You’re out of free articles.
This Halloween, get 20% off using code ADVANCED
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:
Who needs new models when you have chargers and price cuts?

“It doesn't matter if you win by an inch or a mile. Winning's winning.”
I’m reluctant to call Vin Diesel’s Dominic Toretto one of the great philosophers of our time, but his line in the inaugural Fast & Furious movie is as true about street racing as it is about anything else. And in the current electric vehicle sales race, Tesla is the clear winner in mid-2023—this, despite an aging lineup of vehicles, tactics that make the rest of the car business nervous and a dependence on non-car products to entice buyers.
Things could’ve gone very differently this year. I certainly thought so about six months ago. This was supposed to be the year that Tesla’s slew of increasingly dated cars faced real, direct competition for the first time ever; when its CEO’s objectively disastrous foray into social media ownership took attention away from his core business; and when most other car companies got truly serious about creating a future without gasoline.
But now that we have insight into what EVs people bought — or didn’t buy — in the first and second quarters of this year, the numbers tell a different story. Tesla is still the clear leader in EV sales, moving almost half a million cars globally in just the past three months. The Model Y is the best-selling car in the world. The rest of the competition that was supposed to show up and eat Elon Musk’s lunch? Not even remotely close.
According to data from Automotive News, the rest of the EV landscape looks sad by comparison. After the Model Y and Model 3, the bronze medal finish went to the Chevrolet Bolt — an EV that’s generally excellent and affordable but outdated and soon to be discontinued. (By the way, Tesla sold almost six times as many Model Ys as Chevy sold Bolts.)
Right below the Bolt, there’s the expensive and also aging Model S, followed by the Volkswagen ID.4, finally hitting its stride somewhat due to EV tax incentives. After that, the Ford Mustang Mach-E, which has had a slew of production problems this year; then the Hyundai Ioniq 5, a superb EV but one that does not qualify for any tax breaks unless it’s leased; and then Tesla’s own Model X, also long in the tooth.
Keep in mind that the freshest product in Tesla’s lineup these days is the Model Y, which went on sale in 2020, followed by the Model 3, which is now six years old — at the point when another car company would replace it with an entirely new model. The point is, the hottest-selling EVs in the world aren’t fresh, new products at all. (And to be fair, Tesla’s had its own share of headaches with the Cybertruck, which has been pushed back so much it’s starting to feel like the Half-Life 3 of cars.)
Finally, questions are arising about EV demand in general. Monday morning, Axios reported on “the growing mismatch between EV supply and demand,” meaning that while EV sales are steadily climbing and making up more and more of the U.S. market, those sales aren’t matching what car companies are actually building and putting up for sale. In fact, the time EVs spend sitting on dealer lots — a measurement of demand for a car, traditionally — is now nearly double the industry average, Axios reports. In other words, they’re sitting there, unpurchased, about twice as long as gasoline cars.
That’s disheartening news for the climate, especially given how palpably horrific the heat and weather events have been this summer. The world cannot wait for people to switch to electrified and lower-emission vehicles. But there are a lot of reasons this is happening, and the biggest factor is still cost.
With rising interest rates, an uncertain economy ahead and the average EV still costing almost $60,000 — which actually went up this year despite Tesla’s price cuts and all the new cars on the road — can you really blame buyers for sitting this out until things get cheaper?
Simply put, Tesla is offering the best deals right now. As old as the Model 3 and Model Y are, they’re still fun to drive, high-range EVs boasting the best charging network in the business (we’ll get to that in a bit.) They’re also still cutting-edge in most ways that count for EV newcomers; they just don’t look new and are beginning to lack key features offered by many new competitors like bidirectional charging or more predictable automated driving assistance.
This year, Tesla has dramatically slashed their prices and positioned them to take advantage of the full EV tax credits when other car companies cannot. Tesla’s lead remains a solid one in 2023; it has the experience, production capacity, and scale to slash prices on these cars while remaining profitable. Other automakers are sweating their ability to make money on EVs at all right now.
Generally, car companies are wary of slashing prices too much or relying too heavily on discounts. They tend to water down a brand’s image while cutting into profit margins, and the auto industry is very much a business of margins. Now, Tesla has taken a hit to its gross profit margins amid these price cuts, but it’s still doing well and Musk doesn’t seem to care. In the meantime, more than likely, a person’s first EV will be a Tesla.
And then there’s America’s new EV tax credit scheme, which may actually be backfiring to some degree right now.
