’s currently dismantling the government in the most corrupt power-grab of the modern era. And it’s really hard to deny that Musk is a far-right extremist. Musk actually would eventually deny he was doing a Nazi salute on Jan. 20. But it was much, much later, coming only after he kept making Nazi jokes and embracing the attention he was getting online for his salutes. But we all knew what we saw. The billionaire told podcaster Joe Rogan he was making a gesture meant to communicate, “My heart goes out to you.” But there’s no universe in which any reasonable person looks at the gesture Musk made and believes he was expressing love. That’s the look of a man determined to make a fascist salute. Elon Musk appears to give one of two Nazi salutes on Jan. 20, 2025. © Photo by ANGELA WEISS/AFP via Getty Images In fact, Musk didn’t do just one salute, which may have given him more plausible deniability. This guy did two Nazi-style salutes on that stage. As you can see by the expressions of the people behind him, everyone knew what was happening. And they loved it. © Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images Even before Musk made his salutes, many politically middle-of-the-road people who had to serve under Trump understood what the MAGA movement stood for. Former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Gen. Mark Milley, was extremely worried about the possibility of Trump attempting a coup after he lost the 2020 election. Milley was correct, and Trump tried a self-coup on Jan. 6, 2021, when he instructed a mob to descend on the U.S. Capitol. After Jan. 6, Milley held drills with top military and law enforcement officials in preparation for Joe Biden’s inauguration. It was their job to protect Washington D.C. if they tried it again. “Here’s the deal, guys: These guys are Nazis, they’re boogaloo boys, they’re Proud Boys. These are the same people we fought in World War II. We’re going to put a ring of steel around this city and the Nazis aren’t getting in,” Milley was quoted as saying by CNN. Trump would later call for Milley to be executed for treason. Most Americans hate what Musk is doing, and Tesla’s profits have plunged 71%, all because the world can see what he’s doing to advance the cause of fascism. And we can take at least one World War II vet’s word that all of this needs to be crushed immediately. Elon Musk is a fascist. He’s spent hundreds of millions of dollars to further the MAGA cause, and he’s currently in the Middle East as an unelected representative of the U.S. government, getting lucrative deals with the leverage of a corrupt oligarch. None of this stops without Musk getting stripped of his power. And while the billionaire keeps saying he’ll leave government eventually, we’ll believe it when we actually see it (like we saw his salutes). Daily Newsletter You May Also Like By Lucas Ropek Published May 13, 2025 By AJ Dellinger Published May 13, 2025 By Matt Novak Published May 13, 2025 By Ed Cara Published May 13, 2025 Laura Newcombe Published May 12, 2025 By AJ Dellinger Published May 8, 2025

Source: Wright & Wright ArchitectsProposed scheme on Oxford High Street Wright & Wright Architects have secured planning permission for a major retrofit scheme for All Souls College, Oxford. The project is intended to create new academic and public-facing spaces within a group of conjoined historic buildings on Oxford’s High Street, expanding the college’s presence beyond its historic quadrangles. The scheme is intended to restore original architectural features across a series of existing buildings and shoprfronts, while introducing new facilities across multiple floors. The upper levels will include three seminar rooms, a lecture theatre with capacity for 100 people, fellows’ studies, staff offices and a rooftop garden. Historic elements such as 17th-century stone walls, ancient roof timbers and 18th-century ceilings are to be retained and revealed as part of the works. Clare Wright, founding partner at Wright & Wright, said: “It has been a privilege to help realise the College’s ambition to remodel an extraordinary set of historic buildings on an important site on Oxford’s High Street. In an era when city centres are languishing, this pioneering project can help preserve the soul of Oxford.” David Renton, estates bursar at All Souls College, said: “Our ambition is to create a place of learning that connects directly with the life of the city, while honouring the historic complexity of the site. We are excited to work with Wright & Wright to bring this vision to life.” Roof gardenSource: Wright & Wright Architects Front elevationSource: Wright & Wright Architects Proposed sectionSource: Wright & Wright Architects Front elevationSource: Wright & Wright Architects Study roomSource: Wright & Wright Architects 1/5 show caption The ground floor proposals include replacing existing shopfronts with bespoke joinery designed to reflect the proportions of earlier facades. The scheme also seeks to enhance the covered passageway linking the High Street to the Covered Market with improved signage, lighting and finishes. The project, comprising three conjoined structures, is described by the architects as a low-energy, deep retrofit. The design aims to reduce carbon emissions while safeguarding the building’s historic fabric. Later modern interventions are to be stripped out in order to improve environmental performance and expose earlier features. Founded in 1438, All Souls is one of the University of Oxford’s oldest and most academically distinctive colleges, known for its postgraduate-only focus on research and absence of undergraduates. Wright & Wright’s wider body of work includes projects for the British Museum, Lambeth Palace Library, the British Academy and several other Oxford colleges. A construction timeline has not yet been confirmed. Project team Architect: Wright & Wright Architects Structural & Civil Engineer: engineersHRW M&E, Sustainability Engineer: Max Fordham Acoustic Engineer: Max Fordham Heritage Consultant: Donald Insall Associates Project Manager: Ridge and Partners Cost Consultant: Gardiner & Theobald Property Management: Cluttons Planning Consultant: Carter Jonas Fire Consultant: OFR Consultants Landscape Consultant: Harris Bugg AV Consultant: Hewshott Retail Consultant: KLM Real Estate Accessibility Consultant: Mima Group Ltd Archaeological Consultant: Oxford Archaeology Building Regulations PD: Ridge and Partners Principal Designer Advisor: Stroma Visual Impact Assessment: Neaves Urbanism

I hoard tech devices, but funny enough, I don’t keep piles of tech accessories. I tend to buy cables, dongles, and organizational bits infrequently. I wait until I need them, since I figure I can always buy them. But that soon may not be the case, as a lot of such stuff comes from China. Even as tariff policies are changing, shipments dropped pretty dramatically over the last month and a half. Plus, when availability goes down, prices go up. So I’m biting the bullet and finally stocking up on a few small but key items—the same things that many friends often grumble about not having on hand. Chances are, you’ll want to grab some of these, too. 1) Cables Anker Somehow, I always need more USB-C cables. (I recently rescued an e-reader and an unwanted phone, so that may have something to do with it.) Right now a pack of two is under $10. I also recently decided to rework my layout for networking gear within my home. Longer cords would make the project easier, and I may as well get faster ethernet cabling anyway. A 50-foot CAT 6 cable is $28, but if I’m willing to forgo future-proofing, I can grab a CAT 5e variant for just $10. Plus, I always need HDMI cables. So at least one cheapie $9 six-foot one goes in the cart, too. 2) Zipties HAVE ME TD / Amazon A lot of zipties are made in the U.S.—but since I don’t know if their factories rely on materials and parts made overseas, I figure this is an easy buy now, too. A pack or two of zipties doesn’t take much space or much money ($4/each). I own Velcro ties as well, but I hoard my gigantic roll for PC building projects and other places where I may want to adjust or redo the cabling. I won’t stay rich in Velcro ties if I use them everywhere. (Even if they’re only $10 for 100, they’re preeeecciouuusss to me.) Zipties are more versatile around the house, too. For tech, I use them to tidy up cabling at my desk, behind my PC, and along the back of my entertainment center. But they also come in handy with my plants, organizing craft supplies, securing loose pieces of (cheap) furniture, and the like. Pretty much every time I’m grumbling about a twist-tie breaking but being too stubborn to use one of my precious Velcro ties, I should be using a zip tie. So now I’ll have plenty. 3) USB dongles StarTech / Amazon So, in theory, USB ports can hold up to removing and inserting cables many times over. In practice, death can come faster than expected. (RIP to the charging port on my old laptop after someone tripped over the charging cable.) Whenever I can, I buy USB extender dongles for USB ports I know I’ll be swapping devices in and out of frequently. I’ve been making use of a few older USB 2.0 models I already had, but recently I started using gear needing USB 3.0. So that gets an upgrade, and I’m getting two just in case. (May as well, at $8 a pop.) 4) Cable adapters Cable Matters / Amazon I have a lot of HDMI cables. (At least, in theory I do—they’re stashed all over my place so I can’t always find them right away. Hence buying more because I may as well.)  I don’t have many specialty display cables, like HDMI to mini-DisplayPort and HDMI to micro-HDMI. I use them infrequently, but they’re valuable when doing tech support or stretching life out of older hardware. I could buy more of the specialty cables, but I’m snagging adapters instead. (Right now, I’m starting with a $10 HDMI to mini-DP option.) Converting a standard HDMI cable gives me much more flexibility, like if I need a longer cable than the specialty one I own.

