Electric vehicles

[Airband]

57 minutes ago, deicer said:

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

U.S. weighs higher tariffs on China EVs

Chinese EVs are currently subject to a 25 percent levy in the U.S., limiting their ability to enter the market

Thu Dec 21, 2023 - Automotive News
by Katrina Nicholas

The U.S. is considering raising tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles and other goods as it tries to limit reliance on Asia’s biggest economy and shield its own green industry, the Wall Street Journal reported Thursday, citing people it didn’t identify.

While officials in President Biden’s administration have largely left in place Trump-era tariffs on around $300 billion of Chinese goods, the White House and other agencies are debating the levies again, the people said, with an eye on completing a review of the tariffs early in the new year.

China has become a global powerhouse in electric vehicles, with Bloomberg NEF earlier estimating that the country was expected to account for about 60 percent of the world’s 14.1 million new passenger EV sales in 2023. That dominance has led to tension elsewhere — most prominently in Europe, which in September launched a probe into state subsidies for Chinese EVs with EU officials claiming that China was unfairly flooding the market with cheap cars. Beijing has called that investigation a breach of World Trade Organization rules.
 
The EV landscape in Europe is different than in the U.S., where tariffs are already high enough to deter competition from China. China exported nearly 48,000 EVs to North America as of October this year, compared to the more than 564,000 vehicles it sent to Western Europe.

Chinese EVs are currently subject to a 25 percent levy in the U.S., limiting their ability to enter the market. China’s BYD Co., for example, doesn’t retail passenger vehicles in North America — despite being on the cusp of overtaking Elon Musk’s Tesla Inc. as the world’s biggest seller of EVs.

 

[deicer]

I can understand why they want tariff's on imports, however, why aren't they trying to develop and manufacture affordable ev's in the U.S.?  

If they are superior in their technical prowess and manufacturing, what are the Americans afraid of?

Or is it just the lobby protecting the oil companies?

[Malcolm]

1 hour ago, deicer said:

I can understand why they want tariff's on imports, however, why aren't they trying to develop and manufacture affordable ev's in the U.S.?  

If they are superior in their technical prowess and manufacturing, what are the Americans afraid of?

Or is it just the lobby protecting the oil companies?

Or perhaps the current evs do not fit the normal driving habits (distances etc) of most americans?

[deicer]

2 hours ago, Malcolm said:

Or perhaps the current evs do not fit the normal driving habits (distances etc) of most americans?

Seems surveys find otherwise.

Average American does about 35 miles per day.  So if you are commuting to work, you could fill/charge your EV weekly just like an ICE car.

https://www.kbb.com/car-advice/average-miles-driven-per-year/

 

[Malcolm]

57 minutes ago, deicer said:

Seems surveys find otherwise.

Average American does about 35 miles per day.  So if you are commuting to work, you could fill/charge your EV weekly just like an ICE car.

https://www.kbb.com/car-advice/average-miles-driven-per-year/

 

 

the survey talks about the average driver in the us, it does not address the lack of chargers, low trade in value, higher repair cost, higher Auto Insurance Rate  or indeed those who take longer weekend  trips on a speedway or out into the country..

according to Forbes:

5 Reasons Why Electric Vehicle Sales Have Slowed

Michael Harley

Contributor

Michael Harley is an author and a noted automotive industry expert.

Follow

 

 

4

Oct 30, 2023,02:43am EDT

•  
•  
•  

The wedge-shaped Tesla Cybertruck enters the marketplace as EV sales fall off

©2023 MICHAEL HARLEY

There’s been a lot of recent news about automakers cutting back or delaying production of electric vehicles (EV) due to slowing consumer demand. The headlines include Ford announcing it was postponing $12 billion in planned electric vehicle production, GM abandoning a goal to build 400,000 electric vehicles through mid-2024, and Volkswagen Group cancelling plans for a new $2 billion EV factory in Germany.

 

 

Why are consumers less-than-hot on EVs today, following a significant boost in sales in 2021? Here are five reasons why consumers are cooling off in 2023:

 

Unfamiliarity with the product

Automakers initially touted EVs as electric variants of traditional combustion vehicles, which did themselves a disservice. That couldn’t be further from the truth, as EVs are as dissimilar to pure combustion vehicles as propellor aircraft are to jets. EVs are less complex to build, more technically advanced, and require far less maintenance than their gasoline- and diesel-powered equivalents. Consumers don’t understand the nuances between the two powertrains — especially because the added initial cost of an EV pays for itself with a much longer (and less expensive) service life.

 

PROMOTED

Lingering Concerns of Range

According to Department of Transportation statistics, the average driver in the United States drives 37 miles per day, which is effortlessly covered by today’s EVs (in 2010, the average EV only delivered about 80 miles of range, but by 2021, that number had exceeded 220 miles). Nearly all of today’s EVs will provide approximately 250 miles on a full charge, with some offering nearly double — upwards of 500 miles on a single charge. Yet consumers still mention range as one of their primary concerns about EVs.

 

Limited Charging Network

Every city and town in the United States has at least one gas station, and fuel stops may be found at nearly every offramp on highways and interstates — most drivers don’t even think about where they will find fuel until their vehicle is near empty. But that isn’t the case with EVs, as the national charging network is still in its infancy. A road trip in an EV requires planning, and drivers need to add additional time to the journey as replenishment (to 80 percent charge) typically requires 20-30 minutes — news that isn’t comforting tonyone in the market for an EV.

Forbes Lifestyle00:1601:12Why Clouds Could Disappear As The Total SolarEclipse Begins

MORE FROMFORBES ADVISOR

Best Car Insurance Companies Of October 2022

By

Penny Gusner

Editor

Compare Car Insurance Quotes Online (2022 Rates)

By

Jason Metz

Editor

Early Adopters Have Been Fulfilled

As is typical with new emerging technology, the first wave of buyers were higher-income households, enthusiastic technophiles, and those concerned about the environment. That is a particular demographic that comprises only a small portion of consumers — adoption is expected to be much slower for other demographics. Automakers will have to engineer more entry-level models to reach a less affluent demographic and target buyers with vehicles that specifically replace their combustion counterparts.

 

Passport: Explore the finest destinations and experiences around the world in the Forbes Passport newsletter.

