The Answer To Our Problems, EV's

Jack Hays · Nov 25, 2024

More EV sales weakness.
Weak EV Sales: Ford Cuts 4,000 Jobs in Europe
Chris Johnson, Business Insider

Jack Hays · Nov 26, 2024

Enthusiastic embrace of the EV looks to have been a mistake.
Automakers to Rue Picking Bureaucrats Over Customers
Duggan Flanakin, RCEnergy

AFM · Nov 29, 2024

Only in America can a company lose $ on every sale and be bailed out again. The Biden administration will lend $6B to Rivian so that they can increase their losses from $4B to $40B. Economy of scale turned upside down.

In this unfortunate era of industrial policy, it’s good to be a politically favored company no matter your commercial prospects. Consider the Biden Energy Department’s stunning $6 billion loan to struggling Rivian Automotive to make electric vehicles.

We had fun calling Rivian a “government unicorn” three years ago when it went public and surged to a fantastic $120 billion market valuation. Rivian at the time had sold a mere 156 vehicles despite being in business for 12 years. Its shares are now worth $11.8 billion.

Investors may have been betting on government subsidies supercharging Rivian’s growth, and they can’t blame the Biden Administration for not delivering. The Inflation Reduction Act includes a $7,500 tax credit per vehicle for EV buyers, plus a $40,000 credit for commercial EVs. The latter is a particular boon for Amazon, that corporate pauper, which owns shares representing 14.8% of Rivian’s voting power and has agreed to buy up to 100,000 of its delivery vans. The IRA also includes hefty subsidies for domestic battery production.

Despite these giant subsidies, Rivian lost about $4 billion on the 37,396 vehicles it has sold during the first nine months of this year. That’s $107,043 a vehicle. Ford loses only about $51,000 on each EV sold.

But unlike traditional auto makers, Rivian can’t use profits from gas-powered cars to subsidize EVs. Thus the company is rapidly burning through cash. It has suffered repeated assembly disruptions and had to recall vehicles to fix defects. It has $1.25 billion in debt due in 2026, so its current spending pace is problematic.

Enter the Biden DOE, which on Monday awarded Rivian the $6 billion loan to build a factory in Georgia with the capacity to make 400,000 SUVs and crossovers. This follows Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s pledge this spring of $827 million in state “incentives” for Rivian to expand production at an Illinois plant to 215,000 vehicles a year.

They believe in an EV field of dreams. But even if Rivian scales up and builds all these EVs, there’s no guarantee someone will buy them. Rivian’s sales fell in the last quarter, which it attributed in part to a “more challenging consumer environment.” It’s right about that. Traditional auto makers are having to slash prices to sell EVs to meet government mandates.

Rivian warns in its latest earnings statement that industry competition will intensify owing to government subsidies, new entrants, auto-maker discounts and a “regulatory push for alternative fuel vehicles.” Stellantis CEO Carlos Tavares says the industry is experiencing a “Darwinian period” in which only the financially fittest will survive.

Even Rivian seems to harbor doubts about its future. It warns that current and potential competitors have “significantly greater financial, technical, manufacturing, marketing, or other resources.”

The DOE loan program is supposed to help promising startups. But the Biden team is financing a struggling company with a known credit risk that is competing in a well-developed auto industry. Rivian’s debt maturing in 2026 carries an effective interest rate of 12%, but DOE is lending to it at the Treasury rate.

DOE says the loan is a “conditional commitment” that hinges on Rivian meeting “technical, legal, environmental, and financial conditions.” That means the Trump team may have the power to scrap it. GOP Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp has promoted Rivian’s planned factory in his state, but the loan will mainly benefit the company’s investors, especially Amazon.

The Rivian loan is an attempt to keep the company afloat at enormous taxpayer risk before the Trump Administration takes office. But if the loan goes bad in the next four years, don’t expect Biden officials to accept responsibility. They’ll blame the Trump crowd.

Energy secretary-designate Chris Wright has a big job ahead, and that includes cleaning up a Biden portfolio of corporate-welfare loans handed out for political reasons, not based on market principles or prospects.
Click to expand...

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/biden-t...t=In this unfortunate,principles or prospects.

Pieces of Malarkey · Nov 29, 2024

Jack Hays said: ↑

Enthusiastic embrace of the EV looks to have been a mistake.
Automakers to Rue Picking Bureaucrats Over Customers
Duggan Flanakin, RCEnergy
Click to expand...