After farmers filed suit, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) has agreed to restore climate information to webpages it took down soon after President Donald Trump took office this year.The US Department of Justice filed a letter late last night on behalf of the USDA that says the agency “will restore the climate-change-related web content that was removed post-inauguration, including all USDA webpages and interactive tools” that were named in the plaintiffs’ complaint. It says the work is already “underway” and should be mostly done in about two weeks. If the Trump administration fulfills that commitment, it’ll be a significant victory for farmers and other Americans who rely on scientific data that has disappeared from federal websites since January.“We’re ecstatic.”“I’ll be real frank, it feels good to win one, right? Farmers have been so put upon by the actions of this administration that, you know, it feels good to be able to say, we have something for you. This is back. You can rely on these resources,” says Marcie Craig, executive director of the Northeast Organic Farming Association of New York. “We’re ecstatic.”The group filed suit in February alongside two environmental organizations, alleging that the USDA threatened organic farmers’ livelihoods by removing information they relied on to help them make decisions about planting crops and managing their land — key resources as climate change leads to more unpredictable and extreme weather. One of the resources removed by the USDA is an online tool called the “Climate Risk Viewer” that showed the impacts of climate change on rivers and water sheds, and how that might affect water supplies in the future.“We’re really glad that USDA recognized that this blatantly unlawful purge is harming farmers and researchers and advocates all across the country, and we’re ready to ensure that USDA follows through on this promise,” Jeffrey Stein, an associate attorney with the nonprofit legal organization Earthjustice that represented the plaintiffs, tells The Verge. The initial complaint accused the USDA of violating the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) that gives the public the right to access key records from any federal agency, the Paperwork Reduction Act that stipulates adequate notice before changing access to information, and the Administrative Procedure Act that governs the way federal agencies develop regulations. President Trump’s backing of the fossil fuel industry has also stripped farmers of federal funding through climate-related programs. The Northeast Organic Farming Association of New York has lost nearly half of its budget this year due to funding freezes, which it has been trying to make up for through donations, according to Craig. “This has been one of so many cuts. You know, pain by a thousand cuts,” Craig says. “This [legal victory] was good … then, of course, after the initial feeling, you sit back, you take a breath, and you say, ‘and we still have a whole lot of work to do.’”See More:

After farmers filed suit, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) has agreed to restore climate information to webpages it took down soon after President Donald Trump took office this year.The US Department of Justice filed a letter late last night on behalf of the USDA that says the agency “will restore the climate-change-related web content that was removed post-inauguration, including all USDA webpages and interactive tools” that were named in the plaintiffs’ complaint. It says the work is already “underway” and should be mostly done in about two weeks. If the Trump administration fulfills that commitment, it’ll be a significant victory for farmers and other Americans who rely on scientific data that has disappeared from federal websites since January.“We’re ecstatic.”“I’ll be real frank, it feels good to win one, right? Farmers have been so put upon by the actions of this administration that, you know, it feels good to be able to say, we have something for you. This is back. You can rely on these resources,” says Marcie Craig, executive director of the Northeast Organic Farming Association of New York. “We’re ecstatic.”The group filed suit in February alongside two environmental organizations, alleging that the USDA threatened organic farmers’ livelihoods by removing information they relied on to help them make decisions about planting crops and managing their land — key resources as climate change leads to more unpredictable and extreme weather. One of the resources removed by the USDA is an online tool called the “Climate Risk Viewer” that showed the impacts of climate change on rivers and water sheds, and how that might affect water supplies in the future.