At the same time, government should remove all credits and tax breaks to the fossil fuel industry. Let everyone play on the same level and let the consumer decide.
@@rp9674 Yes, even the IRA itself included massive giveaways to the fossil fuel industry. It seems as if giving money to the oil barons (and other very wealthy people) is the only way Congress can pass bills these days.
We suspect the US auto market would quickly be subsumed by electric vehicles if Laissez-faire capitalism were to become realized globally. Unfortunately, there are too many cookie jars and too many policymaking hand in each one :( -Producer Tim
We aim to provide fair and factual information related to policies which might affect the electrification of transportation in addition to the economic, technological, and cultural, news in the category. Thank you for joining us! -Producer Tim
We are approaching one year of consecutive episodes of The Current. If the audience continues to grow, we will be able to continue producing this program for free. If viewership plateaus here, some form of revenue will be required to keep it up. Thank you for joining us and for your encouragement! -Producer Tim
Its great to see affordable EVs. We know that affordable EV production is possible even without subsidization. It is tough to find the line between government subsidies accelerating innovation and free money removing the incentive for corporations to aggressively cut costs in order to survive. There are at least 50 EVs on the market in the USA with about 1/3 currently eligible for the tax credit. If the consumer-side subsidy is removed, we hope automakers will sharpen their pencils to compete with internal combustion vehicle pricing. We've talked about this quite a bit, but there are many other subsidies collected by American EV automakers behind the scenes. If they build their batteries in the USA like GM, Ford, and Tesla do...they can collect at least $40/kWh of taxpayer money. As an example, the taxpayer gives GM over $8,000 for their 200+kWh packs in the Silverado, Sierra, and Hummer EV. We've reported on several billion dollars of grants and subsidies from state and federal governments to pay for tooling and factories as well. Other automakers pay those expenses out of pocket and have to recoup the investment by raising the price of their vehicles. We know that most legacy automakers have failed to automate, vertically integrate, simplify, and operate EV manufacturing operations in a capital efficient manner. We think it is wise to remove safeguards which insulate companies from the consequences of foolish behavior or willful inaction. -Producer Tim www.caranddriver.com/features/g32463239/new-ev-models-us/ www.caranddriver.com/features/g32463239/new-ev-models-us/
@Shazam As far as the US government is concerned, the joint-ventures which Ford and GM have established in the United states alongside Korean and Japanese companies sufficiently qualifies Ford and GM to receive up to $40/kWh. We have reported extensively on the CATL/SK/LG/Panasonic joint ventures in previous episodes of "The Current". We have informed viewers about several billion additional tax payer dollars allocated to build the US facilities producing cells and packs for Ford/GM/Stellantis. -Producer Tim
@@MissGoElectric While the largest volume supplier of batteries for Tesla is the JV with Panasonic in the US, Tesla is the only one who actually make batteries (for the Cybertruck). Batteries of Tesla's own unique design. GM may slap "Ultium" branding on various other batteries, but couldn't make a single one without their "partners"; same for Ford.
We are happy that our approach suits your preferences. We aren't very sensational, and we hope that viewers like you tune in for that very reason. -Producer Tim
Joe, it means a lot to us that level-headed viewers like you have begun to discover our channel. It is difficult for rational messaging to be detected when so many outlets are shouting from each end of the spectrum. Thank you for taking the time to leave this encouraging note. -Producer Tim
We are happy that you've tuned in and taken the time to leave a compliment. It goes a long way to motivating us to continue producing The Current weekly. Thank you. -Producer Tim
Great Chanel . I subscribed recently . Thank god this you tuber doesn’t use AI . Keep up the excellent work . Very informative . I really appreciate the news on the trump administrations impact on EVs. We need facts and no nonsense reporting . Wonderful .
Miss GoElectric earned her college degree in broadcast journalism and espouses the values she learned there. Thank you for sharing your encouragement! -Producer Tim
We know that consumers prefer better products at lower prices. EVs are bolstered by the laws of basic economics. We suspect the path to profitability for makers of uncompetitive EVs will become much more difficult. We are not concerned about the prospects for automakers which build the best EVs in the most capital efficient manner. -Producer Tim
All EV makers should focus on efficiency. It makes everything better. Like Apple developed its own chips that removed all the unneeded but power consumming components/functionality to improve the speed to power consumption ratio. It also turns off most processes and turns them back on intermittently or when needed again to reduce power consumption. GM & other OEM can do same/similar
@mow leadership at publicly traded companies have a *legal obligation* to return shareholder value. Building a low cost EV without the advantage of a vertical integration, lean manufacturing, direct sales, and an aftersales revenue alternative to ICE service is literally against the law for American and Japanese legacy automakers. -Producer Tim
@@MissGoElectric Yet keeping incompetent management and kowtowing to unions is not only legal, but encouraged. As for the "obligation" to return shareholder value", continuous bad decisions and granting unlimited union wishes seem to be exempt.
That is correct. NO CHANGES have taken place regarding the federal credits. The credits still do not apply to more than 2/3 of the EVs on the market in the USA. The top 10% of American earners ($150k+ annually) also remain ineligible for the federal credit for purchases. The commercial lease loophole remains. -Producer Tim
Changes to the $7500 tax break, when they get here, will be the most impactful. True, not many models this year on the list, but over the next five years this list would have been longer.
Incentives like that add unearned profit margin for automakers which benefit from them. That removes incentive to innovate and slows the overall pace of technological improvement. There are many ways to evaluate the effects of government intervention within a competitive marketplace. -Producer Tim
The $7500 tax credit was very effective at getting OEMs to invest in US assembly of EVs and source battery components and minerals in North America or from free trade nations. I am concerned that changing incentives like this every 4 years plays havoc with OEM investment plans. It pulls the rug out from under them after investments have been committed. IMO, the US needs to return to a stable regulatory policy.
All things considered, I think leaving the current purchase requirements intact while closing the lease-loophole would be good compromise measure but I doubt the current administration would be interested in any kind of compromise. Ending subsidies and preferential tax treatment for the fossil fuel industry would seem to be appropriate as well.
We have reported on several American EVTOL companies as well. Drive - FLY - Ride...Go Electric :) -Producer Tim ruclips.net/video/QS8ByuSmJ38/видео.html
Hello as always great info from you , I really think these companies ie Cadillac need to focus on getting the weight down , most people don't need boost buttons and 0 to 60 times of less than 5 seconds , the reason I bought an EV was to save money on cost, if the cost is going up lets go for range thats what most people want , I talk to a lot of EV drivers most seem to have tire wear problems few get to 40K km which is because of the weight but more so the torque , build these cars with less then you get more range .
Cadillac is paid at least $40/kWh by the US government (taxpayer). That ill-conceived incentive not only insulates them from the harms of an inefficient powertrain, but incentivizes them to build the biggest (heaviest) battery packs possible and put them in EVs. An oversupply of their EVs can sit on the lots and GM still gets to collect revenue. Poor policy has directly driven undesirable outcomes which are counter to the best interest of Americans *AND* humanity in general. James & RP: 2025 Bolt returns but this time made in Kansas instead of Michigan. -Producer Tim www.assemblymag.com/articles/98774-gm-to-temporarily-lay-off-workers-in-kansas-for-chevrolet-bolt-ev-tooling-installation
Thanks for reporting the details on the new Executive Orders. Coverage elsewhere is sensationalist and inaccurate. MGE provides a valuable public service informing us of the actual effects of these EOs, as she does on other EV topics.
It means a lot to us that you appreciate our efforts to report in a balanced manner. It is difficult to attract new viewers without resorting to sensationalism. The growth of this show has been slow and steady, but we have noticed that viewers like you tune in consistently. Thanks. -Producer Tim
@@MissGoElectric the non-sensationalism is invaluable. We get drowned in slanted crap from all sides. I don't understand how the slop in mainstream media can be called "news." It's like calling sugary cereal "part of nutricious breakfast" ... sure but the rest of the breakfast is the nutricious part.
@peter BRILLIANT. Like breakfast cereal...the profitable part is the junk. This show earns nothing and our competitors have 10x-20x as many subscribers collected over the same period of time. -Producer Tim
Thank you for another great show. Learned a lot as usual. Thank you for clarifying that there never has been an “EV mandate”. When you go to a car dealership they’re not forcing you to buy an EV, at least not when I’ve recently visited dealerships. Question for you - for the states who have received funding but not yet opened their NEVI sites, what does that mean for both a) sites currently under construction and b) sites that haven’t yet broken ground, in the context of the Executive Order and OMB tasking. Are these site owners/hosts obligated to complete the work?
Thank you for joining us each week! States will decide how much risk they are willing to assume based on their funding status, the status of each project, and the nature of each contract they've established with winning bidders. Having $5B of federal taxpayer dollars locked into a program is only a benefit to society if the capital is deployed. Many states have refused to act. Some state leaders have declared that they have no intention of accepting or utilizing the NEVI funds. We can understand how it is sensible for leaders to assess the progress and divert money which is being held hostage or subject to a corrupt bidding process. Hopefully corrections will be prudent and expedient. -Producer Tim
I'd note, and she did touch on this, while there was no "mandate" the EPA rules set by the Biden administration would have made selling ICE vehicles more and more challenging over time. That is what Trump and republicans are referring to when they talk about a mandate.
@tiger to *mandate* EVs (make them mandatory) is not the same as incentivizing EV production. Hopefully we were able to unwind the insinuation and communicate the realities with a lower degree of distortion compared to the language chosen by politicians. -Producer Tim
@@MissGoElectric I thought how you reported it was very well done. However, the EPA rules were pretty much a mandate take make EV's if you wanted to stay in business. It seems many in the pro-EV community are pretending that was not the reality. I have zero issues with Trump calling it a mandate when it pretty much was. We can agree to disagree and I'll still be a big channel supporter since you do such a great job.
The alleged "Energy Emergency” EO justifying suspension of environmental regulations is arbitrary and capricious because it’s premised upon the notion that energy prices are crippling our economy where DJT is simultaneously placing tariffs on Canadian and Mexican electricity, oil and gas. Given the oligopoly practices of OPEC, there can be no justification for suspension of regulations to increase oil/fuels production in an effort to decrease prices as there is no correlation between US crude or product production rates and the international price of oil/fuel, which is manipulated by the Cartel using oil production cuts to raise prices again. He even admitted that he needed to ask OPEC to lower prices. He’s even stopping use of EVs and solar-battery-wind generation, which are cheaper than fossil fuels and can greatly reduce the high energy prices.
Our primary focus is not energy, but electric transportation. That said, we agree that domestic energy is the wisest source of energy from an economic standpoint and from a sovereignty standpoint. We'd prefer sustainable energy where it is viable. It is perplexing to us that government would take any action which might prevent or deter private citizens or enterprises from generating their own power from the wind or the sun. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. -Producer Tim
Every single word from the new administration, thus far, is either theater intended to appease their voter base, or fabrication intended to cover an action favoring a "special interest" (e.g. oil and energy interests), or smoke and mirrors intended to disorient those who might oppose them. I don't think any other class of communication has come forth at this point.
I can see eVTOL being very handy for hotel to airport jumps and VIP/supply transport to major events as well as air ambulance use. Might even be good for automated fire fighting devices.
