[HN Gopher] Toyota to invest $1.3B in Kentucky factory to build ...
___________________________________________________________________
Toyota to invest $1.3B in Kentucky factory to build battery packs
and new EV
Author : clouddrover
Score : 192 points
Date : 2024-02-07 12:17 UTC (10 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (apnews.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (apnews.com)
| psychlops wrote:
| How much does Toyota pay in taxes in Kentucky or are we
| subsidizing the factory?
| josefresco wrote:
| "KEDFA approved the $43.5 million tax incentives shortly after
| the Toyota expansion announcement was made Monday. The dollar
| figure combines the incentives from the Lexus expansion in 2015
| with the latest investment for a total of $190 million in
| incentives, said Jack Mazurak, communications director at
| KEDFA.
|
| https://www.kentucky.com/news/business/article143755074.html
| itsoktocry wrote:
| I don't think there is such thing as manufacturing investment
| without subsidization any more.
|
| And it most often results in the Winner's Curse: the entity
| providing the greatest subsidies win's the "investment", but
| they give up so much in the process that the economic benefits
| are wiped out.
|
| See: Tesla in Buffalo, VW in Ontario, FoxConn in Wisconsin.
| psychlops wrote:
| Overall, yes. But I suspect there are winners if we could
| follow the money trail.
| jsight wrote:
| I'm not sure if I agree, tbh. You've certainly brought up
| some good cases of failures, but what about:
|
| Tesla in Sparks NV, BMW in Greer SC, or Mercedes in Alabama
| and SC? It seems like those have more than paid for
| themselves by now. In at least one of those cases, they've
| had huge regional impacts.
| itsoktocry wrote:
| > _Tesla in Sparks NV_
|
| Ironically, you go to the website and there's a fake image
| of the factory, based on previous promises.
|
| I can't speak to the others, but I'm sure there's some
| positive outliers!
| jsight wrote:
| Why assume they are outliers? It seems like there are
| more successes than failures, just that the failures get
| attention.
| itsoktocry wrote:
| > _Why assume they are outliers?_
|
| Because when the government hands tax money over to
| profitable companies to "create jobs", you are inherently
| distorting the market.
|
| > _It seems like there are more successes than failures_
|
| Maybe, but I'm skeptical.
| api wrote:
| It's true globally too. China heavily subsidizes their
| industrial base as do many other countries.
|
| When everyone else is subsidizing you have to subsidize too
| or you lose.
| newsclues wrote:
| You can have tax policy that makes up for unfair subsidies
| or simply block those countries from your market.
| api wrote:
| The first is a subsidy by another name. The second has a
| lot of knock-on effects unless you own the whole supply
| chain, and nobody does anymore.
| onlyrealcuzzo wrote:
| Foxconn in Wisconsin is the one people love to mention.
|
| AFAIK - they got $3B in FUTURE benefits - of which none came
| to fruition.
|
| Foxconn delivered nothing and also got almost nothing (~1% of
| that $3B).
|
| Yeah - it was a dumb political stunt - and it unfortunately
| worked for the time. But it wasn't the massive financial
| disaster people think it was.
| xyst wrote:
| Let's be honest. Southern state probably lured them in with a
| nice package.
|
| Toyota has been moving ops to states with lower cost of living
| for awhile now. Toyota corp in USA shifted ops from CA to TX a
| decade back. Many workers hate or regret the move. C-level
| executives are excited because they pay less in state taxes.
| Probably even got a nice deal on the land.
| bhpm wrote:
| Toyota broke ground in San Antonio more than two decades ago,
| in 2003, not one. Georgetown KY has been around since 1986
| and Princeton IN since 1996. Toyota has been investing in
| "low cost of living" states for a very long time.
| brandonagr2 wrote:
| How much is the currently empty field where the factory will be
| built currently contributing to tax revenue?
| kycommenter wrote:
| I don't know how much they currently pay in taxes, but when
| Toyota built the plant in the 80's, Kentucky gave $125M in
| incentives.
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martha_Layne_Collins#Toyota_As...
| earthwalker99 wrote:
| Ford made these same promises 2 years ago then bailed when the
| interest rate rose.
| itsoktocry wrote:
| > _Ford made these same promises 2 years ago then bailed when
| the interest rate rose._
|
| Sometimes investment makes sense, and then things change and it
| doesn't make sense anymore. That's fair, isn't it?
| earthwalker99 wrote:
| Fair? What would that even mean?
|
| These empty promises are how we ended up electing Trump the
| first time and it's virtually guaranteeing that we'll elect
| him a second time.
|
| Rural Kentucky is in horrible shape and a lot of people here
| were placing hope in this, much like they have so many other
| empty promises from their leaders, so at least stop acting
| surprised when the consequences show themselves.
| psychlops wrote:
| He means that companies exist to make a profit, supply
| customers and their needs and to pay employees.
|
| If they make a promise to spend money and economic
| conditions change to the extent that they would lose money,
| it makes sense to not continue with that commitment.
|
| Comparing a company making a profit with a politician
| trying to get elected is not fair.
| thfuran wrote:
| That's not how promises or commitments work. It's true
| that that describes the behavior of profit maximization
| engines, but the language of your justification implies
| wrongdoing.
| jonnycomputer wrote:
| It's not a mirage. Manufacturing investment is happening.
|
| https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/industry/manufactu
| r...
|
| Mostly in red-states, tbh, because they have fewer
| regulations slowing down building stuff.
|
| Also, Trump is a prove loser who will lose again.
| trgn wrote:
| > Rural Kentucky is in horrible shape and a lot of people
| here were placing hope in this,
|
| "Rural KY" is not all that big, a couple million people, if
| that, and solely exists to the rest of the US for low-key
| victim-blaming election cycle human interest dreck.
|
| These news stories about manufacturing expansion are all
| about development just outside large towns and cities, like
| bowling green, louisville, cincinnati, ... and will draw
| similar demographic than if they were in Texas, Georgia, or
| North Carolina.
|
| And fwiw, just nitpicking, "rural ky" can also include the
| bluegrass, and that's just plain comfortably rich.
| itsoktocry wrote:
| > _Fair? What would that even mean?_
|
| It means you can't hold it against a company if an
| investment no longer seems profitable.
|
| Blame your politicians, who feel the need to hold a ribbon
| cutting ceremony before anything is signed.
| kjksf wrote:
| $1.3B seems like a lot of money but it isn't for a car factory,
| especially spread over many years.
|
| For context: Tesla is guiding for $10+B a year capex spending for
| the next 3 years.
|
| Nevada factory took $6.2B and Tesla plans to spend additional
| $3.6B
|
| Toyota is still under-investing in EV. $1.3B is nothing.
|
| https://www.tesla.com/blog/continuing-our-investment-nevada
| jsight wrote:
| Yeah, it must be less than 1% of revenue. Probably a lot less,
| given that it is likely spread over several years.
| jgalt212 wrote:
| It feels "right-sized" given Toyota's approach towards EV's
| and the slowing adoption rate of EVs in the US.
| dumbo-octopus wrote:
| Toyota initiated the hybrid as a modern platform, and they
| continue make the best selling hybrid in the world (Prius).
| But since they don't want to be in the business of making
| undesirable vehicles with short lifespans that require
| expensive maintenance, they have stuck to hybrids rather
| than full electric and all the extremely costly low
| lifespan batteries that go into them.
|
| Speaking as a 2004 Prius daily driver, the Toyota approach
| works. And I guarantee I'm a hell of a lot more
| "environmentally friendly" than anyone who commissioned
| literal tons of metal to be dug out of the earth to make
| their "green" new Tesla.
| throw0101b wrote:
| > _Toyota initiated the hybrid as a modern platform_
| [...]
|
| E.g., the first Prius was released in 1997:
|
| * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Prius_(XW10)
| brandonagr2 wrote:
| You aren't more environmentally friendly, in less than 2
| years an EV is net positive
|
| https://www.tesla.com/impact (see page 22)
|
| And that's not even mentioning that in 20 years we won't
| be mining materials out of the ground anymore, will just
| be recycling existing battery materials
| explaininjs wrote:
| Parent stated they drive a Prius, which is not the
| "standard EV" that article mentions. They slate 24mpg,
| which is laughable: that's around what my old gas
| guzzling V8 got, and they call it the norm? The Prius
| gets high 40's easily. But it's a EV fluff piece
| published by "the EV company", one can't expect
| scientific integrity.
|
| In fact, reading through the lines of Tesla's own fluff
| piece, in places like China the Prius is net-
| environmentally positive even year by year as compared to
| the Model 3. China has the most emissions of any country,
| so that's a pretty big caveat to simply ignore. But
| again, fluff piece by the fluff company.
| sndean wrote:
| OP continuing to drive a 20-year-old car (of any kind,
| not just a hybrid) is likely more environmentally
| friendly than buying a new car every few years. They're
| doing the reduce part of "reduce, reuse, recycle." A
| long-lasting, low-maintenance hybrid has a good argument
| for being very environmentally friendly.
