Fresh on the heels of its ban on rental e-scooters, Paris is now targeting “auto-besity” by enforcing substantially higher parking fees for SUVs, and that includes large electric and hybrid ones too.
While those narrow, traffic-clogged streets of Paris may seem a better fit for the likes of the nimble Twingo or the Dacia Spring, city officials say that its number of SUVs has increased by 60% over the last four years. SUVs account for 15% of the 1.15 million private vehicles parked on the Paris streets every night.
To help turn this around and give smaller cars a boost, Paris mayor Anne Hidalgo has set up a referendum for local residents to vote on February 4 on whether or not to heavily increase parking fees for SUVs and 4x4s. This follows her first referendum that pushed out rental e-scooters, where only the haters showed up to cast their ballot, and very few of those even bothered to turn out. Still, for the SUV vote, Hidalgo promises that Paris city dwellers won’t be affected and that parking hikes will only apply to suburbanites and out-of-towners driving in for work or play. Considering SUV ownership is low in the city anyway, alongside tensions over traffic from the summer 2024 Olympic Games, predictions say that this will be an easy win.
“Today, many of you are telling me that there are still too many big, polluting cars taking up more and more space on our streets, sidewalks, and even bike paths,” Hidalgo said in a video shared on social media. “We need to curb this phenomenon by limiting the presence of SUVs and 4x4s in Paris.”
So who will be subject to these vague-yet-menacing “very significant” increases in parking fees? Anyone driving a combustion or plug-in hybrid vehicle weighing 1.6 tons or more, and owners of an electric vehicle weighing 2 tons or more. The higher rate, however, won’t apply to residential parking, nor to parking for some professionals, emergency services, or disabled drivers. Earlier discussions originally excluded electric SUVs altogether and people with large families, but that seems to no longer be the case.
The Socialist mayor has put front and center a reduction in car usage while simultaneously boosting eco-friendly transport in the city. This plan also emulates what is happening in Lyon, which will penalize heavier, more polluting vehicles parking in the city from 2024. SUVs – which are taller, heavier, deadlier, and use more energy and resources than a typical sedan – account for almost half of all new passenger cars sold in Europe last year, according to the European Automobile Manufacturers Association. A pedestrian is twice as likely to die in a collision with an SUV than a standard vehicle, Hidalgo stated.
“With this vote, we want to say stop,” she added. “Stop the excesses of carmakers, who are pushing people to buy ever bigger, more expensive, more raw-material-intensive, more polluting vehicles.”
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
The BP logo is displayed outside a petrol station that also offers electric vehicle recharging, on Feb. 27, 2025, in Somerset, England.
Anna Barclay | Getty Images News | Getty Images
BP shares jumped on Wednesday after activist investor Elliott went public with a stake of more than 5% in the struggling British oil major, which has pivoted back to oil in a bid to restore investor confidence.
BP shares were last seen up 4.75% at 9:44 a.m. London time. The London-listed stock price is down around 5% year-to-date.
Hedge fund Elliott Management has built its holding in the British oil major to 5.006%, according to a regulatory filing disclosed late Tuesday. BP’s other large shareholders include BlackRock, Vanguard and Norway’s sovereign wealth fund.
Elliott was first reported to have assumed a position in the oil and gas company back in February, driving a share rally amid expectations that its involvement could pressure BP to shift gears from its green strategy and back toward its core oil and gas businesses.
Within weeks, BP, which has been lagging domestic peer Shell and transatlantic rivals and posted a steep drop in fourth-quarter profit, announced plans to ramp up fossil fuel investments to $10 billion through 2027. This marked a sharp strategic departure for the company, which five years ago became one of the first energy giants to announce plans to cut emissions to net zero “by 2050 or sooner.” As part of that push, the company pledged to slash emissions by up to 40% by 2030 and to ramp up investment in renewables projects.
The oil major scaled back this emissions target to 20% to 30% in February 2023, saying at the time that it needed to keep investing in oil and gas to meet global demand.
