中国才是欧盟取消内燃机禁令的真正赢家
正文翻译
Germany is claiming victory for its automakers after the European Commission reversed its 2035 combustion engine ban, but the change gives Chinese automakers time to get even further ahead — in Europe and emerging markets.
“The package doesn’t solve any of the structural issues of European carmakers in Europe or globally,” said Nils Redeker, co-director of the Jacques Delors Centre. “There is a technological gap between European automotive manufacturers and those in China. The package doesn’t move the needle on any of these fronts.”
European industry is facing a cacophony of problems, including being squeezed out of the Chinese market as consumers turn to domestic brands offering better electric vehicles; sluggish sales at home; and a transatlantic trade war courtesy of U.S. President Donald Trump.
Dutch MEP Mohammed Chahim from the center-left Socialists and Democrats put it more bluntly in a Parliamentary debate on Tuesday after the package was announced: “This is a Christmas gift for the Chinese car industry.”
The Commission last year hit Made-in-China EVs with new duties, but instead of shutting automakers out of the European market, Chinese brands are getting around the duties by shipping plug-in hybrids that are popular with European consumers.
德国在欧盟委员会撤销2035年燃油车禁令后，宣称这是本国汽车制造商的胜利，但这一改变反而给了中国车企更多时间，在欧洲以及新兴市场进一步拉开领先优势。
雅克·德洛尔中心联合主任尼尔斯·雷德克表示：“这一整套方案并没有解决欧洲汽车制造商在欧洲本土或全球范围内的任何结构性问题。欧洲车企与中国车企之间存在技术差距，而这套方案在这些方面根本没有产生任何实质性影响。”
欧洲工业正面临一连串问题，包括在中国市场被挤出——因为消费者正转向提供更优电动车的本土品牌；本土销量疲软；以及在美国总统唐纳德·特朗普推动下出现的跨大西洋贸易战。
来自中左翼“社会党与民主党联盟”的荷兰欧洲议会议员穆罕默德·查希姆，在该方案公布后的周二议会辩论中说得更直接：“这是送给中国汽车产业的一份圣诞礼物。”
欧盟委员会去年对中国制造的电动车加征了新关税，但结果并未将中国车企挡在欧洲市场之外。相反，中国品牌通过出口深受欧洲消费者欢迎的插电式混合动力车型，绕开了这些关税。
Germany is claiming victory for its automakers after the European Commission reversed its 2035 combustion engine ban, but the change gives Chinese automakers time to get even further ahead — in Europe and emerging markets.
“The package doesn’t solve any of the structural issues of European carmakers in Europe or globally,” said Nils Redeker, co-director of the Jacques Delors Centre. “There is a technological gap between European automotive manufacturers and those in China. The package doesn’t move the needle on any of these fronts.”
European industry is facing a cacophony of problems, including being squeezed out of the Chinese market as consumers turn to domestic brands offering better electric vehicles; sluggish sales at home; and a transatlantic trade war courtesy of U.S. President Donald Trump.
Dutch MEP Mohammed Chahim from the center-left Socialists and Democrats put it more bluntly in a Parliamentary debate on Tuesday after the package was announced: “This is a Christmas gift for the Chinese car industry.”
The Commission last year hit Made-in-China EVs with new duties, but instead of shutting automakers out of the European market, Chinese brands are getting around the duties by shipping plug-in hybrids that are popular with European consumers.
德国在欧盟委员会撤销2035年燃油车禁令后，宣称这是本国汽车制造商的胜利，但这一改变反而给了中国车企更多时间，在欧洲以及新兴市场进一步拉开领先优势。
雅克·德洛尔中心联合主任尼尔斯·雷德克表示：“这一整套方案并没有解决欧洲汽车制造商在欧洲本土或全球范围内的任何结构性问题。欧洲车企与中国车企之间存在技术差距，而这套方案在这些方面根本没有产生任何实质性影响。”
欧洲工业正面临一连串问题，包括在中国市场被挤出——因为消费者正转向提供更优电动车的本土品牌；本土销量疲软；以及在美国总统唐纳德·特朗普推动下出现的跨大西洋贸易战。
来自中左翼“社会党与民主党联盟”的荷兰欧洲议会议员穆罕默德·查希姆，在该方案公布后的周二议会辩论中说得更直接：“这是送给中国汽车产业的一份圣诞礼物。”
欧盟委员会去年对中国制造的电动车加征了新关税，但结果并未将中国车企挡在欧洲市场之外。相反，中国品牌通过出口深受欧洲消费者欢迎的插电式混合动力车型，绕开了这些关税。
评论翻译
DasistMamba
Why has China achieved such results in electric cars without banning internal combustion engines, while the EU needs a ban to do so?
为什么中国在没有禁止内燃机的情况下，电动车却能取得这样的成果，而欧盟却需要靠禁令才能做到？
Allu71
China also has a semi ban on ICE cars by making it much easier to get a license plate for an electric vehicle in many major cities, limiting the amount of people that can legally drive ICE vehicles
中国其实也算是半禁内燃机，通过在许多大城市让电动车更容易上牌，同时限制合法驾驶内燃机车的人数。
Collar
A policy implemented for noise and pollution reasons as well. It was embarrassing to have air in cities be chewy and for it to be deafening if you open your window. They just saw how to pivot into success once EVs came around as an option.
这项政策同样是出于噪音和污染的考虑。城市里的空气太糟糕了，一开窗就吵得要命，真的很丢人。后来电动车成为选项，他们就顺势成功转型了。
podfather2000
Also a lot of internal competition. Many Chinese EV companies went under. If European car companies that generated billions in profit can't pivot to a trend that's 10+ years in the making. Sorry, you deserve to go under at that point.
还有大量的内部竞争。很多中国电动车公司已经倒闭了。如果一家欧洲车企能赚几十亿利润，却没法转向一个已经酝酿了十多年趋势的方向，那不好意思，你活该被淘汰。
Forman
Yup. China was public about their attentions when I was a college kid in 2008. They had been laying the groundwork for this for coming on 20 years, western firms have just been walking like a dumb cow into the slaughterhouse while everyone who wasn't coping with "hurrdurr, those Chinese can't innovate" delusions was screaming at them to get their shut together.
