BYD is about to open another EV plant overseas with 150,000 vehicle capacity(electrek.co)
electrek.co
BYD is about to open another EV plant overseas with 150,000 vehicle capacity
https://electrek.co/2025/01/20/byd-open-new-ev-plant-overseas-150000-vehicle-capacity/
47 comments
I live in Singapore and see a lot of BYD cars here. They seem quite good.
They are tapping German engineers to design the automobiles. Really upped their game.
I just don’t know why it’s Indonesia. Why not somewhere like Thailand or Vietnam?
Local investment = no import tax. BYD is maximizing based on markets where there are no local automakers to defend and the investment is desired.
> After opening its first EV plant in Thailand last year, BYD confirmed another overseas manufacturing facility is on track to open by the end of the year. In a new interview with Reuters, Eagles Zhao, BYD’s president director in Indonesia, said the company is aiming to finish the $1 billion manufacturing plant in the region by the end of 2025.
> Because of the $1 billion investment, BYD has been temporarily allowed to ship cars into Indonesia without an import tax.
> The move is part of Indonesia’s goal to build 600,000 EVs domestically by 2030. Like other Southeast Asian countries, Indonesia is introducing new policies to attract foreign investments and take advantage of the market’s shift to EVs.
> BYD is already the leading EV maker in Indonesia, accounting for over a third (36%) of the market. According to the auto association, the EV giant sold nearly 15,500 vehicles last year, its first full sales year.
> After opening its first EV plant in Thailand last year, BYD confirmed another overseas manufacturing facility is on track to open by the end of the year. In a new interview with Reuters, Eagles Zhao, BYD’s president director in Indonesia, said the company is aiming to finish the $1 billion manufacturing plant in the region by the end of 2025.
> Because of the $1 billion investment, BYD has been temporarily allowed to ship cars into Indonesia without an import tax.
> The move is part of Indonesia’s goal to build 600,000 EVs domestically by 2030. Like other Southeast Asian countries, Indonesia is introducing new policies to attract foreign investments and take advantage of the market’s shift to EVs.
> BYD is already the leading EV maker in Indonesia, accounting for over a third (36%) of the market. According to the auto association, the EV giant sold nearly 15,500 vehicles last year, its first full sales year.
Because they already have a factory in Thailand. So you just commented without opening and reading the article?
Indonesia wants to move further up the value chain. Some time back Indonesia banned the export of nickel ore because they wanted to attract more investment in domestic smelters and refineries. The EU response to that was to take them to the WTO.
https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2024/10/28/indonesias-trade-dispu...
Biden tried to work out a deal with Indonesia of nickel supply but then its stuck on concerns like environmental impact, forced labor, etc.
https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/us-indonesia-dis...
https://www.eenews.net/articles/feds-link-indonesia-nickel-n...
I imagine China has no concerns about these issues. They just trade technology and building domestic factories for access to minerals.
https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2024/10/28/indonesias-trade-dispu...
Biden tried to work out a deal with Indonesia of nickel supply but then its stuck on concerns like environmental impact, forced labor, etc.
https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/us-indonesia-dis...
https://www.eenews.net/articles/feds-link-indonesia-nickel-n...
I imagine China has no concerns about these issues. They just trade technology and building domestic factories for access to minerals.
The U.S. is so freaking behind on EVs.
China went from making cars with 3 gears and lawn mower engines (practically speaking) to mass EVs in like 15 years.
Meanwhile here the big automakers are crying about unfair competition and Chinese subsidizes. Free market sucks when it's not in your favor anymore, ain't it?
China went from making cars with 3 gears and lawn mower engines (practically speaking) to mass EVs in like 15 years.
Meanwhile here the big automakers are crying about unfair competition and Chinese subsidizes. Free market sucks when it's not in your favor anymore, ain't it?
>China went from making cars with 3 gears and lawn mower engines (practically speaking) to mass EVs in like 15 years.
The history is a bit different. China is still making three gear lawn mowers compared to their ICE competition. The EV market opened an enormous opportunity, where suddenly every single manufacturer had to start propulsion from zero, the advantage of decades of ICE research instantly vanished. This combined with Chinas long push in manufacturing and somewhat recent push in high tech manufacturing made for a very good environment.
>Meanwhile here the big automakers are crying about unfair competition and Chinese subsidizes.
Not in Europe. The car makers are opposing the tarifs, the EU leadership wants them.
