The time has just jumped to 2024, and the smoke at the end of 2023 has not completely dissipated, leaving a pungent smell, the slogan of "far ahead" is still echoing in the ears, and the naked clamor and malicious battles erupt from time to time.
Suddenly, a voice came from above this blazing world—long-termism
The voice was like a cry, as if to say "calm down!" to this drastically changing world. The sound waves spread out, like ripples caused by stones thrown into a pond, and gradually became nothing. It didn't make much of an echo, and it didn't cause people to look up.
……
One
Although there is only a small amount of echo, the source of the sound is different, which makes "long-termism" interesting.
"Hamlet", "Oedipus the King", "Flat Country", the reason why these classic dramas and novels can still be attractive through the centuries and millennium is that different people have different understandings of them. The vitality of things and ideas is reflected in this "difference". When there is no objection to everything about "it", then this "it" is dead.
Some people think that "long-termism" reflects the demand for rational development in the automobile market, and some people think that from the foreseeable future period, fuel vehicles and hybrid vehicles are still the existence that cannot be ignored, while the long-term accumulated advantages of traditional brands in terms of quality and after-sales cannot be ignored. Others feel that this is the last "moan" of a traditional car.
If it is short-termism to compete around the existing technical route of electric intelligence, then it is long-termism to provide more ideas, directions and solutions for the future development of automobiles.
To be clear, I don't think long-termism is limited to a few car manufacturers, it is certainly open and brainstorming. But in practice, long-termism is more suitable for powerful global automakers, because it requires them to invest more, but the return may only be "futures". Manufacturers such as Tesla (the world's largest in terms of market capitalization), Volkswagen and Toyota (the top three in the world in terms of market capitalization, and the top two global car companies in terms of revenue in 2023), BYD (the world's top seller of new energy vehicles in 2023) and other manufacturers have a global market, and a relatively stable supply model and mature sales channels can also provide them with "capricious" capital, and among them, more are traditional car manufacturers. Looking back at those nascent brands, survival is the ultimate priority.
However, in the face of fierce competition and drastic changes, traditional car companies are prone to become cautious and bound by the status quo.
Since last year's Guangzhou Auto Show, the ninth-generation Camry has entered people's field of vision, from the debut of the new car to the pre-sale during the New Year's Day, I can clearly feel GAC Toyota's various apprehensions and entanglements in the promotion of the new car. What information should be announced, when should it be announced, will it affect the sales of the eighth-generation Camry, and will it attract people's attention?
The problem is that today's Chinese auto market can hardly be said to be rational. People are expecting "huge changes", "surprises that are far ahead" and "life-and-death battles", and will not be too patient and careful about such a calculating strategy of the Camry. It's like getting used to the taste of heavy oil and spicy, but it's hard to taste the light and wonderful again.
On January 1 this year, the ninth-generation Camry opened pre-sales, but only the 2.0-liter model was announced for pre-sale, and the 2.5-liter model was not involved. This led to an unintended consequence, with many people thinking that the ninth-generation Camry would no longer launch a 2.5-liter model, leaving only the 2.0-liter model to reduce the overall price. Traditional car companies seem to be in a hurry to deal with the current Chinese market, and I think a large part of the psychological factor behind this is the fear of the failure of traditional classic models.
Tradition is always inevitably on the opposite side of development, to accept criticism and challenges, to welcome change and even death. We need to accept the possibility of the decline of traditional classics. Accepting the reality of change and having a long-term, bold and rational vision are the qualities required for long-termism.
Two
Long-termism is a future-oriented way of thinking, so it must be thought about. Constrained by a clumsy mind and limited vision, I feel that based on the current situation, there are two basic ideas at present.
First, it is based on the current trend of electrification and intelligence. In the long run, the intelligence of automobiles is certainly one of the development directions, but no one has answered the question: is the realization of autonomous driving the ultimate of intelligence?
In addition, if pure electric drive is the development trend of automobiles in the future, how to minimize the environmental pollution and carbon emissions caused by the production and use of electric vehicles?
Second, if the current development of electrification of automobiles does not conform to long-termism, are there other alternatives?
Three
From the perspective of long-termism, traditional car companies should not only consider the future appearance of intelligence, but also the old R&D and production model around suppliers has also caused difficulties for their development. At present, the idea of software-defined vehicles is more suitable for intelligent development, but this requires breaking the old concept and model.
In the past, software systems were only the bottom layer of the entire automotive development process, but now software is the core of the upper layer. Intelligence means that software and hardware are no longer separated, and the system coordinates hardware through software, which requires the development of systems and algorithms based on a global perspective, rather than putting together the hardware of each company and handing it over to another company's software for coordination and management. Unlike top-down software-based development, patchwork ideas make costs more difficult to manage, and the vehicle's hardware and software systems are difficult to coordinate.
However, it is very difficult to break the old model, which cannot be summed up by a simple sentence of "elephant turn", there are interests and even cultural relations behind it.
Let's take Toyota as an example. Japanese-American political scientist Francis Fukuyama mentions in his book Trust: Social Virtues and Creating Economic Prosperity that many countries, including Japan, Germany, and the United States, have established business networks based on mutual moral responsibility. One of the major benefits of such a long-term stable relationship between partners is the savings in transaction costs. Toyota could acquire many subcontractors, but it did not, and they supported each other by trusting each other and forming a strong and close relationship to ensure the stability of its business network. Even when many subcontractors are struggling to survive and want to raise the price of their products, Toyota and other partners will still choose to cut profits to help them tide over the storm rather than choose new suppliers with lower costs.
For a long time in Toyota's overseas development, this trust has led Toyota to build factories overseas with its supplier partners. Although Toyota's relationships with suppliers and subcontractors are no longer as strong, and the competition and cooperation model is more convenient and economical, the trust of this business group is still there. Fukuyama believes that the unique business model of the Japan Economic Federation is closely related to traditional Japanese culture.
Or Japan. In the aftermath of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident on March 11, 2011, the separation of power transmission and distribution and the nationalization of nuclear power have been the focus of discussion within the Japanese government and the public, and Prime Minister Naoto Kan has advocated the abandonment of nuclear weapons. In the aftermath of the accident, Tokyo Electric Power Co., Ltd., the owner of the Fukushima nuclear power plant, needed an emergency loan of 2 trillion yen to tide over the situation and avoid bankruptcy, and TEPCO's main banks, Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation and Mizuho Industrial Bank, decided to provide loans.
An important reason for the banks' decision to lend is that Article 3 of the Original Compensation Act stipulates that "when nuclear damage is caused by the operation of a nuclear reactor, the operator (power company) shall be liable for compensation". However, the same provision also stipulates that "this provision does not apply when the loss is caused by an unusually large natural or terrestrial disaster or social unrest." In addition, Article 16 of the Act stipulates that "the government shall provide necessary assistance in the event that an electric power company bears the amount of compensation for damages that cannot be borne on its own." The banks determined that the March 11 tsunami-triggered nuclear accident would result in TEPCO waiving compensation. However, the Energy Agency and the Ministry of Finance have been at odds over how to understand "natural disasters." The Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI), which is part of the Energy Agency, has formed a very solid relationship with TEPCO and other power companies and a high degree of monopoly in Japan's nuclear power industry.
Although the final confrontation ended with TEPCO's "capitulation", the fact was that the separation of transmission and distribution and the nationalization of nuclear power were not succeeded by the joint efforts of the power companies and the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, which was the main goal of the efforts of Naoto Kan, the Ministry of the Environment, and the Ministry of Finance. Far from being successful, the Kan cabinet was forced to resign after a series of "you go back and forth" about nuclear abandonment and separation of transmission and distribution. The important point that power companies and the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry have always maintained is that if nuclear power plants are abandoned or most nuclear power plants are shut down, Japan's electricity supply will not be able to keep up. However, a survey conducted by the Ministry of the Environment has found that it is possible to meet Japan's electricity needs by generating electricity from other clean sources.
