2025 Summer Intern

Samsung SDI and General Motors to develop new batteries for electric vehicles. 15:24 / 18.08.2026 · 18 · Technology Samsung SDI and General Motors have reached a new agreement to jointly develop high-performance prismatic battery cells for future electric vehicles. This strategic step is expected to expand bilateral cooperation and take technological capabilities in vehicle electrification to a new level. Ixbt.com reports it. According to ixbt.com, the signed document provides for the development of advanced prismatic batteries with high capacity and support for fast charging technology. These solutions combine features that are in high demand in the automotive market. Structural changes and the plant's future. As part of the agreement, the parties decided to change their corporate structure. In particular, Samsung SDI fully acquired General Motors' 49.99% stake in the SynergyCells joint venture in New Carlisle, Indiana, USA. According to the official press release, this change in ownership structure is linked to current market conditions, particularly the fact that demand for electric vehicles is growing somewhat more slowly than initially expected. As a result, the parties agreed to abandon the previous joint venture format and look for other effective areas of cooperation. The first manufacturing site in North America. As a result of the deal, Samsung SDI became the plant's sole owner and gained its first battery manufacturing facility in North America. The plant is currently under construction. Once construction is complete, Samsung SDI plans to initially start producing batteries for energy storage systems (ESS) at the plant. One of the main reasons for this decision is the sharp increase in demand for such systems in the United States. In the future, the facility may also begin producing prismatic battery cells for electric vehicles. Thanks to their rigid rectangular design, prismatic cells play an important role in the automotive industry and enable more efficient integration into battery packs. Discuss with Zamin AIAnalyze the news, get useful answers

Why Detroit auto manufacturers are pivoting from pure EVs to next-gen hybrid software platforms. The parking lot outside Ford's Rouge Electric Vehicle Center in Dearborn, Michigan, conveys a message that the press releases don't quite make clear. The vehicle is really fantastic; there are F-150 Lightnings waiting to be delivered, and they look amazing. However, there are also fewer of them than what the production plans from three years ago predicted, and those working at the factory are aware of this shortfall. There is lightning. When Ford made the investment decisions that resulted in this building, it underestimated the demand for it at the price point required to cover its production costs. Billions were lost by Ford's Model E division. Analysts who had been monitoring GM's EV plans were upset when the company stated that it had postponed its electric Silverado and reorganized its Ultium platform goals. The parent company of Jeep and Ram, Stellantis, has been the least forthcoming of the three regarding its precise write-down estimates; however, the company's approach aligns with those of its American partners. The total write-offs from EV investments that underperformed now surpassed $53 billion across the Big Three. That's a big amount. It is a substantial wager on a shift in customer behavior that occurred more slowly, unevenly, and at a lower price tolerance than the corporations' planning models predicted. This reevaluation did not result in a decision to give up on electric cars. It was decided to design a bridge, specifically a hybrid bridge, on a software-defined platform that can handle several powertrain configurations without requiring a separate factory for each, rather than viewing pure battery electric vehicles as the sole option. The reasoning is both technical and economic. Economically speaking, hybrid cars are selling well, their profit margins are higher than those of pure EVs given the present cost of batteries, and the average consumer who wasn't prepared to shell out $60,000 for an electric truck will frequently spend $45,000 for a plug-in hybrid version of the same vehicle. Technically speaking, a software-defined vehicle architecture that can operate on plug-in hybrid, hybrid, or fully electric vehicles is more valuable than one that can only operate on one. Toyota is observing this with an expression that the firm is too kind to publicly characterize as vindication after years of criticism in the automotive media and financial circles for its hesitancy to make a strong shift toward pure EVs. Toyota's hybrid approach, which was based on the Prius platform and expanded to the Camry, RAV4, and Highlander lineups, created cars that people actually purchased in large quantities at profit margins without the need for significant capital write-downs or government subsidies. The automakers who placed the biggest bets on the pure EV transition occurring more quickly and thoroughly than it did are now moving closer to where Toyota was five years ago. Beyond the immediate revenue recovery narrative, Detroit's hybrid turnaround becomes strategically intriguing in the software dimension. A software-defined vehicle, which allows for post-purchase updates and expansions to the car's features, performance attributes, and linked services, represents a business model shift just as important as the powertrain change. Tesla based its valuation in part on hardware and in part on the claim that software updates improve its vehicles over time, fostering a continuous client engagement as opposed to a one-time purchase. GM and Ford are developing hybrid platforms with similar capabilities. The data produced by millions of cars running on integrated software systems, the post-sale service connections, and the subscription income from linked features are all revenue streams that the conventional dealership model was never able to capture. This emphasis on flexibility is reflected in the industrial retooling that is currently taking place at a number of Big Three operations. In order to accommodate several engine types on the same production platform, lines that were especially set up for battery-only vehicles are being rebuilt. This lowers the efficiency advantages that dedicated EV lines were meant to produce and incurs short-term expenditures. Additionally, as battery costs continue to decline and charging infrastructure advances, the plants will be able to accommodate a more significant shift in consumer choice toward complete EVs in three or five years without having to make additional capital write-downs. Although optionality is costly, it appears more appealing than conviction following $53 billion in losses on a single wager that did not fully pay off.

