Electric vehicles

[Malcolm]

A collision, 2 months and $18K later, a couple worries their EV insurer will raise rates

Recent report says higher uptake of EVs can lead to higher premiums

Jenna Benchetrit · CBC News · Posted: Mar 22, 2024 2:00 AM MDT | Last Updated: 3 hours ago

After colliding with a deer during a nighttime drive in January, Benjamin Vassalle, shown here, was astonished to find that a broken headlight and bumper on his electric vehicle took two months to fix and cost $18,000. His insurance company ultimately covered it — raising concerns that his premiums will go up. (CBC)

Social Sharing

•  

After Benjamin Vassalle hit a deer during a nighttime drive in northern Ontario in January, he and his partner knew that repairing their damaged electric vehicle would come at a cost.

Yet when their insurance company sent the car to an independent garage, the vehicle stayed there untouched for weeks — because the mechanic didn't have the parts or expertise required to fix an EV.

The couple had little choice but to send their car to its manufacturer, Tesla, which fixed the broken headlight and crushed bumper.

A photo shows the damage on Vassalle's Model 3 Tesla following a collision with a deer during a nighttime drive. Vassalle is worried that his insurer will hike their premiums as a result of the expensive repair claim. (CBC)

Although the ensuing $18,000 bill was covered by their insurance company, the couple is now worried that their insurer will hike their premiums in the future.

"I think there's a lack of knowledge from insurance companies about [electric] cars and all the repairs that can occur when you have that type of car," Vassalle said.

Electric vehicles are more costly and complicated to repair than traditional cars, experts say. And more people are buying them. For those reasons, insurance claims for EVs are on the rise in other countries — and the same might soon be true for the Canadian market, according to a new report. 

• U.S. eases vehicle emissions rules, but overall reduction targets remain unchanged

• CBC EXPLAINS
  What Canada can learn from Norway, the EV capital of the world

Report says EV premiums could start rising in Canada

A recent report by credit rating agency Morningstar DBRS assessed how a higher uptake of electric vehicles could lead to higher insurance premiums.

EV sales in the U.K., Europe and U.S. have boomed since 2019, according to the report. Boosted by government incentives and investments in charging infrastructure, these drivers will be the first to bear the brunt of higher insurance premiums on EVs — and Canada could be next, the report says.

In Canada, about 12 per cent of all new motor vehicles registered in the third quarter of 2023 were zero-emissions vehicles, according to Statistics Canada. That's an increase from the same period in 2022, where they made up 8.7 per cent of all new registrations.

• The cars, the chargers or the customers? A look at what's behind cooling EV sales growth

• The federal government wants Canadians to switch to electric vehicles. Are they interested?

"Insurance is a pool business, whereby you have insurance premiums from a lot of people [that] are used to pay claims for very few people," said Victor Adesanya, vice-president of insurance at Morningstar DBRS and a co-author of the report.

In the U.K., for example, the average cost of EV insurance rose by 72 per cent in 2023, compared to 29 per cent for internal combustion engine vehicles (heat engines that combust fuel or gas, like most cars), according to the Financial Times. 

An increase in insurance premiums for EVs will be gradual for Canadians — mostly because the provinces regulate sharp insurance hikes — but they could be driven up by claims experience as more people transition to electric cars, Adesanya explained.

"Once you get more EVs into the mix, then the experience of that pool begins to change," he explained, noting that rates are driven by everything from inflation to repair costs to theft to the cost of a vehicle's parts.

WATCH | Why EVs are easy to find but difficult to afford in Canada: 

 

U.S. announces rule aimed at expanding EV sales

 

2 days ago

Duration2:00

The U.S. is moving forward with an ambitious plan aimed at shifting its auto industry toward making more electric vehicles — and Canadian companies could stand to benefit.

While EV sales are still growing, experts say they've cooled off due to concerns about range and charging infrastructure. But the federal government announced in December that it would implement an electric vehicle standard, aiming for a target of 100 per cent zero-emissions vehicle sales by 2035.

While Canada doesn't have as many EVs on the road as the other regions covered by the report — mostly due to range anxiety, high prices and concerns about maintaining the cars in extreme temperatures — the cars are entering the mainstream, said Adesanya.

"In the next 10 years, we'll most likely all be driving EVs, or close to all of us will have to start buying EVs," he added. "So it's going to affect both the insurance companies and the car owners."

Electric vehicles have fewer parts compared to a traditional vehicle with an internal combustion engine, but an EV's parts can be far more expensive, says Colin Simpson, who developed an EV technician program at George Brown College.

In five or 10 years, there will be a significant increase in used EVs on the market, and with that, certain repair requirements, said Simpson, who is also the dean of George Brown's Centre for Continuous Learning. 

The problem is that customers might not be able to identify what those repairs should be, using the same methods they would for a traditional car, for which you can "get a visual idea of how well the vehicle has been cared for."

EVs could have less wear and tear and lower mileage, but if the battery needs a replacement, it can cost up to $20,000.

 

"So the used vehicle market is going to be, I think, a challenge, because for one thing, people don't have that same ability to recognize what's a good deal and what is not when they're buying a used electric vehicle."

Understanding the state of an EV battery's health is a "far more complicated process," as well, which could pose difficulties for insurance companies trying to determine a pricing model for EV premiums, he said.

"This whole mystery around 'what's the state of health of the battery' … the usual signs aren't there, like the actual mileage."

When comparing non-electric and electric vehicles from the same manufacturer, "that electric version might be more costly to initially purchase because of those [repair] costs can be higher and that can also influence the premiums," said Rob de Pruis, national director of consumer and industry relations at the Insurance Bureau of Canada.

The agency is working with auto manufacturers and vehicle associations to collaborate on ways to reduce some of those claim costs. But they're not simple solutions, de Pruis added.

"We don't have a lot of influence over these vehicle manufacturers, and that's where we're also talking with the government."

[deicer]

Concerns over charging time are becoming a thing of the past.  Seems the reality of battery swapping is happening, and it takes less than 2 minutes.

Like any new tech, there will be glitches, but improvements are happening.

 

[deicer]

 

[Airband]

3 hours ago, deicer said:

Concerns over charging time are becoming a thing of the past.

Now, all you have to do is convince the buyers - they're proving to be a tough sell.

[Malcolm]

[Seeker]

4 hours ago, deicer said:

 

When I get my BBQ propane tank filled at Costco it cost about $12.

When I get my tank filled at a local gas station it costs about $20.

When I swap tanks at the Sobey's it costs about $30.

When you swap batteries not only do you need to pay for the energy in the battery but also the facility to perform the swap, the upkeep, maintenance and replacement for a pool of batteries.  And, don't forget - the profit for the company providing the service.  I would guess that the total cost would be 400% higher than charging at home.

Battery swapping might be possible but in the video it mentions that it's mostly taxis that have gotten onboard.  Like most places I would assume the taxi fleet has settled in on one type of vehicle therefore only one type of battery to swap.  Can you imagine trying to start such a business where there are 40 different types of batteries?  Of course I've never even heard of a vehicle in NA that is setup for this. 

[deicer]

Much like most innovations, North America is way behind on the tech curve.

When you talk about paying for the facilities, don't forget, gas stations, et al that you fill up with have been established for a long long time.

Compare it to filling a car in the 1910's.

That's where we're at with regards to recharging technology.

Give it a while....

Edited to add...

When it comes to different battery types, over time gasoline was standardized also.

 

Edited March 25 by deicer

[Airband]

17 hours ago, deicer said:

Give it a while....

It's been a while...

[Airband]

The problem with plug-in hybrids? Their drivers

Plug-in hybrids are often sold as a transition to EVs, but new data from Europe shows we’re still underestimating the emissions they produce

Wed Mar 27, 2024 - MIT Technology Review
By Casey Crownhart

Plug-in hybrids are supposed to be the best of both worlds—the convenience of a gas-powered car with the climate benefits of a battery electric vehicle. But new data suggests that some official figures severely underestimate the emissions they produce. 

