electric

BYD (BYDDY -1.09%) produces far more vehicles than Tesla. But you wouldn’t be able to tell based on stock prices alone. The Chinese electric vehicle maker’s market cap is around $990 billion, while U.S.-based Tesla is valued at more than $1.3 trillion.

Part of the valuation gap is explained by BYD’s recent struggles. Shares are down 20% in value since May. Tesla stock, meanwhile, has gained more than 40% in value over that time period. Is this your chance to buy BYD at a rare discount?

There’s no doubt that shares look compelling. But there are two critical factors to consider before jumping in.

1. Warren Buffett changed his mind about BYD

Legendary investor Warren Buffett was one of the first major investors in BYD. He first acquired shares 17 years ago, paying $230 million for a 10% stake in the business. It wasn’t actually Buffett that spotted the opportunity, but rather his longtime business partner, Charlie Munger.

Earlier in its history, BYD was focused on battery technology. Through vertical integration and affordable labor in China, the company was able to keep costs low, leading to major customer wins. It launched its first vehicles in 2003, gradually expanding its portfolio to include two of the most popular EVs in the world. This year, analysts expect the company to produce more EVs than Tesla, making it the number one EV maker worldwide.

Over the last 17 years, Buffett has made more than 2,000% on his original investment. This year, however, he liquidated his entire position. Why? Even though it has massive scale, BYD is still primarily a Chinese company. Around 80% of its sales are domestic, a reality that creates two critical headwinds.

First, the Chinese economy has been gradually slowing. Last year, GDP in the country grew by just 5% — one of the lowest figures in decades. Accordingly, BYD’s domestic sales have struggled in 2025, leading to a sales forecast cut by management.

Second, the Chinese government has a heavy influence on BYD. The company has received significant financial support from the government over the years. But that generosity may be ending. BYD failed an audit this summer, which may force it to repay more than $50 million in subsidies. The Chinese government’s involvement in the auto industry has ramped up this year, with the ultimate results still uncertain.

Buffett hasn’t yet commented on his stake sale. But with rising political uncertainty and a shaky domestic market, it appears as if the Oracle of Omaha has had enough with this long-term position.

Image source: Getty Images.

2. Don’t compare BYD to Tesla

Due to China’s sluggish GDP and falling population growth, it will be difficult for BYD’s sales to maintain historical growth rates over the long term without expanding international sales aggressively. Increasing regulatory oversight may complicate efforts to do so, but BYD is making moves to shift its focus away from China.

A recent deal with Uber Technologies, for instance, attempts to make its vehicles more accessible to drivers in Europe and Latin America. The deal also paves the way for BYD to help power Uber’s robotaxi division in certain parts of the world.

On the surface, now looks like a compelling time to pick up BYD shares. While challenges exist, the company has an impressive manufacturing base, with the ability to sell cars at a price point that few competitors can match at scale. Its recent Uber deal, meanwhile, gives it exposure to the robotaxi market, which could eventually be worth more than $5 trillion globally.

Add in that shares trade at roughly 1 times sales versus Tesla’s valuation of nearly 17 times sales, and it’s not hard to get excited. Here’s the problem: BYD isn’t Tesla. Tesla, for instance, has a leading position in the robotaxi market, making it far more than a simple auto manufacturer. BYD’s position in the market is simply as a supplier to operators like Uber.

Is BYD stock a buy today? Patient investors comfortable with Chinese regulatory uncertainty may think so. But the valuation gap between BYD and Tesla shouldn’t be a motivating factor. These are two very different businesses.

Getty Images

Policy differences

Bloomberg via Getty Images

FAMILIES can now receive a cut of £56million in energy bill support from a ‘Big Six’ supplier.

From today, OVO Energy is handing out free electric blankets as one of its ways to help customers with rising energy bills.

1

The supplier runs the extra support service for users all year round, but is now increasing the amount of aid it’s giving out ahead of the winter months.

Since 2022, OVO has given £190million in aid, including heated blankets, smart sockets, and efficiency kits, helping 42,000 customers last year.

The latest £56million package includes free energy-saving products and direct financial support.

And it’s not just electric blankets that you could bag for free.

OVO is also giving away mattress toppers and home efficiency kits to struggling households as part of the scheme.

Customers could also receive a wide range of energy-saving measures installed through ECO4 – from loft insulation to a new boiler, or even high-end tech like heat pumps.

Eligible customers could get a whole package installed, all for free.

Financial support including Direct Debit reductions, emergency credit top-ups, and extended repayment plans are also being offered.

To check your entitlement, visit ovoenergy.com/extra-support.

Ovo is separately campaigning for the introduction of a social tariff to protect vulnerable customers from high energy prices and combat fuel poverty across the UK.

David Buttress, chief executive of OVO, said: “We’re providing support to those who need it most by working together with our charity partners and committing our largest ever customer support package.”

“But this isn’t a long term solution.

“We need to make the energy system work better for everyone.

“That starts with targeted support in the form of a social tariff – no one can be, or no one needs to be left behind.”

What other grants are available?

There are several other ways households can boost their home’s energy efficiency and save money through a variety of grants.

From insulation and boiler upgrades to modifications for disabled residents, financial assistance can cover a substantial portion of your home improvement costs.

Some grants may even cover up to £50,000 worth of home improvements.

Great British insulation scheme – £1,000s

You can get help insulating your home through the Government’s Great British Insulation Scheme (GBIS) if you’re not eligible under the ECO scheme.

GBIS is open to an extra 400,000 households in council tax bands A to E across England, Wales and Scotland who might not be claiming benefits.

To qualify, you must have an energy performance certificate rating of D or lower.

You could be in line for essential upgrades to your home, including roof, loft or cavity wall insulation – which could cut your annual energy bill by £100s.

Check whether you meet the eligibility criteria by visiting gov.uk/apply-great-british-insulation-scheme.

Boiler upgrade scheme – £7,500

Through the boiler upgrade scheme, you could get a grant to cover part of the cost of replacing fossil fuel heating systems with a heat pump or biomass boiler.

You can get one grant per property, towards help with the following:

• £7,500 towards an air source heat pump
• £7,500 towards a ground source heat pump (including water source heat pumps and those on shared ground loops)
• £5,000 towards a biomass boiler

To qualify for this scheme you must own the property you are looking to upgrade.