| _aavaa_ wrote:
| > OP continuing to drive a 20-year-old car (of any kind,
| not just a hybrid) is likely more environmentally
| friendly than buying a new car every few years.
|
| Sure, but that isn't the comparison here. Buying a new EV
| and then holding on to it for 20 years will be even more
| environmentally friendly.
| calfuris wrote:
| Combustion-powered vehicles are something of an
| exception, because only a small fraction of their
| pollution is associated with their creation. Buying a new
| car every few years probably isn't optimal, but operating
| an ICE vehicle for decades probably isn't optimal either.
| blackoil wrote:
| 1. Conflict of interest. Is there any alternative report?
| 2. 2 years is vague, do we have it in kms? 3.
| Which car is it against? How does it compare with Prius
| 2024?
|
| Also, how much investment in renewables is because of
| EVs? If we had 0 EVs and same renewables, coal/oil/gas
| generated electricity would have gone down by what is now
| consumed by EVs.
| seadan83 wrote:
| The break-even depends on the source of electricity,
| which in turn depends on Geography.
|
| If the electricity is from coal, the break-even is after
| 5 years; even then, the lifetime emission of the EV is
| not even 10% less than that of the conventional gas car.
|
| If the electricity is from hydro and other 100% non-
| fossil fuel renewables, than the break-even is even
| shorter, under a year, and over the lifetime the
| emissions are about 70%~80% less overall (and the longer
| the car is driven compared to a conventional gas car,
| more than 13 years, the greater the reduction in lifetime
| emissions)
|
| All data from this source:
|
| https://www.reuters.com/graphics/ELECTRIC-
| VEHICLES/EMISSIONS...
|
| (Full webpage, for context:
| https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-
| transportation/when-d...)
| belltaco wrote:
| > But since they don't want to be in the business of
| making undesirable vehicles with short lifespans that
| require expensive maintenance
|
| Then why did they go all in on hydrogen cars?
|
| https://www.hydrogeninsight.com/transport/analysis-it-is-
| now...
| enragedcacti wrote:
| Because the Japanese government bet big on hydrogen and
| heavily subsidized the industry. Also, is there any
| evidence that hydrogen vehicles have short lifespan or
| require expensive maintenance? I don't disagree about how
| undesirable they are based on fuel cost but its hard to
| suss out how much of that is just based on extremely low
| production.
| dumbo-octopus wrote:
| "All in" is a very strange way to describe a
| multinational corporation producing in the single digit
| thousands of an item. They tried something, it hasn't
| panned out yet, they're sticking to what they know works
| in the mean time.
| WorldMaker wrote:
| > But since they don't want to be in the business of
| making undesirable vehicles with short lifespans that
| require expensive maintenance
|
| The average BEV is lasting just as long as any other car
| on the road and the used market is _not_ filled with
| "broken EVs requiring expensive maintenance". The
| opposite seems to statistically be the case: the used
| market for EVs is "barren" because the cars don't need
| expensive maintenance and often stay with their first
| owners for longer and when they do move to new owners
| don't often go through the traditional used market
| _because they don 't need as much maintenance_.
|
| You've been lead to believe some interesting
| misinformation. Toyota themselves have been a source of
| some of that misinformation, which is further unhelpful.
| seadan83 wrote:
| Do you have citations? I can think of alternative &
| plausible explanations:
|
| - the used car industry is just barren post-pandemic.
| Prices are up and inventory is super low [1]
|
| - EVs are generally not that old! Why put a BEV up as a
| used car when it's just a few years old? The average age
| of a used car is 6.1 years (according to CBC in Sep-2023)
| [2]. Further, that 'used car' age is up from 4 years,
| which further indicates the first point that the used car
| market is very short on supply. Most of Tesla's sales
| have been in just the last 4 years [3], Tesla represents
| a lot of BEV car sales in the US (going from memory, it
| was about 75% and is down to around 55%). In such a short
| amount of time, most BEVs are essentially still brand
| new. Thus, BEVs not being in the 'used' market is
| somewhat expected since they are half the age of the
| average used car, most of them are under 4 years old.
|
| Thus, their lack of presence in the used car market could
| easily be more a function of their age (relatively brand
| new) compared to: "don't often go through the traditional
| used market because they don't need as much maintenance."
|
| [1] https://www.cbtnews.com/the-state-of-used-car-prices-
| why-are...
|
| [2] https://www.cnbc.com/2023/09/26/3-things-to-consider-
| when-bu...
|
| [3] https://cleantechnica.com/2023/04/22/tesla-just-
| passed-4-mil...
| WorldMaker wrote:
| That CNBC article points out one of the big sea changes
| in the fast recent jumps from a used car average of 3
| years (for _decades_ prior to ~2017) to 4 years (prior to
| 2019) to 6 years is a big change by rental car companies
| to hold rental fleets longer. The biggest sea change for
| rental companies over the last few years has been a
| switch to a higher balance of BEVs in their fleets. It
| certainly seems to me to be causative, the used car age
| average is rising for the first time in my lifetime just
| as BEV ownership is rising doesn 't _seem_ to be a
| correlative coincidence and more indirect evidence that
| the BEV first owner lifetime is higher than historic ICE
| averages. (Possibly _much_ higher given that 4 to 6.1
| year jump in just one calendar year.)
|
| The early EVs have passed their 10 year marks. Some are
| closer to 15 years. There's a very long tail of BEVs
| already on the road. The only models that statistically
| have shown "battery degradation" enough to remark on have
| been the early model years of the Tesla Model S and
| Nissan Leaf before both companies invested in active
| thermal management of their batteries. So far "to remark
| on" was "noticeable compared to factory spec", but most
| of those batteries remained in first use (as car
| batteries). I've heard of Nissan Leaf battery
| replacements as a mini-industry, but not due to battery
| degradation, due to massive jumps in density upgrading
| the early Leafs to _larger_ range than their original
| spec. There doesn 't seem to be much of a market yet for
| Tesla battery replacements and most of the numbers thrown
| around are speculation and/or misinformation.
| seadan83 wrote:
| Thanks for the reply. Your hypothesis seems more
| plausible now to me FWIW. Before I would outright agree
| (in order to be convinced), I'd like to see more
| evidence/data that used car prices are being driven by
| low maintenance requirements of EVs and that it is not
| other factors.
|
| Another thing to consider, the picture is changing quite
| a bit somewhat recently. The supply crunch is fading,
| used car prices are coming down [1], and the effects of
| higher interest rates is taking hold. Would you say those
| recent trends are consistent with your hypothesis?
|
| [1] https://money.com/used-car-prices-cheaper-tesla-ev/
| dumbo-octopus wrote:
| > The average BEV is lasting just as long as any other
| car on the road
|
| Teslas haven't even existed as a car producing company
| for as long as most cars last, Toyotas in particular.
| Model 3's certainly not.
|
| > The used market for EVs is "barren"
|
| I just pulled up hundreds in a 10 mile radius of me on
| craigslist. Probably most needing $20,000 battery
| services.
|
| > You've been lead to believe some interesting
| misinformation
|
| No, you.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| Your 2004 Prius has a lead acid battery, hows that for
| "low lifespan" battery?
| suoduandao3 wrote:
| I do believe that Tesla's success in the last decade was in
| large part due to the fact it was the only technology company
| that could use all the money people were throwing at technology
| companies.
| anonylizard wrote:
| Softbank's belief was that throwing capital would just make
| things work. But from wework to many other of their startups
| shows its not the case.
|
| Telsa had to deploy their capital very efficiently in a
| capital intensive industry. Say their bet on the Shanghai
| factory, despite obvious IP leak risks and spawning deadly
| competitors like BYD, was their only choice to reach scale at
| a low cost.
| thfuran wrote:
| >Telsa had to deploy their capital very efficiently in a
| capital intensive industry
|
| Surely that's an easier task than deploying a similar
| amount of capital in an industry that isn't capital heavy.
| lvturner wrote:
| Spawning?
|
| BYD was founded in 1995 and its automotive subsidiary 2003
| (via aquisition)
| fnordpiglet wrote:
| BYD didn't really differentiate itself until starting
| 2019, which is about a year after Tesla would have had to
| complete its forced technology transfer program to
| establish Tesla Shanghai. BYDs first new generation EV
| concept car in 2019, and production of the Seal and other
| major EV products (which looks like clones of Model 3s,
| etc) didn't start in earnest until 2022. They changed
| their logo to be a stylistic copy of the Tesla logo in
| 2022.
|
| Yes, their bus and ICE lines long predated, and they had
| hybrids built out of forced technology transfers from
| Toyota. But their EV lines that are so popular didn't
| start until after Tesla acquired their corporate license
| and rights to build their gigafactory. If you've done
| business in China you know forced technology transfers
| and training of competitive local workforces is
| contingent on those stages. The factory itself and its
| parts supply chain would also have required transfer of
| technical knowledge, skill, and local supplier ability
| without exclusivity.