Sign Up

 

By signing up, you accept and agree to our Terms of Service (including the class action waiver and arbitration provisions), and you acknowledge our Privacy Statement. Forbes is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

High-Interest Rates

Electric vehicles are more expensive than their combustion counterparts — often upwards of 30 percent before incentives and credits are factored into the sale. The post-pandemic economy has seen interest rates rise significantly, which has slowed all vehicle sales — not just EVs. But, as they tend to be more expensive than an equivalent combustion vehicle, EVs are feeling the pinch extremely hard.

[Airband]

11 hours ago, deicer said:

I can understand why they want tariff's on imports, however, why aren't they trying to develop and manufacture affordable ev's in the U.S.?  

A couple of thoughts...

America's strength and customer preference have always been larger, content-laden vehicles—they've never been able to develop (never had to), build, and profitably sell a market-leading small, cheap car like the VW Beetle, Civic, or Corolla.

As a result, there's no engineering tradition to support such development. In contrast, China's mainstay vehicles have been small and cheap, and there is a reservoir of engineering talent to support ongoing development and transition to small EVs.

11 hours ago, deicer said:

If they are superior in their technical prowess and manufacturing, what are the Americans afraid of?

Americans may have uncontested prowess in some fields, but not automobiles. China easily matches the U.S. and chases Japan and Germany in both quality and productivity (partly as a result of copying/stealing Western manufacturers' methods/designs).

China has had a 15-year lead in EV development and production methods, mainly driven by dependence on imported oil for 70% of its needs but having relatively cheap and abundant electricity.

Quote

What are the Americans afraid of?

Whatever it is, both Joe and Don have set a common protectionist course to deal with it.

11 hours ago, deicer said:

Or is it just the lobby protecting the oil companies?

With respect to oil, it isn't industry lobbying but decades of low gasoline prices that have led the US industry to continue focusing on the larger vehicles consumers prefer. If gas prices were raised to European levels, there would be an immediate drift to smaller vehicles. They just won't be electric.

[deicer]

If you think the oil lobby in the U.S. has no influence, then why do they spend so much?

https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/lobbying?cycle=All&ind=E01

Also, it's who they lobby...

https://www.statista.com/statistics/788056/us-oil-and-gas-lobbying-spend-by-party/

Oil companies are amongst the most profitable, returning billions to investors.  They are also the amongst the largest subsidized corporations in the world.  Is this just a way for governments to reward the rich for their support as well?

As for the drift to smaller vehicles, North America has always had a knee jerk reaction to price spikes.  This makes the auto companies make substandard small vehicles to stop-gap the issue, but then they go back to pumping out big gas guzzling vehicles.  

What we need to see is like the Europeans have done, small efficient, good performing cars at reasonable prices.

So you are right, we need to have European gas prices to get there.

https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/global-fossil-fuel-subsidies-rise-despite-calls-phase-out-2023-11-23/

https://theconversation.com/fossil-fuel-subsidies-cost-canadians-a-lot-more-money-than-the-carbon-tax-226482

Every year, federal and provincial governments use taxpayer dollars to provide financial supports or tax breaks to fossil fuel companies

These subsidies cost Canadian taxpayers at least $6.03 billion, or roughly $214 per taxpayer every year.

 

Fossil fuel subsidies are a big problem across Canada. The federal government has spent $35 billion on the Trans Mountain oil pipeline and $275 million on a liquefied natural gas facility. The Canadian oil and natural gas sector also benefits from special tax breaks under the Income Tax Act.

British Columbia, Alberta and Saskatchewan give more than $2.5 billion in royalty reductions and tax exemptions to the fossil fuel industry every year. Ontario gives $500 million in tax breaks to aviation and agricultural fuels. Manitoba, Québec and the Atlantic provinces give similar tax exemptions to fuel and natural gas.

 

[deicer]

17 hours ago, Malcolm said:

 

the survey talks about the average driver in the us, it does not address the lack of chargers, low trade in value, higher repair cost, higher Auto Insurance Rate  or indeed those who take longer weekend  trips on a speedway or out into the country..

according to Forbes:

5 Reasons Why Electric Vehicle Sales Have Slowed

Michael Harley

Contributor

Michael Harley is an author and a noted automotive industry expert.

Follow

 

 

4

Oct 30, 2023,02:43am EDT

•  
•  
•  

The wedge-shaped Tesla Cybertruck enters the marketplace as EV sales fall off

©2023 MICHAEL HARLEY

There’s been a lot of recent news about automakers cutting back or delaying production of electric vehicles (EV) due to slowing consumer demand. The headlines include Ford announcing it was postponing $12 billion in planned electric vehicle production, GM abandoning a goal to build 400,000 electric vehicles through mid-2024, and Volkswagen Group cancelling plans for a new $2 billion EV factory in Germany.

 

 

Why are consumers less-than-hot on EVs today, following a significant boost in sales in 2021? Here are five reasons why consumers are cooling off in 2023:

 

Unfamiliarity with the product

Automakers initially touted EVs as electric variants of traditional combustion vehicles, which did themselves a disservice. That couldn’t be further from the truth, as EVs are as dissimilar to pure combustion vehicles as propellor aircraft are to jets. EVs are less complex to build, more technically advanced, and require far less maintenance than their gasoline- and diesel-powered equivalents. Consumers don’t understand the nuances between the two powertrains — especially because the added initial cost of an EV pays for itself with a much longer (and less expensive) service life.

 

PROMOTED

Lingering Concerns of Range

According to Department of Transportation statistics, the average driver in the United States drives 37 miles per day, which is effortlessly covered by today’s EVs (in 2010, the average EV only delivered about 80 miles of range, but by 2021, that number had exceeded 220 miles). Nearly all of today’s EVs will provide approximately 250 miles on a full charge, with some offering nearly double — upwards of 500 miles on a single charge. Yet consumers still mention range as one of their primary concerns about EVs.

 

Limited Charging Network

Every city and town in the United States has at least one gas station, and fuel stops may be found at nearly every offramp on highways and interstates — most drivers don’t even think about where they will find fuel until their vehicle is near empty. But that isn’t the case with EVs, as the national charging network is still in its infancy. A road trip in an EV requires planning, and drivers need to add additional time to the journey as replenishment (to 80 percent charge) typically requires 20-30 minutes — news that isn’t comforting tonyone in the market for an EV.