You must find an MCS-certified installer to claim the grant on your behalf.

MCS is the certification scheme for energy-efficiency product installers.

You can find the nearest ones to you by visiting www.mcscertified.com/find-an-installer, but it is worth shopping for a few quotes.

Home upgrade grant – £1,000s

The home upgrade grant provides funding for various energy efficiency measures for homes that are not connected to the gas grid, often in rural or semi-rural areas.

To be eligible, you must own and live in the property you’re applying for and not use a mains gas boiler as your home’s main heating system.

You’ll also need an performance certificate (EPC) rating of D, E, F or G – if you do not know your home’s EPC you can find it out when you apply.

You’ll usually need to have a household income of £36,000 a year or less.

If you’re eligible, your local council will arrange a home survey to see how your home could be made more energy efficient.

They might suggest improvements like installing wall, loft and underfloor insulation, air source heat pumps, electric radiators

Find out more by visiting gov.uk/apply-home-upgrade-grant.

What energy bill help is available?

There’s a number of different ways to get help paying your energy bills if you’re struggling to get by.

If you fall into debt, you can always approach your supplier to see if they can put you on a repayment plan before putting you on a prepayment meter.

This involves paying off what you owe in instalments over a set period.

If your supplier offers you a repayment plan you don’t think you can afford, speak to them again to see if you can negotiate a better deal.

Several energy firms have schemes available to customers struggling to cover their bills.

But eligibility criteria vary depending on the supplier and the amount you can get depends on your financial circumstances.

For example, British Gas or Scottish Gas customers struggling to pay their energy bills can get grants worth up to £2,000.

British Gas also offers help via its British Gas Energy Trust and Individuals Family Fund.

You don’t need to be a British Gas customer to apply for the second fund.

EDF, E.ON, Octopus Energy and Scottish Power all offer grants to struggling customers too.

Thousands of vulnerable households are missing out on extra help and protections by not signing up to the Priority Services Register (PSR).

The service helps support vulnerable households, such as those who are elderly or ill.

Some of the perks include being given advance warning of blackouts, free gas safety checks and extra support if you’re struggling.

Get in touch with your energy firm to see if you can apply.

The traffic light was bright green for EVgo (EVGO 3.79%) stock over the past few days on the market. An analyst reiterated his buy case on the electric charging station stock, and investors took this to heart. According to data compiled by S&P Global Market Intelligence, EVgo’s shares were motoring 13% higher week to date as of Thursday night.

Joint venture supplies juice

The latest prognosticator to weigh in with a positive take on EVgo was Cantor Fitzgerald’s Andres Sheppard. Before the start of the trading week, early Monday morning, he reiterated his overweight (i.e., buy) recommendation on the company’s stock and his price target of $7 per share. That level anticipates robust upside of nearly 51% on the company’s most recent closing price.

Image source: Getty Images.

According to reports, Sheppard’s continued optimism rests on EVgo’s recent news that the joint-venture charging business operated by it, General Motors, and Pilot has reached a notable stage in its build-out. It reported that the company has more than 200 Pilot and Flying J charging facilities.

These are spread far and wide through the country, with around 40 states and a total of roughly 850 stalls for electric vehicles to juice up. The analyst pointed out that the joint venture is aiming to build its sites in major interstate travel corridors, in addition to underserved rural areas.

On the road to 500

Sheppard also expressed optimism that the three companies would reach their goal to hit 500 locations by the end of this year. Volume is important for charging companies like EVgo, and it seems the company is well on its way to achieving meaningful scale.

You’re reading a free article with opinions that may differ
from The Motley Fool’s Premium Investing Services. Become a Motley Fool member today to
get instant access to our top analyst recommendations, in-depth research, investing resources,
and more. Learn More

The California Public Utilities Commission is expected to allow Southern California Edison to hike customer bills by nearly 10% next month, and there may be more increases to come.

Edison’s plan would boost the average residential bill by $17 a month or about $200 a year, the commission said. The monthly bill for a customer using 500 kilowatts would jump from $171 to $188 on Oct. 1.

The five commissioners are scheduled to vote Thursday on the PUC administrative law judge’s proposal. It’s just one of multiple rate hikes Edison has asked the commission to approve in the coming year.

Scores of angry customers have written to the commission since Edison proposed the hike, asking the panel to deny it.

Some customers have pointed out that even as Edison has charged more for tree trimming and equipment upgrades meant to make its system safer and more reliable, its electric lines continue to spark fires.

The company now faces dozens of lawsuits from victims of the Jan. 7 Eaton fire, which killed at least 19 people and destroyed thousands of homes in Altadena. Video captured the fire igniting under an Edison transmission tower. The investigation into the fire’s cause is continuing.

“Please, do not let SCE pass their damages on to their customers,” Sara Green, a Crestline resident, wrote to the commission. “Let them cut executive salaries and forgo dividends, rather than pass this on unilaterally to every customer.”

Other customers have complained about increasing outages, including the preventative blackouts the company uses to try to stop its equipment from sparking fires in hot, windy weather.

William Pilling, a resident of Rovana, a small unincorporated community near Bishop, told the commission last month that he and his neighbors were experiencing “highly frequent service interruptions.”

“This is the very definition of unreliable service,” Pilling wrote. ”We are now being asked to pay more per unit for a lower quality good.”

David Eisenhauer, an Edison spokesman, said in an interview that the company was sensitive to concerns about rising rates. “We know that rate changes are challenging for customers,” he said.

“The cost of action is high, but the cost of inaction is higher,” Eisenhauer said. The increases, he said, were needed to support “a reliable and resilient electric grid that is ready to enable the clean energy transition.”

The proposed 10% hike is the result of what the commission calls a general rate case, where the agency allows utilities to propose how much they need to spend to operate and maintain the electrical grid for the next four years.

After months of hearings and debate, an administrative law judge recommended that the commission allow Edison to spend $9.8 billion on those costs this year — 13.7% more than the amount authorized for last year, according to the release. The proposal is less than the nearly $10.5 billion that Edison had initially requested.

Under the plan, Edison will get additional increases for inflation — and customers will see corresponding hikes — for each year through 2028, the commission said.