|
| It's not a knock on Chinese people to say the Chinese
| government is intertwined in Chinese industry (it is
| communist after all and ultimately the means of
| production is a public trust), or that there is no
| "fairness" by western standards in Chinese industry and
| governmental influence. But it's also disingenuous to
| believe BYD pivoted to a full on global Tesla competitor
| in 4 years from being a low end hybrid and bus
| manufacturer based purely on their tenacity and
| innovation, neither of which is BYD known for in its
| history (having been propped up as a money loser for
| decades by the government and facing a lot of
| intellectual property lawsuits from Toyota, Mercedes,
| Renault, and others throughout its history). It's too
| implausible to take seriously and there's no reason to be
| credulous.
| bluGill wrote:
| We have known for decades that normally doesn't work.
| However we also have a few exceptions that tease people
| into thinking it works enough - or that they can identify
| the few winners (I'm not sure what). Amazon.com at one time
| was the place people were throwing more good capital after
| bad - I was convinced this was the case in the late 1990s.
| dzhiurgis wrote:
| Ummmm you might want to compare debt of VW, Toyota and Tesla
| itsoktocry wrote:
| > _For context: Tesla is guiding for $10+B a year capex
| spending for the next 3 years._
|
| I know people around these parts think that Tesla has uncovered
| some magical factory building ability, but can you even
| consider the fact that _maybe_ Toyota knows what they are
| doing?
|
| > _Toyota is still under-investing in EV. $1.3B is nothing._
|
| This is one factory.
| brandonagr2 wrote:
| What about Toyota's plans makes you think they will ever
| catch up to everyone else with EVs?
| Retric wrote:
| They don't need to innovate just execute and Toyota is all
| about execution. Build a car people want and let sales
| drive future investments.
| TheCleric wrote:
| Yeah I wouldn't bet against Toyota in a game of catch up.
| They've proven over and over that their real strength is
| in doing what other companies have proven out and doing
| it better and more efficiently.
| belltaco wrote:
| Execution like the wheels falling off their flagship all-
| ev car? After they've been making cars for 85+ years.
|
| https://www.carsales.com.au/editorial/details/wheels-
| falling...
|
| https://www.motortrend.com/news/toyotas-fix-
| bz4x-disconnecti...
|
| That doesn't get the headlines and attenion that a icon
| enlargement software update on Tesla does on HN.
| throwup238 wrote:
| _Teslas Have a Minor Issue Where the Wheels Fly Off While
| Driving, Documents Show_ - https://futurism.com/tesla-
| flaws-failures-blame-drivers
|
| It's really easy to cherry pick problems when someone
| makes millions of cars every year.
| belltaco wrote:
| Toyota was forced to recall all their BZX cars for that
| issue, whereas the scale of the problem you linked
| appears to be much lower across Tesla's models.
| throwup238 wrote:
| "All their BZX cars" = less than 5,500 cars _total_. It
| wasn 't just a completely new car model, it was the first
| one built on Toyota's e-TNGA modular EV platform. The
| factory line had just barely gotten off the ground.
|
| Toyta sold ten million cars that year so scale wise that
| doesn't even qualify as a rounding error. The Teslas
| suspension problems that caused some wheels to fly off
| effected tens of thousands.
| enragedcacti wrote:
| It was a voluntary recall on an extremely low production
| vehicle (at least at the time), a total of 260 cars with
| a potential issue.
|
| Compare that to the tens of thousands of ACTUAL INCIDENTS
| identified by Reuters through Tesla internal documents
| and Tesla's refusal to even cover the repairs, let alone
| proactively recall all potentially affected vehicles.
| Much of what was covered by Reuter's occurred AFTER China
| forced a recall for the exact same issues.
|
| https://pressroom.toyota.com/toyota-is-conducting-a-
| safety-r...
|
| https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-
| report/tesla-mu...
| vardump wrote:
| Wasn't that about one incident, where the driver was in a
| traffic accident before the wheel fell off?
|
| Wheels are actually designed to fall off in an accident.
| KptMarchewa wrote:
| I think Toyota feels comfortable being a follower in that
| case and eventually use a large number of suppliers for the
| basic things that Tesla as a first mover has or wants to
| develop themselves.
| explaininjs wrote:
| The fact that they already sell the most popular electric
| vehicle in the US and Japan, and have done so since they
| launched the very beginning of electric vehicles, over 25
| years ago? (Pruis)
| luuurker wrote:
| Hybrid. I'm nitpicking, but current full electric Toyota
| cars are not that good or popular.
| itsoktocry wrote:
| Electric cars are not that popular, period.
|
| Hybrids _may_ turn out to be a more popular option.
| quonn wrote:
| Hybrids have basically all the possible parts that can
| break.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| But Toyota's hybrids have a very good reputation
| regarding longevity and low cost of ownership.
| explaininjs wrote:
| Not really, the transmission can be made much simpler and
| more robust.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| But the entire selling point of Toyota to most people is
| that it WONT break, at least for 150k miles.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| > Electric cars are not that popular, period.
|
| That is a matter of opinion. As a brand new technology, I
| think a market share approaching 10% is _incredible_.
| Only fans thought this was possible even 5 years ago.
| luuurker wrote:
| What I meant is that Toyota electric cars are not popular
| inside the electric category. From range to charging
| speeds, they're behind other brands.
| explaininjs wrote:
| Ha, I read that as Tesla and it's still true. Almost like
| there's more to a car than range and charing speed.
| luuurker wrote:
| Yes, there's more to a car than range and charging
| speeds, but that doesn't change the fact that Tesla makes
| some of the best selling EVs and that Toyota doesn't.
|
| Even if you care more about build quality and comfort,
| there are cars from VW, Audi, Hyundai, Mercedes, etc,
| that are better than, say, the Toyota bZ4X while having
| better range and charging. Toyota simply doesn't make the
| best pure electric cars.
| kjksf wrote:
| Ignoring that Prius is a hybrid and not an EV:
|
| Toyota sold 30k in 2023, the lowest number ever.
|
| Tesla sold 400k of Model Y and 210k of Model 3 and 31k of
| Model X in 2024.
|
| So Model Y outsold Prius by 13x in US in 2023.
|
| ---
|
| https://carfigures.com/us-market-brand/toyota/prius-
| family
|
| https://cleantechnica.com/2024/01/29/tesla-model-ys-huge-
| gro...
| josefresco wrote:
| Look at the insanely huge sales of the RAV4 hybrid.
| Americans don't buy small cars, we buy SUV/CUVs and
| Toyota is the king.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| Didn't the Model Y outsell the RAV4 in 2023? I guess
| there are estimates that go both ways on that, but nobody
| really disputes that the RAV4 and Model Y are neck-and-
| neck. Would be nice if Tesla released actual numbers.
| josefresco wrote:
| Doesn't look like it.
|
| 4. Toyota RAV4 (434,943 units sold)
|
| 5. Tesla Model Y (385,900 units sold, estimated)
|
| https://www.caranddriver.com/news/g43553191/bestselling-
| cars...
|
| This source says the Model Y sold 403,897 (still behind
| the RAV4) https://www.visualcapitalist.com/best-selling-
| vehicles-in-am...
|
| This source says Model Y sales were 394,497:
| https://www.cnbc.com/2024/01/06/top-10-best-selling-cars-
| in-...
| rootusrootus wrote:
| And this source says Model Y was #2 and RAV4 #3.
|
| https://wolfstreet.com/2023/12/07/tesla-model-y-is-2-us-
| best...
|
| My point stands, Model Y sales are matching RAV4 sales,
| for all practical purposes. And it happened in the space
| of a couple years. Toyota sells a lot of cars, but
| they're not the undisputed king of the hill.
|
| Also, not all RAV4s are hybrids. Model Y definitely
| outsold RAV4 hybrids. Though hybrids aren't any kind of
| EV (unless they are plug-in), so that's moot.
| explaininjs wrote:
| Why are we restricting ourselves to Rav4's? Toyota sells
| well over 2 million EV's per year, far more than all
| Teslas.
|
| And yes, HEV's are EV's the same way BEV's are.
|
| https://www.statista.com/statistics/1181404/alternative-
| sale...
| coryrc wrote:
| The vast majority of Toyota hybrids cannot be powered by
| electricity from the grid. I'd say that's a significant
| difference.
| dylan604 wrote:
| why do these have to be estimated? I get that Tesla might
| not be releasing the numbers, but these cars have to be
| registered, right? The registration numbers seems like it
| should more accurate as actual owners.
| antisthenes wrote:
| Toyota has probably shipped more battery capacity in hybrid
| cars than most EV manufacturers to date.
|
| They don't need to catch up to anything.
