[HN Gopher] Western carmakers' retreat from electric risks doomi...
___________________________________________________________________
Western carmakers' retreat from electric risks dooming them to
irrelevance
Author : n1b0m
Score : 153 points
Date : 2026-03-21 13:52 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.theguardian.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.theguardian.com)
| tahoeskibum wrote:
| Weird headline: Japanese carmakers are doing the same error,
| while Tesla (an American company) is the one of the leading
| electric carmakers... I'd just replace it with Legacy Carmakers
| (e.g. Ford, GM, Toyota and so on).
| impossiblefork wrote:
| I feel that Renault is also standing out as a company that's
| going in the opposite direction.
| a-saleh wrote:
| I thought Totyota is still one of the EV leaders. Alongside Kia
| and Hyundai?
| tpm wrote:
| Not at all, they were a hybrid leader long time ago but they
| never had a good pure EV and are only starting last few
| years.
| vel0city wrote:
| Toyota barely makes any fully EV cars, and their bZ series
| hasn't been very great. They have a number of hybrids, but
| even those are often based on dated battery technology.
| They're still selling new cars with NiMH batteries.
|
| They have some incredibly reliable hybrid drivetrains, but
| have weak EVs and ancient battery technology throughout.
| ljlolel wrote:
| Hormuz might change their mind
| Ifkaluva wrote:
| lol no. They have been dragged kicking and screaming into
| offering just one model, the bz4x.
|
| They also spend a lot of money lobbying against
| electrification regulation, because they really don't want to
| make EVs.
| seabrookmx wrote:
| They were late to the game but are definitely investing
| more now.
|
| They have three full EV's, in rough order of size: CH-R, BZ
| (previously called BZ4x), and BZ Woodland (basically a long
| station wagon version of the former).
|
| Subaru is also selling a tweaked and rebadged version of
| each. I believe these are all made in Subaru factories with
| Toyota power-train components.
|
| They're also priced pretty competitively.
| jfengel wrote:
| Toyota pioneered hybrids, but they remain committed to the
| idea that a fossil fuel component is necessary. They continue
| to push for hydrogen, which is generated primarily from
| natural gas. With a hand-wave that maybe it'll be renewable
| some day.
|
| But the hydrogen infrastructure doesn't exist, and they
| haven't solved any of the real problems with it. So they're
| stuck flacking technology that was amazing in the 90s.
| chii wrote:
| It's because japan can't really compete with china in the
| EV battery space (nor can anyone else really).
|
| By betting on hydrogen, it's possible to take the lead in a
| smaller pond as a bigger fish. Tho i'm not a believer in
| hydrogen - it's too difficult, and costs just as much to
| transition to that as it would electric. It'd be easier to
| synthesize carbon-based fuels, and that leverages the
| existing infrastructure for petrol in place for use.
| bastawhiz wrote:
| Toyota has a magical vaporware battery that they announce is
| just a couple years away every couple years. We're likely to
| see general quantum computing and an operational fusion plant
| before Toyota productionizes their first "real" EV with said
| battery.
| kube-system wrote:
| Toyota's leadership is staunchly anti-EV
| breve wrote:
| Toyota sells EVs. They sell the bZ3, bZ4, bZ5, bZ7, bZ3X,
| bZ Woodland, C-HR+, Lexus RZ, Lexus ES, and soon the Hilux
| EV.
|
| The Lexus ES: https://electrek.co/2026/03/19/lexus-
| launches-es-ev-with-300...
| fullshark wrote:
| Tesla is also retreating from the being a car company, at least
| they don't see being a company that sells electric cars to
| consumers being a great business to be in long term.
| jacquesm wrote:
| It's on the way to be merged with SpaceX.
| DennisP wrote:
| There are a couple good reasons for Tesla to do that, which
| don't apply to most carmakers.
|
| One is that their stock is priced for extreme growth, so they
| need to be in businesses that can justify that. Cars are not
| that kind of business. They were for a while when Tesla was
| much smaller and the only decent EV maker, but not anymore.
| For any carmaker with a typical carmaker PE, cars can be a
| fine business.
|
| Tesla's other problem is that Elon did serious damage to
| their brand, and they're not even getting the growth that
| other EV makers are getting.
| fullshark wrote:
| It's priced for extreme growth cause that's the way the CEO
| and board want it to be. They don't want to make cars and
| sell them to consumers for a small profit cause that's not
| an extreme growth opportunity so the focus is elsewhere.
| dangus wrote:
| It is a great business to be in, they just aren't run by a
| sane person who is good at business. If it weren't for
| massive conflicts of interest their CEO would have been fired
| years ago.
|
| They're getting leapfrogged by Chinese companies despite
| being extremely early to the Chinese market along with a
| factory in China.
|
| They've somehow squandered their technology lead despite
| being profitable and scaled unlike some of the companies
| leapfrogging them.
|
| They botched the Cybertruck so badly. Imagine an American
| company failing to make a popular pickup truck. They could
| have been selling pickup trucks at F-150-like volume and
| profitability.
|
| Their brand image of tech futurism is outdated and they're
| squandering the most profitable segments of the automotive
| market. Just look at stuff that's succeeding and pulling in
| big money like the Bronco and Toyota TRD lineup.
|
| Tesla is retreating to robots because their CEO gets bored of
| running scaled companies that aren't startups, and they're
| also doing a whole bunch of financial manipulation to prevent
| Tesla stock from crashing due to its fundamentals. Without a
| future moonshot business, the valuation of the stock makes no
| sense, and would naturally decline to that of a normal
| automobile company otherwise. That event would destroy Elon's
| net worth and probably make him default on a bunch of
| personal loans. By combining other moonshots like xAI and
| robotics, it lessens the impact of the reality of the
| automotive business: a profitable but generally low-margin
| high-maturity type of business.
| siim_osur wrote:
| Tesla is a hype company more than a car company. Also, me
| personally, I consider them all rolling coffins.
| qwerpy wrote:
| They're some of the safest cars ever made, unless you drive
| them into a tree at 110mph.
| kuschku wrote:
| Unless you need to leave the rear seats when the electronic
| door openers don't work anymore. It's possible the parent
| was referring to that, which is to be fair not just a Tesla
| issue, but Tesla is probably the most extreme example.
| xp84 wrote:
| GM has a ton of EV models and has been doing a ton of EV
| investment, R&D, etc. How can you say they're somehow not EV
| enough? I think this article's author is an absolutist and
| believes any company that doesn't go 100% EV regardless of
| market demand is stupid. I think that's irrational. And I love
| my EV. But it's going to take 20 years or more for the entire
| country to even get to a place where all your suburbanites can
| afford the $5,000-$10,000 for the panel upgrade and wiring to
| charge at home. And they are the easiest to win over. Urban is
| tougher (and I assure you, many people drive in cities!) due to
| lack of residential garages, and parking garage facilities
| don't have sufficient capacity to "just" add 500 level 2
| chargers. Typical 500-car garages today have about 5. And of
| course rural has longer range needs which raises cost.
|
| Or if you're one who thinks home charging isn't a necessary
| prerequisite to make EVs attractive, it'll take that long for
| fast charging tech to improve even more, and for those public
| fast chargers, which cost hundreds of thousands of dollars and
| need tremendous amounts of power which needs to be brought in,
| are gonna get built.
|
| And you might argue either is a roadblock that can simply be
| blown up by strategically placed money bombs, but no Western
| government has that much money just lying around. The $7,500
| handout (that mostly padded EV margins) was the best they're
| gonna do. The government isn't going to bankroll every shopping
| center in America to put in 10 350kw fast chargers at a cost of
| $5,000,000 per site, or pay $7,000 for every home to get a
| service upgrade. And even if they did this, it would take a
| decade just to build and install all that to get to 90% EV
| adoption. My point is gas cars are going to be popular and sell
| well for 1-2 decades more at least. "Retreating" from those
| would be the real bonehead move.
| freshpots wrote:
| "But it's going to take 20 years or more for the entire
| country to even get to a place where all your suburbanites
| can afford the $5,000-$10,000 for the panel upgrade and
| wiring to charge at home.."
|
| I'm charging just fine with a decent commute, using only a
| 120V 12A circuit. You don't need a 240V 50A circuit to charge
| your car in 4 hours.
|
| Technology Connections does an excellent video on this:
|
| https://youtu.be/W96a8svXo14
|
| It will help update your knowledge on this topic.
|
| Cheers
| dimmke wrote:
| My home charger was like $500 ($300 with the credit I got
| from electric company) and install was like 250. No upgrade
| needed.
|
| I've also owned a house before that had old electricity -
| knob and tube (this was before I had an electric car) and
| paid less than 10k to get the entire electricity system
| upgraded to something modern. I dont think your 5k-10k thing
| is accurate for the vast majority of houses.
| nullpoint420 wrote:
| How long ago was that? Things have changed in the economy
| recently
| Marsymars wrote:
| It gets tricky once the utility company has to hydrovac an
| upgraded supply line to your house. They've estimated
| $30-40k for me.
| philistine wrote:
| 5,000$ dollars! Do you mean to tell me that most people do
| not have any spare space on their electric panel for an extra
| 220v plug? I didn't but that's because my house was owned by
| cheapstakes who saved 100$ by installing a slightly smaller
| panel that few electricians I talked to had ever seen. That
| can't be most people?!
| foobarian wrote:
| Sadly it's fairly common in the Northeast as far as I could
| tell while househunting in the 2010s and 2020s
| crooked-v wrote:
| Places with natural gas heating/stove are more likely to
| run into the issue because the builders never planned for
| any of the 'important' appliances to need 240V plugs. My
| new (old) house had exactly that problem once I started
| looking at replacing some older gas appliances.
| rsynnott wrote:
| The third-biggest BEV maker is VW AG, a legacy car brand.
| Likely soon the second, given their hefty (33% last year)
| growth vs Tesla's modest shrinkage; unless something changes
| they'll overtake in a year or so.
| cosmic_cheese wrote:
| Nissan at least seems to be somewhat leaning into EVs. The
| Ariya was released to little fanfare but has seen sales pick up
| over time (though it's on pause in the US for 2026 due to
| tariffs), and they just released a freshly redesigned proper
| modern EV version of the Leaf at a surprisingly affordable
| pricepoint. They're also working with Mitsubishi to sell a Leaf
| rebadge (which I'd speculate will come at a lower price point
| with a more stripped down feature set).
|
| In Japan Nissan also had a pure electric kei car they sell.
| fullshark wrote:
| Isn't it over and China owns this market anyway? How can any
| other country possibly compete?
| breakyerself wrote:
| Tarrifs mostly
| p-e-w wrote:
| The same way Chinese tech companies "compete" with Western
| ones: By not permitting them to do business in China.
| yardie wrote:
| They are permitted to do business there. You just have to
| make a bargain with the devil. 50% of your domestically
| incorporated branch is Chinese owned. Then you have the
| requisite technology and IP transfer. Most sensible companies
| would not accept such a bargain, but you have quite a few
| investors only interested in the next quarterly profit going
| up to the right. And they've made that bargain repeatedly.
| tpm wrote:
| On long-term support and parts availability perhaps - I
| seriously doubt most of Chinese models bought now will have
| parts readily available in 5+ years.
|
| VW (and their other brands) and BMW have good new EVs coming to
| market now, while Toyota is waking up too. They will survive I
| think. Stellantis though, not sure about them. And many Chinese
| carmakers will be gone too.
| xp84 wrote:
| If Stellantis dies it won't be because of insufficient EV
| zeal. It'll be because they mostly make garbage cars no one
| wants. Saw this funny video about the top 10 cars with the
| most still-unsold inventory of their 2024(!) MY:
|
| https://youtu.be/R20QEyrQ2FE?si=cou6HgknYQOc8zbt
| DeathArrow wrote:
| Many of those models with unsold 2024 inventory are EVs.
| rsynnott wrote:
| Stellantis, the company which owns all the brands which
| make you go "wait, they still exist?!" when you see one.
| hyperionultra wrote:
| By limiting imports and offering alternatives in home. Also,
| the myths about reliability ads a lot.
| fullshark wrote:
| So essentially western government intervention in the economy
| is the only way and every company is behaving rationally by
| retreating until the government steps in and makes the long
| term math make sense for them.
| hyperionultra wrote:
| Correct. When billions of eur involved, nothing moves
| without support from gov.
| spankalee wrote:
| Western governments should have been intervening like China
| does.
| tw-20260303-001 wrote:
| We have learned from China. And?
| fullshark wrote:
| The implementation details of government intervention in
| the economy is critically important for success and I
| don't really think there is consensus as to how it should
| be done. Seems like the major tariffs on Chinese EVs are
| mostly about buying time, but western manufacturers see
| the writing on the wall and are leaving the market.
|
| So now what?
| jen20 wrote:
| Leaves a very large open question of whether China would be
| getting anywhere without Chinese government intervention...
| ceejayoz wrote:
| > By limiting imports and offering alternatives in home.
|
| Yeah, that's kinda how Cuba winds up with everyone (well, the
| small portion of society who can obtain one) driving 1950s
| cars around. It's not a good approach.
| luizfzs wrote:
| AFAIK, they're not limiting imports. They are heavily
| embargoed since 1960s, which also affects other countries'
| abilities to trade with them, under the threat of
| themselves being sanctioned.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| An embargo is an externally imposed limit on imports.
|
| Doing it to to yourself is a special sort of stupid.
| hyperionultra wrote:
| Embargo is a political tool designed to crush and for e
| to submission by barring required goods.
|
| Import limitation is more catered towards saving local
| economy and minimise dependency.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| That may be the goal. It is rarely the result. We have
| plenty of historical evidence on the downsides of
| protectionism.
| otherme123 wrote:
| I went to Cuba, and they were a good amount of Kia
| Picanto, Daewoo and cars from China brands I could not
| recognize. Of course they can't import from the US due to
| the embargo, and Europe would be unreliable for after-
| sell service.
|
| They trade, limited by their own poverty, with countries
| that can't be easily bullied by the US.
| epolanski wrote:
| Peugeot is the biggest foreign car brand in Cuba.
|
| But it has to be said: the entire car market in Cuba is
| few thousands cars per year.
| epolanski wrote:
| The only embargo is from the US.
|
| Canada and the EU trade fine with Cuba. Spain alone
| accounts for 20% of the trade.
|
| In fact, both EU and Canada have regulations that
| prosecute any European and Canadian company that complies
| with foreign embargoes (Council Regulation (EC) No
| 2271/96 for Europe and Foreign Extraterritorial Measures
| Act for Canada).
|
| Of course US can pull its gigantic economic and financial
| levers to out-out specific companies to choose "you
| either sell here, but don't sell in country X" like it
| has done with ASML, but it can only push so much.
|
| US laws apply to US citizens and companies.
| luizfzs wrote:
| > US laws apply to US citizens and companies.
|
| You're right. But trade in US Dollars with other
| countries need to go through US banks, which can be
| subject to prohibitions, which can be done by political
| motivation.
|
| Also, the issue of the PetroDollar complicates things
| internationally as well. US throws a tantrum when small
| countries (or countries it can bully) trade Oil in other
| currencies. That is very important to keep themselves
| relevant and with some control over international trades.
|
| Yet another aspect is that if any goods, regardless of
| who is selling it, contains more than 10% of components,
| technology, produced by a US company, such seller
| requires an US Export license to trade such goods with
| Cuba.
|
| So it's not as simple as that.
|
| https://shippingsolutionssoftware.com/blog/products-
| subject-...
| epolanski wrote:
| Even more of a reason to detach from the dollar economy
| and New York centered digital transactions asap.
| epolanski wrote:
| I really struggle with this model of protectionism.
|
| It has rarely worked in history, and when it did, it only did
| so for very short specific time frames intended to kickstart
| a sector, never to protect it in its mature state.
|
| Examples are south korean and japanese post ww2 protectionism
| of key sectors, but again, only to kickstart them. Those very
| sectors had to compete globally quickly to survive.
|
| We're in capitalism, capitalism is about competition and
| efficiency.
|
| The moment you're shielding your local companies all that
| happens is that they can raise prices and have even less
| incentives to compete and innovate.
|
| And I don't buy the "but China fuels money into their EV
| industry" either.
|
| So what? How many incentives, bailouts, manufacturing
| credits, sales credits etc do the European and US industries
| receive regularly?
|
| And why would I care if Chinese taxpayers subsidize my car? I
| really don't.
|
| Stellantis, a 20B market cap auto conglomerate has received
| more than 200B euros in help by the Italian government across
| the last 3 decades. And what did it achieve? Nothing.
|
| Just made the fiat group less relevant, less competitive, and
| didn't protect jobs in the long term anyway.
| ericmay wrote:
| > And I don't buy the "but China fuels money into their EV
| industry" either.
|
| Well, you're wrong. There's not much else to say bout that.
|
| > And why would I care if Chinese taxpayers subsidize my
| car? I really don't.
|
| Because it prices the vehicles below points where others
| can compete. Then they go out of business, and then the
| remaining winner raises prices. If you are Germany, Japan,
| or the United States that means lots of bad things for
| jobs, and starting a new automaker to bring down high
| prices later is very difficult.
|
| It's like, who cares if Amazon or Walmart comes in to your
| country, subsidizes the prices, and then runs all the
| competition and small mom and pop stores out of town until
| you have nothing left but Amazon or Walmart. Right?
| epolanski wrote:
| > Well, you're wrong. There's not much else to say bout
| that.
|
| That's an opinion, not a fact.
|
| > Because it prices the vehicles below points where
| others can compete.
|
| This is way too expensive for something like that to
| last. The rush to the bottom is already killing so many
| chinese automakers locally. The idea that they can
| sustain such a money bleed globally is hard to believe.
| galangalalgol wrote:
| The ev and chip market may indeed be insurmountable to
| their subsidy model, but it has worked on so many other
| sectors that now only exist in China. They do have
| troubles discontinuing subsidies to sectors that capture
| government. But mostly the subsidize to bootstrap has
| worked wonderfully for them. Tariffs are one counter. But
| subsidizing your own existing sector to counter it is
| necessary as well and tariffs have the down side of
| making your industries uncompetitive globally. Argentina
| demonstrated this for us. An evenhanded subsidybthat
| doesn't pick winners is also necessary. China broke
| capitalism the same way VC does. Come in with a big
| enough bank roll and it doesn't matter if you are better
| if you can keep spending until the competition folds. The
| open question is if China's demographic issues will
| outpace productivity gains.
| ericmay wrote:
| > That's an opinion, not a fact.
|
| It's not an opinion. You're welcome to go read China's
| own self-published strategic plans on this or a litany of
| news and policy journals discussing this.
|
| > This is way too expensive for something like that to
| last.
|
| How can you claim it's too expensive if you're claiming
| you don't even buy that it's happening??
|
| > The rush to the bottom is already killing so many
| chinese automakers locally. The idea that they can
| sustain such an money bleed globally is plain asinine.
|
| Look at German automakers in China for a view of the
| future.
|
| As Chinese automakers compete and then consolidate
| they'll raise prices of course but the level of
| competition and capacity build out will still have them
| underpricing other automakers due to economies of scale,
| cheap labor, _and_ advanced manufacturing. They don't
| need to sustain it really, globally they're already
| poised to win which is why US, EU, Japan are going to
| have a lot of import controls, tariffs, and will utilize
| other tools to protect domestic industries.
| epolanski wrote:
| > It's not an opinion. You're welcome to go read China's
| own self-published strategic plans on this or a litany of
| news and policy journals discussing this.
|
| I didn't say they don't prop their carmaking, battery or
| ev industries. I said that I don't buy the argument it's
| bad for us.
|
| > They don't need to sustain it really, globally they're
| already poised to win which is why US, EU, Japan are
| going to have a lot of import controls, tariffs, and will
| utilize other tools to protect domestic industries.