The trouble with backup cameras: Here's what we know about the many recalls. Stewart Lewis Sat, August 15, 2026 at 7:34 a.m. PDT A Bloomberg News report out of the U.S. this week tells a story that will be familiar to Canadians who've dealt with the many recalls of vehicles due to glitching backup cameras. Bloomberg said U.S. automakers have recalled approximately 21 million vehicles due to glitching backup cameras during the eight years they have been mandatory in the U.S., including close to six million just last year. Such recalls have been similarly frequent in Canada. Here's what we know about the trouble with backup camera systems, one of the most fault-prone elements of modern vehicles: How have backup camera systems performed in Canada? Like in the U.S., there are myriad media reports about vehicle recalls in Canada over faulty backup cameras. Here are a range of recalls reported in just the last few years. In late July, more than 17,000 Volkswagen vehicles were recalled, requiring the owners to take them back to a dealership. Transport Canada officials said that "(u)nder certain conditions, a software problem could cause the rearview camera image not to display when the transmission is shifted into reverse." As a result, it "could reduce a driver's ability to see behind the vehicle while backing up. This could increase the risk of a crash." In early July, Honda Canada recalled 32,289 Odyssey minivans due to an issue with the rearview-camera-image display. In late May, Honda recalled nearly 1,000 vehicles due to an issue that could affect the rearview cameras. In April, General Motors recalled more than a quarter of a million Chevrolet Malibus in Canada and the U.S. due to potentially defective rear-view cameras. The number of affected vehicles in Canada numbered 10,098. At the time, the Associated Press reported that a letter from the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration stated that the rearview camera on certain Malibu vehicles could display distorted or blank images when they were reversed, increasing the risk of a crash. In late January, Transport Canada issued a recall notice for 12,179 Toyota Tundra trucks from the years 2024 and 2025 due to an issue that could affect the vehicle's backup camera. In early January, Transport Canada announced an update regarding an earlier recall involving more than 40,000 Volvo cars and SUVs. Again, the issue cited was a software problem that could cause the rearview camera images not to display when the vehicle was reversed. Even vehicles recalled previously required a new fix. In late December of 2025, Porsche recalled more than 25,000 vehicles in Canada because of the possibility that the rearview camera image might not appear on the display. In October 2025, Toyota recalled 32,733 vehicles in Canada due to rearview camera safety concerns, according to Transport Canada. The month before, on Sept. 9, Ford issued a massive recall. It affected more than 120,000 vehicles in Canada due to potentially faulty rearview cameras. The notice from Transport Canada was part of a broader recall affecting around 1.9 million vehicles worldwide. In November 2024, Hyundai recalled 48,509 SUVs and small cars in Canada because of a potential issue with the rearview camera imaging not showing up on the driver's screens. An even larger recall in June 2024 by automaker Stellantis involved more than one million vehicles, including minivans, SUVs, and pickups, in North America due to a software problem that could affect the display from the rearview camera. Transport Canada listed 126,530 affected vehicles. How do recalls work in Canada? Notably, while there have been frequent large-scale recalls due to defective backup camera displays, Transport Canada notices regularly state the issue as the probability of a crash, rather than a link to recorded fatalities. An overhaul concern for safety is paramount. In Canada, the Motor Vehicle Safety Act requires automakers to notify Transport Canada as well as current vehicle owners when they become aware of a regulated defect "in the design, construction or functioning of a vehicle or vehicle equipment," Sau Sau Liu, senior communications advisor with Transport Canada told National Post in an email. This is especially true for defects "that could affect the safety of a person." Liu said recalls are issued by the automakers, not Transport Canada. The latter's role is ensuring that companies follow the regulatory requirements. However, Transport Canada publishes information about each recall notice in the Motor Vehicle Safety Recalls Database. An advanced search of "Visual System" recalls in the database, including backup cameras, reveals 847 recalls since 2018. The recalls cover all manner of makes and models. Some of the common reasons listed in rearview camera malfunctioning include: part of the rearview camera image may be blocked, rearview camera image may not display and rearview camera may not work. Not all these recalls are for the backup camera systems. Visual system recalls also cover other visibility issues, such as rearview mirror and windshield wiper malfunctions. To find the recall specific to your vehicle, fill in the make, model and year. An owner can also enter their vehicle identification number (VIN) in the vehicle manufacturer's recall lookup tool. Liu recommends that vehicle owners ensure their vehicle and contact information are registered with the manufacturer to receive prompt recall notifications. This also applies to owners buying and registering a second-hand vehicle. Manufacturer contact information can be found on Transport Canada's website. Finally, says Liu, when a vehicle owner believes there is a safety issue with their vehicle or safety recall repair, they are encouraged to report it to Transport Canada's defect complaints and recalls hotline at 1-800-333-0510 or submit a defect complaint form. When did regulations change to mandate rear backup cameras? A 2008 U.S. law, signed by former U.S. President George W. Bush, directed regulators to help prevent pedestrian deaths and injuries caused by backup collisions - particularly among children. That led to mandatory installation of backup cameras in all vehicles beginning in 2018. They were previously an optional feature. In 2018, Canadian standards were shifted to fall in line with the U.S. The cameras are required in Canada by regulation in passenger cars, SUVs, light pickup trucks and minivans in Canada. How do rear backup cameras work? Transport Canada describes backup cameras as displaying "the area directly behind a vehicle when it is in reverse," geared to preventing the driver from backing into something. They show the area monitored by the camera on a dashboard screen in front of the driver. What can cause a backup camera to become faulty? Audiomobile in California says that common symptoms of a failing backup camera include a black screen, blurry or distorted images, flickering or intermittent video, no guideline or misaligned lines and poor night visuals. Electrical and hardware failures can be caused by a blown fuse. The backup camera, like most electrical components in a car, is protected by a fuse. Meanwhile, the wiring connecting the camera to the display runs through the vehicle, making it vulnerable to damage. The camera unit itself is an electronic device and can fail due to age, manufacturing defects or physical impact. A loose connection at the camera, the head unit or anywhere along the wiring can lead to intermittent functioning or a complete loss of signal. Since many backup cameras are triggered by the vehicle's reverse lights, a faulty reverse-light switch (which tells the car it's in reverse) can prevent the lights as well as the camera from activating. Can the software be problematic? The problem could be attributed to software and system glitches. This is often cited as the cause in Transport Canada notices. The head unit that displays the camera feed, the interface mounted in the dashboard, is often part of a larger infotainment system, says Audiomobile. Software glitches, firmware issues, or even a temporary freeze in the unit's operating system can prevent the camera feed from appearing. Sometimes, the resolution could be a basic system reset. With owners that install an aftermarket head unit or other electronic accessories, there might be compatibility conflicts that interfere with the backup camera. Improper wiring or software incompatibility could be disrupting the signal. Should you fix it yourself? Despite offering these tips, Audiomobile points out that "there comes a point when a backup camera issue transcends simple fixes" and requires an owner to call upon professional expertise. Messing with complex electrical systems can lead to more damage, costly repairs and compromising a vehicle's safety features.