The Information : The Electric: Is Toyota Right to Be Skeptical About EVs?

The Electric: Is Toyota Right to Be Skeptical About EVs?

n Aug. 2 in Tokyo, Toyota unveiled the first hybrid electric Land Cruiser, a refreshed version of a large SUV previously known for its off-road muscle-bound chops, now containing both a gasoline engine and a small electric motor. Toyota, which had pulled the Land Cruiser from its U.S. lineup in 2021 after Americans began to balk at its $85,000 base price, said the hybrid would cost around $55,000, and that it would deliver the first vehicles in North America next spring.

Perhaps the loudest point in the event, however, was what Toyota did not say: The company would make neither fully combustion nor fully electric versions of the Land Cruiser, at least not yet. That is, while much of the auto industry has rushed to go fully electric as fast as it can, the Japanese giant would maintain its longtime strategy straddling combustion and electric propulsion.

For more than two years, Toyota—the world’s largest automaker by production—has been criticized for its skepticism toward electric vehicles: Environmentalists, policymakers and other automakers have accused the company of falling behind rivals and moving too slowly to reduce carbon emissions by eliminating combustion engines.

That may be changing. Last month, Ford CEO Jim Farley abandoned plans to make 2 million EVs annually by 2026. EV sales, he said, were growing more slowly than he expected, as many customers were put off by the relatively high price tag for the company’s electric Mustang Mach-E and Ford-150 Lightning models. So Farley said Ford would slow the transition to EVs and instead quadruple its production of hybrids by 2028, including introducing hybrid versions of its best-selling F-150 pickups at the Detroit Auto Show in September. Already, he said, well over half the customers of its $22,000 Maverick compact pickups were choosing the hybrid version. “We never thought we would be at 60% hybrid mix for Maverick,” Farley told analysts. “It was far beyond our expectation.”

Others, too, have embraced hybrids, including China’s Li Auto, which only makes hybrids, and South Korea’s Hyundai Motor. China’s Byd is the world’s largest seller of electrified vehicles, counting both pure EVs and hybrids. Roughly half its sales are hybrids—900,000 last year, mostly in China, and about 600,000 in the first half of this year.

The big selling point for hybrids: price. In the U.S., the average price for a hybrid is $39,000, according to Kelley Blue Book, compared with $53,000 for a fully electric vehicle. In China, Byd’s Qin Plus plug-in hybrid, equipped with an 18 kilowatt-hour battery, sells for about $17,400, compared with $24,400 for the Qin Plus EV.

U.S. sales of pure EVs are growing strongly, up 62% last year from 2021 and 61% in the first half of this year, according to data compiled by Argonne National Laboratory. Less noticed, however, has been a recent sales surge of hybrids and plug-in hybrids: From 2021 to 2022, sales of plug-in hybrids rose just 3%, while those of hybrids fell 4%. But in the first half of this year, hybrid sales are up about 32% and plug-in hybrids by 39%, though some of this surge may reflect the slower growth last year. In June alone, the last month for which Argonne has data, plug-in sales rose 52% compared with the same month in 2022, and pure hybrids by 66%; sales of pure EVs, meanwhile, rose just 35%.

Jack Hollis, executive vice president of Toyota Motor North America, told me that U.S. consumer demand for hybrids and plug-in hybrids was surprising even Toyota. He said the company underestimated the scale and timing of demand for hybrids. “Right now we cannot make enough hybrid vehicles to meet the demand,” he said. “Demand for hybrids has outpaced our expectations, greater than the forecast for EVs.”

Regulators could gum up Toyota’s calculus: In California, they want to ban combustion and hybrid cars as of 2035, though they would allow plug-ins; European regulators want to ban both hybrids and plug-in hybrids that year. But as we have written, there is no way to know if those deadlines will be met—future policymakers could delay the transition to EVs, consumers could reject the timing, or both.

Most automakers, including Tesla, Volkswagen and General Motors, have embraced the fast timetable to EVs and either abandoned hybrids or, in the case of Tesla, never made them. Toyota argues that, given typical driving habits, hybrids can save as much gasoline as pure EVs. Americans on average drive about 37 miles per day. Toyota’s newest plug-in Prius can go 44 miles on a charge before switching over to the gasoline engine. The company also argues that its batteries, since they are much smaller than those in EVs, require much less lithium, nickel, graphite and other metals and minerals, and so cause less environmental disruption.

The contrarian, pro-hybrid group is betting that hybrids will maintain their price advantage as lithium and nickel remain in short supply, squeezing the availability of EVs and pushing up their price.

A 122-Year-Old Idea

In 1901, Ferdinand Porsche, founder of the luxury carmaker today owned by VW, commercialized the first hybrid electric car—the Mixte. It failed—largely because the drive train could barely propel the heavy vehicle, which weighed almost two tons, according to the official Porsche history.

In 1993, Toyota picked up the idea. The company assigned a team to begin designing a car “for the 21st century.” Most of the industry was experimenting with EVs—GM was working on what would become the electric EV1, and Ford was developing an electric Ranger pickup. Both models were commercialized and for different reasons quickly abandoned. Toyota researchers, meanwhile, rejected a pure EV, deciding that the batteries were not ready, and settled on a hybrid system containing a gasoline engine and two electric motors, one of which would act as a generator to recharge the battery when a motorist applied the brakes. In 1997, Toyota introduced the Prius in Japan. It was impractical as an electric car, since it could go just a half mile on its battery power alone. But by 2008, Americans were snapping them up, seeing them as an environmental statement. Toyota’s new Prius is an attempt to gussy up the car, sales of which have declined in recent years, and attract new buyers.

But tastes have changed in the last 26 years. Today, Americans favor pickups and SUVs, which is why automakers are turning out hybrid and EV versions of those vehicles. Hyundai will release hybrid and plug-in versions of its Santa Fe SUV next year, and Toyota has launched a hybrid version of the $23,000 midsize Tacoma pickup.

Toyota’s Land Cruiser is an attempt by the company to bring back some of the glory of the early Prius days. Toyota introduced the Land Cruiser in 1951 as a military vehicle for the U.S. Army, then fighting in Korea. In 1958, the company started to sell cars in the U.S. and imported civilian versions of Land Cruisers into the country, along with Crown sedans. It sold only one Land Cruiser that first year. But in subsequent decades, Toyota made the car heftier, with features designed for rough, off-road conditions, making it a symbol of machismo and toughness. When I was based in Afghanistan in the 1990s, white Land Cruisers were the go-to status vehicle for Western diplomats, spies and the Afghan commanders they bankrolled (the troops drove around in Toyota Hilux mini-pickups).

Now, Toyota says it hopes to recapture that spirit for the Land Cruiser while using propulsion more suited for today. Toyota’s Hollis argues that hybrids are a better choice than EVs because they are more affordable, and, unlike an EV, they don’t burden a motorist with the worry of finding a charger or budgeting lots of time to charge up. Until the price of EVs comes down and charging infrastructure is built up everywhere, hybrids will remain the best choice, he said, and that could take much longer than rival companies and policymakers expect: “I think hybrids will be the No. 1 choice of customers in the 2030s.”

It’s a compelling argument—everything including advances in batteries, deployment of charging infrastructure and opening new lithium and nickel mines will have to go right for EVs to take off the way their champions predict. So far, success has favored the bold—mainly China and Tesla, both of which bet early on that EVs would prevail. That doesn’t mean the pro-hybrid hands now playing it safe will be wrong about the next stage of the transition.

Electrek : Tesla says it will build new ‘1st of its kind’ data centers

Tesla says it will build new ‘1st of its kind’ data centers

Tesla says it will build new “1st of its kind” data centers. The automaker is hiring staff for it and snapping up some existing data centers.

The data center business is now massive with a market size of more than $250 billion.

Most of the biggest companies in the world, which are known to consumers for other products, are in it, like Amazon Web Services (AWS), Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud Platform (GCP), and Meta Platforms (Facebook).

Now Tesla is getting into the data center business.

Tesla has shared a new job posting for a “Sr. Engineering Program Manager, Data Center” role first spotted by Electrek last week.

In the job posting, Tesla says that it will build “1st of its kind Data Centers”:

“This role will lead the end-to-end design and engineering of Tesla’s 1st of its kind Data Centers and will be one of the key members of the factory engineering team.”

Tesla didn’t explain how those data centers will be “1st of their kind”, which is not something you’d expect in a job posting anyway.

But interestingly, the new effort comes as Tesla has been taking over data centers from Twitter.

When Elon Musk took over Twitter, the company stopped paying a lot of its bills, including some data centers’ bills.

At the end of last year, Twitter stopped using data centers in Sacramento. When discussing the issues regarding Twitter’s data center, Musk said that Sacramento is “possibly the worst place to have a data center” for Twitter Spaces. He especially complained about the heat.

And yet, just a few months ago, The Information reported that Tesla has taken over one of the old Twitter data centers leased from NTT Data that the social media company was using in Sacramento.

The report also mentions that Tesla is in talks with Prime Data Centers to use another data center that Twitter used to have in Sacramento.

Tesla is seeing its need for data processing increasing rapidly as it tries to take advantage of its growing fleet of millions of vehicles all equipped with cameras in order to improve the neural nets powering its self-driving effort.

The automaker is also handling a growing number of connectivity features that it tries to sell to vehicle owners through a $10-a-month “Premium Connectivity” subscription service.

On the energy side, Tesla is also handling a lot of data to operate its virtual power plant and its services to distributed energy assets, like Autobidder and Powerhub.

>>> The European Energy Crisis May Be Back Soon

The European Energy Crisis May Be Back Soon
European natural gas prices soared almost 40 percent on the risk of a global liquefied natural gas shortage. European wholesale power prices remain below the record highs of the energy crisis but have steadily climbed as the volatility in the international commodity spectrum underscores the fragility of the European energy system.
Unfortunately, the European Union bureaucrats declared the end of the energy crisis as if it were the result of decisive policy action, but the reality is that the energy problem in the EU was only diminished by purely external factors: a very mild winter and the decline in global commodity prices due to the central bank rate hikes. Thus, the energy crisis remains, and the problems of security of supply and affordability of the system persist.

The European Union’s dependency on Russian gas has not been solved; it has only been disguised by a massive increase in dependency on coal (lignite) in the case of Germany and expensive liquefied natural gas imported from the rest of the world. At the end of 2022, Germany’s energy mix was the clearest example of its energy policy failure. Hard coal and lignite accounted for 31.2%, natural gas 13.8%, and mineral oil 0.8%, with nuclear at 6.0%. After almost 200 billion euros in renewable subsidies, Germany needs more coal and imported natural gas. What did the government decide after facing the mistake of shutting down almost all its nuclear fleet? You guessed it. Double down and continue with the process of closing the remaining ones. No wonder Germany is in recession. Its industrial model requires abundant and affordable energy, and the different governments have made the cost of energy uncompetitive.

What about Spain? The government decided to implement an “Iberian exception” that eliminates the cost of gas from the wholesale power price only to charge it back to consumers as a surcharge in the bill. The result? The fifth highest electricity bill in Europe sent hundreds of millions of euros to France and Portugal that purchased the subsidized energy while the Spanish consumer paid the bill to natural gas producers, and its imports of Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) soared, but the government tried to convince citizens that LNG from Novatek is “not Russian gas” because it is not a pipeline Gazprom supply, even when the supplier is a leading Russian energy multinational. You cannot make this up.

Even worse. Consumers have not seen the improvement in commodities in their bills. If we look at the latest reported Eurostat figures of household electricity prices, these increased in all but two EU Member States in the second half of 2022, compared with the second half of 2021, just as commodities slumped in international markets. The average for the EU stands at 252 euros per MWh and 261 euros per MWh for the euro area. This is between 20 and 30% higher than the average residential electricity rate in the U.S., according to data from Energy Sage.

The European energy crisis was not solved. It was disguised thanks to a mild winter and the slowdown in coal and gas imports from China. European governments continue to place all their bets on a misguided energy transition that ignores security of supply and competitiveness and will make the EU depend on China for rare earths and metals as well as the U.S. and OPEC for commodities.