| mensetmanusman wrote:
| 5 million prius * 14 kWhr 5 million tesla * 50 kWhr
|
| This is probably true, hybrids may win in the US market
| in the short term until they are outlawed?
| kevin_thibedeau wrote:
| They'll never be outlawed. There are too many use cases
| for 300+ mile trips in remote areas where recharging
| isn't possible or less remote areas where it isn't
| practical.
| riku_iki wrote:
| There are laws in effect already:
| https://www.gov.ca.gov/2020/09/23/governor-newsom-
| announces-...
| katbyte wrote:
| If it's anything like Canada it still allows for hybrid.
| Banning everything but BEV will never happen because Bev
| will never work for a small subset of users
| petre wrote:
| > until they are outlawed?
|
| In the US? When hell freezes over. In the Nederlands?
| Probably in 5-6 years.
| josefresco wrote:
| They're still killing it with hybrids and the rest of the
| industry, having realized that "all electric" is a little
| too early, is scrambling.
|
| The RAV4 is the top selling "SUV" in America(1) and it
| looks like close to 50% of those are the hybrid model.
|
| 1.
| https://www.caranddriver.com/news/g43553191/bestselling-
| cars...
|
| In 2022 it was 48%:
| https://evstatistics.com/2022/07/48-of-1h-2022-toyota-
| rav4-s...
| stetrain wrote:
| If Toyota shipped the same annual battery capacity as
| Tesla then they could sell 100% of their vehicles as
| hybrid or plug-in hybrid instead of 30%.
| stetrain wrote:
| This might be true cumulatively but certainly isn't true
| on an annual basis anymore.
|
| If Toyota were shipping the same battery capacity as
| Tesla they could make every car they sell globally a
| hybrid or plug-in hybrid and they are at about 30% of
| that.
| woobar wrote:
| You are assuming that 100% of Toyota customers want to
| buy EV vehicles.
| stetrain wrote:
| I wasn't, but who wouldn't want a hybrid?
| itsoktocry wrote:
| > _What about Toyota 's plans makes you think they will
| ever catch up to everyone else with EVs?_
|
| Their history of engineering and execution.
|
| What makes you think think they can't? EV proponents like
| to argue that the simplicity is what makes EVs so great,
| but at the same time making arguments like "no one can
| catch up".
|
| Believe it or not, it's not a certainty that EVs are going
| to be the solution, rather than just an improvement on our
| way to something else.
| quonn wrote:
| What else?
| mjamesaustin wrote:
| What makes me think they can't catch up is watching them
| spend dramatically less than their competition on the
| needed infrastructure when they are already very far
| behind.
|
| To catch up from behind, you need to do more than your
| competition.
| dylan604 wrote:
| When someone else has already spent money on the hard
| part of being first, those that follow do not need to
| spend the same amount of money repeating the same
| mistakes.
| mikeyouse wrote:
| This is an article about a single factory - Toyota spends
| upwards of $30 billion a year in CapEx -- Tesla spends
| under $10 billion per year.
|
| Toyota's battery complex in North Carolina is a greater
| spend than the entire annual budget from Tesla and will
| have about the same output as Tesla's "gigafactory". The
| $1.3 billion in Kentucky is in addition to that.. it's a
| mistake to think they're not investing heavily.
|
| https://www.just-auto.com/news/toyota-to-double-
| investment-i...
| tenpies wrote:
| Correct. Toyota's bet is simple: what makes rational
| economic, environmental, and good-policy sense for most
| locales is not an EV. It's a hybrid.
|
| And it's a bet that's working well so far:
| https://fortune.com/asia/2023/12/28/toyota-hybrid-cars-
| sales...
| pie420 wrote:
| yet they refuse to build hybrids in large numbers. RAV4
| primes and Prius primes are insanely difficult to get at
| or near MSRP. Toyota is saying that Hybrids make the most
| sense, but still use hybrid as an upsell for a higher
| trim, and thus only makes a fraction of their cars as
| hybrids. If >50% of their vehicles were hybrids, i'd be
| ecstatic and would agree with them, but currently it's
| just whataboutism and misdirection
| carabiner wrote:
| Easy to catch up when EV market is shrinking. Toyota is
| right, gas hybrids are the future. Awesome range, you don't
| have to own a home to charge one, no problems in cold
| weather.
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| The EV market was 30% larger in 2023 than 2022.
| carabiner wrote:
| Lagging indicator. Hertz is dumping their Teslas and
| canceled their purchase of 65k Polestars.
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| If you want to cherry-pick random anecdotes I'll counter
| with multi-year waitlists for Hyundai EV9 despite being
| expensive and ineligible for the $7500 rebate.
| FirmwareBurner wrote:
| _> Hyundai EV9 despite not being expensive_
|
| It starts at EUR70k. In what world is this not expensive?
| Maybe in Bay Area Fang wages.
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| Sorry, typo. It being very expensive makes the wait-lists
| surprising. If it wasn't expensive wait-lists wouldn't be
| surprising.
| FirmwareBurner wrote:
| _> It being very expensive makes the wait-lists
| surprising. _
|
| Does it? Ferraris, Zondas and Koenigseggs also have big
| waiting lists.
|
| Expensive things to the well off sell easier than average
| products to the ever shrinking middle class.
| justin66 wrote:
| Wait lists for a manufacturer are somewhat interesting.
| It's interesting that Tesla and Toyota both sell cars
| faster than they make them, and can get away with making
| new car buyers wait for months.
|
| Wait lists for a single model? I mean, maybe Hyundai just
| aren't making a lot of EV9s.
| tempestn wrote:
| The thing about hybrids is that while you get the
| benefits of a gas engine (not needing to charge), you
| also get most of the combined drawbacks of ICE cars and
| EVs. You still need to go to the gas station, change the
| oil, maintain the belts and filters, etc. If you're
| mostly driving in EV mode, stale gas could even be an
| issue (though that's probably not a huge concern for
| most). But you've also still got electric motors and
| battery that could fail, although admittedly the battery
| is a lot cheaper.
|
| IMO hybrids could have a lot of life as a stopgap, but
| full EVs are pretty clearly where things are going. We've
| got chargers being installed (Tesla 4th Gen) that can
| charge at 600kW. Cars can't handle that yet, but the
| current 800V platforms are getting closer. Once you can
| get the better part of a full charge in less than 10
| minutes, it's not really less convenient than stopping
| for gas on a trip. And as more people get EVs (and even
| PHEVs), more buildings will be equipped with charging.
| Even a regular 120V outlet is fine for most people for
| day to day overnight charging - especially if they can
| get a quick top-up to near full at a supercharger when
| needed.
|
| Summary: hybrids are great for a lot of people right now
| and in the near future. In the medium to far future, EVs
| are going to be superior in, I think, all relevant
| metrics^. (Even cost, as batteries will get cheaper,
| while the cost of added hybrid components will stay
| roughly flat.)
|
| ^Well, except weight and sound, specifically thinking of
| sports cars. I'd be a lot more excited about the new
| electrified Porsche 718 (Cayman/Boxster) platform if it
| were hybrid instead of full electric, for those reasons.
| Not super relevant for commuter cars though.
| ActorNightly wrote:
| I could walk in and buy Model Y any time I want. Not so
| with Rav 4 Prime.
|
| Plugin hybrids are the future.
| oohffyvfg wrote:
| tesla fans defending how easy it is to find a Tesla in
| stock is a new one. grand.
| tempestn wrote:
| I don't think that's the point they're trying to make.
| repler wrote:
| Test drive a RAV4 Prime.
|
| All it needs is more battery capacity, which apparently
| they are indeed investing in.
| ThinkBeat wrote:
| The electric car Toyota is selling now is doing quite well
| sales wise. (at least in Norway)
|
| They have a whole line of them "coming any day now".
|
| They have a lot of people who love the Toyota/Lexus brand.
| mbesto wrote:
| > I know people around these parts think that Tesla has
| uncovered some magical factory building ability, but can you
| even consider the fact that maybe Toyota knows what they are
| doing?
|
| Not a Tesla fanboy (I'm turning mine in for a Rivian), but
| the OP wasn't saying this, not sure how you got that
| conclusion. They are saying for a car company they are (1)
| way behind and (2) any investments they are making won't
| reach fruition for years, nor likely make a dent in the
| industry.
|
| Outside of MB and the Chinese EVs, the design of Tesla motors
| is far superior. Their build quality and finishing is awful
| however - something the traditional players do really well.
| itsoktocry wrote:
| _> not sure how you got that conclusion._
|
| The OP drew a direct comparison from what Tesla spent on a
| plant, to what Toyota is spending on a factory. How can you
| draw a different conclusion? What makes Tesla "right" and
| Toyota "wrong"?
|
| > _They are saying for a car company they are (1) way
| behind and (2) any investments they are making won 't reach
| fruition for years, nor likely make a dent in the
| industry._
|
| Way behind what? The RAV4 sold more units than the Model Y
| last year, and that's just one model. Again, people have
| this weird way of extrapolating what Tesla is doing in the
| EV market (dominating) to the overall car market (rounding
| error).