The history is a bit different. China is still making three gear lawn mowers compared to their ICE competition. The EV market opened an enormous opportunity, where suddenly every single manufacturer had to start propulsion from zero, the advantage of decades of ICE research instantly vanished. This combined with Chinas long push in manufacturing and somewhat recent push in high tech manufacturing made for a very good environment.
>Meanwhile here the big automakers are crying about unfair competition and Chinese subsidizes.
Not in Europe. The car makers are opposing the tarifs, the EU leadership wants them.
China doesn't have oil like the USA, one of their main weaknesses is the potential to be cut from their oil supply if there's a blockade on the Strait of Malacca. I think that explains a lot why ICE cars were never that attractive for indigenous development, seeing the writing on the wall and investing in EVs is a quite ingenious move.
That and their solar/nuclear capacity being rapidly developed is putting them on path to depend for oil only on very specific purposes, looking like in the next decades the main one will be for their military but if they can cut away from oil dependency for most other uses... They will be happy with being supplied by Russia, even better if the oil is kept cheap by price caps.
The USA is really looking to be deciding to get stuck on an increasingly stagnating path if it keeps getting more and more conservative and inwards-looking.
That and their solar/nuclear capacity being rapidly developed is putting them on path to depend for oil only on very specific purposes, looking like in the next decades the main one will be for their military but if they can cut away from oil dependency for most other uses... They will be happy with being supplied by Russia, even better if the oil is kept cheap by price caps.
The USA is really looking to be deciding to get stuck on an increasingly stagnating path if it keeps getting more and more conservative and inwards-looking.
This sure doesn't seem to have stopped Japan from basically refusing to scale EV production.
With the Nissan Leaf as the first major production EV in the world, and the Prius the first major hybrid, They have basically refused to proceed.
I feel, to appease US financial and military interests.
The Prius, by simply scaling the battery capacity, and adding a plug-in charger could be a very affordable plug-in hybrid. The Leaf with a little battery capacity increase could compete as a low cost EV against the typical $80K models entering the market..
Instead both of those manufacturers have cancelled those product lines.
With the Nissan Leaf as the first major production EV in the world, and the Prius the first major hybrid, They have basically refused to proceed.
I feel, to appease US financial and military interests.
The Prius, by simply scaling the battery capacity, and adding a plug-in charger could be a very affordable plug-in hybrid. The Leaf with a little battery capacity increase could compete as a low cost EV against the typical $80K models entering the market..
Instead both of those manufacturers have cancelled those product lines.
Did I miss something? The Prius Prime (Toyota’s plug-in hybrid) still seems to be on the market: https://www.toyota.com/priuspluginhybrid/
> The EV market opened an enormous opportunity, where suddenly every single manufacturer had to start propulsion from zero, the advantage of decades of ICE research instantly vanished.
That's not true though.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_EV1
U.S. automakers refused to invest and plan for the future while they could continue to profit off their cash cow.
Now they are behind because of their negligence.
That's not true though.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_EV1
U.S. automakers refused to invest and plan for the future while they could continue to profit off their cash cow.
Now they are behind because of their negligence.
>That's not true though.
It is. Or do you think that any of the engineers at GM knew how to make EVs, because 25 years ago they designed one once? The advantage of that was completely negligible and easily outweighed by Chinese companies being in direct contact with e.g. battery manufacturers.
>U.S. automakers refused to invest and plan for the future while they could continue to profit off their cash cow.
Which contradicts what I said how?
It is. Or do you think that any of the engineers at GM knew how to make EVs, because 25 years ago they designed one once? The advantage of that was completely negligible and easily outweighed by Chinese companies being in direct contact with e.g. battery manufacturers.
>U.S. automakers refused to invest and plan for the future while they could continue to profit off their cash cow.
Which contradicts what I said how?
My point was that U.S. automakers did not have to start from scratch with regards to propulsion as you claimed.
But they had to start from scratch. How many engineers who know how to build EV motors do you think where sitting around at GM between 1996 and 2020 doing nothing? Exactly zero.
Do you think GM has been developing EV motors and batteries since 1996 and just never used them for anything? That is ridiculous. All of the people there had to start from zero when designing EVs.
There is no advantage of having had an idea but abandoning it 25 years ago.
If anything Chinese EV companies had an advantage as getting specialist in producing batteries and motors is surely easier if your country is one of the biggest manufacturers.
What of course is true is that GM could have had 25 years of development advantage, but chose to abandon that idea. This does not conflict at all with my point that they did not have that advantage, as they did not continue to make EVs.
