Working in Tech, I love a lot about electric cars. I just have a few issues I cannot seem to overcome (this is a personal ME thing about EV's and some new gas vehicles, your mileage may vary....pun intended).
All new cars spy on you (well most do), but EV's are completely software driven and seem to be more intrusive. I want a car I can connect to the internet when I want to for updates and that is it. I also want android auto and the apple one for my wife, I do not want a proprietary (Tesla) entertainment system.
I want right to repair. It is my car if I spend that much on it, I want to do to it whatever I want.
I want all the equipment in the car to work when i purchase it and no monthly fees (I get it for XM Radio, I am talking like seat heaters and such).
For some reason it also irritates me Tesla can increase mileage with a flip of a switch (Like they were going to do in Florida for a hurricane a while back). So you are telling me they could of been build with smaller batteries and save money and the environment, but they were not so you could have a software upgrade (or was that a monthly payment as well). Also the fact Tesla can remote disable my vehicle, and purchased upgrades do not transfer to the new owner.
I can probably go on and on with my whining, but that is why i still have 2 gas guzzlers and a motorcycle (newest vehicle is 2008, 2005 Honda van has 270,000 miles on it). They are paid for an yes a little maintenance here and there but that is not enough to make me spend $30k + on an electric vehicle.
> So you are telling me they could of been build with smaller batteries and save money and the environment, but they were not...
If you charge and discharge a lithium ion cell from 4.2V to 2.75V, you might get 250 full cycles. If you stop charging at 4V and call that 100%, and stop discharging at 3.2V, you might get 2000 cycles before capacity is reduced.
Phone and laptop manufacturers prefer to burn the battery out in 2 years, car manufacturers want to sell bigger packs and are afraid consumers will rebel if a BEV needs a replacement battery at 100k miles.
Neither, for reasons unclear to me, allow the owner to make that decision.
> If you charge and discharge a lithium ion cell from 4.2V to 2.75V, you might get 250 full cycles. If you stop charging at 4V and call that 100%, and stop discharging at 3.2V, you might get 2000 cycles before capacity is reduced.
Is there literally an almost 10x difference in the number of full cycles? Where can I read more about this?
The top end charge voltage is particularly sensitive, this is the most chemically unstable state of the cell charge cycle.
I really wish cell phones and computers came with an adjustment to max cell voltage. Cutting even 10% capacity can double your cycle life. Some do, but it's a hodgepodge and not standard.
Thanks for the link. It is not clear to me if the resource is geared towards cell phone batteries or if it also applies to EV batteries, but I wouldn't be surprised if the trends apply to larger batteries as well.
Having said that, this resource does not seem to support the magnitude of the numbers in LeifCarrotson's comment that I was replying to. First, I did not see a relationship between voltage and Depth of Discharge (seems unlikely to be linear, especially given table 4), which is what the page seems to mostly talk about. Second, comparing 4.2V to 4.0V in table 4 suggests a 4x difference in the number of cycles, not a ~10x difference. Figure 6 also seems relevant and suggests maybe a 2x difference.
Something to keep in mind is that all of the tables are only trying to measure one thing and lay out the effect of the one variable. But in reality these can be mixed and matched for the desired performance characteristics. 10x is indeed possible by doing multiple things to extend the life of the cell.
Pull 4x from one table and 2-3x from another and it would probably put you somewhere in the 10x range. Though I'm not sure it would be strictly multiplicative.
It's a bit more complex than that unfortunately. Depending on how long you stay at high charge level it will negatively impact the battery life. So someone charging at 100% all the time but discharging quickly might see a better cycling count that someone charging at 90% but staying there almost all the time.
We seem to be inching more and more towards the dystopian future we always feared. The sad thing is we seem to be willingly and collectively marching towards it ourselves.
> I also want android auto and the apple one for my wife, I do not want a proprietary (Tesla) entertainment system.
