Clean
Car Standards
Newsom
Calls Trump’s Effort To Scuttle California’s Auto Emissions Standards ‘Pathetic.’
According
to the Los Angeles Times, “California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Tuesday accused President Trump of trying to scuttle California’s strict car emissions standards to help the oil industry, calling it a ‘pathetic’ decision disguised as a way to assist automobile manufacturers.
Newsom’s comments came less than a month after California state officials worked to circumvent the Trump administration’s efforts to relax tailpipe pollution regulations by reaching a deal with four major automakers to gradually strengthen fuel-efficiency
standards. ‘This was a big blow to the Trump administration, what we were able to accomplish, and I don’t think they saw it coming,’ Newsom told reporters at a conservation summit at Lake Tahoe with leaders from California and Nevada. ‘This idea that they’re
helping the automobile manufacturers, that’s just been blown up, a complete myth. It was made up.’ The New York Times reported that a fter the announcement of the deal, a T rump advisor called officials from Toyota, Fiat Chrysler and General Motors to the
White House to urge them to support the president’s emissions policy. Newsom criticized the president for trying to impose his will on private industry, saying it was a strong-arm tactic expected in ‘crackpot, Third World countries’ and not the United States.”
[Los Angeles Times, 8/21/19
(+)]
Here’s
How California Derailed Trump’s Auto Emission Rollbacks. According
to Forbes, “President Trump’s efforts to roll back Obama-era regulations requiring more fuel-efficient cars have been thwarted by California, which recruited four automakers to agree to make cars that meet the state’s stricter standards—with more automakers
expected to follow. California has the right to set stricter environmental standards under a 1960s law, which has made it a powerful regulator in automobile emissions and efficiency. California represents about 12% of the total U.S. market auto market. In
2018, the Trump administration proposed a freeze to Obama’s planned fuel-efficiency increases for automakers until 2026. California said it would continue to enforce stricter fuel-efficiency targets, and in July, Ford, Honda, BMW, and Volkswagen all agreed
to comply with California’s regulations—which the Environmental Protection Agency’s spokesman derided as a ‘PR stunt.’ Besides California, 13 other states have adopted stricter fuel-efficiency standards and plan to sue the Trump administration if it continues
to enforce the rollbacks. Automakers, according to reports, are increasingly wary of the different federal and state standards, and warn that it could adversely impact production costs.” [Forbes,
8/20/19
(+)]
Will
Automakers Stand By Trump In The Rose Garden? According
to E&E News, “When President Obama announced more stringent auto pollution rules in 2009, he was flanked by the CEOs of 10 major automakers, who stood in the White House Rose Garden to lend their symbolic support. That may not happen again. When President
Trump announces the rollback of the Obama-era fuel economy standards this fall, it remains unclear whether any CEOs of major automakers would be willing to show their faces at the event. Indeed, the rollback is strongly opposed by the main industry that stands
to be affected. Most automakers fear the proposal will lead to years of regulatory uncertainty and costly litigation. In the strongest sign yet of their frustration with the rollback, four major automakers — Ford Motor Co., Honda Motor Co. Ltd., Volkswagen
AG and BMW of North America — last month inked a deal with California to improve the fuel efficiency of their cars and trucks in the coming years (Greenwire, July 25). Automakers are also hurting from Trump’s tariffs on imported steel and aluminum in the trade
war with China. And the president took the unusual step of publicly criticizing General Motors Co. CEO Mary Barra following the company’s decision to close several plants in North America. When Obama took the podium in the Rose Garden in 2009, he had a packed
audience that included the CEOs of General Motors, Ford and Toyota Motor Corp.” [E&E News,
8/21/19
(=)]
Two
More Carmakers May Dump Trump For CA’s Emissions Targets, Newsom Says. According
to the San Francisco Chronicle, “California is close to bringing two more automakers into its plan to reduce tailpipe emissions below national targets, Gov. Gavin Newsom said Tuesday, despite what he called the Trump administration’s ‘pathetic’ attempts to
pressure the industry not to get involved. Newsom said Mercedes-Benz and another company are talking to state officials about joining a voluntary compact, announced last month, to raise the fuel efficiency of their cars and light trucks to about 50 miles per
gallon by model year 2026. The governor declined to identify the second company. The New York Times reported Tuesday that after California unveiled an agreement in July with Ford, Honda, BMW and Volkswagen, a senior Trump adviser summoned three other car manufacturers
to the White House to urge them to stick with the president’s proposal to weaken plans to raise national auto emissions standards.
