Tesla stacked emissions credits in 2023, while others posted deficits


Tesla stacked greenhouse gas emission credits in the 2023 model year through the sale of its electric vehicles (EVs), while multiple other automakers struggled, posting substantial deficits from tightened emissions regulations.

In 2023, Tesla gained almost 34 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions credits, as detailed in a report from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) seen by Reuters. The EPA also reported that new vehicle fuel economy increased by 1.1 mile per gallon in 2023 to reach a record of 27.1 mpg, while it expects the figure to rise to 28 mpg in 2024. In 2022, the fuel economy figure landed at about 26 mpg.

Each carbon offset credit, or emissions credit, equates to one metric ton of greenhouse gas emissions, rewarding companies for building electric vehicles (EVs) with no tailpipe emissions, and charging automakers that produce more emissions than the EPA’s guidelines call for.

Across the industry in 2023, automakers generated roughly 11 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions, as led by General Motors (GM) with a credits deficit of 17.8 million metric tons. GM bought roughly 44 million credits in 2023, while automakers excluding Tesla saw an overall emissions deficit of 43.5 million credits, compared to the industry as a whole generating 3 million credits in 2022. Tesla sold around 34 million emissions credits to lead the industry, and corresponding with its sale of credits.

According to the EPA, the industry still has a surplus of 123 million metric tons of the regulatory credits for meeting future requirements. Automakers have also pushed back on the emissions mandates in the past, and especially ahead of tightened standards between the 2024 and 2026 model years.

The news also follows a fee of $145.8 million charged to GM in July, after an investigation from the EPA required the automaker to relinquish almost 50 million metric tons of carbon allowances claimed for years between 2012 and 2018 model-year vehicles. The investigation found that GM produced roughly 10 percent more carbon emissions than it previously indicated in its compliance reports, across roughly 5.9 million vehicles.

In March, the EPA set forth new regulations for emissions cuts that lowered the required amount of reductions, now mandating that automakers must cut emissions by 49 percent by 2032 from 2026 levels, as cut from the original mandate of 56 percent.

Of the legacy automakers, multinational Dodge-Chrysler parent company Stellantis registered the lowest fuel economy, as followed by GM and Ford in second and third. Tesla was found to be the most efficient, while Kia and Hyundai followed.

The incoming Trump administration is also widely expected to roll back the tightened fuel-efficiency regulations, along with doing away with the $7,500 EV tax credit and other climate initiatives contained in Biden’s sweeping Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).

What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send us tips at tips@teslarati.com.

SEC removes emissions requirements from climate rules draft

Tesla stacked emissions credits in 2023, while others posted deficits





Source

Tesla, Rivian still face complicated direct sales laws across U.S. states


Executives from both Tesla and Rivian have commented on the decades-long fight to overturn direct vehicle sales bans across many U.S. states, reigniting a long-held conversation in the electric vehicle (EV) community about dealership policy lobbying groups and online sales models.

Tesla has managed to side-step direct sales bans in many states through legal loopholes such as leasing-only models, processing purchases as out-of-state transactions, or simply opening stores in exempted tribal territories where the company’s stores will be exempt from dealership mandates. In other states, the company is still completely prohibited from selling vehicles, such as in Louisiana, where a U.S. appeals court just upheld Tesla’s right to sue the state over the direct-sales ban in August.

In Connecticut last July, Tesla managed to open a store on sovereign Mohegan tribal land, effectively side-stepping the U.S. state’s ability to prohibit direct sales. The Connecticut Automotive Retailers Association (CARA), a dealership lobbying group, immediately spoke out against the decision, though it gained support from Governor Ned Lamont.

Elsewhere, Tesla, Rivian, and many others sporting a direct sales model also face state store limits, and some executives have recently highlighted the decades-long fight to overturn these kinds of laws.

Other states have bans on service centers, storefronts, or both, while some only allow Tesla to sell vehicles online, though they must make deliveries through a service center. The latter includes Texas, where Tesla’s headquarters is located and where it operates a U.S. Gigafactory. As for Rivian, it faces a similar situation through its Seattle retail “Space,” since company representatives are prohibited from sharing specific details on prices or receiving orders.

As such, the state-to-state laws can be difficult for EV companies like Tesla and Rivian to wade through and operate under, so it shouldn’t come as much of a surprise when they point to dealership lobbying practices that keep them in place as being bad—or to their local teams who are working on overdrive.

Rivian CEO on state-to-state dealership laws

In a report published on Thursday, Rivian CEO RJ Scaringe said that dealership franchise laws were “as close as you can get to corruption,” as stated during a discussion with InsideEVs about whether Rivian’s recent Volkswagen partnership could let the startup work through VW dealerships. The report has reignited long-held discussions about states where Tesla, Rivian, and others aren’t allowed to operate—and seemingly due to powerful lobbying from dealership groups.

