Western governments: We need to take climate change seriously and transition to renewables and EVs.
Also western governments: It’s bad that China has ramped up production on renewable energy sources and EVs, hit them with tariffs to protect our insufficient domestic production.
Yeah, tariffs might have a positive effect short term, but it can also lead to a trade war, but regardless, we make earth a harder place to live, and it also make EVs more expensive.
Cars, including EVs are bad. Climate tax on EVs to encourage public transport use is good climate policy. I’m not trying to imply that’s what’s happening here. European EVs aren’t* better. I just want to push back against EVs being a viable strategy for fighting climate change.
*In theory it’s possible for a European made product to be made with the same emissions as a Chinese made product, and then there would be one fewer ship journey involved in delivering it to customers. But in reality, European production has higher emissions because of laxer environmental protection mandates.
But I agree with the sentiment of your comment 100%. There’s evil desire among our policy makers to limit Chinese solar panels in the EU. Everyone’s priority should be to maximise solar panel use, even if that means having to fully subside production. There shouldn’t be any scenario where a manufacturer in China is willing to sell us solar panels and we put up barriers to that sale.
I’m fully aware that EVs won’t solve the climate crisis. And, of course leaders in the west, especially the US, pitch consumerism as the solution to climate change. Unfortunately for many people, myself included, we have no option but to to drive as public transit has been purposefully dismantled, and opting for EVs (when already buying a car) is one of the only real choices that has any noticeable climate impact.
The argument isn’t about that EVs are bad. The argument is that the Chinese government subsides the manufacture of them, so they can outperform western car companies, in order to capture the market.
Western governments need to step up their subsidies for green tech then to compete, I guess. Not start banning the people who are providing the solution.
I do agree with you, unfortunately the climate is always trumped by the business climate.
On the other hand let’s not hail the Chinese government as being climate minded. Their industry is cheap partly due to climate and worker safety not being regulated as much.
yes, those subsidies are much more important that climate change and there’s no way that we subsidize and bail out our own auto industries and definitely not multiple times with zero strings attached.
That’s not really the point. The important metric is the price of Chinese EVs in Europe compared to EVs from European car makers. That’s why the tarrifs are instated.
Western governments: We need to take climate change seriously and transition to renewables and EVs.
Also western governments: It’s bad that China has ramped up production on renewable energy sources and EVs, hit them with tariffs to protect our insufficient domestic production.
Yeah, tariffs might have a positive effect short term, but it can also lead to a trade war, but regardless, we make earth a harder place to live, and it also make EVs more expensive.
Cars, including EVs are bad. Climate tax on EVs to encourage public transport use is good climate policy. I’m not trying to imply that’s what’s happening here. European EVs aren’t* better. I just want to push back against EVs being a viable strategy for fighting climate change.
*In theory it’s possible for a European made product to be made with the same emissions as a Chinese made product, and then there would be one fewer ship journey involved in delivering it to customers. But in reality, European production has higher emissions because of laxer environmental protection mandates.
But I agree with the sentiment of your comment 100%. There’s evil desire among our policy makers to limit Chinese solar panels in the EU. Everyone’s priority should be to maximise solar panel use, even if that means having to fully subside production. There shouldn’t be any scenario where a manufacturer in China is willing to sell us solar panels and we put up barriers to that sale.
I’m fully aware that EVs won’t solve the climate crisis. And, of course leaders in the west, especially the US, pitch consumerism as the solution to climate change. Unfortunately for many people, myself included, we have no option but to to drive as public transit has been purposefully dismantled, and opting for EVs (when already buying a car) is one of the only real choices that has any noticeable climate impact.
The argument isn’t about that EVs are bad. The argument is that the Chinese government subsides the manufacture of them, so they can outperform western car companies, in order to capture the market.
Western governments need to step up their subsidies for green tech then to compete, I guess. Not start banning the people who are providing the solution.
I do agree with you, unfortunately the climate is always trumped by the business climate.
On the other hand let’s not hail the Chinese government as being climate minded. Their industry is cheap partly due to climate and worker safety not being regulated as much.
yes, those subsidies are much more important that climate change and there’s no way that we subsidize and bail out our own auto industries and definitely not multiple times with zero strings attached.
Hey I’m not defending the decision, I’m just clarifying the reason they were put in place.
they’re not reasons; they’re excuses and parroting them only serves to legitimize those excuses to those who don’t bother to pay attention.
Now you’re being obtuse
Why, then, are Chinese EVs in China sold at a 30%+ discount relative to Chinese EVs in Europe?
That’s not really the point. The important metric is the price of Chinese EVs in Europe compared to EVs from European car makers. That’s why the tarrifs are instated.