Kind of funny in a bad way that nobody saw this obvious outcome coming.

Absolutely ridiculous.

Pieces of Malarkey · Nov 29, 2024

AFM said: ↑

Only in America can a company lose $ on every sale and be bailed out again. The Biden administration will lend $6B to Rivian so that they can increase their losses from $4B to $40B. Economy of scale turned upside down.

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/biden-tosses-rivian-a-6-billion-lifeline-dfdce139?mod=opinion_lead_pos1#:~:text=In this unfortunate,principles or prospects.
Click to expand...

Looks like we'll soon be back to square one in the US EV market- i.e. Tesla will be the last man standing.

AFM · Nov 29, 2024

Pieces of Malarkey said: ↑

Looks like we'll soon be back to square one in the US EV market- i.e. Tesla will be the last man standing.
Click to expand...

Hopefully Trump will create a free market where real prices will result in decisions determining the allocation of resources.

AFM · Nov 30, 2024

Newsom vs. Musk. Progressive petulance vs. real innovation. So much for the goal of reducing CO2 in whatever way it takes. The real climate change crisis is based on political reward or punishment. Musk I am sure is enjoying this.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom this week essentially conceded what we’ve long noted: Tesla has profited from taxpayer support. To punish CEO Elon Musk for backing Donald Trump, the Governor now wants to limit subsidies for Tesla.

Mr. Newsom said Monday he plans to revive the state’s defunct electric-vehicle rebate program if Mr. Trump scraps Inflation Reduction Act subsidies for EVs. The Governor told Bloomberg News that new market-share limitations would exclude Tesla’s popular models. Tesla has accounted for more than half of California’s battery-powered EV sales this year.
Click to expand...

The Governor didn’t say he’s seeking retribution for Mr. Musk’s support of Mr. Trump, but why else restrict subsidies for California’s top-selling EVs? It’s true that Tesla has already benefited enormously from federal and state government assistance over the years and doesn’t need more taxpayer help. It may be the only manufacturer turning a profit on EVs.

But Democrats were happy to shower subsidies on Tesla and Mr. Musk’s other companies until now. In 2009 the Obama Administration helped Tesla get out of the gate with a $465 million loan. California also exempted Tesla’s equipment purchases from sales tax to induce it to build a factory in the state.

Tesla boasted a near monopoly on EVs for many years, and it has benefited from the $7,500 per vehicle federal tax credit and California’s rebates that ranged from $2,000 to $7,500. Democrats in Sacramento closed the rebate program in November 2023 amid the state’s then ballooning budget deficit.

California’s EV sales have increased slightly this year, perhaps because the affluent who are buying EVs don’t need subsidies. But restoring the subsidies while restricting them for Tesla might steer buyers to other EV models. This would also reduce how much Tesla makes from selling regulatory credits to other auto makers to comply with the state’s EV mandates.

Tesla’s regulatory-credit sales have surged to $2 billion during the first nine months of this year from $3 million in 2011 as federal CO2 emissions regulations and California’s EV mandate ratcheted up. If Mr. Newsom wants to level the playing field for auto makers, he’d scrap the state’s EV mandate and subsidies in toto. Then traditional auto makers wouldn’t have to subsidize Tesla or sell EVs at a loss. Let companies compete on merit—a concept that may not have occurred to Mr. Newsom.

Mr. Musk called the Governor’s proposal “insane” and noted that Tesla is the only company that produces EVs in California. That’s no doubt owing to the subsidies California dangled. Politically unfavored auto makers haven’t set up shop in California because of its burdensome taxes, regulation and high labor costs.

The Tesla CEO’s outrage at Mr. Newsom’s disparate treatment is warranted, but he’ll get less public sympathy because his companies have benefited so much from government favoritism. California’s legislature in 2014 granted SpaceX, which he controls, a tax exemption on business property that other businesses don’t get. This is a lesson for businesses pleading for taxpayer support. Those rewarded by politicians one day can easily be punished the next.[/QUOTE]

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/gavin-n...os3#:~:text=California Gov.,punished the next.

AFM · Nov 30, 2024

More from the morons steering the California boat.

