Great news: IMO agrees to first-ever global carbon price on shipping
The International Maritime Organization, a UN agency which regulates maritime transport, has voted to implement a global cap on carbon emissions from ocean shipping and a penalty on entities that exceed that limit.
After a weeklong meeting of the Marine Environment Protection Committee of the IMO and decades of talks, countries have voted to implement binding carbon reduction targets including a gradually-reducing cap on emissions and associated penalties for exceeding that cap.
Previously, the IMO made another significant environmental move when it transitioned the entire shipping industry to lower-sulfur fuels in 2020, moving towards improving a longstanding issue with large ships outputting extremely high levels of sulfur dioxide emissions, which harm human health and cause acid rain.
Today’s agreement makes the shipping industry the first sector to agree on an internationally mandated target to reduce emissions along with a global carbon price.
The agreement includes standards for greenhouse gas intensity from maritime shipping fuels, with those standards starting in 2028 and reducing through 2035. The end goal is to reach net-zero emissions in shipping by 2050.
Companies that exceed the carbon limits set by the standard will have to pay either $100 or $380 per excess ton of emissions, depending on how much they exceed limits by. These numbers are roughly in line with the commonly-accepted social cost of carbon, which is an attempt to set the equivalent cost borne by society by every ton of carbon pollution.
Money from these penalties will be put into a fund that will reward lower-emissions ships, research into cleaner fuels, and support nations that are vulnerable to climate change.
That means that this agreement represents a global “carbon price” – an attempt to make polluters pay the costs that they shift onto everyone else by polluting.
Why carbon prices matter
The necessity of a carbon price has long been acknowledged by virtually every economist. In economic terms, pollution is called a “negative externality,” where a certain action imposes costs on a party that isn’t responsible for the action itself. That action can be thought of as a subsidy – it’s a cost imposed by the polluter that isn’t being paid by the polluter, but rather by everyone else.
Externalities distort a market because they allow certain companies to get away with cheaper costs than they should otherwise have. And a carbon price is an attempt to properly price that externality, to internalize it to the polluter in question, so that they are no longer being subsidized by everyone else’s lungs. This also incentivizes carbon reductions, because if you can make something more cleanly, you can make it more cheaply.
Many people have suggested implementing a carbon price, including former republican leadership (before the party forgot literally everything about how economics works), but political leadership has been hesitant to do what’s needed because it fears the inevitable political backlash driven by well-funded propaganda entities in the oil industry.
For that reason, most carbon pricing schemes have focused on industrial processes, rather than consumer goods. This is currently happening in Canada, which recently (unwisely) retreated from its consumer carbon price but still maintains a price on the largest polluters in the oil industry.
But until today’s agreement by the IMO, there had been no global agreement of the same in any industry. There are single-country carbon prices, and international agreements between certain countries or subnational entities, often in the form of “cap-and-trade” agreements which implement penalties, and where companies that reduce emissions earn credits that they can then sell to companies that exceed limits (California has a similar program in partnership with with Quebec), but no previous global carbon price in any industry.
Carbon prices opposed by enemies of life on Earth
Unsurprisingly, entities that favor destruction of life on Earth, such as the oil industry and those representing it (Saudi Arabia, Russia, and the bought-and-paid oil stooge who is illegally squatting in the US Oval Office), opposed these measures, claiming they would be “unworkable.”
Meanwhile, island nations whose entire existence is threatened by climate change (along with the ~2 billion people who will have to relocate by the end of the century due to rising seas) correctly said that the move isn’t strong enough, and that even stronger action is needed to avoid the worse effects of climate change.
The island nations’ position is backed by science, the oil companies’ position is not.
While these new standards are historic and need to be lauded as the first agreement of their kind, there is still more work to be done and incentives that need to be offered to ensure that greener technologies are available to help fulfill the targets. Jesse Fahnestock, Director of Decarbonisation at the Global Maritime Forum, said:
While the targets are a step forward, they will need to be improved if they are to drive the rapid fuel shift that will enable the maritime sector to reach net zero by 2050. While we applaud the progress made, meeting the targets will require immediate and decisive investments in green fuel technology and infrastructure. The IMO will have opportunities to make these regulations more impactful over time, and national and regional policies also need to prioritise scalable e-fuels and the infrastructure needed for long-term decarbonisation.
One potential solution could be IMO’s “green corridors,” attempts to establish net-zero-emission shipping routes well in advance of the IMO’s 2050 net-zero target.
And, of course, this is only one industry, and one with a relatively low contribution to global emissions. While the vast majority of global goods are shipped over the ocean, it’s still responsible for only around 3% of global emissions. To see the large emissions reductions we need to avoid the worst effects of climate change, other more-polluting sectors – like automotive, agriculture (specifically animal agriculture), construction and heating – all could use their own carbon price to help add a forcing factor to drive down their emissions.
Lets hope that the IMO’s move sets that example, and we see more of these industries doing the right thing going forward (and ignoring those enemies of life on Earth listed above).
The agreement still has to go through a final step of approval on October, but this looks likely to happen.
Even without a carbon price, many homeowners can save money on their electricity bills today by going solar. And 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. – ad*
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Based on the excellent Hyundai IONIQ 5 N platform, Vanwall gives its Vandervell H-GT a high-performance aesthetic makeover inspired by the classic Lancia Delta HF Integrale. But what makes this body kit a genuine “high-performance” upgrade isn’t the way it makes the car look: it’s the 500 lb. weight savings!
Developed by Austrian racing team ByKOLLES Racing and invoking the name of a 1950s Formula 1 team, the Vandervell H-GT is essentially a new Hyundai IONIQ 5 N in aggressive, Lancia Delta-inspired carbon-fiber bodywork that the company claims gives the car an, “unprecedented weight optimization in this vehicle category.”
The H-GT’s new “thin wall” carbon fiber body slashes the car’s weight by over 230 kg (507 lbs.), which means ByKOLLES’ new Vandervell can do anything that Hyundai’s “special” IONIQ 5 N hot hatch can do. Only faster.
Raw carbon, raw performance
Mechanically identical to the IONIQ 5 N and packing the same 641 hp (with N Grin Boost) and 568 lb-ft of torque. That’s enough to launch the Hyundai version of the hatchback from a standstill to 60 mph in just 3.0 seconds.
After its 500 lb. crash diet, it’s even quicker.
The car was first announced in 2023 (along with the renderings shown, below), when ByKOLLES was competing in the World Endurance Championship (WEC) with what used to be called an LMP car – but they keep changing the names of these things so it could be a Daytona Prototype, Hypercar, or even a 24 Hour LeMans Wonkavator by now.
The important part, however, is that a few of these cars have now broken cover, with ex-Formula 1 supremo, Bernie Ecclestone, having been seen trying the new-age Lancia on for size.
The Vanwall Vandervell website still shows the same €128,000 ($145,405, as I type this) price tag and specs it did in 2023, which either means they haven’t updated it in a while, were really, really good at pricing the thing in the first place, or both.
That’s presumably on top of the IONIQ N’s already hefty $66,100 price tag.
Electrek’s Take
This isn’t the first time my weird love of Lancia models from the 70s and 80s has been highlighted on these digital pages, but even my biased sensibilities can see that this is a unique, ultra-luxury statement piece that offers supercar levels of performance with the sort of daily driver dependability that Hyundai has offered for years.
It’s an incredible machine – and the only thing they did wrong, in my book, was not show one in Martini colors on its debut.
SOURCE | IMAGES: Vanwall Vandervell; CarExpert.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
I had the chance to drive the new 2025 RS Audi GT e-tron for a few hours in the Nevada desert and for a few minutes on a race track.
Here are my thoughts.
Audi has stepped up its EV game in a big way with its new electric vehicles based on the PPE platform. Over the last year, I drove both the Q6, an electric SUV based on the PPE, and the A6, an electric sedan based on the same platform, and I came out extremely impressed.
I think those vehicles are going to take Audi to the next level when it comes to EVs.
But they are not the EVs pushing Audi’s limits; that’s still its flagship Audi GT e-tron, now with a top-performance RS version launched with the 2025 model-year refresh.
The new GT e-tron, which is built on the same platform as the Porsche Taycan, is more than a model year refresh; it’s a mid-cycle update, but not a normal one. While mid-cycle updates often focus on design changes and adding a few features, the 2025 GT e-tron looks very similar to the previous version, but it’s significantly different under the hood.
The design has been slightly updated with a honeycomb grill, a few new wheel designs, and a very cool new motorsport-inspired rear reflector.
I think that the rear diffuser with vertical reflector looks sick on the RS GT:
It still looks like the same sporty vehicle, but more refined, especially the RS version.
Speaking of the RS version, it’s now the most powerful Audi ever with almost 1,000 horsepower (912hp). That’s thanks to new motors with increased copper density, resulting in more power and lower weight:
An added bonus is that they can also regen at a higher rate of 400kW, which quite impressive. I prefer the regen modes in the Q6/A6, but the 400kW capacity has some incredible stopping power. That’s 0.45G at max deceleration.
It’s useful when you launch the RS GT e-tron from 0 to 60 mph in 2.4 seconds with launch control is engaged. I did a few quick acceleration and fast launches in the desert and on a small racetrack outside of Las Vegas and you need to make sure your head is firmly on the headrest.
Audi also has a “push-to-pass” power boost button on the steering wheel that unleashes an extra 94 hp (70 kW) for 10 seconds. The German automaker emphasized that this is repeatable. I didn’t test that, but I can say that I tested the RS GT e-tron on the racetrack after a dozen people did with the same car, and I was impressed by the capacity at about 50% state-of-charge.
Now, if you look closely at this launch, you might have noticed how the front end of the vehicle adjusted itself down after shooting up from the launch.