Edison says it has increased its spending aimed at preventing wildfires, including by undergrounding lines, installing new insulated wires and increasing equipment inspections in areas with high fire risk. The company has also increased the trimming of trees and other vegetation growing near its equipment.

Eisenhauer said that since 2019 wildfire-related investments have helped drive up rates.

He added that demand for electricity is “growing faster than it has in decades” leading to higher costs. In addition, he said, “threats to grid safety and reliability are becoming more frequent and more costly.”

Since 2014, Edison’s rates have risen by 80% — more than twice the rate of inflation, the commission’s public advocates office said in a May report.

More than 860,000 Edison customers — or 19% of the total — are behind in paying their electric bills, the report said. The average unpaid balance was $957.

The proposed 10% hike is one of several increases Edison has asked the commission to approve, or that state officials have already greenlighted.

In November, customers who use little electricity, like those living in small apartments or those owning solar panels, will see higher bills when the company begins adding a $24 monthly fixed charge, according to a recent Edison release.

In return, the price per kilowatt hour will fall, leading to possible savings for those using more power. For example, a residential customer using 1,000 kilowatts per month — double the average — will see their bill decline to $355 from $380, according to the release.

The commission designed the new monthly charge, which applies to customers of the state’s three largest for-profit electric companies, so that revenue increases from the new fees match the loss from the lower price per kilowatt hour.

The new fee was created under a bill pushed through the state Legislature in 2022 by Gov. Gavin Newsom. The utilities asked for the change in how electricity was billed to encourage Californians to switch to electric-powered vehicles and home appliances.

Edison also expects to raise rates for the damages from two catastrophic wildfires that investigators found the utility’s equipment sparked.

It has asked the commission for a nearly 2% increase to cover $5.4 billion in damages from the 2018 Woolsey fire, which killed three people and destroyed more than 1,600 homes and other structures in Malibu and nearby communities.

Earlier this year, the commission agreed Edison could increase rates by less than 1% to collect $1.6 billion from customers for damages from the 2017 Thomas fire. The blaze burned more than 280,000 acres in Ventura and Santa Barbara counties and left barren hillsides that helped set off mudslides in Montecito that killed 23 people. The commission must still sign off on final approval of the hike.

Eisenhauer said that under state law utilities are allowed to shift fire damages to customers if they have operated their system prudently and reasonably. He said the two fires were “largely driven by unprecedented and extreme weather events and other factors outside SCE’s control.”

In another proposal, Edison has asked the commission to raise customer bills by 2.1% to increase profits going to its investors, according to its customer notice. The plan would increase its cost of capital — the rate that helps determine how much profit it earns when it builds electric lines and other infrastructure.

The utility asked for the increase in investor profits after its stock price plummeted in January when lawyers claimed its transmission line had ignited the Eaton fire. The company told the commission that because of California’s high risk of wildfire, it needed to earn higher profits to encourage investors to continue holding its stock and to bolster its credit rating.

Despite Edison’s rapidly rising spending on insulated wires, tree trimming and other fire prevention work, its equipment sparked 178 fires last year — up from 90 in 2023.

Company executives said most of those ignitions were small fires that did not spread. The number of fires each year, they said, depends on the weather. Last year, heavy rain and then hot weather, they said, left more dried vegetation.

Edison has said its increased fire prevention work will decrease the number of times that it must shut off power to communities in hot, windy weather to stop lines from sparking fires.

Yet the company said at an Aug. 19 meeting that it expects the number of days of preventative power shutoffs to increase by 20% to 40% this year and that the number of customers subject to them could be twice as high.

Eisenhauer explained that the number of preventative shutoffs was expected to rise because the utility recently lowered the wind speed thresholds that trigger them. The company also added 47,000 more customers to areas believed to have high fire risk, which are subject to the preventative shutoffs, he said.

At the August meeting, Edison executives touted the success of the company’s fire prevention work.

In a presentation, Timothy O’Toole, an Edison board member and head of its safety and operations committee, noted the devastation the January fires caused in and around Los Angeles.

“Nonetheless, we remain very proud and confident in the progress we’ve made,” he said.

O’Toole said the utility’s fire prevention work had “created ever greater protection for our communities and our customers.”

Later in the meeting, Caroline Thomas Jacobs, director of the state Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety, questioned O’Toole’s repeated praise of the company’s work to prevent fires.

“Your tone sounded defensive and justifying the progress that’s made as opposed to acknowledging the humility of what an event like the January fires I would think would bring,” she said to O’Toole.

The public can comment on the proposed hike at the meeting on Thursday or in the docket for the case.

Tesla (TSLA 7.21%) is one of the world’s largest manufacturers of electric vehicles (EVs), but rising competition is slowly chipping away at its market share. EV sales are still the main driver of Tesla’s financial results, but CEO Elon Musk is trying to future-proof the company by steering its resources into new products like autonomous vehicles and robotics.

Ark Investment Management, which was founded by seasoned tech investor Cathie Wood, predicts autonomous vehicles will transform Tesla’s economics. In fact, Ark thinks a whopping 86% of the company’s earnings will come from self-driving robotaxis by 2029, paving the way for a stock price of $2,600. That would be a 615% increase from where Tesla stock trades today.

How realistic is Ark’s forecast? Let’s dive in.

Image source: Tesla.

Tesla’s EV business is sputtering

To meet Ark’s bullish 2029 forecast, Tesla will have to transition from selling passenger EVs to selling self-driving robotaxis, and it will also have to build new services like an autonomous ride-hailing network.

Unfortunately, Tesla is currently operating from a position of weakness, which is forcing this shift earlier than the company perhaps would have liked. After all, government regulators haven’t approved Tesla’s full self-driving (FSD) software for unsupervised use anywhere in the U.S. yet, which is a huge barrier to the success of its upcoming Cybercab robotaxi.

Tesla delivered 1.79 million passenger EVs during 2024, which was down 1% from the prior year, marking the first annual decline since the company launched its flagship Model S in 2011. The situation is much worse in 2025, with deliveries shrinking by a whopping 13% in the first half of the year. This led to a 14% decline in Tesla’s revenue and a 31% collapse in its earnings per share (EPS) during the same period, which is alarming to say the least.