| gergi137 wrote:
| Nope, the Model Y was the best selling vehicle in 2023,
| regardless of powertrain.
|
| https://insideevs.com/news/706169/tesla-model-y-best-
| selling...
| fragmede wrote:
| car, not vehicle. The best selling vehicle in the US in
| 2023 by a long shot is the Ford F-series truck.
|
| Car and Driver also says the Rav4 outside the Model Y,
| fwiw.
|
| https://www.caranddriver.com/news/g43553191/bestselling-
| cars...
| _aavaa_ wrote:
| Your article doesn't contradict their argument. Their
| link is for worldwide sales, yours is US only.
|
| Further, that top spot is not for a specific Ford truck,
| but for all F-series trucks put together. That's an
| apples to oranges comparison.
| fragmede wrote:
| it doesn't. it just depends on how you slice the pie to
| see what you want to see.
| kbos87 wrote:
| Yeah, but there are standard ways to slice the pie. An
| equivalent approach would be comparing multiple Ford
| vehicles to Tesla's entire lineup. They are about as
| similar to one another as Ford's trucks are.
| pawptart wrote:
| As someone who lives a few miles from Georgetown, KY, it's
| important to note that this factory already exists and sounds
| like they are (partially) re-tooling it to begin EV production.
| So that might explain the dollar figure.
| jmoak3 wrote:
| Louisville checking in, spent a lot of time in Georgetown and
| can confirm this is likely just more work on the Camry plant.
|
| Toyota has been good to the area.
|
| Off topic, but is there a popular tech meetup in the state?
| Moved back a year and some change ago and would love to get
| more involved.
| richiebful1 wrote:
| I'd be curious too. I'm in Powell County, so the "greater
| Lexington area". I'm seeing these in Lex:
|
| - PHP user group (https://www.meetup.com/kentucky-php-user-
| group/events/298973...)
|
| - Bluegrass Developers Guild (https://www.meetup.com/the-
| bluegrass-developers-guild/events...)
|
| Also, being an early employee at a startup, I've been
| attending the rare Startup Lexington event I can make it
| to.
|
| Feel free to contact my email (in profile) if you want to
| connect
| daveguy wrote:
| I'm not sure what could justify comparing the announcement of a
| single investment to _upgrade_ a plant to the capex of an
| entire auto company.
|
| Do you really think this $1.3B is Toyota's entire capex in EV?
| apapapa wrote:
| In addition to that, I wouldn't be surprised if they got 100
| percent of that amount from the government in one way or
| another
| anonu wrote:
| Similarly, Hyundai building $8bn battery plant outside Savannah,
| Georgia:
|
| https://apnews.com/article/hyundai-georgia-electric-vehicle-...
| downrightmike wrote:
| Its because the south is fairly young and impoverished, so
| cheaper to mfg there. Down vote, but that's the reason.
| frogpelt wrote:
| Have you ever been to the south? The down votes are because
| your position is asinine.
|
| It's more likely that southern states are willing to throw
| huge incentive packages to these manufacturers. Probably not
| so much on the coasts or the northern states.
|
| Also, unions are less common in the south; those states tend
| to be right-to-work states.
|
| Finally, you used the word "impoverished", which is
| ridiculous. But wages are lower in the south so that is
| probably another reason.
| anonu wrote:
| Savannah and Brunswick are huge car export ports because many
| manufacturing facilities are spread out between South
| Carolina and Georgia: Volvo, Mercedes, BMW, Honda, KIA to
| name a few. These ports are also the largest on the Eastern
| seaboard of the US. So access to shipping is probably one of
| the main reasons. Also major demographic shifts to the
| Southeastern part of the US help supply the labor pool.
|
| Georgia and South Carolina tend to be the poorest states. The
| Poverty rate is around 14.5% for both. Compare that to
| California where the poverty rate is 12.5%. Though the
| poverty rate is lower, California has more people in poverty
| than Georgia and South Carolina combined. Anyway, using the
| word "impoverished" is grossly misleading.
| belltaco wrote:
| At least Hyundai hasn't been faking emissions tests like
| Toyota.
|
| https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/commit...
|
| Not to mention spending a lot on lobbying against clean air
| regulations aroun the world
| https://thedriven.io/2023/05/11/toyota-under-fire-for-anti-c...
| consumer451 wrote:
| As someone who used to be a stalwart Toyota fan, their
| behaviour recently is not my favorite.
| xyst wrote:
| On the bright side, some manufacturing jobs brought state side.
| On the other hand, it's in KY. These multibillion dollar deals
| tend to land in states with the lowest cost of living, non-
| educated workforce, minimal enforcement/respect of environment
| (dump waste into rivers), and tend to be subsidized at the state
| and local levels.
|
| Apple opened up shop outside of Austin (ie, not Travis County)
| because of lower taxes and more incentives provided by other
| county. Multi Trillion dollar company by the way. Amazon has been
| opening up warehouses in the sticks, soaking up all of those
| incentives from those desperate small towns looking to giveaway
| the land for a couple of decades in exchange for short term gains
| (mayor/city council able to say, we brought X jobs to Y town!1).
| Yet another multibillion company taking advantage of the
| desperate.
|
| What do the people get in return? Getting the opportunity to work
| shit hours in a non-union job. Possibly back breaking work. No
| investment in their future. Just cogs in the wheel which are
| completely fungible (broke your back? File a claim with
| insurance. Fuck off. Deal with it. Not our problem. Then hire the
| next sucker to replace you. Rinse and repeat)
| Xirgil wrote:
| Yeah, those poor towns should just remain poor, definitely
| don't spend a billion dollars there, that would be terrible for
| them.
| 2devnull wrote:
| Agree that often politicians sell out their people and natural
| resources (the rights and endowment of future citizens) for
| short term gain. This is a natural consequence of politicians
| being inherently terrible people by and large.
| themaninthedark wrote:
| State environmental laws can be more restrictive than the
| Federal but not less, so if anyone is dumping into waterways
| the EPA can go after them.
|
| Don't know of many waterways that are solely in one state so
| the EPA automatically has jurisdiction as well.
|
| What is it that you are purposing? That companies don't go to
| states with low cost of living?
|
| The idea that "it's KY" is bigoted. They are people, just like
| anyone else. We don't tolerate it when others are dismissive of
| people based on their race and we should not be tolerant of the
| attitude based on where they live either.
| nebula8804 wrote:
| They should unionize. In fact UAW wants to unionize all
| automakers including Tesla and the ones in the south. They
| failed in the past but with the downward trajectory of
| population size, there is a great opportunity here.
|
| Now you might say they will just leave the US and manufacture
| elsewhere. Well thats where tariffs come in and the UAW is a
| core voting block so they will have to alter any plans to move
| to Mexico. Higher inflation will be the result but its probably
| worth it long term.
| mp05 wrote:
| > They should unionize
|
| No one at these Toyota facilities has an appetite for that.
| The benefits package and overall lifestyle for a TMMK worker
| is quite nice compared to the average person in the Lexington
| metro and the jobs are competitive.
|
| Perhaps ironically, when I was in school, the biggest issue
| was finding engineers that would accept the pay which was
| generally _lower_ than guys on the floor.
| nebula8804 wrote:
| Well just 20 mins ago we heard that the majority of people
| at the VW plant in Tennessee signed UAW cards. Now this
| wont guarantee a successful vote but it makes the
| leadership give an honest attempt so maybe times might be
| changing for the Toyota plants as well.
|
| [1]:https://thehill.com/policy/transportation/4454085-uaw-
| says-m...
| mp05 wrote:
| Volkswagen is not the same company as Toyota. For all we
| know, work conditions and benefits packages between the
| two organizations vary considerably.
| mp05 wrote:
| > non-educated workforce
|
| Sorry, but to be frank, you just don't know what you're talking
| about.
|
| I did a co-op at TMMK in Georgetown, KY many moons ago and it
| was a short drive from Lexington where I was studying for my
| mech engineering degree at UK. It is a massive university with
| a solid engineering school, for the uninitiated. The metro also
| has an excellent network of technical colleges and during my
| various other stints over those years, I was always impressed
| with the quality of the workforce on the factory floors.
|
| As someone born in the coalfields of Appalachia, I'll admit
| that the ignorant hillbilly stereotype has some merit, but
| that's two hours of interstate driving east of where this is
| happening and the cultures have almost nothing in common. Hill
| people don't really leave the hills and Lexington is quite the
| "big city" for where I come from, full of hifalutin Whole Foods
| shoppers. I think the series "Justified" does a good job of
| describing this phenomenon.
|
| There is a lot more I could address about your thoughts on
| labor and poverty, but it's hard to move past your premise and
| I don't have time to write a treatise... but JD Vance did and
| it's pretty good.
