Connect with us

Automotive

Lithium Prices: What They Tell Us About the Popularity of Electric Vehicles

Published

6 minute read

From EnergyNow Media

By Jim Warren

The online database, Trading Economics, indicates that in June 2023 the global price for lithium had risen to $59,212 per tonne. But by November it had fallen by more than half to $27,218. Prices have continued to plummet. As of December 31, lithium was selling for just $18,242 per tonne.

How could this be? Electric vehicle (EV) mandates established in many rich developed countries over the past few years had analysts predicting that if targets were actually met, the world would need 388 new lithium mines by 2035. A Fraser Institute study suggests that getting enough mines built to satisfy all the mandates will be a problem. It takes from seven to ten years to get a mine financed, approved and built.

Canada’s Environment Minister, Steven Guilbeault is certainly trying to drive up demand for lithium. The federal government’s Zero Emissions Vehicle Standard insists that by 2030, 20% of all new passenger cars, SUVs and light trucks sold in Canada must be greenhouse gas emissions free. New battery plants are being handsomely subsidized in Canada to power all of the new electric cars that will presumably be required. With similarly aggressive mandates in Europe and US states led by California there should be heavy demand for lots of batteries and a mountain of lithium.

The most likely explanation for collapsing lithium prices is US consumers’ reluctance to embrace electric vehicles. The Economist reports that EVs accounted for just 8% of new vehicle sales in America this past year. GM was only able to sell 20,000 EVs, but it did manage to sell over half a million fossil-fueled vehicles. Disappointing demand for EVs prompted GM to shelve plans to spend $4 bn to convert one of its plants to electric pickup truck production. Ford has similarly lost enthusiasm for EVs. This past fall it decided to delay plans to invest $12bn in EV production. Companies that make lithium batteries for EVs have responded accordingly. This past fall battery plants in Georgia and Michigan laid off hundreds of employees. Fewer batteries translated into less demand for lithium.

It would appear that EV adoption goals established under Joe Biden’s eye-wateringly expensive green transition initiative (disguised as the “Inflation Reduction Act,”) are not being met. The Biden plan offers tax credits of up to $7,500 for people who purchase EVs. However that hasn’t been a sufficient sweetener. The average EV sold in the US has a $52,000 price tag and that doesn’t account for additional costs like wiring a home charging set up. California, Florida and Texas account for over half of US EV sales and are also responsible for high average sticker prices. Ostensibly virtuous EV buyers in the US have a bit of hypocrisy going on. They’ll happily drive EVs as long as they are full size SUVs. Batteries are heavy which makes EVs heavier than gas and diesel fueled vehicles. And, electric SUVs are especially heavy—heavy enough to increase the chances of deadly collisions. Tesla has apparently created a super-sized SUV, designed for wealthy California drivers, that makes the Hummer look like a toy. And, because they are extra heavy, driving them uses more electricity and it takes extra energy and materials to build them. Furthermore, given that fossil fuels still account for 60% of the electricity generated in the US, EVs are less environmentally friendly than advertised. They are far from being “emissions free.”

EVs are indeed more popular in Europe and China. In Europe 1.5 million EVs were sold this past year and 3.5 million were sold in China. The models sold in China are small, zippy units that don’t weigh much. However, like in the US, around 60% of the electricity consumed in China is generated by burning fossil fuels (mostly coal).

Despite having a copycat EV mandate that mirrors those in Europe, Canadian sales have been even less stellar than what the US has been able to achieve. In 2021, EVs accounted for just 5.3% of new car sales in Canada. Most of them were sold in Ontario, BC and Quebec (55,229) which makes sense—those are the provinces where most Canadians and most climate-alarmed Canadians live. In all the rest of Canada just 7,301 electric vehicles were purchased.

Clearly, the adoption of electric vehicles has failed to meet the overly ambitious targets set by environmentally-friendly policy makers. This result lines up with the litany of missteps and missed targets that have plagued green transition projects over the past two years. The failures include the big decline in demand for new solar and wind power projects and the reversal of greenhouse gas emissions reduction projects in the UK and Europe. An issue this could raise for us in Canada is that Steven Guilbeault might see the international data and worry that his transition plans need to be beefed-up. He could make them even more onerous, expensive and ludicrous.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Automotive

Electric vehicle mandates mean misery all around

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Matthew Lau

The latest news of slowing demand for electric vehicles highlight the profound hazards of the federal government’s Soviet-style mandate that 100 per cent of new light-duty vehicles sold must be electric or plug-in hybrid by 2035 (with interim targets of 20 per cent by 2026 and 60 per cent by 2030, with steep penalties for dealers missing these targets).