“Unfortunately, in the United States, it’s not an easy question,” Scaringe said as to the proposition of selling through VW’s dealers. “We have this horrific state-by-state level of rules that are as close as you can get to corruption.

“I think you essentially have, like, lots of dealers have paid for laws that make it really hard for us to interact directly with the consumer,” the Rivian CEO adds.

RELATED: Tesla granted license for direct vehicle sales in Kentucky

Tesla VP of Finance on state-to-state dealership laws

As a follow-up to the story, Tesla VP of Finance Sendil Palani shared his thoughts in a post on Saturday, praising the company’s local teams in states where direct sales are actively banned:

Tesla has been pursuing the direct-to-consumer model for two decades, and it has been an enormous challenge to pursue what we believe is the best model for customers.

I spent a portion of this past week visiting our Northeast region, and was reminded about how these laws are among our most prominent challenge for Sales and Delivery. Local teams make a heroic effort across the entire customer journey: from allowing customers to learn about our product at non-licensed locations while observing restrictions on sales activities, to managing a large flow of deliveries through a small number of licensed locations, to ensuring that we can properly perform vehicle registration paperwork for multiple states and customer circumstances at each licensed location.

Our customers have to make heroic efforts of their own, from traveling long distances to pick up their vehicle to patiently enduring any kinks in the process.

Sadly, this is common throughout much of the country, resulting in higher costs and a worse customer experience for the affected regions.

U.S. states with bans on direct sales models like at Tesla, Rivian

  • Alabama (includes service centers)
  • Arkansas
  • Connecticut (leasing is allowed; tribal land loophole)
  • Iowa
  • Kansas (includes storefronts)
  • Kentucky
  • Louisiana (Tesla allowed through special license, “service center” model)
  • Nebraska
  • New Mexico (includes service centers; tribal land loophole)
  • Oklahoma
  • South Carolina (includes service centers)
  • Texas (Tesla sells through online loophole, “service center” model)
  • West Virginia (includes storefronts)
  • Wisconsin

U.S. states with store limits on direct sales models like at Tesla, Rivian

  • Illinois (limited to 13)
  • Maryland (limited to 4)
  • Mississippi (limited to 1)
  • New Jersey (limited to 4)
  • New York (limited to 5)
  • North Carolina (limited to 6)
  • Ohio (limited to 3)
  • Pennsylvania (limited to 5)
  • Virginia (limited to 5)

What are your thoughts? Did I miss anything, or do you have a story or opinion to share regarding direct auto sales? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send us tips at tips@teslarati.com.

DOJ echoes Tesla argument in Louisiana direct sales appeal

Check out the TESLARATI Marketplace!

Head on over for more TESLARATI on TikTok!

Tesla, Rivian still face complicated direct sales laws across U.S. states





Source

Tesla launches range-limited ‘Actually Smart Summon’ in new markets


Tesla has officially launched a range-limited version of Actually Smart Summon in markets in Europe and the Middle East, as announced by the company this week. Some have expressed criticism for the limited version and for the related regulations, though the move could also represent a crucial step in Tesla’s aims to launch its Supervised Full Self-Driving (FSD) in the markets.

The company announced the news on in a post on its Europe and Middle East account on X on Thursday, after the company initially launched the highly-anticipated feature in the U.S. in September. For now, users must be within a 6-meter (~20 feet) range of the vehicle to use the feature, and some have expressed frustration with the limitation.

By comparison, Tesla’s Actually Smart Summon works within approximately 213 feet (~65 meters) in the U.S., which left many wondering why there was such a stark difference. As it turns out, there is a United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) regulation that requires operators to remain within 6 meters of their vehicle when operating them autonomously, hence the regulation.

In UNECE Regulation No. 79 Revision 5, it says that such a system’s “maximum RCP operating range shall not exceed 6 m,” explaining the limitation. You can see the full UNECE regulation here, or check out more details from Tesla about Actually Smart Summon here in its U.S. owner’s manual.

Actually Smart Summon is also not available in Canada just yet, though the country is often the first to follow the U.S. regarding new Tesla features.

The news also comes as Tesla has been aiming to launch FSD Supervised in Europe, China, and other markets, and some have suggested that Actually Smart Summon’s launch in the former region could be a precursor to FSD. Tesla launched Actually Smart Summon in September as a part of an FSD Supervised update, though the two systems technically have separate coding, as Elon Musk explained in July.

Tesla seems to have taken important steps to launch FSD Supervised in Europe throughout much of this year, along with similarly important steps in China. However, last month, a former executive from the company pointed out that the United Nations (UN) had chosen to delay a regulation that could slow down the rollout of FSD in Europe.

What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send us tips at tips@teslarati.com.

Tesla Actually Smart Summon handles busy Costco parking lot with ease

Check out the TESLARATI Marketplace!

Head on over for more TESLARATI on TikTok!

Tesla launches Actually Smart Summon in Europe and the Middle East





Source