|
| Protectionism historically only helps industries in their
| earliest stages when you need to kickstart them, never
| when they are mature.
|
| At the end of the day western consumers and workers are
| always left with the bill if they cannot compete. It's us
| who will end up paying twice the amount for cars that
| aren't competitive, and don't have incentives to compete
| because they are protected anyway.
|
| You also need to understand I'm European. Not American.
|
| German/Italian economies are strongly export dependent.
| Exports amount for 50% of german economy and 30%+ of
| Italian one.
|
| Protecting internal markets achieves little to nothing,
| which is why Germany and Italy were among those less
| willing to tariff chinese cars.
|
| US has a giant internal market and is not a good
| exporting economy, it's core exports are financial and IT
| services.
| ericmay wrote:
| > I didn't say they don't prop their carmaking, battery
| or ev industries. I said that I don't buy the argument
| it's bad for us.
|
| And I explained why it was bad for us.
|
| > Protectionism historically only helps industries in
| their earliest stages when you need to kickstart them,
| never when they are mature.
|
| Never is a strong word. You're assuming that the Chinese
| EV industry isn't still in the kickstarting stages. The
| goal is to, via subsidies and capability to
| deindustrialize other parts of the world. Through that
| lens you can see their actions quite clearly.
|
| As a European you should be particularly worried if you
| value labor. When you say things like German and Italian
| economies are export dependent it begs the question: what
| happens when those exports to their #1/#2 export market
| (China) collapse, and then China - because as you said of
| course Germany and Italy aren't willing to tariff Chinese
| cars - comes in to the EU and then outcompetes German and
| Italian automakers too?
|
| What does that leave you with? It leaves you with:
| China - dominating EV sales and a massive player in the
| auto market. America - protected domestic
| industry that's not reliant on exports, little to no
| competition from China Japan - serving US/EU
| global markets and protecting domestic industries
| Europe - Collapse of industrial capacity to make
| vehicles, maybe with tariffs or import controls will have
| workers at Chinese factories making cars (with profits
| and capital of course heading back to the home market).
| Follows the British model a bit with focus on luxury
| automobiles (Ferrari, Aston Martin, things like that)
|
| I hear your point about subsidies in American and
| European markets and how regular people are "left with
| the bill", but that's mostly because regulators and those
| working in government are incompetent, by and large, not
| because there aren't actions one can take. China serves
| as a clear counter example. And then you could also look
| at other countries and steps they've taken to shore up
| their domestic industries or otherwise.
| pqtyw wrote:
| > Exports amount for 50% of german economy and 30%+ of
| Italian one.
|
| And in China its barely 20%. But most of German and
| Italian exports go to other EU countries so its not
| exactly a fair comparison. Not quite the same but not
| that different to trade between different US states.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| There are plenty of countries that lack domestic
| automotive production that are very OK using Chinese EVs.
| Nepal for example, is all in in Chinese EVs now since
| it's people couldn't afford much gas or ICEs before, and
| with some hydro investments (also aided by China), they
| can now better afford to buy (cheap Chinese EVs) and
| drive cars (cheap hydro). There are a hundred nepals out
| there that the western and Japanese countries aren't
| going after.
| ericmay wrote:
| There's nothing wrong with Chinese EVs (or any EVs) going
| to Nepal or something. China is closer, it's a tough
| country to get to, makes sense that China (or India
| perhaps) would be their primary supplier.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| Logistics through Tibet wasn't really a thing until
| recently, China had to invest there. But it's not just
| Nepal, it's most of Africa, southeast asia, as well as
| Australia/NZ. China is literally creating markets for its
| products that simply didn't exist at all before.
| ericmay wrote:
| Sure, though I'm not positive that's a good economic
| strategy outside of perhaps SE Asia. Market size in
| places like Africa, along with general instability
| presenting challenges has not made it a great place to
| invest, unless of course you have state backing and
| subsidies from, idk, China?
|
| But let's say China develops these markets and they can
| afford more cars. That's great. That means after China
| develops them, Western countries can come in and sell
| their cars too at China's developmental expense. Seems
| like a win-win all around.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| Western countries don't have a product to sell without
| protectionism. Look at Australia, a first word country by
| any measure but without an auto industry to protect has
| wholly embraced Chinese EVs.
| ericmay wrote:
| Could you summarize your larger point? I'm starting to
| get lost in what exactly we're talking about - my fault.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| China is creating and making markets where they are
| allowed to create/make markets. The western auto
| manufacturers are turtling up via protectionism, and they
| are no longer aiming to compete on their products.
| kubb wrote:
| It seems like you're ignoring real-life things that
| happened to fit your world model.
| kubb wrote:
| It has worked plenty. The US built its entire industrial
| base behind tariff walls in the 1800s. Japan protected
| Toyota and Sony until they could compete globally. South
| Korea did the same with Samsung. And China itself got there
| through decades of protectionism and subsidies.
| epolanski wrote:
| That's the same thing I said.
|
| Protectionism can help when you want to develop an
| industry.
|
| But it never works for mature ones.
| demosito666 wrote:
| EV cars is not a mature industry.
| jakubadamw wrote:
| Correct, so that's why it needs to be employed to help
| develop the Western EV industries so that they can
| compete with that of China.
|
| EVs are so different that the know-how of the combustion
| engine power automobile industry does not extend to them.
| In fact, it can be detrimental.
| joe_mamba wrote:
| I think Ferrari, Lambo, Rolls Royce, Bugatti, Zonda etc. will do
| just fine with selling luxury ICEs with many cylinders that go
| vroom to rich people. In fact they'll probably do better as
| global wealth gap increases.
|
| It's the Audis, BMWs, Mercedes, etc of Europe they'll probably
| end up the way of Philips, Blaupunkt, Alcatel, Grundig, Nokia,
| Thomson, Gigaset, SAgem, etc. meaning selling off their consumer
| civilian operations to chinese OEMs and all that remain will be
| the recognizable name badge put on imported Chinese components
| assembled in EU, while the small remaining European operations
| focus on vehicles and powertrains for
| defense/naval/aerospace/etc.
| youknownothing wrote:
| the question is _where_ they 'll be able to sell them: Europe
| is going to ban the sale of ICE cars from 2035 so, unless
| someone finds a loophole, that's a whole market gone.
| xp84 wrote:
| Europe will change their mind when protests start that many
| people can't buy a car that they can charge because their
| home doesn't have the capacity and public charging scarcity
| and congestion makes the 1970s gas rationing look convenient.
|
| Nearly all these carmakers already do make plenty of EVs. If
| I'm very wrong and people there wish to buy EVs exclusively,
| that's what will sell and what will get made.
| bakies wrote:
| Their homes don't have electricity?
| seabrookmx wrote:
| A standard wall socket doesn't provide enough amperage to
| charge an EV at reasonable rate if you use your car more
| than once or twice a week. Maybe this is less of a
| problem in the EU where people generally have shorter
| commutes, but I could definitely still see it being an
| issue.
|
| I know multiple people that have had to upgrade the main
| electrical panel in their home to support an EV charger,
| because their older building did not have enough
| capacity.
| tzs wrote:
| Don't forget that in the EU household circuits tend to
| support higher loads than US household circuits.
|
| EU typically from what I've read uses 240 V compared to
| 120 V in the US. They are usually 16 A compared to 15 A
| in the US.
|
| That gives them 3840 W vs 1800 W for the US, but that
| would just be for intermittent loads. For continuous
| loads you are supposed to derate that. In the US the
| continuous limit is 1440 W. From what I've read it is
| 2800 W in much of Europe.
|
| At 3.5 miles/kWh that gives 5 miles/hour charging in the
| US and 9.8 miles/hour in the EU.
|
| In most of the EU that would be enough to cover the
| average daily commute with 2 hours of charging.
| Wieldable4640 wrote:
| Most homes in the EU have a three phase connection and
| can support 22kW wall charging.
|
| Homes in the EU can draw more power than homes in the US
| as we use 240V with the same amount of amps. That's also
| part of the reason why we use kettles as we can boil
| water roughly 2x faster (they can draw up to 3kW while
| operating!)
| joe_mamba wrote:
| _> Most homes in the EU have a three phase connection and
| can support 22kW wall charging._
|
| Most Europeans don't live in single family homes for this
| to be relevant.
| adrian_b wrote:
| Many people live in apartments and they do not have a
| garage.
|
| You cannot connect a cable from your home at the 10th
| floor to a car that may be hundreds of m away.
| sroussey wrote:
| There are companies selling streetlight replacements with
| chargers. They may get a lot of business in the next
| decade.
| joe_mamba wrote:
| _> Europe is going to ban the sale of ICE cars from 2035 so_
|
| A law made up on the way the economy and purchasing power was
| going in 2020. The reality now is way different. If you don't
| adjust laws based on economic reality you're gonna have a bad
| time.
| ahartmetz wrote:
| No way that European car companies give up that easily. I bet
| you didn't know that VW is currently the #1 EV seller in Europe
| and #1 car seller _in China_ (with a small but increasing
| fraction of EVs there, though):
|
| https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/volksw...
|
| https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/volksw...
| joe_mamba wrote:
| Same VW models in China cost about 50% less than in EU.
| rsynnott wrote:
| Which should in itself tell you that VW can compete on
| price if it has to.
| joe_mamba wrote:
| I never said they can't sell in China. My question with
| this was if they can maintain the same levels of
| profitability they enjoyed during the ICE glory days, as
| a lot of EU economies are dependent on the profitability
| of the auto sector. If profits slump, then so will the
| lives of a lot of working class Europeans. Keep in mind
| the auto sector used the be the biggest R&D spender in
| EU.
|
| Some companies accept a profit loss in some markets
| compensated by the profit gains in others in the interest
| of capturing a growing market so this might distort VW's
| success in China.
| nxm wrote:
| VW is too slow and bureaucratic to compete with China
| gregorygoc wrote:
| FUD
| tw-20260303-001 wrote:
| Zonda is a model from Pagani Automobili.