Having used Carplay recently after few months in Tesla I couldn't believe how crap it was. Can't pinch and zoom map, can't use maps on your phone while you navigate (how do I add additional stop without using screen), it wouldn't connect about 10% of drives. Overall UX is feels about a decade behind - a bit like OEM systems before Carplay.
Yeah I completely agree with you and I’ve never driven any Tesla. CarPlay is an extension of your phone and somewhere between an Apple Watch and an iPhone. There are so many situations I experience where if CarPlay had like 10% functionality it would feel like a must have game changer. Instead it just feels like a pretty good maps UI (regardless of which maps platform you use) with an ok but severely limited music UI.
BEVs are a dead end technology because they are far more expensive than the cars they are replacing. There is no way this market is going to survive once the subsidies and government support ends. People with brains are finally realizing that it is time to move on and towards some other technology.
I think we will end up pulling back towards PHEVs (or range extended EVs). You can have literally 1/4 of the battery and still never use fossil fuels for 90% of journeys. You don't get to have as much power, but EVs are more powerful than necessary anyway.
Key part of the article: "But orders from corporate clients — which account for around 70% of the IDs built at the plant — have been plummeting since a federal subsidy for battery-powered company vehicles expired this month, one of the people said."
Is there really any surprise no one wants to pay $45000 for a compact car? What is the profit margin on EVs that its cheaper to not sell cars versus making them affordable and within reach of more customers?
Edit: actually I can't tell if thats their cheapest car, VWs website sucks on mobile so I gave up. You'd think it'd be easy to just show the prices
Honda is probably not who you want to look at for EV comparisons. They have the Honda E (city car, I think being discontinued) and upcoming partnership with GM to rebadge the Blazer EV as Honda Prologue. And then there’s their “Afeela” joint venture with Sony which I’m sure will go great…
Ah, so I guess the follow up question is did VW raise their prices to take advantage of the subsidy, basically just pocketing what was supposed to make a fairly-priced car more accessible? I guess that would be tough to get a clear answer without knowing the real cost of a car, though...
Volkswagen got big (it's in the name) with building affordable cars like the Beetle and the Golf. Compact fuel efficient cars that a nurse or teacher could afford.
The comparison here is so vague as to be useless. There are 4 categories of nurse, and I can assure you that A) a CNA and RN (let alone an APRN) are very different jobs with different requirements and wage/salary brackets and that B) K-12 wages and requirements also vary drastically.
A CNA (the second most common "nurse") most assuredly does not earn more than the average High School teacher, let alone one with any sort of seniority or departmental/administrative responsibilities. An APRN probably earns more than any blue collar field as it's a decidely high salaried white collar position.
And both model S and X have been completely discontinued in the UK due to the lack of interest. The only Tesla you can order here is a model 3, and it's got fierce competition from other brands.
I think the cybertruck will sell very well for consumer and fleet. Probably good for Tesla to have extra inventory of S, X, 3 Y so they can make enough trucks
They were the "cool kid" on the block but every kid grows up, becomes an adult and is no longer cool. Th same can be said about Tesla, their roadster was without a doubt a cool looking car and the fact that it was electric made it even cooler. Since then it's rode the "scrappy new start up road" busting the balls of the large auto manufacturers but Elon is getting a little long in the tooth and soft in the head, the upper income liberals don't like what's coming out of his mouth and considering the price they'd be better off purchasing their over priced EV from Mercedes or BMW. Further it's a pretty well known fact that Teslas are horrible cars, Kia quality at BMW prices. Finally like anything that's considered cool everyone wants on the band wagon, Teslas are no longer just for the monied tech mom it's open to everyone including Uber drivers, yep Uber made a deal with Tesla so instead of being edgy a Tesla is what picks you up when you go to the airport -to quote Memphis Raines, " I saw three of these parked outside the local Starbucks this morning, which tells me only one thing. There's too many self-Indulgent wieners in this city with too much bloody money! Now, if I was driving a 1967 275 GTB four-cam...". Nobody is going to drop $70K to drive the same car and Uber driver drives.