“We’re really glad that USDA recognized that this blatantly unlawful purge is harming farmers and researchers and advocates all across the country, and we’re ready to ensure that USDA follows through on this promise,” Jeffrey Stein, an associate attorney with the nonprofit legal organization Earthjustice that represented the plaintiffs, tells The Verge. The initial complaint accused the USDA of violating the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) that gives the public the right to access key records from any federal agency, the Paperwork Reduction Act that stipulates adequate notice before changing access to information, and the Administrative Procedure Act that governs the way federal agencies develop regulations. President Trump’s backing of the fossil fuel industry has also stripped farmers of federal funding through climate-related programs. The Northeast Organic Farming Association of New York has lost nearly half of its budget this year due to funding freezes, which it has been trying to make up for through donations, according to Craig. “This has been one of so many cuts. You know, pain by a thousand cuts,” Craig says. “This [legal victory] was good … then, of course, after the initial feeling, you sit back, you take a breath, and you say, ‘and we still have a whole lot of work to do.’”See More:

General Motors revealed Tuesday a new battery chemistry called lithium-manganese-rich (LMR), which it says should slash costs while delivering driving range that’s just shy of the most advanced batteries on the market.  “With LMR, we can deliver over 400-mile range in our in our trucks while significantly reducing our battery costs,” Kurt Kelty, GM’s vice president of battery, propulsion and sustainability, told TechCrunch. LMR will also dramatically reduce the amount of nickel and cobalt compared with GM’s most advanced cells, two critical minerals that aren’t readily available from domestic sources in the United States. Today, the Chevrolet Silverado EV uses nickel-manganese-cobalt (NMC) cells to drive 492 miles on a full charge. That impressive range comes with a hefty price tag. The electric trucks start at over $73,000 for the general public (a fleet version costs less). GM is planning a version with cheaper lithium-iron-phosphate (LFP) cells, which would drop the price by $6,000, but also cuts range to 350 miles.  The new technology would preserve the LFP price cuts without sacrificing as much range. GM says the new cells will be cheaper for a few reasons. For one, manganese is cheaper than cobalt or nickel. The LMR chemistry will have zero to 2% cobalt, 30% – 40% nickel, and 60% – 70% manganese. That’s significantly less than today’s leading NMC cells, which are up to 10% cobalt and 80% nickel. Previous attempts at manganese-rich batteries have tended to degrade quickly. GM thinks it has cracked the problem. The automaker experimented with a range of materials and manufacturing processes to arrive at the current formulation. Techcrunch event Join us at TechCrunch Sessions: AI Secure your spot for our leading AI industry event with speakers from OpenAI, Anthropic, and Cohere. For a limited time, tickets are just $292 for an entire day of expert talks, workshops, and potent networking. Exhibit at TechCrunch Sessions: AI Secure your spot at TC Sessions: AI and show 1,200+ decision-makers what you’ve built — without the big spend. Available through May 9 or while tables last. Berkeley, CA | June 5 REGISTER NOW LMR battery packs will contain prismatic cells instead of pouches. Today’s Ultium batteries use the latter. Kelty said switching to prismatic cells, which have a rigid shell, will help the company build a battery pack with more than 50% fewer parts. “It’s a huge, huge cost savings we’ll get,” he said. GM has big plans for LMR, with the chemistry potentially spreading throughout the EV lineup. Andy Oury, business planning manager at GM, said that LMR could “take up a huge chunk in the middle” of the market, pushing LFP to entry level vehicles and pricey NMC to applications that need long range and high energy density. The new cells will be made by Ultium Cells, GM’s joint venture with LG Energy Solution. Through Ultium, the two companies have invested billions of dollars in battery manufacturing in the United States.  Both have been pursuing LMR for years. GM has more than 50 patents on LMR, though LG has also been working on the technology itself. Kelty acknowledged it’s possible that LG could make it’s own version of LMR cells that don’t infringe on GM’s patents, making the chemistry more widely available. “It’ll be interesting to see how this all plays out,” Kelty said. GM’s LMR research has been underway for a decade. Its efforts kicked into high gear in the last couple years as engineers successfully produced large-format cells similar to those in EVs on the road today. GM has made about 300 large format cells so far, and its testing regime equates to around 1.5 million miles of typical driving, said Kushal Narayanaswamy, director of advanced cell engineering at the automaker. That leaves just a few short years for the company to modify its existing manufacturing plants to accommodate the new chemistry and then scale up production. Scaling, in particular, tripped up the first Ultium cells. Kelty is confident that GM can hit the 2028 target.  “It meets all our performance metrics, we have a partner that’s going to manufacture it, and we’ve got a manufacturing location,” he said. “The other thing is, the supply chain is much more local than high-nickel or LFP, so we’re really incentivized to do this. There’s a lot of things coming together here that really make us want to go quickly.”