Connect with us

Published

on

In this article

Jeff Greenberg | Universal Images Group | Getty Images

The economics of the rental car industry give companies including Avis Budget Group and Enterprise Holdings multiple reasons to go slow on the adoption of electric vehicles. Just think of how much money they make every time a renter forgets to return a car with a full gas tank. But on Monday, the rental car companies received the biggest reason yet to move quicker to EVs as part of their fleets. The deal between Hertz and Tesla for 100,000 vehicles is a signal to the major car rental companies that a strategy for EVs is going to be needed, and maybe sooner than they had planned on it.

It was not a surprise to auto industry analyst John Healy of Northcoast Research that Hertz is the first among the small group of major rental car companies to place a big bet on EVs. After an era of industry consolidation, the three companies represent as much as 95% of the car rental agencies at an airport terminal: Enterprise owns Alamo and National; Hertz owns Dollar and Thrifty; Avis combined with Budget. But it’s only Hertz that has offered EVs in any significant way to date, and its focus was limited to the niche market of luxury renters using its premium services such as Ultimate Choice.

“There hasn’t been a lot going on in electric,” said Healy.

That “ultimate” vehicle category offered consumers access to high-end electric cars from Porsche and Tesla, among others, but the numbers were at the level of a “few hundred” in the fleet versus the 100,000 Teslas in the Hertz deal. “They were trying to make money renting cars, not meet this niche,” Healy said of the main competitors. Hertz saw the affluent renter combined with an EV “intrigue” factor as enough of a reason to experiment on the margins of the business, “but nothing more than that,” Healy said.

Enterprise and Avis Budget did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

If demand hasn’t been there yet to justify a major spend on an EV fleet, the Hertz deal may be the signal that the time has come. But there are big economic hurdles for the rental car industry to overcome that are related to hesitation about EVs to date.

As Hertz prepares to re-IPO after restructuring under private equity investors and with former Ford CEO Mark Fields in as interim-CEO, the Tesla headline gives it another way to differentiate itself in a consolidated rental car space. But ultimately EV fleets are an issue the major rental car companies are all going to need to work through as part of sustainability commitments and new economic thinking.

Dan Ives, analyst at Wedbush Securities who covers Tesla, said the rental car fleets were always viewed as “untouchable” because of the scale of their bulk purchases. “The fact that Hertz dove into the deep end of pool and is spending over $4 billion, that was never even on the radar for the likes of a Tesla,” he said. But now it represents a tipping point not only in EV interest from the market but the supply that Tesla can produce with its factory operations expanding around the world and, within the U.S., to Austin.

The rental car industry represents 1.5 million to 2 million cars per year, a significant part of new sales. 

“For Tesla that is 2 million cars that were never on the radar,” Ives said.

Tesla reached a $1 trillion market capitalization on Monday after the deal was announced.

“This announcement is a clear signal from Tesla that they can deliver a large volume of vehicles,” Jonathan Smoke, chief economist at Cox Automotive, wrote in an emailed statement to CNBC.

Size of EVs for rental has been an issue beyond the luxury market with the sedans too small for most renters’ preferences, but that is changing with the production of more crossover EVs and other hybrid vehicles. The crossover utility segment accounted for 50% of EV sales in the second quarter.

While the carbon footprint of the car rental industry has not been a primary focus of the U.S. government, the pressure is expected to increase in the future and there has been talk among those who follow the industry, Healy said, that President Biden wants the rental car companies to commit to electric vehicle fleets.

“The government push is yet to be determined but it’s probably not going away,” Healy said.

The car rental agencies have sustainability in their business models, such as Enterprise’s carbon offsets program and a longstanding research affiliation it has in the biofuels area. Enterprise has reported on Scope 1 and Scope 2 carbon emissions for years, but not the scope 3 emissions that occur at the tailpipes of its fleet cars. Avis Budget also offers carbon offsets, carbon footprint estimates for corporate clients and cites its acquisition of car-sharing company Zipcar as part of its sustainability initiatives. Avis Budget reports 21,000-plus hybrid vehicles in its fleet globally.