You bet! Tourism, passenger transport, and emergency rescue are among the uses we cited in this segment. Automated fire fighting could be very cool. The payload capacity utilized for a halon canon or halon bombs would be significant. -Producer Tim
I think that an EVs of whatever kind that is targeted to big businesses, and which solves a problem for those businesses, will have an impact well beyond the businesses they actually help.
Good point. Displacement of inferior technology by mass-produced superior technology anywhere moves the needle for quality of life everywhere. -Producer Tim
EV delivery and short haul vehicles are getting lots of interest from fleet buyers. Cheaper to fuel and maintain, drivers love them, what's not to like?
@james fleet buyers look at total cost of ownership and uptime. Nothing else matters and today's commercial EVs already deliver superior figures in most form factors. -Producer Tim
THIS JUST IN>>> For the 2024 model year EVs outsold diesel cars in Europe. ALSO, The coal fired power plant @ Ratcliffe-on-Soar near Nottingham, England has closed. It was the last coal plant in all of England. !
Each location (with a minimum of 4 stations) costs near, or above, $ 1 million. Each site host must pony up $200K (20%), with minimal return on investment and minimal chance of profit. State grants AND “demand charge pricing” agreements with the power companies will be needed to enable viability. Some states, and potential site hosts within the state, simply cannot afford it. (The more interstate miles in the state, the greater the financial burden.) It will take time to make the “infrastructure” for the “infrastructure “!
Can someone explain why Florida with the 2nd largest number of EV registrations and $42M funding has zero solicitation, zero awards, and zero stations opened?
The private sector had provided abundant public EV charging in Florida. Several states have refused to expand local resources to distribute NEVI funds. Those states tend to have powerful auto dealer group lobbies or oil/gas lobbies. Those businesses pull in far more lifetime revenue when transportation is posted by internal combustion vehicles. Some leaders might not want to use the money because it was the result of an initiative by the opposing political party. Some might reject the idea that government should be involved when the private sector could address the network. That could be ideological on a macro level or acutely linked to the economics associated with poor capital efficiency by givens bureaucracy. So far, the deployed NEVI cost per dispenser is astronomical compared to private deployment by Tesla, for example. -Producer Tim
@@MissGoElectricwhen you don’t have to build canopies, ensure a distance from the highway, or other factors, it’s easier to be cheaper. As IONNA and PFJ keep expanding, it makes me very curious how the market compares 24/7 bathroom availability and services to what Tesla barely provides.
How would gasoline based transport subsidies figure in this ? If the gov want an even playing field then there may be awkward questions asked that weren't previously.
The current administration's statement about "market distortions" is selectively applied to EVs and not those distortions which drive internal combustion sales such as direct manufacturing subsidies and the subsidies to oil/gas which affect operational costs. To be fair, utility companies which produce the electricity for most EVs are also heavily subsidized and protected. Cheap solar is blocked from American buyers, too. That limits the accessibility of independent energy production at an extremely low cost per kWh, as well. We are focused on electric transportation and we only provide news on *new* policy when it directly affects our field of interest. There is no doubt that government interference has unintended consequences. -Producer Tim
As our channel name specifies, we are in favor of electric transportation. We also think it is important to be balanced and to counterbalance the sensationalism we see elsewhere with truth. Thank you for joining us and for articulating what you appreciate about this week's episode. -Producer Tim
I'm thinking FSD is not selling well since they are trying to prop up the numbers by "including" it with desirable vehicles. We will never know how many folks actually bought it because Tesla won't break out that number.
Many drivers subscribe to FSD for $99/mo rather than buying it. That makes good sense for drivers who only keep vehicles for 2-3 years. As the technology advances and word spreads, adoption will continue to rise. Miss GoElectric and went winter camping this weekend with friends and our Cybertruck did all of the driving there and back. That is a normal experience for us despite being rural Michigan drivers in winter conditions with snowy/icy roads. When we tell our friends that 99% of our city+highway driving is completely hands-free they are typically unaware that this is reality today. -Producer Tim
While many comments below hint, yet wont come out and say it: "Orange Man Bad" and the "Sky is Falling". There, you're welcome. 😂 Of course the really crazies are proclaiming "Orange man has caused the Sky to Fall last year already!!!" because they researched it in their bubble.
We do not have reason to believe drivers will stop wanting more reliability, higher performance, quieter riding, and safer vehicles. EVs are dominant in all of those categories. EVs can be produced and operated at lower costs. Policy can influence the pace of adoption, but the merit of superior products is unbeatable. -Producer Tim
I don't think anyone is saying that what drivers want is changing. However, the government is now/will discouraging EV ownership by removing, reducing, or delaying incentives and charging ease. On a macro scale, it will have an impact.
I have no doubt the red state I live in will find a way to tax me even more for driving an EV, effectively 'mandating' that I drive a combustion vehicle.
In the short term, taking government out of the EV business will negatively affect the rate of adoption. On the other hand, the best selling passenger car on earth (and in the USA) is an American EV. Mass production of EVs has been happening for 15 years. When does the little birdie leave the nest to fly and feed itself? From what I've seen working within the automakers....the spoon feeding of taxpayer dollars to GM, Ford, and Stellantis may enable and reward poor behavior and lax culture rather than working as an accelerant to innovation. -Producer Tim
China is years ahead in all aspects of EV market adoption, manufacturing, innovation. So, if the world doesn't want over 90% of EV production to be in China by 2030, then regional political players need to rethink protecting and supporting their own production and development. “The world is much larger [than the US] and there are many other partners and players that do understand why it is important to remain united,” Teresa Ribera, European Commission In response to EU EV subsidies.
The world leader in EVs is an American company, but all of the close competitors are indeed Chinese. China is the world's leading auto producing nation and is among leading EV adopters. We have reported extensively on the why and how this is true on several previous episodes of The Current. -Producer Tim
Are you talking about tomorrow now? Speculation is not part of The Current...but I can confirm that Tesla leadership has publicly stated the expectation of 20-30% increase in sales volume in 2025 compared to 2024. BYD is also growing and could well surpass Tesla globally...or they might not. Remember, *MOST* of the automobiles which BYD produces have an engine, a gas tank, and an exhaust pipe. Their EV profit margins are tighter than Tesla's. Tesla's business model will soon revolve around vehicles as a service rather than volume. It is wonderful to see strong competitors in China doing great things. At the moment, Tesla leads all of them by almost every metric including safety, advanced driving technology, manufacturing efficiency, profit margin, revenue per unit, and total volume. -Producer Tim
Great technology at great prices will prevail. As you've pointed out, electric transportation continues to gain market share...but the rate at which it does so will ebb and flow. -Producer Tim
Thank you for providing so much valuable EV info without political bias or preaching! Had to stop watching another one I used to like because of all the Musk and Trump bashing. Got old.
Chuck and Russ - we were tired of it, too. Miss GoElectric pours a lot of energy into this project each week...even when we have several other productions going and/or are traveling. She does it because neither of us could find a single regular source for concise EV news with limited editorial and some journalistic integrity. Until somebody comes along and does it better...or we go broke...I think we'll continue producing The Current. Thank you both for watching and letting us know why you do. -Producer Tim
Interesting how this left out the general anti ev and fanatically pro fossil fuel sentiment of the current administration and all of the pro oil acts also made. Hopefully, future videos are more comprehensive.
Hey Doc, This is an *electric transportation* channel. This is a ten minute program. We aren't here to talk about the environment, politics, clean energy, or the opinions of leaders. When there is POLICY which affects the electrification of transportation, we'll cover it. Policy is one of many relevant facets which also include INNOVATION, ADOPTION, and PRODUCTS which affect the electrification of transportation. Those looking for sensationalism and rhetoric have hundreds of other choices. Those looking for level headed, concise, weekly EV news have very few choices. It is our goal to be among the best in that category. -Producer Tim
@MissGoElectric perhaps I should have specified "pro oil and technologies that use said oil increasing the demand to the detriment of evs which decrease oil demand." I would have hoped my above statement would have implied that sufficiently.
Less than half of the oil used by the USA becomes gasoline. A subset of that is consumed by internal combustion driven passenger vehicles. We are disinterested in oil, gas, internal combustion engines, and how various leaders might feel about any of those three categories. We plan to continue reporting exclusively on electric transportation and "Going Electric". -Producer Tim
"It's not like the business has some deep fundamental design around IRA," he said, referring to the Inflation Reduction Act. "It was there - that was nice. It's not going to be there now, but it's OK." RJ Scaringe
Perhaps the credit will evaporate. Perhaps the qualifications for the credit will change significantly. One possible outcome is that the credit could require American manufacturing. Another is that it could expand to include any American automobile with any kind of powertrain. Our goal is not to speculate or opine. Our goal is to the deliver the information which is relevant to electrified transport as it is this week. -Producer Tim
Sooner or later: There aint no "free lunch". Considering that the new "Y" is better featured than the existing one and costs less, and as both Musk and Scaringe have stated, the possible tax credit will not negatively impact their sales. Who paid you $7500 on your last CE vehicle purchase?
At the same time, government should remove all credits and tax breaks to the fossil fuel industry. Let everyone play on the same level and let the consumer decide.
They're lobbying power is too strong, it will never happen, that's why we need EV incentives
@@rp9674 Yes, even the IRA itself included massive giveaways to the fossil fuel industry. It seems as if giving money to the oil barons (and other very wealthy people) is the only way Congress can pass bills these days.
Petroleum mafia
We suspect the US auto market would quickly be subsumed by electric vehicles if Laissez-faire capitalism were to become realized globally. Unfortunately, there are too many cookie jars and too many policymaking hand in each one :( -Producer Tim
Great review of the new administration’s potential impact on EVs. Thanks
We aim to provide fair and factual information related to policies which might affect the electrification of transportation in addition to the economic, technological, and cultural, news in the category. Thank you for joining us!
-Producer Tim
You have insight I don’t get anywhere else. Keep it up
We are approaching one year of consecutive episodes of The Current. If the audience continues to grow, we will be able to continue producing this program for free.
If viewership plateaus here, some form of revenue will be required to keep it up.
Thank you for joining us and for your encouragement!
-Producer Tim
Really appreciated a fact based review of what is changing.
We are happy to report that (so far) no part of the sky is falling or has fallen. :) Thank you for tuning in. -Producer Tim
Nice work this week! Really hoping we don't see these policy changes slow down or disrupt EV efforts!
Its great to see affordable EVs. We know that affordable EV production is possible even without subsidization. It is tough to find the line between government subsidies accelerating innovation and free money removing the incentive for corporations to aggressively cut costs in order to survive. There are at least 50 EVs on the market in the USA with about 1/3 currently eligible for the tax credit. If the consumer-side subsidy is removed, we hope automakers will sharpen their pencils to compete with internal combustion vehicle pricing.
We've talked about this quite a bit, but there are many other subsidies collected by American EV automakers behind the scenes. If they build their batteries in the USA like GM, Ford, and Tesla do...they can collect at least $40/kWh of taxpayer money. As an example, the taxpayer gives GM over $8,000 for their 200+kWh packs in the Silverado, Sierra, and Hummer EV.