The targets were wild to begin with—as Manhattan Institute senior fellow Mark P. Mills observed, bans on conventional vehicles and mandated switches to electric mean, in jurisdictions such as Canada, “consumers will need to adopt EVs at a scale and velocity 10 times greater and faster than the introduction of any new model of car in history.”

Indeed, when the Trudeau government announced its mandate last December, conventional vehicles accounted for 87 per cent of the market, and today the mandated switch to electric looks even more at odds with actual consumer preferences. According to reports, Tesla will cut its global workforce by more than 10 per cent (or more than 14,000 employees) due to slowing electric vehicle demand.

In Canada, a Financial Post headline reads, “‘Tall order to ask the average Canadian’: EVs are twice as hard to sell today.” Not only has Tesla’s quarterly sales declined, Ford Motor Co. announced in April it will delay the start of electric vehicle production at its Oakville plant by two years, from 2025 to 2027.

According to research from global data and analytics firm J.D. Power, it now takes 55 days to sell an electric vehicle in Canada, up from 22 days in the first quarter of 2023 and longer than the 51 days it takes a gasoline-powered car to sell. This is the result, some analysts suggest, of a lack of desirable models and high consumer prices—and despite federal subsidies to car buyers of up to $5,000 per electric vehicle and additional government subsidies in six provinces, as high as $7,000 in Quebec.

Similarly in the United States, the Wall Street Journal reports that on average, electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids sit in dealer lots longer than gasoline-powered cars and hybrids. Again, that’s despite heavy government pressure to switch to electric—the Biden administration mandated two-thirds of new vehicles sold must be electric by 2032.

In both Canada and the U.S., politicians banning consumers from buying vehicles they want and instead forcing them to buy the types of vehicles that run contrary to their preferences, call to mind famed philosopher Adam Smith’s “man of system,” described in his 1759 book, The Theory of Moral Sentiments.

The man of system, Smith explained, “is apt to be very wise in his own conceit” and “seems to imagine that he can arrange the different members of a great society with as much ease as the hand arranges the different pieces upon a chess–board.” But people are not chess pieces to be moved around by a hand from above; they have their own agency and if pushed by the “man of system” in a direction opposite to where they want to go, the result will be misery and “society must be at all times in the highest degree of disorder.”

That nicely sums up the current government effort to mandate electric vehicles contrary to consumer preferences. The vehicle market is in a state of disorder as the government tries to force people to buy the types of cars many of them do not want, and the outcomes are miserable all around.

Continue Reading

Automotive

Biden’s Climate Agenda Is Running Headfirst Into A Wall Of His Own Making

Published on

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By WILL KESSLER

 

President Joe Biden’s administration unveiled tariffs this week aimed at boosting domestic production of green energy technology, but the move could end up hamstringing his larger climate goals.

The tariffs announced on Tuesday quadruple levies for Chinese electric vehicles (EVs) to 100% and raise rates for certain Chinese green energy and EV components like minerals and batteries. Biden has made the transition to green energy and EVs a key part of his climate agenda, but hiking tariffs on those products to help U.S. manufacturing could jack up prices on the already costly products, slowing adoption by struggling Americans, according to experts who spoke to the DCNF.

The risks posed by hiking levies on green technology expose the inherent tension between Biden’s climate agenda and his efforts to protect American industry, which often struggles to compete with cheap foreign labor. Items on his climate agenda typically raise costs, and requiring companies to comply could make them uncompetitive on the world stage.

“These tariffs are a classic example of the Biden administration’s left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing,” E.J. Antoni, a research fellow at the Heritage Foundation’s Grover M. Hermann Center for the Federal Budget, told the DCNF. “The inability to import Chinese-made EVs due to prohibitively high costs will necessitate importing raw materials and parts for EVs from China. Since automakers can’t afford to build and assemble the vehicles here, prices will have to rise. In other words, American consumers will pay the cost of this tariff, not the Chinese.”

The White House, in its fact sheet, pointed to China artificially lowering its prices and dumping goods on the global market as the justification for the new tariffs in an effort to help protect American businesses. China has pumped huge subsidies into its own EV industry and supply lines over the past few years, spawning a European Union investigation into vehicles from the country.

“Tariffs on Chinese EVs won’t just make Chinese EVs more expensive, they will also make American EVs more expensive,” Ryan Young, senior economist at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, told the DCNF. “This is because domestic producers can now raise their prices without fear of being undercut by competitors. Good for them but bad for consumers — and for the Biden administration’s policy goal of increased EV adoption.”

Several American manufacturers are already struggling to sell EVs at a profit, with Ford losing $4.7 billion on its electric line in 2023 while selling over 72,000 of the vehicles. To ease price concerns and increase EV adoption, the Biden administration created an EV tax credit of $7,500 per vehicle, depending on where its parts are made.

The market share of EVs out of all vehicles fell in the first quarter of 2024 from 7.6% to 7.1% as consumers opted to buy cheaper traditional vehicles instead. Growth in EV sales increased by just 2.7% in the quarter, far slower than the 47% growth that the industry saw in all of 2023.

The Biden administration has also sought to use regulations to push automakers toward electrifying their offerings as consumers refuse to voluntarily adopt EVs, finalizing rules in March that effectively require around 67% of all light-duty vehicles sold after 2032 to be electric or hybrids.

“By raising the price — and thereby stunting the deployment — of EVs, the tariffs undermine the Biden administration’s stated goals of reducing carbon emissions (as many U.S. environmentalists and EV fans have recently lamented),” Clark Packard, research fellow in the Herbert A. Stiefel Center for Trade Policy Studies at the Cato Institute, wrote following the announcement. “The EV tariffs (and also-​announced solar tariffs) would continue the administration’s habit of choosing politics and protectionism over their environmental agenda.”

Despite the subsidies, the 25% tariff that is currently in place for Chinese EVs already prices the product out of the U.S. market, resulting in no Chinese-branded EVs being sold in the country, according to Barron’s. Only a handful of the more than 100 EV models being sold in China appeal to American consumers, and none of them can compete under current levies.

“Something like this happened just a few years ago when former president Donald Trump enacted 25% steel tariffs in 2018,” Young told the DCNF. “Domestic steel producers raised their prices by almost exactly the amount of the tariff, and America soon had the world’s highest steel prices. As a result, car prices went up by about $200 to $300 on average. Larger trucks with more steel content increased even more. Now Biden is going to do the same thing to EVs.”

In the year following the increase in steel tariffs under the Trump administration, U.S. Steel’s operating profit rose 38%, prices were hiked 5 to 10% and revenue was up 15% due to reduced competition, according to CNN.

Despite the massive tariff hike on EVs, Biden only raised the tariff rate on Chinese lithium-ion EV batteries and battery parts to 25%, according to the White House. The tariff rate on certain essential minerals, like natural graphite, was also hiked to just 25%.

“Despite rapid and recent progress in U.S. onshoring, China currently controls over 80% of certain segments of the EV battery supply chain, particularly upstream nodes such as critical minerals mining, processing, and refining,” the White House wrote in its fact sheet. “Concentration of critical minerals mining and refining capacity in China leaves our supply chains vulnerable and our national security and clean energy goals at risk.”

China has broad control over the majority of minerals necessary to construct EVs, possessing nearly 90% of the world’s mineral refining capacity. Sources of the required minerals often also have serious human rights concerns, such as the world’s supply of cobalt, which has widespread ties to child labor.

Biden attacked former President Donald Trump during the 2020 election for the broad tariffs that he put on Chinese goods, noting that “any freshman econ student” could point out that the costs of the tariffs would be passed on to American consumers.

EV makers have increasingly struggled over the past year to maintain profits amid stalling demand, with the largest American EV manufacturer, Tesla, reporting a 10% drop in year-over-year revenue in the first quarter of 2024. Tesla is one of several EV makers that have announced layoffs in recent months.

“Fortunately, the EV market is still small in the U.S. and Chinese EVs are an even smaller slice of that small pie,” Antoni told the DCNF. “Even if the EV market in the U.S. were large, these tariffs would not help the domestic EV industry. While consumer demand for EVs would shift to domestic models, an increase in domestic production would rely on very expensive inputs from China, cutting into profits.”

The White House did not respond to a request to comment from the DCNF.

Continue Reading

Trending

X