| rpcope1 wrote:
| Have you ever actually been to the Lexington metro? It's not
| really any of that bullshit you just wrote.
| jonnycomputer wrote:
| More Biden policy winning back investment in America, is my take.
|
| Update:
|
| People who may not have been following closely what Biden has
| accomplished during his Presidency might have questions.
|
| In this case, the Inflation Reduction Act specifically has
| credits to encourage battery manufacture in the US.
|
| https://www.orrick.com/en/Insights/2022/11/Section-45X-of-th...
|
| More generally, the IRA and the Infrastructure Investment and
| Jobs Act, and the CHIPS act has encouraged investment in US
| manufacturing, which is surging.
|
| https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/industry/manufactur...
| thinkingtoilet wrote:
| I'm left of Bernie and voted for Biden but I tend to not like
| takes like this. Is there a specific policy that he championed
| that is responsible for this? To me, it's like when people
| cheer a 'record stock market' as an example of a president's
| abilities, but fail to mention every single modern president
| has had a record stock market at some point in their term.
| jonnycomputer wrote:
| Yeah, the Inflation Reduction Act.
|
| https://www.orrick.com/en/Insights/2022/11/Section-45X-of-
| th...
|
| More generally, the IRA and the Infrastructure Investment and
| Jobs Act
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrastructure_Investment_and_.
| ..
|
| https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/industry/manufactur.
| ..
|
| There's also the CHIPS act.
|
| By the way, anyone active in the green tech space knows that
| the IRA has been an absolute game-changer.
| thinkingtoilet wrote:
| Wonderful! Thanks.
| mywittyname wrote:
| > Is there a specific policy that he championed that is
| responsible for this?
|
| This was something the President activity campaigned on
| (Build Back Better), pushed through Congress, and signed into
| law as The Inflation Reduction Act.
|
| While it did little to reduce inflation (outside of
| medicine), it was a massive win for people who wanted more
| investment in clean power generation, more funds for the ACA,
| lower drug prices, and higher taxes on certain corporate
| entities.
| vlangber wrote:
| Several battery factories that were planned in Norway have
| scaled down their plans or have been cancelled due to the
| much better incentives in the IRA.
| dmix wrote:
| US domestic manufacturing became a major theme in the last two
| prior US elections.
|
| If you look at growth charts in US factory capital it started
| spiking just before the signing of CHIPS act which was pitched
| to congress in 2019, which was a bipartisan effort seeded from
| the Trump admin.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CHIPS_and_Science_Act
|
| And the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act which Biden
| admin pitched to congress, which also got pretty smooth
| bipartisan support:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrastructure_Investment_and_...
|
| But it's success will be defined on how successful the
| factories are, not just how many billions/trillions of free $$
| the US gov gives to megacorps to prop up these projects. We've
| seen many, many gov-incentivized factory announcements that
| went no where. Or worse wasted a ton of time & money of local
| govs + small town employees. The Obama admin had a few really
| bad examples of this.
| jonnycomputer wrote:
| Yes, but the CHIPS act was also signed by Biden. I think we
| can fairly credit him for seeing it through. Trump talked a
| lot about bringing manufacturing back, but he did not have
| the self-discipline to actually see any of it through;
| legislatively, Trump is a master of self-sabotage.
|
| But it is true that the CHIP had bipartisan support, but the
| ones who supported it were not MAGA types, but people like
| McConnell.
| edgyquant wrote:
| This is just not true. Trumps tariffs have been one of the
| biggest motivators of reshoring, which started under him.
| Yes the chips act is also great, there is no need to
| pretend one guy was useless and the other did all of the
| work its bipartisan and the two presidents work in this
| arena has complimented each other.
| dmix wrote:
| Trump was the first president with no political, military,
| or even lawyer experience. And it showed, badly, when it
| came to congressional policy making.
|
| But he no doubt was a major reason domestic manufacturing
| shot to the top of Biden's election priorities, after it
| was a major sticking point that Trump fared far better with
| the working class vs Hillary.
|
| Even Michael Moore conceded back then that his messaging
| around rebuilding gutted industry was far better, so it's
| not surprising it was co-opted.
|
| Which is a good thing, what matters is listening to people
| and getting results at the end of the day.
| seadan83 wrote:
| > Or worse wasted a ton of time & money of local govs + small
| town employees. The Obama admin had a few really bad examples
| of this.
|
| Indeed. China had even more examples, but overall they found
| the winners and boosted them. The US instead defunded and now
| China produces 80% of all solar panels in the world. It's
| similar for VC firm, for example, they'll invest in 10
| companies and expect only a couple to be profitable.
|
| > If you look at growth charts in US factory capital it
| started spiking just before the signing of CHIPS act which
| was pitched to congress in 2019, which was a bipartisan
| effort seeded from the Trump admin.
|
| Do you have those charts available? I was initially going to
| give a commendation for pointing out the Trump's
| administration's role in the Chips act, but... the Chips act
| was passed in late 2022! "The bill was signed into law by
| President Joe Biden on August 9, 2022." [1]
|
| What's more, while the CHIPS act was initially bi-partisan,
| it passed in a relatively partisan vote: "Every senator in
| the Senate Democratic Caucus except for Bernie Sanders voted
| in favor of passing the CHIPS Act, and they were joined by
| seventeen Republican senators" [1]
|
| Bottom line, seems like this bill was presented to Senators*
| in 2019 and then took time to work its way through Congress.
| It does not seem the Trump admin had much to do with this (I
| would more says the CHIPS act was seeded from an initial
| bipartisan effort that originated in the Senate; there's no
| mention I see that the executive branch had anything to do
| with it in 2019; if anything, it seems that congress of 2019
| and whatever role the executive had at the time both _failed_
| to get the CHIPS act through; it was the next congress that
| got it done in 2022)
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CHIPS_and_Science_Act
|
| * I'm not entirely sure if 'presented' to senators means
| there was an executive branch role. My reading of the wiki
| article is that it sounds like the original 2019 bill
| originated in the Senate. I just don't see anything that
| mentions the executive's role in 2019 or 2020.
| dmix wrote:
| You can find the growth charts here:
| https://home.treasury.gov/news/featured-stories/unpacking-
| th...
|
| but these charts/analysis come from the White House so they
| are going to be a bit biased (how much is proposed vs real,
| etc).
|
| I don't really see the value in debating the details of the
| policies as it's pretty clear Trump made rebuilding
| industry his #1 message, which was later co-opted by Biden
| in the 2nd election. Trump was just an utter failure at
| working with (a very hostile) congress and COVID destroying
| factory construction didn't help private industry either,
| or public spending priorities.
|
| I also take issue with the idea China's success in
| manufacturing was a result of the gov choosing winners = a
| good thing. Gov as a giant VC sounds like a horrible idea,
| here in Canada they tried that in tech and it was an
| embarrassment. China's mass urbanization, huge cheap labour
| base, a culture of hard work, and the West happily
| destroying their own industry...it's easy to 'pick' winners
| in a flush market.
|
| Rebuilding a dead one is different story.
| seadan83 wrote:
| Those charts seem to indicate a spike after the CHIPS act
| was passed, rather than when it was proposed by the two
| bipartisan US senators in 2019.
|
| > I don't really see the value in debating the details of
| the policies
|
| > Trump made rebuilding industry his #1 message
|
| Not debating policy. I don't see the evidence that Trump
| is linked to the CHIPS act. While that might be his
| message (as you claim), the evidence of him doing
| anything for that relative to the CHIPS act is lacking.
| The attribution beyond two bipartisan senators proposing
| the CHIPS act in 2019 is so far without evidence.
| Further, when the CHIPS act did pass, it was despite
| Republican opposition. In essence, there doesn't seem to
| be any evidence Trump had anything to do with the CHIPS
| act other than holding office while it failed to go
| anywhere in congress.
|
| > I also take issue with the idea China's success in
| manufacturing was a result of the gov choosing winners =
| a good thing.
|
| My claim is that without Chinese government support,
| China would not be producing 80% of today's solar panels.
| According to 'ucigcc', the Chinese government played a
| big role in creating a domestic market (demand) for solar
| panels. [1] Further: "Credit lines to expand
| manufacturing capacity were brokered and backed by local
| governments and state-owned firms, even in the years
| after the global financial crisis when the collapse
| particularly of European markets led to overcapacity in
| global solar markets. " [1]
|
| Taking stock from [1], the Chinese government induced
| demand for solar panels (subsidized them), and supported
| the industries producing the solar panels.
|
| From the same reference: "In 2015 the central government
| launched a so-called Top Runner program. Top Runner
| projects injected incentives to deploy advanced solar PV
| technologies and retire the production of dated
| technologies. Module cost continued to fall because of
| these incentives, while module efficiency continued to
| increase. Particularly installations of high-efficiency
| panels in Western China were able to achieve grid parity
| because of those incentive changes, yet broader issues,
| including the perpetual underfunding of the renewable
| energy fund, the low profitability of domestic
| manufacturers, overcapacity, and broader trade tensions
| remained unresolved."