没错。早在我2008年上大学的时候，中国就已经公开他们的意图了。他们为此铺垫了将近20年，而西方企业却像蠢牛一样一步步走向屠宰场。只要不是沉浸在“呵呵，中国人不会创新”这种幻想里的人，当年都在冲西方企业大喊让他们赶紧振作。
LazyGandalf
China has a similar 2035 ban, where by then 50% of new cars sold have to be EVs and 50% hybrids. But EVs are at around 50% already, so the ban will probably be completely unnecessary.
中国也有类似的2035年目标，到那时新车销量50%必须是纯电，50%是混动。但现在纯电已经接近50%了，所以这个“禁令”可能完全没必要。
robinrd91
Also has to do with the EV price and the low cost of electricity as well.
most of the taxi/didi (Chinese uber) on the road are now EVs
这也和电动车价格以及低廉的电价有关。
现在路上的出租车 / 滴滴基本上都是电动车了。
NaCl_Sailor
they never built combustion engine cars (at least not seriously)
中国根本就没怎么认真造过内燃机汽车。
Boreras
Well they seriously tried and failed.
他们认真试过，而且失败了。
moiwantkwason
They built ICE using joint ventures and EU wanted to build EVs in Europe through JVs. History is supposed to be learning lessons not a model to replicate.
他们是通过合资企业来造内燃机，而欧盟则想通过合资在欧洲造电动车。历史的意义是吸取教训，而不是照搬模式。
wolflance1
LOL no. They absolutely did. And their ICE cars will eat EU lunch too.
China's ICE cars are only losers compared to their EVs. They still absolutely munch everyone else for breakfast.
哈哈，不是的。中国绝对造过，而且他们的内燃机车照样能把欧盟车企按在地上摩擦。
中国的内燃机车只是相对于他们的电动车来说是“失败者”，但对其他国家来说，依然是轻松碾压。
TheShart
I've looked into some of their gas engines and they commonly have issues. Their small engines are some of the worst out of any country often being stolen designs while lacking the material science needed.
Main bearings that are normally seen in 30 year old engine designs and not using cam ground pistons. The hardness of bearing surfaces is often inconsistent, sand is common in their castings, and many other issues.
我研究过他们的一些汽油发动机，发现问题相当普遍。他们的小型发动机在各国中算是最差的一批，往往是被盗用的设计，同时又缺乏所需的材料科学水平。
所使用的主轴承还是三十年前发动机设计中常见的那种，而且没有采用凸轮磨削活塞。轴承表面的硬度经常不一致，铸件中常见夹砂等缺陷，此外还有许多其他问题。
DasistMamba
They are not particularly reliable, but German cars today are not particularly reliable either, and they cost twice much more expensive. Don't get me wrong, I would choose a German car over a Chinese one, but Chinese cars have made huge strides, even in terms of their ICE auto.
中国车确实谈不上特别可靠，但现在的德国车也谈不上可靠，而且价格还贵一倍。
别误会，我还是会选德国车而不是中国车，但中国车的进步非常大，甚至在内燃机方面也是如此。
pomezanian
well, they already took 10% of polish market, mostly by their combustion and hybrid cars, not by BEV
他们已经拿下了波兰市场10%的份额，而且主要靠的是内燃机和混动车，不是纯电。
DasistMamba
Geely, which owns Volvo, produces decent cars with internal combustion engines. In 2024, they sold 3.3 million cars, and a large proportion of those were internal combustion engines.
拥有沃尔沃的吉利，内燃机车做得就相当不错。2024年他们卖了330万辆车，其中很大一部分是内燃机车型。
iFoegot
Massive subsidies, and I’m saying it as a Chinese. The Chinese government has always been doing it: trying to catch the correct trend. It has always been like: they spot something that may have a potential, it announces that it will give huge incentives to companies that do it. For the most of the time it resulted in bubbles, this time too. The Chinese EV industry is also full of bubbles (look at the 0km secondhand car market in China), but it’s solidly supported by the global trend of transitioning to EVs, so it looks healthy and booming. One day it may collapse too, but may also thrive and dominate the world, if the Chinese government placed the bet correctly.
巨额补贴，我作为一个中国人这么说。中国政府一直都是这样：试图抓住正确的趋势。
通常的模式是：他们发现一个可能有潜力的方向，就宣布给相关企业巨额激励。大多数时候这会导致泡沫，这次也是。
中国电动车行业同样充满泡沫（看看国内的“0公里二手车”市场），但它又牢牢站在全球电动车转型的大趋势上，所以看起来健康又繁荣。
有一天它可能也会崩盘，但如果中国政府这次押对了方向，它也可能继续壮大并主导世界。
MrHighVoltage
This, and I don't know why european law- and car-makers don't see or acknowledge that. They are playing the long game. They completely outsold the solar-industry in all other countries, and prevented the building up of a battery industry outside of China by undercutting the prices. Now they dominate the market, giving them self incredibly cheap energy and the whole world can choose to be dependent on Chinese solar panels and batteries or (insert random despot country) fossil energy.
And the same can happen with cars. The european car-makers (except Renault, seemingly) have completely missed that the market requires low-cost EVs.
正是如此。我不明白为什么欧洲的立法者和车企看不到、也不愿承认这一点。他们是在打长期战。
他们通过压价，把其他国家的太阳能产业全部挤出市场，也阻止了中国以外地区建立电池产业。如今他们主导市场，使自己获得极其廉价的能源，而全世界只能选择依赖中国的太阳能板和电池，或者依赖（随便哪个独裁国家的）化石能源。
同样的事情也可能发生在汽车产业上。欧洲车企（看起来雷诺除外）完全错过了市场对低价电动车的真实需求。
roiki11
They haven't missed it. They just can't pay Chinese wages. That's the biggest factor.
他们并不是没看见这个趋势，只是他们付不起中国那样的工资。这才是最大的因素。
pomezanian
they are paying similar , this is why european car manufacturers build their huge plants in Poland, Czechia, Hungary, even Serbia and Marocco (stellantis). Workers there earn from 960 eur -1300 euros compared to average Chinese salary in the moto industry around 1000 eur. Not such a huge difference as you can see
他们付得其实差不多，这也是为什么欧洲车企把大型工厂建在波兰、捷克、匈牙利，甚至塞尔维亚和摩洛哥（斯泰兰蒂斯）。那里的工人月薪大约在960欧到1300欧之间，而中国汽车行业的平均工资大概在1000欧左右。你可以看到，差距并没有那么大。
roiki11
The salary you see on the ticket is not what it costs to employ someone. The cost of labor in China is much cheaper than any European nation.
你在工资单上看到的数字，并不等于雇佣一个人的真实成本。中国的用工成本比任何一个欧洲国家都低得多。
pomezanian
what is the difference ? 20-30%? No, simply, labour cost is overrated. For a car industry, it vary from 10 to 20% of total cost. Not 50, not 40%. From what I've found:
- the biggest part are materials and components : steel, electronic, batteries, etc: 50 -65%
- labour : 10-20&
- factories and machines amortisation: 10-15%
-energy, logistics, plant maintenance: 5-10%
-and few minor remaining costs, like IT, security, few %
Of course it vary from a country, from 15-20& in Germany, to 10-15% in Poland to around 10% in China
差多少？20–30%？并不是。说白了，劳动力成本被高估了。
在汽车行业，人工成本通常只占总成本的10–20%，不是50%，也不是40%。
根据我查到的数据：
最大的成本是原材料和零部件：钢材、电子元件、电池等，占50–65%
劳动力：10–20%
工厂和设备折旧：10–15%
能源、物流、工厂维护：5–10%
以及少量其他成本，如IT、安全等，占几个百分点
当然，不同国家会有差异：德国大约15–20%，波兰15–10%，中国大约10%。
CapableCollar
CSIS studies have also found China has dropped subsidies except for EVs except a sales tax exemption. They did a phased step down as the EV manufactures became able to stand on their own.
CSIS 的研究也发现，中国已经削减了除电动车以外的大多数补贴，目前主要保留的是购置税减免。他们随着电动车制造商逐渐站稳脚跟，分阶段下调了补贴。
tooltalk01
China's NEV subsidies have been around since 2009 -- renewed, extended every 2-4 years. The last "consumer direct purchase subsidy" ended in Dec 2022, but was renewed as "tax credit" for another 4 years in June 2023.
The CSIS study covers NEV subsidies up to 2023 before the publication date in 2024. Also, remember China doesn't report all subsidies to the WTO, as required under their WTO Accession. China refused to cooperate with the EU Commission on Anti-Subsidy probe against Chinese EVs to hide the full extent of their NEV subsidies last year, which, as a result, penalized EV companies like SAIC/MG with 35% tariff.
For instance, CATL is estimated to have received ~$2B in state subsidies last year. That's in spite of CATL's ~$7B in profit and another $4.6B raised by listing on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange. CATL is the biggest EV battery company in the world with approx 35% market share.
中国的新能源车（NEV）补贴从2009年就开始了——每2到4年续期一次。
最后一次“直接面向消费者的购车补贴”在2022年12月结束，但在2023年6月又以“税收抵免”的形式延长了4年。
CSIS 的研究涵盖了截至2023年的新能源车补贴情况，并于2024年发表。
另外要记住，中国并未按照加入WTO时的要求，向世贸组织完整申报所有补贴。去年在欧盟对中国电动车展开反补贴调查时，中国拒绝配合欧盟委员会，试图隐瞒新能源车补贴的真实规模，结果导致像上汽 / 名爵这样的企业被征收35%的关税。
例如，宁德时代（CATL）去年被估计获得了约20亿美元的国家补贴——而这还是在其实现约70亿美元利润、并通过在香港（特区）上市融资46亿美元的情况下。宁德时代是全球最大的电动车电池企业，市占率约35%。
tooltalk01
That's exactly why China "model" is suitable for EU. China didn't have much at all when they were starting out back in 2010. China was really nobody, well behind the industry leaders from Japan and South Korea.
这正是为什么“中国模式”适合欧盟。中国在2010年左右起步时几乎一无所有，当时他们远远落后于日本和韩国这些行业领先者。
UsefulReplacement
First off, China didn't "start" with EVs in 2010, more like early 2000s.
Second, calling Japan/South Korea "industry leaders" in what was a nascent industry back then makes no sense.
Third, EVs now are an established and highly competitive industry, so it's rather dumb to think that if you just apply a model that worked 20+ years ago in a completely different situation from today, it'll magically save you.
The Chinese EV companies had 20+ years to compete internally, build the tech, the supply chain, secure the rare earths and lithium resources. Today they have massive technological, manufacturing and economies of scale advantages that can't be overcome by throwing some state money at the problem. Not to mention that they also control the supply of materials used in key components.
Let's be honest and just acknowledge that the Chinese govt made a strong bet on this tech a long time ago and it's paid off big time for them. And the EU simply didn't.
第一，中国并不是2010年才“开始”做电动车，而是更早，大概在2000年代初。
第二，在当时这个尚处于萌芽阶段的产业中，把日本和韩国称为“行业领导者”本身就没什么意义。
第三，如今电动车已经是一个成熟且高度竞争的产业，认为只要照搬一个20多年前、在完全不同背景下奏效的模式，就能奇迹般地自救，是相当愚蠢的。
中国电动车企业有20多年的时间进行内部竞争、积累技术、打造供应链，并锁定稀土和锂资源。
今天，他们拥有巨大的技术、制造能力和规模经济优势，这些并不是简单砸点国家资金就能追上的。更不用说他们还控制着关键零部件所需材料的供应。
说实话，应该承认：中国政府在很早以前就对这项技术下了重注，而且回报巨大；而欧盟没有。
tooltalk01
It's not just about how much, but also how they abused subsidies. China's NEV subsidies are illegal, or in violation of the WTO's Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM) Agreement.