What causes Tesla's demand to be so high ? price only ? or did VW EV effort failed ? I didn't read about it but it, but last year or so, IDn cars prototypes were reviewed favorably.
I think the problem is price. Traditionally VW has been cheap, reliable cars that are almost as good as the 'fancy' brands, but for a lot less money. However when it comes to EVs, the ID.4 costs just as much a Tesla model Y and I guess when given the choice between a VW and a Tesla for the same price, people choose Tesla.
They have good brand visibility. Like Apple. I won’t say that their product isn’t differentiated, but it isn’t offering much that’s spectacularly divergent from other brands.
yeah everything non-Tesla is a complete non-starter for me until they actually use the harmonized charging network, so I guess the 2025 models?
Tesla models are a somewhat starter, too few options in look
and then the price
and its a weird quagmire, the people that can afford to live in dense high cost of livings cities are the exact target audience for EV’s but have the most perplexing and inconvenient charging arrangements, while suburban homeowners are like “I just slow charge everynight to an AC outlet in my garage, you’ll never notice the range, its not an issue bro” completely oblivious about the problem
then once the harmonized charging network takes off, its not even clear if the electric grid can handle it, which isnt my problem for sure, but funny to think about. solve this issue and the next one comes quickly
>the people that can afford to live in dense high cost of livings cities are the exact target audience for EV’s but have the most perplexing and inconvenient charging arrangements
Just one anecdote, but I live in Seattle and every garage space in my building has a Level 2 charger available.
I suspect that is the case for most higher-end new construction these days.
This is not an issue in Europe fwiw, all cars use CCS2 there. In most european cities you probably have a parking garage if you have a car (and sure you have to deal with the HOA), street parking is an absolute nightmare there.
nice, yeah the US government is mandating something like that and simultaneously Tesla is opening their charging system to others (because of US government sentiment that will turn into pressure)
I think we also have to force chargers to accept simple means of payment like a credit card. Imagine how ridiculous it would be it we had to create an account for every single gas station network. This would also take care of when you are outside of cell coverage. Yes there are aggregator that works on multiple networks but you still have to track what is in/out network and in case of emergency. The current state of the charging infra is really not up to the task.
I charged my 2020 MY using a normal 15 amp outlet for 3 months when I first got the car. I drove it as much as I wanted during the day and plugged it in at night. 99% of the time it was no problem at all. A few times I had to unplug before it was completely (80%) charged but it was fine and I was able to drive normally that day.
I eventually upgraded to a Wall Connector for Level 2 charging (40 amp circuit) which charges about 10x faster (40miles / hour). This was much more convenient but not completely necessary.
Who is buying a new car these days anyway? Maybe the older generation who are living in their cheap paid off homes. But i dont know anyone below 50 who ever bought a new car.
50k for a small refrigerator? Compared to a 10 year old bigger car for 15k with similar operating costs and no hassle.
The used car market has gotten expensive, you’re not saving much for a similar vehicle. And a 10 year old vehicle at that price point is, in the average case, absolutely not going to cost the same in maintenance.
The pendulum for new versus used has swung far in the direction of new cars, compared to a decade ago. The caveat is that it might take 6 months to get a new car due to inventory issues. I think used is much more expensive because it’s nearly the only option, regardless of cost, for folks who need a car this week.
I bought a new car in April of 2020 and it was a screaming deal. Paid 3k under MSRP for a prestige trim and the total price was in the 20s. Maybe your friends just don't know a buying opportunity when it comes around?
Same. Buying a car is a significant purchase for me and I only do it when I'm able to get a deal and mainly buy used. 2020 was ridiculous. I basically named my price.
If the title had a "their" after the "for", it would make a bit more sense. Maybe people who want e-vehicles are just not interested in VW nowadays.
VW once had quite a lot of brand loyalty, because they made good products and changed them incrementally, according to engineering decisions. That's not true now, with so many different styles being made available that it's hard to keep track, with odd finishing decisions (those horrid screens on the dashboard make it anything but a drivers' car). Heck, I saw a video of a test drive that talked about the gear shifter coming out of its attachment as the driver made an aggressive shift. I drove VWs for years, and I never one thought the gear shifter would come lose.