We've reported on several billion dollars of grants and subsidies from state and federal governments to pay for tooling and factories as well. Other automakers pay those expenses out of pocket and have to recoup the investment by raising the price of their vehicles. We know that most legacy automakers have failed to automate, vertically integrate, simplify, and operate EV manufacturing operations in a capital efficient manner. We think it is wise to remove safeguards which insulate companies from the consequences of foolish behavior or willful inaction.
-Producer Tim
www.caranddriver.com/features/g32463239/new-ev-models-us/
www.caranddriver.com/features/g32463239/new-ev-models-us/
@@MissGoElectric Gm & Ford do not "build their own batteries..." They buy them from their joint venture partners!
@Shazam As far as the US government is concerned, the joint-ventures which Ford and GM have established in the United states alongside Korean and Japanese companies sufficiently qualifies Ford and GM to receive up to $40/kWh. We have reported extensively on the CATL/SK/LG/Panasonic joint ventures in previous episodes of "The Current". We have informed viewers about several billion additional tax payer dollars allocated to build the US facilities producing cells and packs for Ford/GM/Stellantis. -Producer Tim
@@MissGoElectric While the largest volume supplier of batteries for Tesla is the JV with Panasonic in the US, Tesla is the only one who actually make batteries (for the Cybertruck). Batteries of Tesla's own unique design. GM may slap "Ultium" branding on various other batteries, but couldn't make a single one without their "partners"; same for Ford.
True. -Producer Tim
Great and useful reporting. Thank you.
We are happy that our approach suits your preferences. We aren't very sensational, and we hope that viewers like you tune in for that very reason. -Producer Tim
Drive Fly ride go Electic Miss GoElectric
👍
WISE,Miss GoElectric
Take care,Miss GoElectric
From Nick Ayivor from London England UK 🇬🇧 ⏰️12:53 Noon
Go Electric!
-Producer Tim
Thank you for providing clarity on all the noise. I know I can always depend on this channel for real factual news.
Joe, it means a lot to us that level-headed viewers like you have begun to discover our channel. It is difficult for rational messaging to be detected when so many outlets are shouting from each end of the spectrum. Thank you for taking the time to leave this encouraging note. -Producer Tim
Action packed report. Thanks for the weekly updates.
We are happy that you've tuned in and taken the time to leave a compliment. It goes a long way to motivating us to continue producing The Current weekly. Thank you. -Producer Tim
Gm, Ty miss Go Electric.
Good day Sasha. -Producer Tim
Great Chanel . I subscribed recently . Thank god this you tuber doesn’t use AI . Keep up the excellent work . Very informative . I really appreciate the news on the trump administrations impact on EVs. We need facts and no nonsense reporting . Wonderful .
Miss GoElectric earned her college degree in broadcast journalism and espouses the values she learned there. Thank you for sharing your encouragement!
-Producer Tim
Thanks once again for the facts. It's not necessarily an EV doomsday at this point.
We know that consumers prefer better products at lower prices. EVs are bolstered by the laws of basic economics.
We suspect the path to profitability for makers of uncompetitive EVs will become much more difficult. We are not concerned about the prospects for automakers which build the best EVs in the most capital efficient manner. -Producer Tim
All EV makers should focus on efficiency. It makes everything better. Like Apple developed its own chips that removed all the unneeded but power consumming components/functionality to improve the speed to power consumption ratio. It also turns off most processes and turns them back on intermittently or when needed again to reduce power consumption. GM & other OEM can do same/similar
You bet. Yield per watt hour matters when EV and AI technology scales up. -Producer Tim
So they should offer smaller EV models instead of gargantuan Hummers, F150 Lightnings, and Silverado EV's.
@@mowcowbell But they make more money on them.
@mow leadership at publicly traded companies have a *legal obligation* to return shareholder value. Building a low cost EV without the advantage of a vertical integration, lean manufacturing, direct sales, and an aftersales revenue alternative to ICE service is literally against the law for American and Japanese legacy automakers. -Producer Tim
@@MissGoElectric Yet keeping incompetent management and kowtowing to unions is not only legal, but encouraged. As for the "obligation" to return shareholder value", continuous bad decisions and granting unlimited union wishes seem to be exempt.
I appreciate the details you provide. Please keep it up.
Good video.
Good comment. Thanks for joining us. -Producer Tim
Thanks. If I understood you correctly, the $7500 point of sale tax credit and the $7500 lease credit are still available.
That is correct. NO CHANGES have taken place regarding the federal credits.
The credits still do not apply to more than 2/3 of the EVs on the market in the USA. The top 10% of American earners ($150k+ annually) also remain ineligible for the federal credit for purchases.
The commercial lease loophole remains. -Producer Tim
Changes to the $7500 tax break, when they get here, will be the most impactful. True, not many models this year on the list, but over the next five years this list would have been longer.
Incentives like that add unearned profit margin for automakers which benefit from them. That removes incentive to innovate and slows the overall pace of technological improvement. There are many ways to evaluate the effects of government intervention within a competitive marketplace. -Producer Tim
The $7500 tax credit was very effective at getting OEMs to invest in US assembly of EVs and source battery components and minerals in North America or from free trade nations. I am concerned that changing incentives like this every 4 years plays havoc with OEM investment plans. It pulls the rug out from under them after investments have been committed. IMO, the US needs to return to a stable regulatory policy.
@@georgepelton5645I absolutely agree. It is hard to build a business on a sand bar.
All things considered, I think leaving the current purchase requirements intact while closing the lease-loophole would be good compromise measure but I doubt the current administration would be interested in any kind of compromise. Ending subsidies and preferential tax treatment for the fossil fuel industry would seem to be appropriate as well.
Instability is terrible for business, very much so Auto industry
Enjoyed it as always gang hi Tim😊 the Highlander
Thank you for commenting, Highlander. -Producer Tim
That Chinese VTOL is hella cool.
