ReportWire

Tag: Batteries

  • Here Comes the Flood of Plug-In Hybrids

    Here Comes the Flood of Plug-In Hybrids

    [ad_1]

    Last week, the Biden administration made it official: American cars are really going electric.

    The US Environmental Protection Agency finalized a rule, long in the works, that will require automakers selling in the United States to dramatically boost the number of battery-powered vehicles sold this decade, putting a serious dent in the country’s carbon emissions in the process. By 2032, more than half of new cars sold must be electric.

    Automakers will have more leeway in choosing how to reach the government’s new tailpipe emissions goals, thanks to changes made between when the rules were first introduced in draft form nearly a year ago and now. One big, important shift: Plug-in hybrids are part of the picture.

    In the draft of the rule, auto companies could only meet the gradually ratcheting zero-emissions goals by selling more battery-electric cars. But after lobbying from automakers and unions, which both argued that the EPA’s proposals were unrealistic, manufacturers will now be allowed to use plug-in hybrids to meet the standards.

    This means that now carmakers can satisfy federal rules by ensuring that two-thirds of their 2032 sales are battery electric—or that battery-electric vehicles are just over half of their sales, and plug-in hybrids account for 13 percent.

    Expect automakers to take advantage of these types of hybrid vehicles—which are powered primarily by electric batteries but supplemented by a gas-powered engine once the batteries deplete—as they race to meet the nation’s most ambitious climate goals yet.

    There will be a lot of these things on the road. But the technology has a climate hitch: It’s only as emission-free as its drivers choose to be.

    Gateway EV Drug

    In recent months, executives for manufacturers including Audi, BMW, the Chinese EV-maker BYD, General Motors, Mercedes, and Volvo have suggested that the “compromise” cars could be a springboard that launches more cars and customers into the electric transition. And the policy shift could be vindication for Toyota, which has bet that customers will flock to gas-electric hybrids and plug-in hybrids rather than following Tesla down a fully electric path.

    Globally, sales of plug-in hybrids are growing faster than battery-electrics (though this is partly because the hybrids have further to climb). Sales of plug-in hybrids jumped by 43 percent between 2022 and 2023, to almost 4.2 million, according to figures provided by BloombergNEF, a market research firm. Sales of battery-electric vehicles increased by 28 percent in the same period, to nearly 9.6 million.

    The tech has some powerful upsides. The average US driver only puts in about 30 miles of driving each day, meaning most could get by most days using only a plug-in hybrid’s electric battery, and only using gas on longer trips.

    Plug-in hybrids also make some automakers less nervous, manufacturing-wise: They’re more expensive to build than pure battery electrics (the whole two-motor thing), but the tech can sometimes be retrofitted into existing, gas-powered cars. This means less work, short-term, an exciting prospect for an industry that has to rejigger both how it builds its cars and how it sources the materials that will make their batteries go in the next few decades, as they move towards electrics.

    [ad_2]

    Aarian Marshall

    Source link

  • Cathie Wood’s ARK Invest predicts waning EV sales will balloon, hitting 74 million cars annually by the end of the decade

    Cathie Wood’s ARK Invest predicts waning EV sales will balloon, hitting 74 million cars annually by the end of the decade

    [ad_1]

    Forget about anything you may have read about the waning hype around electric vehicles. According to ARK Invest founder Cathie Wood, EVs are only just starting to take off.

    In her firm’s annual “Big Ideas” report published on Wednesday, the asset manager predicts the new battery-powered cars sold last year could soar by a third every year to reach 74 million in 2030 — all of which will at least be technically capable of driving autonomously. By comparison only about 10 million EVs were delivered to customers last year. 

    “As battery costs continue to decline, EV prices should fall, potentially driving exponential growth in unit sales,” the report argues.

    At an average selling price of $20,000 each, that represents a grand total of more than $1.4 trillion in annual revenue potential for EV carmakers, who she anticipates will pocket a tenth of that as profit before interest and tax. 

    The flip side is this will all but wipe out demand for internal combustion engine cars as total global new vehicle sales only hit 100 million in 2030, barely more than what was sold in the peak year of 2017. This may cause a “death spiral for incumbent auto manufacturers”, ARK Invest warns.

    EV makers struggling to reach Tesla’s scale

    Wood is known for her love of moonshot technologies tipped to render existing ones obsolete in five to 10 years, and to better predict trends deliberately employs research analysts from specialist fields rather than from conventional Wall Street backgrounds. 

    She first earned a reputation as a star investor for her prescient bullish bets on Tesla, which Wood argues should hit $2,000 in 2027, largely because Musk will have by then solved autonomous driving, what he calls Tesla’s “ChatGPT moment”. 

    Nonetheless her firm acknowledged that many EV manufacturers are struggling to scale profitably. So far only Tesla and BYD have proven they can ramp operations fast enough to achieve the kind of cost advantages their competitors can only dream of. 

    “Many are pulling back from the market […] because the already-profitable market leaders are cutting prices aggressively,” ARK Invest wrote, citing General Motors, Volkswagen and Ford delaying some of their EV capacity expansion plans.

    Volvo Cars abandons Polestar in its hour of need

    One competitor that has struggled to scale is Sweden’s Polestar. The company should be ideally placed to benefit from the EV revolution in China and Europe, as it combines clean Scandinavian design and a premium brand positioning with a low-cost manufacturing base outsourced to partners to minimize cash burn. 

    In practice however, Polestar has been unable to scale fast enough to finance itself internally, growing vehicle sales by just 6% in 2023. 

    Now, large Polestar shareholder Volvo Cars said on Thursday it will cease any and all further funding and revealed plans to reduce its 48% stake in the company, in part through a “distribution” of stock to its own investors including its Chinese parent company, Geely.

    “Our focus is on developing Volvo Cars and concentrating our resources on our own ambitious journey,” the Swedish premium carmaker said.

    Seeking to reassure his investors all was not lost, Polestar CEO Thomas Ingenlath praised what he called the “continued cooperation with Volvo Cars” in other areas of the business, such as manufacturing. He also welcomed Geely’s interest to potentially step into the breach, before claiming talks to plug a $1.3 billion financing gap were “well advanced”.

    So given the recent gloomy news in the EV industry, why is Wood’s ARK Invest so bullish? The asset manager bases its call on a conviction that the cost for batteries will tumble 28% every time their production output (measured not in units but kilowatt hours) doubles. 

    Come 2040, ARK Invest anticipates applications for battery technology will experience their own “Cambrian explosion”—a reference to the most intense burst of rapid-fire evolution Earth has ever seen. This should enable flying taxis to transform urban landscapes by that point.

    Subscribe to the Eye on AI newsletter to stay abreast of how AI is shaping the future of business. Sign up for free.

    [ad_2]

    Christiaan Hetzner

    Source link

  • The No. 1 Reason Why This New Battery Tech Will Make Traditional Batteries Obsolete… | Entrepreneur

    The No. 1 Reason Why This New Battery Tech Will Make Traditional Batteries Obsolete… | Entrepreneur

    [ad_1]

    Disclosure: Our goal is to feature products and services that we think you’ll find interesting and useful. If you purchase them, Entrepreneur may get a small share of the revenue from the sale from our commerce partners.

    Lithium batteries, the current industry standard, can be ticking time bombs. They’re expensive, environmentally unfriendly, and, frankly, potentially dangerous. Remember those headlines about phones and electric cars catching fire? They’ve gotten worse.

    In New York, one out of every five fire deaths this year were from lithium batteries. That’s the legacy lithium’s left behind. And if New York is any indication of what’s to come, the longer we rely on lithium batteries, the more lithium deaths we’ll be hearing about on the news.

    Even still, our future relies on batteries. Forecasts project the market for global energy storage systems to rocket up to a staggering $435.32 billion by 2030. Right now, there’s not even enough batteries for less than 1% of all global power needs.

    Therefore it stands to reason, with so many headwinds against lithium batteries, investing in a non-lithium technology could represent a significant opportunity. Thankfully, today there is a seismic shift away from lithium happening, and there’s one investment you can make today to cash in on this growing trend. A new company has introduced a revolutionary next-gen battery–a lithium-free innovation that’s safe, cost-effective, and incredibly powerful.

    Say goodbye to sleepless nights worrying about battery fires. That’s because the next-gen battery platform is based on a battery chemistry that is dramatically safer than lithium.

    Unlike lithium, this pioneering battery technology uses materials that are inherently safe. These next-gen battery cells can’t explode or catch fire, even under extreme conditions. In all of the stress testing, gas leak, and nail puncture tests, these cells beat every other cell tested.

    A new investment that can redefine your future.

    The company behind this revolutionary next-gen battery is an early-stage battery upstart called Next Thing Technologies. And they recently opened a new funding round to allow anyone like yourself to invest in their technology platform.

    That means you can invest in the next-gen battery right now.

    This technology can be so disruptive, it’s poised to transform how we power our lives. While the company’s flagship home storage battery is just the start, these next-gen battery modules are set to transform not just homes, but everything from data centers… to commercial buildings… to the utilities themselves!

    Click here to invest in Next Thing Technologies and their mission for safer and more affordable energy storage for all.

