AD #3224 – BYD Develops 1200-Volt System for EVs; Graphite Shortage Looms; Chinese Automakers Own 20% Of Daimler

December 15th, 2021 at 11:53am

Audio-only version:
Listen to “AD #3224 – BYD Develops 1200-Volt System for EVs; Graphite Shortage Looms; Chinese Automakers Own 20% Of Daimler” on Spreaker.

Follow us on social media:

Instagram Twitter Facebook

Runtime: 9:04

0:08 Graphite Shortage About to Hit Auto Industry
0:55 Mexico Threatens Legal Action Over U.S. EV Proposal
1:28 Germany Plans Stricter EV Incentive Requirements
2:19 Two Chinese Automakers Now Own Nearly 20% Of Daimler
3:43 Hongqi Introduces New Luxury Minivan in China
4:18 Honda Helps Out Highway Departments
4:47 Volta Trucks Now Developing Smaller EV Commercial Trucks
6:01 Continental & ZF Invest in AV Startup
6:52 BYD Develops 1200-Volt System for EVs

Visit our sponsors to thank them for their support of Autoline Daily: Bridgestone, Intrepid Control Systems and Schaeffler.

»Subscribe to Podcast |

5661 rss-logo-png-image-68050 stitcher-icon youtube-logo-icon-65475

Thanks to our partner for embedding Autoline Daily on its website:

16 Comments to “AD #3224 – BYD Develops 1200-Volt System for EVs; Graphite Shortage Looms; Chinese Automakers Own 20% Of Daimler”

  1. ChuckGrenci Says:

    When I first saw the new mini-van (for China), I thought it was a Lincoln. I guess the Chinese are continuing their style-stealing ways. By the way, I like the Buick’d design the best of the three shown.

  2. Kit Gerhart Says:

    1 I like the Buick best too. As usual, we Americans get short changed. China gets the best looking minivans and the more basic Tesla Models 3. For years, Europeans have had much better vehicle choice, like rear drive wagons of various sizes, some with manual transmissions. We have our 200 different CUVs, though.

  3. Jim Haines Says:

    Many years ago when the EU was formed I said that what makes the EU open will allow outsiders they don’t want to buy in to or purchase companies like it or not and now they see the problem and can’t stop it as they did in the past

  4. wmb Says:

    I still don’t get the heart burn other countries have, about the incentives that the US is using to encourage BEV adoption for vehicles made by the UAW, IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY?! Well,…I get it and I comes down to the lose of money in their countries. The trade agreement allows companies to build their products in the neighboring countries, at lower costs and bring them to the US and sell them in the States. The trade agreement allows them to move products back and forth across borders without tariffs. Giving US citizens incentives for buying products built here, discourages automakers from building them in their countries, but I don’t see how this impacts the agreement that was made. Because it only applies to those who qualify in the US! To me, it would be different if the tax incentives could be employed on vehicles built in the US, but we’re sold in Canada or Mexico. That would/could mean that that country would loose out on sells tax that that country would normally see (I know it’s not this simple, but say a BEV sells in their country for $50K, with a 6% sales tax. The US then gives their citizen $10K for buying a vehicle built in the US. That I can see them taking issue with). These countries can do the same thing for
    EVs built in their country like the US is doing in theirs! The second point is, what vehicles built in the US, does this currently apply to? The Chevy Bolt and EUV? Next year’s F-150 Lightning (the next gen Lightning will be built at Ford’s new plants in Tennessee and Kentucky and there is no word on whether they will be union shops)? The up and coming Cadillac, Hummer and future Silverado EV? The Mach-E is built in Mexico, so it doesn’t get the incentives. So, it would be very few products that these incentives could even be applied to right now and many of the exciting vehicles that please may want to use them for, may come out under a new admin, that may get read of them all together! So all this posturing is really for nothing and just a show for the public, IMHO.

  5. Bob White Says:

    The Chinese control the supply chains. Now they will use this to steamroll all the OEMs around the planet.

    The get the best models because they are now the largest auto market in the world with a middle class 4X the size of the US.

    Their plan is to buy the OEMs like Mercedes or put them out of business.

  6. Bob White Says:

    Those same OEMs have thought them everything they know, including the most valuable asset of all, their quality control systems.

  7. Bill Says:

    If the US can’t play by the rules, they should stop signing agreements which they don’t live by. The world will engage in trade wars and stop buying American goods which is the trend for decades now.

    The US has the most to lose as the US falls into irrelevancy…

  8. XA351GT Says:

    #4 I think what is being unsaid is Canada and Mexico are worried the Ford GM and Stellantis will pull production of EVs from there an build them in US in order to tempt people into buying a EV if they are being bribed to do so.

  9. Kit Gerhart Says:

    As John Mc. said a few days ago, it is extremely unlikely that the extra incentive for UAW vehicles will happen. Even if it did, it’s unlikely that Ford would move Mach-E production to a UAW plant, especially since there is no stability in US policies between administrations.