According to new real-world driving data from the European Commission, plug-in hybrids produce roughly 3.5 times the emissions official estimates suggest. The difference is largely linked to driver habits: people tend to charge plug-in hybrids and drive them in electric mode less than expected.

“The environmental impact of these vehicles is much, much worse than what the official numbers would indicate,” says Jan Dornoff, a research lead at the International Council on Clean Transportation.

While conventional hybrid vehicles contain only a small battery to slightly improve fuel economy, plug-in hybrids allow fully electric driving for short distances. These plug-in vehicles typically have a range of roughly 30 to 50 miles (50 to 80 kilometers) in electric driving mode, with a longer additional range when using the secondary fuel, like gasoline or diesel. But drivers appear to be using much more fuel than was estimated.

According to the new European Commission report, drivers in plug-in hybrid vehicles produce about 139.4 grams of carbon dioxide for every kilometer driven, based on measurements of how much fuel vehicles use over time. On the other hand, official estimates from manufacturers, which are determined using laboratory tests, put emissions at 39.6 grams per kilometer driven.

Some of this gap can be explained by differences between the controlled conditions in a lab and real-world driving. Even conventional combustion-engine vehicles tend to have higher real-world emissions than official estimates suggest, though the gap is roughly 20%, not 200% or more as it is for plug-in hybrids.

The major difference comes down to how drivers tend to use plug-in hybrids. Researchers have noticed the problem in previous studies, some of them using crowdsourced data. 

In one study from the ICCT published in 2022, researchers examined real-world driving habits of people in plug-in hybrids. While the method used to determine official emissions values estimated that drivers use electricity to power vehicles 70% to 85% of the time, the real-world driving data suggested that vehicle owners actually used electric mode for 45% to 49% of their driving. And if vehicles were company-provided cars, the average was only 11% to 15%.

The difference between reality and estimates can be a problem for drivers, who may buy plug-in hybrids expecting climate benefits and gas savings. But if drivers are charging less than expected, the benefits might not be as drastic as promised. Trips taken in a plug-in hybrid cut emissions by only 23% relative to trips in a conventional vehicle, rather than the nearly three-quarters reduction predicted by official estimates, according to the new analysis.

“People need to be realistic about what they face,” Dornoff says. Driving the vehicles in electric mode as much as possible can help maximize the financial and environmental benefits, he adds.

It’s important to close the gap between expectations and reality not only for individuals’ sake, but also to ensure that policies aimed at cutting emissions have the intended effects. 

The European Union passed a law last year that will end sales of gas-powered cars in 2035. This is aimed at cutting emissions from transportation, a sector that makes up around one-fifth of global emissions. In the EU, manufacturers are required to have a certain average emissions value for all their vehicles sold. If plug-in hybrids are performing much worse in the real world than expected, it could mean the transportation sector is actually making less progress toward climate goals than it’s getting credit for.

Plug-in hybrids’ failure to meet expectations is also a problem in the US, says Aaron Isenstadt, a senior researcher at the ICCT based in San Francisco. Real-world fuel consumption was about 50% higher than EPA estimates in one ICCT study, for example. The gap between expectations and reality is smaller in the US partly because official emissions estimates are calculated differently, and partly because US drivers have different driving habits and may have better access to charging at home, Isenstadt says.

The Biden administration recently finalized new tailpipe emissions rules, which set guidelines for manufacturers about the emissions their vehicles can produce. The rules aim at ramping down emissions from new vehicles sold, so by 2032, roughly half of new cars sold in the US will need to produce zero emissions in order to meet the standards.

Both the EU and the US have plans to update estimates about how drivers are using plug-in hybrids, which should help policies in both markets better reflect reality. The EU will make an adjustment to estimates about driver behavior beginning in 2025, while the US will do so later, in 2027.

