When people ask me about EVs they should consider, I always mention the Mustang Mach-E. I think it looks great. The range and value are there, and I love the option of an LFP (lithium iron phosphate) battery. The extended range version, up until now, has also qualified for a $3,750 federal tax credit. The future of that credit is now in question.
The Treasury Department finally answered some of our questions about the requirements surrounding electric vehicle tax credits, but it’s been a waiting game to see which vehicles do or do not qualify. Ford, it seems, isn’t getting the rose.
This whole thing is already pissing off China, which is complaining that the United States is violating World Trade Organization guidelines. All of this EV stuff is also making some in Congress angry, and the House passed a bill trying to roll back the EPA’s plan to curb emissions.
And, finally, today’s Morning Dump will also discuss how one of China’s biggest companies just saw itself dropped from a Department of Defense project to increase energy security.
Get Your Mach-E While It’s Cheaper
As the man said, there are numerous ways you can choose to earn funds, and one of the simplest ways over the last year has been to buy an EV while the Inflation Reduction Act tax credit rules were a little vague. Starting next year they’re not going to be so vague.
One of the first victims of the clarification is Ford’s Mustang Mach-E with the extended battery. Prior to this point, the larger battery qualified for a $3,750 credit. As of January? Not so much.
From David Shepardson and Ben Klayman, via Automotive News, there’s this fun update:
Ford told dealers according to a bulletin seen by Reuters about the tax credit and said the expiration is “an excellent motivator to purchase before the end of the year. This is a great time to reach out to customers in your pipeline to close the sale and ensure they are able to receive the credit.”
So far as I can tell, Ford hasn’t explained why, but I’ve got a guess. The battery packs are seemingly assembled in Poland (a country we’re cool with) and then the car itself is assembled in Mexico. This means there’s a decent chance the content of the LG-supplied batteries contains enough materials from a ‘foreign entity of concern’ (China) that it’s no longer going to qualify under the stricter guidelines.
The good news is that the Mach-E you might want is the 250-mile range standard battery and that already didn’t qualify for the federal tax credit, so you’re still good.
Get the LFP Mach-E! It’s nice. [Ed Note: I find the Mach-E crossover to be rather boring, but it is well-executed, and it’s different than all the Tesla Model Ys running around. -DT]. It also seems like some Tesla Model 3s will lose half their tax credits based on updates to the Tesla site.
China Is Shook Over Tax Credit Changes
Potential Ford buyers are not the only ones upset over recent clarifications to the Inflation Reduction Act, which clearly targets China because China provides most of the stuff that goes into batteries (as much as 75% of the world’s battery-grade lithium, for example).
This is the unfortunate push-and-pull of the law as it was passed. On one hand, America desires to have a secure supply of batteries and not rely solely on China. On the other hand, America desires to have cheap EVs so it can meet its own emissions targets.
The Chinese government doesn’t love this development, to say the least. From a Reuters report on this development:
“Targeting Chinese enterprises by excluding their products from a subsidy’s scope is typical non-market orientated policy,” said He Yadong, a commerce ministry spokesperson.
“Many World Trade Organization members, including China, have expressed concern about the discriminatory policy of the U.S., which violates the WTO’s basic principles,” he said.
While China is clearly not pleased, there’s also a bit of working the refs on all sides here. In theory, the WTO does indeed try to encourage all partners to trade equally and fairly for the benefit of businesses and creators. In reality, China is complaining about not accessing what is essentially a business subsidy for its own likely unfairly over-subsidized companies, which is itself against the spirit of the WTO’s basic principles.
The United States is clearly not being fair to China, and if Iceland had robust lithium and cobalt operations I’m not sure it would be so protectionist. But maybe it would be? This is, to some degree, about slowing down Chinese supply while the West builds its own.
House Passes Bill To Curb Curbing Of Emissions
The United States House of Representatives, now short one at least half-way crook, has moved on to passing a bill trying to restrict the enforcement of the CARS Act, which seeks to curb emissions by requiring automakers to reach even more stringent CO2 goals.
I like tthiis description from The Detroit News about all the back-and-forth, which involves mostly Republicans (against the EPA’s proposal) complaining about this being an EV mandate and Democrats (supportive of the proposal) saying this is all grandstanding.
House Republicans in debate argued that the EPA’s rule is unattainable, unrealistic and unaffordable, as Walberg put it. They said it amounts to a de facto “mandate” to electric vehicles.
“No, there isn’t a word ‘mandate’ in there,” Walberg said in remarks off the floor. “But if you look at the tailpipe emission standards, the only way that can be met by 2032, starting in 2027, is with electric vehicles. Because what comes out of a tailpipe will never meet that standard ― I don’t care what you have. So they’re mandating EVs.”