问题不仅在于补贴“有多少”，还在于他们如何滥用补贴。中国的新能源车补贴是非法的，或至少违反了WTO《补贴与反补贴措施协定》（SCM）。
Cautious-Finding86
But the government subsidies are also paid to Tesla. Musk saved Tesla from the brink of death with the production scale of the Shanghai factory. Will protectionism protect the enterprises of hostile countries?
但政府补贴也同样给了特斯拉。马斯克正是靠上海工厂的规模化生产，才把特斯拉从濒死边缘拉了回来。保护主义真的会去保护来自敌对国家的企业吗？
pomezanian
Evs in China are much cheaper than in Europe, plus electricity is around 1/5th average european price
中国的电动车比欧洲便宜得多，而且电价大约只有欧洲平均水平的五分之一。
CapableCollar
EVs will never get as cheap as they are in China anywhere else though. Chinese EV manufactures are in a price war trying to kill each other right now because there are so many players in the market. They want to get into the EU to sell luxury vehicles so they can actually get decent margins on sales.
电动车在其他地方永远不可能像在中国那样便宜。中国的电动车制造商现在正陷入价格战，试图互相“杀死”，因为市场里的玩家太多了。
他们想进入欧盟市场，销售高端车型，这样才能真正获得可观的利润率。
harrytaisa
Correct. Finally, I'm glad to have found someone with a decent intellect.
Have you heard of the “electric vehicle graveyard”?
Due to failed subsidy policies and car-sharing ventures, coupled with the proliferation and withdrawal of manufacturers, vast numbers of unused electric vehicles have been abandoned en masse, becoming a social problem.
没错。终于遇到一个有正常智商的人了。
你听说过“电动车坟场”吗？
由于失败的补贴政策和共享汽车项目，再加上大量厂商涌入又退出，成批无人使用的电动车被遗弃，已经成了社会问题。
TulipWindmill
This is a real piece of work. You ban combustion, they say “China wins”. You lift the ban, they also say “China wins”.
I guess politico wants the EU to exclusively import American cars (or “Yank Trucks”). Isn’t that right?
这事真的很魔幻。你禁止内燃机，他们说“中国赢了”；你取消禁令，他们还是说“中国赢了”。
我猜 Politico 是希望欧盟只进口美国汽车（或者说“美国皮卡”），对吧？
berikiyan
Or perhaps they want to say that EU is not competitive anymore in global markets?
I mean EU can regulate and artificially protect its own market, but when it comes to exports and other markets (Latin America, Africa, Middle East, India etc) EU firms will still be outcompeted by Chinese manufacturers.
又或者，他们只是想说欧盟在全球市场上已经不具竞争力了？
欧盟当然可以通过监管和人为手段保护自己的市场，但一旦涉及出口和其他市场（拉美、非洲、中东、印度等），欧盟企业仍然会被中国制造商击败。
suentendo
Protectionism has helped the local asian auto industries evolve in a relatively short time, I mean who doesn’t remember a Kia being essentially a budget car, and nowadays they make impressive cars. Same goes for Chinese cars. And certain classic european brands still hold a lot of cache if they can get their shit together. Of course, it will always be an uphill battle, but EU has all the incentive to try everything they can to modernize its auto industry precisely because they have such a long standing on it and brand power that doesn’t need to go to waste.
保护主义确实帮助亚洲本土汽车产业在相对短时间内完成进化。谁不记得起亚曾经基本就是“廉价车”的代名词，而如今却能造出相当出色的汽车？中国车也是如此。
一些经典的欧洲品牌仍然拥有很高的品牌溢价，只要他们能把事情理顺。当然，这始终是一场艰难的战斗，但欧盟有充分的动力去尝试一切办法来推动汽车产业现代化——正因为这是他们长期以来的支柱产业，品牌价值不该被浪费。
berikiyan
Well, EU needs to at least get off the high horse and stop the arrogant attitude towards China and other countries. I agree that there is potential, but some deep changes need to be done.
不过，欧盟至少需要放下身段，停止对中国和其他国家的傲慢态度。我同意存在潜力，但必须进行一些深层次的改变。
Mikowolf
Article conviniently omits that EU BEV already lost, with only tarrifs keeping the sector afloat. Sales of European EV has been stagnant, while ICE does alright and Europe still has a leg up there.
Lifting a theoretical ban deadline 10y from now, by which time eu car biz might not even be a genuine player anymore, hardly makes any difference.
这篇文章刻意回避了一个事实：欧盟的纯电动车（BEV）其实已经输了，只是靠关税才勉强维持。
欧洲电动车销量停滞不前，而内燃机车型表现还行，欧洲在这方面仍有优势。
把一个理论上的禁令期限从现在往后推10年，而到那时欧盟汽车产业可能早就不再是一个真正的玩家了，这几乎没什么实际影响。
CostGuilty8542
Politco article , pratically usa propaganda
Politico 的文章，本质上就是美国宣传。
TheGreatestOrator
It’s literally run by Europeans
它明明是由欧洲人运营的。
bxzidff
Lately it has become obvious, but thinking back it was always kind of strange how Politico seemed to hate especially France in every article they write about them
最近这一点变得很明显，但回头想想，Politico 在写法国相关报道时，总是带着一种莫名的敌意，这本来就很奇怪。
Aerhyce
Yep, as a Frenchman politico being trash has always been obvious lol
It's just that it usually talks about "enemy" countries, so nobody cares that it's saying garbage.
Like when it says that "China did X", when China absolutely did not do X, and the typical reaction is "doesn't matter, China is evil enough to do X anyway" and the whole thing is swept under the rug. (An example is the Social Credit Score thing, which outright never existed the way Western journos described it, and nowadays no longer exists at all).
Now that it turns its head on "friendly" countries, people are increasingly noticing that it's oddly biased.
是的，作为一个法国人，我一直都觉得 Politico 很垃圾，哈哈。
只是它通常写的是“敌对国家”，所以没人关心它在胡说八道。
比如它说“某某中国做了X”，而中国实际上根本没做X，典型反应就是：“无所谓，中国邪恶到完全可能做X。”于是整件事就这么被糊过去了。（社会信用评分就是个典型例子，它从来没有以西方记者描述的方式存在过，现在更是早已不存在。）
而当它开始针对“友好国家”时，人们才越来越意识到，它的偏见有多离谱。
aiart13
The narrative is always the same - it's either USA, China or Russia winning and Europe is always losing.
Meanwhile americans fail to create even a basic free health care system for all citizens while boasting around with Nvidia market capitalization or something.
Russia created a meat grinder without any resemblance of getting out of this war in any even remotely normal for the society and economy way possible and their citizens are living like dogs while the children of the oligarchs are living their best lives... where? in Europe
And China created for their citizens some absurdly high tech hell with social credits, sweat shops all around, and people in the village and rural areas still living like dogs. And with all the power their economy is supposed to be, they still actually need to spam the ever loosing Europe with bullshit sits, like Temu and Sheen.
But somehow the free EU market, the free Shengen traveling, categorically the best live and societies right now on earth, not ideal, but the most just societies in the world, the most educated societies in the world, they are constantly losing, according to media.
叙事永远是同一套——不是美国赢了，就是中国赢了，或者俄罗斯赢了，而欧洲永远在输。
与此同时，美国连一个覆盖全民的基本免费医疗体系都建不起来，却在那儿炫耀英伟达的市值之类的东西。
俄罗斯打造了一个血肉磨坊，却看不到任何能以正常社会和经济方式结束战争的可能，普通民众活得像狗，而寡头的孩子却在过着人生巅峰——在哪里？在欧洲。
而中国为自己的公民打造了一个高度技术化的地狱，社会信用、血汗工厂遍地，农村和乡下的人依然活得像狗。即便拥有如此强大的经济实力，他们仍然需要不断向正在“衰败”的欧洲倾销垃圾商品，比如 Temu 和 Shein。
但不知为何，在媒体叙事中，拥有自由市场、申根自由流动、当今地球上生活质量最好的社会体系——不完美，但最公平、受教育程度最高的社会——的欧盟，却永远在“输”。
Why has China achieved such results in electric cars without banning internal combustion engines, while the EU needs a ban to do so?
为什么中国在没有禁止内燃机的情况下，电动车却能取得这样的成果，而欧盟却需要靠禁令才能做到？
Allu71
China also has a semi ban on ICE cars by making it much easier to get a license plate for an electric vehicle in many major cities, limiting the amount of people that can legally drive ICE vehicles
中国其实也算是半禁内燃机，通过在许多大城市让电动车更容易上牌，同时限制合法驾驶内燃机车的人数。
Collar
A policy implemented for noise and pollution reasons as well. It was embarrassing to have air in cities be chewy and for it to be deafening if you open your window. They just saw how to pivot into success once EVs came around as an option.
这项政策同样是出于噪音和污染的考虑。城市里的空气太糟糕了，一开窗就吵得要命，真的很丢人。后来电动车成为选项，他们就顺势成功转型了。
podfather2000
Also a lot of internal competition. Many Chinese EV companies went under. If European car companies that generated billions in profit can't pivot to a trend that's 10+ years in the making. Sorry, you deserve to go under at that point.
还有大量的内部竞争。很多中国电动车公司已经倒闭了。如果一家欧洲车企能赚几十亿利润，却没法转向一个已经酝酿了十多年趋势的方向，那不好意思，你活该被淘汰。
Forman
Yup. China was public about their attentions when I was a college kid in 2008. They had been laying the groundwork for this for coming on 20 years, western firms have just been walking like a dumb cow into the slaughterhouse while everyone who wasn't coping with "hurrdurr, those Chinese can't innovate" delusions was screaming at them to get their shut together.
没错。早在我2008年上大学的时候，中国就已经公开他们的意图了。他们为此铺垫了将近20年，而西方企业却像蠢牛一样一步步走向屠宰场。只要不是沉浸在“呵呵，中国人不会创新”这种幻想里的人，当年都在冲西方企业大喊让他们赶紧振作。
LazyGandalf
China has a similar 2035 ban, where by then 50% of new cars sold have to be EVs and 50% hybrids. But EVs are at around 50% already, so the ban will probably be completely unnecessary.
中国也有类似的2035年目标，到那时新车销量50%必须是纯电，50%是混动。但现在纯电已经接近50%了，所以这个“禁令”可能完全没必要。
robinrd91
Also has to do with the EV price and the low cost of electricity as well.
most of the taxi/didi (Chinese uber) on the road are now EVs
这也和电动车价格以及低廉的电价有关。
现在路上的出租车 / 滴滴基本上都是电动车了。
NaCl_Sailor
they never built combustion engine cars (at least not seriously)
中国根本就没怎么认真造过内燃机汽车。
Boreras
Well they seriously tried and failed.
他们认真试过，而且失败了。
moiwantkwason
They built ICE using joint ventures and EU wanted to build EVs in Europe through JVs. History is supposed to be learning lessons not a model to replicate.
他们是通过合资企业来造内燃机，而欧盟则想通过合资在欧洲造电动车。历史的意义是吸取教训，而不是照搬模式。
wolflance1
LOL no. They absolutely did. And their ICE cars will eat EU lunch too.
China's ICE cars are only losers compared to their EVs. They still absolutely munch everyone else for breakfast.
哈哈，不是的。中国绝对造过，而且他们的内燃机车照样能把欧盟车企按在地上摩擦。
中国的内燃机车只是相对于他们的电动车来说是“失败者”，但对其他国家来说，依然是轻松碾压。
TheShart
I've looked into some of their gas engines and they commonly have issues. Their small engines are some of the worst out of any country often being stolen designs while lacking the material science needed.
Main bearings that are normally seen in 30 year old engine designs and not using cam ground pistons. The hardness of bearing surfaces is often inconsistent, sand is common in their castings, and many other issues.
我研究过他们的一些汽油发动机，发现问题相当普遍。他们的小型发动机在各国中算是最差的一批，往往是被盗用的设计，同时又缺乏所需的材料科学水平。
所使用的主轴承还是三十年前发动机设计中常见的那种，而且没有采用凸轮磨削活塞。轴承表面的硬度经常不一致，铸件中常见夹砂等缺陷，此外还有许多其他问题。
DasistMamba
They are not particularly reliable, but German cars today are not particularly reliable either, and they cost twice much more expensive. Don't get me wrong, I would choose a German car over a Chinese one, but Chinese cars have made huge strides, even in terms of their ICE auto.
中国车确实谈不上特别可靠，但现在的德国车也谈不上可靠，而且价格还贵一倍。
别误会，我还是会选德国车而不是中国车，但中国车的进步非常大，甚至在内燃机方面也是如此。
pomezanian
well, they already took 10% of polish market, mostly by their combustion and hybrid cars, not by BEV
他们已经拿下了波兰市场10%的份额，而且主要靠的是内燃机和混动车，不是纯电。
DasistMamba
Geely, which owns Volvo, produces decent cars with internal combustion engines. In 2024, they sold 3.3 million cars, and a large proportion of those were internal combustion engines.
拥有沃尔沃的吉利，内燃机车做得就相当不错。2024年他们卖了330万辆车，其中很大一部分是内燃机车型。
iFoegot
Massive subsidies, and I’m saying it as a Chinese. The Chinese government has always been doing it: trying to catch the correct trend. It has always been like: they spot something that may have a potential, it announces that it will give huge incentives to companies that do it. For the most of the time it resulted in bubbles, this time too. The Chinese EV industry is also full of bubbles (look at the 0km secondhand car market in China), but it’s solidly supported by the global trend of transitioning to EVs, so it looks healthy and booming. One day it may collapse too, but may also thrive and dominate the world, if the Chinese government placed the bet correctly.
巨额补贴，我作为一个中国人这么说。中国政府一直都是这样：试图抓住正确的趋势。
通常的模式是：他们发现一个可能有潜力的方向，就宣布给相关企业巨额激励。大多数时候这会导致泡沫，这次也是。
中国电动车行业同样充满泡沫（看看国内的“0公里二手车”市场），但它又牢牢站在全球电动车转型的大趋势上，所以看起来健康又繁荣。
有一天它可能也会崩盘，但如果中国政府这次押对了方向，它也可能继续壮大并主导世界。
MrHighVoltage
This, and I don't know why european law- and car-makers don't see or acknowledge that. They are playing the long game. They completely outsold the solar-industry in all other countries, and prevented the building up of a battery industry outside of China by undercutting the prices. Now they dominate the market, giving them self incredibly cheap energy and the whole world can choose to be dependent on Chinese solar panels and batteries or (insert random despot country) fossil energy.
And the same can happen with cars. The european car-makers (except Renault, seemingly) have completely missed that the market requires low-cost EVs.
正是如此。我不明白为什么欧洲的立法者和车企看不到、也不愿承认这一点。他们是在打长期战。
他们通过压价，把其他国家的太阳能产业全部挤出市场，也阻止了中国以外地区建立电池产业。如今他们主导市场，使自己获得极其廉价的能源，而全世界只能选择依赖中国的太阳能板和电池，或者依赖（随便哪个独裁国家的）化石能源。
同样的事情也可能发生在汽车产业上。欧洲车企（看起来雷诺除外）完全错过了市场对低价电动车的真实需求。
roiki11
They haven't missed it. They just can't pay Chinese wages. That's the biggest factor.
他们并不是没看见这个趋势，只是他们付不起中国那样的工资。这才是最大的因素。
pomezanian
they are paying similar , this is why european car manufacturers build their huge plants in Poland, Czechia, Hungary, even Serbia and Marocco (stellantis). Workers there earn from 960 eur -1300 euros compared to average Chinese salary in the moto industry around 1000 eur. Not such a huge difference as you can see
他们付得其实差不多，这也是为什么欧洲车企把大型工厂建在波兰、捷克、匈牙利，甚至塞尔维亚和摩洛哥（斯泰兰蒂斯）。那里的工人月薪大约在960欧到1300欧之间，而中国汽车行业的平均工资大概在1000欧左右。你可以看到，差距并没有那么大。
roiki11
The salary you see on the ticket is not what it costs to employ someone. The cost of labor in China is much cheaper than any European nation.
你在工资单上看到的数字，并不等于雇佣一个人的真实成本。中国的用工成本比任何一个欧洲国家都低得多。
pomezanian
what is the difference ? 20-30%? No, simply, labour cost is overrated. For a car industry, it vary from 10 to 20% of total cost. Not 50, not 40%. From what I've found:
- the biggest part are materials and components : steel, electronic, batteries, etc: 50 -65%
- labour : 10-20&
- factories and machines amortisation: 10-15%
-energy, logistics, plant maintenance: 5-10%
-and few minor remaining costs, like IT, security, few %
Of course it vary from a country, from 15-20& in Germany, to 10-15% in Poland to around 10% in China
差多少？20–30%？并不是。说白了，劳动力成本被高估了。
在汽车行业，人工成本通常只占总成本的10–20%，不是50%，也不是40%。
根据我查到的数据：
最大的成本是原材料和零部件：钢材、电子元件、电池等，占50–65%
劳动力：10–20%
工厂和设备折旧：10–15%
能源、物流、工厂维护：5–10%
以及少量其他成本，如IT、安全等，占几个百分点
当然，不同国家会有差异：德国大约15–20%，波兰15–10%，中国大约10%。
CapableCollar
CSIS studies have also found China has dropped subsidies except for EVs except a sales tax exemption. They did a phased step down as the EV manufactures became able to stand on their own.
CSIS 的研究也发现，中国已经削减了除电动车以外的大多数补贴，目前主要保留的是购置税减免。他们随着电动车制造商逐渐站稳脚跟，分阶段下调了补贴。
tooltalk01
China's NEV subsidies have been around since 2009 -- renewed, extended every 2-4 years. The last "consumer direct purchase subsidy" ended in Dec 2022, but was renewed as "tax credit" for another 4 years in June 2023.
The CSIS study covers NEV subsidies up to 2023 before the publication date in 2024. Also, remember China doesn't report all subsidies to the WTO, as required under their WTO Accession. China refused to cooperate with the EU Commission on Anti-Subsidy probe against Chinese EVs to hide the full extent of their NEV subsidies last year, which, as a result, penalized EV companies like SAIC/MG with 35% tariff.
For instance, CATL is estimated to have received ~$2B in state subsidies last year. That's in spite of CATL's ~$7B in profit and another $4.6B raised by listing on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange. CATL is the biggest EV battery company in the world with approx 35% market share.
中国的新能源车（NEV）补贴从2009年就开始了——每2到4年续期一次。
最后一次“直接面向消费者的购车补贴”在2022年12月结束，但在2023年6月又以“税收抵免”的形式延长了4年。
CSIS 的研究涵盖了截至2023年的新能源车补贴情况，并于2024年发表。
另外要记住，中国并未按照加入WTO时的要求，向世贸组织完整申报所有补贴。去年在欧盟对中国电动车展开反补贴调查时，中国拒绝配合欧盟委员会，试图隐瞒新能源车补贴的真实规模，结果导致像上汽 / 名爵这样的企业被征收35%的关税。
例如，宁德时代（CATL）去年被估计获得了约20亿美元的国家补贴——而这还是在其实现约70亿美元利润、并通过在香港（特区）上市融资46亿美元的情况下。宁德时代是全球最大的电动车电池企业，市占率约35%。
tooltalk01
That's exactly why China "model" is suitable for EU. China didn't have much at all when they were starting out back in 2010. China was really nobody, well behind the industry leaders from Japan and South Korea.
这正是为什么“中国模式”适合欧盟。中国在2010年左右起步时几乎一无所有，当时他们远远落后于日本和韩国这些行业领先者。
UsefulReplacement
First off, China didn't "start" with EVs in 2010, more like early 2000s.
Second, calling Japan/South Korea "industry leaders" in what was a nascent industry back then makes no sense.
Third, EVs now are an established and highly competitive industry, so it's rather dumb to think that if you just apply a model that worked 20+ years ago in a completely different situation from today, it'll magically save you.
The Chinese EV companies had 20+ years to compete internally, build the tech, the supply chain, secure the rare earths and lithium resources. Today they have massive technological, manufacturing and economies of scale advantages that can't be overcome by throwing some state money at the problem. Not to mention that they also control the supply of materials used in key components.
Let's be honest and just acknowledge that the Chinese govt made a strong bet on this tech a long time ago and it's paid off big time for them. And the EU simply didn't.
第一，中国并不是2010年才“开始”做电动车，而是更早，大概在2000年代初。
第二，在当时这个尚处于萌芽阶段的产业中，把日本和韩国称为“行业领导者”本身就没什么意义。
第三，如今电动车已经是一个成熟且高度竞争的产业，认为只要照搬一个20多年前、在完全不同背景下奏效的模式，就能奇迹般地自救，是相当愚蠢的。
中国电动车企业有20多年的时间进行内部竞争、积累技术、打造供应链，并锁定稀土和锂资源。
今天，他们拥有巨大的技术、制造能力和规模经济优势，这些并不是简单砸点国家资金就能追上的。更不用说他们还控制着关键零部件所需材料的供应。
说实话，应该承认：中国政府在很早以前就对这项技术下了重注，而且回报巨大；而欧盟没有。
tooltalk01
It's not just about how much, but also how they abused subsidies. China's NEV subsidies are illegal, or in violation of the WTO's Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM) Agreement.
问题不仅在于补贴“有多少”，还在于他们如何滥用补贴。中国的新能源车补贴是非法的，或至少违反了WTO《补贴与反补贴措施协定》（SCM）。
Cautious-Finding86
But the government subsidies are also paid to Tesla. Musk saved Tesla from the brink of death with the production scale of the Shanghai factory. Will protectionism protect the enterprises of hostile countries?
但政府补贴也同样给了特斯拉。马斯克正是靠上海工厂的规模化生产，才把特斯拉从濒死边缘拉了回来。保护主义真的会去保护来自敌对国家的企业吗？
pomezanian
Evs in China are much cheaper than in Europe, plus electricity is around 1/5th average european price
中国的电动车比欧洲便宜得多，而且电价大约只有欧洲平均水平的五分之一。
CapableCollar
EVs will never get as cheap as they are in China anywhere else though. Chinese EV manufactures are in a price war trying to kill each other right now because there are so many players in the market. They want to get into the EU to sell luxury vehicles so they can actually get decent margins on sales.
电动车在其他地方永远不可能像在中国那样便宜。中国的电动车制造商现在正陷入价格战，试图互相“杀死”，因为市场里的玩家太多了。
他们想进入欧盟市场，销售高端车型，这样才能真正获得可观的利润率。
harrytaisa
Correct. Finally, I'm glad to have found someone with a decent intellect.
Have you heard of the “electric vehicle graveyard”?
Due to failed subsidy policies and car-sharing ventures, coupled with the proliferation and withdrawal of manufacturers, vast numbers of unused electric vehicles have been abandoned en masse, becoming a social problem.
没错。终于遇到一个有正常智商的人了。
你听说过“电动车坟场”吗？
由于失败的补贴政策和共享汽车项目，再加上大量厂商涌入又退出，成批无人使用的电动车被遗弃，已经成了社会问题。
TulipWindmill
This is a real piece of work. You ban combustion, they say “China wins”. You lift the ban, they also say “China wins”.
I guess politico wants the EU to exclusively import American cars (or “Yank Trucks”). Isn’t that right?
这事真的很魔幻。你禁止内燃机，他们说“中国赢了”；你取消禁令，他们还是说“中国赢了”。
我猜 Politico 是希望欧盟只进口美国汽车（或者说“美国皮卡”），对吧？
berikiyan
Or perhaps they want to say that EU is not competitive anymore in global markets?
I mean EU can regulate and artificially protect its own market, but when it comes to exports and other markets (Latin America, Africa, Middle East, India etc) EU firms will still be outcompeted by Chinese manufacturers.
又或者，他们只是想说欧盟在全球市场上已经不具竞争力了？
欧盟当然可以通过监管和人为手段保护自己的市场，但一旦涉及出口和其他市场（拉美、非洲、中东、印度等），欧盟企业仍然会被中国制造商击败。
suentendo
Protectionism has helped the local asian auto industries evolve in a relatively short time, I mean who doesn’t remember a Kia being essentially a budget car, and nowadays they make impressive cars. Same goes for Chinese cars. And certain classic european brands still hold a lot of cache if they can get their shit together. Of course, it will always be an uphill battle, but EU has all the incentive to try everything they can to modernize its auto industry precisely because they have such a long standing on it and brand power that doesn’t need to go to waste.
保护主义确实帮助亚洲本土汽车产业在相对短时间内完成进化。谁不记得起亚曾经基本就是“廉价车”的代名词，而如今却能造出相当出色的汽车？中国车也是如此。
一些经典的欧洲品牌仍然拥有很高的品牌溢价，只要他们能把事情理顺。当然，这始终是一场艰难的战斗，但欧盟有充分的动力去尝试一切办法来推动汽车产业现代化——正因为这是他们长期以来的支柱产业，品牌价值不该被浪费。
berikiyan
Well, EU needs to at least get off the high horse and stop the arrogant attitude towards China and other countries. I agree that there is potential, but some deep changes need to be done.
不过，欧盟至少需要放下身段，停止对中国和其他国家的傲慢态度。我同意存在潜力，但必须进行一些深层次的改变。
Mikowolf
Article conviniently omits that EU BEV already lost, with only tarrifs keeping the sector afloat. Sales of European EV has been stagnant, while ICE does alright and Europe still has a leg up there.
Lifting a theoretical ban deadline 10y from now, by which time eu car biz might not even be a genuine player anymore, hardly makes any difference.
这篇文章刻意回避了一个事实：欧盟的纯电动车（BEV）其实已经输了，只是靠关税才勉强维持。
欧洲电动车销量停滞不前，而内燃机车型表现还行，欧洲在这方面仍有优势。
把一个理论上的禁令期限从现在往后推10年，而到那时欧盟汽车产业可能早就不再是一个真正的玩家了，这几乎没什么实际影响。
CostGuilty8542
Politco article , pratically usa propaganda
Politico 的文章，本质上就是美国宣传。
TheGreatestOrator
It’s literally run by Europeans
它明明是由欧洲人运营的。
bxzidff
Lately it has become obvious, but thinking back it was always kind of strange how Politico seemed to hate especially France in every article they write about them
最近这一点变得很明显，但回头想想，Politico 在写法国相关报道时，总是带着一种莫名的敌意，这本来就很奇怪。
Aerhyce
Yep, as a Frenchman politico being trash has always been obvious lol
It's just that it usually talks about "enemy" countries, so nobody cares that it's saying garbage.
Like when it says that "China did X", when China absolutely did not do X, and the typical reaction is "doesn't matter, China is evil enough to do X anyway" and the whole thing is swept under the rug. (An example is the Social Credit Score thing, which outright never existed the way Western journos described it, and nowadays no longer exists at all).
Now that it turns its head on "friendly" countries, people are increasingly noticing that it's oddly biased.
是的，作为一个法国人，我一直都觉得 Politico 很垃圾，哈哈。
只是它通常写的是“敌对国家”，所以没人关心它在胡说八道。
比如它说“某某中国做了X”，而中国实际上根本没做X，典型反应就是：“无所谓，中国邪恶到完全可能做X。”于是整件事就这么被糊过去了。（社会信用评分就是个典型例子，它从来没有以西方记者描述的方式存在过，现在更是早已不存在。）
而当它开始针对“友好国家”时，人们才越来越意识到，它的偏见有多离谱。
aiart13
The narrative is always the same - it's either USA, China or Russia winning and Europe is always losing.
Meanwhile americans fail to create even a basic free health care system for all citizens while boasting around with Nvidia market capitalization or something.
Russia created a meat grinder without any resemblance of getting out of this war in any even remotely normal for the society and economy way possible and their citizens are living like dogs while the children of the oligarchs are living their best lives... where? in Europe
And China created for their citizens some absurdly high tech hell with social credits, sweat shops all around, and people in the village and rural areas still living like dogs. And with all the power their economy is supposed to be, they still actually need to spam the ever loosing Europe with bullshit sits, like Temu and Sheen.
But somehow the free EU market, the free Shengen traveling, categorically the best live and societies right now on earth, not ideal, but the most just societies in the world, the most educated societies in the world, they are constantly losing, according to media.
叙事永远是同一套——不是美国赢了，就是中国赢了，或者俄罗斯赢了，而欧洲永远在输。
与此同时，美国连一个覆盖全民的基本免费医疗体系都建不起来，却在那儿炫耀英伟达的市值之类的东西。
俄罗斯打造了一个血肉磨坊，却看不到任何能以正常社会和经济方式结束战争的可能，普通民众活得像狗，而寡头的孩子却在过着人生巅峰——在哪里？在欧洲。
而中国为自己的公民打造了一个高度技术化的地狱，社会信用、血汗工厂遍地，农村和乡下的人依然活得像狗。即便拥有如此强大的经济实力，他们仍然需要不断向正在“衰败”的欧洲倾销垃圾商品，比如 Temu 和 Shein。
但不知为何，在媒体叙事中，拥有自由市场、申根自由流动、当今地球上生活质量最好的社会体系——不完美，但最公平、受教育程度最高的社会——的欧盟，却永远在“输”。
