olofscience

it's not a myth. Did you see the Guardian link?

That was a quick turnaround from "subsidies are eye-watering expensive, they shouldn't give them", to "fossil fuel companies should be given MORE subsidies because they generate more energy!" His lying can't be more obvious...

What, didn't you say that if they were viable businesses, they shouldn't get any subsidies at all?

Fossil fuels received £20bn more UK support than renewables since 2015 Source: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/mar/09/fossil-fuels-more-support-uk-than-renewables-since-2015

Bullshit, you railed against the grid-scale lithium battery in Australia, when it turned out it was neither renewable (backing up a coal plant) nor subsidised (actually VERY profitable). As for "Institute for Energy Research" - a propaganda organization - they use dishonest methods for calculating subsidies. According to Nature, (https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02847-2) Triple. No, not an ounce of complaint from you about that, because that's not really the issue. You're lying to us, and to yourself.

Nah, you've been saying that since BEFORE the pandemic. According to you Tesla should have been bankrupt by now. You can't really give a good reason why they're less viable as businesses, you can just point to examples but can't give the underlying reason except that you hate renewables and EVs. You're not an engineer or a businessman (not anymore, at least). You know nothing about them, really. You even keep calling wind turbines "windmills" when they don't mill any flour. Here's a prediction: like any industry, renewables and EVs will have good years, and bad years. During the good years you'll be silent, during the bad years you'll be "Ha!". (Not really silent though - you'll find another topic to "own" the libs for). But no matter how many times you think you've been proven right, you''ll still get angrier and angrier, and keep posting more baiting articles (google searching "sneaky fucker peterson" anyone?) because what you really need is not being proven right

There will probably be another bankruptcy next week: WeWork: Shares plunge after reports say firm is filing for bankruptcy Interest rates, huh? At least Ørsted isn't going bankrupt.

Lol, I couldn't care less how you allocated your limited funds, the more limited they are, the more one has to prioritise to get the highest return with the lowest expenditure - of course. Again my point is - the power companies' costs like salaries and materials went up with inflation - could they have frozen those costs like you've done with your mortgage?

Same with you, right? Hopefully you got your car on finance when rates were low.

You think that was jealousy? I was actually surprised you had a mortgage, I thought with all your bragging you should have owned them outright. The "whoosh" was the point going over your head. Anyway, power companies having trouble with surging inflation and interest rates are on a much bigger scale than an unknown boomer who thinks they have foresight and discipline for getting their 15 year fixed rate mortgage. They can't freeze their employees' salaries and ignore inflation rates, and they can't always freeze the price of the stuff they buy in either. And finally, all of that has nothing to do with the energy being renewable.

whoosh.

Fixed rate?

This is quite a popular fallacy here in the UK too. The money collected from gasoline and diesel is nowhere near enough for the construction and maintenance costs of the highways, they're mostly funded by general taxation. So even people who don't drive pay for the highways.

Darn tech startup scene is also pretty grim these days, if you're a VC or invested in one. Oh, and mortgages too. Tough times if you have one. Wait, what was your point again?

Yeah, one of my friends was complaining how his mortgage has gotten a LOT more expensive. It's like high interest rates affect a lot of things, right?

Thanks! None of that refutes what I posted though.

So what was the expected demand, and by how far did the projections miss by? If you're right, when will they cancel the EV factories?

Nothing to do with them being renewables, but just a company being mismanaged: "Claudia Kemfert, an energy expert at the German Institute of Economic Research in Berlin, said that while Siemens’ wind power woes were “tragic” they were not emblematic of the wind industry, which was in good shape overall." “Wind power is literally on the rise globally,” Kemfert said. “The problems at Siemens Gamesa are homemade. The group must get a grip on quality problems. The fact that this has not been done to a sufficient degree to date is astonishing and must be changed.”

But no expansion plans? They're doing a LOT of expansion plans for EVs. Delayed, as you keep crowing about, but not cancelled.

As far as I know Tesla's stock price has a much higher P/E ratio than normal because investors have priced in 50% growth for several years. They're more like a tech stock right now, and I don't think that share price is sustainable, much less skyrocket even further. Well it's a standard - I don't think Tesla will earn any money (directly) as they offered their spec up for standardization. I don't think they have any "moat" here except their app - it's likely competitors will aggressively price under them and this will keep prices under control. Electricity is fairly cheap compared to gasoline, after all. The atrocious reliability of chargers so far is inexcusable given that they have no moving parts. This is mostly due to software, and at some point a startup will make one easy and reliable and bring the fight to Tesla.

You actually haven't responded to lippy's point. Are they building new ICE factories? They just shut down their engine factory here in the UK.

Do you know the difference between quarters and years? EV sales have slowed down compared to the last quarter. But as billvon has pointed out, they're up 50% since last year. Your link says car sales are up in the 3rd quarter compared to last year. By how much? 21%. Here's some more maths: 21% is less than 50%.

Oh, I did. I pointed out your misrepresentation of the cause of the sales slowdown (it's not because they were EVs). You said "EVs remain a niche market for lefty effetes" and pointed to slowing down demand, but ALL cars (not just EVs) experienced slowing demand in 2023 because of high interest rates, which was highlighted by the end of the article you quoted. I then pointed out how you misquoted the IEA and the fossil fuel peak dates. So how about you, what can you contribute to this thread besides misinformation?

Yes, you are allowed to assume the worst, you are allowed to assume anything really. Brent assumes that I live in my parents' basement and don't have an EV, but that's more for stroking his own ego than any connection to reality. Now, shall we get back to the topic?

Sorry that you think that, but I don't think that's going to be solved by telling everyone here what car I drive. Because in a discussion about global EV sales, that IS a trivial thing.