Connect with us

News

What can convince more consumers to buy EVs?

Published

on

What can convince more consumers to buy EVs?

Catherine Michaux and her husband Jean Yves seem to fit squarely into the target consumer group for electric vehicles.

A retired lawyer, she no longer needs to commute. The couple own a home where they could charge an electric vehicle on their own time, at lower cost. They have tried out electric car rentals in their small French village near Nice last year and enjoyed the experience.

Even so, the couple says they are put off by the cost of buying an EV. “People will never be able to afford electric cars. It’s impossible,” Michaux says.

The challenge is to kick off old habits, her husband adds. “We’ve always lived with engine cars. Those are the reflexes we have. We know there are gas stations all along the highway. Here, you have to think about your journey and plan it out a bit, and download a mobile app.”

Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.

Advertisement

Fifteen years after Nissan released the world’s first mass-produced electric vehicle in 2010, consumers in much of the world are still stubbornly reluctant to switch away from combustion-engine vehicles to fully electric.

What carmakers initially embraced as a necessary evolution has increasingly become an existential crisis for an industry that has spent tens of billions of dollars to develop electric vehicles and the batteries that power them with the hope that consumers will buy into the technology.

This week, Northvolt, Europe’s leading battery champion, filed for bankruptcy, throwing the continent’s entire industrial strategy under question. Vauxhall owner Stellantis on Tuesday announced plans to shut its van factory in Luton, putting about 1,100 jobs in the UK at risk, only weeks after Volkswagen warned of unprecedented plant closures. Ford also recently unveiled plans to cut about 4,000 jobs in Europe to address slower than expected demand for EVs.

Catherine Michaux and her husband Jean Yves, who live in France, are put off by the cost of EVs
Catherine Michaux and her husband Jean Yves own a home in France where they could charge an EV on their own time, at lower cost, but are still put off by the expense © Matthieu Audiffret/FT

Mathias Miedreich, former chief executive of battery materials maker Umicore which will join German automotive supplier ZF Friedrichshafen in January, says European carmakers and suppliers are likely to continue focusing on getting leaner next year instead of building capacity to expand EV sales. “The year of the rebirth of the electric vehicle is probably 2026, and not 2025,” Miedreich says.

America is also likely to fall further behind in its green transition, given president-elect Donald Trump’s promises to kill the generous subsidies for electric vehicles. Despite President Joe Biden’s ambitious target of having EVs make up half of all new cars sold in the US by 2030, they were only 10 per cent of the market last year.

The industry’s capacity to build EVs is expected to fall further next year with carmakers having revised their EV production plans by 50 per cent in the US and 29 per cent in Europe, according to Bernstein estimates. The penetration of EVs is expected to reach 23 per cent in Europe, 13 per cent in the US in 2025.

Advertisement

“The EV production forecast for 2025 has seemingly only gone one way — down,” Bernstein analyst Daniel Roeska wrote in a report.

Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.

The reasons for the slowing growth in EV sales range from the high upfront costs combined with concerns over driving range and charging infrastructure. The promise of lower energy prices faded with the war in Ukraine while high interest rates globally have pushed up monthly lease payments.

According to analysis by NGO group Transport and Environment, the average price of an EV in Europe was around €40,000 before taxes in 2020. Today, the price is around €45,000.

A separate study by the European Commission suggests that the median price European consumers are prepared to pay for an EV is €20,000, including new and secondhand sales.

But car executives also blame government policy in various countries which has not been consistent despite having the common longer-term goal of decarbonisation.

Advertisement

Matthias Schmidt, an independent car analyst, estimates that EV volumes will decline by 29 per cent this year in Germany, Europe’s largest market, after Berlin abruptly pulled purchase subsidies for EVs in late 2023. France is planning to slash EV purchasing subsidies by as much as half for some families next year.