This bill probably isn’t going to pass the Senate and, even if it did, it would be vetoed immediately. The bit about it not-not being a mandate is fairly amusing. It technically isn’t a mandate and I’d like to quote Rep. Tim Walberg, who is quoted above, from a different article:
“While EVs may play a large role in the future of the auto industry, Washington should not discount other technologies like hydrogen, hybrids, and the internal combustion engine,” said Republican Tim Walberg, a sponsor of the legislation.
Unlike in the EU, there’s no requirement that the reduction comes from any specific technology. If hydrogen is capable of doing this then let’s do hydrogen. Right? Anyone? Is this thing on?
Chinese Battery Company Loses Military Base Backup Job
CATL, probably the largest battery supplier in the world, did a project with North Carolina’s Duke Energy to provide storage for U.S. Marine Camp Lejune in the state.
The military installation has a solar power array and uses CATL-supplied batteries to store the energy collected for operations. As a press release points out, this was done for security:
“Through an enhanced use lease (EUL) and strategic partnership with Duke Energy Progress, MCB Camp Lejeune has been able to make an important investment in the pursuit of energy security inside the fence-line,” said U.S. Navy Cmdr. Ross Campbell, director of Public Works.
The 11-megawatt battery is the largest battery system in North Carolina, and it’s being integrated into the existing Duke Energy EUL 13-megawatt solar facility on base.
“These systems are part of the ongoing collaboration between Duke Energy, a strong supporter and advocate for our chamber, and the Department of Defense, to ensure energy security,” said Laurette Leagon, Onslow County Chamber of Commerce Executive.
So much for that. After pressure from Republicans, the batteries were disconnected temporarily over, uh, security concerns. From Fox News:
“Nevertheless, some concerns about this project have been raised, and, as a result, Duke Energy disconnected these batteries as we work to address these questions,” Duke Energy spokesperson Kaitlin Kirshner told Fox News Digital in a statement. “As an American energy company, we welcome the ability to use American-manufactured batteries.
“Given the rapidly increasing demand for electricity, we support more domestic manufacturing to help expand energy resources in the United States and accelerate the energy transition.”
Kirshner added that Duke Energy designs its projects with “security in mind.” She further noted the battery storage facility was connected to Duke Energy’s system with a “robust network security and safeguards fully in place,” not to Camp Lejeune’s internal network or other systems.
That bit about American batteries is such a burn, and the PR person deserves 25-to-life just killing it in a press statement.
Is this a thing? I feel like everyone involved would see this coming and try to avoid making the base insecure, but perhaps I’m wrong. I’m no expert.
This just goes to show how difficult being behind China in the creation of batteries makes everything.
The Big Question
Where was your daily driver built?
Daily was made in East Germany, which I thought only made the i3 but guess the 135is I used to have was also made there.
DD car built in Ohio, truck is from Kentucky, and there’s an old fart in the garage that was built in LA 60yrs ago.
My car was assembled in Trollhättan and my girlfriend’s in Dingolfing. Thank you for making me look that up it’s going to be how I introduce us from now on
Which Volvo and which BMW?
Edit: Saab I guess! Even cooler!
My wife’s rav4 hybrid was made in Canada, my truck was made in the USA. Previous to that all my cars were made in Japan or Korea
A Mexican VW and a Honda from Alabama.
DD was built in Japan at Mazda’s Hofu plant. I’ve owned exclusively Japanese cars but one was made in the USA.
I have to agree with Nsane here that the Mach E is incredibly boring and fits right in with the Eclipse Cross as a shameful subversion of a once-great nameplate.
China complaining about trade policy is incredibly rich. They truly have no shame whatsoever. I reminds me of the classic Solzhenitsyn quote “We know they’re lying, they know they’re lying…” There is nothing anyone could do to them that they haven’t already done a thousand times over. Not a single dime of subsidies should go to any Chinese owned company.
I heard somewhere that the mach-e was mostly designed then Jimbo Farley came in and forced a rushed re-design to make it a “Mustang.” Not sure this is substantiated, but quite sure I believe it.
I’ve read that as direct quote from Farley. Basically something like it can’t be a generic/boring vehcile if we want people to want to buy it.
The Mach-E was not introduced after they killed the Mustang. You can still get the Mustang, like right now. The Mach-E might have a really stupid name but it’s not comparable to how far Mitsu fell.
I’m not surprised that the DoD has disconnected these batteries. Its just the right blend of precautionary planning and jingoism.
Miata was built where all Miatas were built, Hiroshima
Currently? Japan.
Previously? (and current winter beater) Japan.
Before that? California – a Geo Prizm from the NUMMI plant.
Prizm representing! That Corolla in makeup was a solid little car.
Two Japanese cars built in Japan, and one Japanese car built in Indiana.