| froh wrote:
| I see two things discussed too little:
|
| * in the ICE world, California and EU norms created a tight
| barrier to entry. the patent portfolio protected the old
| automotive industry. they only built their patent protected ICEs,
| and they bought everything else from suppliers.
| electric circumvents that barrier and that enabled dozens of new
| automotive OEMs: the first big disruptor
|
| * automotive has created amazing r&d processes for the mechanical
| vehicle design. they are centered around early decomposition,
| isolated component engineering and then composition. integration
| in that world men's: screwing and plugging the pets together. if
| the hinges and flanges are to spec things integrate nicely.
| too bad the hard part for software instead is system integration.
| consistency cross all components. all the great
| hardware engineering processes are completely ND utterly
| misguided for software system engineering.. integrate rely,
| often, continuously vs clearly specified interfaces and isolated
| component engineering with expensive and thus relatively rare
| integration. that's IMHO the second disruption
| for automotive.
| izacus wrote:
| VAG group has EVs (and pretty good ones) across the board: VW
| with ID series, Skoda with Enyaq/Elroq/Epiq, Audi with eTron
| series (SUV, sedan and estate), SEAT with Cupra Born and others.
| BMW just launched Neue Klasse, with iX3 selling like hot cakesa
| nd i3 looking amazing, with i7 in pipeline. Mercedes also
| launched a great new platform with CLA which is coming to other
| sizes as well.
|
| Meanwhile, Renault 5 is selling very well with Renault 4 in the
| pipeline. Zoes have been selling well too. Peugeot also has good
| EV models (208 is really fun to drive).
|
| There pretty much isn't a single European car manufacturer that
| wouldn't have a compact car or an SUV in EV market and most of
| them have good range, decent pricing and are moving to 800V
| platforms as well.
|
| Sooo... where's the retreat?
| ceejayoz wrote:
| > Sooo... where's the retreat?
|
| As the article says; "In the US"
| delta_p_delta_x wrote:
| > In the US
|
| American car marques are nearly completely irrelevant outside
| the US.
| galangalalgol wrote:
| Ive seen plenty of fords in Europe but they have evs
| 4ndrewl wrote:
| Right, but Ford Europe is, and always had been, a
| different beast to Ford America.
| delta_p_delta_x wrote:
| Ford of Europe has succeeded because its direction and
| leadership are completely different to its American
| outfit, and has released models targeting European
| sensibilities. You will probably not find Mondeos or
| Focuses in the North American market. Nor will you
| (easily) find an F-150 in Europe. A Ranger, perhaps, but
| not the F-150.
| jolux wrote:
| You could definitely buy the Focus in the US.
| seabrookmx wrote:
| Even the Fiesta was sold in the US and Canada off and on.
| consp wrote:
| Same name, mostly same internal components, different
| chassis (mostly bigger) afaik. Same for Fiesta's except
| for some models (e.g. ST). I know for the Fiesta since
| the electronics are the same but the dash components are
| made for a bigger chassis (to make it fit you have to
| dremel quite a bit).
| rsynnott wrote:
| The Focus is about the only European-designed Ford which
| really made it to the US in significant numbers (albeit
| somewhat late) at all, AIUI.
| mapgrep wrote:
| You've shown your words to be meaningless. You said the
| U.S. car brands were "completely irrelevant" outside the
| U.S., here you admit that's wrong. You move the goalpost
| and change your assertion to something entirely
| different. But there is no reason to think this statement
| has any factual basis either. You're just talking out of
| your &ss.
| tw-20260303-001 wrote:
| They said "nearly". Ford is the only American brand
| selling numbers in Europe, maybe nect to Tesla.
| cucumber3732842 wrote:
| GM sells a whole bunch of stuff they just don't put a
| bowtie on the grill in Europe or Asia because they have
| other brands they use there.
| rsynnott wrote:
| Ford of Europe is arguably a European car brand which
| happens to be owned by a US company (in much the same way
| as Chrysler/Jeep etc are clearly American car brands,
| despite being owned by a European company).
| spockz wrote:
| Here in the Netherlands ford sales seem to have
| completely consumed by Kia sales. Around me houses that
| typically had Fords now have Kia's, Toyota, Tesla or
| small Volvo like EX30/40.
|
| After the huge hits of the focus and to some extend
| Mondeo, the Kuga has sold subpar. There were only a few
| new ones around here. Now you see some new EV Ford
| Explorer SUV and just a tiny account of the big old
| Explorer. (Yes, the traditional Explorer suv counts as
| big here.)
|
| In the mean time there is an explosion of BYD, Volvo,
| Skoda Enyaq, etc happening. Mostly driven by which model
| has the most beneficial tax package for lease.
| consp wrote:
| > the Kuga has sold subpar.
|
| I own a Plugin one, I completely understand why. It's
| "meh", plus all the recalls because Ford cheaped out on
| the battery production and Samsung (the battery cells)
| can't do inventory management. For the US audience: it's
| the Escape (they are identical in all but numbering).
| ErroneousBosh wrote:
| Fords in Europe are made a little to the north-east of
| London, or near Cologne.
|
| They have (almost) nothing to do with North American Ford
| vehicles.
| lycopodiopsida wrote:
| Why talk about "western" then, not about "US"? Because
| clickbait?
| ceejayoz wrote:
| https://imgur.com/a/XCQQ3cD
| lycopodiopsida wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_world
| kuschku wrote:
| And this is what it looks like for me:
| https://i.k8r.eu/CzluFg.png
| whateverboat wrote:
| Also europe.
| dabber21 wrote:
| I noticed that it happens a lot "western media" etc, it's
| usually used at touchy topics
| seb1204 wrote:
| Porsche... Eye roll
| thyristan wrote:
| Porsche isn't so much into the car business as it is into the
| genital enlargement business...
| kriberg wrote:
| It's a tiny market, but, I promise, it has growth
| potential.
| delta_p_delta_x wrote:
| If money wasn't an object, I'd buy one EV: the Taycan Turbo
| S.
| speedgoose wrote:
| Though, shitty software and no one pedal driving because
| Porsche drivers pilot with two pedals.
| gmac wrote:
| Renault Megane and Scenic EVs are also great.
| neya wrote:
| > Sooo... where's the retreat?
|
| https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gqyyly9v8o
| Volkswagen has said it will cut 50,000 jobs in Germany by 2030
| as its profits dropped to their lowest level since 2016.
| It said it was hit by US import tariffs, intense competition
| from China and high restructuring costs from the shift to
| electric vehicles.
|
| https://www.cnbc.com/2026/03/13/honda-flags-first-annual-los...
| Honda to lose as much as $15.7 billion this fiscal year.
| The write-down is latest in industry grappling with EV
| transition.
|
| From Google, first page.
| lelanthran wrote:
| That's not a retreat from EVs.
|
| Article seems to be gibberish, carmakers don't seem to be
| retreating from EVs.
| neya wrote:
| You are free to believe what you want, I'm just presenting
| the data.
| lelanthran wrote:
| > You are free to believe what you want, I'm just
| presenting the data.
|
| It's not a matter of belief: what does the data you
| presented (profitability and employee count) have to do
| with the claim about product types?
|
| I mean, you could have presented data showing that the
| sky is blue - your data is correct, but irrelevant to
| whether the manufacturers are cutting down on a specific
| product type.
| rsynnott wrote:
| > and high restructuring costs from the shift to electric
| vehicles.
|
| I'm baffled how you think "it's going to cost us a lot to
| shift to electric vehicles through 2030" could be read as "VW
| is retreating from electric vehicles".
| decimalenough wrote:
| I went to a car show in Australia last year. VAG was out in
| full force displaying all the models you mention... but so were
| the Chinese manufacturers, who were 25-50% cheaper across the
| board, for all models and all price points.
|
| VW ID.3 vs BYD Dolphin: https://www.bike-ev.com/reviews/byd-
| dolphin-vs-volkswagen-id...
|
| Audi Q4 e-tron vs Zeekr 7X:
| https://www.carsguide.com.au/audi/q4-e-tron/vs/zeekr-7x
|
| People will pay a premium for a brand they recognize, but for
| how long?
| twoodfin wrote:
| Per that link, the BYD Dolphin is EUR30,000 and the VW ID.3
| is EUR36,000. That's a 20% premium.
|
| For that, you get more range, faster charging, and better
| highway driving, even aside from the brand premium.
|
| That doesn't seem like a slam dunk to me, especially since
| the Chinese EV market is at the peak of deliberate over-
| production:
|
| https://www.theatlantic.com/international/2025/11/china-
| elec...
| PreciousH wrote:
| no one is willing to admit the EV tech isn't just there yet to
| fully replace gas powered cars?
| ceejayoz wrote:
| Strawman, basically no one argues "fully". Yet.
| jillesvangurp wrote:
| > no one is willing to admit the EV tech isn't just there yet
|
| The easy explanation is that it's because it is there. The
| article is about the rapid decline of companies that believe
| otherwise. They aren't doing to great.
| applfanboysbgon wrote:
| 98% of new car sales in Norway are EV at this point. How do you
| admit something that is not true?
| quickthrowman wrote:
| A wealthy nation with a small population that has plenty of
| money to update their infrastructure is not comparable to
| upgrading the grid and converting the fleet of 250M cars in
| the US, which is a mess of 50 states who spend varying
| amounts of money on their infrastructure.
|
| The US grid is already stressed by all these new data
| centers, where is the power to send 10kW of power minimum to
| tens to hundreds of millions of vehicles every day going to
| come from?
|
| 100M vehicles times 10kW divided by one million is One
| Million Megawatts.
|
| One Thousand Gigawatts. That's five hundred 2GW power plants.
| Four thousand solar panels make 1MW, four million solar
| panels make 1GW, four billion solar panels make 1000 GW.
|
| And that's 40% of the fleet converted to EVs, and does not
| account for diesel semi-tractors being converted to EV.
| applfanboysbgon wrote:
| > which is a mess of 50 states who spend varying amounts of
| money on their infrastructure.
|
| That is not a tech problem, which is the claim I was
| replying to.
|
| I saw your deleted comment about four charging stations
| costing $200,000 or so. Four petrol stations also cost that
| much. Nobody is saying infrastructure is free, but phasing
| out infrastructure is simply a matter of time and political
| will, not a fundamental tech problem.
| quickthrowman wrote:
| I agree that we'll eventually fully convert to EVs, it's
| just going to take way longer than a lot of people
| expect. It's going to be tens or hundreds of billions of
| dollars to upgrade electrical transmission, distribution,
| and premises distribution.
|
| Edit: You nailed it, it's a political problem in the US.
| applfanboysbgon wrote:
| > It's going to be tens or hundreds of billions of
| dollars to upgrade electrical transmission, distribution,
| and premises distribution.
|
| Would certainly happen a lot faster if, for example,
| America spent the $200 billion the Pentagon just asked
| for the Iran war on infrastructure instead. It would even
| benefit Americans, imagine that! America is the
| wealthiest country in the world by far, it has the
| capital to facilitate the process, but taxpayers would
| rather blow it on bombing schools across the world.
| Forgeties79 wrote:
| Norway is hardly alone. More and more countries are
| increasing EV purchases and decreasing ice purchases. We
| are clearly headed in that direction
| quickthrowman wrote:
| I agree, I'm just saying it's easier for a country with a
| sovereign wealth fund and ridiculous oil royalties to
| handle upgrading their infra to handle EVs for 6M is much
| easier than doing it in the US which has extremely low
| average population density, 250M+ vehicles and 400M
| people, and a mess of separate but inter-tied grids and
| varying levels of infrastructure investment depending on
| which state you are in.
| varjag wrote:
| We have the wealth fund precisely because we don't
| discretionally spend oil royalties.
| wasabi991011 wrote:
| > A wealthy nation with a small population that has plenty
| of money to update their infrastructure is not comparable
| to upgrading the grid and converting the fleet of 250M cars
| in the US, which is a mess of 50 states who spend varying
| amounts of money on their infrastructure.
|
| The US is plenty wealthy per capita, around the same or
| more than Norway. It has plenty of money to upgrade it's
| infrastructure, it just chooses to spend it on other goals
| such as bombing Iran.
| nullpoint420 wrote:
| If they could find the power for the data centers, why
| can't we find it for EVs?
| tw-20260303-001 wrote:
| But they didn't find power for data centres. That's one
| of their problems.
| GenerWork wrote:
| Remove the EV subsidies and ICE taxes, and what would that
| number switch to?
| speedgoose wrote:
| 97% perhaps. EVs are nicer and more convenient there. And
| cheaper.
| tw-20260303-001 wrote:
| > And cheaper.
|
| You sound like a broken record.
|
| > Remove the EV subsidies and ICE taxes.
| speedgoose wrote:
| Should I include the cost of the current wars?
| tw-20260303-001 wrote:
| Go on then.
| speedgoose wrote:
| Per my calculations, EVs are cheaper over the whole
| vehicle lifetime. I included construction costs and usage
| costs, in terms of money, environmental impact, and
| health impacts.
|
| Of course, no cars is even better. If we could all ski,
| cycle, or run, it would be even cheaper and better for
| our health. It's a trade of.
| tw-20260303-001 wrote:
| We could all go back to caves, too.
| nxm wrote:
| Or bulk of NATO's defense costs, which Europeans refuse
| to contribute to
| 8note wrote:
| from the impacts of the straight of hormuz closing, and
| the Russian invasion of Ukraine - electrification and
| removing dependence on oil and gas is a major defense
| cost.
|
| any spending on EV adoption should be considered part of
| the NATO commitment
| pqtyw wrote:
| Entirely because of taxes. Norway and Denmark are special
| cases because they already had extremely high taxes on
| ICE vehicles.
| tw-20260303-001 wrote:
| Yes. Five million of them does not require many cars. 180k in
| 2025. Compare that to 2.4 million in Germany.
| wodenokoto wrote:
| I think 80 or 90% of new cars in northern Europe are electric.
|
| Saying EV tech isn't there to replace gas is like saying gas
| tech isn't there to replace diesel.
|
| Gas powered cars are niche or legacy.
| SirHumphrey wrote:
| In 2024[1]: - 37.2% in Sweeden - 51.6% in Denmark - 30.4% in
| Finland
|
| of newly registered cars were BEV. Only Norway reaches 89%
| you are talking about. The total average of newly registered
| BEV cars in European Union was 13.6%.
|
| The EV tech is here,but the grid in most EU countries is
| certainly not. The proliferation of heat pumps in the local
| area caused 3 blackouts caused by a failure of a local
| transformer - something that hasn't happened before or at
| least not as frequently. And in most countries you are
| looking at doubling the electricity consumption if all road
| transport was to switch to electricity.
|
| [1]: https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/indicators/new-
| registr...
| margalabargala wrote:
| > Fully
|
| Everyone's willing to admit that.
|
| EV tech is there to replace the vast majority of gas powered
| cars.
|
| We don't need to get to "fully" to have a replacement event.
| Horses can travel down trails that cars cannot, that didn't
| save them.
| whynotmaybe wrote:
| Everybody knows it won't fully replace it.
|
| It's impossible to go on a long off-road travel with the EV
| equivalent of 50L of gas in a jerrycan.
|
| But some are twisting the narrative to say that because of that
| reason EV will fail.
|
| Millions of people could use an EV in their daily life, just
| like I can go without a pickup in my daily life and rent one
| whenever I need one.
| nslsm wrote:
| I'm not affluent enough to buy one car for my daily life and
| rent another for whenever I have to leave the city.
| timbit42 wrote:
| Look at a hybrid.
| neogodless wrote:
| Show the math.. only about 12% of buyers buy new cars.
| Economical, efficient EVs can be had for $20k. Renting a
| big truck occasionally can be as little as $20, but even at
| $5000 for a truck rental... most people are buying trucks
| that cost $10, $20, $30K more than an enconomy car.
| whynotmaybe wrote:
| How often do you leave the city for more than 200km?
|
| Each time I travel oversea, I take a "public transportation
| plane", not my private jet.
|
| It's not because an EV doesn't fit for 100% of your
| requirements, that it doesn't fit for everyone.
|
| No car fits for 100%.
| 8note wrote:
| You could alternatively just rent a car or truck when you
| need one, and not one a car at all?
|
| if you arent affluent, all the costs that come with car
| ownership are a bit excessive.
|
| even still you might want to go for the cheap EV, and just
| not do things that require a pickup, rather than paying the
| costs of the pickup all the time
| ahussain wrote:
| The EV tech seems to be good enough already in China
| nxm wrote:
| Heavily subsidized by China to undercut the international
| competition
| kdheiwns wrote:
| I only hear people in certain countries say this. Meanwhile
| many countries with rough terrain and long roads are already
| all in on EVs.
| seabrookmx wrote:
| Which ones?
| dangus wrote:
| That's a strange statement considering that 20% of new vehicles
| sold globally are EVs. And that's not just China propping up
| the numbers: 20% of new vehicles sold in the EU are EVs as
| well.
|
| Obviously that's not "fully replace" territory, but that is
| most definitely a critical mass beyond being a niche vehicle
| category.
|
| The EV market globally is growing much faster than the ICE
| market. At the rate of technology and pricing improvement, EVs
| taking over the majority of sales is almost inevitable.
|
| It's just not growing as quickly in certain markets like the
| USA, and many predictions were too aggressive.
|
| Who is really going to prefer ICE vehicles when we start seeing
| median MSRP vehicles start to reach customers with 400-500mile+
| range numbers? This isn't some crazy idea (e.g., see the 2026
| BMW i3, estimated range of 440 miles in an entry level premium
| sedan - in 5-10 years that's the kind of spec you'll be seeing
| in a cheap Kia).
|
| There just isn't that much more progress in battery technology
| and pricing left to achieve to make ICE fully obsolete, and
| that is exacerbated by oil prices that are now set to rise for
| years to come.
| rsynnott wrote:
| They just have to replace most use cases. There will come a
| point, not too far away, where battery progress makes them
| cheaper to purchase than petrol cars (for many use cases the
| point may already have come where TCO is lower, and Trump's oil
| crisis will only speed the arrival of that point for more use
| cases.)
| rossjudson wrote:
| Gas powered cars can't fully replace EVs either.
|
| After three years and 50k miles with a Model X, the idea of
| buying a non-EV seems ridiculous.
| orange_joe wrote:
| America clearly has an EV industry (Tesla, Rivian) but its
| adoption is pretty limited by infrastructure.
| cyanydeez wrote:
| AlSo by goverment lobby, tHe mosT equal branch of modern USA
| Forgeties79 wrote:
| ASHT?
| ericmay wrote:
| And Lucid.
|
| I'm not sure it's the infrastructure so much as the cost for
| these vehicles. Well, Tesla has political problems but Rivian
| and Lucid don't - but they are priced quite high.
| maxerickson wrote:
| It's kind of a yes both. A base Model 3 is in the same price
| range as decent hybrids that will be more convenient for many
| owners given current highway adjacent charging
| infrastructure.
|
| Of course there are also new vehicles that cost quite a bit
| less than a base Model 3, but they invite a discussion of not
| being all that comparable.
| ericmay wrote:
| My post was poorly worded I meant to say Tesla wasn't too
| high of a price but it has political problems (we won't buy
| another one for example).
|
| Lucid and Rivian don't have those problems but they are
| quite expensive relatively speaking.
| maxerickson wrote:
| But Tesla is priced high for anyone that is even
| moderately price sensitive. Even the base model of their
| cheapest car.
| ericmay wrote:
| Sure if $37k is a lot for a car I'll agree with you. Then
| I think Tesla is now just joining Rivian and Lucid by
| being too expensive. The infrastructure would be besides
| the point then because you don't care about that if you
| can't even afford the car.
| hypeatei wrote:
| > Sure if $37k is a lot for a car
|
| 37k with 20% down payment means you borrow $29k at say, a
| 4.79% interest rate for 60 months so... $556/month. I
| know we're on HN with high salaried tech workers but
| c'mon, that's a lot of money and doesn't even include
| insurance.
|
| That and their base model 3 is RWD which makes it a non-
| starter for anyone who drives in snow/ice. The AWD model
| starts at $47k.
| ericmay wrote:
| A Honda CRV Hybrid for example starts at $35k (Accord
| Hybrid is 34k) and that's a pretty common vehicle here in
| Ohio. We could debate the capabilities and such and what
| you get for your money, but I'm just not in an agreement
| that $37k is a lot of money for a car.
|
| I've owned a base model 3 RWD and live in Ohio where we
| regularly get all of the weather, sometimes the same day
| even. I would rather drive that than an AWD Honda or
| Toyota or similar. The weight and center of gravity,
| especially with the right tires, makes it a very nice
| vehicle to drive in adverse conditions. Those "average"
| market SUVs aren't very good in snow/ice either. At least
| in my experience.
| maxerickson wrote:
| Well, speaking as someone who is moderately price
| sensitive, I'm probably going to shop for a used car.
|
| I'm not sure people are reading my comments above as
| making 2 comparisons. I used "decent hybrids" as a group
| of cars that are roughly comparable to the Model 3, but
| more convenient in areas where chargers are sparse (in
| northern Michigan and the Upper Peninsula, you pretty
| much have to plan your route to the available chargers).
|
| And then I noted that there are cars that are available
| for quite a lot less, so anyone that is price sensitive
| probably isn't going to be shopping for a new electric
| vehicle that costs nearly $40k.
| ericmay wrote:
| Yea I think we got side-tracked here in discussing what
| is affordable. But my point was that the big 3 EV makers
| in the United States: Tesla, Lucid, Rivian are either
| politically uncompetitive (Tesla) or financially
| uncompetitive (all three if you are also arguing Tesla is
| too expensive) and because of that the charging
| infrastructure isn't relevant if you are already thinking
| the car itself costs too much.
|
| As an aside I've been to the UP and it's lovely up there.
| At the time (2020) there weren't really any charging
| stations except Maciniac City where there was a Tesla
| Supercharger and Marquette where, my wife and I found
| ourselves for about 12 hours charging our car in a
| parking garage. But Tesla has built a few new
| Superchargers in the area and they are to varying degrees
| open to other EV manufacturers.
| senordevnyc wrote:
| The average new car transaction price in the US is about
| $50k.
| yardie wrote:
| It's not even the infrastructure. It's generally a lot of FUD.
| Everyone fears they have to buy a 800-mile range SUV for the
| frequent roadtrips they take apparently. I commute 1000 miles
| every month. That is 4x DCFC every month vs 2.5 petrol fillups
| for the same period.
|
| I also know a lot of drivers who plan to get an EV when their
| current car stops working. A lot of people are feeling
| economically anxious right now. They know gas is a dead end so
| they are squeezing every last mile out of the cars they
| currently own. Car companies can't exist on the wishes of their
| customers. Everyone is doing a lot of hoping that its the right
| time. The EV rebates were a great tool in getting to that
| tipping point but they were cancelled too son in my estimation.
| declan_roberts wrote:
| I don't think this is true, at least for Tesla, which has a
| very mature and wide range of chargers almost everywhere.
| AFAIK, Rivian can also use Tesla chargers now.
| kube-system wrote:
| It is mature enough to barely support the current level of
| adoption which is between 1 and 2% of cars on the road.
|
| Also charging at home is a significant part of EV
| infrastructure which is also sorely lacking in the US
| ectospheno wrote:
| I live on the eastern coast of the US. I travel for work up
| and down the eastern seaboard. Sometimes I ride with a
| coworker who drives his Tesla. The experience turned me off
| of ever buying one.
|
| Yes, chargers are everywhere here. But making multiple
| "stops" to charge that you wouldn't otherwise make definitely
| isn't saving any time.
|
| The seats are horrid.
|
| Watching the windshield wipers freak out over nothing is
| funny.
|
| "Full self driving" is a bit of a joke.
| BoneShard wrote:
| We can despise Musk as much as we want, but I leased a
| Tesla Model 3 for three years and it was the best car I've
| ever owned. I had zero issues, it was always charged, zero
| maintenance(other than topping off washer fluid), and for
| long trips, I usually rent a car anyway. I seriously
| considered buying a Model S once my lease ended, but thanks
| to Musk's shenanigans, I'm waiting for a Rivian R2 or R3
| instead.
|
| And yes Teslas aren't for passengers but for drivers.
| thyristan wrote:
| Western car makers learned the hard lesson that, at least in most
| of Europe, electricity prices are far too high, EV prices are too
| high, and customers do know how to use their calculators. In
| Germany, the only thing propping up the EV market are tax
| subsidies for commercially used EVs, so company cars are very
| likely to be EV or at least hybrid. For the rest of sales? Only
| idealists buy EVs, and then only those with deeper pockets, their
| own home charger, etc.
|
| The current third oil crisis won't change much in this picture,
| because while fossil fuel prices have gone up, electricity prices
| are also starting to react and rise. That's because electricity
| demand rises, some industrial users can either use electricity or
| gas. And because gas prices are rising, which influence a small
| but very important part of electricity generation: on-demand gas
| power plants, that smooth out the sharp variations in renewable
| generation and demand.
|
| And in the one important area of EV construction that makes a
| real difference, batteries, they tried and failed horribly.
| Everything else isn't really that special or EV-specific. So this
| winding down is just admitting that they already failed when the
| likes of Northvolt went boom. And the imho realistic assumption
| that production lines can be changed again if EVs should see more
| demand in the future. After all, some car brands to produce EVs,
| hybrids and ICE cars on the same line even now.
| BoredPositron wrote:
| French manufacturers, on the other hand, are experiencing a
| revival by prioritizing EVs and treating ICE vehicles as a
| secondary focus. If you look at the numbers across the
| Volkswagen Group (the entire AG, including Audi, Porsche, and
| Skoda), a clear trend emerges: the only brands currently in
| trouble are those that abandoned an EV first approach.
|
| Skoda and Cupra are thriving, and it's not just because of
| their affordability. They are steadily increasing their EV
| sales percentages while heavily promoting them as first class
| citizens within their portfolios. Porsche, by contrast, is
| hitting roadblocks because they are trying to retrofit their
| new EV first models to accommodate ICE powertrains. Meanwhile,
| Volkswagen Nutzfahrzeuge just posted their best quarter ever,
| driven specifically by their ICE lineup.
|
| The main problem for German automakers was losing their core
| identity by chasing a "Modern Luxury" business model
| prioritizing low sales volume in exchange for high per unit
| margins. Electricity prices are simply not a factor in their
| demise.
| baka367 wrote:
| Oh please, it hit two euros a liter thanks to the orange turd
| DennisP wrote:
| Electricity costs more in Europe than the US, but so does
| gasoline, by about the same ratio. EVs in the US have lower
| running costs than internal combustion cars.
|
| The EV industry in general is growing quite well in Europe.
| It's just that China is capturing the biggest share of that
| growth.
| sjducb wrote:
| EVs are more expensive in total.
|
| The Volvo XC90 EV is about 90k the petrol equivalent is 60k
|
| Then if you drive 100,000 miles in it you'll spend PS20,000
| on petrol.
|
| 100000 miles / 32 mpg = 3125 gal 3125 x 4.546 L = 14206 L
| 14206 L x PS1.45/L = PS20598.70 [?] PS20.6k total petrol cost
|
| Even with free electricity petrol wins on cost.
|
| If you buy the car used then the story changes.
| campl3r wrote:
| I'd love to see that math
| cmurphycode wrote:
| https://cmurphycode.com/electricity
|
| Not Europe, but unfortunately, my state of Massachusetts has
| terrible electric costs for complicated reasons, so I
| understand what the OP is saying. I had to keep explaining
| this to my friends in MA - I replaced a Prius with a Nissan
| Leaf and my running costs are far higher.
|
| (note that these prices are yearly averages for the state
| selected, but you can also fill in your own values since
| things change)
| burnt-resistor wrote:
| Embrace and skip to extinguish. Remember the EV-1 anyone? The
| standard strategy for a Detroit mfgr is to half-heartedly go
| through the motions of EV offerings so they can "prove" "no one
| wants them", it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy that also
| discourages change influence on the customer side as well.
| Marketing, advertising, and investment with intent and impactful
| efficacy would manufacture consent for different products.
| DeathArrow wrote:
| Somehow having freedom to choose is bad?
| 1970-01-01 wrote:
| Yes it's bad when you're set to pick big overconfident losers.
| See also: 1929
| M0r13n wrote:
| I've had a rough time with the last two EVs I've owned. I bought
| a Honda e in 2020 because of its retro-future charm, but ended up
| being disappointed by several things:
|
| - the range was miserable
|
| - the software quality was bad
|
| - no OTA updates ever (despite Honda's promises)
|
| - slow charging
|
| - poor public charging infrastructure in Germany
|
| I should have known that a 35 kW battery wouldn't deliver great
| range or charging speed. But I didn't fully appreciate how
| limiting it would be.
|
| Last year, I bought a new Mini Cooper e. Larger battery. Better
| software. BMW's quality actually delivered this time. The car
| feels objectively nice. The software is polished. There are
| updates. Few bugs. But the range still leaves something to be
| desired. In summer it's okay. During winter 30-40% of the range
| just melts away.
|
| Public charging in Northern Germany still sucks:
|
| - too few public chargers
|
| - chargers are often broken or out of service
|
| - pricing is intransparent
|
| Municipal utility companies ("Stadtwerke") seem especially bad at
| maintaining their charger fleets. Every second charger that I
| want to use is out of service. The one next to my apartment has
| been labeled as "defective" for a couple of weeks now. Nobody
| seems to care...
|
| I still like (love during summer) my car. It's a cool car. It
| feels luxurious. It's comfortable. It's fun to tear around
| corners. It's still compact enough to maneuver through the city.
| And it looks cool. But it also costs 40-50k EUR and only has
| limited range. And public charging really needs to improve.
| colechristensen wrote:
| Basically there's an adoption curve. "Western carmakers
| retreat" is showing they pushed ahead of the curve and got
| bitten so they're correcting.
|
| THIS is where public subsidies makes the difference, finding
| and spending the way out of the pain points to make the
| adoption curve steeper.
| pshirshov wrote:
| > poor public charging infrastructure in Germany
|
| Dunno, had a trip through it last year, there are more than
| enough chargers. Some of them were literally free.
|
| I have 70kWh battery though. Also, I paid much less than 40k
| for my chinese SUV. The software is buggy though, a random
| reboot on motorway doesn't feel nice.
| M0r13n wrote:
| It depends where you are. I live in a somewhat rural area in
| Northern Germany. There are some chargers, but many of them
| are out of service like the one next door. I've never
| stumbled upon a free charger though.
| BobaFloutist wrote:
| Does the random reboot affect the motor, lights, defogger,
| signals, anything else absolutely essential to driving?
|
| Don't get me wrong, I'd be annoyed and unsettled if the sound
| system or gps or whatever rebooted while I was driving, I'm
| just curious just how dire it is
| sjducb wrote:
| It's just the Android bit that reboots, so maps and music.
|
| The rest of the car drives fine.
| StilesCrisis wrote:
| American safety standards require that the car be more-or-
| less entirely functional without the infotainment system.
| Gud wrote:
| I work all over Europe and I'm not super impressed with the
| state of charging infrastructure in general and it seems
| particularly bad in German.
|
| One thing that's super annoying and this is not specific to
| Germany, but why the fuck do I need some shitty app to use
| your charger? Should be tap and go like any other purchase.
| You know, like how I pay for my petrol?
|
| Seems to me like everyone wants to force an app down my
| throat where it's really not needed. It especially sucks when
| you're a visitor to the country.
| toast0 wrote:
| > why the fuck do I need some shitty app to use your
| charger?
|
| I have PHEV that doesn't pull much from a charger, and I
| usually don't use chargers for money, but... When I charged
| for fun while I was shopping at a grocery store, it ended
| up being like a 70 cent charge. If you bill 70 cents to a
| credit card, it doesn't make sense. Tieing it to an app,
| you can either charge more and have me loan you the
| balance, or you can wait until I acrue enough debt that
| it's economic to charge me.
|
| With full EVs, they can usually pull enough current to
| reach a billable amount in a short time, but aggregating
| charges may still be useful.
| Marsymars wrote:
| It doesn't have to be an app to handle small transactions
| - different countries already have mechanisms in place to
| handle that - e.g. any credit card purchase under $5 gets
| a $1 surcharge, to avoid the surcharge you can tap with a
| debit card (with much lower transaction costs).
| speedgoose wrote:
| The Mini Cooper E, the one adapted from the i3 platform from
| 2013 but without the nice parts of the i3 such as the light
| carbon fiber monocoque, the aluminium frame, and the rear wheel
| engine and rear wheel drive?
| anarticle wrote:
| Probably the J01 SE, an electric model not available in the
| US due to tariffs, but available everywhere else.
| M0r13n wrote:
| yes!
| speedgoose wrote:
| Oh I see. It sells extremely poorly in Norway. Looking at
| the specs, I could guess why.
| garyfirestorm wrote:
| Inversely I leased a Fiat 500e for a year in Detroit Michigan
| and had no issues with range ~130 miles. I would plug it in
| nightly as I had a level 2 charger installed at my house. The
| experiment was quite successful. I just didn't like front wheel
| drive on somedays with heavy snow. I used it for commuting to
| work, buying groceries and visiting friends nearby. It met my
| needs and I feel a slightly bigger car with 4 doors and 200-250
| mile range should be sufficient for most of the people
| (assuming it is affordable)
| M0r13n wrote:
| Sadly, I don't own a wall box. So I'm dependent on public
| infrastructure. If I could charge at home I'd be even happier
| with my car.
| foobarian wrote:
| Sadly I think it's kind of accepted by this point that
| overnight charging is a prerequisite to a good experience
| with an EV.
| overfeed wrote:
| It's not a prerequisite: I see lots of people plugging
| their cars at public chargers in my residential area; I
| assume they charge once a week while doing groceries or
| dining out.
| Marsymars wrote:
| I like the form factor of the 500e, but boy do I not trust
| Fiat.
| dangus wrote:
| I hate to say it, but doesn't a lot of this have to do with
| your poor choice of vehicles? You bought a 35kW battery-
| equipped EV and replaced it with an EV with a 32.6kW battery.
| What did you expect?
|
| I don't see poor software as a problem that's related to the
| powertrain. My ICE vehicle from 2016 has poor software that
| never gets updates.
|
| You overspent on a Mini because Minis are overpriced vehicles.
| On mobile.de I see a used VW ID3 (82 kW (Pro S)) with 60000 km
| miles on it listed for 22000 euros. I see a Kia EV6 GT-line
| with 18000km (77 kW) for 33000 euros.
|
| I totally understand the issues with broken and insufficient
| chargers, as we have that same issue in the USA, but that's why
| you maybe avoid getting the kind of vehicle that has some of
| the smallest battery on the market if you need that range.
| M0r13n wrote:
| I agree. Though I replaced it with a car with a capacity of
| 40 kW and better overall efficiency. You're right, however,
| that I could have bought a used VW ID.3 or similar. But I
| can't stand how these cars look or feel. I'm also not
| complaining. I really like my car. I just wanted to share my
| experience :)
| oompydoompy74 wrote:
| Might I suggest choosing an EV that has more range?
| padjo wrote:
| You're making me very happy with my decision in 2021 to resist
| the appealing design of the Honda and buy an id3 with a
| reasonably sized battery.
|
| Also your in winter are you running the heater constantly? I
| find just dressing for outdoors, leaving the heater off and
| using heated seats/wheel means I only lose maybe 15% range.
| M0r13n wrote:
| > Also your in winter are you running the heater constantly?
|
| Nope. But last winter it got really cold (< -10degC). Also
| the Honda was aggressively heating the battery
| themafia wrote:
| > are you running the heater constantly?
|
| Something every car prior to this has been able to do without
| any impact on performance.
|
| > means I only lose maybe 15% range.
|
| Which could be a reasonable sacrifice if you choose to make
| it. It's certainly not included in the marketing for these
| vehicles.
| wongarsu wrote:
| Running a heater is easier the less efficient your engine
| is, because there's more waste heat to work with. ICEs have
| the clear advantage there
| 1718627440 wrote:
| If the energy is used for something intended (e.g. hot
| air) than it is not inefficient.
| Marsymars wrote:
| That's not really the context of the comment though. The
| point is just that an EV turns ~80% of its fuel energy
| into motion (with the rest as heat) and an ICE turns
| about ~30% of its fuel energy into motion (with the rest
| as heat).
|
| If you need heat, an EV needs to turn more of its fuel
| energy into heat, while an ICE can just repurpose what
| was otherwise being dumped.
| themafia wrote:
| The second factor is your battery needs heat. So you may
| be forced to generate excess heat even if you aren't
| using it in the cabin.
|
| The point being is that EV cars are a great idea, but the
| American auto market was not a good _general_ fit, and
| manufacturers didn't tailor their products enough to
| actually be successful. They really just pushed a bunch
| of product onto the market to capitalize on government
| subsidies.
|
| Which, to me, is the real "risk." Manufacturer
| incompetence. That all being said my next car will
| probably be a hybrid.
| Asmod4n wrote:
| The temps don't affect your range that much, it's mostly the
| tires.
|
| I got a heat pump and using the heater or AC only needs
| around 1 kWh during the winter or when it's hot.
|
| But winter tires increase the power consumption by 30%, just
| like with a diesel.
| sigio wrote:
| Public AC charging in Germany isn't great, but DC/Fast charging
| is quite good. I traverse the entire country with a Kia Nero
| EV, and that's not really a problem using either EnBW, Tesla or
| Ionity chargers. Besides these networks there are enough others
| with mostly nation-wide coverage (but not as cheap as these).
|
| (EnBW and Ionity for 39ct/kwh, tesla for a bit more or less,
| depending on time and location)
| inglor_cz wrote:
| One of the interesting trends in my life (I am 47 now) is the
| slow collapse of the "in Germany, things WORK!" concept.
|
| It used to be actually true in the 1990s, but right now, I
| definitely expect better public services in Poland than in DE.
| notrealyme123 wrote:
| Sounds Bad in the north. In the south I have a charger max 10
| min away in every direction. And 300kw charger are also the
| norm for long distance charging. I was surprised to see that
| even some Aral gas stations removed some of their pumps and
| replaced them with high speed chargers around here.
| Asmod4n wrote:
| Seams to be a non issue in the south, I can charge near my
| house, everywhere I have to do something and at work.
|
| Aka, every super market has at least one charger. Most parking
| spaces have 2-3 chargers. From various vendors. Some even for
| less money then you can get for your own house per kWh.
|
| I also had no issues in the north east so far or in north rein
| westfalia.
|
| Chargers usually don't break but get shut down when the grid
| can't handle their load currently.
| simonw wrote:
| The other day I was joking with friends about how I'd love to
| have a car with a deployable surveillance drone to help with
| parking and so if I'm stuck in traffic I could have my drone
| scout ahead and see what's up.
|
| Turns out BYD have one of those already!
| https://www.theverge.com/news/622963/byd-dji-vehicle-mounted...
| black_puppydog wrote:
| Dear god, the street level noise pollution of flying taxies,
| but democratized so _everyone_ can have it! : /
|
| Makes me happy for once about the restrictive drone policies
| where I live.
| maxkfranz wrote:
| Basically the Larry David periscope car:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQRm1cg8T8I
|
| His idea was like a back up camera, but front-facing and
| elevated (retractable).
| c22 wrote:
| Make the drone carry a couple of orange cones (or just look
| like an orange cone itself) and you can even have it save the
| spot it finds until you get there.