In short, to get the full $7,500 tax credit on an EV, a car and its batteries must be now made in North America. On a long enough timeline that will help build a robust electric car and battery manufacturing infrastructure here, so that both aren’t dependent on China — exactly the goal of the law. The problem is, local battery factories alone will take years to set up; it’s going to be a long time before the majority of EVs Americans can buy meet both qualifications.
At the beginning of this year, EV demand seemed to be booming because those “buy local” rules hadn’t taken effect yet. Now, a bunch of automakers, including BMW, Volvo, and Hyundai, are left out of the credits because their EVs aren’t made here yet. While well-intentioned, the stringent rules of the tax credit scheme run the risk of dampening EV demand and killing the momentum the car industry had in January.
Finally, car companies now seem to be struggling to reconcile their big environmental promises — you know, vowing to go all-electric by 2035 — with the cold, hard realities of public-company capitalism.
Take General Motors, for example. While it’s made that all-electric commitment, its promised EV lineup has barely materialized yet; the Bolt is the best representation of this promise and it’s on the way out. The Cadillac Lyriq? MIA. The other EVs? Delayed. And the GMC Hummer EV is so environmentally unfriendly, they may as well have just given it a V8 engine. Speaking of, GM has said it’s committed to making gasoline heavy-duty trucks and SUVs for a long time to come; they’re far too profitable to phase out, planet be damned.
Or take the Volkswagen Group, the original “pivot to EVs” automaker in penance for its diesel-cheating sins. It’s dealt with a ton of delays, production problems, and software issues, and it too is reluctant to phase out its most profitable ICE vehicles. And both companies are due to have massive fights with their labor unions over EVs and jobs soon enough.
Essentially, pivoting to EVs is hard. It’s not just about making battery-powered cars. Automakers must retool how cars are designed, built, and sold while focusing on software and revamping their entire supply chains. Deep down, most auto executives would probably rather not do this. It will be an expensive, messy, and complicated process that runs counter to just making shareholders happy each quarter with the status quo until you comfortably retire.
And Tesla’s most powerful weapon keeps proving to be its charging network. There’s perhaps no greater signifier of car companies’ EV trepidation than their willingness to say “You know what? You deal with this” while handing the charging keys to Tesla. GM, Ford, Volvo, Rivian, Volvo, and now Mercedes-Benz have all said they’ll switch to Tesla’s charging standard in North America, giving EV buyers access to that network in the coming years. Perhaps that will drive up EV purchases and make buyers consider things that aren’t Teslas. I think that it probably will.
But in doing so, Tesla will reap significant income in public funding for EV charging stations made possible by the 2021 infrastructure law. It’s unclear whether doing that — and getting revenue from the charging itself — will outweigh potential lost future sales to Mercedes or Volvo or whoever, but one thing seems clear: the biggest winner of the Biden-era tax incentives so far is Tesla.
Short of dramatic price cuts — which are unlikely to happen because these things are so unprofitable as-is — or radically new cheaper battery technologies, it feels unlikely that Tesla will lose the lead in the electric drag race this year or anytime soon.
Who cares if it’s winning on price cuts and its charging network? Ask Dom; a win’s a win.
This Halloween, get 20% off using code ADVANCED
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Ford reveals a promising tidbit about its upcoming electric pickup.
When the Ford Fathom debuts in 2027, much of the attention will focus on its size and its price. As it should: The all-electric mid-size truck is promised to start under $30,000, and the success or failure of that car at that price will tell us a lot about the future of Ford, as well as mainstream America’s true appetite for EVs.
While we wait for our first real look at the truck and the full list of its specifications, Ford just revealed a promising tidbit. The automaker has been working in the background to make it simpler and cheaper for Fathom drivers to use bidirectional charging: the ability for power to flow both ways so that EV drivers can use the energy stored in the vehicle battery to power secondary loads, to back up a home power supply during a blackout, or even to feed back onto the power grid.
Specifically, Ford announced on Tuesday that the Fathom will be the first EV from a U.S. automaker with a starting price below $30,000 that does not need a separate wall-mounted inverter — the piece needed to transform the DC power stored in the car’s battery to the AC power used in the house. Instead, engineers built one into the truck’s “e-box” module that houses much of its electronics. That on-board unit is good enough to supply more than 10 kW of AC power to a home, Ford says.
