Category: Auto News

As a national advocate for right-to-repair reforms — for all types of equipment from toasters to tractors — I am used to hearing manufacturers’ claims that they alone can protect your data, and pro-repair reforms will undermine your security and privacy.

At the core of the issue is what we advocates call “the myth of the benevolent monopoly.” That myth is, essentially: The manufacturer and their dealerships are the only ones capable of doing things the right way and are the only trustworthy partners. If a third party tries to use the same methods as the “authorized” elite to fix the product, everything will go horribly wrong. The implication is that independent repair shops are sketchy.

The monopoly, therefore, is to protect us. What an act of care and benevolence from the manufacturer!

Readers of Automotive News have seen this argument. For example, John Bozzella, CEO of the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, wrote that backers of the REPAIR Act seek “unfettered access to a treasure trove of private telematics data for their own sales and marketing purposes.”

The REPAIR Act would allow a car owner to access and direct car maintenance data to a third party.

As a national advocate for right-to-repair reforms — for all types of equipment from toasters to tractors — I am used to hearing manufacturers’ claims that they alone can protect your data, and pro-repair reforms will undermine your security and privacy.

At the core of the issue is what we advocates call “the myth of the benevolent monopoly.” That myth is, essentially: The manufacturer and their dealerships are the only ones capable of doing things the right way and are the only trustworthy partners. If a third party tries to use the same methods as the “authorized” elite to fix the product, everything will go horribly wrong. The implication is that independent repair shops are sketchy.

The monopoly, therefore, is to protect us. What an act of care and benevolence from the manufacturer!

Readers of Automotive News have seen this argument. For example, John Bozzella, CEO of the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, wrote that backers of the REPAIR Act seek “unfettered access to a treasure trove of private telematics data for their own sales and marketing purposes.”

The REPAIR Act would allow a car owner to access and direct car maintenance data to a third party.

Ford is nearing an agreement to sell a plant in Germany, with two groups of Chinese automakers among the three leading bidders at a time when Chinese investments in Europe are under growing scrutiny.

One of the bids comes from BYD, the largest domestic automaker in China, while another involves several smaller Chinese car companies, according to people familiar with the situation.

The U.S. automaker and the German state of Saarland, home to the plant, are also in talks with a German solar component maker, said the people, who declined to be named discussing private information.

Ford is seeking to reach a preliminary agreement on a sale later this month, the people said. That would be about a year after the manufacturer said it will cease making cars at the site in Saarlouis in 2025.

The factory, which assembles Ford Focus compact cars, employs about 4,600 people.

There are additional interested parties and there is no guarantee a deal will be finalized by the deadline later this month, the people said. Talks may also fail, they said.

Ford said it’s committed to transforming its Saarlouis plant and create future employment opportunities, while declining to comment further. Spokespeople for BYD and Saarland’s economy ministry, which is also part of negotiations, declined to comment.

Any deal involving a Chinese entity may attract the scrutiny of Berlin, even as thousands of jobs are on the line in a region highly dependent on making combustion-engine components and vehicles.

Germany over the past years has tightened rules for non-European investors buying companies in high-tech sectors such as robotics and artificial intelligence, widely seen as targeting Chinese state-backed investors.

Previously, only investments in critical infrastructure, such as energy, water, telecommunications and defense could be screened.

Smaller footprint

Ford is shrinking its extensive footprint in Europe with thousands of job cuts while also investing billions to retool for the electric age.

The company’s lineup of mass-market passenger cars, going electric-only by the end of the decade, has for years suffered from low returns, in contrast to its thriving commercial vans unit.

Next week, Chancellor Olaf Scholz is due to attend the opening of Ford’s EV factory in Cologne following a $2 billion overhaul to start making electric cars later this year.

The 90-year-old industrial complex is one of the largest in Europe.

For Chinese automakers, purchasing a major carmaking plant will help boost plans to gain a foothold in Europe’s competitive market as demand for EVs surges. BYD, which has switched to only make electric cars, was China’s biggest automaker during the first quarter, overtaking Volkswagen Group.

BYD is also looking at alternative sites for a factory in France and Spain, according to three people familiar with the matter.

While taking over Saarlouis offers close proximity to an established automotive supply chain, BYD also sees advantages of establishing a new facility outside Germany, one of the people said.

General Motors will spend $209 million to retool its Oshawa Assembly Plant northeast of Toronto to build the next generation of internal combustion engine (ICE) full-size trucks. However, the automaker said Tuesday that product details and timing related to GM’s future trucks are not being released at this time.

This investment builds on GM’s commitment to Canadian manufacturing, which includes more than $903 million invested in the Oshawa plant in 2020, less than a year after it ceased assembly at the facility.

GM agreed to maintain the integrity of the plant even as it launched an aftermarket parts operation there, leaving the door open for potential investment down the line.

The automaker then agreed to invest the $903 million as part of a collective bargaining agreement, negotiated with Unifor in 2020.

“When people said auto-making was finished in Oshawa back in 2018, we said ‘no chance.’ Not only has this facility risen from the proverbial ashes, it has become a symbol of Canada’s relentlessness, its drive and desire to build an economy we can be proud of,” Unifor President Lana Payne said after the announcement Tuesday.

Two years ago, Oshawa Assembly delivered one of the fastest plant launches in GM history, “demonstrating the flexibility and agility of the Oshawa workforce,” the automaker said in a statement.

Since it reopened, GM Canada says it has created 2,600 new manufacturing jobs, and thousands of indirect jobs at Canadian suppliers. Production has increased to three shifts, and fifty per cent of new production hires at the Oshawa plant are women.

It produces the Chevrolet Silverado heavy- and light-duty pickups, powered by internal combustion engines.

“Oshawa Assembly plays a critical role in meeting customer demand for GM’s popular full-size trucks, helping GM lead the Canadian industry in heavy-duty truck sales in 2022 and take an early lead in total truck sales for 2023,” GM Canada Marissa West said in a statement. “Today, we are proud to say we will continue to build pickups with Oshawa pride for years to come.”

SHANGHAI — Volkswagen Group’s Chinese joint venture with SAIC has transformed one of its plants in Shanghai for production, research and development of electric vehicles, VW said.

Production of internal combustion engine models at the main plant of SAIC Volkswagen in Anting of Shanghai will be relocated to other plants, VW said in an emailed statement to Reuters, which came after comments on social media saying VW was shutting a plant in Shanghai.

The change will not affect the production capacity for individual models, it added.

The move underscores VW’s efforts to accelerate its shift to electrification as it has been losing shares in its biggest market where it lags behind Chinese rivals in launching new EV models.

VW-branded cars have been outsold by EV maker BYD since November last year, according to data from industrial associations.

The European Commission’s decision in late March to allow an exemption for cars running on e-fuels to qualify for sale after 2035 — when all new vehicles must be zero-emission — has given the internal combustion engine a new life in Europe.

But do the fuels, which are processed from water and carbon dioxide, come at too great a cost? 

Critics say e-fuels are an expensive distraction from the transition to electrification, which they say offers a much greater return on investment if the goal is to reduce greenhouse gases. They say that e-fuel production will divert sustainable wind and solar energy from more pressing uses, and that combustion engines running on e-fuels still produce pollutants such as nitrogen oxide and carbon monoxide.

Supporters say they can be a “plug and play” way to decarbonize the hundreds of millions of internal-combustion engine cars on the road, as well as other forms of transportation such as shipping and aviation. They say that cars running on e-fuels can have a similar carbon footprint to EVs using a holistic life-cycle assessment. 

It’s not yet clear what e-fuels regulations will look like or when they could be finalized, but the move has complicated the industry’s multibillion-dollar march toward full-electric vehicles, which looked all but inevitable just a few months ago.

Prominent backers in the automotive industry include sports-car makers Porsche and Ferrari, which see them as a way to continue selling their iconic internal combustion engines such as the Porsche 911’s flat-six and the Ferrari V-12. Porsche has invested heavily in a pilot e-fuels plant in Chile with Siemens and energy companies.

“I know no other possibility to decarbonize combustion-engine cars,” Porsche and Volkswagen Group CEO Oliver Blume said in March at the group’s annual results conference. 

“This is very good for us, because you can run a thermal car with a fuel that is (carbon) neutral,” Ferrari CEO Benedetto Vigna said in May.

But it’s not just exotic cars that may benefit from e-fuels. Following the EU’s decision, the CEOs of Stellantis and Renault said they could be a valid solution to decarbonize existing internal combustion engines, although they stopped short of explicitly endorsing their use after 2035 in new cars.

“It’s good news, but not only good news for Ferrari and Porsche,” Renault Group CEO Luca de Meo said in May. He said the group’s Dacia brand would seek to switch to electrification “as late as possible,” agreeing that e-fuels could be a way to decarbonize Dacia’s affordable cars with internal combustion engines. Renault is working with Saudi Aramco, its partner in a planned combustion-engine venture, to develop e-fuels.

Stellantis in April said it was completing testing of e-fuels on a range of engine families from 2014 to 2029, although noting that it was “remaining committed” to selling only battery-electric vehicles in Europe by 2030.

“By working to make sure our Stellantis engines are e-fuels friendly, we are aiming at giving our customers another tool in the fight against global warming,” CEO Carlos Tavares said in a news release.

The EU’s move to allow cars running on e-fuels dismayed critics.

“Losing focus away from electrification of road transport risks diverting resources and delaying scaling up of battery electric vehicles,” the environmental group Transport & Environment wrote in a report on e-fuels in 2021.

William Todts, the executive director of T&E, wrote in March that the “e-fuels lobby’s backers, mainly the oil industry, are not looking for a fair contest between e-fuels and electric vehicles — they are looking to derail mass electrification.” 

The e-fuels lobbying group, the E-Fuels Alliance, says that is not against electrification, but that e-fuels can be produced in a truly sustainable way, and that their current high cost will come down if there is a market for them.

WASHINGTON — A bipartisan bill that would prevent automakers from eliminating AM broadcast radio in new vehicles isn’t necessary, an industry trade group representing automakers is expected to tell a House panel Tuesday.

The Alliance for Automotive Innovation’s Scott Schmidt, vice president of safety policy, will argue that while the group’s members are “committed to ensuring drivers have access to free, public alerts and safety warnings through the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Integrated Public Alert and Warning System,” the way consumers receive information is constantly evolving, according to his written testimony.

Emergency alerts under FEMA’s system are sent out across multiple platforms, including AM, FM and satellite radio as well as cellular networks.

“The intent is not for the public to rely on a sole source to receive the alerts but to create a ‘net’ of sources in which the public can receive them. In other words, the more the better,” the testimony, which was made public Monday, states.

Schmidt also will argue that there are several reasons behind automakers’ decisions on vehicle design and offered features, including technical challenges, market expectations and consumer demand.

“These factors, coupled with the numerous regulations on automobiles, dictate the decisions that automakers make when designing and constructing vehicles, prioritizing safety, efficiency, and consumer preferences,” the testimony reads.

The House’s Subcommittee on Communications and Technology is holding the hearing over concerns that automakers have removed, or are planning to remove, AM radio receivers from their vehicles, especially electric models.

At least seven automakers — BMW, Mazda, Polestar, Rivian, Tesla, Volkswagen and Volvo — do not offer broadcast AM radio in their electric vehicles, citing electromagnetic interference from EV batteries that can generate static, a high-frequency hum and other noise and affect the reception of AM radio signals.

Ford Motor Co. previously said it would not include AM radio in any of its new models starting in 2024 but reversed course last month “after speaking with policy leaders about the importance of AM broadcast radio as a part of the emergency alert system.”

In May, a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the House and Senate introduced legislation — known as the AM for Every Vehicle Act — that would direct NHTSA to issue a rule requiring automakers to keep AM broadcast radio in new vehicles at no additional charge.

The lawmakers argue AM radio is important during large-scale emergencies, especially “when the cell phone runs out, the internet gets cut off, or the television doesn’t work because of no electricity or power to your house,” U.S. Rep. Josh Gottheimer, D-N.J., the House bill’s lead sponsor, said in a statement last month.

In a blog post Monday, Alliance CEO John Bozzella pushed back against those concerns.

“Whether or not AM radio is physically installed in vehicles in the future has no bearing on the multiple methods of delivering those emergency communications alerts to the public,” Bozzella wrote. “Mandating audio features in a vehicle isn’t necessary. Congress hasn’t ever gone this route, especially in a competitive environment with so many choices — many of them free.”

Two witnesses — Lt. Col. Christopher DeMaise, who is commander of the Homeland Security branch of the New Jersey State Police, and Jerry Chapman, who is appearing on behalf of the National Association of Broadcasters — are expected to testify in favor of the bill.

WASHINGTON — A bipartisan bill that would prevent automakers from eliminating AM broadcast radio in new vehicles isn’t necessary, an industry trade group representing automakers is expected to tell a House panel Tuesday.

The Alliance for Automotive Innovation’s Scott Schmidt, vice president of safety policy, will argue that while the group’s members are “committed to ensuring drivers have access to free, public alerts and safety warnings through the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Integrated Public Alert and Warning System,” the way consumers receive information is constantly evolving, according to his written testimony.

Emergency alerts under FEMA’s system are sent out across multiple platforms, including AM, FM and satellite radio as well as cellular networks.

“The intent is not for the public to rely on a sole source to receive the alerts but to create a ‘net’ of sources in which the public can receive them. In other words, the more the better,” the testimony, which was made public Monday, states.

Schmidt also will argue that there are several reasons behind automakers’ decisions on vehicle design and offered features, including technical challenges, market expectations and consumer demand.

“These factors, coupled with the numerous regulations on automobiles, dictate the decisions that automakers make when designing and constructing vehicles, prioritizing safety, efficiency, and consumer preferences,” the testimony reads.

The House’s Subcommittee on Communications and Technology is holding the hearing over concerns that automakers have removed, or are planning to remove, AM radio receivers from their vehicles, especially electric models.

At least seven automakers — BMW, Mazda, Polestar, Rivian, Tesla, Volkswagen and Volvo — do not offer broadcast AM radio in their electric vehicles, citing electromagnetic interference from EV batteries that can generate static, a high-frequency hum and other noise and affect the reception of AM radio signals.

Ford Motor Co. previously said it would not include AM radio in any of its new models starting in 2024 but reversed course last month “after speaking with policy leaders about the importance of AM broadcast radio as a part of the emergency alert system.”

In May, a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the House and Senate introduced legislation — known as the AM for Every Vehicle Act — that would direct NHTSA to issue a rule requiring automakers to keep AM broadcast radio in new vehicles at no additional charge.

The lawmakers argue AM radio is important during large-scale emergencies, especially “when the cell phone runs out, the internet gets cut off, or the television doesn’t work because of no electricity or power to your house,” U.S. Rep. Josh Gottheimer, D-N.J., the House bill’s lead sponsor, said in a statement last month.

In a blog post Monday, Alliance CEO John Bozzella pushed back against those concerns.

“Whether or not AM radio is physically installed in vehicles in the future has no bearing on the multiple methods of delivering those emergency communications alerts to the public,” Bozzella wrote. “Mandating audio features in a vehicle isn’t necessary. Congress hasn’t ever gone this route, especially in a competitive environment with so many choices — many of them free.”

Two witnesses — Lt. Col. Christopher DeMaise, who is commander of the Homeland Security branch of the New Jersey State Police, and Jerry Chapman, who is appearing on behalf of the National Association of Broadcasters — are expected to testify in favor of the bill.