GM letting some EV owners sell electricity back to the US power grid ⁠33%

By Eric Revell⁠74%

6/11/2026, 11:00:43 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 16 faulty reasoning types, including Self-Serving Bias, Ambiguity (Equivocation), and Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 22.3% saturation with 118 hits. Analysis detected 841 faulty-reasoning hits from 529 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 41.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠33% (14,847 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 67.80% of the article peer group.

General Motors on Tuesday announced it's releasing a software update that allows some electric vehicle (EV) owners to send power back to the electric grid. 
The update allows owners of GM's vehicle-to-home energy system, which allows the EV to power the home during a blackout, the expanded capability of sending electricity to the power grid. 
Owners of the system would be able to sell power from their vehicle back to utility providers at times when demand is high, with GM getting a portion of the proceeds. 
EVs are viewed as an untapped resource for balancing the electric grid to meet surging demand from AI data centers as well as extreme weather events. 
GM said that it alone has over 250,000 bidirectional capable vehicles on U.S. roads at this time, while it will include the vehicle-to-grid technology in all planned EVs going forward. 
AUTO INDUSTRY TRADE GROUP URGES FEDS TO SCRAP GAS TAX AND REPLACE IT WITH A VEHICLE WEIGHT FEE 
It said that the quarter-million GM EVs that are capable of vehicle-to-grid energy transfers currently have the storage capacity to help power 120,000 homes for up to one week. 
GM said that it's actively testing vehicle-grid integration technology through a partnership with Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), and it expects that by 2030 there will be over 52,000 GM EVs actively participating in grid-balancing protocols. 
It's also conducting tests in Michigan with DTE Energy, using the homes of GM employees, to grow reliable backup capacity in a way that suits the preferences of home and EV owners, which GM Energy Vice President Wade Sheffer said is a "win for customers, automakers, and utilities." 
INSIDE GM'S $242M PUSH TO REBUILD AMERICA'S SKILLED TRADES WORKFORCE 
"Maintaining a safe, reliable, and affordable grid is paramount. 
This transition won't be easy, and we deeply respect the challenge of balancing day-to-day grid reliability with rapid innovation," Sheffer said in a letter, adding that the company sees three areas in which utilities, regulators and automakers can simplify the path forward. 
Those include boosting the enrollment of customers in utility programs by GM and industry partners, educating them on EV grid support and the value in utility programs and rates, with best practices developed amid its ongoing regional pilot projects. 
GM TAKES $7B HIT AFTER SHIFTING EV STRATEGY DUE TO SLOWING DEMAND 
GM noted that consumers will be more motivated to participate when given clear and appropriate incentives, such as expanding localized, time-of-use tariffs, allowing EV owners to charge cost-effectively during energy surplus and receive appropriate compensation for supporting the grid during peak strain or times of need. 
GM also said that streamlining paperwork, engineering reviews and utility interconnection processes to boost consumer confidence in being able to easily purchase and install a bidirectional charger. 
"It's time for us to look at parking lots and driveways across our communities as a massive, distributed power asset waiting to be integrated. 
By working together, we can help secure an affordable, reliable, and resilient energy future for everyone," Sheffer's letter said. 
GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE 
Reuters contributed to this report. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 7.4%Eric Revell: 2.6%FoxBusiness: 4.4%Confirmation Bias7.4%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 4.7%FoxBusiness: 3.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 4.9%Eric Revell: 3.6%FoxBusiness: 4.1%Availability Heuristic4.9%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 1.3%FoxBusiness: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.4%FoxBusiness: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 5.7%Eric Revell: 3.0%FoxBusiness: 3.7%Overconfidence Bias5.7%This article: 7.0%Eric Revell: 11.0%FoxBusiness: 12.9%Framing Effect7.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 1.4%FoxBusiness: 1.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 1.4%FoxBusiness: 1.1%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 22.3%Eric Revell: 9.5%FoxBusiness: 8.8%Optimism Bias22.3%This article: 7.9%Eric Revell: 1.7%FoxBusiness: 2.0%Pessimism Bias7.9%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 6.9%FoxBusiness: 7.9%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 20.0%Eric Revell: 2.5%FoxBusiness: 4.5%Self-Serving Bias20.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.5%FoxBusiness: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.6%FoxBusiness: 1.7%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.8%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 9.1%Eric Revell: 3.1%FoxBusiness: 3.8%Halo Effect9.1%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 2.8%FoxBusiness: 2.3%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 7.0%Eric Revell: 0.4%FoxBusiness: 0.4%Primacy Effect7.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.2%FoxBusiness: 0.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 6.7%FoxBusiness: 7.2%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 1.2%FoxBusiness: 1.6%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.8%FoxBusiness: 1.2%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.2%FoxBusiness: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 4.2%FoxBusiness: 6.3%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.4%FoxBusiness: 0.8%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.9%FoxBusiness: 1.2%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 12.7%Eric Revell: 3.4%FoxBusiness: 6.1%Appeal to Emotion12.7%This article: 7.4%Eric Revell: 0.8%FoxBusiness: 1.2%Begging the Question7.4%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 3.9%FoxBusiness: 4.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.2%FoxBusiness: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 1.0%FoxBusiness: 2.4%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 14.2%Eric Revell: 2.1%FoxBusiness: 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)14.2%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.2%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.3%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 1.7%Eric Revell: 1.3%FoxBusiness: 1.8%Unattributed Quote1.7%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.9%FoxBusiness: 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 12.7%Eric Revell: 3.2%FoxBusiness: 4.1%Biased Writer Voice12.7%This article: 5.3%Eric Revell: 1.9%FoxBusiness: 1.7%Indoctrination5.3%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.7%FoxBusiness: 2.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 13.8%Eric Revell: 2.8%FoxBusiness: 4.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…13.8%

529 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers65%attributed speech183writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageGeneral Motors • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageGM • 30 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageGM • 37 words • 100.0% coverageWade Sheffer • 48 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWade Sheffer • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWade Sheffer • 42 words • 0.0% coverageWade Sheffer • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageGM • 46 words • 100.0% coverageGM • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWade Sheffer • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWade Sheffer • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

GM

100%flagged-word coverage
140 attributed words40% of attributed speech54% writer coverage
0%27.5%55.0%Attempt to Sell a Product +52.1 ptsWriter: 0.0%GM: 52.1%52.1%Biased Writer Voice+47.9 ptsWriter: 0.0%GM: 47.9%47.9%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.