[Malcolm]

Electric vehicles may not be as good for the planet as you think

Story by Zeleb.es

 • 3h

slide show presentation

Electric vehicles may not be as good for the planet as you think (msn.com)

Electric vehicles may release more pollution than petrol-powered vehicles, according to a report that has recently resurfaced.

The study, which was published in 2022 but has begun circulating again after being cited in a WSJ op-ed,  found that brakes and tyres release 1,850 times more particulate matter compared to modern exhaust pipes which have filters that reduce emissions.

It found that EVs are 30 percent heavier on average than petrol-powered vehicles, which causes the brakes and tyre treads to wear out faster than standard cars and releases tiny, often toxic particles into the atmosphere.

 

Hesham Rakha, a professor at Virginia Tech told Dailymail.com that the study is only 'partially correct' because even though EVs are heavier, their tyres will emit more microplastics into the air, but this could also be true for sedans versus SUVs. 

[Jaydee]

[Malcolm]

57 minutes ago, Jaydee said:

Our gas has gone up 20 cents a ltr since Jan and evidently more on April 01, so based on your post Electric Vehicles should be selling like hotcakes..... but not

and in the rest of Canada

   

[Malcolm]

Biden's electric road to nowhere: Two years after he vowed to spend $7.5 billion building 500,000 charging stations only SEVEN have been plugged in

Biden's electric road to nowhere: Two years after he vowed to spend $7.5 billion building 500,000 charging stations only SEVEN have been plugged in | Daily Mail Online

• Only seven electric vehicle charging stations built with Bipartisan Infrastructure Law funds are currently operational 
• $5 billion was allocated to go toward the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure program 
• The law says the charging stations must be held to a certain standard and created a multi-step process before construction could commence

By NIKKI SCHWAB, SENIOR U.S. POLITICAL REPORTER

PUBLISHED: 17:17 EDT, 29 March 2024 | UPDATED: 17:18 EDT, 29 March 2024

 

More than two years after President Joe Biden pledged to build 500,000 electric vehicle charging stations throughout the United States only seven are operational across four states. 

The Washington Post reported Friday on the sluggish pace the allocated $7.5 billion in infrastructure funds have been put to use.  

The bulk of the funds, $5 billion, are to go toward building fast chargers along major interstates - what's being called the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure or NEVI program. 

 

To satisfy the federal program's requirements, chargers must be built at least every 50 miles over major highway routes and be operational 97 percent of the time.

They also must take credit card payments and certain components must be made domestically.

More than two years after President Joe Biden pledged to build 500,000 electric vehicle charging stations throughout the U.S. only seven are operational across four states

Additionally, states must submit proposals to the Biden administration for approval, solicit bids for construction and then can award the funds. 

So after the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law was passed in November 2021, only seven charging stations are operational. 

They are in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Hawaii and New York and offer 38 spots for cars to charge. 

Twelve additional states have been awarded contracts for construction to begin, while another 17 states haven't even submitted proposals.  

'I think a lot of people who are watching this are getting concerned about the timeline,' Alexander Laska, deputy director for transportation and innovation at the center-left think tank Third Way told The Post.   

Nick Nigro, founder of Atlas Public Policy, told the newspape that some of the delays are to be expected.

'State transportation agencies are the recipients of the money,' he told The Post. 'Nearly all of them had no experience deploying electric vehicle charging stations before the law was enacted.' 

 

'I expect it to go much faster in 2024,' Nigro added. 

If Republicans take back full control of Congress and also the White House - some of these programs could see a backslide.  

Biden's challenger, former President Donald Trump, has been openly antagonistic toward the Democrat's green agenda. 

In mid-February at a campaign stop in the battleground state of Michigan, Trump said that Biden 'ordered a hit job on Michigan manufacturing' with mandates to move the American car industry away from gas guzzlers toward EVs. 

And GOP lawmakers on Capitol Hill also haven't been impresssed. 

