Summary

China has become the world’s largest car exporter by dominating electric vehicle (EV) production, surpassing traditional carmakers in Europe, Japan, and the U.S.

This shift stems from China’s heavy investment in battery technology, supply chains, and generous subsidies, enabling it to produce cheaper EVs, like the BYD Seal, compared to Western competitors.

Europe and America, reliant on outdated internal combustion engine expertise, have struggled to adapt to this disruptive innovation.

Many nations are imposing tariffs on Chinese EVs, but without robust domestic battery infrastructure, Western car industries face mounting challenges as the EV transition accelerates.

  • 𞋴𝛂𝛋𝛆@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Xi openly said and made no secret that China was investing in RESEACH and DEVELOPMENT in 2014. There was no surprise. It isn’t due to Chinese subsidies either. It is simply R&D instead of corporate criminals fluffing quarterly earnings with absolutely no commitment to even the company itself, and certainly not customers, neighbors, country, the world ecosystem, or humanity as a species. The USA gave GM 6 billion dollars for EV R&D in 2017. The corporate criminals used it to do a stock buy back to fluff their short term earnings. We should not be getting punished with tariffs to subsidize criminals. Let these shits fail and fall apart first. Then build something new from the ashes. Their inability to fail is the primary reason that they are failing. We really do need a league of c-sweet assassin heroes, or a dark knight of the real Gotham.

    • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      5 months ago

      Chinese constructors indeed told this plan, I’ve seen the interviews, they’ve been following it exactly and got the results they were after. We knew this 10 years ago. There should not be any surprise.

      We knew the Western manufacturers would deny, delay and lobby against this to keep shareholder value up, to cry foul when sales take a hit and they did not disappoint. It’s the classic market disruption, something we’ve seen many times in history, but now on the losing side. Again, no surprise.

      Capitalism has a fatal flaw with long term planning and it’s been exploited masterfully by China. Actually China had plans to uproot the entire fossil fuel sector and replace it with their renewables, so hold on for a lot more drama.

    • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      China has very few petroleum and methane reserves so there’s no real industry in China to subsidize for those. China does have lots of coal reserves though. They have the 4th largest in the world right after the USA. Yes, China heavily subsidizes their available fossil fuel.

      “The GSI identified around USD 18 billion (CNY 121 billion) of subsidies given to the generation of coal-based electricity in 2015.” source

  • Maggoty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    5 months ago

    The battery tech was out there. It was just an engineering problem and the legacy western companies refused to do it. China put the work in years before companies like Renault or Ford were serious about it. So there was no “leapfrog”. Our car companies just assumed China and India couldn’t do it. And they were wrong.

  • cyd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    It’s not (or at least not just) about subsidies, cheap Chinese labor, etc. It’s a fairly classic tech disruption story. Globally, the established carmakers know the future is electric, but they’ve got existing plants, workers who are trained to build ICEs, long established suppliers who make ICE parts, and so forth. You can argue that executives are being paid big bucks to solve such issues, which is true, but it’s truly a hard problem. Especially when these are real factories and workers and industrial equipment you’re dealing with.

    But why did the disrupters come from China? Everyone is pointing to state support and existing strengths in battery tech, which are supply side factors, but there are also reasons on the demand side. Chinese people have relatively few cars (300 cars per capita, versus 850 per Capita in the US or 603 in the UK). As people get richer and start buying cars, there’s a chance for EV makers to get in the door. This, by the way, is why it makes sense that the Chinese EVs are entering on the cheap end of the market, whereas Tesla, which started out selling to western consumers, entered on the premium end.

    China has its own ICE carmakers, but they aren’t established enough (and politically connected enough) to really push back against the onslaught of EV firms. (China can hardly impose tariffs on itself…) And at this point, the smarter ones like Geely have decided to go with the flow.

    • BreadstickNinja@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      China is also following the well-tread path of Japan and then Korea. Build up a cheap manufacturing base, move into more complex products, then eventually stand up heavy industry in automotive. But China’s experience with batteries through consumer electronics along with its natural abundance of rare earth minerals, alongside the general maturity of EV technology, positioned it well to take an electric automotive route where Japan and Korea previously went ICE.