Do you think GM has been developing EV motors and batteries since 1996 and just never used them for anything? That is ridiculous. All of the people there had to start from zero when designing EVs.
There is no advantage of having had an idea but abandoning it 25 years ago.
If anything Chinese EV companies had an advantage as getting specialist in producing batteries and motors is surely easier if your country is one of the biggest manufacturers.
What of course is true is that GM could have had 25 years of development advantage, but chose to abandon that idea. This does not conflict at all with my point that they did not have that advantage, as they did not continue to make EVs.
You're forgetting about HEV and PHEV that were/are in development in the interim.
So yes, U.S. automakers did have electric propulsion and battery engineers for some time.
Again, the U.S. automakers were negligent in planning for the future and are now laughably behind.
So yes, U.S. automakers did have electric propulsion and battery engineers for some time.
Again, the U.S. automakers were negligent in planning for the future and are now laughably behind.
Tesla has done nothing but EVs and is laughably behind BYD. In fact, every US automotive manufacturer went to China and pretended that they wouldn't be able to catch up to them (racist) while teaching them how to build automobiles. Now everyone (especially Tesla) is crying foul and trying to invoke protectionism.
>Again, the U.S. automakers were negligent in planning for the future and are now laughably behind.
That was my original point though?
That was my original point though?
You disagreed on the history of events by saying automakers globally started at the same point with regarding EVs and that's why in part China is so far ahead.
I corrected you, that's it's worse than that because the U.S. automakers weren't even starting at 0 in comparison (which you doubled-down on that they were for whatever reason). They had the advantage to be ahead.
I corrected you, that's it's worse than that because the U.S. automakers weren't even starting at 0 in comparison (which you doubled-down on that they were for whatever reason). They had the advantage to be ahead.
It was all creative disruption, Kodak again.
It's easier to act as EVs are not coming than change the old investor base.
It's easier to act as EVs are not coming than change the old investor base.
US automakers have already lost, their market will shrink to whatever the US domestic market demands. Global light vehicle TAM is ~90M units/year, and BYD is going to ramp as quickly as they can to meet that.
Couldn't agree more.
Meanwhile the US is doubling down on fossil fuel energy sources which will be decreasing in demand globally over the next several decades as EVs grow in market share along with growth in alternative energy generation.
Meanwhile the US is doubling down on fossil fuel energy sources which will be decreasing in demand globally over the next several decades as EVs grow in market share along with growth in alternative energy generation.
[deleted]
It's not just EVs, the US is behind in many many ways.
In all forms of electrification, and in any mitigation of equity stake market threat avoidance.
Monopoly is a good thing, for the monopolists...
Chongqing is the latest poster child, there is not one city in the US like it, but it's just one example.
The modernization that eventually arose from WWII reconstruction bypassed the US. This is now starting to show its consequences...
In all forms of electrification, and in any mitigation of equity stake market threat avoidance.
Monopoly is a good thing, for the monopolists...
Chongqing is the latest poster child, there is not one city in the US like it, but it's just one example.
The modernization that eventually arose from WWII reconstruction bypassed the US. This is now starting to show its consequences...
if U.S. could have opened its market to Chinese EVs (yes yes I know Chinese Gov subsidizes those vendors a lot, but U.S. can still do punitive tariffs, instead of just ban[1], and of course, making excuses out of national security, meanwhile Tesla is doing okay in China) these U.S. vendors have no competitions is the reason why they are far behind.
[1] https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/biden-...
[1] https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/biden-...
Do the Chinese EVs meet US safety standards? Those requirements add a non trivial amount of weight to the vehicle.
There are a few Chinese EVs available widely in Australia (BYD, MG, and recently Zeekr) that all conform to Australian Design Rules (ADR), which have been "harmonised" with the European ones for a while. So, most likely this would get the vehicles pretty close to passing the US safety rules, though they'd still have to go through testing and certification.
Pretty sure EU safety standards are higher and many Chinese EVs meet those.
Considering a Cyberbeast out of all vehicles meets "US safety standards", I have to admit I don't have a lot of faith in those.
Btw it doesn't meet European Union standards and hence isn't sold there.
Btw it doesn't meet European Union standards and hence isn't sold there.
Unfortunately, the US customer doesn't want EVs so we're kinda capped. You could imagine a forcing function beyond the tax credit but clearly politically that is off the table for awhile.
The US (people) doesn't want to lead the world in EVs, and thus we won't.
The US (people) doesn't want to lead the world in EVs, and thus we won't.