    Reasons to consider investing in early-stage companies:

    • Potential for returns: First of all, private companies may provide the opportunity for greater a return on investment than public companies. Their valuations often increase as they grow and scale, resulting in potentially higher gains for early investors before they reach the public market.
    • Early access to innovations: Secondly, investing in early-stage companies allows you to support groundbreaking ideas and technologies. Oftentimes, these technologies have the potential to fundamentally change the market landscape of the competition. And with disruptive potential, comes disruptive value creation.
    • Diversification: Lastly, if you are already invested in the stock market, early-stage companies offer new exposure to new companies in industries like technology or green energy that you can’t access as easily in the public markets.

    Next Thing Technologies says it fits those three criteria perfectly. And the company has already raised more than $6 million and counting. To date, they’ve made progress in five generations of testing commercial-grade battery cells. Now, they’re taking everything they’ve learned from all the previous tests and creating their latest generation module as well as a residential prototype.

    As a result, they intend to produce units in as little as 18 months. So there’s never been a better time to invest in their innovative technology platform.

    With an investment of $1,500, you can join thousands who have already backed this solution to our looming lithium-dependence crisis, and play a pivotal role in the shifting landscape of a massive industry.

    Learn more about Next Thing Technologies’ investment opportunity here.

    Disclosure: Past performance and forward-looking statements are not indicative of future results. This is a paid advertisement for Next Thing Technologies’ Regulation A+ offering. View the offering circular and disclaimers at invest.nextthing.tech.

    [ad_2]

    StackCommerce

    Source link

  • Tesla rival BYD and other battery giants are betting on sodium for EVs and energy storage—and challenging the dominance of lithium-ion

    Tesla rival BYD and other battery giants are betting on sodium for EVs and energy storage—and challenging the dominance of lithium-ion

    [ad_1]

    Battery giants are starting to put their money on new sodium-based technology, a sign that there could be yet another shakeup in the industry that’s crucial for the energy transition.

    Sodium — found in rock salts and brines around the globe — has the potential to make inroads into energy storage and electric vehicles because it’s cheaper and far more abundant than lithium, which currently dominates batteries. But while chemically and structurally similar, sodium has yet to be used on a large scale, partly due to the better range and performance of similarly sized lithium cells.

    That could be about to change. In the past week, Sweden’s Northvolt AB said it made a breakthrough with the technology, while Chinese EV maker BYD Co. signed a deal to build a $1.4 billion sodium-ion battery plant. China’s CATL already said in April that its sodium-based batteries will be used in some vehicles from this year.

    Read more: Charlie Munger says Elon Musk is outclassed by the head of China’s BYD—poised to overtake Tesla in global sales of fully electric vehicles

    “It’s serious investment,” said Rory McNulty, senior research analyst at Benchmark Mineral Intelligence. “It’s creating a confidence boost with them saying we are here to continue scaling capacity to commercialize this technology.”

    If sodium products do prove successful, they could curb lithium consumption. It’s also a reminder of the perils of trying to forecast metals usage in a constantly evolving industry as companies seek cheaper and more efficient cells.

    While sodium-ion batteries’ low energy density means they’re unsuitable for larger EVs, they could increasingly be used instead of lithium in lower-end, shorter-range vehicles — or for power-grid energy storage, where size isn’t such an issue.

    BloombergNEF has said that sodium should cut about 272,000 tons of lithium demand by 2035, or more than 1 million tons if lithium supplies can’t meet usage.

    Changes in the metals mix in batteries has upended supply-and-demand outlooks and whipsawed prices. Cobalt and nickel — which just a few years ago were seen facing long-term shortages — have had demand estimates revised by the emergence of cells that don’t use them.

    And the potential for big price swings is particularly evident in lithium.

    A buying frenzy sent prices soaring through last year — a spike that prompted battery firms to look at sodium as a cheaper alternative — before plunging as EV demand disappointed and supply prospects improved.

    “Sodium-ion will have a part to play in improving the lithium supply-demand balance,” said Sam Adham, head of battery materials at consultancy CRU Group. “It will dampen those really severe swings in lithium prices.”

    Even with the recent slump in lithium prices, sodium is still a cheaper option. If the market does grow, it could potentially echo the rise of lithium-ion phosphate (LFP) cells that have been preferred to higher-performing products due to their lower cost.

    Its clearest potential advantage is in storing excess electricity for grids, something that’s becoming more important as the world shifts away from fossil fuels. There, battery performance is less relevant than a low cost.

    Sodium’s success will also rest on improving cells’ cycle life — how many times they can be charged and discharged before needing to be replaced. Sodium cells currently average 5,000 cycles, compared with about 7,500 for the most cost-effective lithium products.

    The big question is being able to do that, and if it works then there could be more demand from the energy storage sector, said Rystad Energy analyst Duo Fu.

    For now, the developing sodium-based cell sector looks like it will be dominated by Chinese producers, who control most of the lithium battery production due to the large size of their operations that keeps costs down. That should give them an advantage over European and American rivals.

    European and American manufacturers “have far less experience in producing sodium or lithium batteries at mass scale,” CRU’s Adham said. “You’re able to be cost competitive in reality through economies of scale.”

    Subscribe to the Eye on AI newsletter to stay abreast of how AI is shaping the future of business. Sign up for free.

    [ad_2]

    Eddie Spence, Annie Lee, Bloomberg

    Source link

  • America Recycles Day: First-Ever “Zero Battery Waste Guide” Released by Crown Battery

    America Recycles Day: First-Ever “Zero Battery Waste Guide” Released by Crown Battery

    [ad_1]

    Crown Battery has just released a new “Zero Battery Waste Guide” that simplifies sustainable and effective battery management.

    “Our ‘Zero Battery Waste Guide’ is an actionable manual for both consumers and businesses,” says John Connell, Vice President of Crown Battery’s SLI Products Group. “It’s an objective tool for anyone striving for a smaller carbon footprint and a bigger bottom line.”

    The user-friendly Zero Battery Waste Guide presents findings from US EPA studies, independent lifecycle audits, Department of Energy pilot programs, Fortune 500 warehouses, Central Asia’s largest microgrid, and more than a million battery installations worldwide.

    The Guide shares straightforward keys to compare batteries’ recyclability, sustainability, and lifecycle impacts, including:

    • Why some batteries are 99% recycled – but others are 95% landfilled (sources: US EPA and International Energy Agency)
    • What is Zero Waste, and why does it matter now?
    • Battery selection strategies that reduce waste, carbon emissions, conflict zone mining, and ownership costs
    • 5 common battery-killing mistakes to avoid
    • Checklist: How to compare battery sustainability, engineering, and manufacturing for longer lifespan – regardless of brand
    • Easy steps that strengthen your supply chain
    • How to close the Battery Recycling Gap – and what’s next for Zero Battery Waste

    The Zero Battery Waste Guide also features on-the-ground insights from Crown Battery’s global sustainability initiatives,” says Connell. These include Crown’s switching to 100% renewable energy for manufacturing, sourcing approximately 80% previously recycled materials, and becoming the first battery company recognized as a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Green Power Partner.

    “Crown’s Zero Battery Waste Guide shows how to close the recycling gap, improve sustainability, and make informed energy storage decisions,” says Hal Hawk, President and CEO of Crown Battery. “Reducing waste helps our environment and gives you a competitive edge – regardless of which battery chemistry or manufacturer you choose.”

    To request a free copy of Crown Battery’s “Zero Battery Waste Guide,” visit www.crownbattery.com/zerowaste today. Or call +1.419.334.7181.

    ###

    About Crown Battery Manufacturing

    Founded in 1926, Crown Battery is committed to 100% renewable, lower-waste energy storage for more than 100 markets on six continents, including powering electric vehicles, trains, schools, hospitals, businesses, warehouses, and homes.

    Crown Battery is the world’s leading manufacturer of 99% recyclable, deep-cycle batteries. The companies’ batteries are 100% US-Engineered and -Manufactured — and every one of Crown’s lead-acid batteries comes from the company’s ISO 9001:2015-certified plant in Fremont, Ohio, USA. In addition, batteries use approximately 80% recycled materials. The plant incorporates solar panels, high-efficiency robotic welding, and 100% renewable energy.

    Crown’s consistent efficiency and sustainability efforts earned it the following American Electric Power (AEP) Ohio awards: Sustained Excellence Award (2020, 2015, and 2014); Continuous Energy Improvement Award (2016); and Energy Efficiency Champion Award (2013).

    Source: Crown Battery Manufacturing

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The future of warfare: A $400 drone killing a $2M tank

    The future of warfare: A $400 drone killing a $2M tank

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    KYIV — Sergeant Yegor Firsov, deputy commander of a Ukrainian army strike drone unit, sounds exhausted in a voice message he sent to POLITICO from Avdiivka, an industrial city at the center of intense fighting on the eastern front.

    Russian troops have been storming Avdiivka relentlessly for more than two weeks in an all-out effort to encircle the Ukrainian forces there.

    “The situation is very difficult. We are fighting for the heights around the city,” Firsov said. “If the enemy controls these heights, then all logistics and roads leading to the city will be under its control. This will make it much harder to resupply our forces.”

    Facing an enemy with superior numbers of troops and armor, the Ukrainian defenders are holding on with the help of tiny drones flown by operators like Firsov that, for a few hundred dollars, can deliver an explosive charge capable of destroying a Russian tank worth more than $2 million.

    The FPV — or “first-person view” — drones used in such strikes are equipped with an onboard camera that enables skilled operators like Firsov to direct them to their target with pinpoint accuracy. Before the war, a teenager might hope to get one for a New Year present. Now they are being used as agile weapons that can transform battlefield outcomes. Others are watching, and learning, from a technology that is giving early adopters an asymmetric advantage against established methods of warfare.

    “It’s hard to handle the emotion when a drone pilot hits a tank. The whole group and the whole platoon are happy like babies. Infantry units are rejoicing nearby. Everyone is screaming, and hugging. Although they do not know the guy who gave them this happiness,” Firsov wrote in a Facebook post.

    A typical FPV weighs up to one kilogram, has four small engines, a battery, a frame and a camera connected wirelessly to goggles worn by a pilot operating it remotely. It can carry up to 2.5 kilograms of explosives and strike a target at a speed of up to 150 kilometers per hour, explains Pavlo Tsybenko, acting director of the Dronarium military academy outside Kyiv.

    “This drone costs up to $400 and can be made anywhere. We made ours using microchips imported from China and details we bought on AliExpress. We made the carbon frame ourselves. And, yeah, the batteries are from Tesla. One car has like 1,100 batteries that can be used to power these little guys,” Tsybenko told POLITICO on a recent visit, showing the custom-made FPV drones used by the academy to train future drone pilots.

    “It is almost impossible to shoot it down,” he said. “Only a net can help. And I predict that soon we will have to put up such nets above our cities, or at least government buildings, all over Europe.”

    Contagious technology

    Commercial drones were first weaponized in Azerbaijan’s — ultimately successful — campaign to retake the Nagorno-Karabakh breakaway region from Armenian separatists. Their use has expanded rapidly in the 20-month-old Russian war in Ukraine.

    And, earlier this month, Hamas militants flew drones to knock out Israeli border defenses during a surprise attack in which they massacred more than 1,400 people and took around 200 hostages. For Ukrainians, the video clip of a Hamas drone destroying an Israeli main battle tank by dropping a grenade was a film they had seen before.

    Ukrainian drone experts and intelligence officials are convinced that Russian specialists have trained Hamas in the art of drone warfare — although Moscow denies this.

    Some experts worry that militants across the world will soon learn how to use FPV drones to sow terror | Simon Wohlfahrt/AFP via Getty Images

    “Only we and the Russians know how to do this — and we definitely did not teach them,” Andriy Cherniak, a representative of Ukraine’s Military Intelligence Directorate, told POLITICO.

    Ruslan Belyaiev, head of the Dronarium military academy, shares that view. He warns that other militants will soon learn how to use FPV drones to sow terror.

    “No one is immune from such attacks,” said Belyaiev. “In theory, a specialist with my level of expertise could plan and execute an operation to liquidate the first persons of any European state … Pandora’s box is open.”

    Secret training

    While NATO militaries hesitate to use commercial drones that are mostly made in China, or made from Chinese components, some Western democracies have already shown interest in learning from Ukraine’s experience of drone warfare.

    Several figures in Ukraine’s drone community, granted anonymity due to the sensitivity of the matter, told POLITICO that special forces and anti-terrorist units of two NATO countries bordering Russia have taken courses from Ukrainian drone operators over the past six months.

    Their focus is on countering small kamikaze drones and commercial drones that can be successfully used for reconnaissance, correcting artillery fire and video signal transmission, one person with direct knowledge said.

    Basic training for a drone pilot takes five days. Learning how to pilot a kamikaze drone takes more than 20 days, Tsybenko said.

    Battlefield experience has led the Ukrainian government to shift its preference away from conventional military drones, which are miniature fixed-wing aircraft with a long enough range to strike targets inside Russian territory. The effectiveness of FPV drones at closer quarters has led Defense Minister Rustam Umerov to simplify approvals for new models to be deployed.

    “FPV drones are effective tools for destroying the enemy and protecting our country. The Ministry of Defense is doing everything possible to increase number of drones,” Umerov said in a statement on Wednesday.

    Team players

    Every FPV drone pilot works in tandem with aerial reconnaissance units, who fly a DJI Mavic or other type of drone with video and audio transmitters to observe their mission. “An FPV loses its video signal close to the target. So, the other drone helps the pilot and supporting units to understand the target was indeed hit,” Tsybenko said.

    Firsov confirmed that in a Facebook post from the front. What looks simple on video in fact requires close coordination between dozens of people.

    “Everything seems so simple, put on glasses — and “Bam!” you destroyed a tank,” said Firsov. “In fact, aerial scouts spend hours looking for targets. A decryptor looks at video and finds targets that the enemy has carefully hidden. A navigator who is nearby helps the pilot to fly along the route. An engineer attaching explosives, a sapper, who twists standard ammunition for drones and many, many others.”

    Russian forces use FPV drones to target single soldiers | John Moore/Getty Images

    Most FPV drones are kamikaze, Tsybenko said. And their effectiveness has changed the stakes. The Russians, who at first lagged behind Ukraine in mastering drone warfare, have learned from their mistakes. And now they are scaling up Ukraine’s methods of drone warfare.

    Russian forces now have “countless” FPV drones that they now use to target single soldiers.

    Russia has also launched its own production lines and is devising new tactics to deploy drones in swarms. “One manager and all the others will repeat the movement. This controlled pack is a very big threat on the battlefield,” Tsybenko warned.

    China factor

    However, neither Ukraine nor Russia are able to produce drones for warfare by themselves. They still source crucial parts from China — the leading maker of commercial drones. Earlier this year the Chinese Ministry of Commerce imposed restrictions on drone exports to both Ukraine and Russia out of “fear it would be used for military purposes.”

    Still, it’s possible to obtain components and drones via third countries. “Yes, China can either stop or stall the export of parts if it sees ‘Ukraine’ in export data. But it can’t control what we buy in Europe. Russia has fewer problems and a common border with China, and that makes drone imports way easier.”

    With Russia allied to China, the preference of Ukraine’s military for Chinese technology raises concerns among Kyiv’s Western partners. They fear that Beijing might pass sensitive military data to Moscow.

    “Every lock has its key. Indeed, the commercial drones we buy in stores are synchronizing their data with a server. But we learned how to create user logins that are completely anonymized. Even the drone might think it is flying somewhere in Canada — and not in Donbas,” Tsybenko said.

    “When we talked to Europeans, they were amazed at how easy it is to hack and anonymize Chinese drones. It is safe to use them, we tried to persuade our partners,” Tsybenko said, adding that Ukraine did not have the luxury of time to independently develop and certify its own drones.

    “If we waited, the war would be over when they finally arrived.”

    [ad_2]

    Veronika Melkozerova

    Source link

  • ChargePoint Stock Plunges on Capital Raise

    ChargePoint Stock Plunges on Capital Raise

    [ad_1]

    If anyone wanted evidence that the market feels skittish just look at stocks related to electric vehicles. They are getting hammered on capital raising activity that, frankly, should surprise no one.

    [ad_2]
    Source link

  • Novaphos Announces Appointment of Evgeny Fedoseev as Chief Operating Officer

    Novaphos Announces Appointment of Evgeny Fedoseev as Chief Operating Officer

    [ad_1]

    Globally Recognized Production and Management Leader and ‘Russia-2022’ Immigrant to Drive Revenue and Operational Efficiency for a New Era of Sustainable Phosphate Production

    Novaphos announced today the appointment of Evgeny Fedoseev as its Chief Operating Officer. Fedoseev will lead the commercialization of the Company’s proprietary technological advances that produce sustainable phosphoric acid. For over 20 years in the chemical industry, Fedoseev served as an internationally recognized operations leader who guided fertilizer production in Belgium, China, Kazakhstan, Lithuania, and Russia. He holds a Master of Science, a Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering, and an EMBA degree. Most recently, he and his family finalized a two-year journey to immigrate from Russia, which began after the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Prior to the Novaphos appointment, Fedoseev served as Chief Operating Officer for the fertilizer division at EuroChem Group, a large Switzerland-based international agrochemical company vertically integrated from mining to the production and distribution of fertilizers. Fedoseev will report to Novaphos Chief Executive Officer Timothy Cotton.

    “Over the last 10 years, Novaphos has invested in and developed a new, modern, low-waste, low-cost process to produce high-quality phosphoric acid,” stated Timothy Cotton, Novaphos’ Chief Executive Officer. “Our unique approach, patents, and technology are a true game-changer and industry disrupter. Most importantly, Novaphos will ultimately ensure that one of the most valuable resources on the planet remains available and can be produced sustainably. Evgeny’s years of institutional experience and knowledge will be crucial to Novaphos as we scale our unique systems and processing to serve a variety of crucial phosphate-specific industries. His decision to leave Russia is truly inspiring, and we are thrilled he and his family were willing to move to Florida to lead our operations. His appointment shows Novaphos is ready to enter a new stage of operations and production, and no one gives me or our team more confidence during this important moment for the Company.”