'We have significant concerns that under your efforts American taxpayer dollars are being woefully mismanaged,' read a letter sent to the Biden administration from a group of Republican representatives in February. 

'The problems with these programs continue to grow — delays in the delivery of chargers, concerns from States about labor contracting requirements and minimum operating standards for chargers,' said the letter, which was signed by GOP Reps. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Jeff Duncan and Morgan Griffith. 

[Airband]

 

The big worry for carmakers: what if the EV slowdown is not a blip?

Expansion of production is far outstripping demand

Robotic arms assemble electric cars at a factory in Jinhua, China.

Tue Apr 02, 2024 - Financial Times
by Peter Campbell

Quote

Some investors are now privately warning about an “enormous misallocation of capital” across the industry. “It is difficult to see anything that could cause a marked acceleration in demand in 2025.”

As global electric vehicle sales growth slows, carmakers and regulators are asking an existential question: is the current slowdown a blip? 

One scenario sees mass market buyers, who currently balk at higher prices of EVs, eventually come around and flock to the technology. EVs are silent, accelerate like sports cars and can save money in the long run. Once they are cheaper than petrol cars, and there are enough chargers, most consumers will never turn back. 

The other scenario is more worrying. If prices do not fall, or legitimate concerns over charging infrastructure are not met, motorists may resist indefinitely. The implications of the second are potentially concerning. Meeting long-term decarbonisation targets without removing all petrol and diesel cars from the roads is impossible. 

But if politicians cannot persuade consumers to buy EVs, will they tear up their net zero pledges, or turn to other measures to drive EV sales? You cannot, in the words of Ineos boss Jim Ratcliffe, force EVs “down consumers’ throats”. Norway has become the world’s hotspot for EV adoption by penalising petrol cars through higher taxes. But France’s gilets jaunes protests over higher fuel taxes show this approach will not work everywhere.

The shift to EVs will take time. Prices will fall as new models come on sale, while the job of installing charging stations grinds on. “The next two years are going to be very wobbly,” admits one former EV adviser to the UK government, who predicts demand will not pick up until later in the decade. 

Carmakers must be prepared for either scenario. Asking senior industry executives the question over the past weeks has elicited almost an even split. “EVs are more expensive and just not as good,” says the head of one carmaker that has nevertheless pledged to phase out engine sales in the coming two decades. 

Carmakers, like all companies, only have a certain number of chips to place on the board. Deciding where to put the money has direct consequences — a new hatchback means no money for an alternative model, for example. The rise of the electric era throws this issue into even sharper relief. Volvo Cars last week made its last-ever diesel model, after choosing to invest in battery models instead.

How fast to ramp up EV production is a key — possibly the key — decision being taken in automotive boardrooms currently. From Ford and General Motors all the way up to Bentley, carmakers globally have pulled back EV plans to focus on hybrid models, with one eye on milking the cash cow of the internal combustion engine for just a little longer. 

But they may not have gone far enough. The global auto industry manufactured 10.5mn electric vehicles last year — and expects to produce 13.5mn this year, according to data pooled from suppliers and forecasters by one auto investor. 
In 2025, on current projections, output will rise even further to 18mn — a 70 per cent increase in global EV output in just two years, the forecasts show. Yet sales, the same data set predicts, will lag even further behind. EV interest last year resulted in sales of 9.5mn vehicles, but the figure is only expected to be 9.8mn this year. 

Some investors are now privately warning about an “enormous misallocation of capital” across the industry. “It is difficult to see anything that could cause a marked acceleration in demand in 2025,” says one investor who has studied the data. 

“Arguably the cars need to be cheaper than their engine equivalents to drive adoption, but with many carmakers already losing billions on EVs, their appetite for further price cuts to promote the switch is going to be very limited.” 

Even BYD — the most feared of the new EV players from China — has seen price cuts denting its own profitability in the past week. If governments slow targets — a possibility that several carmakers believe is more likely than not — it helps the industry generate higher profits in the short term, while also giving them more breathing room to compete with the coming wave of Chinese EVs. 