Bidirectional charging isn’t new to American EVs or to Ford. The F-150 Lightning EV got this feature when it debuted five years ago. The trouble is that this game-changing technology doesn’t come cheap: The Lightning — now discontinued, soon to be revived as an extended-range EV — was an expensive ride starting above $50,000. The electrical hardware needed to connect the truck to one’s home power supply added thousands of dollars on top of the truck’s price.
The same was true for other EV makers. Two years ago, when I interviewed EV pickup drivers after Hurricane Helene hit North Carolina, I found F-150 Lightning and Tesla Cybertruck owners alike who hadn’t forked over more money for the extra tech needed to hook directly into the home. They got themselves through the blackout the Macgyver way, plugging the refrigerator and other critical appliances right into the power outlets in the back of the truck.
Ford’s Fathom, though, comes closer to giving the best of bidirectional charging to the masses. In addition to installing an on-board inverter, Ford says it will make the Ford Home Power Station and Home Backup Panel — the hardware that drivers will need to connect to the house — cost at least 60% less than the brand’s first-generation tech. The Detroit giant also says it’s working with a consortium of utilities, including American Electric Power, BC Hydro, Consumers Energy, Exelon, and Pacific Gas and Electric Co., to iron out how Fathom owners across the country will connect to their homes and the grid.
As Ford notes in its release: “There are more than 3,000 utilities across the U.S. and Canada with largely unique interconnection processes. Interconnection processes were primarily written for rooftop solar and stationary battery storage, which are fixed assets. Bidirectional EVs bring new considerations since they are vehicles first, not stationary equipment.”
Indeed, cooperation between car companies and utilities is suddenly a pressing matter as more EVs hit the roads, and the grid. Rivian and other electric car makers are trying to make their vehicles play nice with the power grid as a way for their customers to save money and reduce grid strain by having EVs charge when demand is low and electricity is cheap. And at some point, electric cars will become a major cog in virtual power plants — the ability of the power grid to pull energy from sources like EVs, backup batteries, and homeowner solar in times of need.
That day is finally approaching. Although bidirectional charging is a striking bonus feature for EVs, something so much more interesting and sophisticated than what a fossil fuel car can accomplish, the tech has flown fairly under the radar in the U.S. One could blame not only the lagging pace of EV adoption here, but also the fact that Tesla, far and away the market leader, has been slow to get on board. Just this month, it finally said that Model Y and Model 3 vehicles, the two best-selling electric cars in America, would get bidirectional capability.
The Ford Fathom, then, may do more than revitalize the lagging fortunes of Ford, which lost billions upon billions in its first forays into electrification and started up a skunkworks team to design the new truck in a totally different way. Their creation might also show Americans the EV’s enormous role in the home, and the grid, of tomorrow.
Current conditions: Tropical Storm Olana is headed for Hawaii with yet more flooding and powerful winds as the state continues to recover from previous storms • Tropical Cyclone Arnab is strengthening into a “severe” storm as it approaches the northern coast of India’s Andhra Pradesh state near the port city of Visakhapatnam • In-fa has become a typhoon, en route by the end of this week to the Northern Mariana Islands, the U.S. territory that took the brunt of this month’s Super Typhoon Champi.
Call it Anthropic’s magnum Opus 5.5. The Claude maker filed its public paperwork Monday ahead of its planned stock market debut. Aside from the basic details of how the company makes money and what risks its technology may pose to humanity itself, Anthropic mentions the word “energy” at least 14 times in the section of the document outlining the risks to its business. “Climate” and “climate change” are mentioned just four times. The overarching concern, per my colleague Matthew Zeitlin’s rundown of the S-1 filing, is that the company “might not get enough power for data centers running its large language models,” and that “the pace of the energy infrastructure build-out “is generally behind the need.
Brazil’s national oil company, meanwhile, had a brutal day of trading on the stock market following left-wing Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s surprise surge to reelection in Sunday’s runoff. Shares of Petrobras plunged 14% on the New York Stock Exchange by the time trading ended Monday evening. While conservative candidate Flávio Bolsonaro had promised more privatization and fewer environmental regulations, Lula has ramped up drilling, particularly offshore, as he seeks to capitalize on South America’s oil boom.

EQT Corporation bills itself as “America’s only large-scale, vertically integrated natural gas producer.” Soon it will also be the largest gas company in the nation. On Monday, the company announced plans to acquire Range Resources Corporation in a deal to create a North American gas giant worth more than $50 billion. The all-stock transaction would also establish the biggest gas producer in the U.S. by output. Combined, EQT and Range pump out 9 billion cubic feet of natural gas equivalent per day. The next largest shale gas producer in the U.S. is Expand Energy, at 7.5 billion cubic feet per day. The merged company would also command a network of pipelines and other midstream infrastructure that tops 3,700 miles. “This transaction brings together two of the highest-quality, longest-duration asset bases in North America and creates a company uniquely positioned for the next era of natural gas,” EQT CEO Toby Z. Rice said in a statement. “We believe this combination creates a must-own energy company capable of generating durable, through-cycle free cash flow while compounding value for shareholders for decades to come.”
The deal is a sign “U.S. gas consolidation is accelerating,” Salih Yilmaz, a senior oil analyst at the consultancy Bloomberg Intelligence, wrote in a post on X. “The bigger theme is consolidation: scale, concentration, and infrastructure control are becoming increasingly important in US gas, especially as LNG exports and power demand grow.”
U.S. orders for wind turbines vaulted to 2.8 gigawatts in the second quarter of this year — the highest since the end of 2023 — as developers scrambled to meet the deadlines to qualify for expiring tax credits, according to a new market analysis by the consultancy Wood Mackenzie. New Mexico saw the biggest surge as the SunZia megaproject, the largest wind farm ever built in the U.S., came online, raising the state to the top of the list of capacity additions. Despite the Trump administration’s efforts to kill or slow walk permits for wind projects, the industry is on track to add 39 gigawatts of new onshore wind farms by 2030. More than half the projects set to come online over the next two years are already under construction, meaning there’s little risk of disruption. Offshore wind, by contrast, tops out at 5 gigawatts, all of which is on course to be delivered in the next two years. “Policy is the variable with the greatest impact on wind installations,” Wood Mackenzie analyst Tyler Gifford said in a statement. “With tax credit expirations on the horizon, developers are prioritizing projects that can be operational by 2030, so the five-year onshore wind installation outlook remains stable.”
On the other side of the Atlantic, exports of wind turbines are booming. While Europe is still debating how to deal with the sudden rise of China’s wind companies, as I told you last week, the European Union's exports of wind turbines spiked by nearly 11% to $3.4 billion last year, Renewables Now reported.
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:
The climate movement, as virtually anyone involved will tell you, is broken. Even those who are part of it want to stop talking about “climate change,” according to the results of this year’s Heatmap Insiders Survey. Clean Air Task Force, one of the more pragmatic groups in the policy arena fighting for clean energy, is out with a new memo detailing the strategy it plans to use through the end of the decade. Dubbed CATF Forward, the plan is “designed to drive the global adoption of climate solutions, orienting around three clear impact priorities and rooted in the attributes that have made” the group “uniquely effective” since its launch 30 years ago. “The world’s increasingly complex climate and energy challenges require sober thinking and sharper focus,” Armond Cohen, CATF’s founder and executive director, said in a statement. “How do we protect climate in a world turned upside down?”
His answer:
All of that seems fairly straightforward. But the document is defined as much by what it omits as what it includes. Amid a growing debate over whether climate activists should keep targeting fossil fuel infrastructure, which my colleague Robinson Meyer aired out nicely on a recent episode of our podcast Shift Key, CATF isn’t pushing for boycotts of fossil fuels or, you know, committing crimes in the name of saving the planet.
India’s solar factories have boomed in recent years as the world’s most populous country turns to photovoltaics to meet surging domestic electricity demand and supply overseas buyers looking for alternatives to China. But the subcontinent has struggled to take on China’s dominance of the solar supply chain’s upstream elements. On Monday, Noida-based Jakson Solar announced plans to invest over $525 million into manufacturing solar cells, ingots, and wafers. The company plans to commission a 3-gigawatt cell factory by the end of next year, managing director Ivan Saha told Reuters on the sideline of a conference. The company then plans to stand up a 3-gigawatt ingot and wafer plant by the third quarter of 2028. That will all feed into Jakson’s existing 1.2-gigawatt module-making factory.
Indonesia and Malaysia have launched more than 100 cloud-seeding missions this year in an attempt to engineer rain to quench parched lands as El Niño worsens droughts. The worst wildfire season in decades has shrouded the region in devastating toxic smog. But the high cost of the effort, including using dry ice to break up warm air that traps smog on the ground, “have so far brought little in the way of lasting results,” Bloomberg reported. “Sometimes, there’s a lot of political pressure to do things that may not be really well-founded scientifically,” Steven Siems, a professor at Monash University in Melbourne and the co-chair of an expert team on weather modification at the World Meteorological Organization, told the newswire.
It’s amazing what you can do with a repurposed car engine.
Venture capitalists love a system that fits inside a shipping container. But that kind of modularity has been hard to pull off in the low-carbon fuels industry, where producers have generally remained yoked to the prevailing wisdom of economies of scale as the key to profitability. That’s led to enormous, capital-intensive facilities packed with complex, custom-built machinery churning out fuels and chemicals like hydrogen, methane, and ammonia.
But Massachusetts-based startup Emvolon thinks it can upend this model with its compact, prefabricated chemical plants powered by the likes of repurposed car engines. Its modular systems convert methane captured from landfills and other sources into energy-dense liquid methanol on-site, making it easier to transport to customers. On Tuesday, the company announced $22 million in new funding — an undisclosed mix of Series A equity and non-dilutive federal and state grants — to build its first commercial-scale system at a landfill near Houston, in partnership with biogas company Montauk Renewables.
The approach aims to solve a persistent logistics problem. Economics dictate that commodity producers typically locate near a high-volume source of feedstock or a pipeline that can deliver it. But for captured methane — a potential feedstock for lower-carbon fuels, chemicals, and fertilizers — that’s often not an option. The potent greenhouse gas escapes from geographically dispersed landfills, farms, and wastewater treatment plants, many of which are too small to support a large gas-to-liquids facility and too far from existing pipelines. Trucking the gas to a centralized plant is generally prohibitively expensive, often leaving operators to either flare it or let it escape unabated.
“We are really kind of burning money, creating a lot of emissions when we could be capturing this and making high-value products,” Emmanuel Kasseris, Emvolon’s CEO, told me in an August conversation about the company’s technology, which it spun out of MIT.
“We really try to flip the script completely,” Kasseris said of the startup’s modular approach. Rather than one large facility, the company aims to produce “a few tons to maybe tens of tons per day” of methanol for the $40 billion global market. For comparison, conventional gas-to-liquid facilities can produce hundreds of times more product daily.
Emvolon’s technology is “engine agnostic,” running on repurposed engines from used cars and diesel generators as well as new builds modified for the startup’s purposes. The engines take in captured methane from landfills, farms, or gas-flaring sites. But instead of burning the fuel completely like a standard combustion engine, Emvolon limits the oxygen supply, triggering only partial combustion of the methane to produce a mixture of hydrogen and carbon monoxide known as syngas. The company then feeds that mixture into a conventional reactor, where a catalyst converts it into liquid methanol that can be shipped in standard tanker trucks.
The process requires relatively few modifications to standard internal combustion engines, Kasseris told me, thereby bringing the economics of mass production to small-scale chemical production. “You’re taking something that comes from an assembly line, you repurpose it — changing sensors, controls, simple things that require a lot of [intellectual property] but are not expensive — and you build the plant around it,” he explained. The goal is to offer customers a four-year payback period sans low-carbon fuel subsidies.
Emvolon is now attempting to push that logic a step further. For the second stage of the conversion process, the company is working to swap out its conventional reactor with another modified engine in order to “replace even more one-off process equipment” with mass-produced components. The Department of Energy’s Advanced Research Projects Agency–Energy awarded Emvolon a $2.3 million grant to develop this part of its system.
But the startup doesn’t need to have this additional piece of technology dialed in to start securing customers. In August, global commodities merchant Freepoint Commodities signed on as the startup’s primary buyer, securing priority rights to purchase at least $450 million worth of Emvolon’s biomethanol for use across maritime shipping, aviation, heavy transport, and specialty chemicals. The agreement also gives Freepoint priority rights to invest in or lend to future Emvolon projects, a provision Kasseris described as the anchor for the startup’s project financing platform.
The company’s first commercial projects are designed to produce up to 50,000 metric tons of biomethanol annually across multiple sites, with the Freepoint agreement structured to scale that output to 300,000 metric tons per year. Because each plant should cost only “a few million dollars,” Kasseris said, the company can spread out its risk rather than bet on “the half a billion dollar e-fuels plant” common to the alternative fuels industry. If one plant runs into trouble, the setback should be manageable, and the company can keep churning out and deploying its modular units elsewhere.
“This is great for scaling,” Kasseris told me. “It’s just very different. It’s just more boxes.”