Employees protest this week over planned job cuts at Ford in Cologne
Employees protest this week over planned job cuts at Ford in Cologne. The car manufacturer recently unveiled plans to cut about 4,000 jobs in Europe to address slower than expected demand for EVs. The sign in the foreground reads ‘Workers are not goods’ © Oliver Berg/picture-alliance/dpa/AP Images

Michael Leiters, the chief executive of McLaren, says the government subsidies for EV purchase in recent years had created artificial demand that was not sustainable. “We pushed too hard on battery electric vehicles,” Leiters says in an interview. “I think incentivisation is not healthy and so we have seen an unnatural acceleration rate, and then we go through a dip.” 

The industry and analysts are divided on what the right mix of incentives and inducements are to kick-start sales again. Car executives feel that governments in Europe are pulling back the incentives before consumers have fully warmed up to EVs — but governments are also aware that keeping sweeteners for too long can be risky and costly.


In China, a statewide project to electrify its car industry conceived almost two decades ago is bearing fruit.

More than half of new cars sold in China today are EVs or plug-in hybrids, while electric cars in Chinese showrooms are nearing price parity with petrol vehicles.

For Beijing, the policy to electrify the auto sector was conceived to help China rid cities of choking pollution and tackle crippling dependence on foreign oil. But it is now seen as a means to support decarbonisation and also give Chinese companies a path to global domination.

Advertisement

Government officials had concluded by the late 2000s that local carmakers would not be able to compete against western rivals in the realm of petrol vehicles.

Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.

But they saw the chance to beat the likes of General Motors and Volkswagen in EVs since the country had built a supply chain to produce lithium-ion batteries for mobile phones in large volumes at low cost. As a producer of rare earths, it also had strength in electric motors. 

Beijing began pilot programmes in 10 cities across the country to promote the use of electric vehicles in 2009 with an ambitious target to invest Rmb100bn ($13.8bn) in “new energy vehicles” over the next decade. 

Two years later, the World Bank came out with a set of recommendations urging China’s policy to move beyond purchase subsidies for EVs to include more comprehensive measures to develop charging infrastructure and investments in technology development and manufacturing capacity. 

“In the long run, consumers will only commit to EVs if they find value in them,” the World Bank said as it called for the creation of a vehicle finance market and leasing scheme as well as a secondary market for batteries to bring down the upfront cost of buying a vehicle.

Advertisement

When the State Council, China’s cabinet, came out with a plan for the automotive industry in the summer of 2012, Beijing had incorporated most of the World Bank’s recommendations with a strategy to develop the entire automotive supply chain from components and batteries to materials and charging facilities, with smart grids as well as renewable energy, according to an analysis by law firm Akin Gump. 

“China’s entire EV supply chain has been sewn up in an industrial strategy, which is joined up from end to end. Europe has nothing that looks anything like that,” says Andrew Bergbaum, managing director at AlixPartners.

But Europe’s free market cannot — and does not wish to — compete with China-style state capitalism. EU member states have agreed to impose tariffs of up to 45 per cent on imports of Chinese electric vehicles, arguing that heavy subsidies to local carmakers are making it harder for European rivals to compete fairly.

Shawn Xu, chief executive of Omoda and Jaecoo brands at Chinese carmaker Chery, argues that the success of the country’s automakers was not a result of government policy alone.

“All of the Chinese brands, especially the top brands, put a lot of investment to develop new technology,” Xu says, noting that consumers are now purchasing EVs and hybrids as much on in-car tech as any other aspect of the car. “This kind of technology innovation can bring benefit to consumers and this can also happen in the UK and the European markets.”

Advertisement
Oslo Taxi’s Tesla model Y, left,  and the NIO ET5 electric vehicle from Nio Inc, a Chinese multinational electric car manufacturer, drive through the Norwegian capital in September
Oslo Taxi’s Tesla model Y, left, and the NIO ET5 electric vehicle from Nio Inc, a Chinese multinational electric car manufacturer, in the Norwegian capital in September © Jonathan Nackstrand/AFP/Getty Images

The potential and pitfalls of lavish incentives can be seen in Norway, the one country in Europe to successfully make the electric transition.

