2 ms·

Not sure how this is an example of over regulation. Regulations goal is to reduce CO2 output. If a private company want to achieve that by funding a foreign el

Not sure how this is an example of over regulation. Regulations goal is to reduce CO2 output. If a private company want to achieve that by funding a foreign electric car company to create a reduced total footprint, that’s their choice. Ultimately the regulation achieves its goal, reducing CO2. That fact it’s done by increasing competition in the automotive industry can only be seen as an extra win.

makomk 7y ago
One of the other things those CO2 regulations did is push companies towards producing and selling diesel cars that emitted less CO2 but more other pollutants like NO2 and particulates that caused direct and immediate harm. Which lead to dieselgate and then this: "Compliance has gotten harder for automakers as consumers have shifted toward gasoline cars, which emit comparatively more CO2, following Volkswagen AG’s diesel-emissions scandal that first erupted in 2015." So I guess this isn't so much a footgun moment as a whole series of them.
nemothekid 7y ago
It all depends on if, as a European, you see the goal of reducing CO2 justified by the fact that you may be kneecapping local industries in favor of a foreign one. I wouldn't call it a foot gun moment but it does feel somewhat like a faustian bargain.
- avianlyric 7y ago
  For me preventing climate change is pretty non-negotiable. I’m rather a fan of having a liveable planet, and as some that lives in London, I’m acutely aware of what sea level rise will do to my home. In this specific case a small foreign company (and Tesla is tiny compared to the likes of VW) gets a leg up. I don’t think it have much impact of EU automotive industry in the long run.
  - greglindahl 7y ago
    Tesla's German plant will be a part of the EU automotive industry, right?
    - avianlyric 7y ago
      Absolutely true. Although I’m assuming some people will take offence to the idea of it being run by an American owned company.
  - rapsey 7y ago
    > (and Tesla is tiny compared to the likes of VW) Check the market cap.
    - ziftface 7y ago
      Or don't, because that's entirely irrelevant
    - tonyedgecombe 7y ago
      In 2018 Tesla made 87,000 vehicles, VW made 10.5 million.
rapsey 7y ago
> Regulations goal is to reduce CO2 output. Maybe that regulation is stupid and it causes the wrong incentives? If you wanted more electric cars, there are plenty of ways of making them more appealing thus creating a market for them. Like improving charging infrastructure. Putting a gun to the head of one if not the largest manufacturing industry on the continent is pretty stupid way of doing so. > That fact it’s done by increasing competition in the automotive industry can only be seen as an extra win. Yeah great, us europeans will all be thrilled by the increased foreign competition and dead local manufacturers who have EU regulation burdens and foreigners who don't.
- avianlyric 7y ago
  The goal is to reduce CO2, not create more electric cars. That’s just one possible solution. Additionally have you seen how small Tesla is compared to someone like VW? They’re easily an order of magnitude smaller. Finally if Tesla are building in the EU then they’re contributing to the EU manufacturing industry, and they’re beholden to EU regulation.
  - rapsey 7y ago
    > The goal is to reduce CO2, not create more electric cars. That’s just one possible solution. Well shooting yourself in the foot is a pretty bad way to achieve those goals. > Additionally have you seen how small Tesla is compared to someone like VW? They’re easily an order of magnitude smaller. A US company benefiting from much looser regulation at home and most of all the insane FED money printing making its way to the stock market and funding them with free money. > Finally if Tesla are building in the EU then they’re contributing to the EU manufacturing industry, and they’re beholden to EU regulation. So we can all be factory workers for americans. Great.
    - avianlyric 7y ago
      > Well shooting yourself in the foot is a pretty bad way to achieve those goals. You’re going to have to explain why this is shooting ourselves in the foot. I’m still not seeing it. > A US company benefiting from much looser regulation at home and most of all the insane FED money printing making its way to the stock market and funding them with free money. I’m not entirely sure I understand what your trying to say. Which regulations are so much looser and can you explain what advantages they provide to Tesla vs an EU company. > So we can all be factory workers for americans. Great. EU companies own factories in the US (VW is a notable example), and US companies own factories in the EU. Nothing wrong with that.
mattlondon 7y ago
> Ultimately the regulation achieves its goal, reducing CO2. Does it though? Instead of Fiat reducing their product's CO2 emissions, isn't it actually the case that they've just done some fancy accounting and now say their emissions are lower because the paperwork now says Tesla is part of their fleet? Tesla were going to make those cars anyway, so really Tesla gain the free money from Fiat, and Fiat keeps making polluting cars, and we all get to suffer the consequences of no actual reduction of CO2 because ultimately nothing has changed apart from some paperwork that follows the letter of the law rather than the spirit? Doesn't seem that great to me.
- torpfactory 7y ago
  It’s an economic disincentive for Fiat to continue producing them. Sure Fiat could continue to sell those cars, but being on the hook for shoveling Tesla $2bn every few years isn’t a winning long term strategy. Hurts Fiat, helps a company that’s got much better CO2 performance. CO2 will be reduced because it will now be in Fiats financial interest to produce EVs. It certainly won’t happen overnight but the incentives are clear for Fiat.
- woodandsteel 7y ago
  No, the standards keep going up, so Fiat still has to change. It already knows this, and its problem is it is not yet really to start manufacturing a lot of ev's. This gives them another year or two to get ready.

makomk 7y ago

One of the other things those CO2 regulations did is push companies towards producing and selling diesel cars that emitted less CO2 but more other pollutants like NO2 and particulates that caused direct and immediate harm. Which lead to dieselgate and then this: "Compliance has gotten harder for automakers as consumers have shifted toward gasoline cars, which emit comparatively more CO2, following Volkswagen AG’s diesel-emissions scandal that first erupted in 2015." So I guess this isn't so much a footgun moment as a whole series of them.

nemothekid 7y ago

It all depends on if, as a European, you see the goal of reducing CO2 justified by the fact that you may be kneecapping local industries in favor of a foreign one. I wouldn't call it a foot gun moment but it does feel somewhat like a faustian bargain.

avianlyric 7y ago
For me preventing climate change is pretty non-negotiable. I’m rather a fan of having a liveable planet, and as some that lives in London, I’m acutely aware of what sea level rise will do to my home. In this specific case a small foreign company (and Tesla is tiny compared to the likes of VW) gets a leg up. I don’t think it have much impact of EU automotive industry in the long run.
- greglindahl 7y ago
  Tesla's German plant will be a part of the EU automotive industry, right?
  - avianlyric 7y ago
    Absolutely true. Although I’m assuming some people will take offence to the idea of it being run by an American owned company.
- rapsey 7y ago
  > (and Tesla is tiny compared to the likes of VW) Check the market cap.
  - ziftface 7y ago
    Or don't, because that's entirely irrelevant
  - tonyedgecombe 7y ago
    In 2018 Tesla made 87,000 vehicles, VW made 10.5 million.

rapsey 7y ago

> Regulations goal is to reduce CO2 output. Maybe that regulation is stupid and it causes the wrong incentives? If you wanted more electric cars, there are plenty of ways of making them more appealing thus creating a market for them. Like improving charging infrastructure. Putting a gun to the head of one if not the largest manufacturing industry on the continent is pretty stupid way of doing so. > That fact it’s done by increasing competition in the automotive industry can only be seen as an extra win. Yeah great, us europeans will all be thrilled by the increased foreign competition and dead local manufacturers who have EU regulation burdens and foreigners who don't.

avianlyric 7y ago
The goal is to reduce CO2, not create more electric cars. That’s just one possible solution. Additionally have you seen how small Tesla is compared to someone like VW? They’re easily an order of magnitude smaller. Finally if Tesla are building in the EU then they’re contributing to the EU manufacturing industry, and they’re beholden to EU regulation.
- rapsey 7y ago
  > The goal is to reduce CO2, not create more electric cars. That’s just one possible solution. Well shooting yourself in the foot is a pretty bad way to achieve those goals. > Additionally have you seen how small Tesla is compared to someone like VW? They’re easily an order of magnitude smaller. A US company benefiting from much looser regulation at home and most of all the insane FED money printing making its way to the stock market and funding them with free money. > Finally if Tesla are building in the EU then they’re contributing to the EU manufacturing industry, and they’re beholden to EU regulation. So we can all be factory workers for americans. Great.
  - avianlyric 7y ago
    > Well shooting yourself in the foot is a pretty bad way to achieve those goals. You’re going to have to explain why this is shooting ourselves in the foot. I’m still not seeing it. > A US company benefiting from much looser regulation at home and most of all the insane FED money printing making its way to the stock market and funding them with free money. I’m not entirely sure I understand what your trying to say. Which regulations are so much looser and can you explain what advantages they provide to Tesla vs an EU company. > So we can all be factory workers for americans. Great. EU companies own factories in the US (VW is a notable example), and US companies own factories in the EU. Nothing wrong with that.

mattlondon 7y ago

> Ultimately the regulation achieves its goal, reducing CO2. Does it though? Instead of Fiat reducing their product's CO2 emissions, isn't it actually the case that they've just done some fancy accounting and now say their emissions are lower because the paperwork now says Tesla is part of their fleet? Tesla were going to make those cars anyway, so really Tesla gain the free money from Fiat, and Fiat keeps making polluting cars, and we all get to suffer the consequences of no actual reduction of CO2 because ultimately nothing has changed apart from some paperwork that follows the letter of the law rather than the spirit? Doesn't seem that great to me.

torpfactory 7y ago
It’s an economic disincentive for Fiat to continue producing them. Sure Fiat could continue to sell those cars, but being on the hook for shoveling Tesla $2bn every few years isn’t a winning long term strategy. Hurts Fiat, helps a company that’s got much better CO2 performance. CO2 will be reduced because it will now be in Fiats financial interest to produce EVs. It certainly won’t happen overnight but the incentives are clear for Fiat.
woodandsteel 7y ago
No, the standards keep going up, so Fiat still has to change. It already knows this, and its problem is it is not yet really to start manufacturing a lot of ev's. This gives them another year or two to get ready.