    “Novaphos is bringing innovative technology to a conventional market that has seen little technical change, and I am so proud to be a part of this Company,” stated Evgeny Fedoseev. “As a form of protest, my family and I left our home due to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022. While it has been a long journey, with many challenges and personal stories to share, we are thrilled to finally come to the United States and help revolutionize the phosphate industry. Novaphos has clearly developed a technology that will serve as one of the most significant advances in decades for the phosphate industry. I am very excited to join the team, contribute my expertise and passion to the continued growth and success of the Company, and will never forget the support the Novaphos team has provided me and my family over the last few months.”

    In his newly created role at Novaphos, Fedoseev’s mandate will focus on maintaining product quality, overseeing company operations, and ensuring industrial assets’ safety, reliability, and efficiency. He brings to Novaphos deep experience in engineering and managing the construction, modernization and operation of plants that have produced compounds such as ammonia, methanol, phosphoric acid, and their derived products. In addition, as the head of the fertilizer manufacturing units at EuroChem Group, he directed the integration of existing and newly created business divisions into a unified operational system. In June, Fedoseev received immigration approval and a work permit from the United States.

    ABOUT NOVAPHOS

    Novaphos Inc. is a privately owned company that has developed proprietary processes for use in the phosphate industry. Novaphos technology allows phosphate producers to use low-quality phosphate rock to make high-quality phosphoric acid for use in agriculture and industry without producing any phosphogypsum wastes, representing the most significant technology development in decades for the global phosphate industry. The process is scalable, energy-efficient, and produces a useful construction aggregate byproduct — J-Rox™ — instead of phosphogypsum. For more information, go to www.novaphos.com.

    Source: Novaphos

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • C3.ai, GameStop, UiPath, ChargePoint, Yext, BlackBerry, and More Stock Market Movers

    C3.ai, GameStop, UiPath, ChargePoint, Yext, BlackBerry, and More Stock Market Movers

    [ad_1]


    • Order Reprints

    • Print Article

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Munich car show a grim affair for European automakers

    Munich car show a grim affair for European automakers

    [ad_1]

    BERLIN — Consider this a final warning for Europe’s car industry.

    The IAA motor show gets up and running in Munich on Monday, but rather than purring Mercedes engines and silhouettes of sleek new Porsches wrapped under sheets of crisp satin cloth, the spotlight will be on Tesla and China’s insurgent all-electric brands.

    After a few years of sparring, this is where rivals to Europe’s legacy brands start landing punches.

    In a rare motor show appearance, Elon Musk’s Tesla is set to unveil an updated version of its best-selling Model 3 in Munich, while Shenzhen-based BYD — the country’s largest electric car company — will have a record six models on show in the IAA exhibition halls.

    The show’s organizers say 41 percent of those exhibiting will be Asian companies, which includes big battery-makers from South Korea such as LG and Samsung. The roster of Chinese companies has more than doubled since the last bash in 2021, and that includes market leaders in battery technology with big ambitions for the Continent.

    “China has its gaze set on the European market, with the potential to fundamentally change the face of Europe’s industries as we know it,” Sigrid de Vries, Europe’s chief car lobbyist at the ACEA association, wrote in a pre-show open letter. “Propped up by public money and government intent, it is no secret that China’s auto industry now mounts a challenge to the auto industry in Europe and beyond.”

    It’s not that the locals aren’t trying.

    In Munich, BMW promises an exclusive with its Vision Neue Klasse concept car at its hometown show. And the likes of Volkswagen and Mercedes have new EV models to talk about too. But many of the next-generation vehicles aren’t set to enter commercial production until later this decade.

    In the here and now, that puts the competition firmly in the driving seat.

    “While the EV transition of legacy OEMs [carmakers] is happening at a moderate pace, Tesla and BYD are gapping away,” said bank UBS in an analysis note shared ahead of the Munich show. “We consider two-thirds of the global car market as addressable by Chinese OEMs, and Europe is the most appealing region, given its size and the clear EV roadmap.”

    The alarming arrival of China, a global leader in batteries, is nothing new in European automotive circles; its brands have been building beachheads in richer continental markets with high EV penetration since the Paris motor show in 2022. But the invasion is on the verge of turning into a rout.

    Data from Schmidt Automotive Research, covering 18 markets across Western Europe, shows roughly one in 10 new battery electric vehicles sold in July was from a Chinese brand, with rumors that at least one company will soon invest in a local production site.

    “If Paris wasn’t a wake-up call, Munich certainly is,” said Matthias Schmidt, an automotive analyst.

    Mass assault

    Tesla has already snagged the top two spots in European EV sales with its Model Y and Model 3, but no company has yet cracked the sub-$30,000 EV market. China could do that. In a cost comparison study, UBS says it will be “near-impossible” for a legacy carmaker to compete with any Chinese model even if it is built inside the EU.

    That’s because of structural advantages companies like BYD have in sourcing batteries and components, UBS said.

    While BYD sold just 1,900 units across Western Europe in July, Schmidt expects the company to accelerate its sales push through the second half of the year with the launch of new models in Munich, including the new Seal SUV variant. The company “is truly dedicated to introducing innovative and high-tech eco-friendly cars to the European market,” Michael Shu, BYD’s managing director for Europe, said in a statement.

    The disruption by new market entrants is already playing havoc with the industry’s business model.

    Carmakers have traditionally planned product launches over seven-year cycles of development and sales, giving them plenty of time to earn fat profits from each generation of combustion engine technology.

    But the pace of innovation in batteries and digital technologies is upending that, and turning cars, at least during this rapid period of innovation, into fast moving consumer goods similar to mobile phones with models quickly going out of date, said Martin Benecke from S&P Global Mobility.

    At the IAA in Munich, Tesla plans to unveil changes to its Model 3 that will see it deliver more range from a charge.

    That puts pressure on Europe’s legacy carmakers to compete, and they may end up falling short.

    “One example is the ID.3 from VW,” said Benecke. “It’s quite fresh but it will stay for three or four years, even though it’s looking quite old already. There has been a face lift, but to compete [against the Chinese] with the same vehicle will be tough.”

    [ad_2]

    Joshua Posaner and Wilhelmine Preussen

    Source link

  • Why Latin America still won’t condemn Putin’s war in Ukraine

    Why Latin America still won’t condemn Putin’s war in Ukraine

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    The ghosts of colonial history returned to haunt European and Latin American leaders at their summit in Brussels.

    For the guests, four hundred years of European colonial rule, economic exploitation and slavery was front of mind. For the hosts, it was Russia’s war on Ukraine in the here and now. 

    The divergence in views was so profound that the two sides struggled to align their thinking at their first summit in eight years — especially to find words to condemn Russia’s war of aggression in their closing communiqué.

    That made the two-day gathering frustrating for all concerned — but especially for leaders of the EU’s newest member states from Eastern Europe, which have their own bitter memories of Soviet imperial rule and Russian aggression.

    “It is actually a war of colonization,” Latvian Prime Minister Krišjānis Kariņš said of the 16-month-old Ukraine conflict. 

    “There is a former colonizer, Russia, and a former colony, Ukraine. And the former overlord is trying to take back their one-time possession. I think that many countries around the world can relate to that.”

    Despite the pre-summit rhetoric highlighting the two continents’ shared values, EU leaders struggled to persuade the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) — which includes traditional allies of Moscow such as Nicaragua, Cuba and Venezuela — to clearly condemn Russia’s war.

    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy — a regular guest in Brussels — wasn’t invited this time. Wrangling over the wording in their joint declaration delayed the end of the meeting by hours as leaders sought to bridge the gaps. In the end, only Nicaragua dissented.

    “No one intends to lecture anyone,” said European Council President Charles Michel, seeking to placate his guests. “This is not how it works, we have a lot of respect for those countries, for the traditions, for the culture, and the idea is always to engage in a spirit of mutual respect.”

    Four hundred years

    Spain, which holds the rotating presidency of the Council of the EU, has its eyes on Latin America and likes to emphasize the close cultural and linguistic ties between the two. 

    But those links hark back to Spain — and Europe’s — colonial past. The Spanish kingdom colonized much of Latin America starting in 1493 and, over the next 400 years, acquired vast wealth by exploiting its lands and people. The European slave trade also forcibly transported millions of Africans into slavery in Latin America and the Caribbean.

    While European leaders hoped to ease geopolitical tensions, their Latin American counterparts came to the table with a clear message: Defining relations today means addressing and rectifying past injustices — especially as the EU looks once again to the resource-rich region, this time to power its green transition.

    Saint Vincent and the Grenadines’ Prime Minister Ralph Gonsalves | Jean-Christophe Verhaegen/AFP via Getty Images

    The prime minister of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines — a small island state that heads up the 33-nation group — called for talks on economic reparations for colonization and enslavement. 

    “Resources from the slave trade and from slavery helped to fuel the industrial revolution that has laid the basis for a lot of the wealth within Western Europe,” Ralph Gonsalves told a small group of reporters on Tuesday.

    This was part of his argument for a plan to “to repair the historical legacies of underdevelopment resulting from native genocide and the enslavement of African bodies,” as he said on Monday ahead of the summit.

    Trade tensions

    Trade talks between the EU and Mercosur — which groups four of Latin America’s big economies — also reflected the broader tensions over what it really means for Europe to start afresh in a relationship of equals.

