Academician of Chinese Academy of Engineering deeply interprets the status quo of new energy automobile industry

The development of new energy vehicles has become the focus of today's automotive industry. In recent years, under the policy subsidy, China's new energy vehicle market can be described as "a good situation." However, the new energy auto industry fraud incident that broke out earlier this year has made the fast-growing new energy auto industry questionable. In the face of the current situation of China's new energy vehicle market, Yang Yusheng, an 84-year-old Chinese Academy of Engineering academician, expressed his concern.

Since the Shanghai World Expo, I have been paying attention to the price of electric vehicles in China. The year before the Shanghai World Expo, I went to Shanghai, with 1.6 million buses. When the end of the World Expo rose to 1.9 million, the Expo reached 2.1 million at the beginning of the World Expo. I went to Shanghai three months before the opening of the World Expo and it has risen to 2.6 million. About a year or so, the 12-meter pure electric bus rose by 1 million yuan. In the case of subsidies, the subsidies are still clear, and they are still rising.

So why is a 12-meter pure electric bus selling 2.6 million? High subsidies enable enterprises to chase the purest electric buses with the highest subsidies, and the state-owned bus companies are underwritten. If the quality is not good, they will not have to worry about not selling them. Production companies do not want to reduce costs to cater to the market, but deliberately raise the price of the car.

Enterprises are following the subsidy baton. Most of the subsidies have become the high profits of auto companies, and the government's financial burden is too heavy, delaying the development of the industry; induced a big scandal of deception and "compensation." 6~8m commercial vehicles, the subsidy is much higher than the cost of the car, selling a car, taking the invoice can get subsidies, which is very unreasonable.

Because of the high subsidies, we have increased the price of the car because of government underwriting. If you rely on the market, you must find ways to reduce costs and lower prices. This will make auto companies become the protagonists of the marketization of electric vehicles. This is the practice in California.

The current situation in our country is that unsubsidized enterprises are unsustainable. Without falling back, it is difficult for companies to stand on their own feet. Business dependence is strong and cannot be self-reliant.

The high subsidies in recent years have cultivated some bad habits in some auto companies in China. Relying on high-subsidy habits and short-sighted interests, not considering long-term development, the habit of high-preparation, high-priced cars. Because subsidies are high, especially now subsidies are tied to the amount of batteries. The profit of fuel vehicles is between 2% and 8%, while the profit rate of electric vehicles is 10% to 20% or even higher. These habits of car companies are not conducive to the development of the enterprise, nor to the marketization of electric vehicles, and must be changed in the market-oriented transition process.

First, it is based on cars sold only in California, and does not reflect the responsibility of the company to sell the total number of fuel vehicles in the country.

Second, its score is 0.5 0.01 & TImes; pure electric mile. The longer the pure electric exercise, the higher the score. It is 4 points to reach the highest line. Tesla can get this score and sell it, and buy hundreds of millions of dollars a year. But Tesla's car in Singapore received a fine because of high power consumption, high energy consumption, and high emissions. Therefore, linking with pure electric mileage is a violation of the purpose of emission reduction. This is a wrong approach in California.

Third, it is linked to pure electric mileage. If it is used in China dominated by coal-fired power, the result is to encourage double-increased emissions. After getting a few points, you can sell it to the fuel car, and once again encourage the increase of emissions. So it is double.

Fourth, zero-emission points and some zero-emission points are not interchangeable and are not subject to settlement. In other words, each company must produce both types of vehicles.

Fifth, both the responsibility that the company must complete and the points that the company sells for electric vehicles are called “points” and are easily confused.

Participate in the California points system, but can not copy it. California's power generation emits very little carbon dioxide, and electric vehicles save fuel and emissions. China's power generation is 70% coal, and pure electric vehicles only save fuel and consume a lot of carbon dioxide. The car with a large power consumption has increased carbon dioxide emissions.

I recently talked about BYD's E6. This car consumes 19.7 kWh of electricity, which is a very large power consumption. Therefore, we should promote the company to sell fuel-efficient and emission-reducing vehicles, to reduce electricity consumption, reduce carbon dioxide emissions and points, and not one-sided pursuit of long-range pure electric.

Now it is said that the "ton of 100 kilometers of electricity consumption" does not exceed 13KWH to subsidize. Gradually improve the continuous driving history of models such as pure electric buses. I have to say a few words about this issue.

The weight of the whole car is placed in the denominator, so that the heavier the car, the easier it is to reach the standard. This is to encourage big cars and heavy cars.

To increase the driving range of pure electric buses, it is necessary to install more batteries. This is to encourage vehicles with high power consumption and high emissions. Just like BYD has a 700 kg battery.

If this threshold is raised, the dance electric vehicle will deviate from the lightweight development direction, which runs counter to the original intention of developing electric vehicles to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

Small passenger cars have less material, lower power consumption, fewer batteries, and lower costs. If the impact of reasonable subsidization and subsidence is small, it will be easier to market. Therefore, we must update our concepts, put energy conservation and emission reduction first, and face second.

I explain the face problem, the masses think that the car is a symbol of identity and wealth. Another is that the car is on the street and the whole city is not good. Changan Automobile has a technical manager who will talk to me about this issue at a meeting. It is said that the road is a small car, as seen in Europe, that is ugly. This is also a face problem.

A low-speed car that has been marketed allows the use of lead-acid batteries. There is no subsidy for electric vehicles that use lead-acid batteries, but now lead-acid batteries have new technologies, and the industry's rectification effect is also significant. Therefore, we must treat lead acid with a fair and do not think that it is ancient and backward. In fact, the lead carbon battery and the special activated carbon solve the problem of the acidification of the negative electrode. Lead-rare earth alloy and lead-graphene alloy solve the problem of positive grid corrosion. Therefore, we used to have prejudice against lead-acid batteries.