Are we still convinced that electric vehicles are the best way forward?

teamzr1

Supporting vendor
Bye Bye EV mandate and strict fuel mileage rules !
In his first action, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy axed Biden’s CAFE fuel economy standards that were seen by critics as a de facto EV mandate.
WASHINGTON — Yesterday, Sean Duffy was officially sworn in as the 20th Secretary of the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT). Secretary Duffy was administered the oath of office by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas at the U.S. Supreme Court, and was joined by his family.
Upon arrival at USDOT headquarters, Secretary Duffy’s first act was signing a memorandum directing staff to start the process of resetting Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, which will ultimately lower the price of a car for American consumers and eliminate the electric vehicle mandate.

“I am deeply honored by the trust placed in me by President Trump to lead this important Department and for the Senate in swiftly confirming my nomination,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy.
“We are already hard at work executing the President's vision to usher in a golden age of transportation by taking immediate action to remove government overreach and lower costs for hardworking Americans.

The memorandum signed today specifically reduces the burdensome and overly restrictive fuel standards that have needlessly driven up the cost of a car in order to push a radical Green New Deal agenda.
The American people should not be forced to sacrifice choice and affordability when purchasing a new car.”

The memorandum signed by the Secretary directs the Office of the General Counsel, the Office of the Undersecretary for Policy, and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to immediately initiate a rulemaking to rescind or replace all existing CAFE standards.

As a result of the regulatory costs, fuel economy standards have diminished the strength of America’s auto industry and denied Americans the full range of affordable vehicles they need.

According to data from Cox Automotive

  • From March 2021 to March 2024, the cost of a car increased by a total of 15.5%, from an average of $40,881 to an average of $47,218.
  • Current rule requires all passenger cars and light trucks to meet a standard of 50.4 miles per gallon (mpg) in Model Year 2031. This government mandate has dramatically increased the average price of a new car to nearly $48,000, driving up the cost and making it unaffordable for American consumers.
  • The price of a car has continued to spiral. In March 2024, of the 275 new-vehicle models available for purchase, only eight had transaction prices below $25,000. By comparison, in March 2021, more than 20 vehicles had transaction prices below $25,000.
This direction will implement Executive Order 14148, titled Initial Rescissions of Harmful Executive Orders and Actions, and Executive Order 14154, titled Unleashing American Energy, which were issued by President Trump on January 20, 2025.

You can read the full memorandum by clicking here.

Or read what I attached below
 

Attachments

  • EPa.pdf
    2.9 MB · Views: 0
Last edited:

Pinhead

CCCUK Member
Ah but then with the 25% tarrifs on imports from Mexico and Canada coming in on Saturday and many cars or parts coming from there will prices actually go down or just up by less than they otherwise would ?
 

CaptainK

CCCUK Member
I can't see car prices coming down much - auto companies have invested in research and dev etc for this stuff and will want money back etc, even if they don't implement it. That and they want all the money they can get.
 

teamzr1

Supporting vendor
The administration of now-former President Obama/Biden tried to bankroll the use of electric school buses at government schools across the country.

But as the electric buses continue to have massive reliability issues, some schools regret taking the federal handouts and now want help from the Environmental Protection Agency to get themselves out of the program.

Maine Department of Education Commissioner Pender Makin wrote a letter to the agency voicing concerns with the program, asking for waived penalties for not using buses provided by manufacturer Lion Electric, according to a Monday report from WGME-TV in Portland, Maine.

“Specifically, we urge the agency to pursue legal remedies, including claw-backs of federal funding or other resources provided to the company,” he wrote.
There are at least six districts reporting massive problems with Lion Electric school buses they bought through the federal program.

The six electric buses received by Yarmouth Schools have been with the district for a year and a half, but they have only been used a few times because of functionality issues, per WGME-TV.

“We are trying to work with Lion to have those buses replaced, or to receive compensation for those buses, but really not making much progress at this point and time,” Yarmouth Superintendent Andrew Dolloff said in comments to the station.
“We run them for only a day or so and then we get error messages about engine failures or battery failures,” he described.

Dolloff reported difficulties in communicating with a representative from Lion Electric, which does not have any staffers in the area to handle bus maintenance.
“We are not able to run them until those messages are cleared,” Dolloff added.

WPFO-TV in Waterville, Maine, reported on the same issue at government schools in the state, noting that the Biden administration earmarked $3 billion for the project across the country.
As of last fall, the EPA burned $1 billion of those funds to put just 2,000 electric buses on the roads.

For those keeping score at home, that’s a healthy $300,000 per electric bus, which is much more expensive than your typical diesel school bus.
Even beyond the inflated cost, the poor reliability of these electric buses points to the folly of trying to manipulate the free market for political reasons.

While electric vehicles are advancing in their sophistication, they still have reliability issues that do not affect gas-powered alternatives, such as the fact that they do not charge as easily in the winter.
That is, of course, a relevant factor for Maine, which receives quite a bit of winter weather.

Despite all of these concerns, rather than simply waiting a few more years and allowing the free market to advance the technology, Biden and his handlers put their thumbs on the scale.
Responding to federal handouts, producers and consumers alike shifted toward making and selling more electric vehicles,
overlooking reliability issues to access those federal dollars.

Now they just want their money back.
 

teamzr1

Supporting vendor
Ford Motor Company has reported a $5.1 billion loss in its electric vehicle and software business for 2024, with expectations of losing even more in 2025.

The automaker reported substantial losses in its electric vehicle (EV) and software division, known as Model e.
The company lost $5.1 billion in this segment in 2024, a significant increase from the $4.7 billion lost in the previous year.
Furthermore, Ford predicts that losses will continue to mount, potentially reaching $5.5 billion in 2025.

Despite these setbacks in the EV business, Ford’s traditional gas-powered vehicles continue to perform well, generating sufficient revenue to keep the company profitable overall.
The automaker reported a full-year net income of $5.9 billion and an adjusted earning of $10.2 billion. However, Ford cautioned that its earnings may drop by $2 billion or more in 2025 due to the costs associated with new vehicle launches and declining car prices.

During the earnings call, CEO Jim Farley addressed concerns about potential tariffs threatened by President Donald Trump on imports from Mexico and Canada.
Farley stated that while a few weeks of tariffs would be “manageable,” prolonged tariffs would have a “huge impact” on the industry, potentially wiping out billions of dollars in profits and adversely affecting U.S. jobs and the entire value system in the automotive sector.
He also warned of higher prices for consumers if the tariffs remain in place.

Compared to its rivals in the EV market, Ford appears to be lagging behind.
While General Motors released several new electric models last year, including Chevy and Cadillac vehicles, Ford currently offers only three battery-electric vehicles for sale. Moreover, GM’s EV business is showing signs of profitability, while Ford’s continues to struggle.

To address these challenges, Ford plans to introduce a range of powertrains, including battery-electric, plug-in hybrid, and extended-range EVs that use small gas engines to recharge the battery, offering up to 700 miles of range.

Farley has been a huge proponent of EVs, bragging about how much money Ford could save by switching to electric vehicles:

“So I believe there will be, our industry is definitely heading to a huge price war,” said Farley. He noted that the Mustang Mach-E currently starts at around $45,000, but the battery pack alone costs Ford $18,000 to build, a production price that he hopes to lower in coming years.
 

teamzr1

Supporting vendor
I hope the sharholders of GM stock wise up and force Barra out of GM, guess they are not happy so many GM ICE vehicles were wacked
Bet she knew what was going to happen when about 2 months ago she dumped a lot of her GM stock and pocketed $85 million bucks
Also, she fired two long term Team Corvette guys and rumor they wanted Corvette to stay ICE for the C9s

States trying to build a network of EV chargers are reeling after the Trump administration abruptly ordered a halt to a $5 billion program to build the chargers on highways nationwide.

In a memo released Thursday, the Federal Highway Administration ordered states to halt the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure program, which President Donald Trump cited as an example of the “Green New Deal.” So far, states are now split, with some putting their program on pause and at least one planning to continue to fulfill existing contracts.

The letter informs state transportation directors who are in charge of administering the program that any plans approved by the Biden administration are now suspended until the Transportation Department provides new guidelines in the spring.
“Effective immediately, no new obligations may occur under the NEVI Formula Program,” the letter reads.

The order, which comes as many states are still working to build out their public chargers supported by $5 billion in grants, could strike a major blow to an industry that has experienced slower-than-expected sales and could lose critical federal tax incentives in coming months.
On Wednesday, Ford Motor Co. projected it could lose as much as $5.5 billion this year on its EV and software business.

Just 55 charging stations have been built so far in 4 years, and half of those do not work, according to data from the analytics firm Paren.

Michigan is pausing second-round submissions of the NEVI program, said Jocelyn Garza, a spokesperson for the Michigan Department of Transportation. "We are working with our federal advisors to determine what impacts may exist for the funding obligated through the first round of NEVI submissions," she said.

Vermont Agency of Transportation officials said Friday that they will suspend their program, having built only one charging station withjust four chargers funded by NEVI for about $700,000. The state had already awarded 11 projects for an additional 60 charging ports, but those will all go on hold, said Patrick Murphy, the agency’s state policy director. More than $20 million in NEVI funding promised to the state is now at risk, he said.

“The public really feel they need to have better charging infrastructure before they take the step in making an electric vehicle purchase or lease,” Murphy said. “This has nothing to do with promoting true consumer choice. This will actively limit choice.”

Pennsylvania, meanwhile, has yet to change course on its EV charger rollout. A person with knowledge of Pennsylvania’s state-level program, who spoke on the condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the matter, said there had been no communications with the federal government and that they planned to keep delivering charging projects that had already been awarded until told otherwise.
But the state would not offer new solicitations for building further stations, this person added.

“I don’t believe FHWA has the authority to do this,” said Loren McDonald, Paren’s chief analyst and an expert on the charging program, in an email.
The memo was first reported by InsideEVs.
The program, which Congress approved under the bipartisan infrastructure law, was intended to help fill gaps in the nation’s EV charging network and boost consumer confidence to buy electric vehicles.
The law also provided another $2.5 billion for chargers in communities and neighborhoods.

States had to submit plans to the Transportation Department on how they would use the funds; once their plans were approved, they could begin building out stations. To date, approximately another $3.3 billion has been allocated to states, according to Paren.

But the new memo puts that funding in jeopardy. Even states that have approved plans do not have the money in hand as part of the program, they send invoices to the federal government after meeting key milestones.
“The states don’t get the money that’s been obligated to them until they submit an invoice to FHWA,” McDonald said.

According to the memo, states will continue to receive “reimbursement of existing obligations.” Experts said that indicates states that already have a contract with a charging company will be able to fulfill it but any unfinished contracts will probably be on hold.

Trump has long railed against what he calls an EV “mandate,” and he criticized the Biden administration’s attempts to create programs to boost electric vehicle sales. In an executive order on the first day of his presidency,
Trump ordered the federal government to terminate “the Green New Deal,” “including but not limited to funds for electric vehicle charging stations.” Charging station grants were the only specific clean energy program mentioned in the executive order.

The president has continued to target electric vehicles, even while he maintains a close alliance with Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla. Tesla has been a key recipient of charging grants, and it has the largest fast-charger network in the country.
But Musk has previously said that cuts to EV benefits, such as the $7,500 EV tax credit, will be more painful for the company’s rival automakers than Tesla, even if his company might suffer in the short term.

Some states, including Rhode Island, Missouri, Alabama and Oklahoma, had already publicly confirmed that they were pausing their EV charger programs before the memo was released.

Barbara LaBoe, the deputy communications director for the Washington State Department of Transportation, said the new order affects most of the $102 million the state had been promised for EV chargers.
“We are still seeking more information about all specifics of this suspension,” she said in an email.

The state has no outstanding invoices with the federal government, she added. “Due to the uncertainty of funding, we held off on making any decisions regarding project awards at this time,” she said.

Ryan Gallentine, managing director at the national business association Advanced Energy United, said that states “are under no obligation to stop these projects based solely on this announcement.”

“We call on state DOTs and program administrators to continue executing this program until new guidance is finalized,” Gallentine added.

Fewer chargers may affect consumer appetite to buy electric vehicles in the long term, said Gil Tal, director of the Electric Vehicle Research Center at the University of California at Davis.
But the Trump administration has already dealt a more immediate blow to the EV market, he added, by moving to roll back rules on car emissions that would have effectively required auto companies to make more electric cars.

Some said they believe that the Trump administration’s move may provoke legal action. “I’m assuming the lawsuits from states will start soon, and this will go to court and Congress,” McDonald said.
“But the Trump administration will succeed in just causing havoc and slowing things down for a while.”
 

teamzr1

Supporting vendor
Porsche AG is falling further off track from lofty targets set during its splashy stock listing two years ago, with costs mounting from executives having misjudged how sports-car buyers not wanting to go electric.

The 911 maker’s profit margin will slump to as low as 10% this year, half the 20% level management floated before an initial public offering that raised around €9.4 billion ($9.8 billion). The stock dropped Friday to a new low since the IPO, plunging as much as 8%.

The “sharp deterioration” in outlook is a “major concern,” Bernstein analyst Stephen Reitman said in a note. He urged Porsche executives to convene a call with investors “to further explain and reassure an inevitably febrile market.”

At around €50 billion, Porsche’s market value is now less than half what it was in May 2023. The steep decline heaps more pressure on Chief Executive Officer Oliver Blume, who runs both Porsche and Volkswagen AG. Porsche indicated this past weekend that the supervisory board likely will oust both its chief financial officer and sales chief.

Porsche was among the major automakers wanting to pull back from transitioning to electric vehicles last year, citing underwhelming demand. Challenges with making the jump to EVs have cost the company dearly in China, where deliveries dropped 28% last year.

Porsche said late Thursday that it will take an €800 million ($831 million) hit this year tied to expanding its product portfolio with more combustion engine and plug-in hybrid models.
While the company’s all-electric Taycan got off to a fast start following its 2020 debut, sales stumbled last year, and a new EV version of the Macan sport utility vehicle has underwhelmed.

Return on sales for 2024 is expected to end up at the lower end of its forecast range, or around 14%. This projection was already lowered back in July, with executives blaming supply chain snags.

“Porsche is a luxury brand OEM and is not generating profitability in line with that,” Citigroup Inc. analyst Harald Hendrikse said in a note. “The €800 million hit doesn’t fully account for Porsche’s shortfall, suggesting some execution gaps.”

In a knock-on effect of Porsche’s disappointing outlook, the holding company majority owned by the billionaire Porsche-Piëch family said late Thursday that it now expects to book an even bigger impairment on the carrying value of its investment in the carmaker.

Porsche Automobil Holding SE said the impairment could be in the €2.5 billion to €3.5 billion range. Back in December, the holding company was bracing for a €1 billion to €2 billion setback.

In addition to expenses tied to rolling out more gasoline and hybrid models, Porsche blamed the lower forecast for this year on efforts to bolster its car-customization offerings and increasing investments in battery subsidiaries.
 

teamzr1

Supporting vendor
Porsche AG will trim its workforce by 1,900 employees by the end of 2028 in response to weak electric vehicle demand and “challenging geopolitical and economic conditions.”

The Volkswagen AG-controlled luxury brand plans to reduce headcount at two German sites through voluntary measures like early retirement and severance packages, and will take a “restrictive approach” to new hires, it said Thursday. The goal is to reduce staffing in Zuffenhausen and Weissach by 15% by 2029.

Porsche is grappling with a drop in EV demand, and was among the major automakers to walk back its EV targets last year. Challenges with making the jump to electric cars have cost the 911 maker dearly in China, where deliveries have slumped, piling on pressure to cut costs. The company will take an €800 million ($831 million) hit this year tied to developing products, with more combustion engine and plug-in hybrid models.
 
Top