    Beyond a cursory mention of a Mercosur deal in the final statement, talks with Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay were kept on the sidelines despite previous hopes that the summit could inject new energy into negotiations on wrapping up a trade deal.

    European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen did, however, say after the summit that “our ambition is to … conclude [at] the latest by the end of this year.”

    Industry and civil society have fundamentally different interpretations around how much — or how little — the deal would help put the countries on equal footing with their European partners.

    For businesses, the deal needs to happen to ensure the region remains on the EU’s political and economic map. 

    “For us, the [trade] agreements are important. We need stability and don’t want to be at the mercy of political changes,” said Luisa Santos of the industry lobby group BusinessEurope.

    But NGOs don’t see it that way. “Any proposal that leaves the region as a mere provider of natural resources for the benefit of the one percent in the region, big corporations and rich countries is business as usual,” said Hernán Saenz from the NGO Oxfam.

    Resource craze

    Sealing the Mercosur deal has gained importance for the EU, which is banking on the resource-rich region to power the wind turbines and electric vehicles it needs to meet its climate targets. 

    Brazil is the largest exporter of strategic raw materials to the EU by volume, while the “lithium triangle” spanning Chile, Argentina and Bolivia hosts about half of the world’s lithium reserves. As part of the summit, Brussels and Chile signed a new memorandum of understanding on raw materials. 

    Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (left) and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen (right) in Brussels | Dati Bendo/EC

    But the EU’s new appetite for those metals and minerals evoques those dark memories of Spanish conquistadors who set out to dominate large parts of South America — in the name of god, glory and, not least, gold, fueling an economic boom back home while stripping Latin America of its riches.

    While von der Leyen on Monday announced Brussels will pump over €45 billion into the region through its Global Gateway program — for infrastructure projects that, at least in part, will also benefit the EU’s private sector — Europe is coming late to the party in a region where China has already expanded its influence.

    And raw materials partnerships today, the region’s countries emphasized, cannot be based on a model where resource-rich countries mine the valuable resources — often under poor environmental and working conditions — only for them to be shipped abroad for processing and manufacturing, making them reliant on imports for finished products. 

    “This was the first time that we had the opportunity to discuss in such clear terms a mechanism that would take us away from extractivism in Latin America,” Argentina’s President Alberto Fernández said after the summit.

    “It took five centuries, but we managed it — I’m saying that half in jest, but we have at last succeeded.”

    Camille Gijs and Barbara Moens contributed reporting.

    [ad_2]

    Sarah Anne Aarup and Antonia Zimmermann

    Source link

  • Ford Venture Gets Record $9.2 Billion Government Loan for EV Batteries

    Ford Venture Gets Record $9.2 Billion Government Loan for EV Batteries

    [ad_1]

    Ford Venture Gets Record $9.2 Billion Government Loan for EV Batteries

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Ukraine downs hypersonic Russian missile using Patriot defense system

    Ukraine downs hypersonic Russian missile using Patriot defense system

    [ad_1]

    The Ukrainian military shot down a hypersonic Russian missile over Kyiv using the newly acquired Patriot missile defense system, an air force commander confirmed on Saturday.

    It’s the first time Ukraine has been known to intercept one of Moscow’s most sophisticated weapons, after receiving the long-sought, American-made defense batteries from the U.S., Germany and the Netherlands.

    “Yes, we shot down the ‘unique’ Kinzhal,” Air Force Commander Mykola Oleshchuk said on Telegram, referring to a Kh-47 missile, which flies at 10 times the speed of sound. “It happened during the night time attack on May 4 in the skies of the Kyiv region.”

    Ukraine confirmed that two Patriot batteries were operational last month, following training on the system from the U.S. and Germany, according to the Kyiv Independent. The interception of the hypersonic missile also represents a major success for the Patriot technology, in use on the battlefield after 20 years of upgrades.

    Kyiv had initially denied that it had shot down the Kinzhal missile.

    Ukraine first asked Washington for Patriot systems in 2021, well before Russia’s current war of aggression began in February 2022. The U.S. and Germany have each sent at least one Patriot battery to Ukraine; and the Netherlands said it has provided two.

    Separately, a well-known Russian nationalist writer was injured in a car bomb, reported TASS, Russia’s state-owned news service. Zakhar Prilepin was wounded in the Russian city of Nizhny Novgorod, in a blast that killed one person, according to the report.

    A Russian foreign ministry spokeswoman said the blast was the “direct responsibility of the U.S. and Britain,” without providing evidence, according to Reuters.

    [ad_2]

    Sarah Wheaton

    Source link

  • Toxic Germanity and the battle for ‘das Auto’

    Toxic Germanity and the battle for ‘das Auto’

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    BERLIN — Europe’s worst-kept secret is that the Germans ultimately decide everything.

    “I’ll never forget how all the other member states held back in anticipation, waiting to see what the Germans would do,” a senior U.K. official, recalling his time in Brussels, recently told a private dinner of MPs and other German officials in Berlin.

    The recollection was meant as a compliment, one the official hoped would ingratiate him with the Germans around the table.

    Sad thing is it worked.

    The second worst-kept secret in Brussels is that for all the “peace project” kumbaya, the Germans actually enjoy dominating the place. That said, even stalwart veterans of the EU bubble were hard-pressed in recent days to cite a more blatant example of toxic Germanity than Berlin’s last-minute intervention to save the internal combustion engine.

    To recap: Last week, EU countries were expected to rubber-stamp a package of measures aimed at ridding Europe’s roads of fuel-burning autos. Under the plan, the EU would prohibit new registrations of cars powered by internal combustion engines beginning in 2035. The sweeping deal, the culmination of years of painstaking negotiations in Brussels and European capitals, is a pillar of the EU’s ambitious goal to become carbon neutral by 2050.

    Berlin’s 11th-hour intervention on a deal everyone believed was done and dusted not only left the EU’s environmental policy in limbo, it also laid bare the bloc’s power vertical in all its dubious Teutonic glory. The message: Germany is no longer even trying to hide its power.

    Enter France.

    “For the French, the situation also represents an opportunity and they are never ones to waste a good crisis,” an EU diplomat said. “The more they can contribute to the idea that Germany goes it alone, the more it strengthens the view that the Germans are an unreliable partner in Europe.”

    Germany’s unprecedented move has given rise to fears that other countries will try to follow its example and hold EU reforms hostage by threatening a last-minute veto to win concessions, in effect rewriting the rules of engagement.

    Germans may not be known for their finesse, but even so, Berlin’s bare-knuckle tactics to save the engine have not just shocked Brussels veterans, it’s angered them.  

    That’s why the real significance of the standoff has less to do with CO2 emissions than how Brussels works. One big concern among EU insiders is that the coalition Germany has assembled to save the car, which includes the likes of Poland, Austria, the Czech Republic and Bulgaria, will go rogue as a bloc on other fronts, with or without German support.

    Berlin’s views on “the future of mobility” were so clear that Mercedes, VW and BMW pledged to shift to all-electric by 2035 | Photo by Sean Gallup/Getty Images

    It’s easy to mock the circuitous nature of EU decision-making, the push and pull between the European Commission, Parliament and Council, communicated in the opaque dialect of Brussels’ earnest eurocrats.

    Boring as it may be, the alchemy produces bona fide results that legitimize and sustain the EU.  

    That Germany is willing to tinker with this delicate balance betrays either ignorance in the current regime of how the EU works, ambivalence, or both.

    One could argue with justification that Germany was never going to kill the golden goose. Invented and perfected in Germany over more than a century by the likes of Mercedes, BMW and Audi, the internal combustion engine has been the wellspring of German pride and prosperity for generations.

    The image of a piston-fired Porsche 911 zooming down the autobahn is as core to German identity as sex is to the French.

    Take that away, what’s left (aside from beer and bratwurst)?

    Indeed, considering that the country’s automakers haven’t proved particularly adept at manufacturing electric cars (or more specifically the batteries at the heart of the vehicles), there was a strong case for Germany to develop low-emission synthetic fuels that would keep the internal combustion engine alive.  

    Berlin had at least a decade to do so.

    Thing is, it didn’t, choosing instead to pour billions into subsidizing the purchase of electric vehicles and the infrastructure to recharge them (full disclosure: the author is a beneficiary of such a subsidy).  

    What’s more, Germany also encouraged other European countries to follow suit. In fact, Berlin’s views on “the future of mobility” were so clear that Mercedes, VW and BMW pledged to shift to all-electric by 2035. The cluster of countries that have served as the workbench for those companies, from Slovakia to Hungary and Austria, all agreed to go along.

    That’s why the German insistence this month that the EU carve out an exception to the engine ban for cars powered by synthetic, so-called e-fuels has caught the rest of Europe flat-footed.

    Why now? In a word, politics.

    Germans may not be known for their finesse, but even so, Berlin’s bare-knuckle tactics to save the engine have not just shocked Brussels veterans, it’s angered them | John Thys/AFP

    Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s Social Democrats have dropped below 20 percent in a number of recent polls, putting them more than 10 percentage points behind the first-place Christian Democrats.

    Scholz’s smallest coalition partner, the business-oriented Free Democrats (FDP), are in even worse shape. The party fared miserably in a string of recent regional elections and in national polls, it is teetering perilously close to the 5 percent threshold parties need to surpass for entry into parliament.