We have reported on several American EVTOL companies as well. Drive - FLY - Ride...Go Electric :)
-Producer Tim
ruclips.net/video/QS8ByuSmJ38/видео.html
Hello as always great info from you , I really think these companies ie Cadillac need to focus on getting the weight down , most people don't need boost buttons and 0 to 60 times of less than 5 seconds , the reason I bought an EV was to save money on cost, if the cost is going up lets go for range thats what most people want , I talk to a lot of EV drivers most seem to have tire wear problems few get to 40K km which is because of the weight but more so the torque , build these cars with less then you get more range .
That would be Chevy Equinox tv, this is Cadillac, their brand is not about needs it's about excess and luxury
@@rp9674 We need a new Bolt
Yes, bring back Bolt!
Cadillac is paid at least $40/kWh by the US government (taxpayer). That ill-conceived incentive not only insulates them from the harms of an inefficient powertrain, but incentivizes them to build the biggest (heaviest) battery packs possible and put them in EVs. An oversupply of their EVs can sit on the lots and GM still gets to collect revenue. Poor policy has directly driven undesirable outcomes which are counter to the best interest of Americans *AND* humanity in general.
James & RP: 2025 Bolt returns but this time made in Kansas instead of Michigan.
-Producer Tim
www.assemblymag.com/articles/98774-gm-to-temporarily-lay-off-workers-in-kansas-for-chevrolet-bolt-ev-tooling-installation
Thanks for reporting the details on the new Executive Orders. Coverage elsewhere is sensationalist and inaccurate. MGE provides a valuable public service informing us of the actual effects of these EOs, as she does on other EV topics.
It means a lot to us that you appreciate our efforts to report in a balanced manner. It is difficult to attract new viewers without resorting to sensationalism. The growth of this show has been slow and steady, but we have noticed that viewers like you tune in consistently. Thanks.
-Producer Tim
@@MissGoElectric the non-sensationalism is invaluable. We get drowned in slanted crap from all sides. I don't understand how the slop in mainstream media can be called "news." It's like calling sugary cereal "part of nutricious breakfast" ... sure but the rest of the breakfast is the nutricious part.
@peter BRILLIANT.
Like breakfast cereal...the profitable part is the junk. This show earns nothing and our competitors have 10x-20x as many subscribers collected over the same period of time. -Producer Tim
Thank you for another great show. Learned a lot as usual. Thank you for clarifying that there never has been an “EV mandate”. When you go to a car dealership they’re not forcing you to buy an EV, at least not when I’ve recently visited dealerships.
Question for you - for the states who have received funding but not yet opened their NEVI sites, what does that mean for both a) sites currently under construction and b) sites that haven’t yet broken ground, in the context of the Executive Order and OMB tasking. Are these site owners/hosts obligated to complete the work?
Thank you for joining us each week!
States will decide how much risk they are willing to assume based on their funding status, the status of each project, and the nature of each contract they've established with winning bidders.
Having $5B of federal taxpayer dollars locked into a program is only a benefit to society if the capital is deployed. Many states have refused to act. Some state leaders have declared that they have no intention of accepting or utilizing the NEVI funds. We can understand how it is sensible for leaders to assess the progress and divert money which is being held hostage or subject to a corrupt bidding process.
Hopefully corrections will be prudent and expedient.
-Producer Tim
I'd note, and she did touch on this, while there was no "mandate" the EPA rules set by the Biden administration would have made selling ICE vehicles more and more challenging over time. That is what Trump and republicans are referring to when they talk about a mandate.
@tiger to *mandate* EVs (make them mandatory) is not the same as incentivizing EV production. Hopefully we were able to unwind the insinuation and communicate the realities with a lower degree of distortion compared to the language chosen by politicians. -Producer Tim
@@MissGoElectric I thought how you reported it was very well done. However, the EPA rules were pretty much a mandate take make EV's if you wanted to stay in business. It seems many in the pro-EV community are pretending that was not the reality. I have zero issues with Trump calling it a mandate when it pretty much was. We can agree to disagree and I'll still be a big channel supporter since you do such a great job.
The alleged "Energy Emergency” EO justifying suspension of environmental regulations is arbitrary and capricious because it’s premised upon the notion that energy prices are crippling our economy where DJT is simultaneously placing tariffs on Canadian and Mexican electricity, oil and gas. Given the oligopoly practices of OPEC, there can be no justification for suspension of regulations to increase oil/fuels production in an effort to decrease prices as there is no correlation between US crude or product production rates and the international price of oil/fuel, which is manipulated by the Cartel using oil production cuts to raise prices again. He even admitted that he needed to ask OPEC to lower prices. He’s even stopping use of EVs and solar-battery-wind generation, which are cheaper than fossil fuels and can greatly reduce the high energy prices.
It's anti-everything and gaming the system with false statements
Our primary focus is not energy, but electric transportation. That said, we agree that domestic energy is the wisest source of energy from an economic standpoint and from a sovereignty standpoint. We'd prefer sustainable energy where it is viable. It is perplexing to us that government would take any action which might prevent or deter private citizens or enterprises from generating their own power from the wind or the sun. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. -Producer Tim
@@MissGoElectric merci beaucoup
Every single word from the new administration, thus far, is either theater intended to appease their voter base, or fabrication intended to cover an action favoring a "special interest" (e.g. oil and energy interests), or smoke and mirrors intended to disorient those who might oppose them. I don't think any other class of communication has come forth at this point.
@@MissGoElectric DJT is also increasing the cost of Columbian oil by 25 % this week and 50% next week. So much for the energy emergency.
Ehang ehang❤
We have covered over a dozen EVTOLs on this channel so far and it is one of my favorite subjects. Thank you for sharing your enthusiasm! -Producer Tim
A larger eVTOL would be great as ambulances.