    • filister@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      One other factor is that ICE engines are extremely complicated engines with many unique parts and established car manufacturers have perfected the technology over many generations. For comparison, electrical motors are a lot simpler engines, that are easier to manufacture and maintain. I read an article if VW switches entirely to EVs they still need to fire tens of thousands of employees as they won’t be needed to produce the same amount of cars.

      This and the fact that a lot of the focus on the EVs is on the software and European car manufacturers are struggling immensely of building modern software to run their cars. This gives Tesla and Chinese EV manufacturers a big advantage.

      • cyd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Agreed, though the software part is a bit mystifying to me. It’s not like Europe doesn’t have good software engineers, so the fact that so many of Europe’s carmakers are having so many problems competing on software is jarring. It has to be some kind of institutional/cultural clash within these organizations.

        • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          It’s not like Europe doesn’t have good software engineers, so the fact that so many of Europe’s carmakers are having so many problems competing on software is jarring. It has to be some kind of institutional/cultural clash within these organizations.

          I think the problem with software for European cars comes from the fact that so much of it is outsourced to so many suppliers (Bosch is one example). One supplier makes an HVAC module and the software for it. Another makes a braking system module, and the software for it. Another makes the drive train control modules, and the software for it. Then the car maker is required to build a car with all these disparate pieces and approaches with yet another outsourced company that makes the over all UX and UI software. Each company’s design philosophies, update mechanisms, and testing vary leading to a patchwork quilt of a final product. Yes a patchwork quilt will cover you, but upon usage and washing it will wear differently or fade.

          VW specifically ran into just this problem. source

          “To do that, the VW Group needed, for lack of a better term, a Tesla-like approach to software and digital technology. Historically for the entire auto industry, “software” means things like engine management, or driver-facing bits like infotainment and navigation, or numerous components made by different suppliers with different software standards who often didn’t talk to one another. It was piecemeal and old-school, compared to the smartphones and tablets that have become an integral part of our lives over the past two decades.”

          Contrast this to the highly vertical approaches of many of the Chinese EV companies or Tesla. These companies build nearly all of their own modules (or at least contract manufacture them) then wrote all their own software for stitching the car together into one experience. There is one software update team. There is one team responsible for the bus and communications standards and protocols. If a team handling the HVAC needs to capture heat from the electric motor team (for energy efficiency and motor performance), these teams are in the same building or at least in the same company.

          For better or worse, its cars built like software instead of parts from various disparate manufacturers like one would building a PC.

  • Tattorack@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    5 months ago

    Saw a BYD advertisement here in Copenhagen the other day. Made all these claims of Chinese EVs in Europe a lot more real.

    Copenhagen is gonna be a difficult market, though. There are a lot of Teslas driving about.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    5 months ago

    It’s much easier to lower the overhead on your car prices by totally eliminating the R&D when you don’t care about intellectual property theft.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      China has spent a decade working on this though, they can’t steal battery tech because they are legitimately at the front of it.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          They took apart the publicly available specs and put them back together. Battery tech idled for quite a while. There was freely available academic stuff on them. China isn’t going to expose itself where it doesn’t have to. They aren’t operating in good faith, but they aren’t dumb either.

            • Maggoty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              I’m not saying it’s impossible, I’m saying they have far more pressing things to spy on, like the F-35. Also, you should really vet your sources, that story fell apart 6 months later. (link) (link) (link)

              The last one refences Op Aurora if you want to read about what the Chinese consider being worth espionage. A lot of the IP theft for non secure stuff comes from the laws that any Non-Chinese company in China has to buddy with a Chinese company and knock off products soon flood China. This doesn’t necessarily mean tech or trade stuff has been stolen though. Chinese knock off companies have no problem recreating the shell of something with substandard parts inside. The problem is so bad that OEM electronics manufacturers can no longer guarantee their stuff does what it says it does. You can buy an Anker phone charger and find out the hard way it was from a factory that did this inside Anker’s own supply chain. (Anker is a peripherals and accessories electronics company based in China that sells all over the world.)