A rapid increase in competition is a key reason for Tesla’s woes. Low-cost EV producers like China-based BYD are making serious inroads into some of Tesla’s biggest markets. Tesla’s sales sank by 40% across Europe in July, despite EV registrations climbing by 33% overall. BYD, on the other hand, saw a whopping 225% increase in sales in the region.

Simply put, Tesla is quickly losing market share in the passenger EV space. The company is launching a low-cost EV of its own in order to compete, but production just started so it probably won’t be a factor until next year at the earliest.

86% of Tesla’s earnings could soon come from autonomous robotaxis

Elon Musk is making a big bet on autonomous ride-hailing. The Cybercab, which will enter mass production in 2026, will run entirely on Tesla’s FSD software, so it’s designed to operate without any human intervention. In theory, that means it can haul passengers and even small commercial loads at all hours of the day, creating a lucrative new revenue stream for the company.

Scaling this business will come with challenges. I mentioned FSD isn’t approved for unsupervised use in the U.S. just yet, but Tesla will also have to compete with established ride-hailing giants like Uber Technologies, which has already partnered with 20 other companies in the autonomous driving space. Around 180 million people already use Uber every single month, so it’s in a much better position to dominate the autonomous ride-hailing industry compared to Tesla, which has to build an entire network from scratch.

However, Ark thinks Tesla will eventually make it work. Its forecasts suggest the company will generate $1.2 trillion in annual revenue by 2029, with 63% ($756 billion) coming from its robotaxi platform alone. Ark says that could translate to $440 million in earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA), with 86% attributable to the robotaxi because of its high profit margins — human drivers are the largest cost in existing ride-hailing networks, but the robotaxi won’t need them.

Don’t rush to buy Tesla stock just yet

In my opinion, Ark’s predictions are too ambitious. Wall Street thinks Tesla will generate around $93 billion in revenue during 2025 (according to Yahoo! Finance), so that figure will have to grow by almost 1,200% over the next four years to meet Ark’s forecast of $1.2 trillion — driven by a brand-new robotaxi product that hasn’t even hit the road yet.

Tesla’s valuation is another issue. Its stock is trading at an eye-popping price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio of 209, making it almost seven times as expensive than the Nasdaq-100 technology index — which trades at a P/E ratio of 31.6. Remember, Tesla’s earnings are currently shrinking, which makes its premium valuation even harder to justify.

Therefore, I’m hesitant to buy into the idea that Tesla stock could surge by another 615% over the next four years to reach Ark’s price target of $2,600. It might be possible if the company’s robotaxi platform becomes as successful as Ark predicts, but I think that’s unlikely in such a short period of time. After all, Elon Musk has promised unsupervised self-driving cars for the last 10 years, and Tesla still hasn’t delivered.

California electric customers would pay $9 billion more to shore up the state’s wildfire fund under a last-minute deal reached behind closed doors that was introduced as legislation on Wednesday.

Southern California Edison, and the state’s two other large for-profit electric companies, had been lobbying Gov. Gavin Newsom and legislative leaders, urging them to pass legislation to replenish the state’s $21-billion fund that pays for damages of utility-caused fires.

State officials have warned the fund could be wiped out by damages from the Eaton fire, which killed 19 people and destroyed a large swath of Altadena on Jan. 7.

Customers of the three utilities are already on the hook for contributing $10.5 billion to the original fund through a surcharge of about $3 on their monthly bills.

If approved, the bill amendments made on Wednesday would have customers pay $9 billion more by extending that surcharge by 10 years beyond 2035, when it was set to expire.

Under the deal, the three electric companies’ shareholders would also pay an additional $9 billion into the fund. That means the fund would increase by $18 billion if the legislation, known as SB 254, passes.

Consumer advocates and environmentalists tracking the bill said they were still trying to understand all the provisions of the 229-page bill, which had been debated in hearings in recent months, but was then significantly amended without public input. The new draft of the bill was published at 9:12 a.m. on Wednesday.

“It’s a complete gut and amend,” said Bernadette Del Chiaro, senior vice president at the Environmental Working Group. “It’s an end run around the normal legislative process.”

The complex proposal was introduced just days before the state legislature’s session ends, which means it may receive little public debate.

The session was scheduled to end on Friday, but any amendments must be public for 72 hours, which would push a vote to Saturday morning.

Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, a consumer group, said he was disappointed that ratepayers — who are already paying the country’s second highest electric rates — would have to pay more. But he pointed to some measures that could help reduce the upward pressure on bills.

For example, utilities would be required to finance some expensive transmission projects through a lower-cost method of public financing that legislators said could save ratepayers $3 billion.

Toney said after reviewing the bill’s language his group planned to support it even though it “falls short of addressing the growing affordability crisis.”

Assemblymember Cottie Petrie-Norris (D-Irvine), the bill’s co-author, defended the last minute amendments, saying the legislature needed to move quickly to bolster the fund as the wildfire season begins in California.

She said many of the provisions added to SB 254, including the public financing of transmission lines, had been included in other bills that had been repeatedly been debated in public hearings.

Petrie-Norris, who is chair of the Assembly Utilities and Energy Committee, defended the process and said that she believed electric customers were getting “a good deal” since half the $18 billion addition into the fund would come from utility shareholders.

Also, under the plan, she said, the three utilities must spend billions of dollars more on wildfire prevention costs, which they can’t earn a profit on.

The share prices of Edison International, Pacific Gas & Electric, and Sempra, the parent company of San Diego Gas & Electric all rose Wednesday on the news.

Newsom and lawmakers created the state wildfire fund in 2019 through a bill known as AB 1054 to protect the three utilities from bankruptcy in the event their electric lines sparked a catastrophic wildfire.

Under the law’s protective measures, Edison could pay nothing or just a fraction of the damages for the Eaton fire if its equipment is found to have sparked the fire.

A representative for Newsom did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The investigation into the fire is ongoing. Edison has said a leading theory is that a century-old transmission line, not used since the 1970s, somehow re-energized and sparked the blaze.

The insured property losses alone could be as much as $15.2 billion, according to an estimate released in July by state officials. That amount does not include uninsured losses or damages beyond those to property, such as wrongful death claims. A study by UCLA estimated losses at $24 billion to $45 billion.