In October, 94 per cent of cars sold in the Nordic country were electric, putting it on course to hit a target of no new fossil-fuel passenger vehicles next year. 

But the country, whose wealth is based on fossil fuels, has achieved this boom with tax breaks and spending far beyond anything offered elsewhere in Europe.

94%Proportion of cars sold in Norway that are electric

As well as lower parking fees and road tolls, Norwegian drivers have been offered generous tax incentives to choose electric over petrol vehicles. Charging infrastructure is also ubiquitous, thanks in part to government support.

Yet even in a country with a colossal sovereign wealth fund, this level of support has proved unsustainable.

Advertisement

With the cost of electrification subsidies topping $4bn in 2022, Norway began to roll back benefits from last year but the government has continued to struggle to wean consumers off the big incentives.


Even as some in Europe are removing carrots, others are reviewing the use of sticks.

In the UK, the government is considering easing requirements for carmakers to hit sales targets of electric vehicles. European automakers are lobbying the EU to extend compliance periods to meet CO₂ reduction targets.

But some in the car industry remain optimistic that an EV revolution is still within reach, even without dramatic changes in government support.

The Northvolt gigafactory near the town of Skellefteå in Sweden, near the Arctic circle
The Northvolt gigafactory near the town of Skellefteå in Sweden, near the Arctic Circle. Europe’s leading battery champion has filed for bankruptcy, throwing doubt on the continent’s industrial strategy © Charlie Bibby/FT

Executives hope the industry outlook may change as companies from Renault, Stellantis to Volkswagen, Toyota and Hyundai plan to aggressively roll out dozens of electric vehicles next year to meet tougher new emissions rules in the EU. Some of the new models will be far more affordable with price tags under €25,000.

Surveys have shown that consumers are unlikely to return to petrol vehicles once they make the electric switch. EVs are also much quieter, accelerate like sports cars and can save money in the long run.

Advertisement

In the short term, the focus will be on developing cars at affordable prices, even if that means relying on Chinese battery manufacturers to bring down the cost of batteries. “Now, consumers want to buy a good car and don’t care if it’s electric or not,” Miedreich says. “So what all the car manufacturers are looking for now is the cost.”

Additional reporting by Edward White in Shanghai

News

Cuba says 32 Cuban fighters killed in US raids on Venezuela

Published

on

Cuba says 32 Cuban fighters killed in US raids on Venezuela

Havana declares two days of mourning for the Cubans killed in US operation to abduct Nicolas Maduro.

Cuba has announced the death of 32 ⁠of its ​citizens during the United States military operation to abduct and detain Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and his wife in Caracas.

Havana said on Sunday that there would be two days of mourning on ‌January 5 and ‌6 in ⁠honour of those killed and that ‌funeral arrangements would be announced.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

The state-run Prensa Latina agency said the Cuban “fighters” were killed while “carrying out missions” on behalf of the country’s military, at the request of the Venezuelan government.

The agency said the slain Cubans “fell in direct combat against the attackers or as a result of the bombing of the facilities” after offering “fierce resistance”.

Advertisement

Cuba is a close ally of Venezuela’s government, and has sent military and police forces to assist in operations in the Latin American country for years.

Maduro and his wife have been flown to New York following the US operation to face prosecution on drug-related charges. The 63-year-old Venezuelan leader is due to appear in court on Monday.

He has previously denied criminal involvement.

Images of Maduro blindfolded and handcuffed by US forces have stunned Venezuelans.

Venezuelan Minister of Defence General Vladimir Padrino said on state television that the US attack killed soldiers, civilians and a “large part” of Maduro’s security detail “in cold blood”.

Advertisement

Venezuela’s armed forces have been activated to guarantee sovereignty, he said.

‘A lot of Cubans’ killed

US President Donald Trump, speaking to reporters on board Air Force One on Sunday, said that “there was a lot of death on the other side” during the raids.

He said that “a lot of Cubans” were killed and that there was “no death on our side”.

Trump went on to threaten Colombian President Gustavo Petro, saying that a US military operation in the country sounded “good” to him.

But he suggested that a US military intervention in Cuba is unlikely, because the island appears to be ready to fall on its own.

Advertisement

“Cuba is ready to fall. Cuba looks like it’s ready to fall. I don’t know how they, if they can, hold that, but Cuba now has no income. They got all of their income from Venezuela, from the Venezuelan oil,” Trump said.

“They’re not getting any of it. Cuba literally is ready to fall. And you have a lot of great Cuban Americans that are going to be very happy about this.”

The US attack on Venezuela marked the most controversial intervention in Latin America since the invasion of Panama 37 years ago.

The Trump administration has described Maduro’s abduction as a law-enforcement mission to force him to face US criminal charges filed in 2020, including “narco-terrorism” conspiracy.

But Trump also said that US oil companies needed “total access” to the country’s vast reserves and suggested that an influx of Venezuelan immigrants to the US also factored into the decision to abduct Maduro.

Advertisement

While many Western nations oppose Maduro, there were many calls for the US to respect international law, and questions arose over the legality of abducting a foreign head of state.

Left-leaning regional leaders, including those of Brazil, Colombia, Chile and Mexico, have largely denounced Maduro’s removal, while countries with right-wing governments, from Argentina to Ecuador, have largely welcomed it.

The United Nations Security Council plans to meet on Monday to discuss the attack. Russia and China, both major backers of Venezuela, have criticised the US.

Beijing on Sunday insisted that the safety of Maduro and his wife be a priority, and called on the US to “stop toppling the government of Venezuela”, calling the attack a “clear violation of international law“.

Moscow also said it was “extremely concerned” about the abduction of Maduro and his wife, and condemned what it called an “act of armed aggression” against Venezuela by the US.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Here’s a partial list of U.S. elected officials opposing Trump’s invasion of Venezuela

Published

on

Here’s a partial list of U.S. elected officials opposing Trump’s invasion of Venezuela

Protesters rally outside the White House Saturday, Jan. 3, 2026, in Washington, after the U.S. captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife in a military operation.

Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AP

President Trump’s move to depose Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro has drawn praise inside the United States, especially from Republican leaders. But the invasion also faces significant skepticism, questions about legality, and full-throated opposition from some elected officials across the political spectrum.

Here’s a survey.

Some Republicans condemn, or question, Trump’s invasion

While most conservative lawmakers voiced support for Trump’s action, a small group of Republican House members and GOP Senators described the move as unlawful or misguided.

Advertisement

“If the President believes military action against Venezuela is needed, he should make the case and Congress should vote before American lives and treasure are spent on regime change in South America,” said Rep. Thomas Massie, a Republican from Kentucky, speaking on the House floor. “Do we truly believe that Nicolás Maduro will be replaced by a modern-day George Washington? How did that work out in Cuba, Libya, Iraq or Syria?”

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., posting on social media, voiced skepticism that the true goal of Trump’s invasion was to stop the flow of drugs into the United States. She also described the military action as a violation of conservative “America First” principles.

“Americans disgust with our own government’s never ending military aggression and support of foreign wars is justified because we are forced to pay for it and both parties, Republicans and Democrats, always keep the Washington military machine funded and going,” Greene posted on X. “This is what many in MAGA thought they voted to end. Boy were we wrong.”

Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., a retired U.S. Air Force Brigadier General, generally praised the military operation, but he also said the precedent of U.S. military intervention could embolden more aggressive action by authoritarian regimes in China and Russia.

Advertisement

“Freedom and rule of law were defended last night,” Bacon said on X, referring to the invasion of Venezuela, “but dictators will try to exploit this to rationalize their selfish objectives.”

At least three Republican Senators also voiced concern or skepticism about the invasion and its legal justification, while also celebrating the fall of Maduro.

“In this case, a leader who monopolized central power is removed in an action that monopolizes central power,” Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul wrote on the platform X. “Best though, not to forget, that our founders limited the executive’s power to go to war without Congressional authorization for a reason—to limit the horror of war and limit war to acts of defense.”

GOP Senators Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan, both of Alaska, said Maduro’s ouster would make the United States and the world safer, but suggested the operation could turn into a quagmire for U.S. troops.

“Late last year, I voted to proceed to debate on two resolutions that would have terminated the escalation of U.S. military operations against Venezuela absent explicit authorization from Congress,” Murkowski wrote on the platform X. She added that she expects further briefings from Trump officials on the “legal basis for these operations.”

Advertisement

“The lessons learned from what took place after the United States deposed another Latin American indicted drug lord—Panama’s Manuel Noriega in 1989—could prove useful, as could the painful and difficult lessons learned after the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003,” Sullivan wrote on X.

Most Democrats condemn the invasion

Most Democratic lawmakers and elected officials also described Maduro as a dictator, but they generally condemned Trump’s action. At a press conference Saturday, New York City’s new Mayor Zohran Mamdani told reporters he phoned Trump and voiced opposition to the invasion.

“I called the President and spoke with him directly to register my opposition to this act and to make clear that it was an opposition based on being opposed to a pursuit of regime change, to the violation of federal and international law,” Mamdani said.

Democratic minority leader Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York accused Trump of acting in bad faith and violating the U.S. Constitution. “The idea that Trump plans to now run Venezuela should strike fear in the hearts of all Americans,” Schumer said in a post on X. “The American people have seen this before and paid the devastating price.”

According to Schumer, the Trump administration assured him “three separate times that it was not pursuing regime change or or military action without congressional authorization.”

Advertisement

California’s Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff, a frequent Trump critic, posted a series of comments on X describing Saturday’s military action and Trump’s proposed U.S. occupation of Venezuela as potentially disastrous.

“Acting without Congressional approval or the buy-in of the public, Trump risks plunging a hemisphere into chaos and has broken his promise to end wars instead of starting them,” Schiff wrote.

“Donald Trump has once again shown his contempt for the Constitution and the rule of law,” said Vermont’s Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders, in a video posted on social media, where he described the U.S. invasion as “imperialism.”

“This is the horrific logic of force that Putin used to justify his brutal attack on Ukraine,” Sanders said.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Democrat of New York, also spoke harshly of the military strike, describing it as an effort by Trump to distract attention from domestic troubles in the United States.

“It’s not about drugs. If it was, Trump wouldn’t have pardoned one of the largest narco traffickers in the world last month,” Ocasio-Cortez said, referring to Trump’s decision to free former Honduran President Orlando Hernandez, who had been convicted in the U.S. of helping smuggle more than 400 tons of cocaine into the U.S.

Advertisement

“It’s about oil and regime change. And they need a trial now to pretend that it isn’t. Especially to distract from Epstein + skyrocketing healthcare costs,” Ocasio-Cortez added on X.

Continue Reading

News

Who is Delcy Rodríguez, Venezuela’s leader after Maduro’s capture? | CNN

Published

on

Who is Delcy Rodríguez, Venezuela’s leader after Maduro’s capture? | CNN

Following the capture of President Nicolás Maduro during a US military operation in Venezuela, the command of the South American country has fallen into the hands of Executive Vice President Delcy Rodríguez.

That is what Venezuela’s constitution outlines in its different scenarios anticipating a president’s absence. Under Articles 233 and 234, whether the absence is temporary or absolute, the vice president takes over the presidential duties.

Rodríguez – also minister for both finance and oil – stepped into the role on Saturday afternoon. Hours after the capture of Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, she chaired a National Defense Council session, surrounded by other ministers and senior officials, and demanded the couple’s “immediate release” while condemning the US military operation.

