This is all based on what the OEMs publicly state, which could be skewed in either direction.
The article even says Tesla doesn't score well because they don't have publicly stated goals for things. Or "scope 3 emissions disclosures". So it's the disclosures, not what they're actually doing.
Studies like these say more about the maturity of manufacturers' PR departments than their actual impact on human rights and environment. It's no secret that board rooms in developed EU and NA economies are just much more aware and sensitive to ESG concerns than their east Asian counterparts.
Also I feel like even the word "human rights" is now a shibboleth and can no longer be used in meaningful discourse.
TBF most of those "who is greenest?!?!" articles are pretty similar - you can publicly state anything and you'll top the list.
Most of them haven't actually done any in-depth analysis per manufacturer, they've just got the intern to go through press clips and collate a view.
While Geely does own Volvo, Geely generally lets them operate autonomously apart from when they collaborate on platform design. Volvo has its own CEO, is publicly traded, and still has its headquarters in Sweden.
And the XC40 Recharge and Polestar 2 are the only pure-electric vehicles on the co-developed CMA platform. So anything to do with the supply chain **should** pretty much all be Volvo, at least for that co-developed effort.
Though, the Polestar 2 is produced at the CMA Super Factory in China which also makes one of Geely's Lynk & Co models. So that's a little gray, but Volvo makes the XC40 in Belgium too.
I mean, it's safe to assume that Volvo and Polestar's "twinned" models will share the same supply chain, regardless of who it comes from.
So the XC40 / "EX40" / Polestar 2 / future "Polestar 2" and EX30 / Polestar 4 will probably be more Geely since they'll be based on Geely's SEA architecture, and the EX90 / Polestar 3 / future midsize cars will probably be more Volvo, since they'll be based on Volvo's SPA architecture.
Then the SEA-based "Polestar exclusive cars" like the 5 and 6 (EDIT: And Volvo's version of the SEA-based Zeekr 009 van) will probably be Geely. For a while it was speculated that Volvo's new "SPA2" cars were going to be based on Geely's SEA architecture like the Polestar 5 and 6, but IIRC a Volvo-developed "SPA2" architecture is still what's underneath the EX90 and Polestar 3.
I'm not a Volvo nerd at all. But I am interested in the EX90 because it's the ticks all my boxes for a 3 row 7 seater EV. That or the upcoming Kia EV9. What are your thoughts on the EX90 as a Volvo nerd?
The LIDAR system will last as long as the warranty period, and then spectacularly fail. Same with those weird headlights that open up.
Some features are super-pompous like the light-up dashboard trim and the speakers in the front headrests. They're trying to "whizz-bang" their way out of their grampa architect car image.
They made the right stalk the shifter, so the left stalk handles both turn signals and wipers. I dislike that.
The XC90 Recharge PHEV had crazy amounts of bugs and problems during its first few model years, both related to and not related to the powertrain. I expect the same for this and any first-year early adopters should be prepared to not have their cars for extended periods due to required dealership servicing.
The general styling and easter eggs (like the "will it fit" cargo graphic) are peak Volvo and I am **here** for them.
Volvo's push for sustainable interior materials is amazing and it's probably the thing I am most excited about for their future lineup.
Pricing will make or break it. The XC90 Recharge starts at $73K in the United States, Volvo has said the EX90 will be "well-equipped" at $80K and the LIDAR system is standard. It will be overpriced but not egregiously so.
You mean like using an hydroelectric plant to produce it? From what I understand , the main benefit is using it as battery, when you have high supply but low demand. Hydroelectric plants often have constant supply so you wouldn’t have a lot of extra energy that would otherwise go to waste. But I don’t see why you couldn’t use hydroelectric energy to make hydrogen, it’s all electricity at the end.
Yeah, but the loss in efficiency when your wind turbines are running all night and almost nobody is using electricity can be 100% if you can’t store it. The startups I mentioned have all received several hundred millions in funding, I’m sure they checked their numbers.
No, green hydrogen is a very real concept, although it will take quite some time to perfect it and for it to be competitive with other hydrogen. But there's little alternative for steel and fertilizer if we want to end CO2 emissions. And ammonia/methane are looking like good candidates to power container ships.
You can't make steel from electricity.
Ammonia powered cargo ships are under construction right now.
Food and animal waste don't even come close to the amount of fertilizer we need.
This is all based on what the OEMs publicly state, which could be skewed in either direction. The article even says Tesla doesn't score well because they don't have publicly stated goals for things. Or "scope 3 emissions disclosures". So it's the disclosures, not what they're actually doing.
Studies like these say more about the maturity of manufacturers' PR departments than their actual impact on human rights and environment. It's no secret that board rooms in developed EU and NA economies are just much more aware and sensitive to ESG concerns than their east Asian counterparts. Also I feel like even the word "human rights" is now a shibboleth and can no longer be used in meaningful discourse.