Since switching gears, BP’s CEO Murray Auchincloss and outgoing Chair Helge Lund — who is expected to depart the company in 2026 — retained their posts but were penalized with reduced support during BP’s board re-election vote earlier this month amid pressure from both revenue and climate-focused investors.
BP’s strategic reset back to the company’s oil and gas activities took place just as crude prices began to plunge amid volatility triggered by U.S. tariffs and Washington’s trade spat with China, the world’s largest crude importer.
Energy analysts have broadly welcomed the strategic reset, and BP CEO Murray Auchincloss has since said the pivot attracted “significant interest” in the firm’s non-core assets.
The energy firm nevertheless remains firmly in the spotlight as a potential takeover target, with the likes of Shell and U.S. oil giants Exxon Mobil and Chevron touted as possible suitors.
BP is scheduled to report first-quarter earnings on Tuesday. The company has said it anticipates lower reported upstream production and higher net debt in the first quarter than in the final three months of 2024.
Tesla’s earnings report dropped today, and news isn’t great. But instead of recognizing his failures that have led to Tesla’s downturn, CEO Elon Musk lashed out with conspiracy theories while also hypocritically failing to acknowledge that his company was only profitable this quarter due to regulatory credits.
The numbers are in on Tesla’s dismal quarter, with sales, profits and margins tanking significantly for the company despite a rising global EV market.
You’d expect a drop in car sales to be top of mind for a car company, but instead of talking about this, CEO Elon Musk opened the call by talking about his ineffective advisory role to a former reality TV host.
Musk is heading up the self-styled “Department of Government Efficiency,” an advisory group that is focused on reducing redundancy in government. The office is not an actual government department and has a redundant mission to the Government Accountability Office, which is an actual government department focused on reducing government waste.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
Musk originally claimed that the department would be able to save $2 trillion for the US government, which is actually impossible because federal discretionary spending is $1.7 trillion, which is a (gets out abacus) smaller number than $2 trillion.
He has, of course, failed at this task that anyone with any level of competence would have known was impossible before setting it out for themselves, and now projects that the department will save $150 billion next year, less than a tenth of his original estimate. But even that projection is likely an overstatement, given that most of the supposed savings that DOGE has found are not actual savings at all.
On top of this, the US government’s deficit has grown to the second-highest level on record – with the first happening in 2020, the last time Mr. Trump squatted in the White House. Which means the government isn’t saving money, it is in fact borrowing and spending more of it than ever before.
So, Musk’s tenure in the advisory board has been an unmitigated failure by any realistic account.
But if you listened to Tesla’s call, you wouldn’t have known this, as Musk was quite boastful of his efforts – starting a Tesla conference call with an irrelevant rant about his fake government department, instead of with Tesla business.
He claimed that he has made “a lot of progress in addressing waste and fraud” and that the job is “mostly done,” which is not correct by his own metrics. Musk stated that his purpose is “trying to bring in the insane deficit that is leading our country, the United States, to destruction,” and as we covered above, that deficit has only increased.
But he also went on to spew some rather insane conspiracy theories about the reasons behind his company’s recent failures, all of which of course put the blame on someone else, rather than himself. The buck stops anywhere but here, I guess.
His primary assertion was that the “blowback from the time I’ve been spending in government” (which, again, is an advisory role, not an actual government position) has come mainly from protesters that were “receiving fraudulent money” and are now angry that the government money spigot has been turned off.
Which, of course, he’s provided no evidence for… and he’s provided no evidence for it because it’s false.
Besides, that’s not how protests work. But incorrect claims that protests do work that way are often used by opponents of free speech, with the motivation of putting a chilling effect public participation. Fitting behavior for an enemy of the First Amendment like Elon Musk.
Meanwhile, this assertion also comes from a person who tried and failed to bribe voters to win an election. Perhaps his admiration of Tesla protesters is aspirational – he wishes his ideas were good enough to inspire that sort of grassroots political effort that money, demonstrably, cannot buy.
