Green Car Congress  
Go to GCC Discussions forum About GCC Contact  RSS Subscribe Twitter headlines

« AAA study suggests that lack of experience with advanced systems could put motorists at risk | Main | Kalmar supplying 8 electric RTGs to Turkish port »

Print this post

FAW Group outlines aggressive China EV strategy; targeting 15% EV market share in 6 years

3 May 2014

During the recent Beijing motor show last, FAW Group outlined its new energy vehicle strategic plan. By 2020 the automaker intends to have 6 new energy vehicle platforms and 16 vehicle models with mass market capability. FAW plans to take a 15% market share in the EV segment.

FAW also launched 4 new EVs at Auto Beijing 2014: Besturn B50-PHEV, Besturn B50-EV, VITA-EV and Oley-EV. The PHEV can reduce fuel consumption by more than 60% compared to a conventional vehicle, FAW said, while the range of the EV models is between 150-200 km (93-124 miles).

The EVs can be fully charged in 6 hours, or in 30 minutes with fast charging. The price range of the 4 new EVs is from 219,800 to 258,800 yuan (US$35,000 to $41,000).

In an interview with the South China Morning Post, Dai Dali, general manager of FAW’s new energy vehicle unit said that the company hopes to sell several thousand electric vehicles by next year, especially in the most polluted cities.

We will first target cities that are under the greatest pressure to cut air pollution, particularly those that have set limits on new [non-electric] car licences.

—Dai Dali

FAW has made about 300 EVs so far on a trial basis.

May 3, 2014 in Brief | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c4fbe53ef01a3fd001433970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference FAW Group outlines aggressive China EV strategy; targeting 15% EV market share in 6 years:

Comments

If China makes this goal, they will be the World leader in EVs. The U.S. is fast becoming an "also ran" in technology because the Congress is dysfunctional; they don't vote based on what is best for the American people; their votes are based on what is best for themselves.

We have an Oligarchy running the country made up of Big Business, Lobbyists, and bribed Politicians and they are gaining more power each day. There is little money for R and D because the country's money is in the hands of Big Business and they are keeping it in the banks.

Well said Lad.

Oligarchy, Moneycracy or Monopoly; all fit the current game. By printing more and more green backs every month, Monopoly may eventually win with a unique wealthy winner with $30+T, equivalent to the National Total Debt contacted in the name of the 317,999,999 other citizens.

To backtrack from Monopoly to Oligarchy and then to the original real Democracy may require another 1929 style extended Depression and a new Constitution by and for the People. Some of the $65T hidden in Tax Heavens could be returned to the Central Bank to pay off the National debt etc.

Which is the best way to reduce urban pollution.

a: Promote Hybrids and EVs, or

b: Actively remove the worst vehicles (old buses, etc).

I would suggest b is the better way as one bad vehicle can cause as much pollution as 100 clean ones.

Then you have the problem of what to do with the people who used to drive the really bad vehicles - they are probably self employed or small businesses, who will go bankrupt if you stop them driving. They have to be helped in some way to buy a replacement low pollution vehicle.

After you get the really bad ones off the road, you bring in emissions testing for the rest of the fleet and increase the standards over the years.

Enabling a few wealthy people to replace fairly new cars with EVs is a very expensive (and ineffective) way to reduce pollution.

Also, stop burning coal near towns, and/or add scrubbers to power stations. There are only hundreds of those, there are millions of cars.

+ get people onto subways and buses or bikes - there isn't enough space for all the urban Chinese to use cars to commute to work.

E-bikes would work very well - the Chinese used to cycle p-bikes and they are said to have 120M e-bikes, so just keep that going - but establish ways of disposing of batteries.

@Lad,
Even under oligarchy or even monarchy, the economy, environment, and the well-being of the country can be improved if the best interests of the oligarch can be aligned with the best interests of the nation and the environment.
Christianity flourished far and wide throughout Europe when the emperors of Rome were converted to Christianity instead of them persecuting Christians like before!
Likewise, once the USA's Oligarch are convinced of the necessity to declare WAR on GLOBAL WARMING, this will unleash the gigantic USA's defense budget toward the development of Green Energy. The US defense budget is twice larger than that of Russia and China COMBINED, and US defense budget is even larger than the defense budgets of the rest of the WORLD COMBINED. Is the US planning to be at war with the rest of the World?

@Mahonj,
At ~$30-35,000 USD sticker price of a typical PHEV, the overall cost of PHEV's is competitive with a comparable ICEV because of much lower fuel cost and maintenance cost and depreciation cost. As such, we should go straight to PHEV's instead of just removing the worst vehicles off the road and replacing them with new ICEV's, which will age and will produce the same pollution problem.

Old ICEV should be mandated to maintain their emission system or else pay hefty fines, while generously subsidizing owners of old and polluting ICEV's with money to buy new PHEV's. The carrot and stick approach.

mahonj: best post so far this month. Exceptionally rational, especially in a centrally-controlled economy like China's. If China could relocate 2M people and build dozens of new cities as they did for the Three Gorges, they could quite easily execute your proposal. Moreover many of the vehicle replacements would be for small business assets (old, 2-cycle tricycle delivery trucks) would be very much populist actions.

The biggest transportation-based pollution sources are from old, poor-performing idling engines. These will not be replaced by a shining fleet of upper-class plug-ins.

In our modern Democracies, profit margins are the highest of all priorities.

As long as CPPs and NGPPs can produce electricity at lower cost than Solar, Wind, Hydro and Nuke they will continue to be used, regardless of the pollution created.

The recent switch from CPPs to NGPPs reduce GHG by about 25% while Solar-Wind-Hydro-Nuke reduce GHG by close to 100%.

The same logic applies to BEVs, FCEVs, PHEVs and HEVs versus lower cost ICEVs.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Green Car Congress © 2013 BioAge Group, LLC. All Rights Reserved. | Home | BioAge Group