You’re out of free articles.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Sign In or Create an Account.
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Welcome to Heatmap
Thank you for registering with Heatmap. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our lives, a force reshaping our economy, our politics, and our culture. We hope to be your trusted, friendly, and insightful guide to that transformation. Please enjoy your free articles. You can check your profile here .
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Subscribe to get unlimited Access
Hey, you are out of free articles but you are only a few clicks away from full access. Subscribe below and take advantage of our introductory offer.
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Create Your Account
Please Enter Your Password
Forgot your password?
Please enter the email address you use for your account so we can send you a link to reset your password:
The all-American EV startup is cutting costs to survive.

America’s most interesting electric-vehicle company is about to have the defining year of its life.
On Wednesday, the company reported that it lost $1.58 billion in the fourth quarter of last year, bringing its net annual losses to $5.4 billion. It announced that it is laying off about 10% of its salaried employees, but — at the same time — promised that it has a plan to achieve a small profit by the end of this year.
Rivian does not seem to be in trouble — not quite yet, at least. But the earnings made clear what electric-vehicle observers have known for a long time: Either the company will emerge from this year poised to be a winner in the EV transition, or it will find itself up against the wall.
That’s partially because Rivian has a stomach-turning number of corporate milestones coming up. Over the next 11 months, it plans to unveil an entirely new line of vehicles, shut down its factory for several weeks for cost-saving upgrades, break ground on a new $5 billion facility in Georgia, and — most importantly — turn a profit for the first time. It also expects to manufacture and deliver roughly another 60,000 vehicles to customers.
Any one of these goals would be difficult to achieve in any environment. But Rivian is going to have to execute all of them during a time defined by “economic and geopolitical uncertainties” and especially high interest rates, its CEO R.J. Scaringe told investors on Wednesday. Since 2021, Rivian’s once robust stockpile of cash has been cut in half to about $7 billion; at its current burn rate, the company will run out of money in a little more than two years.
Although Rivian’s situation is dire, it’s not experiencing anything out of the ordinary. As I’ve written before, the electric truck maker is crossing what commentators sometimes call “the EV valley of death.” This is the challenging point in a company’s life cycle where it has developed a product and scaled it up to production — thereby raising its operating expenses to eye-watering levels — but where its revenue has not yet increased too.
During this vulnerable period, a company essentially burns through its cash on hand in the hope that more customers and serious revenue will soon show up. If those customers don’t arrive, then it either needs to raise more cash … or it runs out of money and goes bankrupt.
It’s a frightening time, but once a company crosses the valley of death, it can reach an idyll. Not so long ago, Tesla found itself in something like Rivian’s position as it prepared to launch the Model 3. Seven years later, it is the most valuable automaker in the world.
Once Rivian’s revenue exceeds its costs, its problems will get easier, or at least more straightforward: Instead of fighting for its survival and watching its cash reserves dwindle, Scaringe will be able to make more strategic trade-offs. Should the company cut costs to expand its profit margin and reward investors, or should it pass the savings along to customers in the form of lower prices, thus growing its market share? Scaringe can’t make these types of decisions until his firm is safely out of the valley.
Claire McDonough, Rivian’s chief financial officer and a former J.P. Morgan director, has a plan for crossing that canyon — an aptly if strangely named “bridge to profitability” that it will attempt to build this year. Rivian’s survival, she said, will depend above all on cutting the unit costs of producing its vehicles, including by using fewer materials to make every car. Other savings will come from making more vehicles faster. That’s what makes the shutdown plan, though it might seem extreme, worth it; McDonough said those improvements alone will get the company about 80% of the way to profitability.
Another 15% will come from marketing more “software-enabled products” to Rivian drivers and by selling air-pollution credits to other carmakers, whose vehicles are not as climate-friendly. This is a tried-and-true technique; Tesla first turned a profit in 2021 by selling regulatory credits needed to comply with federal and California state-level rules to other, dirtier automakers. But that same year, Tesla also debuted an entirely new vehicle: the Model Y crossover, which quickly became its top seller in the United States. Tesla, in other words, finally started to make money by cutting costs, finding new revenue sources, and releasing new products.
New products, however, are becoming a weak point for Rivian. The company says that high interest rates will keep demand for its vehicles flat this year. It expects to make about 60,000 of them, about 20,000 fewer than what it had once anticipated. The Rivian R1S, a three-row S.U.V., has become the company’s flagship; it is selling better and is cheaper to manufacture than Rivian’s pickup, the R1T. It also costs at least $75,000, or nearly $600 a month to lease. The highest-tier models can cost $99,000. Turns out, it’s difficult to sell a lot of $70,000 trucks when even the cheapest new-car loans hover around 6%.
Rivian once had a first-to-market advantage in the electric three-row SUV market, but that may be fizzling out, too. Kia is now selling its own all-electric three-row SUV, the EV9, for $18,000 less than the R1S; in fact, the Kia EV9’s most expensive trim costs $76,000, which is only slightly more than the cheapest R1S. The Kia SUV can also charge faster than the Rivian under ideal conditions. It remains an open question how many rich suburbanites are still interested in buying Rivians, especially now that the Tesla Cybertruck and Ford F-150 Lightning are competing directly with Rivian’s pickup truck.
The company’s hopes, in other words, rest on its next product line: the R2, which it will launch on March 7. We know almost nothing about the R2 line, except that it will probably include an SUV, that it will go on sale in 2026, and that it will fall somewhere in the $45,000 to $55,000 price range. (The median new car transaction in the United States now costs $48,200.) Last year, Scaringe told me that the R2’s timing was perfect because it would fit “beautifully with what we see as this big shift” in the American EV market. In today’s market, he said, “a lot of people ask themselves, Am I gonna get an electric car? Well maybe the next one.” He better hope they’ll start buying that next one in 2026.
Even if they do, Rivian may still have to confront the problem that Tesla has changed the EV market before Rivian could get there. When the first Tesla Model 3s were delivered in 2017, the sedan was instantly one of the best EVs on the market — because it was one of the only EVs on the market. Now every automaker in the world has plans to compete at the Model 3’s price point.
Rivian’s fortunes don’t rest entirely on American consumers; it also sells vans to commercial fleet operators, as well as delivery trucks to Amazon. (Amazon owns about 17% of Rivian.) But that business can be lumpy. Rivian’s vehicle growth slowed down last quarter, for instance, almost entirely because of a near pause in sales to Amazon, which sets up fewer new vehicles in the fourth quarter. If Amazon is willing to bail out Rivian, in other words, it’s not yet clear in the data.
None of this is to say that the company’s outlook is dire. Rivian was always going to find itself at a moment like this, when its expenses exceeded its revenue by such a large amount. The automaker already has devoted fans, and many people — myself included — are interested in the R2 as a potential first EV purchase.
And the company has shown that it can make strides in a single year. Twelve months ago, I had never seen a Rivian on the road before; today, one is regularly parked on my block. The company rocketed from a standing start to become the No. 5 best-selling electric car brand in America last year. What the company has done so far is impressive. But now it must prove that it can be great.
Editor's note: This story has been updated to correctly reflect Rivian's cash burn rate.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Trump’s new tariffs seem to make few exemptions for clean energy.
Is this how a new wave of inflation starts?
The international crude oil benchmark leapt to $100 a barrel on Thursday, its highest level since May. The surge came after the Iran-backed Houthi group in Yemen attacked two Saudi oil tankers in the Red Sea.
Those strikes pinched one of the remaining fossil-fuel export routes from the Arabian Peninsula, but they also revealed new constraints on President Trump’s Iran strategy. Throughout most of the spring, the president was able to keep a lid on oil prices by vowing to end the war that he started — and when he said he wanted a ceasefire, investors believed him. Now the White House is running out of options to end the conflict, and the president may be losing his ability to jawbone prices lower.
Now, these high prices haven’t quite hit in America yet. The U.S. oil benchmark, West Texas Intermediate, stands at $92, having increased 25% over the past month. But gasoline and diesel prices are rising fast. And in any case, Americans may be about to deal with a new one-time price hike from another source: tariffs.
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative announced a new array of global tariffs on Thursday afternoon; the government will start levying 10% to 12.5% taxes on most imports from more than 80 countries tonight. (By the Trump administration’s own reckoning, these countries supply 99.4% of America’s imports.) The new tariff regime, which is allegedly designed to withstand the Supreme Court’s scrutiny, has some crucial exemptions, including drugs, cars, phones, planes, semiconductors, and oil and natural gas.
But it will fall heavily on goods and exporters that supply electricity and clean energy inputs to the United States. I’d love to be wrong, but on my initial read, solar panels, lithium-ion batteries, inverters, motors, and other power equipment are all covered by these new tariffs (to name a few categories). These new taxes will stack on top of the existing anti-dumping tariffs that already apply to, say, Southeast Asia-made solar panels. You have to squint for silver lining here, but perhaps there’s an upside for manufacturers: These additional tariffs won’t apply to the “critical mineral” inputs that they rely on to make some of these technologies in the U.S. Most transformers also seem to be exempt because they’re already covered under an earlier tariff regime. Alas, many other goods that manufacturers do need — such as factory equipment — will face the new levies.
The United States economy is resilient; it looked through the spring’s run-up in oil prices as well as Trump’s earlier round of trade levies. (I’m half-convinced that tariffs are likely to outlive the Trump administration, no matter what happens in the next few months, because the federal government would otherwise be starved of revenue without them.) But as my colleague Matthew Zeitlin wrote last week, we know the U.S. energy system is already wheezing under current price levels. A new surge in oil prices, a price hike for renewable energy inputs, and a continued surge in electricity demand do not set us up for a beautiful macroeconomic outcome.
The company’s latest sustainability report, shared exclusively with Heatmap, shows that carbon intensity per kilometer traveled has dropped 81% since 2019.
Lime, the electric scooter and bike-sharing company that recently raised $174 million in its initial public offering, estimates that it replaced 38 million car trips across the globe last year. Even as it helped prevent substantial vehicle pollution, though, Lime racked up about 90,000 metric tons of carbon emissions tied to its own activities.
While that number pales in comparison to the tens of millions of tons of carbon that tech companies like Microsoft and Google emit, or the hundreds of millions of tons that traditional car companies like Ford report, the point stands: Even companies producing solutions to climate change have emissions to deal with.
For such a small player, Lime has made quite a bit of progress reducing its climate impact. Since 2019, when Lime first began tracking its carbon footprint, the number of kilometers traveled by Lime’s bikes and scooters each year has grown nearly 250%, while the carbon intensity of each kilometer has decreased by 81%. All in all, Lime has reduced its total reported emissions from direct and indirect sources by 35%. The company made much of that progress in just the past two years.
According to Lime’s latest sustainability report, shared exclusively with Heatmap, its biggest recent strides came from doing something that is generally considered to be pretty difficult: It decarbonized part of its supply chain.
Most of the emissions related to Lime’s business come from activities that are not within the company’s control. Its biggest source has always been the manufacture of the vehicles and batteries it uses, and more specifically from the manufacture of aluminum, which requires a huge amount of electricity to smelt.
Lime doesn’t manufacture its own vehicles, so it had to convince its partners to find and use lower-carbon metals and batteries. “One of the strategic advantages we have is that we design our own vehicles. We’re not buying them off the shelf,” Andrew Savage, Lime’s vice president of sustainability, told me. “So we don’t own the manufacturing, but we have a large amount of input and ability to work with suppliers to modify a supply chain.”
Savage said that a significant sourcing effort in 2024 paid off in 2025, when the company increased the amount of aluminum in its products that was made using renewable electricity and sourced more batteries made with renewable power. That combination of efforts cut the company’s total capital goods-related emissions in half compared to the previous year, and reduced the carbon intensity of each Lime vehicle by more than 25%. It also didn’t cost too much, Savage told me, adding that the expenditure was “marginal enough that it has made sense for us.”
Lime has also invested in its repair capabilities, which allows the company to keep its vehicles and parts in circulation much longer and avoid buying as many new ones. This has helped to keep emissions down even as its business has grown.
Another major source of emissions for Lime is shipping and logistics — again, a part of the business that is somewhat out of its hands. Lime hires third parties to pick up its bikes and scooters from major ports, transport them to regional hubs, and then distribute them to the markets where it operates. Initially, the vehicles were transported in trucks fueled by diesel. In 2024, Lime found partners that would be able to pick up its cargo at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach and bring them to its logistics hubs in electric drayage trucks.
The company made similar moves throughout its European business, transitioning most of its port-to-hub shipments to trucks running on a bio-based diesel fuel called HVO100, which is made from used cooking oil and other waste oils and estimated to reduce emissions by 89% compared to conventional diesel. This past year, Lime expanded its use of HVO100-fueled trucking partners to cover shipments from hubs to 16 cities.
The problem with HVO100, according to Nikita Pavlenko, the program director for fuels and aviation at the International Council on Clean Transportation, is that there will never be enough of it to fully decarbonize heavy duty trucking. “Particularly in Europe, where the transport sector is more reliant on diesel, it could never feasibly be met with waste oils entirely,” he told me. Purpose-grown crops like palm and soy could meet the increased demand for bio-based diesel, but that starts to come at the expense of land-use emissions and deforestation.
Savage was well aware of the limitations, and told me he views HVO100 as an interim solution. “We looked across Europe and somewhat shockingly found very few options on the electrification side,” he said. Even a country like Norway, which is famous for its adoption of electric vehicles, does not yet have much in the way of electric trucking and logistics, he said. “But it’s something that we absolutely expect to come in as part of our decarbonization roadmap.”
Interestingly, Lime reported that its upstream shipping and logistics emissions slightly increased in 2025 compared to 2024, although the company has cut this category in half overall since 2019. Lime attributed this to an increased use of expedited shipping for certain parts last year, but said its increased use of EVs and HVO100 helped mitigate the impacts.
Lime currently operates on five continents and in 230 cities. While it’s made some progress on low-carbon shipping within the EU and U.S., there’s still Australia, South America, and Asia to figure out. Looking ahead to next year, Savage said he wants to expand the number of markets and the amount of goods the company moves using lower-carbon vehicles. He also wants to augment the company’s repair practice.
“We view the work we’re doing on decarbonizing the business as going completely hand in hand with our mission and objective as a company,” Savage said. “It’s not a sideshow.”
A new 60-home pilot program aims to expand vehicle-to-grid charging.
When energy experts imagine the grid of the future, they often dream of millions of electric vehicles moonlighting as mobile power banks, using their hefty batteries to send electricity back to the grid when it needs a boost. But despite rapid EV adoption, this utopia has remained largely out of reach. Most vehicles don’t yet support bidirectional power flow, and most markets lack incentives for customers to feed power back to the grid in the first place.
That’s finally starting to change. While vehicle-to-grid — a.k.a. V2G — technology is still in its earliest innings, a new Massachusetts program announced on Thursday is working to make the technology something closer to commonplace. Funded by the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center, the state’s economic development agency, the initiative will install 60 bidirectional charging systems in participating residents’ homes.
The program has already begun enrolling its first participants, joining a small but growing group of V2G demonstrations across the country. But the field remains so nascent that even a 60-home project stands out. Kip Hack, who leads the distributed energy resource management company EnergyHub’s EV work, told me he very much considers it a “leading program for North America.”
The Massachusetts initiative brings together a wide variety of partners: utility companies Eversource and National Grid, EnergyHub, and technology partners Sunrun and The Mobility House, which each provide the software and device integrations needed to connect various EV models to the grid. Depending on their vehicle, eligible customers will enroll in the program through either Sunrun or The Mobility House, which will then connect them to their utility’s existing demand flexibility program, ConnectedSolutions. This decade-old initiative pays customers to reduce strain on the grid by leveraging smart thermostats, batteries, and other commercial and industrial energy systems. Now EVs will join the mix.
“They don’t actually care what the participating technology is. They only care about the output,” EnergyHub’s president, Seth Frader-Thompson told me, referring to ConnectedSolutions’ technology-agnostic design, which runs on EnergyHub’s software platform. That means the program can readily incorporate new distributed energy resources as they become available, simplifying the entire process in a way that many other regions have yet to figure out. “So when V2G technology was ready, nobody had to create a new program. You already had a program structure, an incentive structure, et cetera, that you could just have these vehicles participate in.”
Each distributed energy asset enrolled in the program can earn up to $275 per average kilowatt of grid support provided during the summer months. But customers don’t receive that payment directly from their utility. Rather Sunrun and The Mobility House set their own customer incentive structures based on that underlying $275 per kilowatt value.
Chip Silverman, Sunrun’s director of grid services and virtual power plants, told me that its customers will receive a fixed payment simply for signing up, just as the company’s stationary battery storage customers do. That gets new participants in the door — they can then earn additional performance incentives if they actually discharge power back to the grid during a demand response event. “We want to incentivize people to plug in 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weeknights because we want to get you to try to hit the peak events whenever possible,” Silverman told me.
The pool of qualifying vehicles remains quite limited, however. Sunrun’s system only supports the Ford F-150 Lightning, while The Mobility House’s software integrates with chargers compatible with the Kia EV9, Volvo XC90, Polestar 3, and several Nissan Leaf models. Teslas with V2G capability — which today means just the Cybertruck — are not eligible. That’s because while every other vehicle in this program places the requisite DC to AC power converter within the wall charger, Tesla installs this hardware in the car itself. While that will likely prove to be a smarter, cheaper long-term approach, for now it doesn’t align with how utilities certify and approve grid-connected equipment.
Yet even at this early stage, with limited scale and narrow eligibility requirements, Massachusetts’ early adopters are already demonstrating the technology’s value. “It has been quite hot, unseasonably hot in New England these last several weeks,” Hack told me, explaining that participants’ EV batteries have already been tapped to discharge power “more than once” since enrollment began earlier this month.
The potential for far greater impact is enormous. “The size of the battery in the car is remarkable,” Frader-Thompson told me. While a typical home battery stores around 10 to 15 kilowatt-hours of energy, an EV battery can hold on the order of 70 to 100 kilowatt-hours. “So if the vehicle is plugged in, it essentially has the ability to export the equivalent of an entire residential battery every hour during an event,” he explained.
To truly turn V2G from a promising concept into a reliable grid resource, however, utilities and grid operators will need much more data on when these batteries are available and how much power EV owners are actually willing to provide. By the end of this summer, Massachusetts’ latest experiment could offer some of the first real-world answers.