Newsom called it ‘shameful’ that the administration ‘threatened’ companies and told them how they should do business.” [San Francisco Chronicle,
8/20/19
(+)]
California
Deal Interrupts White House Emissions Rollback Effort. According
to Green Car Reports, “Rancor in the White House over the move by four automakers to strike a side deal with California over emissions and fuel-economy rules looks likely to further delay President Trump’s plans to roll back the Obama-era standards. That’s
the conclusion of a report Tuesday in The New York Times, which cited four people familiar with the talks. After BMW, Ford, Honda, and Volkswagen signed an agreement with California to continue selling cars in the state that would exceed new, more lax standards
proposed by the Trump administration, the White House summoned executives from General Motors, Fiat Chrysler, and Toyota to pressure them to support the President’s rollback proposal, the Times reported. Even amid that effort, Mercedes-Benz laid plans to join
the California side deal, two people familiar with the company’s plans told the Times. An unnamed sixth automaker was also planning to join the deal, the Times reported. Mary Nichols, chairwoman of the California Air Resources Board—the state’s top clean air
regulator who manages the California program—told the Times, ‘Many companies have told us—more than one or two—that they would sign up to the agreement as soon as they felt free to do so.’” [Green Car Reports,
8/21/19
(=)]
Tesla's Hefty Electric Vehicle Market Weight.
According to Axios, “For all the justified worries about Tesla’s finances, they remain in a pretty good competitive spot in the electric
vehicle market — for now. The big picture: The chart above, via this new Cox Automotive report on the U.S. EV market, shows how the Silicon Valley company dominates the market for pure electric vehicle sales. ‘Without Tesla, EV market share is stagnant, yet
almost 100 electrified models are coming soon,’ the report notes. Among a survey of people ‘considering’ an EV purchase, Tesla dominates in brand awareness at 81%. It’s not the only recent data showing Tesla’s strength in the EV market. Bloomberg breaks down
new info from the California New Car Dealers Association. ‘Tesla registrations surged to 40,085 in the first half, giving it 4.2% market share in the biggest U.S. state by population,’ they report.” [Axios,
8/20/19
(=)]
Survey Says Consumers Avoid Electric Cars Due To Three Myths: Range, Price, Charging.
According to Electrek, “Autolist has released a new survey showing consumer attitudes on electric cars. Among other questions, consumers
were asked what their biggest reasons were for not buying an EV, and the answers were pretty much what you’d expect. The top reasons given were range, price, and charging. But the problem is that these concerns are, by and large, out of date. In the chart
below, you can see a breakdown of the most common responses. Range, price, and charging are the top four responses, with No. 3 and No. 4 both being charging-related. Almost half (~40%) of respondents were concerned about each of these issues, even though modern
250-mile range EVs are available new for under $30k post-incentive and are capable of 50-250 kW charging rates on thousands of chargers installed across the US. These numbers are all good enough for the vast majority of drivers.
Despite ‘too expensive’ being the second most common reason that consumers wouldn’t buy an EV (by a slim margin), respondents also stated (by a wide margin) that price would be their largest priority in deciding which EV to buy. Survey respondents did have
a reasonable estimation of how much range an average modern EV would have. When asked how much range they would expect from a $35,000 EV, the most common answer was 250-300 miles.” [Electrek,
8/20/19
(=)]
In Tesla-Crazy Norway, The Electric Vehicle Revolution Is Already Here.
According to Fortune, “Until he moved to Norway, Michael Arup had never owned a car. But when the banker and his family moved from Copenhagen,
Denmark to the Norwegian capital of Oslo in 2016, they decided a vehicle was a necessity. So they did as the Norwegians now do, and bought a Tesla Model-S. It hadn’t been his first idea, he says. ‘I had just assumed [a Tesla] would be too costly, but in Norway
there are so many incentives to buy electric cars,’ Arup says. First of all, he paid no tax when he bought the car. There were other benefits too: no congestion charges, no road tolls—and free parking. Those perks have created a powerful demand for electric
cars, pushing the country—the world’s eighth-largest oil exporter—to the front of the electric car revolution. In the first half of this year, electric vehicles made up 55% of personal vehicle sales in Norway, up from 6% in 2013, according to Rystad, an energy
consultancy based in Oslo. That shift is largely due to a powerful mix of tax breaks and incentives to encourage Norwegians to go electric. Those stats cap a dramatic transformation over the last six years. In the period, sales of diesel cars have dropped
by 95%, the consultancy says, and the share of diesel vehicles in use has sunk to just 32%, almost half what it was in 2013. The share of gasoline-burning cars has dropped to 17%, down from 29%, according to Rystad.” [Fortune,
8/21/19
(=)]
Hydrogen Goes From 'Fool Cells' To Forklifts. It's Here.
According to E&E News, “Nations and companies have been struggling for more than 50 years with the idea that hydrogen, the lightest
and most abundant element in the universe, might one day emerge as a solution to the growing need for cleaner energy. There has been a long dialogue about the ‘hydrogen economy’ and the eventual use of hydrogen as a fuel and as a way to store renewable energy.
This summer provided a glimpse of its promise when the U.S. celebrated the anniversary of the Apollo space program. Hydrogen-powered fuel cells provided electricity for the space capsules, and the resulting waste was pure drinking water for astronauts on their
way to and from the moon. It was touted as a miracle, but it was many years away from being a competitive commercial product. The idea has been something like a comet that streaks across the horizon every 20 years. In the 1970s, there was a lot of discussion
in the U.S. about hydrogen-based fuels after the Arab oil embargo sent gasoline prices shooting up. But the enthusiasm waned when prices came down. Fuel cells were still extremely expensive. In the 1990s, the enthusiasm returned and automakers began tinkering
with fuel cells, the electric engines that power cars using tanks filled with hydrogen. But oil prices remained low. The fuel cell-powered cars and buses that eventually emerged were so pricey that Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla Inc. who later pioneered battery-powered
electric cars, often ridiculed the competition by calling them ‘fool cells.’” [E&E News,
8/21/19
(=)]
Chart Of The Day: Tesla's Market Weight.