But slow too fast, and you lose the competitive edge. US auto manufacturers are privately worried that a second Donald Trump win will lead to a gutting of EV rules. While this helps boost short-term profits, it shields the industry from the necessity of coming up with something to beat China.

As one senior executive at a global auto company told me, if the Chinese sell an EV that is just as good as a western car, but cheaper, that is one thing. But if they sell a better car that also undercuts the west, it’s impossible to catch up. 

[Malcolm]

New Jersey Introduces Annual EV Fee, Punishing Owners Who Go Green

Story by Tom Moloughney

 • 46m • 7 min read

 

The new "EV Tax" is the highest in the nation and will likely put the brakes on EV adoption in the Garden State.

With the stroke of a pen, New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy has unplugged the state's pro-electric-vehicle position, signing into law a new EV road tax that is the highest of its kind in the nation. 

Starting in July, New Jersey EV owners must pay an annual $250 road tax fee in an effort to offset the state's loss in fuel tax revenue. The new fee will increase by $10 each of the next four years until it reaches $290 in 2028. To make matters worse, New Jersey requires buyers and leases of all new vehicles to pay four years of registration fees upfront and the new EV fee will be included in that initial payment. 

Therefore, beginning in July, any new electric vehicle purchased or leased in New Jersey will cost $1,060 more than it does today. That's considerably damaging since the higher initial cost of an electric vehicle is one of the biggest impediments to EV adoption. 

Buyers and leasees of new electric vehicles in New Jersey won't be smiling when they find out they need to shell out an upfront road tax fee of $1,060 before they drive off the lot. 

As a lifelong resident of New Jersey as well as a long-time EV owner, it pains me to see the state initiate what I consider an unreasonable tax on clean-energy vehicles so prematurely. 

I say prematurely because I have always maintained that electric vehicles should pay their fair share of road taxes, which help fund the state's infrastructure repair and development. However, I believe that should only start once electric vehicles have reached a point of being 5% of the total light vehicle fleet in the state. Estimates have that figure currently at about 1.8%. 

Additionally, once such a fee was imposed, I would support the amount to be similar to what the average combustion vehicle in its class pays per year through the state's gasoline tax. Murphy's current law will have many EV owners paying twice as much as the owners of a comparable combustion vehicle pay in the gasoline tax. 

And the pain doesn't stop there. Since 2004, battery electric vehicles (BEVs) have enjoyed a sales tax exemption in New Jersey, and that luxury will now begin a three-year phase-out period. The sales tax exemption has been an enormous incentive to Garden State residents wanting to ditch the pump, helping to close the gap between the cost of a comparable combustion vehicle and the more expensive EV.

I understand the sales tax exemption wouldn't—or shouldn't go on forever. I figured that by the end of this decade EVs would have near cost-parity with combustion vehicles and the incentives wouldn't be needed anymore. However, today, and for the next few years, the incentives are still important in helping many that want an EV, afford it. The fact that the sales tax announcement was made at the same time the new EV road tax was signed into law made the news for New Jerseyians even harder to swallow. 

I would also be remiss if I didn't mention the state's ChargeUp EV incentive program, which offers up to a $4,000 point of sale incentive on electric vehicles. Signed into law in 2020, ChargeUp is funded by the Board of Public Utilities which has $30 million set aside every year for 10 years to pay for the rebates. Each year since its inception, the fund runs out well before the year does, and the program gets suspended until the following year's funding is in place. 

 

While the program's intentions were great, the way it has been administered has made it very difficult for dealers and EV buyers, because there are many months of the year when there is no rebate and no clear date when the program will receive its next traunch of funding.  

I think that what's disappointed me most is that with the recent changes the state is going from one of the best states to buy an EV, to one where, over time, it will cost more to own one. 

Starting this July, new electric vehicles at New Jersey Dealerships will come with an additional $1,060 road tax bill at the time of sale or lease. 

I'm certainly not the only person who shares these opinions. I reached out to Pam Frank, the CEO of ChargEVC, a non-profit coalition that promotes the sustainable growth of the electric vehicle market in New Jersey for her thoughts on the recent developments.

 

Frank sent me a copy of a letter the organization sent to members of the New Jersey Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee a few weeks ago along with a request to amend the new EV tax, and hopefully lower the annual fee to something more reasonable.

Below is an excerpt from the letter:

There are three main reasons supporting this position: First and foremost, it is imperative that we keep our eye on the ball. New Jersey has set aggressive statewide clean energy and EV adoption goals to combat the emissions that harm our environment and harm people’s health. The Murphy Administration and the New Jersey Legislature have prioritized efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and fight climate change.

This has included implementing a range of incentives to support the purchase of EVs and the charging infrastructure necessary to charge these vehicles. Imposing an EV fee of $250 would negate the impact of these rebates and tax credits. It would also slow progress towards achieving our statewide goals. In fact, a 2020 nationwide survey of current EV owners by UC Davis concluded that a $100 annual registration fee on EVs would reduce sales by over 10%.

At $250, New Jersey would have the highest, most punitive EV fee in the country. We must ensure that New Jersey remains a national leader in the fight against climate change.

[Malcolm]

Ford Motor delays production of electric vehicles at Oakville plant until 2027

/content/dam/cp24/en/images/2023/4/11/a-line-worker-1-6350765-1681236321223.jpgA line worker works on a car at Ford Motor plant in Oakville, Ont., on Friday, January 4, 2013. Ford Motor Co. says it will invest $1.8 billion in its Oakville Assembly Complex to turn it into an electric vehicle production hub. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Chris Young

Published April 4, 2024 7:29 a.m. MDT

Share

 

Ford Motor Co. is delaying the start of electric vehicle production at its plant in Oakville, Ont., to 2027.

The U.S. automaker had planned to start production in 2025 at the Canadian plant which employs 2,700 workers.

Ford announced plans last year to spend $1.8 billion to transform its Oakville assembly plant into a hub for electric vehicle manufacturing including vehicle and battery pack assembly.

RELATED STORIES

• Ford Motor Co. provides details on plans to spend $1.8B in Oakville to produce EVs
• Feds, Ontario ante up millions to produce electric vehicles at Ford's Oakville plant

It says work to overhaul of plant will begin in the second quarter of this year as planned, but the launch of the new three-row electric vehicles to be produced at the factory won't happen until 2027.

Ford spokesman Said Deep says some employees will remain on site during the plant transformation but there will be layoffs.

The company says it will work with Unifor, which represents workers at the plant, to mitigate the impact the delay will have on its workforce.

 

Report an error

[Airband]

11 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

Ford Motor Co. is delaying the start of electric vehicle production at its plant in Oakville, Ont., to 2027.

 

On 3/25/2024 at 4:46 PM, deicer said:

Give it a while....

All part of the plan...

[Airband]

My 2¢
Mass adoption of EVs in North America won't happen without the availability of low-cost models to fuel it.
The cost structure of domestic OEMs inhibits the necessary return for the production of small, cheap vehicles.
The quickest way to achieve it would be to allow Chinese vehicles priced less than $25K to enter the region tariff-free for five years to replace end-of-life Civics, Corollas, small SUVs, etc.
That would create a critical mass of drivers demanding action from politicians, condo associations, landlords, and employers to speed up the buildout of charging infrastructure.
Of course, promoting it at the moment would be political suicide for any party, so it won't happen. 
The result will be slow growth/plateauing of EV sales in NA and relegation to niche product status for the foreseeable future.

Tesla scraps low-cost car plans amid fierce Chinese EV competition

Fri Apr 5, 2024 - Reuters
By Hyunjoo Jin, Norihiko Shirouzu and Ben Klayman

April 5 (Reuters) - Tesla has cancelled the long-promised inexpensive car that investors have been counting on to drive its growth into a mass-market automaker, according to three sources familiar with the matter and company messages seen by Reuters.