Forbes Lifestyle00:1601:12Why Clouds Could Disappear As The Total SolarEclipse Begins

MORE FROMFORBES ADVISOR

Best Car Insurance Companies Of October 2022

By

Penny Gusner

Editor

Compare Car Insurance Quotes Online (2022 Rates)

By

Jason Metz

Editor

Early Adopters Have Been Fulfilled

As is typical with new emerging technology, the first wave of buyers were higher-income households, enthusiastic technophiles, and those concerned about the environment. That is a particular demographic that comprises only a small portion of consumers — adoption is expected to be much slower for other demographics. Automakers will have to engineer more entry-level models to reach a less affluent demographic and target buyers with vehicles that specifically replace their combustion counterparts.

 

Passport: Explore the finest destinations and experiences around the world in the Forbes Passport newsletter.

Sign Up

 

By signing up, you accept and agree to our Terms of Service (including the class action waiver and arbitration provisions), and you acknowledge our Privacy Statement. Forbes is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

High-Interest Rates

Electric vehicles are more expensive than their combustion counterparts — often upwards of 30 percent before incentives and credits are factored into the sale. The post-pandemic economy has seen interest rates rise significantly, which has slowed all vehicle sales — not just EVs. But, as they tend to be more expensive than an equivalent combustion vehicle, EVs are feeling the pinch extremely hard.

Articles like this are just excuses for not adopting to change.

History shows that change will happen, whether old men yelling at clouds like it or not.

It's just how much money can be made off of legacy technology before they are forced to make the changes.

Along similar lines, have you seen the cellphone technology and prices that the rest of the world has?  Why aren't we getting that as well, just like the EV's they are getting?

[Airband]

Yup, got me convinced it's all a plot by the oil companies and there's no structural issues impeding uptake of EVs in the US.

[Malcolm]

3 hours ago, deicer said:

Articles like this are just excuses for not adopting to change.

History shows that change will happen, whether old men yelling at clouds like it or not.

It's just how much money can be made off of legacy technology before they are forced to make the changes.

Along similar lines, have you seen the cellphone technology and prices that the rest of the world has?  Why aren't we getting that as well, just like the EV's they are getting?

It was you who posted the article that my rebuttal was about , was it your aim to post excuses or ?

[Airband]

On 4/9/2024 at 7:29 AM, deicer said:

Articles like this are just excuses for not adopting to change.

Another one for your list..

The EV Bust in Europe Is a Red Flag for Region’s Climate Goals

Carmakers push back on timing of emissions targets and combustion-engine ban with consumers skirting EVs as soon as incentives end

Slow demand for EVs sees the Il Faldo parking lot near Italy's port of Livorno fill up

Fri 19 Apr, 2024 - Bloomberg News
by Albertina Torsoli

Europe’s falling electric-vehicle sales are painful proof the market isn’t ready to stand on its own, putting governments on notice for more support until affordable EVs become a reality.

The glut is clogging up ports and factories are cutting production — a red flag for the region’s climate goals and risk of more job cuts after Tesla’s mass layoffs this week.

Without subsidies, EVs are still too expensive for many drivers. Insurance and repairs are more expensive than for combustion-engine cars, and many would-be customers continue to bristle at limited charging infrastructure. At the same time, rapid technological advances and Tesla’s price war are causing resale values to plummet, wreaking havoc on ownership costs.

“We are losing momentum,” said Mattias Bergman, chief executive officer of auto industry group Mobility Sweden, where sales slumped by nearly a fifth during the first quarter. “The market is no longer growing, and the share of electric cars in the market is actually decreasing.”

For the industry, it’s too late to turn back. Volkswagen, Mercedes-Benz, Stellantis and other carmakers have invested billions and are now grappling with building out new lineups even as demand weakens. Last month, sales in Europe declined 11% from a year ago, helping tip the broader market into reverse, as Germany, Sweden and Italy saw EV declines of around 30%.

Changes in incentives have been a trigger for the reversal. Germany, looking for savings during an unprecedented budget crisis, yanked its popular subsidy program suddenly late last year, causing EV sales to halve in December. In Sweden, among the most advanced EV markets in Europe with 39% of new vehicles sold last year being battery-powered, the government ended an incentive and then lowered fuel taxes, making combustion-engine cars cheaper by comparison.

“People just don’t earn enough to buy these cars,” said Laurent Favre, CEO of French auto-part supplier OPmobility. “There’s a gap between supply and demand and it’s normal that the subsidies won’t last forever. Reality is catching up with us.”

Governments are starting to be more selective with their subsidies. Italy is considering grants of as much as €13,750 ($14,650) on EV purchases for low-income families who trade in decades-old cars. In France, President Emmanuel Macron’s cut-price EV leasing contracts for poorer households have been wildly popular.

In the UK, the House of Lords in February said it was “premature” for the country to end a plug-in grant for private buyers in 2022. Since then, EV sales have flatlined as a share of overall new car purchases. New targeted grants should be reconsidered, the report said.

“The grants were lifted too early,” said Andy Palmer, interim CEO of charging company Pod Point and former head of Aston Martin. Consumers are reluctant to spend comparatively more on an EV, he said, especially when the charging infrastructure is lagging. “If you want to speed up adoption, you’ve got to reduce the cost of the cars. You’ve got to put cars in that $20,000 to $30,000 bracket.”

Months into owning a Mercedes EQB, Naeem Badiuzzaman in Milton Keynes, England, says he’s ready to trade in the vehicle, which he acquired with the help of a company incentive program. A dearth of charging stations has meant regular 45-minute waits, and even medium-distance trips required him to stop and top up his battery. When his two-year lease ends, Badiuzzaman plans to switch to a hybrid.

“I would currently not recommend an EV to my family or friends,” he said. “For the price of an entry level electric vehicle, you have wide range of slightly more premium petrol cars.”

Sentiments like his are a bad omen for Europe’s ambition to phase out sales of new combustion-engine cars by 2035. Carmakers have begun lobbying for a softening or delaying of that plan, and an easing of interim benchmarks they’re supposed to hit along the way.