It seems like MBAs are making decisions at VW, and not driving enthusiasts.
Here's a thought for VW: electrify the car that made you so much money for so many years (the plain golf) and see what happens to your bottom line.
Considering how many times our 5yo VW has been in the shop for major system breaks, I wouldn’t want to get a whole-new-drivetrain VW without massive warranty protection. We have a 15yo Toyota that’s been in the shop far less.
Plus, (a) reviews for the electric VW aren’t impressed, (b) [charging] network matters, (c) pay the VW “premium” for first-gen tech? Seems like a poor bet.
The EU will do what they did when the Japanese car industry was about to crush it, they'll slap tariffs on Chinese EV imports to protect Thier domestic industry until they're in a position to be competitive.
> The EU will do what they did when the Japanese car industry was about to crush it, they'll slap tariffs on Chinese EV imports to protect Thier domestic industry until they're in a position to be competitive.
The corporate news is the same story, over and over: Cut 5-15% of workforce because of the 'economy'. Meanwhile the economy keeps doing well, so people are making money.
I suspect there's another reason for the cuts, but the following is just BS. I'm hoping someone knows something substantive - a paper, a book, a term for it, etc.:
I often see a new management philosophy of hyper-aggression and disdain for all but money, treating labor (and nursing home patients, healthcare patients, journalism, students, etc.) as commodities to squeeze rather than contributors (and human beings and social goods) to value; treating profit as an outcome of squeezing every dollar/euro possible from everything rather than innovating productivity for society. No, it hasn't always been that way; remember Silicon Valley leaders treating their employees with respect, with flat hierarchies, 20% time dedicated to personal projects, etc etc.
US has had decades of thumping the mantra “MBAs are the smartest people on earth, just give them whatever they want and they'll solve all problems.” (edit-this was at the highest levels of government.) That idea has come home to roost. Lo and behold, those MBAs think non-MBAs are dime a dozen (even phds) and smart people are all in management. (They also thought computers and automation would eventually make every non-management position obsolete or commoditized.)
The law long ago turned on workers largely too. HR takes managements side unless the manager is literally breaking the law and the worker has an airtight case with evidence and especially witnesses. So to be an employee means you need an understanding of the law on par with an entire HR department or learn to always say “yes.”
I think you are misplacing blame in this situation. Electric cars really are not in high demand among the American public. MBA-types, looking at straight economic viability, would never have supported EVs as far as we have. No, it's been massive support from government, primarily, in the form of price subsidies, fuel economy minimums that have forced many gasoline models to be discontinued, gasoline taxes, and unending messaging and pressure about climate change that has artificially created demand. The first wave of people already own EVs, subsidies are ending, further demand is drying up.
I wish there was a law to expose for all products the rate of profit, and the implicit and explicit subsidies. It's impossible to know how EV margins compare to e.g. a minivan or a golf classic ICE.
It is always strange to see a large industry getting disrupted, in slow motion, in plain sight.
The problem is, the leader of a new product direction has not just perfected the new tech, but identified and grown a new market segment and captured a new customer base.
The followers not only have to catch up with technology, but find new market segments with latent customers for their version of the new technology. After the original company scooped up all the low hanging market fruit.
That is a sneaky double whammy they don't plan for when they initially wait things out.
New car. Small car. Expensive car. And, electric car. I don’t think this is entirely an electric vehicle issue. Interest rates and high prices for small cars seems bad enough. If the specs were the same & it was gas even at a slightly lower price; I doubt VWs are hot sellers. I think this might be trust related too. It was smart for VW to pivot from previous fuel sources they gamed, but how much do you trust the specs now that they’re EVs?
The article is talking about demand in Germany, which fell because a subsidy for corporate buyers expired leading to a large drop in German corporate EV purchases. 70% of the EVs from a particular VW plant in Germany went to corporate buyers, so they are making cuts at that plant.
It doesn't really have implications for other EV plants or other countries.
That's a good point. Likely, rates have mostly peaked. There will potentially be downward pressure soon.
On top of that, many cars are hard to get. Low production, backlogged demand. This means fewer deals on finance and lease rates.
I remember 0% lease and finance rates, 15 years ago when the interest rate was this high, because car companies wanted to move product. But now they have no need, not with them unable to supply demand.
So my point is, I decided to keep my current car longer. Rates matter.
What is this based on? I am not so sure if I believe that. Canada's inflation rate jumped to 4% last month (although a lot of that was apparently due to an increase in gasoline prices).
It is not 4% per month, that is the yearly rate, as a current value. And it didn't "jump", it went up a tiny bit.
Target inflation for the Bank of Canada is around 2% yearly. The bank did not increase rates the last round, and inflation is dramatically down from a year ago.
Fair points and I stand corrected in some of my wording. But that still doesn't explain why rates have "mostly peaked". It is equally possible that we are nowhere near the peak.
Many infatuationary pressures have eased. I could write a bunch of things here, but you'd get a better look if you googled on why the bank of canada has eased off a bit on rate increases.
Of course, the future is an unknown, but inflation is about half what it was a year ago.
Heck, there has been some talk of deflation! A lot of stuff peaked due to supply, and those prices could drop dramatically.
That's why I said "mostly peaked". But rather than large jumps every announcement, I suspect we'll skip some, and only have small, quarter point corrections. Maybe one in October, and in the spring.
This indicates a soft landing, but I agree, we'll see. Anything could happen.
Demand for (VW) EVs plunges. It's important to note that their EVs have been universally panned with reviewers straight up recommending NOT to buy VW EVs due to all the software bugs
I’d encourage you to log your actual driving for a week or two, along with how long your vehicle sits idle. Most range anxiety (IMO) is a supposed of opportunity cost rather than actual risk.
Like companies assuming piracy is equal to a lost sale. It might be true in some cases, but not all. Also, most late model EVs offer a couple hundred miles on a single charge.
That and also most people want the biggest battery for road trip and stuffs but fail to realize that the bigger battery only help you on the first leg of the trip as once you need to stop, you are limited by charging speed and not the battery size. When I bough mine, the dealer obviously was pushing for the big battery but after looking at longer trip planning in ABRP, I realize that the difference between the big and small battery was basically a few minutes for a 6h trip.
> At the same time, Volkswagen is following Tesla, BMW AG and others in exporting an EV from lower-cost China to Europe. Its Cupra brand has announced plans to produce the Tavascan SUV at a factory in Anhui. Built on the same hardware and software platforms as the ID series, the model is due to hit the European market in 2024.
So, once again the only country to manufacture cutting edge technology goods at scale and at a reasonable cost ends up being China.
The geopolitical landscape when China's EV domination fully expends will be something else entirely...
I am not so sure this is a bad thing. Electric vehicles still seem to be part of the same pattern of planed obsolesce and profitable waste production. Looking at the production and expected lifetime sustainability seems little more then an image from the marketing campaign. Not a surprise but maybe something worth mentioning given the hype.
My daily driver is over a decade old and has only ever entered a tire shop.
It was the first generation of EV.
When should I plan it's obsolescence?
What is your experience with EV expiration that leads you to your conclusion? Please inform me in any form other than links to idle speculation by obviously biased parties like Motor Trend etc.
I was referencing the battery production and lifetime. As well as the reasonable to expect overall lifetime and repair ability. How many decades do you expect to use it?
Given what goes into these batteries and the inability to recycle the components, sustainable is quite questionable. This is a stop gap that only solves a very specific metric, fossil fuels.
There is also an economic incentive to sell more stuff to a limited numbers of customers. Thats visible with most products, its just market forces so i dont expect EV to magically withstand that. We likely need actually more sustainable (as in designed for) but that goes counter to market forces.
edit: To give examples for the general trend, i have two saws from the same maker, the newer one with a difficult to replicate plastic clip holding the sawblade. Defect controller board for mid-bikes would officially mean replacing the motor. Printers and phones dont need to be mentioned. Given fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders you cant expect much else. New models are designed and need to be sold. Thats problematic given the materials used.