Two Japanese cars built in Canada and one built in Alabama for me.
The four vehicles currently in rotation as my daily drivers were built in Longbridge (GB), Born (NL), Trollhättan (S), and Springfield, OH (USA).
Yes, I know the GB code was replaced by UK in 2021 but my British cars were built well before then.
More specifically, this morning’s commute was courtesy of Longbridge. I’m hoping the same will be true going home but, if not, I’ll try to find out where the tow truck was made.
I almost read this incorrectly. Every British car I’ve ever owned has been a shoddily-built crapcan. I still love them all the same. Conversion to electric plus gutting the Lucas wiring in favor of a low-end crappy GM system, has gotten rid of most of the issues, but the car is also incomplete.
Two were build in Indiana, The third as Canada.
I have my daily is a Japanese Honda (Clarity) wife’s is a Mexican Ford (Maverick) and the toys are German (BMW M3) and Italian (Aprilia Caponord motorcycle)
We need some basic intelligence on some of these issues (I know, a huge ask) China does not equal automatically bad. Should we be relying on Chinese owned smart infrastructure, probably not. A dumb battery, utilized in something designed, assembled and delivered in the USA, probably ok. But of course Orange man said Chynuh bad, so that’s what all the little trumplings focus on, in every case.
I fucking hate Trump, but current foreign policy is not being set by Trump. The Biden administration happily carried forward the 301 tariffs and both countries are responsible for continued escalation.
I don’t disagree. China is no innocent wallflower, but it’s moved past the point of rationality, where we’re cutting our nose off to spite our face.
My winter/family car: Korea
Summer/Fall/Spring/only taking the older child: USA
Wife’s: Japan
Of the 7 cars I’ve owned (in order): USA (Japanese company), Japan, USA (still have), USA (Japanese company), Canada, Japan, Korea.
Directions unclear: purchased a blue-ray copy of critically acclaimed film Wall-e instead. Please advise.
You made the right choice.
My Mazda3 was built in Mexico, so was my old Golf Wagen – have no issues with that, they seem better put together than my Korean G70 or American Aura were.
My daily driver (FIAT 500e) was built in Italy using Samsung battery packs.
“and if Iceland had robust lithium and cobalt operations I’m not sure it would be so protectionist.”
We might find out soon. The Western battery-chemical industry might be able to pivot away from China completely in the next couple years.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/energy/2023/09/11/discovery-of-vast-new-lithium-deposit-in-us-shows-power-of-market/baad25be-50d2-11ee-accf-88c266213aac_story.html
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-64253708
> My daily driver (FIAT 500e) was built in Italy using Samsung battery packs.
So it’ll spontaneously combust on your mechanic’s lift?
Not yet! 😀
Canada. Actually, I think we have three Canadian cars and one British.
I’ve tried to force myself to like the Mach E but I just can’t. It’s an astonishingly boring car underneath all the stolen valor from the Mustang name. At the end of the day it’s just an overpriced EV crossover that happens to come in a few fun colors and have some decent but less than original design cues.
I’d certainly take one over a Model Y but if I were shopping for an EV around that size/price range I’d probably get a Ioniq 5/EV6 or spring for a Genesis GV60. It looks like the damn hypnotoad but for some inexplicable reason (maybe it’s that I have bad taste?) I kind of like it and the Genesis interiors are way, way, way nicer than anything else I’ve mentioned.
The BMW i4 is intriguing as well since it’s built on the excellent CLAR architecture and they can’t even give them away. I don’t like the beaver teeth grille either but that car has so much else going for it that I *might* be able to overlook it.
The GV60 looked so cheap and gawky to me in photos when it was released. I’ve since seen a few in the wild and they’re not bad! Especially in hypnotoad green, they’re this weird mix of immature punk and elegance. I’m slowly becoming a fan.
I was standing around a grocery store parking lot just looking over a mango Mach-E last year (it was the first time I’d gotten up close to one). Some guy just yells “IT’S NOT A REAL MUSTANG BRO” at me as he’s walking into the store. I could live with the Mach-E as a daily, but I couldn’t live with the associated automotive catcalling from Car Men.
Ford’s own messaging on the Mach-E is essentially “it’s another electric crossover blob, but with sporty looks and good handling!” And that’s a reasonable value proposition, but it’s one that Mazda has already nailed down and consistently executes better than Ford.
Mazda does fun crossover better, but they haven’t done EV very well.
I also can’t take the “stolen valor” argument very seriously given the decades of shitbox Mustangs Ford sold the hell out of.
My Dad has a Mach E. I’ve driven it a bit and I’ve rode around in it with him a bunch of times. It’s…fine? I’ve encountered few cars that have inspired less of an opinion from me than that one. He likes it a lot, I guess that’s all that really matters.