The European Union should have abandoned ideological decisions and allowed technology, competition, and industry to provide the optimal solution that delivers a competitive and secure supply of energy. Deciding to forbid the development of domestic resources and focus on intermittent and volatile sources of energy before the battery technology is fully operational is an enormous mistake that condemns the European Union to suffer higher costs and lower growth. Environmental policies must be considered from a global perspective. The EU accounts for less than 10% of global emissions but almost 100% of the cost. It needs to focus on competitiveness, security of supply, and respect for the environment from an industrial perspective. Ignoring the importance of making the most of nuclear, hydroelectric, gas, and all other available sources is dangerous. In China or the United States, affordability, security of supply, and competitiveness are the drivers of energy policy. In Europe, it is a misguided view of “not in my backyard” that is making the continent more dependent on others, not less. Subsidies are delaying the necessary development of intermittent and volatile energy sources because policymakers reject the importance of creative destruction and competition as driving forces of progress. Interventionism is not delivering better or cheaper energy; it is making the European Union lose in the technology and energy security race.


>>> Germany Fin Min Lindner: Committed to providing €5.0B per year in aid to Ukr

Germany Fin Min Lindner: Committed to providing €5.0B per year in aid to Ukraine through 2027 - Kyiv
**Reminder: earlier, Germany Cabinet reportedly backs 2024 budget with €16.6B in net new debt - press
- On July 3rd, Germany Finance Ministry 2024 draft budget said to see €16.6B in net new borrowing (includes record spending on defense) - financial press
- On Jun 22nd, EU's Dombrovskis stated €100M Ukraine aid package may need some adjustments and noted he expects EU members to support €50B Ukraine aid
- On Jun 13th, EU's Dombrovskis said EU Commission to finalize €100M Ukraine aid today

>>> US Research Calls

Research Calls

  • Upgrades:
    • Consolidated Water (CWCO) upgraded to Buy from Neutral at Janney; tgt raised to $28
    • Coterra Energy (CTRA) upgraded to Overweight from Neutral at Piper Sandler; tgt raised to $35
    • Okta (OKTA) upgraded to Buy from Sell at Goldman; tgt raised to $91
    • Parsons (PSN) upgraded to Buy from Underperform at BofA Securities; tgt raised to $65
    • Teledyne Tech (TDY) upgraded to Buy from Neutral at Goldman; tgt raised to $495
    • TTEC Holdings (TTEC) upgraded to Equal-Weight from Underweight at Morgan Stanley; tgt $31
  • Downgrades:
    • Berry Petroleum (BRY) downgraded to Neutral from Overweight at Piper Sandler; tgt $9
    • CF Industries (CF) downgraded to Equal Weight from Overweight at Barclays; tgt raised to $85
    • EPR Properties (EPR) downgraded to Neutral from Buy at BofA Securities; tgt lowered to $45
    • Fresenius Medical (FMS) downgraded to Neutral from Buy at UBS
    • Keysight (KEYS) downgraded to Underperform from Neutral at BofA Securities; tgt lowered to $148
    • Marriott (MAR) downgraded to Mkt Perform from Outperform at Bernstein; tgt raised to $218
    • Mosaic (MOS) downgraded to Underweight from Equal Weight at Barclays; tgt $40
    • Northern Oil & Gas (NOG) downgraded to Neutral from Overweight at Piper Sandler; tgt $46
    • Nutrien (NTR) downgraded to Underweight from Overweight at Barclays; tgt lowered to $68
    • Public Service (PEG) downgraded to Neutral from Buy at UBS; tgt lowered to $66
    • Urban Outfitters (URBN) downgraded to Neutral from Buy at Citigroup; tgt raised to $40
    • W.P. Carey (WPC) downgraded to Underperform from Neutral at BofA Securities; tgt lowered to $67
  • Others:
    • CymaBay Therapeutics (CBAY) initiated with a Buy at UBS; tgt $18
    • Ducommun (DCO) initiated with a Neutral at Goldman; tgt $52
    • Monster Beverage (MNST) initiated with a Buy at HSBC Securities; tgt $72
    • ODDITY Tech Ltd. (ODD) initiated with a Hold at Truist; tgt $54
    • ODDITY Tech Ltd. (ODD) initiated with a Mkt Outperform at JMP Securities; tgt $66
    • ODDITY Tech Ltd. (ODD) initiated with a Neutral at BofA Securities; tgt $60
    • ODDITY Tech Ltd. (ODD) initiated with a Neutral at Goldman; tgt $59
    • ODDITY Tech Ltd. (ODD) initiated with an Equal-Weight at Morgan Stanley; tgt $57
    • PLAYSTUDIOS (MYPS) initiated with a Neutral at BTIG Research
    • Sana Biotechnology (SANA) initiated with a Market Perform at TD Cowen

