We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon
Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
The Alliance for American Manufacturing is a non-profit, non-partisan partnership formed in 2007 by some of America’s leading manufacturers and the United Steelworkers. Its mission is to strengthen American manufacturing and create new private sector jobs through smart public policies. It believes an innovative and growing manufacturing base is vital to America’s economic and national security, as well as providing good jobs for future generations. It also believes EVs built in Mexico by Chinese companies could be a threat to America’s economic security.
On February 20, 2024, it issued a report warning that cheap Chinese electric cars manufactured in Mexico could be the death knell for US automakers. That report warns about “China’s Existential Threat To America’s Auto Industry And Its Route Through Mexico.” The focus of the report has been turbocharged by reports that BYD is scouting locations for a new factory in Mexico.
China, Mexico, & USMCA
The problem, of course, is that Mexico is an integral part of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) that became effective on July 1, 2020, replacing the previous North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). By virtue of that agreement, products manufactured in Mexico can enter the United States without paying import taxes or duties. The basic idea is Mexico, the United States, and Canada are all one big happy family where everyone works together collaboratively to create good jobs for all. That’s the theory. The reality is rather more nuanced.
Picture this. Electric cars built in Mexico will be eligible — if they meet all the requirements on battery materials and component sourcing — for the full $7500 federal tax credit/rebate. How is that going to play in Peoria? “The introduction of cheap Chinese autos — which are so inexpensive because they are backed with the power and funding of the Chinese government — to the American market could end up being an extinction-level event for the U.S. auto sector,” the AAM report warns.
The AAM argues the United States should work to prevent automobiles and parts manufactured in Mexico by companies headquartered in China from benefiting from the USMCA. “The commercial back door left open to Chinese auto imports should be shut before it causes mass plant closures and job losses in the United States,” it says.
BYD Is Disrupting The Disruptors
BYD is the cause of most of this angst. It sells the Qin Pluis plug-in hybrid in China for just $14,000. Is it a car Americans would buy? Maybe, maybe not, but the idea that a company can produce an actual car so cheaply and sell it at a profit (we presume) scares the bejezus out of American car companies. Even Elon Musk is worried and he knows a thing or two about what it costs to build cars in China.
BYD is really just the tip of the spear. Once it sets up shop in Mexico, other Chinese electric car companies like Nio and Xpend and Zeekr are sure to follow. So the US is on the horns of a dilemma largely of its own making. When USMCA was finalized less than 4 years ago, no one could imagine Chinese made cars might one day be manufactured in Mexico. But the market has changed dramatically in less than four years.
In a statement, the Chinese embassy in Washington told Reuters that China’s automobile exports “reflect the high-quality development and strong innovation of China’s manufacturing industry. The leapfrog development of China’s auto industry has provided cost-effective products with high quality to the world.”
The Law Of Unintended Consequences
The US has always been a strong advocate for forcing other companies to open their markets (viz, China). Now the shoe is on the other foot, which must be a bit disconcerting to the free traders who thought the benefits of globalization would always favor America over all other nations. What no one anticipated was how the Chinese central government would create special areas of interest in electronics, batteries, and automobile manufacturing that would give China a huge advantage in those industries. But now the servant has become the master. It is like the limerick by William Monkhouse:
There was a young lady of Niger Who smiled as she rode on a tiger; They returned from the ride With the lady inside, And the smile on the face of the tiger.
Members of Congress from both parties are beating the drum for special levies that would apply to vehicles made by Chinese owned companies who manufacture them in Mexico. How that could possibly square with the various free trade agreements the US has entered into and the rules of the World Trade Organization is not mentioned. What isn’t being said is that Ford, GM, Mercedes, and others all build cars in Mexico for sale in the US. How can you penalize corporations from one country and not others? That’s the nub of the problem.