Jesus cool down. You know modern car production produces junk that mostly will fall apart in 10 years.
First generation of anything are overbuilt by modern mba product engineering practices. I have a 2011 Nissan Leaf that I hope to still be using in another 10 years.
Its funny how the EU is now 'investigating subsidies' in China.
China has been building this sector for like 30 years.
While Europeans were so proud of their diesel vehicles and how clean they were and the Germany companies endlessly talking about hydrogen and green fuels. While Europe has basically no resource extraction related to batteries or much of any battery refinement for most of that period.
But now that this bears fruit for China the EU is like 'what what what, I though our brilliant hydrogen plan was gone work'.
Yeah, in principle no market is open, but in the other hand the “openness” of the European vs Chinese markets is not even comparable. China’s market is notoriously difficult for foreign companies to enter and to operate in.
For starters, Europe doesn’t have the Communist Party dictatorship that can arbitrarily fuck your business over on a whim with no possibility for recourse because the Party is judge, jury and executioner.
China is a scary place to do business if you’re not a huge multinational with leverage.
Do you owe debts for a business deal/partnership gone wrong? Congrats your creditors can have you banned from leaving the country until they are paid. Oops you weren’t even notified there would be a court hearing against you, so you’re not aware of the debt until you tried to board a flight. I hope you didn’t think you had any chance to appeal that bad decision because the courts will side with the local Chinese over the foreigner.
Oh and let’s not forget the Canadian Michaels’ ordeal.
Traditional automakers largely got trapped in the innovator's dilemma. China had no attachment to ICE technology and skipped straight to BEV. Dieselgate was a blessing to VW because it forced them to discuss BEVs to save face.
Europe leads the world in legislation and regulation, both good and bad. Their labor laws are the strongest in the world. Manufacturing in Europe can't compete on price, and the price disparity will be significant, so they will regulate and tax imports.
Related is that china's manufacturing is more focused on low cost labour, rather than high skill, intricate (and thus higher cost) work.
Surprisingly, an ICE car is more intricate, and has more labour intensive parts that require a high skill labour force. Things like engine block manufacturing (and design), spark plugs, etc.
Battery EV are actually low labour - after all, motors are not "intricate", as they don't need to contain explosions!
I think that china has, prior to BEV, tried to reach the same level of car manufacturing as europe (ala germany), but has found that no matter what economic policies they put in place, the labour and value chain in china just cannot catch up to the well established ones in europe.
It actually makes sense that china abandon the ICE manufacturing sector, because the BEV sector at the time had no competition, and capitalism (and the innovator's dilemma) has prevented ICE car manufacturers from entering until they see the real demand - but by then, china has fully controlled the supply chain of critical components such as the batteries, minerals and capacity.
I do not believe that europe (or the US) can really catchup without a major shift in technology of the battery.
China is imposing a government mandate on its car industry. It is a top-down solution that is reminiscence of the Soviet Union. If you actually looked closely, you'll that there is a mountain of question businesses tried to extract subsidies from the government.
In reality, China's BEV strategy is going to be disrupted and will be wiped out. It is pursuing a dead end technology that few people want. It will only take a zero emissions technology that costs a lot less to finish off their BEV strategy.
You also broke the site guidelines repeatedly and egregiously in this thread. As you can see, we ban accounts that do that. I'm not going to ban you because it doesn't look like you've been making a habit of it, but I did notice your account breaking the site guidelines recently in other threads, and that's bad:
If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html, we'd appreciate it. Commenters here need to stick to the rules regardless of how badly other commenters are behaving or it feels like they are.
And you're just a brainwashed BEV fanatic. Time to give up on Chinese Communist propaganda. The whole thing is a giant scam and it is destined to fail.
Its funny how the EU is now 'investigating subsidies' in China.
There is nothing "new" here. The EU warned against China's "funny" NEV policies back in 2018 -- see the EU's WTO complaint WT/DS549, "China — Certain Measures on the Transfer of Technology." You could also tell that Biden's response (aka, the IRA, enacted in 2022) to clean energy was inspired by and modeled on China's "funny" NEV policies -- ensuring that no Chinese EV/battery company set their foot in the territory, or receive tax credit/subsides. The EU is at least playing by the book.
China has been building this sector for like 30 years
I wonder why forced tech transfer and other highly discriminatory/anti-competitive protectionist measures were necessary if China had so much time to build the sector.
While Europe has basically no resource extraction related to batteries or much of any battery refinement for most of that period.
The West wants clean energy, but doesn't want to get their hands dirty. As usual, they outsource all the dirty work of resource acquisition, mining, refining to the 3rd world -- let China pollute their land, air, water for clean energy!
Subsidizing some technology or another isn't new. The US electric car subsidies and other policies date back further then 2018.
And Europe has plenty of subsidies for their car industry, with the car industry being politically powerful.
> if China had so much time to build the sector.
Because its not just about cars, its everything from mine to the battery. And their policies weren't that anti-competitive, European and US car makers made a lot of money in China for quite a while and they didn't transfer much EV technology.
> let China pollute their land, air, water for clean energy!
Or lets actually take responsibility for the policy we have and act accordingly.
No, you just don't seem to understand how subsidies work. There are legal subsidies -- take for instance, food or defense industries, or anything that's produced and consumed domestically is up to individual country to decide.
Then, there are illegal subsidies: "export subsidies" or "import substitution." China, as a member of WTO, is prohibited from giving any subsidy contingent on export performance, or on the use of domestic over imported goods. So for instance, China's subsidies were only given to EVs with domestic batteries made by domestic companies over foreign companies -- even if they were made in China, since 2015. China forced out foreign competitors, eg LG Chem which had close to 50% of the Chinese EV battery market share prior to this now down to less 1%, despite being the world's largest EV battery maker outside China, and ensured that only their domestic champions received EV subsidies in a market where subsidies accounted for as much as 40% of new EV cost. This is all ok, so long as China never intends to sell their EVs over the water -- after all, it's their money. China's EV initiative however was geared towards exports and dominating the field. EV subsidies elsewhere are obviously legal b/c, unlike, China's, they don't violate those rules.
Because its not just about cars, its everything from mine to the battery. And their policies weren't that anti-competitive, European and US car makers made a lot of money in China for quite a while and they didn't transfer much EV technology.
China's EV initiative didn't really start until 2009 when they first announced their EV subsidies. CATL for instance wasn't even founded until 2011; BYD was really nobody back then. The modern lithium ion batteries really became popular after SONY's first commercialization in the early 1990's -- the Japanese and Korean really kept the industry going since. And the leaders in the battery industry for instance were LG, Panasonic, Samsung, BASF, all of whom were asked to give up their IPR in exchange to access China's NEV market. This is detailed in the EU's WTO dispute against China's forced tech transfer - WT/DS549.
While China has long dominated the metal refining/processing industry largely due to developed countries' aversion to pollution, China's EV resource acquistion/spree likewise didn't really start until 2010's.
I don't believe anyone with a brain ever thought hydrogen was going to be practical for cars. Governments (thankfully not the US much) pushed hydrogen as a stalling tactic knowing it would never be viable or reduce demand for fossil fuels.
You are just being brainwashed by BEV propaganda. Not only do people with a brain still believe in hydrogen for cars, that includes the majority of automotive engineers. BEVs are the weird, government mandated BS cars that few people want. If the car industry was given a democratic choice, it will pivot to hydrogen as the future.
I've banned this account for two reasons. First, you've continued to break the site guidelines after we asked you to stop—often egregiously, as in these cases:
Second, you've been using HN primarily for ideological battle, which is not allowed here, and almost always on the same topic, which is especially not allowed here. This is a rule regardless of your ideology and regardless of your topic, because it's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for.