>>> US Gapping down


Gapping down
In reaction to earnings/guidance
:

  • BTAI -25.5%, SSL -5.2%, JKS -2.6%, ROIV -1.6%

Other news:

  • AMC -34.8% (AMC won court approval of a revised stock conversion plan according to Bloomberg)
  • NKLA -15.1% (announces preliminary results of battery investigations voluntarily recalls 209 Class 8 battery-electric trucks)
  • PCYG -8.5% (files $50 mln mixed shelf securities offering)
  • VALN -5.6% (announces PDUFA Date extension for Chikungunya virus vaccine candidate)
  • HE -4.9% (facing questions for not cutting off power to reduce wildfire risk)
  • WK -2.5% (offering of $525 million of convertible senior notes)
  • HRMY -2.3% (to acquire Zynerba Pharmaceuticals (ZYNE)
  • OPAL -2.1% (files mixed shelf securities offering)
  • NOVA -1.6% (launched an underwritten public offering of $75.0 million of Sunnova's common stock)
  • XAIR -1.4% (files for 626308 shares of common stock by selling shareholders)
  • FLNC -1.2% (files mixed shelf securities offering)
  • CHH -0.7% (files mixed shelf securities offering)

Analyst comments:

  • KEYS -2.9% (downgraded to Underperform from Neutral at BofA Securities)
  • MOS -2.9% (downgraded to Underweight from Equal Weight at Barclays)
  • URBN -2.4% (downgraded to Neutral from Buy at Citigroup)
  • NTR -2.3% (downgraded to Underweight from Overweight at Barclays)
  • MAR -1.6% (downgraded to Mkt Perform from Outperform at Bernstein)
  • CF -1.5% (downgraded to Equal Weight from Overweight at Barclays)
  • WPC -1.4% (downgraded to Underperform from Neutral at BofA Securities)

>>> US Gapping up


Gapping up
In reaction to earnings/guidance
:

  • MNDY +5.6%

Other news:

  • APE +27.5% (AMC won court approval of a revised stock conversion plan according to Bloomberg)
  • X +27.3% (receives proposal to be acquired by Cleveland-Cliffs (CLF) for total consideration of $35.00 per share; company committed to maximize stockholder value after receiving multiple unsolicited proposals)
  • PLSE +5% (files for 10022937 shares of common stock by selling shareholder)
  • PHG +3.8% (Exor becomes a long-term investor in Philips supporting the company's strategy)
  • CD +2.7% (enters into definitive agreement for "going private" transaction)
  • APLS +2.7% (Investors are growing confidence in safety of APLS eye treatment according to Stat News)
  • WLK +2.1% (raises dividend by 40% to $0.50 per share)
  • CPA +1.6% (reports July traffic increased 9.9% yr/yr)

Analyst comments:

  • PSN +2.3% (upgraded to Buy from Underperform at BofA Securities)
  • CWCO +1.9% (upgraded to Buy from Neutral at Janney)
  • CTRA +1.2% (upgraded to Overweight from Neutral at Piper Sandler)

>>> US Early premarket gappers


Early premarket gappers

  • Gapping up:
    • X +28.5%, APE +26.4%, PLSE +5%, PHG +4.7%, CD +3%, FOXA +1.8%, CPA +1.6%, SPWR +0.6%, QSI +0.5%
  • Gapping down:
    • AMC -27.8%, NKLA -14.4%, PCYG -8.5%, NOVA -8.2%, VALN -7.4%, SSL -5%, XAIR -4.7%, JKS -3.1%, OPAL -2.1%, HE -1.2%, CHH -0.7%, HLI -0.7%

FT : Airlines rush to avoid cancellations after engine recall

Airlines rush to avoid cancellations after engine recall
More than 1,000 Pratt & Whitney engines are affected, forcing carriers to change schedules and ground craft

Airlines in the US and Europe are rushing to find spare parts and engines and avoid flight cancellations after engine-maker Pratt & Whitney issued a product recall last month.

P&W’s announcement in July that more than a thousand engines would need to be removed from Airbus aircraft and inspected has forced a number of airlines — including Spirit Airlines, JetBlue Airways and Hawaiian Airlines in the US, and Wizz Air in Europe — to change flight schedules or ground aircraft.

Wizz has cut its growth target, is considering temporarily scrapping some flights or routes, and had warned that the engine problems are putting pressure on maintenance operations. Spirit told investors this month that with fewer aircraft to fly “we will likely be overstaffed” in the fourth quarter and early in 2024.

JetBlue chief operating officer Joanna Geraghty told investors this month that the company was looking to lease engines to minimise the fallout of removing “a handful” of engines from aircraft next month.

“We are trying to take whatever self-help measures are available,” she said. “But as you know, the supply is pretty constrained.”

P&W issued the recall after it discovered that contamination in the metal used to manufacture certain engine parts could cause cracks. Parent company RTX said that about 1,200 of the company’s 3,000 geared turbofan engines would need to be inspected earlier than planned. Roughly 200 of these inspections will take place by mid-September.

The GTF engine, which was introduced in 2016, is one of two that can be used in the Airbus A320neo narrow-body jet, the world’s best-selling aircraft. The recalls threaten RTX’s free cash flow, said Melius Research analyst Rob Spingarn, but “arguably worse is the damage to Pratt’s reputation as a provider of reliable large commercial engines”.

RTX has promised to compensate airlines. Chief executive Greg Hayes said on an earnings call last month that the recall was “not an existential threat” to either RTX or P&W, but he acknowledged, “it will be expensive”.

Aircraft engine supply has been tight for more than a year as the big manufacturers Boeing and Airbus have struggled to meet demand for new planes.

P&W’s current manufacturing issues add to ongoing durability issues that have dogged its GTF engine.

More than 57 airlines have their GTF powered aircraft parked or stored, according to consultancy IBA.

Analysis by data provider Cirium found that around 11 per cent of the GTF-powered A320 fleet delivered so far is currently parked, compared with just over 2 per cent for aircraft powered by rival Leap engines made by CFM International.

Almost one-third of those parked aircraft belong to Indian carrier Go First whose operations remain suspended pending bankruptcy proceedings.

The P&W engine recall is “simply another unwelcome issue which leaves airlines potentially short of capacity,” said Rob Morris, head of Cirium’s consultancy business Ascend.

Wizz has cut its summer growth target from 30 to 25 per cent year-on-year because of the recall. Chief executive József Váradi said it had added to the “creep” of supply chain problems. Together with too few spare engines and packed repair schedules, “that affected the availability of the aircraft, that affected the integrity of the operations”.

At the same time, airlines are extending lease agreements in response to booming travel demand, and demand for older aircraft is outstripping supply.

Aengus Kelly, chief executive at the world’s biggest lessor, AerCap, said about 40 per cent of used aircraft sales in the second quarter went to airlines, up from 20 per cent before the pandemic. Engines are in demand too, representing up to 40 per cent of AerCap’s second-quarter asset sales.

Lufthansa bought four wide-bodied A350 planes in May that Latam Airlines offloaded during a bankruptcy process, while Finnair leased two A330s to Australia’s Qantas after the closure of Russian airspace limited its long-haul operations.

“Airlines need to ensure they have access to aircraft to be able to maintain schedule integrity, and the leasing channel is the best option currently,” said TD Cowen analyst Helane Becker. “Lessors are generally happy to sell . . . as they are usually able to book a gain.”

Paul Geaney, chief commercial officer of lessor Avolon, said aviation’s “fundamental supply and demand imbalance” would last for several years.