The shift to EVs has become highly politicized, and ill-conceived measures can backfire. France’s yellow vest protests in 2018 over increased fuel taxes brought the country to a standstill. In the UK, London’s extension of the city’s Ultra Low Emission Zone has brought about vandalism. 

Germany’s far-right AfD party has denounced a forced shift away from combustion-engine cars, and the issue could feature prominently in upcoming elections in September in the states of Thuringia, Brandenburg and Saxony, where the AfD is leading in polls.

“Consumers in Europe are lost right now as governments change the rules for EV subsidies too often,” Alexandre Marian, partner and managing director at consultancy AlixPartners. “What is badly needed is some continuity in the rules in the run-up to 2035.”

[Jaydee]

Owning an electric vehicle is madness and I regret ever buying one

Recently, all EV owners in my building received notice that we would no longer be allowed to plug in at all

Canadians have repeatedly been told that electric vehicles (EVs) are the future. The Trudeau government has even mandated that all new vehicles sold in Canada must be electric by 2035 (and 60 per cent by 2030, which is just around the corner). There’s only one problem: to loosely quote Jerry Maguire, “Show me the infrastructure.”

 

My own vehicle is a short-range plug-in, for which I paid a premium, after clearing with my strata (condo association) that I’d be allowed to charge it. First, I was granted permission to use an extension cord, which I had purchased. Later, we were told that extension cords were no longer allowed due to safety concerns expressed by the fire department. Fair enough. I managed to trade spots with a neighbour.

 

But recently, all EV owners in my building received notice that we would no longer be allowed to plug in at all. At least, not until actual Level 2 chargers are installed. When this joyous event might happen is anybody’s guess. All I know is that the idea was brought up at least three years ago, was seriously discussed and no action was taken.

 

Meanwhile, there are a number of owners who will no longer be able to charge their vehicles at home. Just not enough of them to have any say, since other owners who have gas vehicles, understandably, are not as eager to shoulder the cost of adding chargers.

 

As for the safety concerns, my vehicle was sold with the assumption that it would be plugged into a regular socket. That was a key selling point. And presumably it had passed safety tests to ensure it could be operated in such a way.

 

In fact, a study by the Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency found that EVs are 20 times less likely to catch fire than petrol and diesel vehicles.

 

There’s also a debate over which vehicles pollute more. Opponents of EVs point to the environmental costs of battery disposal and mining for the materials required to make them. Proponents argue that EVs makes us less reliant on oil, that our ability to safely dispose of or recycle batteries is only going to improve and that EVs significantly decrease urban air pollution.

They are also more fun to drive, with faster acceleration and no noise. Naturally, there’s much debate about which type of vehicle is more enjoyable and we’ll never fully settle that particular dilemma.

 

The problem is that while the government is pushing for EVs to dominate the market, it avoids a simple reality: EVs are currently only feasible for those who have financial resources. The cost of charging is often on par with filling a gas tank, but takes significantly longer — that is, if you even manage to find an available charger nearby.

 

So, for most people, charging at home is the practical option. But when you’ve got stratas that can cut off their residents at any moment, this becomes an option only for those who own their own homes, or have moved into condos with sufficient charging infrastructure.

 

Some cities, such as Vancouver, are now requiring that all new condo buildings provide Level 2 charging stations in every parking spot. But anyone who has bought into an older building has no such assurances. Given the prohibitively high cost of real estate in Canada, personal charging stations will remain out of reach of many Canadians.

Simply legislating that all vehicles sold by 2035 must be electric doesn’t guarantee that there will be options that are as affordable as the gas vehicles that are currently on the market. While I support innovation, and appreciate EVs, there’s something deeply elitist in the government policies that surround them.

 

Firstly, these should be vehicles that people should want to choose, rather than be forced to. And second, forcing EVs on people without encouraging or building sufficient infrastructure in advance is bound to lead to trouble ahead.

 

There are some changes coming in certain jurisdictions. In British Columbia, for example, strata corporations will be required to obtain electrical planning reports, which will provide them with information on their electrical systems and expected demand increases due to EV charging and heat pumps. But these won’t be required in Vancouver until 2026 — and as late as 2028 in some parts of the province. And installing new EV infrastructure will still require a majority vote by the strata corporation.

 

In my current situation, I can’t help but feel like I was misled. I was actively encouraged to buy an EV and the government even provided incentives to do so. But there were no guardrails put into place when my strata decided to cut off my power (without making an alternative option available).

 

Without proper infrastructure, 100 per cent EVs by 2035 is just a pipe-dream — or a nightmare.

 

National Post

[Malcolm]

Link to the NP article: The author is:

Katherine Brodsky is a freelance writer, commentator and author of, “No Apologies: How to Find and Free Your Voice in the Age of Outrage—Lessons for the Silenced Majority.” She tweets on X @mysteriouskat and writes essays on Substack: katherinewrites.com.

How to survive in the age of cancel culture | National Post

Owning an electric vehicle is madness and I regret ever buying one | National Post

[Jaydee]

Ford just reported a massive loss on every electric vehicle it sold

Ford’s electric vehicle unit reported that losses soared in the first quarter to US $1.3 billion, or US$132,000 for each of the 10,000 vehicles it sold in the first three months of the year, helping to drag down earnings for the company overall.

Ford, like most automakers, has announced plans to shift from traditional gas-powered vehicles to EVs in coming years. But it is the only traditional automaker to break out results of its retail EV sales. And the results it reported Wednesday show another sign of the profit pressures on the EV business at Ford and other automakers.

The EV unit, which Ford calls Model e, sold 10,000 vehicles in the quarter, down 20 per cent from the number it sold a year earlier. And its revenue plunged 84 per cent to about US$100 million, which Ford attributed mostly to price cuts for EVs across the industry. That resulted in the US$1.3 billion loss before interest and taxes (EBIT), and the massive per-vehicle loss in the Model e unit.

 

The losses go far beyond the cost of building and selling those 10,000 cars, according to Ford. Instead the losses include hundreds of millions being spent on research and development of the next generation of EVs for Ford. Those investments are years away from paying off.

And that means this is not the end of the losses in the unit - Ford said it expects Model e will have EBIT losses of US$5 billion for the full year.