I don’t like several things about the Mach E, but there are dealers marking them down before that tax credit, too, so it really is the time to buy one if you want it. I am seeing as much as 7k off the GT locally.
If you can ignore the problems like digging in menus to change drive modes and the weird door opening, the price is pretty reasonable.
My daily driver was built in Sweden during the Reagan administration.
Trollhättan during the Clinton administration for me.
Well, unless it’s really icy out, in which case we turn to George W Bush administration-era Smyrna, Tennessee
Hydrogen is totally clean when burned — but potentially worse than just using an ICE car when considering its production, storage, and shipping — and it’s a daunting challenge to trace all that. This is why it’s so strongly supported by fossil fuel companies feeling threatened by EVs. If properly manipulated, hydrogen can use at least as much fossil fuel to create as the companies currently produce and sell. (And if they can’t game the system, they’ll at least still have a product to sell, which they won’t much have if vehicles are fueled straight from home solar or from the grid — a grid which is quickly ditching its fossil fuel contribution.)
There are other, much greener ways of making hydrogen that burn no fossil fuels whatsoever. The “but current hydrogen production uses natural gas!” canard needs to frigging die. Yes, currently most hydrogen made for commercial purposes is refined from natural gas. That’s because the commercial market for hydrogen is at the moment tiny, and the financial incentive to scale up green H2 infrastructure does not yet exist. The moment governments start pushing H2 as hard as say BEVs, that will change, and in fact it is already coming for aerospace. The next generation of jet airliners might not burn H2 (but will almost certainly burn SAF as a baseline fuel), but the one after that almost certainly will.
People used to make a big stink about how electricity was produced with fossil fuels. Those complaints have steadily died down once people saw that (1) renewable tech received more private investment than fossil tech, (2) renewable energy became objectively more cost effective than competing techs, and (3) major utilities all started phasing out fossil power generation in favor of renewables.
People will shut up about grey/brown hydrogen once those three conditions are met.
Not to be too pedantic, but hydrogen is totally clean when used in a fuel cell. When burned it creates lots of NOx emissions thanks to the high temperature.
My daily is Korean, but I may be spending a bit more time in my American pickup this winter, just for ground clearance and because I’m less bothered by deicer getting all over a pickup from over twenty years ago.
For my next vehicle, I’m looking at a few things, but mostly American-made options.
If there is any emission that should be regulated, CO2 is it. This will further drive efficiency increases by necessity.
It is the other emissions, VOx, NOx, CO, VOCs, particulates, ect. that are much too strictly regulated. Emissions controls 20 years ago were good enough to the extent that these emissions from new ICE cars were basically a non-issue to anyone’s health and well being. At the time, many cars available had an exhaust output that was cleaner than the air that went into them. Anything after that level of regulation has been excessive and unnecessarily added to vehicle cost, and has compromised ultimate possible vehicle fuel efficiency.
I remember reading about a test of a Saab 9000 that found the exhaust was cleaner than the ambient (LA) air. I don’t remember what year that was, but they haven’t built Saab 9000s since 1998. The other thing about this is how common it has become again for many OEMs to have major premature engine and transmission failures with all the tech they need to implement to meet standards (as well as engineering resources being diverted from ICE to EV). I’ll bang this drum again: what is the environmental cost of a vehicle that is prematurely junked? CO2 limits are essentially backdoor mileage requirements. I have no problem with that. Might result in some downsizing (or at least down-weighting).
As a resident of Los Angeles for most of my life, I have to say that this is the first pro-air-pollution take I’ve ever seen. Unless I am misunderstanding your post. How exactly would a rollback of particulate emission regulations not result in an increase of particulate pollution?!
It would result in an increase. But the rest of the world is not LA. For most of the world, particulate emissions coming from cars made 20 years ago and sooner are basically a non-issue, provided the emissions controls are functional.
Consider other sources of particulate emissions such as wildfires, exacerbated by climate change, and how this vastly outnumbers the quantity of particulate emissions from cars.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0269749123018195
There would be less CO2 emissions produced if engines could be run more lean and at a higher thermal efficiency, even if NOx/VOC/particulate/CO/ect pollutant output would increase as a result.
Of those PM emissions produced by traffic, the vast overwhelming majority of those will inevitably come from the minority of vehicles that don’t have emissions controls.
Both of our household’s DDs were built in America by Japanese companies (Toyota and Honda).
Somehow (well maybe by design) I’ve only owned Asian cars… Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Acura, Kia, Subaru. Most were built in America, though a few likely built in Japan.
Lol at China crying over a bit of protectionism.
Wife’s year round DD and my winter DD were built in the USA (so was the Viper and my project Blazers)
My summer DD was built Down Under.