Damages from the Palisades fire, which also ignited on Jan. 7, are not covered by the state wildfire fund. The city of Los Angeles’ Department of Water and Power, a municipal utility, services the area of Pacific Palisades destroyed by that fire.

Only customers of Edison, PG&E and San Diego Gas & Electric pay to support the wildfire fund. And only those three utilities are covered by its protections.

SACRAMENTO — A popular perk for California drivers of electric and low-emission cars is coming to an end.

Beginning Oct. 1, motorists with a Clean Air Vehicle decal will no longer be able to drive solo in carpool lanes because the program was not extended by the federal government, according to the California Department of Motor Vehicles.

The carpool benefit was promoted as a cost-effective incentive to encourage Californians to buy clean and zero-emission vehicles. More than a million motorists have applied for the decal since it became available more than two decades ago. There are roughly a half million vehicles in California with active decals, allowing them to use the carpool lane alone. Last month, the DMV stopped issuing new decals and warned that the program could be ending.

Extending the program would have required approval from Congress and President Trump.

“A Trump traffic jam is on its way to California and other states – all because Republicans in Congress decided to let a wildly successful bipartisan program expire,” Newsom said in a statement. “That’s Trump’s America: more traffic, more smog and a government more committed to slashing proven programs than solving real problems.”

California is one of 13 states offering the benefit. Vehicles that qualified included fuel cell electric, natural gas or plug-in electric cars.

Last year, Newsom signed a bill that extended California’s decal program until 2027, but the state will no longer be able to continue it without federal authority, the governor’s office said. According to the California Energy Commission, 25% of new cars sold in the state are zero-emission vehicles.

Drivers in electric and low-emission cars will only be able to use carpool lanes after the program expires if they meet the multiple occupant requirements. The reduced toll rates available in some areas to drivers with a decal will also end on Oct. 1.

California law indicates that drivers will not be cited for driving in the carpool lane with an invalid decal within 60 days of the program ending.

“Californians are committed to lowering their carbon footprint and these decals helped drivers be good stewards of our highways and environment,” said Steve Gordon, director of the California DMV, in a statement. “By taking away this program, hundreds of thousands of California’s drivers will pay the price. It’s a lose-lose and we urge the federal government to retain this program.”

The program ends at the same time that a $7,500 federal tax credit for new electric vehicles expires.

SAVANNAH, Ga. — Some 475 people were detained during an immigration raid at a sprawling Georgia site where South Korean auto company Hyundai manufactures electric vehicles, according to a Homeland Security official.

Steven Schrank, Special Agent in Charge, Homeland Security Investigations, said at a news briefing Friday that the majority of the people detained were from South Korea.

“This operation underscores our commitment to jobs for Georgians and Americans,” Schrank said.

South Korean Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lee Jaewoong described the number of detained South Koreans as “large” though he did not provide an exact figure.

He said the detained workers were part of a “network of subcontractors,” and that the employees worked for a variety of different companies on the site.

Thursday’s raid targeted one of Georgia’s largest and most high-profile manufacturing sites, touted by the governor and other officials as the largest economic development project in the state’s history. Hyundai Motor Group, South Korea’s biggest automaker, began manufacturing EVs a year ago at the $7.6 billion plant, which employs about 1,200 people, and has partnered with LG Energy Solution to build an adjacent battery plant, slated to open next year.

In a statement to The Associated Press, LG said it was “closely monitoring the situation and gathering all relevant details.” It said it couldn’t immediately confirm how many of its employees or Hyundai workers had been detained.

“Our top priority is always ensuring the safety and well-being of our employees and partners. We will fully cooperate with the relevant authorities,” the company said.

Hyundai’s South Korean office didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.

ICE spokesman Lindsay Williams confirmed that federal authorities conducted an enforcement operation at the 3,000-acre site west of Savannah, Georgia. He said agents were focused on the construction site for the battery plant.

In a televised statement, Lee said the ministry is taking active measures to address the case, dispatching diplomats from its embassy in Washington and consulate in Atlanta to the site, and planning to form an on-site response team centered on the local mission.

“The business activities of our investors and the rights of our nationals must not be unjustly infringed in the process of U.S. law enforcement,” Lee said.

The Department of Homeland Security said in a statement that agents executed a search warrant “as part of an ongoing criminal investigation into allegations of unlawful employment practices and other serious federal crimes.”

President Trump’s administration has undertaken sweeping ICE operations as part of a mass deportation agenda. Immigration officers have raided farms, construction sites, restaurants and auto repair shops.

The Pew Research Center, citing preliminary Census Bureau data, says the U.S. labor force lost more than 1.2 million immigrants from January through July. That includes people who are in the country illegally as well as legal residents.

Kim and Bynum write for the Associated Press. Bynum reported from Savannah, Ga.

Bob Anderson — physician, pilot, executive — is nothing if not a perfectionist.

He’s owned his fair share of recreational vehicles and disliked each of them uniquely. There was the Earth Roamer (anemic axles, in his opinion), the $350,000 Newmar land yacht (complex emissions technology) and a 25-foot Airstream trailer (lots of propane). Yet Anderson, 81, keeps buying camping rigs. And he’s hoping the next one will be his last.

This fall, he’ll take delivery of a Lightship AE.1 Cosmos, an RV as similar to an Airstream as a Tesla Roadster is to a Pontiac Firebird.

What separates the Lightship from the rest of Anderson’s letdowns is its propulsion system and design: The rig has two electric motors, so it can drive itself while hitched to the vehicle towing it, and the entire top half tucks down for better aerodynamics while underway. With these two hacks, the vehicle towing the Lightship will feel virtually no weight most of the time. On the interstate, Anderson’s hybrid pickup truck will theoretically get its standard 27 miles per gallon, rather than the 12.5 miles it manages with the Airstream behind it.

“It’s going to change everything in the RV world,” Anderson says.

This year may well be an inflection point for the RV industry, when serious alternatives are emerging to the gas-guzzling rigs chugging between national parks.

In addition to the Lightship, the Pebble Flow — another towable camper with an electric drivetrain — will hit the road. Meanwhile, a host of electric vans will finally be stamped out in high volumes, most notably Volkswagen’s ID. Buzz , the latest iteration of the brand’s storied bus. Even incumbent Thor Inc., which is to RVs what Apple is to smartphones, is putting the final touches on its first hybrid rig.

“It’s certainly a huge milestone,” says McKay Featherstone, head of global innovation at Thor Inc. “People can finally go and buy these things and experience this technology.”

Last year, Americans bought 637,000 RVs, many of which burned a gallon of gas every six to 15 miles traveled. These rigs will stay on the road for about 200,000 miles, belching copious amounts of carbon dioxide.

Electric RVs promise to make the summer road trip vastly cleaner, more convenient and quiet.

Among other things, electric models will help the RV industry shake off what the Recreational Vehicle Industry Association refers to as a “Covid hangover.” The group is forecasting a slight increase in total US sales this year, in part because of the growing number of electric options.

“The vibes, if you will, are good,” says spokeswoman Monika Geraci. “And there does seem to be an appetite there.”

In a Venn diagram of folks who love camping and folks who are climate-concerned, there’s quite a bit of overlap. That may partially explain why, of the roughly 58 million American households that go camping every year, only 12 million of them own an RV.

Yet it’s not like RV drivers don’t care about the climate. “Obviously, these people love the outdoors,” explains Featherstone at Thor, “and that does translate into people who want a lighter footprint.”

In fact, some of the same people who long avoided camping rigs and their sizable clouds of emissions are now at the helm of RV startups. These folks could never find a camper green enough for their liking, so they set out to make one.

Lightship was launched by two Tesla alumni after a disappointing RV journey. Co-founder Toby Kraus says the company is getting plenty of interest from RV newbies who strive to keep a low carbon footprint, but the company has been surprised at the number of orders from everyday drivers and who don’t care about the climate benefits.

Anderson is one of the latter: He pays little mind to his personal carbon footprint. What thrills him is the idea of spending less money on gas and having an RV that doesn’t have to churn a combustion engine to run the air conditioning and refrigerator.

In that regard, Lightspeed is borrowing a page from the Tesla playbook.

“The reason Tesla was successful is not because it was sustainable,” Kraus explains. “It’s because the product was awesome. It was clean tech by Trojan Horse.”

With the glow of ambient light tucked behind ceiling fabric, the interior of the Lightship Ae.1 feels like the first-class cabin of a commercial jet. An induction cooktop is built into the counter, a heat pump quietly cycles air and everything on the rig is controlled by an app. Lightship plans to eventually sell smaller, more affordable models, but its launch vehicle costs a heady $250,000.

The Pebble Flow parks a little further down market with its founders edition priced at $175,000. Co-founder Bingrui Yang spent much of his career working at Apple on the iPhone and, aesthetically, the rig travels the same lane. With a bed that folds up against the wall and Starlink internet service, the interior is geared for Zoom calls as much as napping in nature, reflecting the rise of remote work.

“This is the right time for this product,” Yang says.

The market is also shifting in ways that may further favor electric models. Since 2021, the average age of US RV customers has dropped from 53 to 49, while the share of the market making more than $100,000 a year climbed from 29% to 33%.

“It’s not your grandma and grandpa anymore,” Geraci says. “It’s a different consumer, and they’re looking for more technology.”

While expensive, the new electric towables change the standard RV economics; because they can propel themselves much of the time, they can be towed with less horsepower and pair nicely with electric vehicles, machines for which towing has been Kryptonite due to range issues.

There are also alternatives on the horizon to the hulking, three-bedroom motor coach. These vehicles make up one out of every 10 RVs sold, yet they get some of the worst gas mileage of any non-commercial vehicle, hoovering up a gallon of gas every six or seven miles.

Thor is putting the finishing touches on a hybrid vehicle — dubbed simply “Test Vehicle” — that doesn’t look markedly different from its gas-burning products. But refinements in design make it about 20% more aerodynamic. The 210 kilowatt-hours of battery power under the hood along with a gas generator for charging give it somewhere around 500 miles of range.

On long trips, it will burn roughly half as much fuel as a similar-sized internal combustion rig and offer even better range on short jaunts. Thor will start taking orders in the fall and producing the vehicles by year-end.

Still, there’s a huge chunk of the camper market for whom even a towable is too much. Last year, Americans bought 8,300 camper vans as well as an untold number converted minivans and commercial vans to handle s’mores and sleeping duty.

These folks also have a bevy of new choices. In the first half of the year, Americans bought 2,500 ID.Buzzes. Many of those rigs will be pressed into minimalist camping service, and aftermarket shops are helping kit them out.

That includes Peace Vans in Seattle, which counts both Macklemore and Pearl Jam drummer Matt Cameron as clients. For the Buzz, the company built three different camping configurations. Owner Harley Stitner expects to complete about 1,000 retrofits in the next few years.

Sam Shapiro launched Grounded RVs after six months on the road in 2020 en route to a job at SpaceX. “Before that, I don’t think I’d ever even been in an RV,” he says. “There’s this irony of having this experience to embrace nature, yet you’re sitting there at a campground running a combustion engine, creating exhaust, making noise.”

At its factory in Detroit, Grounded is essentially taking the chassis of an electric General Motors BrightDrop van, topping it with the shell of a Class B motorhome and adding its own solar array and battery management software. The rigs can travel about 300 miles on a charge. As with other electric campers, buyers will pay a premium: $195,000, nearly double what a gas-burning rig of the same size runs.

Last year, Grounded shipped 15 of its machines; this year, it’s aiming for 50. Roughly half of Grounded customers are RV rookies.

“They’ve been waiting for something like this to come along,” Shapiro says. “So many of our customers have said they never want to own a gas-powered vehicle again.”

Stock writes for Bloomberg.

Ford

Full list of EVs eligible for the £1,500 discount

Gov. Gavin Newsom is preparing draft legislation that would add an additional $18 billion to a state fund for wildfire victims that officials have warned could be exhausted by January’s deadly Eaton wildfire.

Under Newsom’s plan, customers of the state’s three biggest for-profit utilities would pay another $9 billion to supplement a state fund created in 2019 that holds $21 billion.

The other $9 billion would come from shareholders of Southern California Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric and San Diego Gas & Electric, according to a draft of the proposal.