You bet! -Producer Tim
I can see eVTOL being very handy for hotel to airport jumps and VIP/supply transport to major events as well as air ambulance use. Might even be good for automated fire fighting devices.
You bet! Tourism, passenger transport, and emergency rescue are among the uses we cited in this segment. Automated fire fighting could be very cool. The payload capacity utilized for a halon canon or halon bombs would be significant. -Producer Tim
I think that an EVs of whatever kind that is targeted to big businesses, and which solves a problem for those businesses, will have an impact well beyond the businesses they actually help.
Good point. Displacement of inferior technology by mass-produced superior technology anywhere moves the needle for quality of life everywhere. -Producer Tim
EV delivery and short haul vehicles are getting lots of interest from fleet buyers. Cheaper to fuel and maintain, drivers love them, what's not to like?
@james fleet buyers look at total cost of ownership and uptime. Nothing else matters and today's commercial EVs already deliver superior figures in most form factors. -Producer Tim
Great reporting. The Tax Credit might not be gone yet, but it will be very soon, unfortunately
Thank you for tuning in and sharing your kind words. -Producer Tim
THIS JUST IN>>>
For the 2024 model year EVs outsold diesel cars in Europe.
ALSO,
The coal fired power plant @ Ratcliffe-on-Soar near Nottingham, England has closed.
It was the last coal plant in all of England.
!
That bit about coal power ending in England new to me. Thank you for sharing! -Producer Tim
Medical transport
Emergencies are a great application for short range EVTOLS! -Producer Tim
Each location (with a minimum of 4 stations) costs near, or above, $ 1 million. Each site host must pony up $200K (20%), with minimal return on investment and minimal chance of profit. State grants AND “demand charge pricing” agreements with the power companies will be needed to enable viability. Some states, and potential site hosts within the state, simply cannot afford it. (The more interstate miles in the state, the greater the financial burden.) It will take time to make the “infrastructure” for the “infrastructure “!
NEVI deployment costs are much higher than private costs. Government does not generally allocate capital or time efficiently. -Producer Tim
Can someone explain why Florida with the 2nd largest number of EV registrations and $42M funding has zero solicitation, zero awards, and zero stations opened?
DeSantis
The private sector had provided abundant public EV charging in Florida. Several states have refused to expand local resources to distribute NEVI funds. Those states tend to have powerful auto dealer group lobbies or oil/gas lobbies. Those businesses pull in far more lifetime revenue when transportation is posted by internal combustion vehicles.
Some leaders might not want to use the money because it was the result of an initiative by the opposing political party.
Some might reject the idea that government should be involved when the private sector could address the network. That could be ideological on a macro level or acutely linked to the economics associated with poor capital efficiency by givens bureaucracy.
So far, the deployed NEVI cost per dispenser is astronomical compared to private deployment by Tesla, for example.
-Producer Tim
It is up to each state to get the money and implementing it. Forces in Florida does not want that money and stations.
@@MissGoElectric Brilliant explanation. I wish there was something Florida EV enthusiasts could do to use this money for more public charging.
@@MissGoElectricwhen you don’t have to build canopies, ensure a distance from the highway, or other factors, it’s easier to be cheaper. As IONNA and PFJ keep expanding, it makes me very curious how the market compares 24/7 bathroom availability and services to what Tesla barely provides.
How would gasoline based transport subsidies figure in this ?
If the gov want an even playing field then there may be awkward questions asked that weren't previously.
The current administration's statement about "market distortions" is selectively applied to EVs and not those distortions which drive internal combustion sales such as direct manufacturing subsidies and the subsidies to oil/gas which affect operational costs. To be fair, utility companies which produce the electricity for most EVs are also heavily subsidized and protected. Cheap solar is blocked from American buyers, too. That limits the accessibility of independent energy production at an extremely low cost per kWh, as well. We are focused on electric transportation and we only provide news on *new* policy when it directly affects our field of interest. There is no doubt that government interference has unintended consequences. -Producer Tim
Thanks for the clear information about Trump's EV "mandates".
As our channel name specifies, we are in favor of electric transportation. We also think it is important to be balanced and to counterbalance the sensationalism we see elsewhere with truth. Thank you for joining us and for articulating what you appreciate about this week's episode. -Producer Tim
The 6000 lb weight limit for businesss deductibility is for GVWR and not curb weight. the formere is the fully loaded wieight of the vehicles.
Good catch. The GWVR of the new Lyriq is 6,700lb and it does qualify for 179 deductions. -Producer Tim
After the whole Meta disaster Maybe its worth it to also open up a BlueSky account for the channel?
I'm thinking FSD is not selling well since they are trying to prop up the numbers by "including" it with desirable vehicles. We will never know how many folks actually bought it because Tesla won't break out that number.
Many drivers subscribe to FSD for $99/mo rather than buying it. That makes good sense for drivers who only keep vehicles for 2-3 years. As the technology advances and word spreads, adoption will continue to rise. Miss GoElectric and went winter camping this weekend with friends and our Cybertruck did all of the driving there and back. That is a normal experience for us despite being rural Michigan drivers in winter conditions with snowy/icy roads. When we tell our friends that 99% of our city+highway driving is completely hands-free they are typically unaware that this is reality today. -Producer Tim
Hello
-Producer Tim
While many comments below hint, yet wont come out and say it: "Orange Man Bad" and the "Sky is Falling". There, you're welcome. 😂 Of course the really crazies are proclaiming "Orange man has caused the Sky to Fall last year already!!!" because they researched it in their bubble.
Orange man stupid
Miss GoElectric is all about electric transportation. A few commenters try to make it about something else entirely. -Producer Tim
Is anyone surprised that this would happen with the new administration? Back to fossil fuels and contamination.
We do not have reason to believe drivers will stop wanting more reliability, higher performance, quieter riding, and safer vehicles. EVs are dominant in all of those categories. EVs can be produced and operated at lower costs.
Policy can influence the pace of adoption, but the merit of superior products is unbeatable. -Producer Tim
I don't think anyone is saying that what drivers want is changing. However, the government is now/will discouraging EV ownership by removing, reducing, or delaying incentives and charging ease. On a macro scale, it will have an impact.
I have no doubt the red state I live in will find a way to tax me even more for driving an EV, effectively 'mandating' that I drive a combustion vehicle.
@@mowcowbellYes. That's unfortunate. It won't be impactful to EVs only. It will also impact a lot of solar and wind energy generation.
In the short term, taking government out of the EV business will negatively affect the rate of adoption. On the other hand, the best selling passenger car on earth (and in the USA) is an American EV. Mass production of EVs has been happening for 15 years. When does the little birdie leave the nest to fly and feed itself?
From what I've seen working within the automakers....the spoon feeding of taxpayer dollars to GM, Ford, and Stellantis may enable and reward poor behavior and lax culture rather than working as an accelerant to innovation.
-Producer Tim
China is years ahead in all aspects of EV market adoption, manufacturing, innovation. So, if the world doesn't want over 90% of EV production to be in China by 2030, then regional political players need to rethink protecting and supporting their own production and development. “The world is much larger [than the US] and there are many other partners and players that do understand why it is important to remain united,” Teresa Ribera, European Commission In response to EU EV subsidies.
The world leader in EVs is an American company, but all of the close competitors are indeed Chinese.
China is the world's leading auto producing nation and is among leading EV adopters. We have reported extensively on the why and how this is true on several previous episodes of The Current. -Producer Tim
@ China, today, produces over 58% of the world’s EV’s. BYD will surpass the “world leader” very soon as their market share grows and Tesla’s shrinks.
Are you talking about tomorrow now? Speculation is not part of The Current...but I can confirm that Tesla leadership has publicly stated the expectation of 20-30% increase in sales volume in 2025 compared to 2024. BYD is also growing and could well surpass Tesla globally...or they might not. Remember, *MOST* of the automobiles which BYD produces have an engine, a gas tank, and an exhaust pipe. Their EV profit margins are tighter than Tesla's. Tesla's business model will soon revolve around vehicles as a service rather than volume. It is wonderful to see strong competitors in China doing great things. At the moment, Tesla leads all of them by almost every metric including safety, advanced driving technology, manufacturing efficiency, profit margin, revenue per unit, and total volume. -Producer Tim
It's not doomsday for EV's, but it's somewhat of rally-killer...
Great technology at great prices will prevail. As you've pointed out, electric transportation continues to gain market share...but the rate at which it does so will ebb and flow. -Producer Tim
Thank you for providing so much valuable EV info without political bias or preaching! Had to stop watching another one I used to like because of all the Musk and Trump bashing. Got old.
Couldn't agree more. The constant whining really got annoying!.
Chuck and Russ - we were tired of it, too. Miss GoElectric pours a lot of energy into this project each week...even when we have several other productions going and/or are traveling. She does it because neither of us could find a single regular source for concise EV news with limited editorial and some journalistic integrity. Until somebody comes along and does it better...or we go broke...I think we'll continue producing The Current. Thank you both for watching and letting us know why you do. -Producer Tim
Tòo much time on your face and not enough on some of the graphs/ cha rts.
We'll consider holding graphics on screen for more time in the future. The spacebar doubles as a pause button for deep analysis. -Producer Tim
Interesting how this left out the general anti ev and fanatically pro fossil fuel sentiment of the current administration and all of the pro oil acts also made. Hopefully, future videos are more comprehensive.
Hey Doc,
This is an *electric transportation* channel. This is a ten minute program.
We aren't here to talk about the environment, politics, clean energy, or the opinions of leaders.
When there is POLICY which affects the electrification of transportation, we'll cover it. Policy is one of many relevant facets which also include INNOVATION, ADOPTION, and PRODUCTS which affect the electrification of transportation.
Those looking for sensationalism and rhetoric have hundreds of other choices. Those looking for level headed, concise, weekly EV news have very few choices. It is our goal to be among the best in that category. -Producer Tim
@MissGoElectric perhaps I should have specified "pro oil and technologies that use said oil increasing the demand to the detriment of evs which decrease oil demand." I would have hoped my above statement would have implied that sufficiently.
Less than half of the oil used by the USA becomes gasoline. A subset of that is consumed by internal combustion driven passenger vehicles.
We are disinterested in oil, gas, internal combustion engines, and how various leaders might feel about any of those three categories.
We plan to continue reporting exclusively on electric transportation and "Going Electric".
-Producer Tim
"It's not like the business has some deep fundamental design around IRA," he said, referring to the Inflation Reduction Act. "It was there - that was nice. It's not going to be there now, but it's OK."
RJ Scaringe
We'll report if there are any policy changes affecting electrified transportation. -Producer Tim
You can’t stop the Trump train… You can kiss that $7500 tax credit goodbye…
Perhaps the credit will evaporate. Perhaps the qualifications for the credit will change significantly. One possible outcome is that the credit could require American manufacturing. Another is that it could expand to include any American automobile with any kind of powertrain. Our goal is not to speculate or opine. Our goal is to the deliver the information which is relevant to electrified transport as it is this week. -Producer Tim
Sooner or later: There aint no "free lunch". Considering that the new "Y" is better featured than the existing one and costs less, and as both Musk and Scaringe have stated, the possible tax credit will not negatively impact their sales. Who paid you $7500 on your last CE vehicle purchase?