Partnerships, especially when it comes to software, will be the rule, not the exception, in the future. They make sense too. The task is too big, technical and monetary for each individual manufacturer to be able to do it themselves. But that was not the main reason for us to rely on Google’s systems for infotainment. Our strength is building electric cars, not programming navigation systems or voice control. We want to offer customers the best of both worlds.
On the contrary, the number of manufacturers working with is growing. The alleged concern, especially with German manufacturers, of surrendering themselves as a company when they enter into partnerships, is unfounded for me. Because we always have to question this with every partner and clarify it for ourselves. Be it with a supplier or a software developer like. We are convinced that cooperation promotes innovation and that we need to rethink our approach in order to develop a modern product that focuses on customer satisfaction.
Of course, we have dealt intensively with the subject of data protection. It goes without saying that it is very important to us to ensure data security. Consumers can decide which data they want to share and actively agree to this, similar to what they know from their mobile phones, and what convenience they receive in return. Our vehicle can also be used incognito.
Under no circumstance. Hydrogen will get its role in industry, maybe also in heavy goods traffic, but that is not our area of expertise. It has been tested long enough in the car. It was on manufacturers’ agendas for decades, but never made a breakthrough. Hydrogen in cars is technically much more demanding and also much less efficient. In the car, the battery has long since proven that it is suitable for everyday use and is currently superior.
Technically you can do anything. With the appropriate political will and money, i.e. subsidies. I think, however, that the battery-electric car has already established itself rightly and that such efforts would come too late.
We noticed that many customers are a little unsettled. That certainly has to do with the fact that a lot of disinformation is on the way. Many so-called studies are guided by clear self-interest. Some would like to run their combustion engine business for as long as possible and discredit the electric car. We wanted to counter this with something solid, methodically clean. And if we do it, then we do it properly. One of our employees did nothing else for almost a year.
No, we wanted to collect data now and be absolutely transparent – also to see where we have the greatest potential for improvement. And that’s where we will actually start. The better the initial data collection, the easier it will later be for us to save CO2 not only theoretically, but demonstrably and specifically.
The most important lever is the manufacture of the battery, but some CO2 can also be saved in the supply chain.
Not yet complete, but we have enough data points to draw up a serious life cycle assessment; and it gets better.
Yes, if we have to, we also apply pressure.
We work closely with our mother here [ihrerseits Tochter des chinesischen Autokonzerns , Anm. d. Red.] together, especially in purchasing. For example, we recognized cobalt as problematic, so we work with a block chain and NGOs on site to only allow harmless mines. Volvo was a pioneer. This is now an industry-wide trend. Many manufacturers apply pressure along their supply chain. Because the overall balance of the e-car is already much better than that of a comparable gasoline or diesel. But we can’t sit back and say: Now we’re building electric cars, that’s good. We want improvements here as well. Under no circumstances should the automotive industry simply repeat the mistakes made in the past with the internal combustion engine, for example when it comes to battery raw materials for e-cars.
At the moment we have enough cells. But there can always be temporary bottlenecks with such a rapid market ramp-up, especially in the second half of the year, for example, in Europe.
No, we do not intend to directly participate in the raw material mines.
I do not believe that. This may be the case temporarily, but that is part of a rapidly growing market. In the long run, the industry also knows that electromobility will only work in the mass market if the cars can be charged without any problems. The business models for this are only just emerging. New players such as the petrol station chains of the mineral oil companies are emerging; Politics has now also recognized the importance. It will go forward.
This is of particular interest to WiWo readers today
No, we are not aiming for our own charging network. As a pioneer in 2013, Tesla simply had to create some things by itself that did not exist before. From today’s perspective, however, it is no longer expedient for every manufacturer to operate a proprietary network. We don’t want exclusive charging clubs at the moment, but a situation like today with fuel. Customers know: there is diesel and gasoline with 95 and 98 octane, and they can get it everywhere, regardless of the manufacturer of their car. We have to go there. With us it is faster direct current for long journeys and cheaper, slower charging with alternating current at home and at work. We shouldn’t differentiate further; that harms the adaptation.