|
| The reference does not 100% back my claim, but I would
| say strongly supports it. It's hard to see the Chinese
| solar industry being the same without all of the
| government support.
|
| > Gov as a giant VC sounds like a horrible idea
|
| On its face, sure. Though, when there is a war or during
| the pandemic this cames into play. That is an extreme
| example, there are less extreme examples. In these
| extreme examples, the government shifts market forces by
| implementing price caps and forcing production.
| Governments do similar in less heavy handed ways all the
| time.
|
| Reference [2] supports this notion, there is a history of
| governments selecting strategic industries, supporting
| them, creating demand for that industry - and then once
| seeded the industry has legs to run on its own. To do
| this, Governments can create entire markets, which in
| turn creates enough demand for suppliers to come online.
|
| From [2]: "The emerging U.S. advanced battery industry
| represents a bold experiment by the federal government in
| direct financial support of private companies to
| establish a domestic manufacturing industry."
|
| "The photovoltaic industry is an example of a U.S. high-
| tech sector that has lost global share but has a solid
| opportunity to re-emerge as a leader with the right mix
| of federal and state policy support. In the case of solar
| power, a deciding factor will be whether the United
| States will become a big enough market to support a
| large-scale, globally competitive manufacturing industry.
| Federal and state incentives will be essential for the
| next few years, until the cost of solar energy can
| compete against electricity generated from fossil fuels
| without subsidies. Another question is whether U.S.
| companies that focus on products incorporating promising
| new technologies will be able to survive surging imports
| of low-cost photovoltaic cells and modules based on
| mature technologies long enough to attain economies of
| scale. "
|
| "This turn of fortunes is primarily due to strategic
| moves and investments in new technologies by U.S.
| semiconductor manufacturers. Yet, their success also
| rests on the important contributions of U.S. policy that
| was driven by an engaged industry. There were two
| additional interrelated elements to the U.S. success:10
| The research consortium SEMATECH, a $200 million-a-year
| research effort co-funded by the federal government and
| most large American chip companies, accelerated
| productivity and innovation in semiconductor
| manufacturing based on a common technology roadmap and
| enabled a rapid decline in prices.11 Persistent trade
| negotiations and enforcement of previous agreements won
| commitments from Japan to open its market to U.S.
| semiconductors and curtail dumping in any world market.12
| This was deemed essential to prevent the United States
| from becoming a high-priced island in a sea of
| underpriced semiconductors. Had that occurred, it would
| have severely disadvantaged downstream American
| electronics equipment producers compared with competitors
| producing abroad utilizing lower-priced dumped chips."
|
| "The decline and resurgence of the U.S. semiconductor
| industry offers many useful lessons for policymakers and
| industrialists grappling with how to bolster other
| American high-technology sectors facing intense
| international competitive pressure. It shows that erosion
| of U.S. leadership in manufacturing is not irreversible
| as long as both industry and government are committed to
| cooperative action, both on trade policy and in well-
| designed research programs that will lead to innovation"
|
| What are some examples of this? Tax-credits is a big one.
| Think of Tesla, sales were boosted because there was an
| EV tax-credit. Further, there is actually no Tesla
| without the US department of Energy. "In January 2010,
| the Department of Energy issued a $465 million loan to
| Tesla Motors to produce specially designed, all-electric
| plug-in vehicles" [3] Without that loan, Tesla would have
| been toast.
|
| > China's mass urbanization, huge cheap labour base, a
| culture of hard work, and the West happily destroying
| their own industry...it's easy to 'pick' winners in a
| flush market.
|
| While that might all be true - when China was building
| its solar panel industry - the market was not flush. To
| your point, the Solyndra example and the subsequent
| divestment are good examples of the US destroying its
| solar industry. The lack of subsidies for solar panel
| meant demand and production remained anemic, meanwhile
| there were strong subsidies given directly to oil
| companies. The USG effectively cut-off the tap before
| demand picked up, why would then any US company produce
| very expensive solar panels with nobody really to buy
| them? Now that the price has come down, China just
| dominates, it was their innovation and supports that
| created the conditions for that to happen.
|
| > I also take issue with the idea China's success in
| manufacturing
|
| I am being specific to the solar industry. A broader
| generalization to all of manufacturing would need its own
| evidence. Yet, there are broad examples of industries
| that got their roots from government support. The solar
| example is very salient because it was so notable with
| Solyndra and then the US not strongly supporting
| renewables, and then lost out big on that industry.
|
| [1] https://ucigcc.org/blog/how-solar-developed-from-the-
| bottom-...
|
| [2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK100307/#
|
| [3] https://www.energy.gov/lpo/tesla
| bhpm wrote:
| I am curious about what vehicles these will be for. When Toyota
| says "EVs" they often mean hybrids. The article makes this
| distinction, but Toyota didn't in any statements.
| mywittyname wrote:
| The e-TNGA platform that underpins the BZ4x was supposed to
| have several more products built on it, including a larger SUV.
| This vehicle could be that SUV, or it could be one of the first
| products built on the platform that will replace the e-TNGA.
|
| The Georgetown plant currently produces Camry and Rav4.
| jsight wrote:
| In the US, some PHEVs with relatively small batteries can
| qualify for the full $7,500 tax credit.
|
| You might be on to something there. It would certainly explain
| the size of the investment. A $1.3B plant might not build a lot
| of EVs, but it could build quite a few PHEVs.
| enragedcacti wrote:
| Specifically it's 7kWh minimum in addition to all of the
| other sourcing and assembly requirements. In practice there
| haven't been any PHEVs with less, the smallest PHEV battery
| so far in the US is 8kWh in a Ferrari. It'll be interesting
| to see if more small battery PHEVs come out trying to target
| HEV price points with the tax credit. It would still be a
| huge jump up from standard hybrids which as far as I'm aware
| are rarely more than 1.5kWh.
|
| kWh makes sense if your goal is to stimulate US battery
| production but I really wish there were an all-electric range
| requirement, A hypothetical 6.8kWh Prius Prime would get more
| range that the 21kWh Wrangler 4xe.
|
| https://www.irs.gov/credits-deductions/credits-for-new-
| clean...
| jsight wrote:
| Yeah, and the 7kwh should cost ~$1k. So if the manufacturer
| wants to maximize the number of $7,500 rebates, PHEV is the
| way to go. 11 PHEVs == one 300 mile compact crossover.
|
| They don't even have to be good PHEVs. I agree that there
| should have been a range requirement.
| mdorazio wrote:
| The Kentucky plant will produce the upcoming 3-row BEV called
| bZ5X. Additional BEVs have been announced for 2026 and will
| likely share battery components from Kentucky and the new
| battery factory being built in North Carolina.
| the_third_wave wrote:
| An interesting contrast showed up in my RSS feed regarding this
| subject:
|
| First this HN post: _Toyota to invest $1.3B in Kentucky factory
| to build battery packs and new EV_
|
| A few lines below that: _Toyota Refused To Hop On The Electric
| Vehicle Bandwagon, And It Paid Off Big Time_ [1]
|
| We'll see where the chips fall but thus far it seems Tesla is one
| of the few western companies which manages to profitably produce
| and sell consumer EVs. I suspect Chinese companies like BYD run
| at a profit as well but it is hard to get access to reliable
| data. Volkswagen seems to be aiming for 'profit parity for EVs'
| in 2025 but they seem to have a long way to go [2].
|
| [1] https://dailycaller.com/2024/02/07/toyota-2023-fiscal-
| year-3...
|
| [2] https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-
| transportation/volksw...
| costanzaDynasty wrote:
| Globalization is rolling back. It's about to be boom times in
| America as long as the politicians from all parties can actually
| move from one troth to another and actually pass bills.
| trgn wrote:
| Seems to be almost daily news stories about huge capital
| investment in manufacturing in the US, a couple billion here, a
| couple billion there. Was I just blind to these 5-10 years ago?
| smileysteve wrote:
| Targeted subsidies, the most recent bill to the IRA may be
| Cash For Clunkers.
| flextheruler wrote:
| Inflation reduction act
| babypuncher wrote:
| No, it's new as of the last ~2 years.
| Gibbon1 wrote:
| Geopolitics: China's sudden shift to authoritarianism under
| the new emperor has everyone fleeing for the exits as the US
| and Europe abandon the project to bring China into the club.
|
| Economics, Neoliberalism is dead. The pandemic killed it.
| Policy makers well understand the economy can tolerate a lot
| of disruption.
|
| Politics: Dispossessed voters turning to fascism has
| sharpened politicians and sane business leaders minds.
|
| Global Warning and new Tech: Solar, wind, batteries, and the
| need to faze out fossil fuels creates risks and
| opportunities. Risks will be born by those that try business
| as usual.
|
| Increased automation: Low skilled dirt cheap labor is less
| important than it was 20-30 years ago. That changes the
| balance point between low cost offshored labor and the pain
| in the ass that offshoring is.
| trgn wrote:
| > Policy makers well understand the economy can tolerate a
| lot of disruption
|
| If I understand you correctly, this is my reading of the
| pandemic as well. We suddenly all realized there is a _ton_
| of slack in the system. On the individual level, but as
| well as societal.
| Gibbon1 wrote:
| Yeah exactly. Instead of the economy being a delicately
| balanced machine that you don't dare touch. It turned out
| you can push it really hard and it'll hold together. At
| that point the idea that if you change industrial
| policies the whole thing will collapse and it'll be your
| fault went out the window. Policy makers have vastly more
| confidence in 2024 than they did in 2019.
| nebula8804 wrote:
| Not convinced: Not enough workers with the appropriate
| expertise to outmatch China and there is no appetite to import
| more people from either side of the aisle (despite what you
| might hear in the news).
|
| >But people might be more happy walking, biking, etc.
|
| No scenario where division does not increase especially after
| this upcoming election.
| charles_f wrote:
| To be fair Toyota has had local factories for the longest time
| as part of their JIT manufacturing philosophy.
| topspin wrote:
| These local factories exist due to automotive manufacturing
| "domestic content" laws, as opposed to whatever JIT
| manufacturing philosophy Toyota might have. Pushed by the UAW
| and signed by Reagan in the 1980's, the US has many foreign
| car factories in the US as a direct result.
| pavon wrote:
| Cars, and EVs in particular have strong protectionist laws in
| the US that make it more expensive to import vehicles than to
| build them locally. There are a few other sectors like
| semiconductor fabs where we have started to introduce
| protectionist policies but I haven't seen any movement to
| expand those types of policies to most other manufacturing
| sectors.
| Rebelgecko wrote:
| Is this to make the solid state batteries that Toyota has been
| hyping up for a decade?
| kyevevevev wrote:
| lol #41. Kentucky [0] Percentage of registered vehicles that are
| electric: 0.06% Total registered electric vehicles: 2,650 (#33
| overall) Number of statewide charging stations: 222 (#37 overall)
| Number of charging ports per 100 EVs: 19.9 (#21 overall)
|
| [0]https://www _ copilotsearch _ com/posts/states-with-the-most-
| electric-vehicles/
| rootusrootus wrote:
| #44 in income. That's the real reason to put a factory there.
| And it's a good reason why EV adoption would be low there as
| well.
| oflannabhra wrote:
| TMMK (Toyota Motor Manufacturing Kentucky) has an $8B plant in
| Kentucky, the largest Toyota manufacturing facility in the
| world. This plant is where all Camry models are manufactured,
| which is the best-selling car in the United States.
| Additionally, all Rav4 Hybrid models are manufactured there,
| including all the motors (not just assembly).
|
| Seems like a smart place to build your own batteries to me.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| >> Environmental groups have long criticized Toyota for being
| slow to move toward fully electric vehicles, instead clinging to
| gas-electric hybrid technology.
|
| When you run a company as large and old as Toyota, you always
| hedge your bets. There are some other options to battery-powered
| electric vehicles (hydrogen IC). They are currently not as mature
| but anyone running something as big as Toyota needs to hedge
| against that sort of outlier tech. If Toyota abandoned IC, got
| rid of its IC production lines, they would suffer hugely if
| hydrogen IC one out as the green tech. All the major car
| companies do such things. That's why they have survived as long
| as they have.
|
| Would Tesla survive if a new hydrogen storage killed the market
| for battery-powered cars? Toyota has seen and survived a few such
| revolutions.
| aaronbrethorst wrote:
| Bet hedging would've meant introducing the BZ4X years ago.
| Instead, there were 8 years between when Toyota announced their
| first hydrogen car and their first electric vehicle. This if an
| example of simply betting wrong.
| oohffyvfg wrote:
| hydrogen was the right bet for trucks and buses. they are
| planning hide infrastructure in Asia.
|
| the world is not only southern California and Sweden.
| dalyons wrote:
| I'm willing to bet hydrogen was the wrong bet for busses
| too, esp in Asia given the explosion of BEV tech and
| production coming out of china.
| DanielSantos wrote:
| Exactly. Toyota's CEO also explained a few weeks ago that they
| need to build cars for the whole world. Many countries are not
| ready yet with infrastructure for electric cars.
|
| I would also add since insurance companies don't want to insure
| the transportation of batteries in container ships, it makes it
| difficult for Toyota to produce electric cars in all regions,
| it would mean they would always need to have a battery factory
| nearby.
| https://toyotatimes.jp/en/toyota_news/1055_1.html#anchorTitl...
| scythe wrote:
| Hydrogen as a sole technology is going to keep eating that 2-3x
| energy penalty versus batteries regardless of storage tech.
| Hydrogen IC has even worse efficiency than FC. The only
| exception would be if hydrogen mining yields world-changing
| amounts of the stuff.
|
| As a hybrid technology, it has a case. If you run 80% of the
| time on battery and 20% of the time on hydrogen at 50% RTE, you
| burn 120% of the fuel. But if you weigh 30% less, you could end
| up saving energy. The up to 60% efficiency of the fuel cell is
| losing energy as heat, and people like to run the heater, so
| some of that energy isn't lost in appropriate climates. And of
| course, refueling is faster for road trips. The best system
| weight is probably for the experimental direct-ammonia alkaline
| membrane fuel cells, assuming it's possible to stabilize them,
| because ammonia fuel systems (about 100 psi) are much simpler
| than hydrogen systems (about 10000 psi!). So there's a little
| room left for the hydrogen fans. But it's fundamentally a
| battery-powered car _most_ of the time.
| hintymad wrote:
| I was wondering how the manufacturers address the potential
| culture conflicts. Obama's documentary American Factory revealed
| two notable contentions. One is that American workers think that
| the management is too tough on them while the management think
| that the workers are too unreasonable. The other is that Chinese
| workers are 30% (or 2X?) more efficient than American workers. I
| have no judgement on the first contention, but the second worries
| me. American labors were known to be the best in the world many
| years ago, and a strong argument against offshoring manufacturing
| was that Chinese workers were much worse than Americans. Yet the
| tide has turned.
| thedaly wrote:
| > The other is that Chinese workers are 30% (or 2X?) more
| efficient than American workers.
|
| What metrics is this based on?
| CamperBob2 wrote:
| The "two countries with very different labor laws" metric, I
| imagine.
| ericmay wrote:
| I don't really follow what you're trying to say with your last
| sentence and I'd be skeptical of a claim that Chinese workers
| are 30% more efficient, but Toyota, Honda, Nissan, and others
| have maintained US manufacturing facilities for decades and
| seem to be doing just fine with any potential culture
| conflicts.
|
| The 30% number you cite _could be true_ but perhaps in order
| for Chinese (or any other country) manufacturing to be
| economical perhaps it needs to be 60%. Mexico is actually
| important here.
| wongarsu wrote:
| Toyota has manufacturing facilities in at least 16 countries,
| so they probably have this figured out. US import duties make
| it especially lucrative for manufacturers to have US
| facilities, which lines up with Toyota having 10 other
| facilities in the US, plus some in Canada and Mexico.
|
| Still, in my eyes that only makes it more intriguing how they
| bridge the cultural differences, since whatever they are
| doing seems to be working.
| hintymad wrote:
| > claim that Chinese workers are 30% more efficient
|
| I was just quoting what the documentary said. There was so
| much contention between the management and the workers in the
| American glass factory featured in the documentary. In the
| end, the management hosted a competition between the American
| workers and the Chinese workers. Chinese workers won with a
| big margin.
| wongarsu wrote:
| > American labors were known to be the best in the world many
| years ago
|
| I'm pretty sure every country says that about themselves. It's
| more a statement of national pride than of fact.
| achates wrote:
| I doubt that will be a problem here. Their Kentucky plant is
| huge, it's been around for decades and it makes lots of high
| quality cars including the Camry. Toyota goes to a lot of
| effort to teach the workers their production system and
| culture.
| itomato wrote:
| Forcing people to eat off the Dollar menu has consequences
| ThinkBeat wrote:
| This is of course mostly due to the giant US subsidies the
| federal government is offering citizens now, but the EV must be
| "built" in the US (Which has some loopholes and strange
| definitions in it)
|
| I dont quite understand why the sales of EVs in the US is
| considered to have flattened out according to some statistics.
| skeeter2020 wrote:
| My understanding is this is model and region dependent.
| Example: the Ford lightning has tepid demand in a lot of US
| markets and a multi-year waiting list in Canada. (I realize
| you're focused on US, but so much of the auto supply chain is
| coordinated between the 2 countries)
| njarboe wrote:
| All, or almost all EV brands in the US are selling less this
| year than last. Except Tesla, which has about 65% market share.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-02-07 23:01 UTC)