Shareholders advocates focused on ESG have pressed the issue with Avis and Hertz. Shareholders asked Avis to purchase 40,000 EVs. A Hertz shareholder climate resolution in 2020 included EVs as part of a broader discussion on climate change. “Hertz’ standard rental car business currently has only three hybrid electric vehicle options at select locations for consumer rentals, with no all-electric vehicles. While Hertz has taken steps to improve energy efficiency for its operational facilities, the impact of the company’s fleet remains insufficiently addressed,” shareholder advocacy group As You Sow wrote in the 2020 measure.

Driss Lembachar, manager of transportation and infrastructure at Morningstar’s Sustainalytics ESG risk evaluation business, said car rental companies are less exposed to car emissions than automakers, given that the ultimate responsibility for emissions and meeting fuel economy standards from a regulatory point of view mainly rests with car manufacturers. But the fuel efficiency and age of a car rental company’s fleet and its renewal (or lack thereof) is material to investors since these areas impact its attractiveness and customer satisfaction/retention levels.

Sales in the U.S. of zero emissions cars continue to rise, with more than 168,000 zero emission vehicles (battery, plug-in hybrid, and fuel cell electric vehicles) sold in the second quarter of 2021, a 33% increase and 122,000 units more than the same period in 2020, according to industry trade group Alliance for Automotive Innovation. It noted Q2 2021 sales represented 3.8% of the auto market, their highest percentage ever. The auto industry is investing $330 billion in electrification by 2025 and it forecasts more than 130 zero-emission vehicles and 30 hybrid-electric models will be available in the next five years.

The upfront expense for the rental car companies from EV adoption, not only in the purchase price of cars, but in the build out of the charging station infrastructure they would need, have been major reasons for moving slowly, and the current economics of the rental car business makes staying with gas-powered cars attractive. Rental companies make money every time a car is returned without a full tank of gas, and while that represents only about 5% of total revenue, according to Healy, it is high margin revenue. While business models can presumably be developed to charge for “topping off” an EV, there is no established practice for that today.

That is one of the unknowns the rental car agencies are going to experience in a steep learning curve for fleet management with EVs. The timing of EV charging has to be taken into account as part of moving cars in and out of agency lots, and there are basic questions they still can’t answer: how many charging stations will they need, and how many will have to be fast-charging. It takes two minutes if not less to put gas in the car, but it could take hours to charge a car and that time differential could be significant in meeting customer demand.

Analysis of older EVs in recent years as Tesla customer service received scrutiny showed that they can present a unique maintenance and servicing profile. Hans-Werner Kaas, Senior Partner at McKinsey and Company, told CNBC in 2019 that fixes for EVs may be less frequent overall, but more expensive, and equipment including ride control and tires may require more frequent service or replacement due to the higher curb weight and acceleration of electric vehicles.

There are potential economic advantages that EVs may offer rental car companies. They could potentially save money on maintenance and the residual value of the cars hold up better. But all of the unknowns associated with unit economics on EVs have taken precedence over any potential economic benefits.

“Their view was that there is not enough infrastructure and no salivating custom that wants it, so why change anything?” Healy said. “There view has been ‘we will wait and see, but now is not the time.”

For Hertz, in process of coming back to the public market with an IPO, the timing is good for a big announcement related to its positioning versus competitors.

The major car rental agencies have tended to follow each others’ moves in recent history whether it is marketing approach or how they charge customers for various services, and with the space consolidated among the major three players, there will be pressure on Avis Budget and Enterprise Holdings to make moves in the EV space. That could be with Tesla, though they might be getting in line for deliveries behind Hertz, or the major automakers, including GM and Ford, planning to produce a large number of EVs in the years ahead. Rental car agencies have historically focused fleet purchases on the U.S. automakers before adding units from overseas.

“I would think Avis and Enterprise need to respond with something,” Healy said. “This has been a been copycat business for the last 50 years and that won’t change.” 

Ives cited a saying about the car industry, that with bulk orders there is never just one. “I would be shocked if the other competitors of Hertz haven’t put in calls to Tesla,” Ives said.

With a changing consumer landscape and more interest in EVs, the rental car agencies will risk losing business if they move too slowly. Healy expects more consumers in the future will be willing to pay extra to try an EV. “If I can rent a Tesla for an extra $40 a day at Hertz … and Avis doesn’t have it, I might try. … There is a customer who will respond to this and on the margins, Hertz is in a better spot.”

For Tesla, the deal is a good way to introduce consumers who have never driven an electric vehicle before to the technology, especially as the sales prices of EVs relative to traditional cars come down to a level where there is more room for mass adoption.  

