Electric Vehicle Jobs

[juliusa]

Fewer human jobs and higher profits.

Both good things when it comes to jobs. More humans to do more productive things, and more profits. Not good when it comes to national security. There is more to geopolitics than your simple view of jobs.

We stop using coal and moved to NG and other power source. Less coal is good, right? Well, that means less demand from the US, which drives down coal cost. That means China can burn even more coal even more cheaply.

Guess what happens when we move off oil? Chinese would love that. Drive up costs in the US, drive down China's and makes them even better for manufacturing and distribution.

But wait - how is that possible? Isn't China part of the Paris Climate Agreement?? We're not part of the agreement and our emissions are going down - they are part of the agreement, so surely their emissions are going down, right?

 

[nwdiver]

But wait - how is that possible? Isn't China part of the Paris Climate Agreement?? We're not part of the agreement and our emissions are going down - they are part of the agreement, so surely their emissions are going down, right?

The world understands that most of their emissions is due to them manufacturing stuff for us. Not to worry. As the cost of automation keeps declining we're 're-shoring' a lot of those jobs so Chinese built robots can manufacture US goods on US soil. That will help China start lowering its emissions.

 

[juliusa]

The world understands that most of their emissions is due to them manufacturing stuff for us.

Let's do our share and lower emissions by ending that. Oh - and we'd better automate most of it because we have a shortage of workers. Automation is a good thing.

We will do the manufacturing zero carbon. Isn't that what Elon's plan is for the gigafactories?

 

[nwdiver]

Let's do our share and lower emissions by ending that.

Once we can manufacture solar panels in the US for $0.15/w we will. Automation is almost there. Maybe ~3 more years. I toured the Mission Solar factory last year. Maybe ~85% of the stations were automated. Once that's ~97% we can start bringing more jobs back to the US for robots to do

 

[juliusa]

Once we can manufacture solar panels in the US for $0.15/w we will.

The cost to manufacture domestically or import can be the same - all it takes is the will and tariffs.

 

[nwdiver]

The cost to manufacture domestically or import can be the same - all it takes is the will and tariffs.

If you want to lower emissions increasing the cost of solar installations with taxation is definitely not the way to do it.

 

[juliusa]

If you want to lower emissions increasing the cost of solar installations with taxation is definitely not the way to do it.

So combating global warming is simply not economically feasible. I get it.

This is exactly what tariffs are for - they would accelerate the onshoring of manufacturing of solar panels.

 

[TMThree]

But wait - how is that possible? Isn't China part of the Paris Climate Agreement?? We're not part of the agreement and our emissions are going down - they are part of the agreement, so surely their emissions are going down, right?

Trump didn't want to be part of the PCA because it punished the USA while letting countries that pollute off scott free. Which is basically what I was saying - all we have been doing is making it easier and cheaper for china to operate, no net reduction in pollution when you offshore it to China. And not being in the PCA doesn't mean we can't decrease pollution, we've been doing that, and continue to do so.

"An analysis from Greenpeace indicated that China’s 2018 carbon emissions were on track to grow at the fastest rate in six years. The study, based on government data regarding the use of coal and other energy sources, shows carbon output rising 4 percent in the first quarter of this year. Analysts are projecting similar gains over the next several quarters.

The weakness of the Paris Agreement was that it was lopsided, requiring little from China and a great deal from the U.S. President Obama committed the United States to reducing carbon emissions in 2025 by 26 to 28 percent, which would have meant a substantial jump in electricity costs.

By contrast, China committed to boosting non-fossil fuels to around 20 percent of its overall energy mix by 2030 (a project already underway) and a “hope” that emissions might peak at that time. As one analyst commented in the New York Times, “What China is pledging to do here is not a lot different from what China’s policies are on track to deliver.”

As vague as its goals were, it is becoming clear that the country is unlikely to meet them. To do so would require sacrificing growth to rein in pollution. Since the Chinese Communist Party has pledged to double China’s 2010 GDP by 2020 and to create a “moderately prosperous society” by 2021, that is extremely unlikely.

China is key. It is by far the world’s biggest source of carbon emissions, producing more than one quarter of the global total and 81 percent more than the United States. The U.S. is the second-largest; India a distant third.

By contrast, in China, coal use has trended higher recently, driving emissions up. Coal consumption, according to Beijing’s own (questionable) statistics, rose 0.4 percent in 2017, producing some backpedaling among those optimistic about China’s compliance with the Paris accord. Others estimate the increase at between 1 percent and 5 percent.

It is difficult to know, given China’s history of fudging the numbers. In the lead-up to the Paris talks, for instance, it became obvious that China was burning 17 percent more coal than it had admitted, a variance the New York Times described as “immense."​

 

[nwdiver]

So combating global warming is simply not economically feasible. I get it.

This is exactly what tariffs are for - they would accelerate the onshoring of manufacturing of solar panels.

Clearly it’s economically feasible. I just bought a whole pallet of solar panels made in Vietnam for $1400.

If it’s cheaper to pay $170/mo for labor in SE Asia than automate a line why should I care? Capitalism baby!

My priority is GW/ yr. I don’t care where those GW come from. Physics baby!

Relax. The cost of automation gets cheaper every year. Soon it will make more sense to have robots make stuff here than pay someone in China $170/mo.

 

[David_Cary]

Tariffs have multiple effects of course. They can both accelerate automation and production using less carbon in the US and they can also make solar panels more expensive and make them less economically feasible. It isn't an all or nothing.

Trying to defend Trump's decisions with rational thought is probably an exercise in futility. But trying to apply the same carbon standards around the world at the same time is not likely to work. Nearly every country in the world understood that. When a nation sits on a huge amount of NG with a relatively low density, it can reduce carbon much faster. A temperate climate makes it easier. And a richer country makes it easier.

We would never expect India to duplicate Norway's example - to use an extreme example.

That being said, the China tariffs is one thing that environmentalists could agree with Trump on. Kind of like a broken clock is right twice a day.

 

[nwdiver]

That being said, the China tariffs is one thing that environmentalists could agree with Trump on. Kind of like a broken clock is right twice a day.

Depends on which tariffs. I've seen estimates for job losses in the solar industry on the install side upwards of 50k. That's a lot of new solar not getting installed.

 

[David_Cary]

Good point - I was thinking about the "other than solar panel" tariffs and I wasn't clear. But in the long run, if the solar manufacturing moves to the US, it can be decarbonized and be subsidized more easily - if our government would be so inclined....
The one thing NY or CA can do in the absence of federal action is invest in solar manufacturing (or batteries). This could make it so cheap for red states that greed will overcome raw stupidity. Not sure Wyoming can complain to the WTO about that.

 

[MontyFloyd]

Clearly it’s economically feasible. I just bought a whole pallet of solar panels made in Vietnam for $1400.

If it’s cheaper to pay $170/mo for labor in SE Asia than automate a line why should I care? Capitalism baby!

My priority is GW/ yr. I don’t care where those GW come from. Physics baby!

Relax. The cost of automation gets cheaper every year. Soon it will make more sense to have robots make stuff here than pay someone in China $170/mo.

The inconvenient truth.
We need that PV GW/yr over everything, or the earth may become marginally habitable.

Either that or everyone starts to walk everywhere and eat grass. Moooo!


PS: Just now see this thread is almost a year old. Sorry for necro-post