Those members of Congress are urging US Trade Representative Katherine Tai to boost the 27.5% tariff on Chinese vehicles and said her office “must also be prepared to address the coming wave of (Chinese) vehicles that will be exported from our other trading partners, such as Mexico, as (Chinese) automakers look to strategically establish operations outside of (China).”
The Takeaway
There is more than a little irony to all this huffing and puffing about an “existential crisis.” The real existential crisis is global heating caused in part by the tailpipe emissions from conventional cars that traditional automakers manufacture by the millions. From one perspective, affordable electric cars from Chinese-owned companies would help reduce carbon emissions in America and Europe. How odd that people can see one existential crisis but not another.
Europe is just as concerned about a flood of Chinese cars damaging its car makers as is the US. BYD has just sent 5000 EVs to Europe on its own ocean-going car transporter. The auto industry supports millions of people who either help make vehicles or the parts that go into them. Many more are employed in the sale, financing, insuring, repairing and distribution of them. If the car companies were to suffer a devastating loss of business, the impact on all those direct and indirect jobs would be enormous.
An old adage says, “Be careful what you wish for; you just might get it.” Many wish for affordable electric cars. The Chinese seem set to deliver them. Not that BYD cars made in Mexico will be priced the same as they are in China. Mexican labor rates may be lower than than the US, but they are still higher higher than they are in China. That $14,000 Qin Plus PHEV in China might cost $28,000 in a US showroom. So the threat may not be quite as dire as people are saying.
This is a thorny thicket. No one wants to see American or European jobs in the auto sector lost, but how to manage the challenge of low cost electric cars from Chinese companies is a question with no easy answer. Knee-jerk protectionism doesn’t seem like the ideal answer, but what is? Please share your thoughts with the CleanTechnica community in the comments section.
Jan 29, 2020 — President Trump signed a revamped trade agreement with Canada and Mexico into law Wednesday, fulfilling his pledge to rework the North ...
Rat's Nest - Chronicles of Collapse | Political Discussion ForumsShare
A wind turbine usually lasts 20 years or more. But at the end of its life, its giant blades often end up in a landfill.
That’s because many turbine blades are built out of a composite material made of glass fibers mixed with a hardened resin or other polymer.
Recycling this composite material is difficult. But a company called Carbon Rivers has found a way to give this material a new life.
Morgan: “We know how to do this with paper, we know how to do this with metal, and we know how to do this with plastic. Now we’re doing this with composite.”
Surprisingly entertaining and informative conversation above. Another sad reminder that US Auto makers had a 30 year lead on the world in producing sustainable cars – and deliberately walked away from it. Out of greed, they betrayed their country, their workers, the taxpayers who bailed them out, and their own children’s future. SMDH.
It happened very quickly — so fast that you might not have noticed it. Over the past few months, America’s Big Three automakers — Ford, General Motors and Stellantis, the oddly named company that owns Dodge, Chrysler and Jeep — landed in big trouble.
I realize this may sound silly. Ford, General Motors and Stellantis made billions in profit last year, even after a lengthy strike by autoworkers, and all three companies are forecasting a big 2024. But recently, the Big Three found themselves outmaneuvered and missing their goals for electric vehicle sales at the same time that a crop of new affordable, electrified foreign cars appeared, ready to flood the global market.
About a decade ago, America bailed out the Big Three and swore it wouldn’t do it again. But the federal government is going to have to help the Big Three — and the rest of the U.S. car market — again very soon. And it has to do it in the right way — now — to avoid the next auto bailout.
The biggest threat to the Big Three comes from a new crop of Chinese automakers, especially BYD, which specialize in producing plug-in hybrid and fully electric vehicles. BYD’s growth is astounding: It sold three million electrified vehicles last year, more than any other company, and it now has enough production capacity in China to manufacture four million cars a year. But that isn’t enough: It’s building new factories in Brazil, Thailand, Hungary and Uzbekistan, which will produce even more cars, and it may soon add Indonesia and Mexico to that list. A deluge of electric vehicles is coming.
BYD’s cars deliver great value at prices that beat anything coming out of the West. Earlier this month, BYD unveiled a plug-in hybrid that gets decent all-electric range and will retail for just over $11,000. How can it do that? Like other Chinese manufacturers, BYD benefits from its home country’s lower labor costs, but this explains only some of its success. The fact is that BYD — and Chinese automakers like Geely, which owns Volvo Cars and Polestar brands — are very good at making cars. They have leveraged China’s dominance of the battery industry and automated production lines to create a juggernaut.
The Chinese automakers, especially BYD, represent something new in the world. They signal that China’s decades-long accretion of economic complexity is almost complete: Whereas the country once made toys and clothes, and then made electronics and batteries, now it makes cars and airplanes. What’s more, BYD and other Chinese automakers are becoming virtually global car companies, capable of manufacturing electric cars that can compete directly with gas-burning cars on cost.
That is, on the surface, a good thing. Electric cars need to get cheaper and more abundant if we are to have any hope of meeting our global climate goals. But it poses some immediate and thorny problems for American policymakers. After BYD announced its $11,000 plug-in hybrid, it posted on the Chinese social media platform Weibo that “the price will make [gasoline] car assemblers tremble.” The problem is many of those gasoline carmakers are American.
Ford and GM plotted an ambitious E.V. transition three years ago. But it didn’t take long for them to stumble. Last year, Ford lost more than $64,000 on every E.V. that it sold. Since October, it has delayed the opening of one of its new E.V. battery plants, while GM has fumbled the start of its new Ultium battery platform, which is meant to be the foundation for all of its future electric vehicles. Ford and GM have notched some wins here — the Mustang Mach-E and Chevrolet Bolt are modest hits — but they aren’t competing at the level of Tesla or Hyundai — companies that operate factories in less union-friendly states in the Sun Belt.
Jim Farley, Ford’s chief executive, recently disclosed that the company had a secret development team building a cheap, affordable electric car to compete with Tesla and BYD. But producing electric vehicles profitably is an organizational skill, and like any skill, it takes time, effort and money to develop. Even if Ford and GM now bust out innovative new designs, they will lag behind their competition at executing them well.
Ford CEO Jim Farley is worried about competition from China’s electric vehicle makers. Chief among the threats is BYD—backed by Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway—which can produce vehicles at significantly lower costs than industry norms, partly because it owns the entire supply chain for its batteries, which account for roughly 40% of a new EV’s price.
That kind of advantage is hard to beat, and it has Ford evaluating its battery strategy. On Thursday, Farley shared thoughts on how to address the challenge from China, suggesting some cooperation among rivals may be merited on battery production.
“We can start having a competitive battery situation,” Farley told attendees at an auto conference hosted by Wolfe Research on Thursday in New York, as reportedby Reuters. “We can go to common cylindrical cells that could add a lot of leverage to our purchasing capability. Maybe we should do [this] with another OEM [automaker].”
He might well find receptive partners among his rivals—he’s not the only carmaker boss worried about BYD’s price prowess, after all.
“No one can match BYD on price. Period,” Michael Dunne, CEO of Asia-focused car consultancy Dunne Insights, told the Financial Times last month. “Boardrooms in America, Europe, Korea, and Japan are in a state of shock.”
Earlier this month, Farley told investors that Ford had “made a bet in silence two years ago” on a secret “skunkworks” team dedicated to creating a low-cost EV platform.
“It was a small group, small team, some of the best EV engineers in the world,” he said, “and it was separate from the Ford mothership. It was a startup.”
Leading that team—based in Irvine, California— is Alan Clarke, an EV engineer who spent a dozen years at Tesla before Ford hired him in 2022 as its executive director of advanced EV development. Members include engineers ??from Los Angeles–based Auto Motive Power (AMP), an energy management venture Ford acquired last year.
There’s never been any question about who Farley sees as the main competitive threat in the EV space. Speaking at a Morgan Stanley event last May, he said, “I think we see the Chinese as the main competitor, not GM or Toyota. The Chinese are going to be the powerhouse.”
Rat's Nest - Chronicles of Collapse | Political Discussion ForumsShare
The Kremlin has announced a six-month ban on petrol exports after Ukrainian attacks on Russian refineries left Vladimir Putin’s regime scrambling to meet domestic demand.
The ban, which comes into force on March 1, was confirmed by a spokesman for deputy prime minister Alexander Novak who said it would allow for “planned maintenance” of refineries.
It follows attacks on Russian facilities by Ukrainian drones in recent months, which have harmed the country’s ability to refine crude oil into usable products such as petrol and diesel.
Russia previously imposed a similar ban between September and November last year in order to tackle high domestic prices and shortages.
Then, only four ex-Soviet states – Belarus, Kazakhstan, Armenia and Kyrgyzstan – were exempt. This time, more Russian neighbours will be exempt, including Mongolia, Uzbekistan and two Russian-backed breakaway regions of Georgia: South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
Oil, oil products and gas are by far Russia’s biggest export and provide a major source of income for the Kremlin’s war economy. Putin has been working with Saudi Arabia, the world’s biggest oil exporter, to keep prices high as part of the broader Opec+ group, which includes the Opec cartel of oil producing nations and its key allies.
Russia is already voluntarily cutting its oil and fuel exports by 500,000 barrels per day in the first quarter as part of Opec+ efforts to support prices.
The top petrol producers in Russia last year were Gazprom Neft’s Omsk refinery, Lukoil’s NORSI oil refinery in Nizhny Novgorod and Rosneft’s Ryazan refinery.
Russia produced 43.9m tonnes of petrol in 2023 and exported about 5.8m tonnes, or around 13pc of its production.
The biggest importers of Russian gasoline are mainly African countries, including Nigeria, Libya and Tunisia.
Rat's Nest - Chronicles of Collapse | Political Discussion ForumsShare
Dr. Jung Unho's research team at the Hydrogen Research Department of the Korea Institute of Energy Research (KIER) has developed Korea's first clean hydrogen production technology. This technology is based on ammonia decomposition and does not use fossil fuels.
The team's breakthrough could pave the way for a more sustainable and eco-friendly energy source. This allows for the production of high-purity hydrogen that meets international standards for hydrogen-powered vehicles without the carbon dioxide emissions produced by using fossil fuels.
Ammonia, a compound of hydrogen and nitrogen, has a hydrogen storage density 1.7 times higher than that of liquefied hydrogen, and it is gaining attention as the most cost-effective method for transporting hydrogen. In particular, as it has been used in various fields, such as fertilizer, for over 100 years, it is equipped with infrastructure, handling, and safety standards. It is considered the most practical solution to address hydrogen storage and transportation challenges.
Ammonia consists only of hydrogen and nitrogen, so no carbon is emitted when the hydrogen is separated. The decomposition process requires a supply of heat energy of over 600?, and currently, fossil fuels are used, resulting in the emission of carbon dioxide. Therefore, to produce clean hydrogen, a carbon-free energy source must be used, even in the process of decomposing ammonia.
By utilizing the small quantities of hydrogen and ammonia left over from the decomposition reaction, the researchers were able to produce hydrogen without the use of fossil fuels.
To generate pure hydrogen from ammonia, the decomposition of ammonia is carried out at a temperature above 600? using a ruthenium (Ru) catalyst, followed by the purification of hydrogen through pressure swing adsorption (PSA) technology.
While carrying out this method, a residual gas mixture of nitrogen and hydrogen is formed and repurposed as a heating element for the ammonia decomposition reactor. Despite this, the residual gas alone does not offer sufficient heat of reaction, therefore extra heat must be added.
In the case of existing technology, insufficient heat of reaction are supplemented with fossil fuels such as natural gas (LNG) or liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), so carbon dioxide is emitted during combustion. However, using the system developed this time, by supplying ammonia instead of fossil fuels, heat of reaction can be supplied and carbon dioxide emissions can be blocked at the source.
Using the developed system, high-purity hydrogen of more than 99.97%, which can be supplied to fuel cells for hydrogen electric vehicles, is produced at 5Nm3 (approximately 0.45kg) per hour. In addition, the hydrogen produced has an impurity concentration of less than 300 ppm for nitrogen and less than 0.1 ppm for ammonia. It met ISO 14687, the international standard for hydrogen-fueled electric vehicles.
The research team has reached a significant milestone by demonstrating a 1kW fuel cell system for buildings that generates electricity without emitting carbon dioxide, using hydrogen extracted from ammonia.
This demonstration, conducted in collaboration with Doosan Fuel Cell Power BU (Business Unit), is of great importance as it overcomes the issue of carbon dioxide emissions, which has been considered a disadvantage of natural gas (LNG) based fuel cell systems. It shows the potential to generate power using clean hydrogen fuel cells.
According to lead researcher Dr. Jung Unho, the newly developed technology holds great significance as it allows for carbon-free hydrogen production using ammonia, filling a previous gap in this area.
There is an expectation that it will find practicality in diverse areas that use clean hydrogen. In his remarks, he went on to say, "The combining of ammonia and fuel cells presents a viable option for powering eco-ships. And as we scale up, we can also make a significant impact in the clean hydrogen power sector."
Provided by National Research Council of Science and Technology
This story was originally published on Tech Xplore.
Rat's Nest - Chronicles of Collapse | Political Discussion ForumsShare
As more clean, renewable energy projects replace dirty fuels such as oil and gas, one issue power companies are facing is how to store surplus energy harvested from the sun or wind.
As reported by the Financial Times, Spanish electric utility company Iberdrola believes it has the solution to this problem: Use the century-old practice of pumped storage, or “water batteries.”
Pumped storage refers to a system where two reservoirs at different elevations pass water back and forth, storing and generating energy in the process. A pumped storage system “acts similarly to a giant battery, because it can store power and then release it when needed,” according to the Department of Energy.
While the system requires power to move the water to the higher elevation, gravity does the work of moving it to the lower elevation, and on the way down, it passes through a giant turbine, generating new electricity.
Iberdrola has built such a system as part of its €1.5 billion (around $1.6 billion) Tâmega hydroelectric complex in Portugal, which harvests both wind and solar, per the Financial Times.
As Diego Díaz Pilas, Iberdrola’s global head of ventures and technology, explained to the Financial Times, while battery storage makes sense for plants harvesting only solar, a plant that deals with both wind and solar energy needs a more comprehensive solution.
“When you have a lot of solar, it pairs very well with batteries because solar generates in daylight hours, and batteries can be discharged when the sun is not shining,” he said. “But when you have also a lot of wind — and 50% of electricity will be coming from wind in Europe around 2030 — you really need to store vast amounts of energy.”
The main obstacle standing in the way of more pumped storage systems is the large upfront cost and how long they take to construct — usually six or more years, per the Financial Times.
“We don’t need anything fancy,” Díaz Pilas said. “We just need faster permitting and stability in the regulatory framework. It’s actually funny that we are here talking about a technology that is nearly 100 years old, but it is so important for the future.”
Rat's Nest - Chronicles of Collapse | Political Discussion ForumsShare
An off-grid island in the Philippines will make use of some incredible technology to transition from diesel energy to clean, renewable energy powered by the tides.
Electrek reported on the project, which will see the remote Capul Island of Northern Samar receive Southeast Asia’s first “tidal energy plant.” The plant will be constructed by UK company Inyanga Marine Energy Group, which was contracted by Philippines energy company Energies PH.
Inyanga has patented an invention called the HydroWing — a modular, multi-rotor tidal energy device with a permanent gravity-based structure, with attached wings and turbines that harvest energy from the waters’ currents.
This device, Electrek wrote, is “going to get the island off the fossil fuels and onto reliable clean energy.”
Such a device is an ideal source of energy for a remote island, particularly one with strong currents as Capul Island is. And hopefully, other islands in the region will also be receiving similar clean energy generators.
“As we embark on this pioneering tidal power plant for the Philippines, our vision is to replicate this in several off-grid sites all over the country to provide electricity in the hinterlands,” said Energies PH co-chairman and CEO Antonio Ver.
Electrek’s commenters were all for the clean energy transition.
“Great news! Basically any island powered by diesel should be converting to renewables due to the cost of running and shipping the diesel along not to mention the pollution,” wrote one commenter.
“That’s really cool. Engineers have all the fun! I hope this works because diesel stinks,” wrote another.
“Doesn’t matter if it’s 10 barrels a day or 10 million. Every place in the world where oil demand dries up for good is a victory,” a third chimed in. “Islands are renewable energy and electrification champions. I get a thrill every time I hear about an island that reaches energy independence by going renewable.”
Rat's Nest - Chronicles of Collapse | Political Discussion ForumsShare
Residents of a small island off the southern coast of England recently received some big news. The waste-to-energy plant on the Isle of Wight has begun test operations.
It’s been a long time coming for the British island, as the plant was supposed to be up and running back in 2019. Testing at the plant that was done in January produced 386,663 kilowatt-hours, enough to power about 7,000 houses for a week, per a BBC report.
Waste-to-energy — WtE, or sometimes called EfW, energy-from-waste — plants take trash, like paper, plastic, yard waste, and wood, and turn it into energy. The waste is burned, heating water, which turns into steam that is then used to turn turbine blades, generating energy.
The WtE process prevents waste from ending up in a landfill, where it would slowly decompose and release planet-heating methane gas into the atmosphere. It can turn 2,000 pounds of garbage into 300-600 pounds of ash, reducing the volume of waste by about 87%, and turning it into energy instead.
The process clearly has its benefits, though burning the garbage can create other problems.
WtE is controversial because incinerating waste releases toxic chemicals and pollutants. Multiple sources, including the Natural Resources Defense Council and Zero Waste Europe, have condemned the method as toxic and called it a form of greenwashing.
Studies have shown that chemicals and pollutants enter the air, water, and food supply, negatively impacting the health of local residents. While much of the pollution was linked to poorly run and older facilities, it’s still being determined if newer incinerators can filter out enough pollutants.
All that said, studies have found the process to be cleaner than burning dirty energy sources like coal or oil. So when you combine it with the ability to reduce waste heading to landfills that still creates its own air pollution, in several ways it’s a better energy source than many traditional power sources.
It’s an ongoing discussion as we transition away from dirty energy sources we’ve depended on in the past. Every step away from burning those fuels is a step in the right direction.
However, many climate experts argue that investing in infrastructure that is still producing pollution — instead of much cleaner, renewable sources like wind and solar — is like putting a band-aid on a bullet wound.
Copenhagen believes it can lay claim to the best version of this technology with its CopenHill “cathedral of waste-to-energy” power plant, which also has an incredible skiing slope built into and around it. Its designers have shown off the plant and said its air emissions are almost entirely water vapor and carbon dioxide, at lower levels than coal or gas, and that it’s “the cleanest waste-to-energy power plant in the world.”
While the new Isle of Wight facility has not made such claims or given detailed public information about pollutants from its testing phase, a council spokesperson for the new facility said they’ve got a close eye on the tests “to ensure the facility meets operational standards and provides the island with a long-term solution for non-recyclable waste disposal, generating electricity with the potential for heat recovery.”
As a wider society, if we can develop more ways like CopenHill to utilize WtE without exposing residents and wildlife to the chemicals and pollutants it produces, then it would be a huge win for managing our enormous waste problem.
by 
(Photo credit: Lars Plougmann / 