Standing before the Venezuelan flag, Rodríguez said the early-morning operation represents a blatant violation of international law and Venezuela’s sovereignty. She added that the action must be rejected by Venezuelans and condemned by governments across Latin America.

“We call on the peoples of the great homeland to remain united, because what was done to Venezuela can be done to anyone. That brutal use of force to bend the will of the people can be carried out against any country,” she told the council in an address broadcast by state television channel VTV.

Advertisement

Rodríguez, 56, is from Caracas and studied law at the Central University of Venezuela.

She has spent more than two decades as one of the leading figures of chavismo, the political movement founded by President Hugo Chávez and led by Maduro since Chávez’s death in 2013.

Alongside her brother Jorge Rodríguez, the current president of the National Assembly, she has held various positions of power since the Chávez era. She served as minister of communication and information from 2013 to 2014 and later became foreign minister from 2014 to 2017. In that role, she defended Maduro’s government against international criticism, including allegations of democratic backsliding and human rights abuses in the country.

As foreign minister, Rodríguez represented Venezuela at forums such as the United Nations, where she accused other governments of seeking to undermine her country.

In 2017, Rodríguez became president of the Constituent National Assembly that expanded the government’s powers after the opposition won the 2015 legislative elections. In 2018, Maduro appointed her vice president for his second term. She retained the post during his third presidential term, which began on January 10, 2025, following the controversial July 28, 2024, elections. Until the president’s capture, she served as Venezuela’s chief economic authority and minister of petroleum.

Advertisement

Venezuela’s opposition maintains that the 2024 elections were fraudulent and that Maduro is not a legitimately elected president. They insist that the true winner was former ambassador Edmundo González Urrutia, a position supported by some governments in the region.

José Manuel Romano, a constitutional lawyer and political analyst, told CNN that the positions Rodríguez has held show she is a “very prominent” figure within the Venezuelan government and someone who enjoys the president’s “full trust.”

“The executive vice president of the republic is a highly effective operator, a woman with strong leadership skills for managing teams,” Romano said.

“She is very results-oriented and has significant influence over the entire government apparatus, including the Ministry of Defense. That is very important to note in the current circumstances,” he added.

On the path to an understanding with the US?

Hours after Maduro’s capture, and before Rodríguez addressed the National Defense Council, US President Donald Trump said at a press conference that Secretary of State Marco Rubio had spoken with the vice president. According to Trump, she appeared willing to work with Washington on a new phase for Venezuela.

Advertisement

“She had a conversation with Marco. She said, ‘We’re going to do whatever you need.’ I think she was quite courteous. We’re going to do this right,” Trump said.

Trump’s remarks, however, surprised some analysts, who believe Rodríguez is unlikely to make concessions to the United States.

“She is not a moderate alternative to Maduro. She has been one of the most powerful and hard-line figures in the entire system,” Imdat Oner, a policy analyst at the Jack D. Gordon Institute and a former Turkish diplomat based in Venezuela, told CNN.

“Her rise to power appears to be the result of some kind of understanding between the United States and key actors preparing for a post-Maduro scenario. In that context, she would essentially serve as a caretaker until a democratically elected leader takes office,” the analyst added.

In her first messages following Maduro’s capture, Rodríguez showed no signs of backing down and, without referencing Trump’s statements, closed the door to any potential cooperation with the United States.

Advertisement

Earlier in the morning, during a phone interview with VTV, Rodríguez said the whereabouts of Maduro and Flores were unknown and demanded proof that they were alive. Later in the afternoon, during the National Defense Council session, she escalated her rhetoric, condemned the US operation and, despite the circumstances, insisted that Maduro remains in charge of Venezuela.

“There is only one president in this country, and his name is Nicolás Maduro Moros,” said Rodríguez — now, by force of events, the most visible face of the government.

Reuters news agency contributed to this report.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending