Tesla 2023
- Thread starter VicBee
- Start date
The market is wide open and ready for competition:
https://www.france24.com/en/europe/...oval-to-2035-ban-on-new-fossil-fuel-car-sales
EU gives final approval to 2035 ban on sales of new fossil fuel cars
Issued on: 14/02/2023 - 16:20
Cars drive on the Mittlerer Ring in Munich, Germany, February 1, 2023. © Lukas Barth, Reuters
Text by:NEWS WIRES
The European Parliament on Tuesday gave its final approval to a ban on new sales of carbon-emitting petrol and diesel cars by 2035, with a view to getting them off the continent's roads by mid-century.
European Union member states have already approved the legislation and will now formally nod it into law at an upcoming ministerial meeting, despite opposition from conservative MEPs, the parliament's biggest group.
Supporters of the bill had argued to that it would give European carmakers a clear timeframe in which to switch production to zero-emission electric vehicles, and spur investment to counter competition from China and the United States.
This, in turn, will also support the European Union's ambitious plan to become a "climate neutral" economy by 2050, with net-zero greenhouse gas emissions.
"Let me remind you that between last year and the end of this year China will bring 80 models of electric cars to the international market," EU vice president Frans Timmermans warned MEPs.
"These are good cars. These are cars that will be more and more affordable, and we need to compete with that. We don't want to give up this essential industry to outsiders."
But opponents argued that neither European industry nor many private motorists are ready for such a dramatic cut off in production of internal combustion engine vehicles -- and that hundreds of thousands of jobs are at risk.
"Our proposal is ... to let the market decide what technology is best to reach our goals," said MEP Jens Gieseke, a member of the centre-right European People's Party.
Gieseke declared that arguments from Green and socialist MEPs that electric cars are cheaper to run had been rendered "null and void" by the crisis of soaring energy costs.
"In Germany 600,000 people work on ICE production, those jobs are at risk," he declared, urging the European Commission to rethink plans to also extend the ban to trucks and buses.
The EPP group warned of what it said would be the "Havana effect" – Europeans continuing to drive vintage fuel-burning cars after new sales are banned because they can't find or afford an electric.
Opponents also argue car batteries are produced abroad by Europe's competitors like the United States, but Timmermans argued that thanks to EU-backed investment European production would increase.
Green MEPs stressed the importance of the ban in reducing emissions and pollution.
Victory for the planet?
Karima Delli, president of the transport committee, declared: "Today's vote is a historic vote for the ecological transition.
"We will no longer, or almost no longer, have petrol or diesel cars on our roads in 2050 ... it is a victory for our planet and our populations"
Cars currently account for about 15 percent of all CO2 emissions in the EU, while transportation overall accounts for around a quarter.
In October last year, EU member states, the European Commission and parliament's negotiators agreed on a proposal to reduce CO2 emissions from new cars in Europe to zero by 2035.
In practice, in the final legislation, this means a halt to sales of new petrol and diesel cars, light commercial vehicles and hybrids in the bloc by that date, in favour of all-electric vehicles.
US green subsidies
Car-making giant Germany and conservative MEPs have been dubious about the new rules, fearing the burden of re-tooling their plants and retraining workers while global rivals have looser targets.
But the European car industry itself did not lobby hard against the law, with many firms already jockeying for position in the race to become electric vehicle giants.
Since the law began its journey through the EU legislative process, however, the United States has unveiled a huge plan to subsidise the green transition of its own industry with government hand-outs.
This has led to fears in Europe that its US rival will siphon away investment and jobs in electric vehicle and battery production.
Currently around 12 percent of new cars sold in the European Union are electric, with consumers shifting away from CO2-emitting models as energy costs and greener traffic regulations bite.
Meanwhile, China – the world's biggest automobile market – wants at least half of all new cars to be electric, plug-in hybrid or hydrogen-powered by 2035.
The law passed the Strasbourg assembly by 340 votes to 279, with 21 abstentions.
(AFP)
these new rules will make the market wide open ready for US-only made competition!
Feb 15 (Reuters) - The Biden administration on Wednesday issued long-awaited final rules on its national electric vehicle charger network that require chargers to be built in the United States immediately, and with 55% of their cost coming from U.S.-made components by 2024.
The White House seeks to give consumers unfettered access to a growing coast-to-coast network of EV charging stations, including Tesla Inc's (TSLA.O) SuperChargers. Companies that hope to tap $7.5 billion in federal funding for this network must also adopt the dominant U.S. standard for charging connectors, known as "Combined Charging System" or CCS, and use standardized payment options that are smartphone-friendly.
Yes, it's fascinating to see the US which for many decades post WW2 was the leading crusader for free markets and competition but 80 years later has gone full opposite with nationalism and protectionism.
I'm sure there will be agreements between the US and Europe to smooth out flagrantly anti competitive rules. The EU is much stronger today than it was 30 years ago when it was easily bullied by the US and they can now counter with their own discriminatory rules.
But the issue is China more than Europe. A rebalancing needs to happen for China to fully grasp their place in the world.
wait, so legislating chargers is protectionism and stifling competition but legislating out ICE vehicles in EU is promoting competition? I thought you'd have caught a clue by now and I wouldn't have to spell it out.
https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/tesla-2023.371941/page-7#post-5764087
You like to slip from subject to subject, point to point.
When America decides to require parts or builds to be made in America, it's protectionism and subject to WTO review and possible sanctions. However, it's well known that by the time WTO issues findings, the conflict is often long resolved. So countries break the rules, then make deals with the main complaining parties to delay WTO actions. In this case, the government is only subsidizing production of US made parts or products for the electric energy transformation, thereby excluding non US made products, which the EU is challenging.
The EU has long ago, both as independent nations and as a united entity, rejected the US form of free market, one in which competition determines the winner. Instead, they get together to evaluate the situation and the remedies and create a rule that all related businesses have to abide by. For example, telecom standards. The EU decided GSM would be the norm, while in the US there are 2-3 standards "competing" with each other for supremacy. From my point of view, one stifles innovation for efficiency while the other is the opposite. In the end, the consumer wins or loses.
So, in the case we're discussing, the EU has decided that EVs would replace ICE vehicles while the US has decided to let competition decide who wins. Of course government influences the competitive market, being careful not to run astray of legal challenges. Note, the EU isn't mandating EU made EVs, they're just requiring that all auto manufacturers who want to sell their vehicles in Europe after 2035 will have to be EVs. Catch the distinction? The competition for a share of the 250 million EV vehicle market in Europe is thus now wide open....
I don't, which is why I mock your "competition will thrive" when referencing regulation that will phase the biggest competitor for private transportation out of existence w/a similar regulation limiting international competitors from entering domestic charging network. Favoring regulation which benefits your preferred sector/company by squashing competition while chastising another form which limits it makes you biased not a champion for "free market competition".
IOW, it's fine to call the EU regulation good for the environment/global warming, good for the sector, etc..., just don't call it good for "competition" or at least clarify it's good for "EV competition" which at least you've done to some degree in this last post.
Sorry mate if you don't see the fundamental difference between closing your sector to the outside world and redefining your sector that you keep open to the world.
But it's on you.
Sorry mate if you don't see the fundamental difference of how regulation "picking winners" is fundamentally different than the free market picking the "superior" product.
But it's on you.