> that includes the majority of automotive engineers
That is hilariously untrue. Even compared to your usual nonsense.
> If the car industry was given a democratic choice, it will pivot to hydrogen as the future.
In Germany the govenrment wanted to enact more pro-hydrogen polices and the car makers literally told them not to it was a waste of time.
And of course we had many periods, in the US, Europe and Japan where hydrogen was favored and pushed by the govenrment and a grand total of nothing came from it. The German government has spent 100s of millions on hydrogen cars alone, let alone other hydrogen projects. I don't even want to know how much Japan spent.
Reality is many of the subsidies world wide are not for BEV specifically but apply to lots of zero emission vehicles. You simply can't deal with the reality that hydrogen vehicles are pointless nonsense that no sane person would ever try push and BEV have trounced them in every way imaginable.
So lets see what all the hydrogen subsidies and clean vehicle subsidies have amount to:
> Sales of Fuel Cell Vehicles (FCEV) in the light vehicle sector have declined by -25 % so far and stay below 20 000 units annually. Current sales are from 5 vehicle models and most sales are in South Korea and USA. We estimate their current population to ca 60 000 units.
and
> BEVs reaching 10 million units
But I'm sure the 10 million vs 20k is totally just government subsidies.
It really takes next level delusion to think hydorgen cars are the future. Even pretty much all the former pro hydrogen car makers have given up. Its positively laughable that you keep believing in this.
The car makers are not "democratic." It is mostly a handful of out-of-touch executives forcing everyone to go their way. A lot of is driven by the PR fallout of dieselgate too. The line workers and engineers are not on-board. Also, if you listen carefully you'll realize that most executives are not on-board either. The CEO of Stellantis have repeated questioned the direction of the BEV mandate.
And of course, they are quietly sabotaging everything behind the scenes. There's a reason why there is a e-fuel exception, and why the UK sudden moved the deadline back 5 years. There is not much real support behind the scene. I expect the BEV mandates to be abandoned in due time.
Note that FCEV subsidies didn't really exist in the past, outside of tangential subsidies that targeted at all green cars. The real target would be refueling subsidies and deployment of infrastructure, which have only recently started to happen.
What you're doing is regurgitating the same anti-EV argument used against BEVs. Remember, BEVs were at nearly zero before the mid-2000s. And compared to the ICE market, it is still tiny and mostly irrelevant. The moment the government take hydrogen cars more seriously, it will take off.
It's also worth noting that diesel got to >50% of the market in Europe before rapidly dying off. It could easily happen to BEVs too. It is not a real, organic market. It is mostly due to subsidies and heavy-handed government mandates forcing companies to make them. Take that away and the market will disappear just like it did with diesel cars.
Finally, the tides are starting to turn. You are repeat claims that in direct contradiction to the OP itself. A sign you aren't even paying attention before spamming your BEV propaganda. People are starting to lose faith in BEVs, and the problems will get louder over time.
All new cars spy on you (well most do), but EV's are completely software driven and seem to be more intrusive. I want a car I can connect to the internet when I want to for updates and that is it. I also want android auto and the apple one for my wife, I do not want a proprietary (Tesla) entertainment system.
I want right to repair. It is my car if I spend that much on it, I want to do to it whatever I want.
I want all the equipment in the car to work when i purchase it and no monthly fees (I get it for XM Radio, I am talking like seat heaters and such).
For some reason it also irritates me Tesla can increase mileage with a flip of a switch (Like they were going to do in Florida for a hurricane a while back). So you are telling me they could of been build with smaller batteries and save money and the environment, but they were not so you could have a software upgrade (or was that a monthly payment as well). Also the fact Tesla can remote disable my vehicle, and purchased upgrades do not transfer to the new owner.
I can probably go on and on with my whining, but that is why i still have 2 gas guzzlers and a motorcycle (newest vehicle is 2008, 2005 Honda van has 270,000 miles on it). They are paid for an yes a little maintenance here and there but that is not enough to make me spend $30k + on an electric vehicle.