“Every consumer that gets into a rental car car could be a conversion to a buyer … it’s an extended test drive,” Ives said.

If the rental car industry remains hesitant, it isn’t because the companies lack the money to spend on EVs. “The industry has never been more profitable,” Healy said. Amid the chip shortages that have limited car production, fleet size is only up 15% against demand that is now back up to 80-85% of the pre-pandemic level, according to Healy. The value of the cars on their balance sheets also have been appreciating in contrast to the typical depreciation they would expect in used cars.

The coming quarterly results should show record profitability and in the current market of high demand and limited car supply, the rental car companies are able to charge as much as double what would have been normal pricing in the past. “If you need the minivan in Florida you are going to pay $100 rather than $75 a day,” Healy said.

There also isn’t much else out there for these companies to buy even as their balance sheets are strong with the industry controlled by the three main players, making more consolidation less likely.

Healy said more changes are occurring across the auto landscape and beginning to get the focus from the businesses ancillary to the carmakers. He covers the auction space and noted that Manheim, the largest auction house, recently said in an investor presentation that it will retrofit 53 auction locations with 127 EV stations for charging and the diagnostic work on battery condition it needs to perform to properly assess the value of an EV up for auction. “We starting to see some change among adjacent companies in the industry,” Healy said.

Continue Reading

Environment

The aluminum sector isn’t moving to the U.S. despite tariffs — due to one key reason

Published

on

By

The aluminum sector isn't moving to the U.S. despite tariffs — due to one key reason

HAWESVILLE, KY – May 10

Plant workers drive along an aluminum potline at Century Aluminum Company’s Hawesville plant in Hawesville, Ky. on Wednesday, May 10, 2017. (Photo by Luke Sharrett /For The Washington Post via Getty Images)

Aluminum

The Washington Post | The Washington Post | Getty Images

Sweeping tariffs on imported aluminum imposed by U.S. President Donald Trump are succeeding in reshaping global trade flows and inflating costs for American consumers, but are falling short of their primary goal: to revive domestic aluminum production.

Instead, rising costs, particularly skyrocketing electricity prices in the U.S. relative to global competitors, are leading to smelter closures rather than restarts.

The impact of aluminum tariffs at 25% is starkly visible in the physical aluminum market. While benchmark aluminum prices on the London Metal Exchange provide a global reference, the actual cost of acquiring the metal involves regional delivery premiums.

This premium now largely reflects the tariff cost itself.

In stark contrast, European premiums were noted by JPMorgan analysts as being over 30% lower year-to-date, creating a significant divergence driven directly by U.S. trade policy.

This cost will ultimately be borne by downstream users, according to Trond Olaf Christophersen, the chief financial officer of Norway-based Hydro, one of the world’s largest aluminum producers. The company was formerly known as Norsk Hydro.

“It’s very likely that this will end up as higher prices for U.S. consumers,” Christophersen told CNBC, noting the tariff cost is a “pass-through.” Shares of Hydro have collapsed by around 17% since tariffs were imposed.

Stock Chart IconStock chart icon

hide content

The downstream impact of the tariffs is already being felt by Thule Group, a Hydro customer that makes cargo boxes fitted atop cars. The company said it’ll raise prices by about 10% even though it manufactures the majority of the goods sold in the U.S locally, as prices of raw materials, such as steel and aluminum, have shot up.

But while tariffs are effectively leading to prices rise in the U.S., they haven’t spurred a revival in domestic smelting, the energy-intensive process of producing primary aluminum.

The primary barrier remains the lack of access to competitively priced, long-term power, according to the industry.

“Energy costs are a significant factor in the overall production cost of a smelter,” said Ami Shivkar, principal analyst of aluminum markets at analytics firm Wood Mackenzie.  “High energy costs plague the US aluminium industry, forcing cutbacks and closures.”

“Canadian, Norwegian, and Middle Eastern aluminium smelters typically secure long-term energy contracts or operate captive power generation facilities. US smelter capacity, however, largely relies on short-term power contracts, placing it at a disadvantage,” Shivkar added, noting that energy costs for U.S. aluminum smelters were about $550 per tonne compared to $290 per tonne for Canadian smelters.

Recent events involving major U.S. producers underscore this power vulnerability.