  10. Bob Wilson Says:

    Better lane lines will help Tesla too. Both Autopilot and Full Self Driving.


    10) I found that odd that TESLA was also not mentioned when discussing better lines. People who don’t even have driving assist systems would benefit with better lines. There are lines around me that are so worn that you can’t see them with the lightest of rains and it has been that way for years. Now that I am teaching my niece how to drive, I notice it more when trying to teach her how to stay within the lane lines….that are almost non-existent. She keeps asking what lane lines?

  12. Kit Gerhart Says:

    11 With the low gas tax in the US, and no gas tax for EVs, there isn’t money to paint lines.

  13. wmb Says:

    #8.) That is my point. They don’t want to loose the OEM investment in their countries, by them moving production to their home market (which they won’t). So, being a lay person and not having read the trade agreement, on the surface, it does not appear that the US has violated the agreement by using their money to encourage it’s citizens to buy BEVs built within their borders. They are not restricting the sell of vehicles made in other countries for being sold in the US, just adding an incentive for those who live here to purchase what is made here! If OEMs want to move production here as a result, that’s not the US government’s fault, is all I’m saying. That’s a business decision, like the one that sent production to foreign sites in the first place. Again, if those incentives went into effect today, they would only apply to a couple vehicles. By the time most of the high profile vehicles that the Big Three promised come to market, there may be a new administration in place, who may remove those incentives anyway!

  14. Kit Gerhart Says:

    8,13 The “domestic assembly” incentives are, basically, an inverse tariff. Tax money goes out rather than coming in, but the end result is to incentivize vehicles assembled in the US. What seems to be lost in this discussion is that the proposed incentives now, and the earlier tariffs pertain only to vehicle assembly, never mind that parts come from all over the world, and make up a sizable amount of what it takes to produce a vehicle.

  15. Sean Wagner Says:

    The best result of key ingredient shortages for battery cells would be the accelerated buildout of localized supply chains, be it in Asia, Europe, or the Americas. With all the demand and available incentives, I expect related activity to pick up. There’s a big new Lithium plant planned for Portugal, but that’s basic.

    As we see with Ford, the planning is only now catching up with reality – I just found out that the cells (modules?) for the Mach-E come from LG’s plant in Poland, and they can’t build nearly enough at present.

    Incidentally, it’s probably easier to export vehicles from Mexico to the EU than from the US, as there’s an FTA that covers that. Just not certain if it’s already been ratified.

    It’s beyond silly for the US not to have a Canada-style free trade agreement with the EU.

    The upside is that there will be far more US content than in the Mach-Es made by Changan in China… (incidentally, I think the city of the same name once was the capital. A famous poet wrote about the desolation following its sacking).

  16. wmb Says:

    #14.) To say that US “‘domestic assembly’ incentives are, basically, an inverse tariff”, would suggest that the current trade agreement, as it stands, does the opposite today and incentivizes moving production away from the US and are using US citizens tax money to do it (essentially putting a tariff on the US, for the benefit of neighboring countries). While do not think or believe that is the case, right now the only country impacted by such a move would be Mexico, with the Mach-E. I may be wrong, but, I do not think Canada right now has any BEVs currently assembled there that would miss out on any US incentives. How this might farther impact Mexico, is that Ford was going to build a Lincoln from the bones of the Mach-E. With the incentives going to UAW build vehicles and the Lincoln version of the Mach-E no doubt having a higher price point, having it built in a UAW plant, would have some appeal. Again, that is a business decision made by the company and has nothing to do with any free trade agreement negotiate between the governments! On top of that, even if they gave incentives to UAW built EVs, there would still be other tax incentives that EVs not built by non UAW shops COULD still take advantage of! As reported on by the news, the $7500 tax credit/incentive was no longer going to be limited by a number of vehicles an automaker sold. Meaning that GM and Tesla could once again have that applied to vehicles that they sold to customers! I would not be surprised, if there were some wording that prevented individuals from using both the UAW incentives, along with the $7500. Even so, there are still other state and local tax breaks that US citizens can now use on BEVs from ALL automakers! So the noise that other world leaders are making, seems like a lot of nonsense. I understand that they want to keep the current manufacturing in their countries as best they can, while encourage future investment and showing support for their workers. Yet, to say that these incentives some how breaches their free trade agreement, would be like the US saying that Canada’s universal Health care breaches the agreement as well! For it gives their automotive sector an unfair advantage. For it will encourage OEMs to move assembly to their country, because they can produce the same product at a lower cost, due to not having to provide health coverage for employees that work. To that I would say, what right does the US have, to have any say in what that country provides for its citizens?! Health coverage has nothing to do with any free trade agreement between two or three nations! To me, it is the same with the incentives for US citizens who purchase BEVs from UAW work places.