    Party leader Christian Lindner, who used to drive souped-up Porsches around the storied Nürburgring race track, has vowed to save the engine from the clutches of the Green lobby.

    Scholz, keenly aware that his party’s base also remains attached to “das Auto,” has been happy to let him try and has so far not stepped in to intervene.

    About 1 million Germans work in the auto industry and many of those jobs — especially at suppliers — would be lost if the engine is killed for the simple reason that electric cars have far fewer (and different) parts than traditional automobiles.

    The real mystery is why the Greens, the other party in Germany’s governing triumvirate, have not done more to resolve the crisis. Not only has the environmental party championed the engine ban for years, but it is also the most pro-European party in the government and would normally be at pains to keep Berlin from even appearing to undermine Brussels.    

    Yet Green Vice Chancellor Robert Habeck has largely been silent on the issue. Far from the fray in Europe, he was last spotted in the Amazon having his face painted by an indigenous girl during a swing through the region.

    In a bid to defuse the standoff ahead of next week’s EU leaders’ summit, the German government sent a letter to the Commission on Wednesday, spelling out what it wants in return for lifting its blockade. Its chief demand — a broad exception for e-fuels — was already rejected by the Parliament and other institutions during the original negotiations over the package.

    Reversing that would require the deal to be reopened.

    The French are sure to cry foul.

    And then Germany will push ahead anyway.

    Joshua Posaner contributed reporting.

    [ad_2]

    Matthew Karnitschnig

    Source link

  • Biden rebuffs UK bid for closer cooperation on tech

    Biden rebuffs UK bid for closer cooperation on tech

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    LONDON — Britain was rebuffed by the Biden administration after multiple requests to develop an advanced trade and technology dialogue similar to structures the U.S. set up with the European Union.

    On visits to Washington as a Cabinet minister over the past two years, Liz Truss urged U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo and senior Biden administration officials to intensify talks with the U.K. to build clean technology supply chains and boost collaboration on artificial intelligence (AI) and semiconductors.

    After Truss became prime minister in fall 2022, the idea was floated again when Raimondo visited London last October, people familiar with the conversations told POLITICO. But fear of angering the U.S.’s European partners and the U.K.’s diminished status outside the EU post-Brexit have posed barriers to influencing Washington.

    Businesses, lawmakers and experts worry the U.K. is being left on the sidelines. 

    “We tried many times,” said a former senior Downing Street official, of the British government’s efforts to set up a U.K. equivalent to the U.S.-E.U. Trade and Technology Council (TTC), noting Truss’ overtures began as trade chief in July 2021. They requested anonymity to speak on sensitive issues.

    “We did speak to Gina Raimondo about that, saying ‘we think it would be a good opportunity,’” said the former official — not necessarily to join the EU-U.S. talks directly, “but to increase trilateral cooperation.”

    Set up in June 2021, the TTC forum co-chaired by Raimondo, Secretary of State Antony Blinken and U.S. trade chief Katherine Tai gives their EU counterparts, Margrethe Vestager and Valdis Dombrovskis, a direct line to shape tech and trade policy.

    The U.S. is pushing forward with export controls on advanced semiconductors to China; forging new secure tech supply chains away from Beijing; and spurring innovation through subsidies for cutting-edge green technology and microprocessors.

    The TTC’s 10 working groups with the EU, Raimondo said in an interview late last year, “set the standards,” though Brussels has rebuffed Washington’s efforts to use the transatlantic body to go directly after Beijing.

    But the U.K. “is missing the boat on not being completely engaged in that dialogue,” said a U.S.-based representative of a major business group. “There has been some discussion about the U.K. perhaps joining the TTC,” they confirmed, and “it was kind of mooted, at least in private” with Raimondo by the Truss administration on her visit to London last October.

    The response from the U.S. had been ‘’let’s work with what we’ve got at the moment,’” said the former Downing Street official.

    Even if the U.S. does want to talk, “they don’t want to irritate the Europeans,” the same former official added. Right now the U.K.’s conversations with the U.S. on these issues are “ad hoc” under the new Atlantic Charter Boris Johnson and Joe Biden signed around the G7 summit in 2021, they said, and “nothing institutional.”

    Last October, Washington and London held the first meeting of the data and tech forum Johnson and Biden set up | Pool photo by Olivier Matthys/AFP via Getty Images

    Securing British access to the U.S.-EU tech forum or an equivalent was also discussed when CBI chief Tony Danker was in Washington last July, said people familiar with conversations during his visit. 

    The U.K.’s science and tech secretary, Michelle Donelan, confirmed the British government had discussed establishing a more regular channel for tech and trade discussions with the U.S., both last October and more recently. “My officials have just been out [to the U.S.],” she told POLITICO. “They’ve had very productive conversations.”

    A U.K. government spokesperson said: “The U.K. remains committed to working closely with the U.S. and EU to further our shared trade and technology objectives, through the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement, the U.S.-U.K. Future of Atlantic Trade dialogues, and the U.K.-U.S. technology partnership.

    “We will continue to advance U.K. interests in trade and technology and explore further areas of cooperation with partners where it is mutually beneficial.”

    Britain the rule-taker?

    Last October, Washington and London held the first meeting of the data and tech forum Johnson and Biden set up. Senior officials hoped to get a deal securing the free flow of data between the U.S. and U.K. across the line and addressed similar issues as the TTC.

    They couldn’t secure the data deal. The U.K. is expected to join a U.S.-led effort to expand data transfer rules baked into the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation trading agreement as soon as this year, according to a former and a current British official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. The next formal meeting between the U.K. and U.S. is penciled in for January 2024.

    Ongoing dialogue “is vital to secure an overarching agreement on U.K.-U.S. data flows, without which modern day business cannot function,” said William Bain, head of trade policy at the British Chambers of Commerce (BCC). “It would also provide an opportunity to set the ground rules around a host of other technological developments.”

    In contrast, the U.S. and EU are always at work, with TTC officials in constant contact with the operation — though questions have been raised about how long-term the transatlantic cooperation is likely to prove, ahead of next year’s U.S. presidential election.

    “Unless you have a structured system or set up, often overseen by ministers, you don’t really get the drive to actually get things done,” said the former Downing Street official.

    Right now cooperation with the U.S. on tech issues is not as intense or structured as desired, the same former official said, and is “not really brought together” in one central forum.

    Britain has yet to publish a formal semiconductor strategy | Thomas Coex/AFP via Getty Images

    “This initiative [the TTC] between the world’s two regulatory powerhouses risks sidelining the U.K.,” warned lawmakers on the UK Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee in a report last October. Britain may become “a rule-taker rather than a rule-maker,” MPs noted, citing the government’s “ambiguous” position on technology standards. Britain has yet to publish a formal semiconductor strategy, and others on critical minerals — like those used in EV batteries — or AI are also missing.

    Over the last two years, U.S. trade chief Tai has “spoken regularly to her three successive U.K. counterparts to identify and tackle shared economic and trade priorities,” said a spokesperson for the U.S. Trade Representative, adding “we intend to continue strengthening this partnership in the years to come.” 

    All eyes on Europe

    For its part, the EU has to date shown little interest in closer cooperation with the U.K.

    Three European Commission officials disregarded the likelihood of Britain joining the club, though one of those officials said that London may be asked to join — alongside other like-minded countries — for specific discussions related to ongoing export bans against Russia.

    Even with last week’s breakthrough over the Northern Ireland protocol calming friction between London and Brussels, the U.K. was not a priority country for involvement in the TTC, added another of the EU officials.

    “The U.K. was extremely keen to be part of a dialogue of some sort of equivalent of TTC,” said a senior business representative in London, who requested anonymity to speak about sensitive issues.

    U.K. firms see “the Holy Grail” as Britain, the U.S. and EU working together on this, they said. “We’re very keen to see a triangular dialogue at some point.”

    The U.K.’s haggling with the EU over the details of the Northern Ireland protocol governing trade in the region has posed “a political obstacle” to realizing that vision, they suggested.

    Yet with a solution to the dispute announced in late February, the same business figure said, “there will be a more prominent push to work together with the U.K.”

    TTC+

    Some trade experts think the UK would increase its chances of accession to the TTC if it submitted a joint request with other nations.

    But prior to that happening, “I think the EU-U.S. TTC will need to first deliver bilaterally,” said Sabina Ciofu, an international tech policy expert at the trade body techUK. 

    Representatives speak to the media following the Trade and Technology Council Meeting in Maryland | Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images

    When there is momentum, Ciofu said, the U.K. should join forces with Japan, South Korea and other advanced economies to ask for a TTC+ that could include the G7 or other partners. At the last TTC meeting in December, U.S. and EU officials said they were open to such an expansion around specific topics that had global significance.

    But not all trade experts think this is essential. Andy Burwell, director of international trade at the CBI, said he doesn’t “think it necessarily matters” whether the U.K. has a structured conversation with the U.S. like the TTC forum.

    Off the back of a soon-to-be-published refresh of the Integrated Review — the U.K.’s national security and foreign policy strategy — Prime Minister Rishi Sunak should instead seize the opportunity, Burwell said, to pinpoint where Britain is “going to own, collaborate and have access to various aspects of the supply chains.”

