Connect with us

Published

on

The Polestar 3 has officially begun production in Chengdu, China, before its first deliveries. The third bespoke model, which is also Polestar’s first electric SUV, has a lot riding on its success in multiple markets. It will also be built in the US, and Polestar provided an update on that progress.

The Polestar 3 is a new SUV from the Geely-owned EV brand, initially announced in October 2022. It will be the first SUV from Polestar ($PSNY) and its first model built on US soil – South Carolina, to be exact.

That said, initial deliveries will come from production in China, where the Polestar 3 siblings are currently built. The SUV was initially scheduled to launch in Q4 2023, but Polestar delayed its arrival to Q1 2024, citing the need for more time to develop the software used in its platform shared with Volvo Cars.

Volvo recently announced it will be selling a majority of its stake in Polestar, cutting some of the EV automaker’s Swedish roots going forward. Still, Polestar intends to push ahead with China’s Geely. This next chapter begins with the Polestar 3, and production is now up and running overseas.

  • Polestar 3 production
  • Polestar 3 production

Polestar 3 production in US passes initial tests

According to an update from Polestar this morning, production of the 3 SUVs is now underway in Chengdu, with additional builds to follow in the US by mid-2024. The automaker reports that the initial production tests at the South Carolina plant have been completed successfully. Polestar CEO Thomas Ingenlath spoke:

This stunning car takes a significant step forward with start of production marking an important milestone on our journey from a one- to three-car company this year. We have also achieved launch readiness at the factory in Ridgeville, South Carolina, and are well on track with our plans to start manufacturing Polestar 3 in the USA.

Being built on two separate continents, the Polestar 3 will serve markets in Asia, Europe, and the US to begin serving markets in Asia, Europe, and the US. It is available to order and starts at an MSRP of around $84,000. With production now underway, the 3 will be followed by a compact SUV called the Polestar 4, then the 5 sports sedan, and the Polestar 6 based on the automaker’s Roadster Concept.

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

Continue Reading

Environment

BP shares jump 5% as activist investor Elliott discloses stake build

Published

on

By

BP shares jump 5% as activist investor Elliott discloses stake build

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 'never really tried' to become a clean energy company, says climate activist investor

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.

Continue Reading

Environment

Musk complains about handouts when Tesla was only profitable due to credits

Published

on

By

Musk complains about handouts when Tesla was only profitable due to credits

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 Nazi stuff all the time), 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.

Musk has even claimed, probably correctly, that if all subsidies were eliminated both for EVs and for oil & gas, that EVs would come out ahead compared to the status quo (more recently, Musk has become one of the biggest funders of anti-EV forces, allying himself with a bought-and-paid oil stooge who is giving even more preferential treatment to the oil industry).

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.

Continue Reading

Environment

Commercial financing for EVs is way different than you think | Quick Charge

Published

on

By

Commercial financing for EVs is way different than you think | Quick Charge

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!

Prefer listening to your podcasts? Audio-only versions of Quick Charge are now available on Apple PodcastsSpotifyTuneIn, and our RSS feed for Overcast and other podcast players.

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.

Continue Reading

Trending