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.
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.
[1]https://www.autoblog.com/news/chinas-ev-invasion-hits-a-wall
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.
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.
[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-12-09/china-is-...
The car industry that closed factories all over Europe and sold expensive cars made in poor countries?
"Too big to fail" is not a product statement.
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.
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.
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.
You're not making sense.
No need to pretend Papa Xi's mercantilism is all about original innovation, working 996, or Qian Xuesen's vision.