The automaker will continue developing self-driving robotaxis on the same small-vehicle platform, the sources said.

The decision represents an abandonment of a longstanding goal that Tesla, opens new tab chief Elon Musk has often characterized as its primary mission: affordable electric cars for the masses. His first “master plan”, opens new tab for the company in 2006 called for manufacturing luxury models first, then using the profits to finance a “low cost family car.”

He has since repeatedly promised such a vehicle to investors and consumers. As recently as January, Musk told investors that Tesla planned to start production of the affordable model at its Texas factory in the second half of 2025, following an exclusive Reuters report detailing those plans.

Tesla’s cheapest current model, the Model 3 sedan, retails for about $39,000 in the United States. The now-defunct entry-level vehicle, sometimes described as the Model 2, was expected to start at about $25,000.

Cont.

 

[deicer]

On 4/5/2024 at 3:17 PM, Airband said:

My 2¢
Mass adoption of EVs in North America won't happen without the availability of low-cost models to fuel it.
The cost structure of domestic OEMs inhibits the necessary return for the production of small, cheap vehicles.
The quickest way to achieve it would be to allow Chinese vehicles priced less than $25K to enter the region tariff-free for five years to replace end-of-life Civics, Corollas, small SUVs, etc.
That would create a critical mass of drivers demanding action from politicians, condo associations, landlords, and employers to speed up the buildout of charging infrastructure.
Of course, promoting it at the moment would be political suicide for any party, so it won't happen. 
The result will be slow growth/plateauing of EV sales in NA and relegation to niche product status for the foreseeable future.

 

 

A good analogy of where we are with regards to EV's is to look back at the price and availability of OLED TV's.

The original Sony OLED was an 11" model that sold for $2500.  Compare that to what you get for the same price today.

It's only gonna take time....

[Airband]

What would OLED pricing and take-up be if Asian manufacturers such as LG & Samsung were either prohibited entry or faced punishing duties (Korean TV's are currently imported duty free to the US)?

Standing by for a $25K North American produced EV that isn't an electrified Vega/Pinto POS, cause that's what tariff walls will get us.

[deicer]

Tariff's are another discussion altogether.

Like all products, early adopters pay the premium for bragging rights.

[Airband]

3 hours ago, deicer said:

Tariff's are another discussion altogether.

I believe that's not so. Rate of adoption is directly tied to the price, quality and availability of a product. Barriers to access slows rate of adoption.

17 hours ago, deicer said:

It's only gonna take time....

Great news- that's exactly what the climatologists say we have lots of.

[deicer]

2 hours ago, Airband said:

I believe that's not so. Rate of adoption is directly tied to the price, quality and availability of a product. Barriers to access slows rate of adoption.

 

Yes, barriers slow rates of adoption.  It's the people who put tariffs on goods and the reasons for it that are the greatest barrier.  And much like corporations raising profits which causes inflation, which leads to increased interest rates which hurt consumers, tariffs don't hurt manufacturers directly because it is the consumer that pays them.

[Airband]

2 hours ago, deicer said:

tariffs don't hurt manufacturers directly because it is the consumer that pays them.

Unless the tariff is set at such a punishing level that it leaves the product uncompetitive and the manufacturer elects not to even enter the market. 

Welcome to Lada World with Commissars Buttigieg and Guilbeault leading the parade.

[deicer]

15 hours ago, Airband said:

Unless the tariff is set at such a punishing level that it leaves the product uncompetitive and the manufacturer elects not to even enter the market. 

 

In todays world with trade disputes going to court, how often do you really see 'punishing level' tariffs?

Or is it just more fear mongering?

Only one presidential candidate is currently proposing punishing tariffs.

And here's the reality of U.S. tariffs currently...

https://ustr.gov/issue-areas/industry-manufacturing/industrial-tariffs

The United States currently has a trade-weighted average import tariff rate of 2.0 percent on industrial goods. One-half of all industrial goods imports enter the United States duty free.