The company said it is its “intention” to be have EV pricing cover the actual costs of building each EV, rather than covering all the research and development costs, within the next 12 months. But  a price war among EVs for about a year and a half has made even that measure of profitability very difficult said Ford CFO John Lawler. He said while Ford has removed about US$5,000 in cost on each Mustang Mach-E, “revenue is dropping faster than we can take out the cost.”

In 2023, Ford Model e reported a full-year EBIT loss of US$4.7 billion on sales of 116,000 EVs, or an average of US$40,525 per vehicle, just more than a third of the first quarter loss.

Model e doesn’t handle all of the company’s electric vehicle sales. Some are also sold in its Ford Pro unit, which handles fleet sales to businesses and government buyers. And Ford said it had strong demands for electric vehicle sales in that unit, including an order for 9,250 E-Transit vans from the US Postal Service, which are to be delivered through the end of this year, and an order for more than 1,000 of its F-150 Lightning pickups and Mustang Mach-E SUVs from Ecolab, a global sustainability company.

Despite the EV losses, Ford CEO Jim Farley said in a call with investors the company is making changes in its EV business, and that the company’s planned next generation of EVs will allow it to be profitable on that business in the near future.

Ford Pro, which primarily sells traditional internal combustion vehicles, was the primary profit driver for Ford in the quarter, posting EBIT of $3 billion, or more than double what it made a year ago, as revenue from the unit rose 36 per cent to US$18 billion. The number of vehicles sold by Ford Pro was up 21 per cent to 409,000.

But Ford Blue, which handles sales of gasoline-powered cars to consumers, reported that sales fell 11 per cent to 626,000, and revenue dropped 13 per cent to US$21 billion. That resulted in EBIT in those traditional sales falling by nearly two-thirds to US$905 million.

Together Ford Blue and Ford Pro produced roughly the same level of profits as a year earlier, but the increased losses at the Model e unit meant that Ford’s overall net income fell 20 per cent to US$1.3 billion, while its adjusted earnings per share fell to 49 cents, down 21 per cent from a year earlier, but slightly better than analyst forecasts of 44 cents a share.Ford rival General Motors reported earlier this week that it remains on track to have its North American EV business turn profitable in the second half of this year, while Stellantis, which makes cars and trucks in North America under the Jeep, Ram, Dodge and Chrysler brands, said its European EV business was already profitable last year.

On Tuesday Tesla, the world’s largest EV maker, reported that its adjusted earnings plunged 48 per cent in the first quarter as revenue fell 9 per cent, after it reported the first year-over-year drop in sales since the pandemic.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/autos/ford-just-reported-a-massive-loss-on-every-electric-vehicle-it-sold-1.6861922#:~:text=Ford's electric vehicle unit reported,earnings for the company overall.

Edited April 25 by Jaydee

[Malcolm]

Not electric but yet another way to wean off of gas powered vehicles. One major difference is the link to fuel infrastructure, something that those who want to go electric have so far mostly ignored.

Alberta wants more hydrogen vehicles. Experts say fuel infrastructure needs to come with them | CBC News

[Malcolm]

Tens of billions were made in 2022

©Provided by

Fifteen countries make a lot of money from their carbon taxes (msn.com)

The methods vary a lot

Understanding the various ways carbon is being priced and taxed around the world can be difficult but the World Bank collected data on global carbon revenues in 2022 and Visual Capitalist used that data to work out what the top fifteen countries were making in carbon taxes.  The Daily Digest

Tens of billions were made in carbon tax revenue by the top fifteen countries and you might be surprised by the two countries that collected the most carbon tax revenue. So which two countries made the most? Let’s find out.

15. South AfricaGovernment carbon tax revenue: $0.1 billion

 

14. SingaporeGovernment carbon tax revenue: $0.1 billion

13. MexicoGovernment carbon tax revenue: $0.2 billion

 

12. ArgentinaGovernment carbon tax revenue: $0.3 billion

11. PortugalGovernment carbon tax revenue: $0.5 billion

10. DenmarkGovernment carbon tax revenue: $0.5 billio

9. Ireland Government carbon tax revenue: $0.7 billion

8. United Kingdom overnment carbon tax revenue: $0.9 billion

7. Switzerland government carbon tax revenue: $1.6 billion

6. Finland

Government carbon tax revenue: $1.7 billion

5. Japan

Government carbon tax revenue: $1.8 billion

4. Norway

Government carbon tax revenue: $2.1 billion

3. Sweden

Government carbon tax revenue: $2.3 billion

2. Canada

Government carbon tax revenue: $7.8 billion

1. France

Government carbon tax revenue: $8.9 billion

 

[Malcolm]

Tesla Axing Its Supercharger Team Puts The Entire Industry In The Dark

Story by Patrick George

 • 1h • 5 min read

 

Tesla Supercharger Park with bk World lounge cubes in Endsee, Germany© InsideEVs

Most of Tesla's Supercharger team was caught up in recent layoffs, leading to countless questions about the future of EV charging.

Even if you're a die-hard, paying-blue-check, all-in-on-$TSLA, Elon-can-do-no-wrong superfan, it's awfully hard to find a silver lining around the news that most—if not all—of Tesla's Supercharging team was caught up in the company's latest round of layoffs. 

Last night, The Information reported that roughly 500 people in Tesla's charging division are being cut from the company, including its senior director and head of new products. A quick perusal of LinkedIn, Reddit, X and other social media platforms shows scores of people who worked on the charging team at Tesla announcing their layoffs. All of them seem utterly (and understandably) stunned that they had to. (Emails and direct messages to several current and former Tesla officials have gone unanswered.) 

 

Moreover, Musk's own memo to the troops doesn't provide much information or reassurance about the future of charging. “We will continue to build out some new Supercharger locations, where critical, and finish those currently under construction,” Musk wrote, almost with the same level of interest as when he spoke of future Tesla models during last week's Q1 earnings call.

Astoundingly, the rest of the auto industry that was getting ready to partner with Tesla on charging seems blindsided as well today, leaving them with countless questions about what's next. "We were surprised as anyone, and have no additional information than what’s been reported," one automaker official told me. 

There's no two ways about it: this move is utterly baffling. And to one degree or another, it may throw a lot of future plans for both Tesla and the American EV industry into turmoil. 

