Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Podcast

How BYD Got So Big

Rob and Jesse talk with Chinese auto market expert Michael Dunne.

A BYD car.
Heatmap Illustration/BYD

In just the past few years, Chinese EV-maker BYD has become the most important car company most Americans have still never heard of. It is China’s biggest private employer, the world’s third most valuable automaker (after Tesla and Toyota), and it’s capable of producing more than 5 million cars a year. It’s also just one of dozens of innovative new Chinese auto companies that are set to transform the global mobility market — regardless of what happens with Trump’s tariffs.

On this week’s episode of Shift Key, Jesse and Rob talk with Michael Dunne, the founder of Dunne Insights and a longtime observer of the Chinese automotive sector. Dunne was president of GM Indonesia from 2013 and 2015, and was once managing director of JD Power and Associates’ China division. We talk about the deep history of BYD, the five non-BYD Chinese car companies you should know, and how Western automakers could (with difficulty and a lot of policy help) eventually catch up.

Shift Key is hosted by Jesse Jenkins, a professor of energy systems engineering at Princeton University, and Robinson Meyer, Heatmap’s executive editor.

Subscribe to “Shift Key” and find this episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon, or wherever you get your podcasts.

You can also add the show’s RSS feed to your podcast app to follow us directly.

Here is an excerpt from our conversation:

Jesse Jenkins: Is the answer tariffs? I’ll put that out there. I mean, that has been part of the answer for Europe — and in a maybe a bit more targeted way, to some degree, even for the Biden administration — but now, of course, for the Trump administration, is the central feature of competitiveness policy. Will that work? Or what are the downsides or pros and cons there?

Michael Dunne: This may sound counterintuitive and maybe even un-American, but yes, I do believe we need tariffs for the short term to buy ourselves some time. But that’s not the end of the story. We also have to get our act together in regards to innovation investment, scaling at home. So that’s the harder part. Tariffs are almost easier now.

One other thing that is worth mentioning, for sure: When I lived in China, started there in 1990. When I got there, I went to a plant called Beijing Jeep, China’s first joint venture, met the plant manager. I said, Hey, what are you doing here? Yeah, we’re importing parts from the Ohio Jeep Cherokee plant we’re putting them together here in China, and we’re distributing.

Ooh, gosh. Well, when are you going to have your own car? That’ll be about 10 years from now, he said. So that’s kind of where we are — we’re like 10 years behind them in electrics. They were 10 years behind us. So I said, How do you feel about the fact that you’re importing these parts from the U.S. and you won’t be ready for 10 more years? And he said, well, it doesn’t feel good at all, but we’ll get there.

Then shortly after that meeting, the Chinese government came out and said, how are we gonna get there? Number one, we have 100% tariffs on imports. We don’t want imports. If you want to sell into our market, you must manufacture here and you must form joint ventures. And the Chinese partner must have 50% of that joint venture. Those are some serious terms of engagement.

And so people who say, oh, tariffs are for losers, and they don’t work. Actually, if you look around at China, at Japan, at Korea, imports as a share of their markets are all under 10%. So hang on. Did we not get the memo here in America?

Music for Shift Key is by Adam Kromelow.

Blue

You’re out of free articles.

Subscribe to access Heatmap's exclusive climate and energy polling, award-winning journalism, and subscriber-only events. Save $57 on an annual subscription, just $156 $99/year.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Q&A

How to Channel Voters’ Anxieties About Data Centers

A conversation with the Guardrails Alliance’s Shaunna Thomas.

The Q&A subject.
Heatmap Illustration

This week’s Q&A is with Shaunna Thomas of the Democrat-allied super PAC Guardrails Alliance, which describes itself as “not anti-technology” but supportive of AI “rules, accountability, and a government that actually represents the public.” Part of that AI accountability they’re calling for is on data centers.

After the midterms, Guardrails Alliance sent a memorandum to all House and Senate Democratic offices arguing for AI and data center accountability to be a key part of their message and plans heading into the new Congress. Described as a “playbook for how to understand and channel anxieties about AI and data centers,” the document laid out “key narratives” that they said voters who care about these issues want to see reflected and echoed by their politics. They said the push against data centers could help Democrats build more lasting political power.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Hotspots

Consider the Lobstermen Affected by New York’s Empire Wind

Plus more of the week’s biggest development fights.

The United States.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

1. New York City — We have a new must-watch offshore wind lawsuit with potential implications for the entire sector — and this time, it’s from lobstermen seeking damages.

  • In late October, a family of lobstermen sued Equinor in federal court claiming the company’s compensatory mitigation program is failing to adequately make up for alleged negative impacts to lobster fishing grounds in the New York Bight. According to the lawsuit, the wind project irreparably hurt fishing in previously trafficked waters. The suit also claims that Empire Wind construction destroyed lobster fishing pots and seeks at least $75,000 in damages as well as punitive damages and attorneys’ fees.
  • The lawsuit is the first I have seen involving someone in aquaculture suing for damages over negative impacts of an already-constructed wind project, and it carries outsized implications as the Trump administration remands without vacatur the construction and operations plans for other offshore wind farms. This case is far from being decided, but that doesn’t matter: It is precisely the kind of complaint that Trump officials are likely to consider as they mull revisions to operational plans.
  • An Equinor spokesman declined to comment on the case, telling me they don’t speak on pending litigation.

2. Hinds County, Mississippi — The largest proposed solar farm in Mississippi is moving forward after an appeals court rejected arguments from aggrieved local residents that it had been improperly approved.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Spotlight

Data Center Developers Can’t Pay People Enough to Accept Them

Trump’s “data center dividend” appears to have backfired. Our latest poll results help explain why.

Donald Trump and data center protesters.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

This year’s midterm elections called into question the efficacy of a push to pay local residents directly in exchange for building data centers.

Before the elections, I profiled the campaign for politicians to embrace the data center “dividend,” a policy idea modeled off Alaska’s Permanent Fund, which doles out checks to residents from profits off state oil, gas and mineral royalties. The Bitcoin Policy Institute, a tech policy think tank, was one of the first to trumpet the concept, but it was quickly taken up by President Donald Trump, who started raising it in speeches and on social media. “If companies want to make their Data Centers popular, pay the community, and/or individuals within the community, a ‘dividend,’” Trump posted to Truth Social on October 21.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow