Share This

Tuesday, May 28, 2024

Xi's China EV dream is coming true

 

In pole position: Sales staff stand near the Seagull electric vehicle from BYD at a showroom in Beijing. The car, launched last year, sells for around US$12,000 in China and rivals US-made EVs that cost three times as much. — AP

HONG KONG: Ten years ago almost to the day, while checking out a handful of luxury sedans from one of China’s largest automakers SAIC Motor Corp, President Xi Jinping gave a pivotal speech that would set China on the course to dominate the electric vehicle (EV) industry.

The path to becoming a strong automaking nation lies in developing new-energy vehicles, Xi said, according to a 2014 Xinhua report.

Claiming a head start, or “high ground,” in this sector is key to the competition globally, Xi said.

In 2014, China sold around 75,000 EVs and hybrids, and exported about 533,000 cars.

The domestic market was dominated by international manufacturers such as Volkswagen AG and General Motors Co, which were allowed to enter by forming joint ventures with local players in the 1980s and 1990s.

This helped China transform from a bike-riding nation to a car-driving one.

Homegrown carmakers and brands that didn’t work with foreign partners were seen as inferior and lagging behind in engine and other automotive technology.

To get ahead and tackle environmental challenges, Beijing bet on fuel efficient and alternative energy vehicles.

The state had published a guideline in 2012 that established ways to develop the industry by setting sales goals, providing subsidies and allocating resources for building charging infrastructure, among other things.

Xi’s speech two years later signalled China’s determination to use this as a way leapfrog traditional Western and Asian auto powerhouses, in particular Japan, home to Toyota Motor Corp.

With the stage set, China needed a catalyst to spur consumer interest in EVs, which in the early 2010s were mostly cheap cars with short ranges.

That ended up being Tesla Inc, which became the first foreign automaker to set up a wholly owned operation in China.

With that special permission, Tesla completed its Shanghai factory in 2019. Its entry into the market motivated local players to come up with better EVs with longer ranges.

Fast forward to 2024, and China has become the world’s largest auto market and sells more electrified vehicles than any other country, with 9.5 million cars delivered last year.

It also controls the majority of the battery supply chain. Homegrown champion BYD Co dethroned Volkswagen to become the best-selling brand in China and in the last quarter of 2023, surpassed Tesla as the world’s largest producer of EVs.

China also overtook Japan as the largest auto exporter, sending 4.14 million units abroad with 1.55 million of them being EVs or plug-in hybrids.

The achievements proved that Beijing’s industrial policy and investments paid off. But they’re also adding to tensions with the West.

China’s success in EVs, which could disrupt traditional auto supply chains that employ millions of people, has become a key source of discomfort in Washington and Brussels.

As a price war at home and slowing growth drives Chinese automakers to search for buyers for its affordable and tech-laden EVs elsewhere, they’re running into trade barriers, especially in the European Union (EU) and the United States, which are meanwhile trying to develop their own EV supply chains.

Both have accused China of exporting its excess capacity.

The United States has quadrupled import tariffs on Chinese cars to more than 100%, while the EU is investigating Chinese EVs to see if there has been an unfair advantage from government subsidies.

Brazil recently removed a tax break on imported EVs and even Russia, arguably Beijing’s strongest ally and the largest destination for Chinese auto exports since the war with Ukraine, has asked Chinese carmakers to consider localising production.

Beijing has threatened to hit back, with the China Chamber of Commerce to the EU on May 22 saying that the import tariffs on cars with large engines may be raised to 25% from 15%.

There’s a June 5 deadline for the EU to inform Chinese EV exporters of preliminary findings and whether tariffs will be imposed.

SAIC, the state-owned manufacturer whose facility Xi visited 10 years ago, happens to be one of the three Chinese automakers, along with BYD and Zhejiang Geely Holding Group Co, selected for further scrutiny by the EU in its anti-subsidy investigation.

SAIC owns the British-origin MG brand, which is one of the top selling EVs in Europe.

At an event marking the 10th anniversary of Xi’s speech last Friday, SAIC officials including chief engineer Zu Sijie said they’ve remembered the president’s instructions well, and the company has consistently innovated around technologies like smart driving and connected cars.

Li Zheng, the co-founder of SAIC Qingtao New Energy Technology Co, a battery startup backed by SAIC, took the opportunity to promise executives won’t be complacent as EV competition rises, noting that progress in solid-state batteries, which have a higher energy density and reduced fire risk, will be one way for China to maintain its edge.

“New-energy vehicles have become a strategic industry, fiercely contested by countries around world,” Li said. “They’re a key supporting force to our country’s revitalisation of green sectors.”

A lot can happen in 10 years, but with SAIC having invested about 150 billion yuan (US$21bil) into research and development over the past decade alone, even despite trade wars, 2034 looks bright. — Bloomberg

Source link 

Related News


Monday, May 27, 2024

America as a third world country

 ;

Capitol Police and the Nation al Guard on alert at Capitol Hill a day after a pro-Trump mob broke into the US Capitol, Washington DC , on Jan 7, 2021. —AFP

FROM time to time, when something goes wrong in America, its politicians and media commentators would sometimes say the following lines or a variation thereof: “This is something you’d expect in a third world country.”

Having stayed in the United States for a big chunk of the past year, there are times when that line comes to mind. To be fair, I have also gained much more appreciation for this nation, including the cultural diversity fuelled by immigrants from every corner of the world; the Americans’ entrepreneurial spirit and resourcefulness; and the sheer loftiness of its democratic ideals, even if the country has struggled to live up to them. On a more personal note, I’ve also come to embrace its great outdoors, and the New Hampshire’s White Mountains have become a sanctuary.

But there are also moments of frustration and disappointment, during which I am tempted to invoke the “third world” trope. 

Coming from a country that is actually part of the so-called “third world,” I am acutely aware of how problematic and inaccurate the term is, in terms of how it reinforces a divide between the “first world” and the rest of the planet; how it perpetuates how “backward” (another problematic term) other countries are in relation to those that are “advanced”; and how the ability to even conceptualise the world in those simplistic terms comes from a position of unacknowledged privilege.

“From almost the beginning, New Orleans looked more like a Third World country than part of the US,” a news report on Hurricane Katrina back in 2005 went, as though the sight of devastated communities were a natural feature of countries like the Philippines, when it is the colonial condition that actually produced the conditions of such disasters; when it just so happened that America has been relatively spared from powerful storms until recently.

“There is nothing patriotic about what is occurring on Capitol Hill. This is 3rd world style anti-American anarchy,” US Senator Marco Rubio tweeted in the aftermath of the infamous Capitol attacks on Jan 6, 2021, as though America were immune to demagoguery, populism, and (gun) violence; as though America had no hand in anarchies and insurrections the world over.

As we can see, in these instances, the rhetorical uses of the US as a “third world country” are premised an even more problematic idea of American exceptionalism.

In some ways, though, America is indeed “third world,” just as in some ways, the Philippines is “first world” (and we can also just as easily replace those terms with whatever is preferable or acceptable: Global North and Global South; “developing” and “developed”; “high income” and “low and middle income”). These terms may have some utility in certain contexts, but in characterising countries and categorising the world they are essentially meaningless due to the inequality that has intensified both wealth and poverty within each nation.

In the Philippines, for instance, we see how commercial centres like Bonifacio Global City and Makati, even parts of Davao or Cebu, can rival the ritziest parts of America in terms of their restaurants and cafés, luxury apartments, and all the amenities that can be enjoyed by people who can afford them. We have “first world” schools and hospitals, too, completed with the necessary global credentials, readily available for those who have the ability to pay.

Conversely, America’s “third-worldness” is experienced mostly by the millions living from paycheck to paycheck; dispossessed Black, indigenous, and rural communities, in what the Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist Peter Temin calls the decline of middle America. Alongside the homelessness crisis in the Bay Area and in growing number of cities, public infrastructure is perhaps its most visible manifestation: While the uber-rich can fly on private jets, many Americans have to contend with ageing subways, trains, and airports.

More deeply, while billionaires are building ultra-high-tech “bunkers” as status symbols, many Americans face existential risks, from disasters like the wildfires in California and floods in Texas to the everyday violence from guns, criminality, and poverty. And while billions of dollars are spent in military spending and assistance – education and health care are under-prioritised and underfunded, with many African and Asian countries faring better than many US states in their Covid-19 responses and outcomes. Surely, America has much to learn from the rest of the world, in the same way that we also have much to learn from it.

The late medical anthropologist Paul Farmer referred to those on the receiving end of these conditions, in America and the rest of the “first world,” as constituting a “fourth world,” to underscore how vastly different their lived experiences are from their much wealthier counterparts.

But I don’t think we need more than one world to articulate our shared predicaments and the need for global solidarity – including toward the people of this beautiful land who deserve better public transport, health care, education, and quality of life. — Philippine Daily Inquirer/Asia News Network

ource link 

Related posts:

US is a ‘monopoly’

 


Saturday, May 25, 2024

M’sian-born CEO paid more than tech titans

Leading the pack: Tan beats Cook, Musk and Zuckerberg in the analysis by the WSJ. — Photo from Broadcom Inc

Tan tops list of highest paid executives in the US last year 

PETALING JAYA: The highest-paid chief executive officer in the United States is neither Apple’s Tim Cook nor Tesla’s Elon Musk, but Malaysian-born businessman Tan Hock Eng.

Tan, 71, also surpassed Meta Platforms’ Mark Zuckerberg by earning US$162mil (about RM760mil) in compensation last year, according to South China Morning Post, which quoted an analysis by the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) this week.

“Tan, who is a US citizen, is the CEO of semiconductor company Broadcom Inc and has been topping the pay charts since 2006, receiving US$103mil in 2017,” said WSJ.

However, the pay package comes with several conditions, including the company’s stock hitting a certain level by next year. Tan must also remain as CEO for an additional five years, and he will not receive any more equity or cash bonuses during that period.

The semiconductor company’s shares rose 106% over the past 12 months, bringing its total market capitalisation to US$655bil (RM3 trillion).

Tan is also a board member of Meta Platforms, the US-based company that owns Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp among others.

Tan, who hails from Penang, completed his undergraduate studies in mechanical engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

He also has a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering from the National University of Singapore. He then earned a Master of Business Administration from Harvard University. After returning to Malaysia, he was involved with Hume Industries between 1983 and 1988.

He then moved to Singapore as managing director of venture capital firm Pacven Investment.

He reportedly relocated back to the United States in 1992 and assumed the role of vice-president of finance for PC maker Commodore International.

Source link 


Related News