If You Were Thinking About Buying A Mach-E You Should Probably Do It Now

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?