I was thinking Foxconn - don’t they make iPhones?
They just assemble them.
Landlords routinely upgrade properties. Sometimes it’s maintenance, like repairing roofs and repainting. Other times it’s actual upgrades, like “fitness centers” and AC (remember when that was unusual). They do it so they can attract tenants who will pay them.
It’s going to be a long time before the cheapest tier of rental units are upgraded for EV charging, but it’s already happening for higher end place, and not just for super-luxury places. A friend was telling me about how she used to plug her car into an outlet in the garage, but now they have added a bank of level two chargers and aren’t allowing indoor charging (but aren’t actually enforcing that, yet.) She lives in a small unit in a large apartment complex, pretty far out into the 'burbs. Not lower middle class, but not executive class by any means.
The growth of electric cars is certainly driven by people who own homes and can easily charge in their owned parking spot. But the infrastructure is spreading.
Depends on who gets elected.
One party might lobby for government assistance in upgrading the electric grid for mass adoption of EV’s. The other party unquestionably will not.
Right… wouldn’t want any input from the lower middle class, right? That’s only a few tens of millions of people. 
Nevermind that that would be exactly the demographic most likely to purchase less expensive, no-frills EV’s.
It was a long time for the lower middle class to get air conditioning, too. As you point out, there are real costs and paying them would increase the rent. And like AC, some places will adopt charging faster than other places, in any price tier.
But yeah, that may be why there aren’t a lot of those on the market. There are used EVs that are affordable, though. The leaf was a solid car if you didn’t mind the small range. The bolt was an excellent car.
And note that Foxconn is a Taiwanese company, though they do have assembly plants in mainland China.
I think you’re reading it wrong- it says 37% is light duty trucks, and 20% is passenger cars.
This is ridiculous Chicken-Little thinking, and exactly why I said we should concentrate on the low hanging fruit first. If we’re faced with a huge challenge, it’s not smart to flail around and waste time and resources attacking a small issue with huge costs first, especially if it’s only 5%, and you can get more bang for your buck elsewhere.
Not saying ground transportation is not low hanging fruit, but specifically that passenger cars are. Concentrate on the light trucks, semis, and other vehicles where they’re not ALREADY governed by some of the strictest emissions laws.
In other words, making pickups have similar emissions standards as passenger cars would make more sense than trying to electrify cars with Chinese imports.
The nice thing about important chinese evs is that China already did the work for us, we’d just have to allow their vehicles to be sold here. Obviously other than the safety testing we do with all cars.
They didn’t do the work for “us”; they did it for themselves, and they’re not going to share the technology, at least not without charging dearly for it. If EVs are the future, the American, European, Japanese and Korean auto manufacturers need to develop the expertise internally.
Also, not to be too paranoid, but modern cars, from any manufacturer, are actually spying on the driver constantly. I think if that’s a Western manufacturer, it’s so they can sell stuff to the driver, but a Chinese manufacturer?
Idk I’d bet on the non-chinese autos making more significant improvements if they have to compete in more markets. In any case even if no one else can replicate the secret sauce that still allows for lower emissions from autos if some Americans are just buying Chinese evs instead of non-chinese gas vehicles.
And non-chinese companies of all stripes can also sell data to China. Or china can steal data through various means. I don’t buy that tarriffs on China are actually preventing them from spying on us.
I don’t even understand what “spying” means. What would be the point?
The putative justification for the tariffs is actually that we want to encourage and develop more sources for batteries and semiconductors and be less reliant on a single country, which could very well happen if China flooded the US with cheap EVs. Basically to avoid potential shocks, like what occurred during COVID when the supply chain was suddenly disrupted.
That’s not an entirely unreasonable take, especially if the tariffs are eventually allowed to expire once there’s a more robust competitive environment globally.
Not just battery and semiconductor technology but the entire auto industry itself. I think the United States would still like to preserve domestic auto production.
The history on tariffs is that they don’t really work in that transitional way.
If, e.g., tariffs make a $20K Chinese car cost $30K landed in the USA, then the US manufacturers have a $30K bogey to hit, not a $20K bogey.
Let’s assume both sides do just that and that at some future date both US & Chinese EVs are selling well in the USA at $30K retail.
Now what happens if the tariffs are scheduled to expire in another 5 years from then? The automakers have two different tasks ahead to choose from over the next 5 years: Take enough cost out of their cars to reduce the retail price by $10K, or persuade Congress to extend the tariffs. Which do you suppose is easier and cheaper to do? Which effort is more likely to be successful?
The situation doesn’t really change if the tariffs have some prescheduled gradual phase-out over years rather than a brick wall drop-dead date. The US industry faces the same trade-offs and incentives, just in more but smaller bites.
That is what I said. What you’re missing is that ordinary, popular passenger vehicles like a RAV4 or CR-V are classified as light trucks (not to mention obvious examples like an F-150). Even the Subaru Outback was a light truck for a time!
So 37+20=57% of transportation emissions is easily addressable by the same EVs that you can buy already: sedans, SUVs/crossovers, pickups.
See above.
Yes, this is happening too. But it’s a smaller portion than light trucks and cars.
I live in a small single house on a street in rural PA. There are no nearby charging stations that would be feasible. There is no way for me to install or use any kind of charging station. I cannot run a wire across a public sidewalk, grass and then down the street to wherever I have been able to park that day. Not going to work for me at all so I am not considering an EV at the moment.
I am looking to buy a Toyota Corolla or Camry in the near future.
Looks like Tesla is likely to benefit from being first to market - eliminating the EV subsidy will strain Tesla’s domestic competitors. Also, the door to Chinese EVs will likely be shut tight for now (further benefitting Tesla):
Exclusive: Trump’s transition team aims to kill Biden EV tax credit
The counterargument is that the domestic competitors are losing so much money already that the subsidy almost doesn’t matter. Their ICE sales can continue to fund their EV losses. Tesla can’t do that–their EVs have to be profitable.
Shutting the door on Chinese EVs will help (everyone), though. They’re Tesla’s only real competitor right now.
Tesla almost didn’t get Biden’s tax credit. Biden tried to throw the climate under the bus by tying the credit to union manufacturing, as a way to earn a few UAW votes in key states. That was struck down, thankfully.
I read that General Motors is getting close to profitability, at least in terms of the variable costs (not including the fixed costs of building the factories and developing the designs). In part this is because GM uses standard batteries.
That’s good to know. I haven’t followed GM as closely as some others. Their models aren’t as exciting for whatever reason, but I’m glad their battery strategy is paying off.