>Unfortunately, the US customer doesn't want EVs so we're kinda capped. You could imagine a forcing function beyond the tax credit but clearly politically that is off the table for awhile.
Because American EVs are astronomical in price due to no competition.
Because American EVs are astronomical in price due to no competition.
I find it amusing that Chinese subsidies are painted as something terrible for the rest of the world and not China. You can a get high-tech cars for cheap, at China's expense! Chinese taxpayers are paying to upgrade your car!
(yeah, it's really about protecting local manufacturing that has fallen behind and can't compete, despite having its own domestic subsidies)
(yeah, it's really about protecting local manufacturing that has fallen behind and can't compete, despite having its own domestic subsidies)
I agree. I've said this repeatedly: Why shouldn't US consumers benefit from Chinese govt subsidies?
Your post is the first time I've seen anyone else note this...
Your post is the first time I've seen anyone else note this...
Exactly. Why shouldn't people take advantage of a tech startup's ridiculous prices backed by VC money? Why shouldn't people buy cheap EVs backed by Chinese tax payers?
It has been noted that if your competitor is paying out of pocket to flood the market with cheap goods, the optimal strategy is to buy up as much of the cheap goods as you can.
Maybe.
Outsourcing semiconductors was considered good for the consumer too.
Not so much for national security.
Outsourcing semiconductors was considered good for the consumer too.
Not so much for national security.
'Free Market' was never a bi-directional concept. Did the Newspeak fool you?
> unfair competition and Chinese subsidizes
> Free market
Pick one.
> Free market
Pick one.
Because, of course, the major US automakers never ever received any governemtn subsidies, ever.
They just used them to be able to continue to make gas guzlers, instead of electrifying, like in China.
Just search for: US auto industry bailouts
And choose your reference...
They just used them to be able to continue to make gas guzlers, instead of electrifying, like in China.
Just search for: US auto industry bailouts
And choose your reference...
As someone who typically only buys American-made goods, the amount of government money that US automakers receive is miniscule compared to what China automakers get. Unfortunately due to the lack of transparency, I doubt we can get actual numbers from Chinese EV companies, but in the land of the free we're able to at least paint an accurate picture.
If the Chinese govt gives money to EV makers doesn't that mean you can buy an EV cheaper?
Given 100% tariffs on Chinese vehicles, we're not free to buy a $25K EV...
If the concern is security, instead of tariffs, why aren't we outlawing surveillance of users and private data telemetry by _any_ automaker, or any product maker?
Given 100% tariffs on Chinese vehicles, we're not free to buy a $25K EV...
If the concern is security, instead of tariffs, why aren't we outlawing surveillance of users and private data telemetry by _any_ automaker, or any product maker?
Please paint it.
Ok? My point stands. It's still not a free market with subsidies limited to domestic manufacturers.
A country dumping money into an industry in order to undercut foreign competition should be punished. I don't care if it is the US, China or whoever.
One can not let it stand or the market distortion will drive domestic competitors out of business at which point they'll be able to hike up prices. For something like the auto industry with high capital costs to get into, one might never recover.
A country dumping money into an industry in order to undercut foreign competition should be punished. I don't care if it is the US, China or whoever.
One can not let it stand or the market distortion will drive domestic competitors out of business at which point they'll be able to hike up prices. For something like the auto industry with high capital costs to get into, one might never recover.
>Ok? My point stands. It's still not a free market with subsidies limited to domestic manufacturers.
Chinese gave Tesla subsidies as well and a massive amount of valuable land near Shanghai for their Giga plant. They also sped up construction regulation approvals for Tesla.
Chinese gave Tesla subsidies as well and a massive amount of valuable land near Shanghai for their Giga plant. They also sped up construction regulation approvals for Tesla.
Tesla's domestic Chinese manufacturing received subsidies. That still has the effect of benefiting domestic over foreign production and should be punished.
The fact that ultimately Tesla is an American company does not matter as the effect of shifting manufacturing due to market manipulation remains.
The kind of non-preferential subsides I was referring to are generally purchase subsidies without any origin requirements. For instance, EV purchase rebates in the US aren't restricted to domestically manufactured vehicles.
The fact that ultimately Tesla is an American company does not matter as the effect of shifting manufacturing due to market manipulation remains.
The kind of non-preferential subsides I was referring to are generally purchase subsidies without any origin requirements. For instance, EV purchase rebates in the US aren't restricted to domestically manufactured vehicles.
US EV subsidies allowed Tesla to survive, which allowed it to become the dominant EV player in the world.
it's in Indonesia