| JambalayaJimbo wrote:
| This is both really cool and also fucking insanity - the
| lengths we'll go just to avoid building better train service.
| archagon wrote:
| To be clear, China has no issues improving train service at
| the same time.
| tren_hard wrote:
| I could see a future integrated feature among cars brands doing
| this with their cameras. Teslas in your area on the road are
| already monitoring everything, then flag available street
| parking spots so autopilot cars looking for parking are
| dispatched to the nearest one. No need for drones if you
| already have a sufficiently large fleet of cars on the road.
| themafia wrote:
| Why wouldn't we just wire up all the parking spaces with
| sensors and then have a city wide parking app just for this?
| That seems far more efficient and safer over having a fleet
| of parking scout drones randomly flying throughout the city.
| wongarsu wrote:
| Because the car owner has an incentive to spend a couple
| thousand extra for a scout drone, but cities have very
| little incentive to spend many millions on a major
| infrastructure project that achieves the same. Despite that
| being cheaper than everyone getting a drone port in their
| car
| Waterluvian wrote:
| It feels intuitive that cities would have the same
| incentive to maximize use of parking spots as they do
| having them in the first place. Cities want commerce to
| flow.
|
| But let's simplify it down a bit further: pretend all
| parking spots are for-profit. These lots would want to
| communicate vacancy to maximize use. Much like how motels
| are motivated to tell you when they have vacancy without
| you having to stop to find out.
| bluebarbet wrote:
| The correct answer seems to be: because our economic model
| requires that new junk be constantly invented in order that
| we have something to buy. Alas.
| drcongo wrote:
| Get a deposit down on the Xpeng AeroHT!
| https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/xpeng-land-aircr...
| ErroneousBosh wrote:
| > The other day I was joking with friends about how I'd love to
| have a car with a deployable surveillance drone to help with
| parking and so if I'm stuck in traffic I could have my drone
| scout ahead and see what's up.
|
| The Yutong electric buses that Ember use around where I live
| have something like this but I guess it just uses the cameras
| mounted around the bus. When the driver closes the door, the
| central screen on the dashboard does a kind "fake drone
| flyaround" of the bus, even showing reasonably realistic
| depictions of vehicles on the road around it.
| duskwuff wrote:
| A lot of modern SUVs have "360deg backup camera" features
| which work similarly - the car uses footage from cameras
| mounted around the vehicle to synthesize a top-down view.
| It's great for backing out of tight parking spaces, and I can
| only imagine it's even more useful on a bus.
| sirjaz wrote:
| But what about Hydrogen? Many ICE companies would be better to
| focus on that. It would allow legacy vehicles to stay on the
| road, and fix the range anxiety in places like the US which is
| way bigger than all of the EU and bigger than the populated parts
| of China.
| sawjet wrote:
| Hydrogen ICE is not a viable technology for many reasons.
| Combustion temperatures would require exotic alloys to manage
| and the power density is quite low. I remember BMW made a H2
| ice version of one of their large V12s and it made like
| 125hp...
| seabrookmx wrote:
| It's also really hard to store. The tanks need to be made of
| exotic materials and withstand incredible pressures.
| AnotherGoodName wrote:
| It's invariably made from fossil fuels.
|
| If you want to make synthetic fuels it's similar effort and
| efficiency to make methane as it is to make hydrogen. In fact
| converting one to the other is trivial and the conversion from
| methane is how we actually make hydrogen today.
|
| Hydrogen has a lot of issues. It's a pain to store since it's
| corrosive and does not liquify or stay liquified without
| cooling and extremely strong pressure vessels. Methan is
| already used pretty commonly. A lot of busses run on methane
| today.
|
| So we're taking methane, a fuel that's used in transit already
| and that we gave a shortage if right now since it makes
| fertilizer and the hormuz straight is blocked. We're taking
| that precious methane and converting it to hydrogen (not at all
| green to do this and the carbon goes into the air at this
| point) and then we're awkwardly transporting this and storing
| it in cars with all the problems that has just to burn the
| hydrogen in the car pretending that we never released co2 in
| the process.
|
| Now you might say 'yeah but in theory you could use electricity
| to make hydrogen' and I'll point out that's grossly inefficient
| to just using a battery electric vehicle and it's not at all
| done at an industrial scale due to the reality that it was
| always just a way to sell fossil fuels with an obfuscation of
| where the release of carbon occurs and never intended an actual
| reasonable way to store electricity.
| speedgoose wrote:
| In my personal experience, range anxiety is much stronger with
| hydrogen because hydrogen stations are very rare and
| unreliable.
|
| Also, a hydrogen car needs a battery anyway. Just make a bigger
| battery and skip the hydrogen part. Cheaper, simpler,
| lighter,...
| rsynnott wrote:
| People have been trying hydrogen. It's generally a bit of a
| disaster.
|
| And increasingly I think that is being quietly admitted. It has
| a weird afterlife in buses (where the range potential is
| interesting for long-range intercity routes), but even there,
| at this point, it's marginal. The Irish transport authority
| placed an order a few years back for 800 BEV buses... and three
| hydrogen buses, for instance. A decade ago, BEV buses and
| hydrogen buses were both basically experimental. Today BEV
| buses are ordered by the thousand; hydrogen buses are still
| experimental.
|
| (Also I expect hydrogen _trains_ to hang around as a concept
| for a while, and it _may_ actually be viable there where adding
| overhead lines is not.)
|
| > It would allow legacy vehicles to stay on the road
|
| How? Hydrogen cars _are electric cars_; they just have a fuel
| cell instead of a battery. If you're imagining that they have,
| er, a four stroke engine that they burn hydrogen in or
| something, yeah, that's not a thing.
|
| I suppose if you wanted to get _really_ weird you could have a
| hydrogen turbine car? But again, that's nothing like current
| petrol cars tech (and would be horribly inefficient relative to
| the fuel cell ones).
| passive wrote:
| In the US, automakers are still a big source of union power,
| which is at least part of the reason Trump is pushing them to
| drop EVs. In a fascist state, you want all powerful industries
| closely tied to the rulers.
| mapgrep wrote:
| The Western carmakers have been responding rationally to market
| signals in moving away from EVs, meanwhile Chinese carmakers are
| responding rationally to government mandates and subsidies.
|
| It's actually the Western approach that is logically more
| sustainable, modulo global warming impacts. So it's odd to say
| that selling what people actually want to buy right now is
| "dooming them to irrelevance." The Guardian and the people it
| quotes are actualy saying "car buyers are wrong" but by way of
| blaming the companies responding to their signals. In the absence
| of, say, a carbon tax, what they are doing is highly relevant.
|
| Fracking led the U.S. to be a net oil exporter, meanwhile EVs
| have infrastructure costs Western governemnts are not prepared to
| subsidize any further. Those charging stations can easily cost
| $50k to install. The batteries are not cheap or easy to make, and
| the low price of Chinese vehicles is down to heavy subsidies, and
| much of Western demand was also propped up by subsidies that have
| been going away. Gas stations are built out, ICs are well
| understood. Yes the Iran situation has pushed up prices but that
| doesn't mean they'll stay high long term.
|
| There is very little evidence the market actually wants EVs. They
| are nice to drive, probably net better for the environment and
| our health, long term will likely "win," but none of that makes
| them "relevant" today or ICs "irrelevant."
| archagon wrote:
| How is the Western approach more sustainable? Once EVs get
| bootstrapped, they are better than ICE vehicles in almost every
| respect. Once your society is built around EVs, there's barely
| a reason to use anything else. That feels a lot more
| sustainable than having a hard dependency on fossil fuels in
| perpetuity.
| OrvalWintermute wrote:
| perhaps super efficient hybrids that blend the best of both
| worlds are really the future?
| general1465 wrote:
| This is less about carmakers and more about what customers wants
| and what infrastructure offers. People are just not buying unless
| EVs are heavily subsidized. And infrastructure is real pain in
| the butt.
| scuderiaseb wrote:
| The "retreat" framing is too US-centric. I'm in Sweden and
| European OEMs aren't retreating -- BMW Neue Klasse just launched,
| Renault 5 is a hit, Skoda Enyaq/Elroq are everywhere. These are
| competitive new platforms shipping right now.
|
| And the Iran/Hormuz situation actually strengthens the case for
| EVs, not weakens it. Swedish electricity is almost entirely
| hydro, nuclear and wind. When oil spikes, petrol drivers feel it
| immediately. EV drivers barely notice. Pulling back from
| electrification right now is doing exactly the wrong thing at the
| wrong time.
| anonym29 wrote:
| Since when had Ford, GM, and Chrysler escaped irrelevance? With
| the exception of parking lot princess pickup trucks, they've been
| outsold on their own turf by reliable Japanese economy vehicles
| for decades now.
| nxm wrote:
| Volkswagen is on a faster pace to become irrelevance due to
| dependency on diminishing exports, high energy input costs in
| Europe, and labor union which wont't let them right size the
| company. Good luck VW
| jpfromlondon wrote:
| No one buys mechanical watches anymore it's quartz or nothing
| jmward01 wrote:
| I see arguments in the comments about 'I had a disappointing
| experience a few years ago' where the entire point is that China
| has been betting on the future and putting the work in to get
| there. They had disappointing experiences too, but they learned
| and improved. We just give up. The whole point of this article
| and the rise of china in general is that the west keeps looking
| at just the now and 5 years ago and saying 'meh' while china
| looks at 5+ years from now and figures out how to build for that.
| Charging speed is slow? Start investing now in megawatt
| infrastructure at all levels expecting it to be the norm. Range
| worries? Invest in better batteries. Etc etc. Get people using
| the tech and the rough spots will work out more quickly. Instead
| we have governments retreating from subsidies in EVs while fossil
| fuels continue to get massive ones that keep growing in cost each
| year. (war is a subsidy. pollution is a subsidy. cheap/free
| drilling leases are a subsidy. etc etc) Fossil fuels are dead.
| EVs are the now. The only reason we still see fossil fuel
| vehicles on the roads and still in production is because we have
| no vision and the wrong incentives.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2026-03-21 23:01 UTC)