Why should the green energy transition be bottlenecked by entrenched incumbent players' profit margins? Are their profit margins more important than averting global climate disaster? We have a green technology undercapacity, not overcapacity.
Why should Europe allowed China to attack and destroy its car industry, when China is also helping Russia destroy Europe militarily?
Good thing Europe woke up earlier this year. impact of the EU’s tariffs on Chinese EV manufacturers. In November, Chinese automakers captured just 7.4% of Europe’s EV market, a noticeable drop from 8.2% in October and their lowest share since March [1].
As for US, the 100% tariff has safely protected America from Chinese EVs thus far.
“Protected America from Chinese EVs” - aka, ensuring the long term irrelevance and stagnation of American car manufacturers. They will keep their sales temporarily while the rest of the world leaves them behind
What causes issues to Europe's car industry is not Chinese cheap EVs in Europe. There are not even many Chinese EVs driving around here, those tariffs will have very little impact.
What damaged the EU cae makers was that they had a very good market in China, and Chinese EV makers could step up and make cars that were more desirable/affordable for their domestic market. The loss of profits in China is what hurt everyone, because that country alone is a very large market.
> China is also helping Russia destroy Europe militarily
This is a disingenuous framing based on the mere fact that China continues to do business with Russia. China also continues to do business with Europe and Ukraine, so one can just as easily argue that China is helping Europe destroy Russia. Have you seen the number of Chinese-made commercial-grade drones used by Ukraine?
China is "destroying European carmakers" as much as your local supermarket A "destroying" supermarket B. It's called competition. As someone else said, Chinese subsidies have already declined, way way before the EU tarriffs went into effect, and the EU and US can also decide to subsidize their carmakers.
> Have you seen the number of Chinese-made commercial-grade drones used by Ukraine?
China Is Cutting Off Drone Supplies Critical to Ukraine War Effort [1]. China is reportedly making drones for Russia instead, according to multiple intelligence officials.
Today you sell a country a computer, engineering software, books, chips and industrial machines, tomorrow you have missiles pointed at you designed using that computer and manufactured using that machines.
The problem here isn't that we don't want to transition to clean green energy, but that China wants to monopolize that, not by market competition, but by mercantilist practices.
Sure, everyone wants to be next China and is busy "emulating" them. Biden passed the IRA in 2022 which requires local critical material sourcing/manufacturing and excludes any materials, parts sourced from China, inspired by China's anticompetitive practices since 2015. This practice is commonly called local content requirement (aka, LCA) in international trade lingo, and one of the two subsidies prohibitions under the WTO SCM Agreement.
Guess who's whining? China filed a WTO complaint (WT/DS623) against the US IRA earlier this year, accusing the US of violating what China has violated past 10 years.
The EU is also working on theirs, called CRMA approved earlier this year, but nothing that would match Papa Xi's blatant protectionism; or China's annual $270B fossile fuel subsidies to support cheap energy or overcapacity; or China's insatiable appetite for coals and carbon emission.
Sure, that's because everything China did since 2015 was just putting up more barriers to delay green energy development or EV transition for everyone else. China hates it when other do the same to promote their local clean energy development as it inteferes with their quest for domination.
Yep, exactly. It's not "sounds like" -- China's protectionist, mercantilist trades practices have no place in this side of the water. The world is really not too interested in China's weaponization of clean energy or resources.
So you're saying Chinese protectionism prevents US and EU from developing green technology, and that's why US and EU will now also engage in proctionism, even though US and EU still don't have sizable green technology development after doing so, and that is also China's fault??
Sure, sometimes you fight evil with evil. I've also already cited multiple sources on how China delayed everyone's transition to EVs and now as a result both the US/EU in particular are now having to build their own supply-chain from ground up to counter China's weaponization of clean energy initiatives.
No need to pretend Papa Xi's mercantilism is all about original innovation, working 996, or Qian Xuesen's vision.