That’s thanks to the new advanced adaptive air suspension with with damper control.
It’s extremely fast and impressive. I am pretty sure they could make the car jump and down with the suspension if they wanted to, but they don’t.
The suspension is so advanced you don’t need an anti-roll bar. It adjust so fast that it is able to keep the vehicle solid and balance even in high speed corners. It felt effortless driving somewhat aggressively on the desert roads outside of Las Vegas, but Audi enabled a very cool test on the track.
They had me do a lap without the active suspension’s cornering compensation activated and then I did the same lap with it enabled. It was night and day. In fact, it felt like cheating. I’m no track driver, but the second lap felt incredibly easy, almost as if the car was on rails.
Here are the different suspension profiles:
The new 2025 GT e-tron also has 12% more battery capacity resulting in up to 51 more miles of range depending on the configurations and wheel choices. It results in 278 miles of range mac for the RS and 300 miles of range for the S.
As usual, one of the most impressive things about Audi’s EVs is the fast-charging capacity, and the new 2025 GT improves on that thanks to the updated battery pack:
That results in 10 to 80% charging in about 18 minutes.
All that performance doesn’t come cheap. The S e-tron GT starts at $125,500, and the RS e-tron GT Performance starts at $167,000. The version that I tested with closer to $180,000 with options.
Electrek’s Take
This was actually my first time driving an Audi GT e-tron so I can’t compare it to the previous version, but I came out impressed.
With Audi, I love their quiet, comfortable luxury with the A6 and Q6. This is not that. It’s a performance vehicle, but it’s still a 4-door, 4-seater, with decent space in the back, so Audi clearly also focused on comfort, and you can feel it.
I can see this being a great daily driver even though the cabin wasn’t as quiet as the previously mentioned vehicles and you could feel more vibration.
The Audi GT e-tron really shines when you start driving more aggressively. Like I previously said, the active suspension’s cornering suspension is truly impressive and makes things easier.
Though I’d note that, unlike the active suspension in the latest Taycan, the one in the Audi GT does allow a bit of roll to give you some road feedback. I appreciated that.
I also appreciated the vehicle’s steering. Again, I can’t compare it to previous versions, but the ratio was reportedly reduced and it did feel short and precise.
The lower weight and higher battery capacity are also appreciated as it can be hard for people to buy an electric vehicle at $100,000+ with fewer than 250 miles of range, which was the case before this 2025 update.
Now, to be fair, Audi put me in a fully loaded RS GT e-tron Performance that cost closer to $200,000. It was incredible, but I don’t know how the car performs with the base S GT e-tron. I’m sure you can have fun with it too and you get more range.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
A Unifor union rep at the Ontario production facility where GM builds the all electric Chevy BrightDrop van is temporarily halting production of the commercial EV due to slow sales – but with massive discounts, Costco member programs, and state and utility incentives driving costs well below its diesel competitors, it might still be the best EV deal you can get.
Donald Trump’s planned automotive tariffs may have been put on hold, but the uncertainty they caused just from being threatened has caused waves of damage across a dozen industries – and that’s causing companies like GM to expect more pain in the near term.
To that end, GM says it’s making, “operational and employment adjustments to balance inventory and align production schedules with current demand,” at the CAMI Assembly plant in Ontario, Canada, where it makes BrightDrop vans. The layoffs will begin on April 14, according to the union, when production will temporarily cease until October 2025.
During the downtime, GM says it plans to retool the plant to prepare for production of the (presumably updated) 2026 model year BrightDrop vans.
“(The production pause is) a crushing blow to hundreds of working families in Ingersoll and the surrounding region who depend on this plant,” said Unifor National President, Lana Payne, in a statement. “General Motors must do everything in its power to mitigate job loss during this downturn, and all levels of government must step up to support Canadian auto workers and Canadian-made products.”
GM reported sales of just 274 BrightDrop vans in the first quarter of 2025. That’s up about 7% from the 256 sold in Q1 of 2024 – but still really. Definitely. Not. A lot.
When production resumes in October, the plant will operate on a single shift, which will result in reduced manufacturing rate for GM’s commercial vans and the indefinite layoff of nearly 500 union factory workers, according to Unifor.
Electrek’s Take
We’ve covered the $30,000-plus discounts currently available for Chevy BrightDrop customers. Those discounts are already enough to take the $84,235 BrightDrop 400 eAWD EV all the way down to $52,985 – and that’s before utility incentives like ComEd’s commercial EV rebates (which the Chevy van qualifies for) can bring it down even further.
ComEd is offering up to $30,000 in rebates (per vehicle) if you snap up the Class 3/11,000 GVWR version … meaning Chicago area fleets can electrify their delivery operations for much, much less than they probably think.
Check your state and local rebates at this link to see what a BrightDrop might cost you in your state, then let us know if you can think of a better EV deal in the comments.
SOURCE: Unifor; via Reuters.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business3 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway