"상당히 큰 파장 예상.." 이미 한국은 시작됐다

김승현 안피디의 스포일러

29 Jan 202408:51

Summary

TLDRThe video discusses the controversial adjustments to electric vehicle (EV) subsidies by the environmental department, particularly focusing on the regulation of LFP (lithium iron phosphate) batteries, predominantly manufactured in China. It highlights the government's intention to protect national industry by favoring NCM batteries, which have higher recycling value and are mainly produced by domestic companies like LG, Samsung SDI, and SK Innovation. This move is expected to impact affordable EV models, like those from Tesla, by potentially increasing their prices due to reduced subsidies for LFP battery-equipped vehicles. The script critically examines the policy's implications for market competition, consumer choice, and the broader goal of EV adoption and environmental sustainability.

Takeaways

😕 The new regulations make EVs with LFP batteries more expensive for consumers
👨‍🔧 The regulations aim to protect domestic battery makers who use NCM batteries
🚗 Incentives increased for long-range, high-performance EVs
😥 But focus should be on affordable, small EVs for mass adoption
💡 Suggest separate incentives for small Korean brand EVs
🔋 The goal should be supporting domestic industry, not just restricting Chinese parts
🚌 Praise for new incentives helping domestic electric buses compete
⏩ Regulations mostly go in the right direction but still have gaps
😀 Consumer confidence important before full implementation
✅ Supplementary measures needed before enforcement

Q & A

Why did the Ministry of Environment announce stricter regulations on LFP batteries?
-To protect domestic battery companies that mainly produce NCM batteries, as the market share of cheaper Chinese LFP batteries was increasing significantly.
How will the new regulations impact EV prices?
-EVs using LFP batteries, like many models from Tesla, will likely see price increases as they receive smaller subsidies.
What are the key issues with the new subsidy plan?
-The focus on long-range and high-performance EVs goes against the need for more affordable options. Support for small Korean companies is also lacking.
Why does the plan not adequately support Korean companies?
-It only restricts Chinese batteries without providing additional subsidies for EVs using Korean-made components.
How could the plan better support small Korean companies?
-Provide additional subsidies for small, affordable EV models that use Korean components, instead of just subsidizing long-range, high-performance EVs.
What is the main goal of EV subsidies?
-To boost demand and increase the EV market size, which requires affordable pricing, not just long range.
Why do subsidies need to promote affordability?
-To drive mass adoption by making EVs accessible to wider socioeconomic groups.
How does the plan risk stifling market competition?
-It limits options to Hyundai and Kia models, without incentives for other brands to enter the Korean EV market.
Why is the commercial vehicle response more positive?
-New subsidies for domestic electric buses could increase their price competitiveness vs. Chinese models.
What improvements are still needed in the plan?
-More support is needed for small, affordable EVs using Korean components, not just high-performance models.