Sometimes, the solid and long-lasting chains of interests and monopolies are beyond imagination. Whether it's for culture, trust, profit, or other reasons, once the traditional model is firmly established, it's hard to break it completely, even in this age where profit and efficiency are paramount.
Perhaps we don't need to completely abandon the traditional model, after all, intelligent car companies like Xpeng, NIO, and Tesla also need the assistance of suppliers. The solution to many things doesn't rely on an either/or binary mindset, and there should be a lot of options between the two endpoints. Here are two examples that I think are interesting and worth considering.
BYD was founded in the 90s of the last century with the production of batteries, and then began to develop and manufacture IGBT chips, until 2003 after the acquisition of Xi'an Qinchuan Automobile Co., Ltd. began to enter the car industry. Such a development experience allows BYD to have its own unique advantages. On the one hand, based on its own battery production advantages, BYD has been developing in the direction of new energy vehicles from the beginning, and on the other hand, BYD has independent R&D and manufacturing capabilities in many fields such as batteries and chips, which makes BYD not too dependent on the supplier system. BYD has always walked on multiple legs, for example, it also has a large investment and market in commercial vehicles, engineering vehicles and cloud rail. In fact, I think BYD has played a great role in the "revival" of lithium iron phosphate batteries, and BYD's continuous R&D investment in lithium iron phosphate batteries is related to its business in the field of commercial and engineering vehicles. Multiple linkages make BYD highly autonomous and flexible, and less dependent on the traditional supply chain. However, BYD's model has its own uniqueness and is difficult to replicate.
In 2023, Volkswagen Group will take a stake in Xpeng, and this event was once talked about. We can't just dwell on the complacency of the technical output. In fact, the cooperation between Volkswagen and Xpeng also has its significance from the perspective of long-termism, which gives a direction for traditional car companies to adjust their supply and R&D models in terms of intelligence, or at least a way of thinking. The two sides will take what they need and form mutual cooperation in the long run. It's just that the depth of this cooperation and the penetration of technology can reach what extent is not yet known, in mid-December last year, FAW-Volkswagen ID7 on the market can see the shadow of the cooperation between the two, but it is limited to the UI logic of the car machine system, etc., at present, the impact of the two sides is not deep.
Four
If pure electric drive is the future development trend, then it is necessary to face how to solve the carbon emission problem of pure electric vehicles. Unlike the exhaust emissions of combustion vehicles, pure electric vehicles also contribute to greenhouse gas emissions in terms of battery manufacturing, vehicle manufacturing, and the required power source.
As mentioned in the book "Climate Economy and the Future of Mankind" written by Bill Gates, which we mentioned earlier, transportation accounts for only 16% of greenhouse gas emissions, which is still around 2019, and the proportion may be even lower based on the current popularity of new energy vehicles. On the one hand, more and more cars are being built, roads are getting wider and wider, and on the other hand, the electricity on which pure electric vehicles rely will make the power generation field face more severe environmental challenges.
Obviously, the conversion of oil to electricity alone cannot solve the problem of climate change more thoroughly, and the manufacturing of new energy vehicles may need to be considered from the whole cycle of design, research and development, production, use, and recycling, involving more fields, which requires more long-term and non-utilitarian thinking.
These problems cannot all be solved by the automotive industry alone, but I think at least we can provide more valuable solutions in the life cycle of battery production, use, and recycling.
Prior to 2020, Toyota had a philosophy of building a recycling-oriented society and systems, with the idea of realizing a battery-circular society through the establishment of a value chain system and technologies that would make it possible to fully use up old batteries. The content of the system is to recycle, test and sort old batteries from electrified vehicles, and realize the reuse, full use and resource recovery of old batteries. The content of the technology is to detect aging and faulty batteries from old batteries and replace them individually, and retain the batteries in good condition, so that the battery can last longer and be used more thoroughly. Saving battery waste is a great way to reduce pollution from battery production and old batteries.