 

In recent months and weeks, we've seen Musk seemingly lose interest in Tesla's position as the singular leader (Chinese automakers excepted) in the electric vehicle arms race. Artificial intelligence and autonomy have his full attention now as he stakes the company's future on robotaxis, seemingly only confirming "more affordable" new models out of investor pressure.

But if Tesla is walking back its Supercharger growth plans—and cutting the team behind them seems to indicate that—it's an entirely new level of weird for Tesla.

You could make a strong argument that building out its proprietary charging network is the smartest thing Tesla ever did. Way back in 2012, when the Model S was just starting to emerge, Tesla realized that widespread adoption of its products would never happen unless it stepped outside the auto industry's traditional lane—i.e., letting other companies handle "fueling"—and built the charging infrastructure itself. It then quickly scaled its charging network across the country and the world, learning much along the way. The Supercharger network became one of the biggest networks anywhere and the gold standard for how charging itself should work.

Doing everything in-house at Tesla was once a necessity for operating in an industry that had little to no support for EVs. It quickly turned into a key strength, allowing the company to control the entire car ownership experience from top to bottom—including charging. Today, Tesla Supercharging is seamless, easy to use and ubiquitous. Almost every other EV driver has looked with envy at Tesla drivers charging their cars without a care in the world, all while they fought with the credit card reader at an EVGo station or the like. 

 

The Supercharger network even paid dividends for the entire concept of electric vehicles. Tesla showed that it could be done; that a huge, reliable and fast network of chargers could be built and that range anxiety could be made a thing of the past. In many ways, building out that charging network was the best thing Tesla has ever done.

It was no wonder that rival automakers spent much of 2023 announcing they would switch to Tesla's proprietary North American Charging Standard (NACS) plug and allow access to the Supercharger network. That's been widely seen as a win-win for all involved; Ford, General Motors, Honda, Toyota, Rivian and the rest get access to the best charging network around, and Tesla would gain an estimated $20 billion in charging revenue alone by 2030. Not to mention, of course, billions more from the Biden Administration's investments in EV charging grants.

 

By Tesla's own accounting, it grew Supercharger stations by 26% year-over-year by Q1's end and owned some 30% of America's DC fast-charging infrastructure. EV owners were excited to get their NACS adapters and eventually easier native charging. Competitors like ChargePoint were offering the same plugs too, and Tesla seemed poised to rake in cash. Just last week, The Atlantic even likened Tesla to some kind of new Con Edison, less an automaker and more an energy provider. 

As Jay-Z once put it, "It was all good just a week ago." But when it comes to Tesla and Musk, a lot can happen in a week. 

Emails to other automakers from InsideEVs have not received responses yet, and nor have messages seeking comment to Tesla's communications teams in other parts of the world.

It's possible that Musk saw that the Supercharger ecosystem somehow wasn't growing quickly enough for his tastes; Bloomberg recently noted that Tesla didn't hit its target of tripling the network between 2021 and 2023. (It merely doubled it instead!) Perhaps Musk wants a new team that can get it done sooner. Then again, who? Christmas just came early for every automaker looking to hire top-tier charging talent. 

 

What's more likely is the obvious: that this is all part of Tesla's wholesale pivot to AI and robotaxis. That, in Musk's mind, those areas are where Tesla will put the most resources and talent until it has fully "solved" the challenge of autonomous driving. For countless reasons, that pivot seems suspect, and the idea that Tesla's past success will guarantee its future has its limits.

In the meantime, losing a 500-person team responsible for charging probably isn't great for Tesla owners. Questions arise about maintenance, upkeep and new features, to say nothing of new station rollouts.

It's also very unlikely that these layoffs will impact the industry-wide pivot to the NACS plug. That's becoming an SAE standard, so it's effectively out of Tesla's hands. One industry official who spoke to me indicated the move could slow other automakers' moves to the actual Supercharger network, however, but it's still unclear how. 

 

In the end, the only person who can articulate the path forward is Musk. He spent the past 12 hours on X posting about slavery, woke TV shows and declining birth rates, so what happens next is anyone's guess. But slowing the growth of one of the best reasons to buy an electric car isn't good for anyone—not the industry, and certainly not the planet.

Musk seems more focused on Tesla's stock price as of late. Unfortunately for him, even investors don't like this move. Tesla stock is down 5% as of publication, a sign that even Wall Street is baffled by gutting such a key part of the company's empire.

Contact the author: patrick.george@insideevs.com

[Jaydee]

Both Trump and Biden loom large over Trudeau and Ford’s big EV bet  

"America First" industrial policies from Biden or Trump pose significant risks to Canada's subsidized EV sector

 

Last week, the Trudeau government and the Ford government announced a new multi-billion dollar taxpayer-funded subsidy for Honda to expand its Alliston, Ontario plant to manufacture electric vehicles (EV) and host a large EV battery plant. Eventually, the direct and indirect subsidies could total $10 billion from the two governments.

The Honda announcement follows earlier deals with Northvolt, Stellantis, and Volkswagen to build and operate EV battery and auto assembly plants in Ontario. According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, these three deals may total $50.7 billion after accounting for the cost of government borrowing to finance the subsidies and foregone corporate tax revenue from tax abatements tied to production.

Clearly, if future taxpayers across the country (not just in Ontario) are to avoid a huge additional tax burden or suffer reductions in government services, a lot needs to go right for Canada’s EV industry. 
 

In particular, there must emerge sufficient market demand for EVs so these “investments” in the EV auto sector will be fully paid for by future tax revenues from corporate and personal income taxes levied on companies and workers in the EV sector. During their joint announcement of the Honda deal, both Prime Minister Trudeau and Premier Ford ignored this elephant in the room while claiming that the Honda deal would mean 240,000 vehicles a year manufactured at the site and 4,200 jobs preserved while adding another 1,000 jobs.

By way of perspective, in 2023 around 185,000 EV vehicles were sold in Canada—about 11 percent of all new cars sold in Canada that year. This is considerably less than the target capacity of the Honda complex and the total expected production capacity of Canada’s EV sector once all the various announced subsidized production facilities are in operation. In contrast, 1.2 million EVs were sold in the United States.

The demand for EVs in Canada will likely grow over time, especially given the increased incentive the federal government now has to ensure, through legislation or regulation, that Canadians retire their gas-powered vehicles and replace them with EVs. However, the long-run financial health of Canada’s EV sector requires continued access to the much larger U.S. market. Indeed, Honda’s CEO said his company chose Canada as the site for their first  EV assembly plant in part because of Canada’s access to the U.S. market.

But political developments in the U.S. over the past few years have substantially increased the risk of any investment that relies on unrestricted access to the U.S. market. The trade protectionist bent of Donald Trump, the Republican nominee in the upcoming presidential election, is well known and he reportedly plans to impose a broad 10 percent tariff on all manufactured imports to the U.S. if elected. 

Ontario Premier Doug Ford and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau look over a vehicle along an assembly line at an event announcing plans for a Honda electric vehicle battery plant in Alliston, Ont. on Thursday, April 25, 2024. Nathan Denette/The Canadian Press. 

While the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Free Trade Agreement ostensibly gives Canadian-based EV producers tariff-free access to the U.S. market, Trump could terminate the treaty or at least insist on major changes in specific Canadian trade policies that he criticized during his first term, including supply management programs for dairy products. The trade agreement is up for trilateral review in 2025, which would allow a new Trump administration to demand political concessions such as increased Canadian spending on defence, in addition to trade concessions.

Nor would the re-election of President Joe Biden immunize Canada from protectionist risks. Biden has been a full-throated supporter of unionized U.S. auto workers and has staked his administration’s legacy on the successful electrification of the U.S. transportation sector through domestic production. Given his government’s financial commitment to growing a domestic EV sector, Biden might well impose trade restrictions on Canada if Canadian exports start to displace domestic production in the U.S.

In short, Canadian politicians, most notably Justin Trudeau and Doug Ford, have staked the future of Canada’s heavily subsidized domestic EV sector on the vagaries of the U.S. political process, which is increasingly embracing “America First” industrial policies. This may turn out to be a very costly gamble for Canadian taxpayers.

https://thehub.ca/2024-05-01/steven-globerman-u-s-politics-looms-over-trudeau-and-fords-electric-vehicle-gamble/

[Jaydee]

How The EV ‘Revolution’ Came Off The Tracks At Kunes Dealerships

 

The Kunes Auto & RV Group of dealerships in the Upper Midwest “want to be a good partner to manufacturers, and the transition to electric vehicles will happen, but a forced march never bodes well with consumers,” says Scott Kunes, chief operating officer of the owner of more than 40 automotive and recreational-vehicle retailers based in Delavan, Wisconsin.

That’s why Kunes car dealerships, like many of their peers across the country, are applying a bit of their own force to the situation, adapting to unenthusiastic consumer demand by slowing dealer orders for battery-electric models that are being hyped increasingly to an American populace that appears increasingly unmoved. Automakers are responding by rolling back the pace of an EV transformation that they assumed — with billions of dollars of vehicle-development and manufacturing investments to match — would be much further along by now in the marketplace.

“A lot of times,” Kunes says, “we push back because we’ve been here before. We’re slowing it down. The indusry is moving too fast.”

 

Another aspect of the growing revolt by dealers, Kunes says, is that “salespeople are throwing up their hands. They’ve all been trained about the benefits of EVs and how they can fit into someone’s lifestyle. We’re staging contests for those who can lean into it and develop expertise in the ability to win prizes; some manufacturers are coming alongside that as well with their own monetary and prize incentives.

But consumers say it’s a lifestyle change they don’t necessary want to take on at this point. So we’re not only taking losses but are incentivizing salespeople so that we an keep them interested in selling EVs, to move them off our lots. There’s really not a lot of light on the horizon for us with them.”

Kunes regrets that the auto industry got suckered into believing that American consumers would embrace EVs, and move away from traditionally propelled interntal-combustion engine vehicles, more quickly and more robustly than they have.

When you saw EV sales rise so dramatically and quickly initially, it was early adopters and false demand in the way manufacturers were trying to retail them,” Kunes says. “They tried to copy the Tesla [direct-distribution] model and use a direct-to-consumer type of mentality, but still through a dealership reservation system. Unfortunately, that went on at the same time as supply-chain issues” arose amid the pandemic in 2020.

So, many of the hottest vehicles were an opportunity for consumers to flip an EV, like the new Hummers, and make six figures on the transaction. You had a lot of people who were interested in EVs but only in flipping them like a Rolex onto the gray market.”

But when EVs started to hit American dealers’ lots in volume, he noted, “demand wasn’t there. Prices [manufacturers] thought they could get for these vehicles weren’t there. There was mass cancellation of reservations, in these ‘handraising’ systems. When people realized they weren’t going to be able to sell an EV for more than the [manufacturer’s suggested retail price], the reservations went away.”

Early adopters, Kunes said, “were going to adopt EVs no matter what, and a lot of poeple are happy with them. But the vast majority of consumers haven’t wanted them.”

Yet, Kunes said, he sympathizes with manufacturers who “are stuck between a rock and a hard place because of all the things being pushed on them by the [Biden] administration, like the big fines they’ll have to pay in 2030” if automakers don’t sell enough EVs by then. “Unless the administration changes, or something changes on that level, we’re going to have to continue down this path.”

But when EVs started to hit American dealers’ lots in volume, he noted, “demand wasn’t there. Prices [manufacturers] thought they could get for these vehicles weren’t there. There was mass cancellation of reservations, in these ‘handraising’ systems. When people realized they weren’t going to be able to sell an EV for more than the [manufacturer’s suggested retail price], the reservations went away.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/dalebuss/2024/04/30/how-the-ev-revolution-came-off-the-tracks-at-kunes-dealerships/?sh=b91b3c010edd

Edited May 2 by Jaydee

[Malcolm]

Skip to main content

 

LIVECTV News Channel(

Amid climate change warnings, Canadians lukewarm on electric vehicles

As  scientists warn that the world needs to transition away from fossil fuels to limit climate change, Canadians are still lukewarm on electric vehicles, according to a survey conducted by Nanos Research for CTV News.

Nanos surveyed 1,086 Canadians between April 28 and May 1 to gauge their level of support for a hypothetical ban on the use of gas-powered cars and SUVs as of 2035, their feelings about green energy incentives, their level of confidence that Canada will have enough charging infrastructure in the future and their level of interest in owning an electric vehicle.

The survey found Canadians were almost four times more likely to oppose, rather than support, a total ban on the use of gas-powered vehicles as of 2035.

RELATED STORIES

• 'Range anxiety': What’s driving a lack of interest in electric vehicle sales?
• Despite shift to EVs, number of gas-powered cars on Quebec roads hits record high
• After overseas breakthrough, Windsor researchers one step closer to producing EV batteries which charge in minutes

"Opposition is higher among residents of Atlantic Canada, the Prairies and British Columbia compared to Quebec," the study reads.

The results come months after federal Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault finalized new regulations(opens in a new tab) mandating the transition to battery-operated cars, trucks and SUVs.

Automakers will have the next 12 years to phase out combustion engine cars, trucks and SUVs, and to gradually increase the proportion of electric models they manufacture.

The move fulfills a promise the Liberals made in 2021(opens in a new tab) to phase out the sale of gas-powered passenger vehicles by 2035, but it is not a total ban on the use of combustion engine vehicles. Gas-powered models sold before 2035 will be allowed to remain on the roads.

Incentives, infrastructure and ownership

When it comes to green energy incentives, 72 per cent of respondents support or somewhat support incentives for Canadians to use alternative energy sources for home and travel. This figure is consistent with findings from 2023, but remains lower than in 2016. Support is higher in Quebec (81 per cent) and Ontario (72 per cent) than in the Prairies (63 per cent).

Enthusiastic as they are about clean energy incentives, Canadians are much less optimistic about the likelihood Canada will have enough charging infrastructure in the future to support the increasing number of electric cars.

In fact, two-thirds of survey respondents, or 66 per cent, are not confident or somewhat not confident Canada will have the necessary infrastructure in place. Once again, Quebecers expressed the most optimism in this area than respondents in other parts of the country.

Finally, fewer survey respondents are interested in owning an electric car now than in 2022 and 2021. Just over half are interested (21 per cent) or somewhat interested (33 per cent), representing an 11-percentage-point decline in outright interest from 2022, when 32 per cent interested.

Quebec residents are more likely to be interested or somewhat interested in owning an electric vehicle than respondents in the Prairies or Atlantic Canada. The study did not state why Canadians' attitudes toward electric vehicles may have changed.

Methodology

Nanos conducted an RDD dual frame (land- and cell-lines) hybrid telephone and online random survey of 1,086 Canadians, 18 years of age or older, between April 28 to May 1, 2024 as part of an omnibus survey. Participants were randomly recruited by telephone using live agents and administered a survey online. The sample included both land- and cell-lines across Canada. The results were statistically checked and weighted by age and gender using the latest Census information and the sample is geographically stratified to be representative of Canada.

Individuals randomly called using random digit dialing with a maximum of five call backs. The margin of error for this survey is ±3.0 percentage points, 19 times out of 20. Charts may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

With files from The Canadian Press 

RELATED IMAGES

1 / 1

 

[Jaydee]

https://nanos.co/canadians-are-almost-four-times-more-likely-to-oppose-rather-than-support-a-total-ban-on-the-use-of-gas-powered-vehicles-as-of-2035-ctv-news-nanos/
 

 

[Jaydee]

[Malcolm]

 

Matthew Lau: Electric vehicle mandates mean misery all round

Opinion by Matthew Lau

 • 4h 

 

A electric vehicle charging at a parking lot in Tsawwassen, near Vancouver, B.C.© Provided by Financial Post

News of slowing demand for electric vehicles highlights the hazards of the federal government’s Soviet-style mandate that 100 per cent of new light-duty vehicles sold must be electric or plug-in hybrid by 2035 (with interim targets of 20 per cent by 2026 and 60 per cent by 2030 and steep penalties for dealers missing these targets).

 

The targets were wild to begin with. As Manhattan Institute senior fellow Mark P. Mills observed , Canadian-style bans on conventional vehicles and mandated switches to electric mean “consumers will need to adopt EVs at a scale and velocity 10 times greater and faster than the introduction of any new model of car in history.”

When the Trudeau government announced its mandate last December, conventional vehicles still accounted for 87 per cent of the market. Today the mandated switch to electric looks even more at odds with actual consumer preferences. According to reports , Tesla will cut its global workforce by more than 10 per cent (more than 14,000 employees) due to slowing electric vehicle demand.

 

In Canada, a Financial Post headline reads, “‘Tall order to ask the average Canadian’: EVs are twice as hard to sell today.” Not only have Tesla’s quarterly sales declined, but Ford Motor Co. announced in April it will delay electric vehicle production at its Oakville plant by two years, from 2025 to 2027.

According to research from global data and analytics firm J.D. Power, it now takes 55 days to sell an electric vehicle in Canada, up from 22 days in the first quarter of 2023 and longer than the 51 days it takes a gasoline-powered car to sell. This is the result, some analysts suggest , of a lack of desirable models and high consumer prices — and despite federal subsidies to buyers of up to $5,000 per EV and provincial subsidies (in six provinces) as high as $7,000 in Quebec.

 

The Wall Street Journal reports that in the U.S., too, EVs and plug-in hybrids now sit on lots longer than gasoline-powered cars and hybrids. Again, that’s despite heavy government pressure to switch to electric, including the Biden administration’s mandate that two-thirds of new vehicles sold must be electric by 2032.

In both Canada and the U.S., politicians banning consumers from buying vehicles they want and instead forcing them to buy types of vehicles that run contrary to their preferences calls to mind Adam Smith’s “man of system,” described in his Theory of Moral Sentiments, published in 1759, 17 years before The Wealth of Nations.

 

The man of system, Smith explained, “is apt to be very wise in his own conceit” and “seems to imagine that he can arrange the different members of a great society with as much ease as the hand arranges the different pieces upon a chess–board.” But people are not chess pieces to be moved around by a hand from above; they have their own agency and if they are pushed by the “man of system” in a direction opposite to where they want to go, the result will be misery and “the highest degree of disorder.”

• Activists' illogical boycott of Loblaw just doesn't add up
• You think taxes are too low? Feel free to pay more

That nicely sums up the current government effort to mandate electric vehicles contrary to consumer preferences. The vehicle market is in a state of disorder as the government tries to force people to buy the types of cars many of them do not want, and the outcomes are miserable all around.

Matthew Lau, a Toronto writer, is an adjunct scholar with the Fraser Institute.