In March 2023, Alcoa Corp announced the permanent closure of its 279,000 metric ton Intalco smelter, which had been idle since 2020. Alcoa said that the facility “cannot be competitive for the long-term,” partly because it “lacks access to competitively priced power.”

Similarly, in June 2022, Century Aluminum, the largest U.S. primary aluminum producer, was forced to temporarily idle its massive Hawesville, Kentucky smelter – North America’s largest producer of military-grade aluminum – citing a “direct result of skyrocketing energy costs.”

Century stated the power cost required to run the facility had “more than tripled the historical average in a very short period,” necessitating a curtailment expected to last nine to twelve months until prices normalized.

The industry has also not had a respite as demand for electricity from non-industrial sources has risen in recent years.

Hydro’s Christophersen pointed to the artificial intelligence boom and the proliferation of data centers as new competitors for power. He suggested that new energy production capacity in the U.S., from nuclear, wind or solar, is being rapidly consumed by the tech sector.

“The tech sector, they have a much higher ability to pay than the aluminium industry,” he said, noting the high double-digit margins of the tech sector compared to the often low single-digit margins at aluminum producers. Hydro reported an 8.3% profit margin in the first quarter of 2025, an increase from the 3.5% it reported for the previous quarter, according to Factset data.

“Our view, and for us to build a smelter [in the U.S.], we would need cheap power. We don’t see the possibility in the current market to get that,” the CFO added. “The lack of competitive power is the reason why we don’t think that would be interesting for us.”

How the massive power draw of generative AI is overtaxing our grid

While failing to ignite domestic primary production, the tariffs are undeniably causing what Christophersen termed a “reshuffling of trade flows.”

When U.S. market access becomes more costly or restricted, metal flows to other destinations.

Christophersen described a brief period when exceptionally high U.S. tariffs on Canadian aluminum — 25% additional tariffs on top of the aluminum-specific tariffs — made exporting to Europe temporarily more attractive for Canadian producers. Consequently, more European metals would have made their way into the U.S. market to make up for the demand gap vacated by Canadian aluminum.

The price impact has even extended to domestic scrap metal prices, which have adjusted upwards in line with the tariff-inflated Midwest premium.

Hydro, also the world’s largest aluminum extruder, utilizes both domestic scrap and imported Canadian primary metal in its U.S. operations. The company makes products such as window frames and facades in the country through extrusion, which is the process of pushing aluminum through a die to create a specific shape.

“We are buying U.S. scrap [aluminium]. A local raw material. But still, the scrap prices now include, indirectly, the tariff cost,” Christophersen explained. “We pay the tariff cost in reality, because the scrap price adjusts to the Midwest premium.”

“We are paying the tariff cost, but we quickly pass it on, so it’s exactly the same [for us],” he added.

RBC Capital Markets analysts confirmed this pass-through mechanism for Hydro’s extrusions business, saying “typically higher LME prices and premiums will be passed onto the customer.”

This pass-through has occurred amid broader market headwinds, particularly downstream among Hydro’s customers.

RBC highlighted the “weak spot remains the extrusion divisions” in Hydro’s recent results and noted a guidance downgrade, reflecting sluggish demand in sectors like building and construction.

— CNBC’s Greg Kennedy contributed reporting.

Continue Reading

Environment

One of the world’s largest wind farms just got axed – here’s why

Published

on

By

One of the world’s largest wind farms just got axed – here’s why

Danish energy giant Ørsted has canceled plans for the Hornsea 4 offshore wind farm, dealing a major blow to the UK’s renewable energy ambitions.

Hornsea 4, at a massive 2.4 gigawatts (GW), would have become one of the largest offshore wind farms in the world, generating enough clean electricity to power over 1 million UK homes. But Ørsted announced that it’s abandoning the project “in its current form.”

“The adverse macroeconomic developments, continued supply chain challenges, and increased execution, market, and operational risks have eroded the value creation,” said Rasmus Errboe, group president and CEO of Ørsted.

Reuters reported that Ørsted’s cancellation of Hornsea 4 would result in a projected loss of up to 5.5 billion Danish crowns ($837.85 million) in breakaway fees and asset write-downs. The company’s market value has declined by 80% since its peak in 2021.