    The G7, Burwell said, “could be the right platform for having some of those conversations.”

    Yet the “danger with the ad hoc approach with lots of different people is incoherence,” said the former Downing Street official quoted above.

    Too many countries involved in setting the standards can, the former official said, “create difficulty in leveraging what you want — which is all of the countries agreeing together on a certain way forward … especially when you’re dealing with issues that relate to, for example, China.”

    Additional reporting by Mark Scott, Annabelle Dickson and Tom Bristow

    [ad_2]

    Graham Lanktree

    Source link

  • Von der Leyen’s Davos tightrope: Calm Europe, reframe US spat

    Von der Leyen’s Davos tightrope: Calm Europe, reframe US spat

    [ad_1]

    The EU chief argued Europe and the US should team up against China to secure a climate-friendly future.

    [ad_2]

    Suzanne Lynch

    Source link

  • ChargePoint Results Fall Short. Guidance Is Saving the Stock.

    ChargePoint Results Fall Short. Guidance Is Saving the Stock.

    [ad_1]

    Shares of EV charging company


    ChargePoint


    have been caught in the sell off that’s hammered small-capitalization stocks that don’t produce earnings or generate free cash flow, yet. Investors hoped that third-quarter earnings could turn sentiment around, but some concerns linger.



    ChargePoint


    (ticker: CHPT), on Thursday afternoon, reported a per-share loss of 25 cents from $125 million in sales. Wall Street was looking for a loss of 20 cents per share on sales of $132.3 million.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Brexit Britain trapped in the middle as US and EU go to war on trade

    Brexit Britain trapped in the middle as US and EU go to war on trade

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    LONDON — Three years after leaving the EU to chart its own course, Britain finds itself caught between two economic behemoths in a brewing transatlantic trade war.

    In one corner sits the United States, whose Congress in August passed the Biden administration’s much-vaunted $369 billion program of green subsidies, part of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).

    In the opposing corner is the European Union, which fears Washington’s subsidy splurge will pull investment — particularly in electric vehicles — away from Europe, hitting carmakers hard.

    The EU is preparing its own retaliatory package of subsidies; Washington shows little sign of changing course. Fears of a trade war are growing fast.

    Now sitting squarely outside the ring, the U.K. can only look on with horror, and quietly ask Washington to soften the blow. But there are few signs the softly-softly approach is bearing fruit. Britain now risks being clobbered by both sides.

    “It’s not in the U.K.’s interest for the U.S. and EU to go down this route,” said Sam Lowe, a partner at Flint Global and expert in U.K. and EU trade policy. “Given the U.K.’s current economic position, it can’t really afford to engage in a subsidy war with both.” The British government has just unleashed a round of fiscal belt-tightening after a market rout, following months of political turmoil.

    For iconic British motor brands, the row over the Biden administration’s IRA comes with real costs.

    The U.S. is the second-largest destination for British-made vehicles after the EU, and the automotive sector is one of Britain’s top goods exporters.

    Manufacturers like Jaguar Land Rover have warned publicly about the “very serious challenges” posed by the new U.S. law and its plan for electric vehicle tax credits aimed at boosting American industry.

    Kemi on the case

    U.K. Trade Secretary Kemi Badenoch has for months been privately urging top U.S. officials to soften the impact of the electric vehicle subsidies on Britain by carving out exemptions, U.K. officials said.

    When Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo visited London in early October, Badenoch pushed her to rethink the strategy. The U.K. trade chief brought that same message to Washington in a series of private meetings earlier this month, including at a sit-down with Deputy Treasury Secretary Wally Adeyemo.

    Badenoch has “raised this issue on many levels,” an official from the U.K.’s Department for International Trade said, citing conversations with U.S. Ambassador to Britain Jane Hartley, with Secretary Raimondo, “and with members of the Biden administration and senior representatives of both parties.”

    The Cabinet minister has also spoken out in public, telling the pro-free market Cato Institute in Washington earlier this month that “the substantial new tax credits for electric cars not only bar vehicles made in the U.K. from the U.S. market, but also affect vehicles made in the U.S. by U.K. manufacturers.”

    U.S. Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo | Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images

    Badenoch’s comments echo concerns raised by both British automotive lobby group the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT), and by Jaguar Land Rover, in comments filed with the U.S. Treasury Department.

    The SMMT warned that Biden’s green vehicle package has several “elements of concern that risk creating an uneven competitive environment, with U.K.-based manufacturers and suppliers potentially penalised.” The lobby group is taking aim at the credit scheme’s requirement for green vehicles to be built in North America, with significant subsidies available only if critical minerals are sourced from the U.S. or a U.S. ally.

    In response to Washington’s plans, the EU is preparing what could amount to billions in subsidies for its own industries hit by the U.S. law, which also offers tax breaks to boost American green businesses such as solar panel manufacturers. Britain faces being squeezed in both markets, while lacking any say in whatever response Brussels decides.

    Protectionism that impacts like-minded allies “isn’t the answer to the geopolitical challenges we face,” the British trade department official warned, adding “there is a serious risk” the law disrupts “vital” global supply chains of batteries and electric vehicles.

    The conversations Badenoch had this month in Washington were “reassuring,” the official added. “But it’s for them to address and find solutions.”

    ‘Ton of work to do’

    Yet others believe Badenoch will have a hard time getting her colleagues in the U.S. — now cooling on a much-touted bilateral trade deal — to take action. “The U.S. is minimally focused on how any of their policies are going to impact the U.K.,” admitted a U.S.-based representative of a major business group.

    While Britain and the U.S. are “very close allies”, they added, those in Washington “just don’t really view the U.K. as an interesting trade partner and market right now.” The U.S. is more focused, they noted, on pushing back against China, meaning Badenoch has “a ton of work to do” getting the administration to soften the IRA.

    Nevertheless the U.S. is still working out how its law will actually be implemented, the business figure said, and is assembling a working group on how the IRA impacts trade allies. This has the potential, they added, to “alleviate a lot of the concerns coming out of the U.K.”

    Late Tuesday evening, the SMMT called on the British government to provide greater domestic support for the sector as it prepares to ramp up its own electric vehicle production. The group wants an extension past April on domestic support for firms’ energy costs; a boost to government investment in green energy sources; and a speedier national rollout of charging infrastructure and staff training.

    In the meantime, Britain’s options appear limited.

    Newly manufactured Land Rover and Range Rover vehicles parked and waiting to be loaded for export | Paul Ellis/AFP via Getty Images

    The U.K. “could consider legal action” and haul the U.S. before the World Trade Organization or challenge the EU through provisions in the post-Brexit Trade and Cooperation Agreement, said Lowe of consultancy Flint. “But — to be blunt — neither of them care what we have to say.”

    Anna Jerzewska, a trade advisor and associate fellow at the UK Trade Policy Observatory, suggested pressing ahead “with your own domestic policy and efforts to support strategic industries is perhaps more important” than complaining about foreign subsidy schemes. But she noted that after a “chaotic” political period, Britain is “likely to take longer to respond to external changes and challenges.”

    And in truth, Britain “can’t afford to out-subsidize the U.S. and EU,” said David Henig, a trade expert with the European Centre For International Political Economy think tank.

    Outside the EU, Britain could work to rally allies such as Japan and South Korea who are also unhappy with the Biden administration’s protectionist measures, he noted. “But I don’t think we’re in that position,” Henig said, as it would take a concerted diplomatic effort, and the U.K.’s automotive sector would “have to be well positioned” in the first place, not struggling as it is. He predicted London’s lobbying in Washington and Brussels is “not going to get anywhere.”

    [ad_2]

    Graham Lanktree

    Source link

  • EU plans subsidy war chest as industry faces ‘existential’ threat from US

    EU plans subsidy war chest as industry faces ‘existential’ threat from US

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    The EU is in emergency mode and is readying a big subsidy push to prevent European industry from being wiped out by American rivals, two senior EU officials told POLITICO.

    Europe is facing a double hammer blow from the U.S. If it weren’t enough that energy prices look set to remain permanently far higher than those in the U.S. thanks to Russia’s war in Ukraine, U.S. President Joe Biden is also currently rolling out a $369 billion industrial subsidy scheme to support green industries under the Inflation Reduction Act.

    EU officials fear that businesses will now face almost irresistible pressure to shift new investments to the U.S. rather than Europe. EU industry chief Thierry Breton is warning that Biden’s new subsidy package poses an “existential challenge” to Europe’s economy.

    The European Commission and countries including France and Germany have realized they need to act quickly if they want to prevent the Continent from turning into an industrial wasteland. According to the two senior officials, the EU is now working on an emergency scheme to funnel money into key high-tech industries.

    The tentative solution now being prepared in Brussels is to counter the U.S. subsidies with an EU fund of its own, the two senior officials said. This would be a “European Sovereignty Fund,” which was already mentioned in the State of the Union address by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in September, to help businesses invest in Europe and meet ambitious green standards.

    Senior officials said the EU had to act extremely quickly as companies are already making decisions on where to build their future factories for everything from batteries and electric cars to wind turbines and microchips.

    Another reason for Brussels to respond rapidly is to avoid individual EU countries going it alone in splashing out emergency cash, the officials warned. The chaotic response to the gas price crisis, where EU countries reacted with all sorts of national support measures that threatened to undermine the single market, is still a sore point in Brussels.