Another example is the familiar NIO battery swap technology. When NIO provided this technology a few years ago, it was very controversial, but it did provide a direction for the use of batteries, which is not only convenient for users to use, but also conducive to the maintenance, testing and subsequent recycling of batteries by manufacturers, and is beneficial to the standardization of automotive power batteries. Nowadays, Weilai's battery swap technology has been valued by many car companies, and has also formed a "battery swap alliance", which includes Geely, Changan, Chery and JAC, whose combined market share accounts for 19.1% of the domestic market. Although battery swapping technology is only a direction, it does not mean that it must be the mainstream, but from the perspective of long-termism, it has a certain value.
Another issue that I think is crucial is that the regulation and supervision of the domestic battery production and disposal process are not perfect and transparent.
At present, the policy formulation for new energy vehicles is mainly aimed at the consumer market, focusing on the performance of batteries, such as purchase tax exemption, which is linked to the pure electric range of vehicles and the energy density and power consumption of batteries. On December 11, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, the Ministry of Finance, and the State Administration of Taxation jointly issued the "Announcement on Adjusting the Technical Requirements for New Energy Vehicle Products for Reducing and Reducing Vehicle Purchase Tax", adjusting the purchase tax policy, and electric vehicles with a pure electric range of less than 200km cannot enjoy the tax exemption policy, and the energy density is less than 125Wh/kg, and the calculation conditions for power consumption are also more stringent.
However, there is no official and systematic supervision of carbon emissions caused by power batteries. And in this regard, many developed countries and regions are already doing it. For example, the European Union is speeding up the formulation of the EU Battery and Waste Battery Regulation, which requires companies to review the carbon emissions of power batteries from the perspective of the whole life cycle, and provide carbon footprint statements and performance grade labels to set carbon emission limits on production.
Regarding this regulation, the "2022-2023 Annual Report on the Development of China's Automotive Power Battery and Hydrogen Fuel Cell Industry" also mentions. This report is jointly researched and compiled by Guolian Automotive Power Battery Research Institute Co., Ltd. (China Automotive Power Battery Industry Innovation Alliance) and industry enterprises and authoritative experts.
"The EU has established an official unified and sound Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) standard and certification system - Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) guidelines, and plans to incorporate PEF into various environmental policies and regulations such as EU circular economy policy, product environmental labeling, product eco-design, and government green procurement," the report said. At the same time, the new battery law will develop, revise and supplement the carbon footprint methodology applicable to the European battery law on the basis of the EU Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules (PEFCR). ”
In view of the current situation in China, the report mentions: "At present, there is a relatively complete database related to carbon emission evaluation in foreign countries, and the current construction party of the carbon emission factor database of power batteries in mainland China is mainly based on schools and institutions, and has not yet established an official unified database, and has not carried out a good research on carbon emission standards for the whole life cycle of power batteries." ”
From a practical point of view, this will make it difficult to achieve international mutual recognition of regulations related to carbon emissions of power batteries, affect the export of power batteries, and in the long run, it will also affect the low-carbon transformation and upgrading of the global automotive industry. I think these issues are the focus of long-termism.
Five
What if electrification is not the way forward for the future?
Like me, many people think of hydrogen energy first. At present, the development of hydrogen energy vehicles is still not the mainstream direction, and more is concentrated in public transportation such as urban buses, because their use environment is predictable. Among the family cars, there are only two sedans (Toyota Mirai and Deep Blue SL03), two SUVs (Hyundai Nexo and Venucia Big V Hydrogen), and two MPVs (Xintu EV80 and SAIC MAXUS Dajia Hydrogen). None of these cars are cheap, and although the battery capacity used in hydrogen is much smaller, it still faces the pollution caused by the battery life cycle mentioned above.
But compared to the current direction of pure electric drive, at least the energy source of hydrogen energy is very environmentally friendly. But in addition to being expensive, the mainstream doubts also include the safety of hydrogen energy, including the immaturity of the technology in the transportation and storage of hydrogen fuel, and the high cost of hydrogen energy vehicles. But objectively speaking, ten years ago or even five years ago, many people also looked at pure electric vehicles with these questions. I think the main problem with the slow development of hydrogen energy is that it is still not the mainstream trend, if we can concentrate human and financial resources to invest, it is only a matter of time before the technology is improved, at least the situation faced by hydrogen energy vehicles will be much better than now.
There's also solar energy. In fact, there were very early attempts at solar cars, and the earliest solar car I know of was General Motors' Sunraycer race car, built in 1987 and tested for 4,000 miles at a desert proving ground. At the time, the car also set a world speed record for a solar car at 35.22 miles per hour.
However, it is difficult to achieve solar cars in actual mass production. One is that solar energy is an intermittent energy source, can not be used as an independent power source, the second is that the solar energy conversion rate has been very low, the current power density of solar energy is 5 ~ 20 watts / square meter, but the power density of solar energy can theoretically reach 100 watts / square meter, that is to say, it has a lot of room for improvement.
Toyota is still using solar energy as an auxiliary power source. Toyota's pure electric SUV bZ4X can be equipped with an optional solar charging dome, which is a good attempt, but unfortunately the volume of voices in all walks of life is "sinking into the sea". According to Toyota's estimates, the system can generate 243.7 kWh of electricity a year, which is equivalent to providing a range of 1,750 km for the vehicle. A maximum of 1.6 kWh of electricity can be generated in a day, which is equivalent to extending the vehicle's range by 11.6 km (based on power consumption of 13.7 kWh/100 km), or a 950W microwave oven for 1.6 hours, which can also charge a 10Wh mobile phone battery 159 times. Of course, this is just an estimate.
In fact, in 2012, Toyota launched the optional configuration of the rooftop solar charging system for its hybrid model Prius for the first time, but it can only power the on-board ventilation system when parked and as an auxiliary charging power source for the on-board 12V lead-acid battery. The bZ4X is equipped with a second-generation solar system.
The ability to use solar energy to directly increase vehicle range is also due to technological breakthroughs. Toyota, in collaboration with Japan's New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization and Sharp Corporation, has developed a solar cell with a thickness of only 0.03 mm and a conversion efficiency of up to 34%. You must know that the current solar cell conversion rate can reach 25%, which is already very high.
Therefore, as an auxiliary power, the application of solar energy in automobiles can also be viewed from a long-term perspective.
Six
Sociologist Zygmunt Bauman summed up the differences between intellectuals and politicians well. "Intellectuals exist to preserve their value beyond the changing political situation," he said. In principle, politicians should be concerned about what is happening in the moment. The task of intellectuals is even more difficult. Intellectuals must swim against the tide to save the lost possibilities of the past. Those possibilities have not gone away. They have only been temporarily thrown aside – not tested or practiced. ”
For what I understand as "long-termism", this passage from Bauman is the best commentary.
According to Bowman, intellectuals seek the truth, while politicians achieve their goals. The work of intellectuals is long-term, and politics is short-term. Intellectuals need to be far-sighted, and politicians are often short-sighted.
In fact, Baumann is stating the facts here, and there is no praise or disparagement. For the development of human society, intellectuals and politicians are indispensable. It's just a matter of which one you choose to do.
In my opinion, the current technical competition around the main route of electric intelligence is more like a political goal, in order to solve the immediate problem, and long-termism is more like the thinking of intellectuals, to find all possibilities, even if they have been discarded. If the car companies that join the melees are more like politicians, then I think the traditional car companies need to be intellectuals.
The highlight at the end of 2023 is Xiaomi, and I was looking forward to this new "player" from other perspectives to bring more future-oriented solutions from other perspectives, but I regret that what I hear and see is basically the competition and involution of the existing technology direction. This made me a little disappointed, I originally expected it to be an "intellectual", but for now it has chosen to be a "politician".
(Note: The views involved in this article are the author's own views and do not represent the views of Pacific Auto Network)
(Photo/text: Pacific Automobile Huang Keyu)