The cancellation highlights significant challenges currently facing offshore wind development in Europe, particularly in the UK. The combination of higher material costs, inflation, and global financial instability has made large-scale renewable projects increasingly difficult to finance and complete.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

Ørsted’s decision is a significant setback to the UK’s energy transition goals. The UK currently has around 15 GW of offshore wind, and Hornsea 4’s size would have provided almost 7% of the additional capacity needed for the UK’s 50 GW by 2030 target, according to The Times. Losing this immense project off the Yorkshire coast could hamper the UK’s pace of reducing dependency on fossil fuels, especially amid volatile global energy markets.

The UK government reiterated its commitment to renewable energy, promising to work closely with industry leaders to overcome financial and logistical hurdles. Energy Secretary Ed Miliband told reporters in Norway that the UK is “still committed to working with Orsted to seek to make Hornsea 4 happen by 2030.”

Ørsted says it remains committed to its other UK-based projects, including the Hornsea 3 wind farm, which is expected to generate around 2.9 GW once completed at the end of 2027. Despite the challenges, the company emphasized its ongoing commitment to the British renewable market, pointing to the critical need for policy support and economic stability to ensure future developments.

Yet, the cancellation of Hornsea 4 demonstrates that even flagship renewable projects are vulnerable in the face of economic pressures and global uncertainties, which have been heightened under the Trump administration in the US.

Read more: The world’s single-largest wind farm gets the green light


If you live in an area that has frequent natural disaster events, and are interested in making your home more resilient to power outages, consider going solar and adding a battery storage system. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. They have hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.

Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisers to help you every step of the way. Get started here. –trusted affiliate link*

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Is the Tesla Roadster ever going to be made?

Published

on

By

Is the Tesla Roadster ever going to be made?

The Tesla Roadster appears to be quietly disappearing after years of delay. is it ever going to be made?

I may have jinxed it with Betteridge’s Law of Headlines, which suggests any headline ending in a question mark can be answered with “no.”

The prototype for the next-generation Tesla Roadster was first unveiled in 2017, and it was supposed to come into production in 2020, but it has been delayed every year since then.

It was supposed to get 620 miles (1,000 km) of range and accelerate from 0 to 60 mph in 1.9 seconds.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

Site default logo image

It has become a sort of running joke, and there are doubts that it will ever come to market despite Tesla’s promise of dozens of free new Roadsters to Tesla owners who participated in its referral program years ago.

Tesla uses the promise of free Roadsters to help generate billions of dollars worth of sales, which Tesla owners delivered, but the automaker never delivered on its part of the agreement.

Furthermore, many people placed deposits ranging from $50,000 to $250,000 to reserve the vehicle, which was supposed to hit the market 5 years ago.

The official timelines from Tesla are pretty useless at this point since they haven’t stuck to any of them, but the latest official one dates back to July 2024 when CEO Elon Musk said this:

“With respect to Roadster, we’ve completed most of the engineering. And I think there’s still some upgrades we want to make to it, but we expect to be in production with Roadster next year. It will be something special.”

He said that Tesla had completed “most of the engineering”, but he initially said the engineering would be done in 2021 and that was already 3 years after the prototype was unveiled and a year after it was supposed to be in production:

Musk commented on the Roadster again in October 2024, but he didn’t reiterate the 2025 timeline. Instead, he called the new Roadster “the cherry on the icing on the cake.”

Tesla’s leadership has been virtually silent about the new Roadster since. Two Tesla executives even had to be reminded about the Roadster by Jay Leno after they “forgot” about it when listing upcoming new Tesla vehicles with tri-motor powertrain.

There was one small update about the Roadster in Tesla’s financial results last month.

The automaker has a table of all its vehicle production, and the Roadster was updated from “in development” to “design development” in the table:

It’s not clear if that’s progress or Tesla is just rephrasing it. Either way, it is not “construction”, which makes it unlikely that the Roadster is going into production this year.

If ever…

Electrek’s Take

It looks like Tesla owes about 80 Tesla Roadsters for free to Tesla owners who referred purchases, and it owes significant discounts on hundreds of units.

It’s hard for me to believe that Tesla is not delivering the new Roadster because the vehicle program would start about $100 million in the red, but at this point, I have no idea. It very well might be the reason.

However, I think it’s more likely that Tesla is just terrible at bringing multiple vehicle programs to market simultaneously. Case in point: it launched a single new vehicle in the last five years.

At this point, I think it’s more likely that the Roadster will never happen. It will join other Tesla products like the Cybertruck Range Extender.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Trending