    European Commissioner Breton especially has led the pack in sounding alarm bells. At a meeting with EU industry leaders Monday, Breton issued his warning on the “existential challenge” to Europe from the Inflation Reduction Act, according to people in the room. Breton said it was now a matter of utmost urgency to “revert the deindustrialization process taking place.”

    Breton was echoing calls from business leaders all over Europe warning about a perfect storm brewing for manufacturers. “It’s a bit like drowning. It’s happening quietly,” BusinessEurope President Fredrik Persson said.

    The Inflation Reduction Act is a particular bugbear to EU carmaking nations — such as France and Germany — as it encourages consumers to “Buy American” when it comes to electric vehicles. Brussels and EU capitals see this as undermining global free trade, and Brussels wants to cut a deal in which its companies can enjoy the same American benefits.

    With a diplomatic solution seeming unlikely and Brussels wanting to avoid an all-out trade war, a subsidy race now looks increasingly likely as a contentious Plan B.

    To do that, it will be vital to secure support from Germany and from the more economically liberal commissioners such as trade chief Valdis Dombrovskis and competition chief Margrethe Vestager.

    At a meeting of EU trade ministers on Friday, Brussels hopes to get more clarity from Berlin on whether they are willing to break their subsidy taboo.

    France has long been calling for a counterstrike against Washington by funneling state funds into European industry to help industrial champions on the Continent. That idea is now also gaining traction in Berlin, which has traditionally been economically more liberal.

    On Tuesday, German Economy Minister Robert Habeck and his French counterpart Bruno Le Maire issued a joint statement to call for an “EU industrial policy that enables our companies to thrive in the global competition especially through technological leadership,” adding that “we want to coordinate closely a European approach to challenges such as the United States Inflation Reduction Act.”

    Apart from the trade ministers’ meeting on Friday, the idea will also informally be discussed among competition ministers next week. One official said European leaders will also discuss it on the margins of the Western Balkan summit on December 6 and at the European Council mid-December.

    Hans von der Burchard, Giorgio Leali and Paola Tamma contributed reporting.

    [ad_2]

    Jakob Hanke Vela and Barbara Moens

    Source link

  • Germany mulls breaking subsidy taboo to avoid trade war with Biden

    Germany mulls breaking subsidy taboo to avoid trade war with Biden

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    BERLIN — With only six weeks to avoid a transatlantic trade showdown over green industries, the Germans are frustrated that Washington isn’t offering a peace deal and are increasingly considering a taboo-breaking response: European subsidies.

    Europe’s fears hinge on America’s $369 billion package of subsidies and tax breaks to bolster U.S. green businesses, which comes into force on January 1. The bugbear for the Europeans is that Washington’s scheme will encourage companies to shift investments from Europe and incentivize customers to “Buy American” when it comes to purchasing an electric vehicle — something that infuriates the big EU carmaking nations like France and Germany.

    The timing of this protectionist measure could hardly be worse as Germany is in open panic that several of its top companies — partly spurred by energy cost spikes after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — are shuttering domestic operations to invest elsewhere. The last thing Berlin needs is even more encouragement for businesses to quit Europe, and the EU wants the U.S. to cut a deal in which its companies can enjoy the American perks.

    A truce seems unlikely, however. If this spat now spirals out of control, it will lead to a trade war, something that terrifies the beleaguered Europeans. While the first step would be a largely symbolic protest at the World Trade Organization (WTO), the clash could easily slide precipitously back toward the tit-for-tat tariff battles of the era of former U.S. President Donald Trump.

    This means that momentum is growing in Berlin for a radical Plan B. Instead of open tariff war with America, the increasingly discussed option is to rip up the classic free-trade rulebook and to play Washington at its own game by funneling state funds into European industry to rear homegrown green champions in sectors such as solar panels, batteries and hydrogen.

    France has long been the leading advocate of strengthening European industry with state largesse but, up until now, the more economically liberal Germans have not wanted to launch a subsidy race against America. The sands are now shifting, however. Senior officials in Berlin say they are increasingly leaning toward the French thinking, should the talks with the U.S. not lead to an unexpected last-minute solution.

    Berlin is the 27-nation bloc’s economic powerhouse, so it will be a decisive moment if Berlin ultimately decides to throw its might behind the state-led subsidy approach to an industrial race with the U.S.

    Running out of time

    The clock is ticking for a truce with Biden that looks increasingly unlikely.

    Recent attempts by a special EU-U.S. task force to address EU concerns have met little enthusiasm on the American side to amend the controversial legislation, the European Commission told EU countries this week.

    “There are only a few weeks left,” warned Bernd Lange, the chair of the European Parliament’s trade committee, adding that “once the act is implemented, it will be too late for us to achieve any changes.”

    Lange said that the failure to reach a deal would likely trigger a WTO lawsuit by the EU against the U.S., and Brussels could also strike back against what it sees as the discriminatory U.S. subsidies by imposing punitive tariffs. Warnings of a trade war are already overshadowing the runup to a high-level EU-U.S. meeting in Washington on December 5.

    MEP Bernd Lange Lange said that the failure to reach a deal would likely trigger a WTO lawsuit by the EU against the U.S. | Philippe Buissin/European Union

    It’s precisely the kind of spat that the German government wants to avoid, as Chancellor Olaf Scholz hopes to forge unity among like-minded democracies amid Russia’s war and the the increasing challenges posed by China. Earlier this month, Scholz’s government made an overture to Washington by suggesting that a new EU-U.S. trade deal could be negotiated to resolve differences, but that proposal was quickly rejected.

    There are sympathizers for the subsidies approach in Brussels, with officials at the EU’s executive saying powerful Internal Market Commissioner Thierry Breton is a leading proponent. Breton is already advocating for a “European Solidarity Fund” to help “mobilizing the necessary funding” to strengthen European autonomy in key sectors like batteries, semiconductors or hydrogen. Support from Germany could help Breton win the upper hand in internal EU strategy discussions over the more cautious Trade Commissioner Valdis Dombrovskis.

    Breton will travel to Berlin on November 29 to discuss the consequences of the Inflation Reduction Act as well as industrial policy and energy measures with Scholz’s government.

    The German considerations even echo calls from top officials of the Biden administration, including U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai, who are urging the EU to not engage in a transatlantic trade dispute and instead roll out their own industrial subsidies; a strategy that Washington also sees as way to reduce dependence on China.

    Plan B

    Scholz first indicated late last month that the EU might have to respond to the U.S. law with its own tax cuts and state support if the negotiations with Washington fail to reach a solution, lending support to similar plans articulated by French President Emmanuel Macron, who will meet Biden on December 1 in Washington.

    Although Scholz does not endorse Macron’s framing of the initiative as a “Buy European Act” (which sounds too protectionist for the Germans), the chancellor agrees that the EU cannot stand by idly if it faces unfair competition or lost investments, people familiar with his thinking said late last month.

    Negative economic news, such as carmaker Tesla putting plans for a new battery factory in Germany on hold and instead investing in the U.S., or steelmaker ArcelorMittal partly closing operations in Germany, have increased calls in Berlin to consider more state support to counter a negative trend caused by both the U.S. scheme and high energy prices.

    Although the official government line remains that Berlin is still holding out hope for a negotiated solution with Washington, officials in Berlin say that it could be possible to increase incentives for industries to locate the production of green technologies in Europe.

    A spokesperson for the German Economy Ministry said that faced with the challenges stemming from the Inflation Reduction Act, “we will have to come up with our own European response that puts our strengths first … The aim is to competitively relocate green value creation in Europe and strengthen our own production capacities.”

    The spokesperson warned, however, that both the U.S. and EU “must be careful that there is no subsidy race that prevents the best ideas from prevailing in the market,” and added: “Green technologies in particular thrive best in fair competition; protectionism cripples innovation.”

    One important condition that could help Germany and the EU to safeguard said fair competition and to avoid the global free trade system descending into protectionist tendencies would be to ensure that any EU state subsidies remain in line with WTO rules. That means, in contrast to the U.S. law, that those subsidies would not discriminate between local and foreign producers.

    German Chancellor Olaf Scholz first indicated late last month that the EU might have to respond to the U.S. law with its own tax cuts and state support | Sean Gallup/Getty Images

    Crucially, support is also coming from German industry.

    “In the area of industrial policy and subsidies, we could look at measures that are compatible with WTO rules — as the EU is already doing in the chip sector,” said Volker Treier, the head of foreign trade at the German Chamber of Commerce.

    Treier also stressed that “there must be no discrimination” against foreign investors, but added: “This explicitly does not rule out the possibility of settlement bonuses, which in turn should be available to investors from all countries who would be interested in such investment commitments in Europe.”

    In Brussels, the Commission’s competition department has also made clear that it’s looking with an open mind at upcoming proposals.

    “There are no instruments excluded a priori” when it comes to the EU’s response to the U.S. subsidies, the department’s state aid Deputy Director General Ben Smulders said Thursday.

    Barbara Moens, Suzanne Lynch and Pietro Lombardi in Brussels and Laura Kayali and Clea Caulcutt in Paris contributed reporting.

    [ad_2]

    Hans von der Burchard

    Source link