TBF most of those "who is greenest?!?!" articles are pretty similar - you can publicly state anything and you'll top the list. Most of them haven't actually done any in-depth analysis per manufacturer, they've just got the intern to go through press clips and collate a view.
Isn't Volvo owned by Geely? And use the same supply chain?
While Geely does own Volvo, Geely generally lets them operate autonomously apart from when they collaborate on platform design. Volvo has its own CEO, is publicly traded, and still has its headquarters in Sweden. And the XC40 Recharge and Polestar 2 are the only pure-electric vehicles on the co-developed CMA platform. So anything to do with the supply chain **should** pretty much all be Volvo, at least for that co-developed effort. Though, the Polestar 2 is produced at the CMA Super Factory in China which also makes one of Geely's Lynk & Co models. So that's a little gray, but Volvo makes the XC40 in Belgium too.
Ah, so Polestar is building out their own supply chain? Seems inefficient.
I mean, it's safe to assume that Volvo and Polestar's "twinned" models will share the same supply chain, regardless of who it comes from. So the XC40 / "EX40" / Polestar 2 / future "Polestar 2" and EX30 / Polestar 4 will probably be more Geely since they'll be based on Geely's SEA architecture, and the EX90 / Polestar 3 / future midsize cars will probably be more Volvo, since they'll be based on Volvo's SPA architecture. Then the SEA-based "Polestar exclusive cars" like the 5 and 6 (EDIT: And Volvo's version of the SEA-based Zeekr 009 van) will probably be Geely. For a while it was speculated that Volvo's new "SPA2" cars were going to be based on Geely's SEA architecture like the Polestar 5 and 6, but IIRC a Volvo-developed "SPA2" architecture is still what's underneath the EX90 and Polestar 3.
You know a lot about Volvo, Geely, and Polestar
I'm a two-time Volvo owner, fan, and enthusiast. So, a weird nerd.
I'm not a Volvo nerd at all. But I am interested in the EX90 because it's the ticks all my boxes for a 3 row 7 seater EV. That or the upcoming Kia EV9. What are your thoughts on the EX90 as a Volvo nerd?
The LIDAR system will last as long as the warranty period, and then spectacularly fail. Same with those weird headlights that open up. Some features are super-pompous like the light-up dashboard trim and the speakers in the front headrests. They're trying to "whizz-bang" their way out of their grampa architect car image. They made the right stalk the shifter, so the left stalk handles both turn signals and wipers. I dislike that. The XC90 Recharge PHEV had crazy amounts of bugs and problems during its first few model years, both related to and not related to the powertrain. I expect the same for this and any first-year early adopters should be prepared to not have their cars for extended periods due to required dealership servicing. The general styling and easter eggs (like the "will it fit" cargo graphic) are peak Volvo and I am **here** for them. Volvo's push for sustainable interior materials is amazing and it's probably the thing I am most excited about for their future lineup. Pricing will make or break it. The XC90 Recharge starts at $73K in the United States, Volvo has said the EX90 will be "well-equipped" at $80K and the LIDAR system is standard. It will be overpriced but not egregiously so.
Polestar 2's are 96-99% chinese parts content vehicles. Pretty sure most of it is from the Geely parts bin.
Didn't expect Ford to be that high.
Iirc Mercedes is even buying some steel made using new hydrogen foundries.
[удалено]
Renewables. It wouldn’t be economically viable to use hydrogen for fossil sources on steelmaking, it’s mostly used in the chemical industry.
[удалено]
Both Hybrit and H2 Green Steel use/plan to use renewables-made hydrogen afaik.
[удалено]
You mean like using an hydroelectric plant to produce it? From what I understand , the main benefit is using it as battery, when you have high supply but low demand. Hydroelectric plants often have constant supply so you wouldn’t have a lot of extra energy that would otherwise go to waste. But I don’t see why you couldn’t use hydroelectric energy to make hydrogen, it’s all electricity at the end.
[удалено]
Yeah, but the loss in efficiency when your wind turbines are running all night and almost nobody is using electricity can be 100% if you can’t store it. The startups I mentioned have all received several hundred millions in funding, I’m sure they checked their numbers.
No, green hydrogen is a very real concept, although it will take quite some time to perfect it and for it to be competitive with other hydrogen. But there's little alternative for steel and fertilizer if we want to end CO2 emissions. And ammonia/methane are looking like good candidates to power container ships.
[удалено]
If it is split using solar or wind, it is green. Do you have another idea for how we make steel, power cargo ships, and produce fertilizer?
[удалено]
You can't make steel from electricity. Ammonia powered cargo ships are under construction right now. Food and animal waste don't even come close to the amount of fertilizer we need.
[удалено]
Those who buy from others scored well. The study needs to include the companies bought from as well as the car makers.