According to Axios, “For all the justified worries about Tesla’s finances, they remain in a pretty good competitive spot in the EV market
— for now. The big picture: The chart above, via this new Cox Automotive report on the U.S. EV market, shows how the Silicon Valley company dominates the market for pure electric vehicle sales. ‘Without Tesla, EV market share is stagnant, yet almost 100 electrified
models are coming soon,’ the report notes. Among a survey of people ‘considering’ an EV purchase, Tesla dominates in brand awareness at 81%. It’s not the only recent data showing Tesla’s strength in the EV market. Bloomberg breaks down new info from the California
New Car Dealers Association. ‘Tesla registrations surged to 40,085 in the first half, giving it 4.2% market share in the biggest U.S. state by population,’ they report.” [Axios,
8/20/19
(=)]
EV Hurdles And Opportunities.
According to Axios, “Speaking of the Cox analysis, they look at some of the hurdles facing EV adoption, based on their survey of roughly
2,500 consumers. Why it matters: Overcoming consumer reticence is important for the growth of what remains a niche market, even as automakers big and small roll out new models. Where it stands: 77% of respondents who are considering an EV purchase and 87%
of those who are not say EVs are ‘somewhat’ or ‘much more’ expensive that gasoline-powered cars. But, but, but: Cox, in a release alongside the survey, notes that the price gap is ‘closer than most realize’ and is getting smaller. There’s also fresh data on
longstanding public concern about charging availability. Among respondents considering an EV, roughly two-thirds say there are too few charging stations near their home and workplace.” [Axios,
8/20/19
(=)]
auto Manufacturers
Top Tech Analyst Says Electric Vehicles From Jaguar And Audi Are Stealing Market Share From Tesla.
According to CNBC, “Competition is weighing on Tesla’s sales, according to A.B. Bernstein. The firm said increased competition abroad is responsible for the recent weakness in Tesla’s
sales volume. ‘Our analysis suggests that the deteriorating sales trajectory of the Model S and X may be primarily due to competition, particularly in Europe, from Jaguar and Audi,’ said Bernstein’s senior technology analyst Toni Sacconaghi in a note to clients
on Wednesday. Tesla’s financials have been weighed down this year due to the Model S an X volumes falling, the analyst said. In the first half of 2019, the Model S and X gross profit dollars fell 57% year-over-year, Bernstein notes. Typically, Tesla produces
about 20,000 to 25,000 Model S and X cars each quarter, but a drop in orders brings the average to around 14,000 per quarter. Tesla’s stock has reflected the weakness, as it has plummeted more than 30% this year. Sacconaghi said Tesla’s sales weakness is brought
on by competition, specially in Europe. New European luxury vehicles like the Audi E-Tron and the Jaguar I-Pace are all taking market share. Anticipated releases from Mercedes and Porsche could worsen the problem, he said. The total market for these luxury
electric vehicle’s (more the $60,000) has grown only modesty in 2019 and 2018 and Tesla’s sales volume has decreased. ‘In other words, the market isn’t growing much, and Tesla is losing share,’ said Sacconaghi.” [CNBC,
8/20/19 (=)]
Opinion Pieces
Analysis: Electric Cars Hardly Guaranteed To Beat Oil.
According to Jude Clemente in Forbes, “I still argue that one of the best energy headlines ever came out in 2011: ‘Lies, damned lies, and electric vehicle forecasts.’ Indeed, released
just a few weeks ago, J.D. Power’s Mobility Confidence Index shows that Americans are still not exactly in love with the machines that we are supposed to just assume will end oil’s century of dominance in transport. Consumers are not as optimistic about the
future of plug-in cars and self-driving vehicles as analysts and the media are portraying. Among other concerns, electric cars are too expensive, rely on a precarious supply chain (some immorally using child labor), lack a significant used car market, and
have worrying short-range issues. ‘24 Things Wrong With Electric Cars Millennials Choose To Ignore.’ J.D. Power finds that just 39% of Americans would buy an electric car and 51% do not see electric cars as reliable as oil-based ones. On a scale of 100, electric
cars scored a Mobility Confidence Index reading of 55, with self-driving cars scoring even lower at 36 points. The length of time to charge an electric car and the miles range that charge brings were cited as the biggest problems. Indeed, even with huge tax
breaks to encourage their adoption, the U.S. still only has just over 1 million electric cars, compared to more than 250 million oil-based ones. I mention many times how the future energy world will simply not be handed to renewables and electric cars They
will have to fight for it.” [Forbes,
8/20/19 (=)]
Chad Ellwood
Research Associate
202.448.2877 ext. 119