Kern County, in California’s Central Valley, is being destroyed by a perfect storm of laws, regulations and lawsuits designed to eliminate oil and farming. Those industries have sustained Kern’s economy—and California and the nation’s—for over a century. But abetted by bureaucrats and opportunistic litigators, state officials have denied oil drillers and farmers the permits they need to operate, hit them with fines and crippling regulations, cut off their water, and sued them into oblivion.

Oil-and-farm rich Kern County may be ground zero, but this storm is destroying the entire state. Every essential foundation of a healthy, affordable economy is under attack. But rather than acknowledge this storm, California’s Gov. Gavin Newsom is doing everything in his power to make it worse.

Immediately after Nov. 5, Mr. Newsom called a special session of the state legislature to “protect California values in the face of an incoming Trump administration.” He intends to allocate as much as $100 million to the state’s attorney general to wage lawfare against the federal government. One of Mr. Newsom’s top priorities is “climate action.”

In pursuit of reaching net-zero carbon emissions by 2045, the Newsom administration has given billions in subsidies to the “renewables” industry, at the same time it has relentlessly attacked producers of conventional energy.

As a result, California’s households and businesses pay for the most expensive electricity and gasoline in the lower 48 states. It’s all for nothing. California still relies on oil and gas for 80% of its energy, a reliance on fossil fuel that is the same as the national average.

But unlike other states, California imports nearly 90% of its natural gas despite sitting on tens of trillions of cubic feet of reserves. California used to produce 60% of the oil it consumed, but despite reserves estimated as high as 30 billion barrels, in-state production is down to 23% of consumption. Thanks to Mr. Newsom, California’s resource-rich geology is off limits.

This is pure hypocrisy. Instead of safely extracting oil in a state with the world’s most rigorous environmental and labor protections, California is forced to refine oil imported from such paragons of human rights and environmental stewardship as Ecuador, Brazil, Saudi Arabia and Iraq. Meantime, California’s refineries are shutting down, one by one, without the option to import gasoline thanks to the special formulation the state requires to lower the “carbon content” of transportation fuel.

This same hypocrisy extends to renewables. Virtually all of California’s grid-scale batteries are manufactured in Asia, and while California does have some manufacturing capacity, the supply chain of raw materials is controlled by China. There are abundant reserves of lithium in eastern California, but regulations prevent timely development. As for California’s alleged 50 gigawatts of photovoltaic capacity? The panels are mostly imported from China.

Perhaps the worst of Mr. Newsom’s schemes is offshore wind, for which the California Air Resources Board has planned 25 gigawatts of capacity. They clearly haven’t thought this through. Just offshore, California’s continental shelf rapidly descends to a depth of 4,000 feet. This requires floating wind turbines, which must be imported from Europe or China. The plan calls for developers to haul 2,500 of these 10 megawatt turbines, each about 1,000 feet tall from the waterline to the tip of the blade, to points 20 miles offshore. There they’ll be connected to the sea floor with cables nearly a mile long. High-voltage underwater cables will transmit electricity to onshore substations. This is an environmental and financial catastrophe in waiting, but Mr. Newsom says only a climate denier would oppose it.

These are the consequences of a state run by rent-seeking renewable-energy firms and the environmentalist fanatics that offer them political cover. Mr. Newsom’s climate action is hitting every industry and every household.

California’s farmers are losing up to a million acres of some of the planet’s finest irrigated farmland thanks to bureaucratic delusions that water should be left in rivers that run out to the ocean. Californians can’t afford homes, thanks to a housing industry subject to climate-change laws that require infill—or building in “unused and underutilized” city spaces—to prevent the emissions that accompany urban “sprawl.”

California’s forests now burn in superfires that annually release hundreds of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere—far in excess of reductions from climate-inspired laws and regulations. But these intense fires aren’t, as Mr. Newsom alleges, caused by climate change. They’re out of control because environmentalists regulated the state’s timber industry to 25% of what it was in the 1990s. To prevent these massive fires, you must either harvest lumber or permit controlled burns. California regulators have made both nearly impossible, turning 50 million acres into unnaturally dense, overgrown tinderboxes. After a summer of devastating wildfires in 2020, Mr. Newsom announced a mandate that all new car sales in the state must be electric vehicles by 2035. California’s shipping industry is also trying to cope with laws that mandate all-electric trucks and locomotives within the same time.

While Californians from Kern County to Humboldt Bay suffer the consequences of Mr. Newsom’s policies, the governor is positioning himself as the antidote to Donald Trump. He is betting on climate panic to deflect criticism of his policies, and keep him in the presidential mix for 2028. Californians can only hope that the storm passes soon.

Mr. Ring is director of energy and water policy at the California Policy Center.
Click to expand...

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/climate...text=Kern County, in,California Policy Center.

AFM · Nov 30, 2024

California is not the only progressively led economy suffering the effects of the climate crisis.

This week’s net-zero carnage in Europe—these stories pop up weekly now—has happened in Britain, where the no-carbon energy transition is killing another country’s auto industry. How much longer can the insanity last?

Stellantis announced it will shut a plant in Luton, north of London, in the spring. The move imperils up to 1,100 jobs. The factory had been slated to produce electric vans under the storied British Vauxhall make, but the consumer demand isn’t there.

Stellantis may shift some jobs to a plant at Ellesmere Port in northwest England, which has been overhauled with the help of taxpayer subsidies to produce electric vehicles. But there’s spare capacity there, too.

Stellantis and its worried workers are in good company. Ford recently announced it’s cutting 800 of 5,300 jobs in Britain as part of a European restructuring. Nissan, which employs thousands of Brits directly and tens of thousands along its supply chain, warns government officials it may also have to scale back its production.

The culprit, as always these days, is the forced political march to electric vehicles. Britain requires manufacturers to steadily boost the proportion of EVs in their annual sales. Currently the quota is 22% and rising every year. Rishi Sunak’s Tory administration tried to push the final phase-out of new internal-combustion cars to 2035, but the new Labour Party government vows to bring the deadline back to 2030. Even the current quota is proving impossible to meet as consumers spurn EVs.

Manufacturers assumed two years ago that EV sales would reach 457,000 this year, which would have accounted for a little over 23% of total vehicle sales. Instead, EV sales are on track to hit 363,000, or a bit less than 19% of the total, according to the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders, the main industry body.

The total cost to manufacturers of the mandate has hit nearly £6 billion this year, SMMT estimates: about £4 billion in discounts and sales incentives car companies offered to boost EV sales, and £1.8 in outright fines for each “excess” internal-combustion car sold.

The longer the lunacy drags on, the harder it becomes to fix. The companies are begging the government for even more subsidies for consumers to buy EVs. Auto makers have invested heavily in producing the EVs, and they have had to close plants and lay off workers capable of producing the traditional gasoline and diesel cars consumers want. But the government has little fiscal room to help, since Labour already is taxing and borrowing to the hilt to fund other spending.

This news comes amid all the other automotive downsizing across Europe, most spectacularly Volkswagen’s decision to close three factories and cut 10,000 jobs in Germany. The net-zero carbon emissions policy may be the greatest act of industrial self-harm in history, and the urgent question is whether there will be any industry left by the time politicians come to their senses.
Click to expand...

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/britain..._pos4#:~:text=This week’s net,to their senses.

Jack Hays · Dec 2, 2024

Why make cars that no one will buy?
Automakers may rue choosing bureaucrats over customers
Duggan Flanakin
It remains to be seen just how the incoming Trump Administration will impact the BEV marketplace. Trump keeps saying that BEVs have a role while disparaging automakers now venturing into hydrogen-based fueling…

AFM · Dec 2, 2024

Jack Hays said: ↑

Why make cars that no one will buy?
Automakers may rue choosing bureaucrats over customers
Duggan Flanakin
It remains to be seen just how the incoming Trump Administration will impact the BEV marketplace. Trump keeps saying that BEVs have a role while disparaging automakers now venturing into hydrogen-based fueling…
Click to expand...

The market will self correct regardless of the weight of the thumb is applied on one side of the scale.

Pieces of Malarkey · Dec 2, 2024

Jack Hays said: ↑

Why make cars that no one will buy?
Automakers may rue choosing bureaucrats over customers
Duggan Flanakin
It remains to be seen just how the incoming Trump Administration will impact the BEV marketplace. Trump keeps saying that BEVs have a role while disparaging automakers now venturing into hydrogen-based fueling…
Click to expand...

Trump's path is pretty well laid out. He got the first conservative Supreme Court in some 95 years in his first term and they've destroyed Chevron.

Trump can talk nice about EVs and other alternative fuel vehicles all he wants, the SC has done all the heavy lifting. And Musk, probably the only EV survivor once the dust settles, can excise the Federal workforce that will become useless as their Congressional mandates collapse in Chevron's wake.

And nobody will know what the heck happened.

Jack Hays · Dec 2, 2024

Pieces of Malarkey said: ↑

Trump's path is pretty well laid out. He got the first conservative Supreme Court in some 95 years in his first term and they've destroyed Chevron.

Trump can talk nice about EVs and other alternative fuel vehicles all he wants, the SC has done all the heavy lifting. And Musk, probably the only EV survivor once the dust settles, can excise the Federal workforce that will become useless as their Congressional mandates collapse in Chevron's wake.

And nobody will know what the heck happened.
Click to expand...

It's always harder to do than to envision.

Jack Hays · Dec 2, 2024

It is very hard to screw up the Jeep brand, and yet . . . .

Stellantis CEO Carlos Tavares abruptly resigns

Pieces of Malarkey · Dec 2, 2024

Jack Hays said: ↑

It's always harder to do than to envision.
Click to expand...

True. But the Deep State and their supporters are scared witless.

That's always a good sign you're over the target.

Jack Hays · Dec 2, 2024

Pieces of Malarkey said: ↑

True. But the Deep State and their supporters are scared witless.

That's always a good sign you're over the target.
Click to expand...

I actually don't think there is a Deep State, but that's another discussion.

Pieces of Malarkey · Dec 2, 2024

Jack Hays said: ↑

I actually don't think there is a Deep State, but that's another discussion.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. How about "overpopulated state"?

Jack Hays · Dec 2, 2024

Pieces of Malarkey said: ↑

Fair enough. How about "overpopulated state"?
Click to expand...

Depends. I assume you refer to a superfluity of federal employees. I'm sure there are some overpopulated functions, but probably not as many as you think. In my admittedly different corner of the federal government I routinely logged 60 hour weeks, and more in times of crisis.
Keep in mind that every federal position can be traced back to votes by elected officials trying to satisfy voters' desires.

Pieces of Malarkey · Dec 2, 2024

Jack Hays said: ↑

Depends. I assume you refer to a superfluity of federal employees. I'm sure there are some overpopulated functions, but probably not as many as you think. In my admittedly different corner of the federal government I routinely logged 60 hour weeks, and more in times of crisis.
Keep in mind that every federal position can be traced back to votes by elected officials trying to satisfy voters' desires.
Click to expand...

Yeah, if I recall you worked for something like the State Department. I imagine that could really keep you hopping.

But I worked for NHTSA. A regulatory agency. Almost nothing had any real urgency other than begging for more people and money (in fact, one's work was throttled to make the case for more money in the next budget). The fact that once you hit the end of your probationary period you literally almost couldn't be fired made for tons of inefficiency.

The common understanding was that you didn't make big money in the government, that was for the Beltway Bandits (ie- contractors) but the benefits like time off made up for it.

And that's Musk's target.

Pieces of Malarkey · Dec 4, 2024

Another EV death knell.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/12/electric-vehicles-cry-me-a-rivian/

AFM · Dec 4, 2024

Pieces of Malarkey said: ↑

Another EV death knell.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/12/electric-vehicles-cry-me-a-rivian/
Click to expand...

How many spikes can be pounded into this coffin?

Jack Hays · Dec 6, 2024

Another one bites the dust.

Business·Chicago Tribune
Electric school bus maker Lion Electric suspends operations at Illinois plant

AFM · Dec 6, 2024

Jack Hays said: ↑

Another one bites the dust.

Business·Chicago Tribune
Electric school bus maker Lion Electric suspends operations at Illinois plant
Click to expand...

That was quick.

Jack Hays · Dec 8, 2024

The EV defeats are coming fast now.
Hundreds Of Millions In Subsidies For German Gigafactory In Jeopardy As Northvolt Files Chapter 11
By P Gosselin on 8. December 2024

All that glisters green is not gold…

The electric car market is reeling in Europe…Germany’s electric car ambitions have taken another body blow as Swedish Northvolt declares bankruptcy in USA.

The massively taxpayer-subsidized gigafactory now under construction in Heide is in jeopardy and becoming a huge embarrassment for Germany’s Socialist-Green government.