But this hypocrisy extends beyond Musk’s hatred of free expression, and strikes at the heart of the business he is the titular leader of, Tesla, the organization that has made him into the richest man in the world. Because not only is it not true that Tesla protests are driven by his ineffective government actions (they are, in fact, driven by him doing Nazistuffallthetime), it’s also objectively true that Musk’s companies are a large recipient of government money.
And that’s particularly relevant today, to the very earnings call where Musk made his ridiculous assertion, because in Q1 2025, Tesla only turned a profit due to government credits. Without them, it would have lost money.
Tesla only profitable in Q1 due to regulatory credits
Per today’s earnings report, Tesla earned $595 million in regulatory credits in Q1. But its total net income for the quarter was $409 million.
This means that without those regulatory credits, Tesla would have posted a -$189 million loss in Q1. It was saved not just by credit sales, but credit sales which increased year over year – in the year-ago quarter, Tesla made $442 million in regulatory credits, despite having higher sales in Q1 2024 than in Q1 2025. So not only were credits higher, but credits per vehicle were higher.
This is a common feature of Tesla earnings, and we even said in our earnings preview that we expected it. While Tesla had a bad quarter, nobody expected it to become actually unprofitable, because there was always the possibility of increasing regulatory credit sales to eke out a profitable quarter.
And this has been the case many times in Tesla’s past, as well. In earlier times, Tesla’s first few profitable quarters were decried by the company’s opponents as an accounting trick, suggesting that regulatory credit sales weren’t “real” profits, and that the cars should have to stand on their own.
This is a silly thing to say – businesses do business in the environment that exists, and every business has an incentive structure that includes subsidies and externalities. If we were to selectively write off certain profits for certain businesses, we could make a tortured case that any business isn’t profitable.
Plus, these opponents didn’t extend the same treatment to the oil industry, which is subsidized to the tune of $760 billion per year in the US alone in unpriced externalities, yet that is somehow never mentioned during their earnings calls.
But, setting aside the debate over whether credits are valid profits (they are), for years now we’ve been well beyond Tesla’s reliance on credits. The company has produced significant profits, regardless of credit sales, for some time now.
At least, until today. That’s no longer true – Tesla did rely on credits to become profitable in Q1. And Musk starting the call with a ridiculous rant about government handouts not only shows his hypocrisy and projection on this matter, but his detachment from reality itself. He is, truly, too stuck in the impenetrable echo chamber of his self-congratulating twitter feed to realize what an embarrassment he’s being in public – to the point of inventing shadow enemies to explain the very real, very simple explanation that people aren’t buying his company’s cars because he sucks so much.
Charge your electric vehicle at home using rooftop solar panels. Find a reliable and competitively priced solar installer near you on EnergySage, for free. They have pre-vetted installers competing for your business, ensuring high-quality solutions and 20-30% savings. It’s free, with no sales calls until you choose an installer. Compare personalized solar quotes online and receive guidance from unbiased Energy Advisers. Get started here. – ad*
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
No matter how badly a fleet wants to electrify their operations and take advantage of reduced fuel costs and TCO, the fact remains that there are substantial up-front obstacles to commercial EV adoption … or are there? We’ve got fleet financing expert Guy O’Brien here to help walk us through it on today’s fiscally responsible episode of Quick Charge!
This conversation was motivated by the recent uncertainty surrounding EVs and EV infrastructure at the Federal level, and how that turmoil is leading some to believe they should wait to electrify. The truth? There’s never been a better time to make the switch!
New episodes of Quick Charge are recorded, usually, Monday through Thursday (and sometimes Sunday). We’ll be posting bonus audio content from time to time as well, so be sure to follow and subscribe so you don’t miss a minute of Electrek’s high-voltage daily news.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
Got news? Let us know! Drop us a line at tips@electrek.co. You can also rate us on Apple Podcasts and Spotify, or recommend us in Overcast to help more people discover the show.
If you’re considering going solar, it’s always a good idea to get quotes from a few installers. 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. It has 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 Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.