
China Opens Door For Tesla and Other Foreign Automakers To Produce Electric Vehicles (electrek.co) 84
Despite its strong protectionism laws in place that require any automaker wanting to establish production capacity in the country to partner and share its technology with a local manufacturer, China is proposing to relax laws. In an attempt to accelerate electric vehicle production in the country and fight its air pollution problem, China is now proposing to relax those laws for what they call "new energy vehicles," a.k.a. electric vehicles, in order to attract more foreign investments. From a report: The new rules are expected to open the door to Tesla and other automakers who recently expressed desires to establish manufacturing capacity in China to produce electric vehicles. The National Development and Reform Commission and the Ministry of Commerce released the new policy last week, and it is seeking public comment until next month. The new rules could go into effect soon after.
Partner and Share = Give up IP (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Exactly. Just look at what happens to all the tech we sell and install there. Within a year, a copy shows up and the Chinese firm sues the original inventors for "stealing Chinese IP".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Partner and Share = Give up (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You mean the other car companies? Like the one that built electric cars two decades ago [wikipedia.org] and then crushed them instead of selling them? [ev1.org]
Re:For once pragmatism trumps policy (Score:5, Insightful)
Have they seriously tried anything as far as legislative remedies? You'd think a totalitarian government could force people to comply with whatever regulations it wants.
California had a terrible smog problem in the 1970s and early 1980s. The entire Los Angeles area (including Disneyland, for example) had air that was smothered with a visible brown haze. Even the Bay Area was getting bad. We passed a bunch of laws, force people to comply with them e.g. by requiring catalytic converters in all new vehicles and refusing to register vehicles that haven't had their emissions checked. Today the air quality has improved immensely.
If any government can do the same, it's China. They just lack the will. Moreover, it may turn out that vehicles aren't even their biggest problem -- their crony-capitalist industries may be just as much to blame, and who wants to regulate them?
No, this move is far more likely to be about getting their hands on the technology so they can steal it.
Re: (Score:2)
"California had a terrible smog problem in the 1970s and early 1980s"
With such a low UID, one would think you could remember that CA smog problems went back much, much further.
https://www.arb.ca.gov/html/br... [ca.gov]
Re: (Score:3)
Cars are not really a big problem in cities right now, most of them have effective emission control systems. But in future they are going to become more significant. Inte
Re: (Score:2)
Northern China uses coal for local heat. Just like people in London did when they had killing 'fogs'.
Coal burning stoves are dirty as fuck.
Re: (Score:2)
Northern China uses coal for local heat. Just like people in London did when they had killing 'fogs'.
Coal burning stoves are dirty as fuck.
Some years ago, I was mentoring a student from Northern China and he did mention that coal was the primary fuel source in households.
Re: (Score:2)
It's easy, low hanging fruit. Electric resistive heat is a terrible solution, but it's much better than a coal burning stove. N. China's city cores have enough density they should be using common steam loops and waste heat from nearby power plants.
Re: (Score:2)
Combustion engines are a big problem in cities. While their emissions in terms of greenhouse gasses and some harmful particles have improved a lot, they still do a lot of damage to people's health.
Even if all the electricity is from dirty old coal plants, it's still better to move it away from densely populated areas.
Re: (Score:2)
China has been taking action against coal plant emissions for a few years, passed laws roughly as stringent as any to be found in the West that went into enforcement in Fall 2014 and, most importantly, were not grandfathering ANY plants. I don't know if they've backed on on that since the law went into effect.
But even for their heavy handed government, enforcement isn't easy and local officials typically have quite a bit of power.
But if there's a death or disaster, those same officials quickly find themselv
Wrong (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Now, as to America, we currently buy the majority of EVs made in the west. We buy more than Europe. In addition, when Model 3 hits the market, the majority will go t
Trump! Trump! (Score:1)
China does not want to be locked out so they are dropping the partner and share its technology and are willing to be open to more out side stuff. They don't want an trade war.
Re: (Score:2)
Hilarious!
Communist China knows Trump will roll over and turn a blind eye while they steal all the technology they can get their hands on. If Tesla sets up any kind of manufacturing facility over there, it will be so riddled with surveillance equipment and "employees" who check in with the Party before they clock in at work that there won't be any proprietary tech left to steal after the first few months.
Trump won't go up against the Commies. He's a bully, not a warrior.
Re:Trump! Trump! (Score:4, Informative)
If Telsa or anyone else is naive enough to go through with this type of deal, what is Trump supposed to do about it?
Trump's plans are (1) to end the asymmetrical trade deals that the last 4 four presidents have given us and (2) push to eliminate the existing tax code provisions that make it more economical to move manufacturing offshore and then import back in to the US. The US is pretty much alone in having such an inverted tax structure.
Re: (Score:2)
Aside from Australia of course, where they do everything in an inverted position.
Re: (Score:2)
Call me when he actually does any of this. Talk is cheap.
Re: (Score:2)
That is an interesting assertion. I would like to learn more. Could you possibly provide links to supporting evidence? Thanks in advance.
Re: (Score:2)
We people with three-figure IQ's have this thing called "inductive reasoning". We use it to reach reasonable conclusions based on past performance.
http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/inductive-reasoning
You're welcome.
Is there anything else I can help you with?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
You're one of those two-figure folks who believe when you throw something up in the air, "supporting evidence" is needed to confirm that it will fall back to Earth.
Thanks for confirming.
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone who thinks that boasting of his IQ supports his argument is not as smart as he thinks he is.
"Do you see a man wise in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him."
See also Dunning-Kruger effect [wikipedia.org]: "The Dunning-Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which low-ability individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly assessing their ability as much higher than it really is. Dunning and Kruger attributed this bias to a metacognitive incapacity, on the part of those with low ability,
Re: (Score:2)
Commenting about your palpable lack of a three-figure IQ isn't boasting about my IQ. Perhaps you should read up a bit about Dunning-Kruger yourself. Try a place that doesn't use words like "metacognitive", so maybe you'll have a fighting chance of understanding what you're trying to read.
Or perhaps you could just try to improve your reading skills to Grade 5 level. That might work, too. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that metacognition can be a challenging concept to grasp. Basically, it describes the awareness and understanding of one's own thought processes, or to put it more simply, "thinking about thinking" or "knowing your mind". For example, one might analyze his own learning processes to determine the study strategies that are most successful for him and then adjust his behavior based on this knowledge. Or one might learn to recognize his own biases and preconceptions and take this into consideration whe
Re: (Score:2)
I'm happy that you've learned how to cut and paste definitions. This represents a real breakthrough for you! And I'm sure your employer will allow you to package fewer garbage bags and enjoy a little "you time" on the computer. It is, after all, the holiday season.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.
Re: Trump! Trump! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously with Tesla have the TOP RATED CAR BY OWNERS, means that they are above and beyond other companies. Year after year, they come in tops, even though the early ratings of each model is low. Right now, they have a manufacturing that equals what GM and the rest have, only it is done differently. They are in the process of moving the final assembly line
Re: (Score:2)
I thought protectionism doesn't work (Score:2)
Well, China is using protectionism quite successfully to employ their people and give an advantage to their country. I thought it didn't work! Now they're "relaxing" the law. Of course, there are no specifics, and Chinese laws are notorious for being interpreted on the spot by local officials. Five cities have five different ways of implementing the exact same law.
I guess it's just weird for me, as an American, to see a national government helping its people. Even if it's with a non-working idea like
Re:I thought protectionism doesn't work (Score:4, Informative)
Protectionism works just fine - the 90 million chinese workers employed in industry as a testament to that.
Free trade only raises the standard of living of all parties if everyone is playing by the same rules - asymmetrical trade relationships don't work.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How can you say that? China has implemented tarriffs on US made luxury cars and SUVs and even been ruled against by the WTO.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: I thought protectionism doesn't work (Score:2)
Cars that spy on you (Score:1)
How soon before China infects the firmware without Tesla even being aware of it?
Re: Tesla Open Sourced their Patents (Score:2)
Hopefully musk not stupid (Score:2)
Well (Score:2)
Would this be the same intelligence folks that told us during the cold war that the USSR had better and more thermonuclear bombs than the US did?
Re: Well (Score:2)
Still trust CHINA? (Score:1)