Press image Northvolt

Northvolt, a Swedish battery manufacturer, is facing immense financial difficulties and has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the United States. This filing has raised concerns about the future of Northvolt’s battery plant now under construction near Heide, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany.

Construction of the Northvolt Drei battery factory near Heide began in March 2024 and it was planned to begin production in 2026.

In 2023, the German government and the state of Schleswig-Holstein began to provide significant financial support for the project for the Northvolt plant in Heide, which included a direct grant of 700 million euros and a guarantee of 202 million euros. German Minister for Economic Affairs and Climate Action, Robert Habeck, (Green Party), called the battery plant “one of the most significant lighthouse projects of the energy and transport transition, which will create thousands of green tech jobs.”

Habeck, who majored in philosophy and has no education in economics, went on to call the Heide gigafactory project “one of the most important industrial investments in Europe in key green technologies.”

Habeck’s lofty dreams have since turned into a nightmare

But since Northvolt has filed bankruptcy in USA, the cash is gone and it’s increasingly likely German taxpayers will be left to pick up the tab as dreams of a flagship gigafactory in Heide disintegrate.

The billion-euro investment in the plant pushed by Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) and Economics Minister Robert Habeck was to be supported by public funds, loans and direct subsidies. According to Blackout News, “The consequences are now hitting German taxpayers with full force.”

AFM · Dec 16, 2024

Another opportunity to bring sanity to our energy policies and to eliminate another California dream.

What fortuitous timing. As the Biden Administration prepares to green-light an extension of California’s electric-vehicle mandate, the Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear a challenge to the rule (Diamond Alternative Energy LLC v. EPA).

The Clean Air Act bars states from regulating vehicle emissions, but it allows the Environmental Protection Agency to grant California a waiver to enforce its own rules “to meet compelling and extraordinary conditions.” Congress created the California carve-out because its geography and climate can exacerbate smog.

Unlike tailpipe pollutants such as NOx and particulate matter—the intended targets of the Clean Air Act—CO2 is ubiquitous and doesn’t cause asthma or other respiratory ailments. Because the climate effects of greenhouse gases are global, California has no more compelling reason to regulate vehicle CO2 emissions than any other state.

The Obama Administration nonetheless granted California a waiver for its CO2 standards and EV quotas, which the Trump team revoked, only for the Biden EPA to reinstate it through next year. The Administration is expected in its final days to renew California’s waiver through 2035, when all new cars sold in the state (and other states that have adopted its mandates) must be “zero emission.” Sorry, no hybrids allowed.

Most auto makers are falling well short of California’s EV quotas. Many are buying compliance credits from Tesla, though some have also struck deals with the California Air Resources Board for regulatory flexibility in return for not supporting a rollback of its waiver authority. Although auto makers gripe about California’s EV mandate, they’re afraid to sue their regulators.

Not so refiners and gas stations, which are challenging the EPA’s California waiver. A D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals panel dismissed their suit on grounds that the plaintiffs lacked standing. To sue in federal courts, plaintiffs must demonstrate a concrete injury as a result of a defendant’s actions that can be redressed by courts.

The express purpose of California’s EV mandate is to reduce gasoline consumption, which would hurt gas stations and refiners. But the D.C. Circuit quibbled that the plaintiffs hadn’t submitted evidence, such as affidavits from auto makers, showing that the waiver would reduce gas-powered car production. Say what?

Enter the Supreme Court, which on Friday agreed to review the D.C. Circuit ruling. If the Justices rule that the plaintiffs have standing, the D.C. Circuit would have to address the merits—i.e., whether the EPA can let California regulate auto CO2 emissions—which will be all the more important if Mr. Biden extends California’s waiver through 2035.

While Donald Trump has pledged to revoke California’s waiver, the Golden State sued him last time he did. So courts may have to decide the issue, as the U.S. auto trade group noted in a memo to “interested parties” last week. “Achieving [California’s] mandates will take a miracle” and “depress economic activity, increase costs and limit vehicle choice,” the group stressed.

How about auto makers tell that truth to the Justices?
Click to expand...

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/califor...:text=What fortuitous timing,to the Justices?

Log in or Sign up

The Answer To Our Problems, EV's

Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

The Answer To Our Problems, EV's

Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

Share This Page

Useful Searches