“We continue to work with the Legislature on policy that will stabilize California’s Wildfire Fund to support the recovery of wildfire survivors and to protect California utility consumers — even as wildfires become bigger and more destructive due to climate change,” Newsom’s office said in a statement Thursday.

Customers of the three utilities are already on the hook for contributing half of the original $21 billion fund through a surcharge of about $3 on their monthly bill. The proposal would have customers pay $9 billion more by extending that surcharge by 10 years beyond 2035, when it was set to expire.

“We’re very disappointed to be at a point where there is even talk of more ratepayer money going to the wildfire fund,” said Mark Toney, executive director of the the Utility Reform Network, a consumer advocacy group.

Utility executives also criticized the plan, which was reported earlier by Bloomberg, for proposing that their shareholders pay additional amounts into the fund.

Pedro Pizarro, chief executive of Edison International, told Wall Street analysts on a conference call that the company has told Newsom and lawmakers that any legislation to shore up the fund “would not have a shareholder contribution.”

“We will need to see the balance of an ultimate package,” Pizarro said.

Newsom’s plan has been circulating with legislative leaders and others and would require approval of the state Senate and Assembly. Under the draft proposal, the $18 billion would go into a new “Continuation Wildfire Fund.” The new fund would not be created until the administrator of the state’s original wildfire fund determines additional funds are needed.

Newsom and lawmakers created the $21 billion fund in 2019 to protect utilities from bankruptcy in the event their equipment sparks a devastating fire.

Toney said said state officials told him then that there was a 99% chance the fund would last 20 years. Now it could be wiped out by a single fire.

He said he believes there needs to be limits on the liabilities that the fund will pay for. “We can’t go back every three or four years and put more money in,” he said.

Since the fund was created, electric customers have also paid $27 billion for tree trimming and other work aimed to prevent wildfires, which is fast driving up electric bills, Toney said.

Despite that spending, fires sparked by Edison’s equipment leaped from 90 in 2023 to 178 in 2024.

The investigation into the Eaton fire, which killed 19 people and destroyed thousands of homes and businesses in Altadena, is continuing. Video captured the fire igniting on Jan. 7 under an Edison transmission tower.

Pizarro has said a leading theory is that a dormant Edison transmission line, not used since 1971, somehow became electrified and sparked the blaze.

The insured property losses alone could be as much as $15.2 billion, according to an estimate released by state officials last week. That amount does not include uninsured losses or damages beyond those to property, such as wrongful death claims. A study by UCLA estimated losses at $24 billion to $45 billion.

Twisting along roads flanked by cherry trees, granite boulders, vines and wildflower-flecked pastures, I wind down the windows and breathe in the pure air of Portugal’s remote, historic Beira Interior region. The motor is silent, the playlist is birdsong and occasional bleating sheep; all is serene. “This is easier,” I say to myself with a smile, recalling my previous attempt to visit the Aldeias Históricas – a dozen historic hamlets bound by a 1995 conservation project – using woeful public transport. Revisiting this unspoilt pocket of Portugal, 155 miles (250km) north-east of Lisbon, near the border with Spain, is going to be effortless in an EV. And, best of all, the transport doesn’t cost me a penny.

An hour before, I arrived in Castelo Novo, a four-hour train ride from the capital, and currently the sole hub of the Aldeias Históricas’s Sustainable Urban Mobility Scheme. It was launched in 2022 to address local transport issues by providing five free-to-hire electric vehicles, alongside other community-supporting projects. It sounded too good to be true, but I booked the maximum three-day rental – enough time to see at least nine of the villages. I was informed that if I arrived by train, someone would meet me at the station.

‘I don’t have an electric car’

More than 30 million Californians across the state could see their electric bills go up to pay for the devastating Eaton fire, as officials scramble to shore up a state wildfire fund that could be wiped out by damage claims.

One early estimate places fire losses from the Eaton fire at $24 billion to $45 billion. If Southern California Edison equipment is found to have sparked the blaze on Jan. 7, as dozens of lawsuits allege, the damage claims could quickly exhaust the state’s $21-billion wildfire fund.

“Everyone is concerned about this,” said Michael Wara, director of Stanford’s climate and energy policy program, who was involved in the fund’s creation. “If we need to put more money into the fund, where will it come from?”

The wildfire fund was created to shield the state’s three big utilities from bankruptcy in the event one was found liable for massive fire damages.

At a meeting last month, members of the state Catastrophe Response Council, which oversees the fund, were told that Gov. Gavin Newsom and legislative leaders were being urged to extend a monthly surcharge on electric bills beyond its planned expiration in 2035. The fee, called the non-bypassable charge, adds roughly $3 a month to the average residential bill.

“They are asking the people of California to put more money into the fund,” said council member Paul Rosenstiel, a former investment banker and Newsom advisor, according to a transcript of the meeting. “Some of them are asking for an extension of the non-bypassable charge.”

The fee is paid by customers of the state’s three big for-profit utilities — Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric and San Diego Gas & Electric.

Rosenstiel didn’t respond to a request for comment. At the meeting, he didn’t say who was lobbying the governor and lawmakers to extend the surcharge to ratepayers.

California utility executives have told their investors they have been talking to Newsom and legislative leaders about shoring up the fund. PG&E executives have said that they have asked that no new money come from utilities or their shareholders, which would likely leave electric customers to pay more.

“We continue to advocate that we don’t think there is a good case that investors should contribute to the fund,” Patti Poppe, PG&E’s chief executive, told Wall Street analysts in an April conference call.

A Siller Skycrane removes Southern California Edison’s tower 208 from a hillside in Altadena in May. The idle transmission tower, suspected of sparking the Eaton fire, will be examined at a lab.

(Myung J. Chun/Los Angeles Times)

Pedro Pizarro, chief executive of SoCal Edison’s parent company Edison International, was asked in a recent call with Wall Street analysts about the prospects for legislation that would bolster the wildfire fund.

“Clearly the governor’s office is engaged, as are our legislative leaders,” he said, adding that he was “certainly very encouraged by the level of diligence and engagement that I’m seeing.”

Asked to elaborate, Kathleen Dunleavy, a SoCal Edison spokeswoman, said the utility was not seeking a specific solution to questions of the fund’s durability.

“Our focus is to convey the importance of a strong wildfire fund,” she said. “We are not being prescriptive in how to achieve that.”

This year, the electric bill surcharge is expected to add $923 million to the fund, according to California Public Utility Commission records. If the fee was extended an additional 10 years, it would require customers of the three utilities to pay an additional $9 billion into the fund.

That doesn’t sit well with consumer advocates, who point out customers are already on the hook to contribute half of the $21-billion fund, while also paying higher bills to cover costs such as undergrounding and insulated electric wires.

Those measures are intended to make the electric system safer. Yet despite spending billions of dollars last year on wildfire mitigation, the number of fires sparked by its equipment jumped from 90 in 2023 to 178 last year.

Altadena homes lie in ruins after the Eaton fire.

(Robert Gauthier/Los Angeles Times)

“We think ratepayers have more than done enough,” said Mark Toney, the executive director of The Utility Reform Network, also known as TURN, a consumer group in San Francisco. “My position is that ratepayers should not pay another penny.”

Rosenstiel said at the May meeting that Newsom and legislative leaders were also being asked for the state’s general fund, which pays for schools, healthcare, prisons and other government operations, to contribute to the fund that protects utilities from wildfire claims.

The governor’s office declined to answer questions and said Newsom’s schedule didn’t allow time for an interview.

Newsom has a seat on the Catastrophe Response Council. He was a no-show at the group’s most recent meeting, sending a designee in his place.

Assemblywoman Cottie Petrie-Norris (D-Irvine), the chair of the Assembly’s Utilities and Energy Committee, acknowledged that lawmakers are concerned about the fund but said that they are still considering remedies.

“All options are on the table and are being considered and evaluated,” she said. “I have certainly not arrived at a solution yet.”

The cause of the Eaton fire, which killed 18 people and destroyed more than 9,000 homes, businesses and other structures in Altadena, remains under investigation.

Edison CEO Pizarro has said a leading theory is that an unused, decades-old transmission line in Eaton Canyon was reenergized and sparked the blaze. Video captured flames erupting under an Edison transmission tower on the night of the fire.

If Edison’s equipment is found to have started the inferno, the state’s wildfire fund is expected to cover most of the cost of damages over $1 billion, under a 2019 law that was passed after PG&E went bankrupt from its liability for the deadly 2018 Camp fire.

The first $1 billion in damages from the Eaton fire would be covered by insurance that electric customers paid for.

The total cost of the fire in Altadena won’t be known until dozens of lawsuits make their way through the courts, which could take years.

A February study by UCLA economists Zhiyun Li and William Yu estimated that the fire caused $24 billion to $45 billion in property damages and capital losses, or the cost to replace what was destroyed.

Officials at the California Earthquake Authority, which manages the wildfire fund, told members of the Catastrophe Response Council in a May memorandum that the authority had “undertaken a significant project to evaluate alternatives for extending the durability of the Wildfire Fund in the face of potential large losses.”

To determine how to strengthen the fund, authority officials said they had rehired consultants who worked with Newsom’s office in 2019 to create the fund. The four firms will be paid $4.5 million, which the fund will cover, they said.

Among the consultants is Guggenheim Securities, the investment banking arm of Guggenheim Partners. Another subsidiary of Guggenheim Partners owns stock in the state’s three big utilities.

A recommendation to tap utility customers to replenish the fund, instead of the utility companies themselves, would likely have a big impact on company share prices.

“They [Guggenheim] certainly have a vested interest in the financial success of the utilities,” Toney said.

A spokesman for Guggenheim Securities said the stocks owned by the sister company didn’t pose a conflict, saying it “maintains a robust conflict management program, including strict information barriers between its investment banking department and the rest of Guggenheim Partners.”

Wara at Stanford said if Edison is found responsible for the Eaton fire, the wildfire fund would cover what insurers paid to victims and also pay for property damage not covered by insurance.

For example, families who lost their homes but received insurance payouts lower than the value of their property could seek the balance from Edison, he said. The utility would then seek to recover those sums from the wildfire fund.

The other deadly Los Angeles County inferno that ignited on Jan. 7, the Palisades fire, is not covered by the wildfire fund because Pacific Palisades is served by the Los Angeles Department of Water & Power, a municipal utility. The fund only covers blazes ignited by equipment owned by the state’s three biggest investor-owned utilities.

“They have their insurance and that’s it,” Wara said of Palisades fire victims.

At its meeting last month, the state Catastrophe Response Council was informed that insurance claims from the Eaton fire have totaled roughly $15 billion so far.

Adding to the damage bill is the potential cost of lawsuits. The possibility that the fund will pay out large amounts for Eaton fire damages has led to dozens of lawsuits being filed against Edison, even before the official cause has been determined.

Families of Altadena residents who died have filed wrongful-death suits. Edison is also facing lawsuits from L.A. County and other local governments for damages, including to public infrastructure such as water systems. Residents living outside the fire’s borders have filed suit, saying they were harmed by lead and other toxins in the smoke.

If a court found Edison negligent in maintaining its equipment, Wara said, victims could ask for compensation for pain and suffering, which would escalate the cost.

“Then the wildfire fund is out of money,” Wara said.

Pizarro has said that Edison is “committed to a thorough and transparent investigation.”

“Our hearts go out to everyone who has suffered losses,” he said.

The 2019 law that created the wildfire fund, known as AB 1054, greatly limited what Edison would have to pay for any of the claims. The company has told its investors that its maximum liability would be $3.9 billion.

The three utilities are asking legislators to ensure that state law continues to protect them and their shareholders, even if the $21-billion fund runs out of money.

Since the January fires, Edison, PG&E and Sempra, the parent company of San Diego Gas & Electric, have each spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to lobby in Sacramento, according to required regulatory reports they filed for the first three months of the year.

A PG&E lobbyist reported taking Assemblywoman Petrie-Norris to a $267 dinner at Paragary’s, a bistro in Sacramento, on Feb. 3.

Petrie-Norris said the dinner was with Carla Peterman, a former state public utilities commissioner who is now a top PG&E executive. Petrie-Norris said they talked about a planned March hearing on electricity affordability and didn’t discuss the wildfire fund.

The next month, a PG&E lobbyist took Dee Dee Myers and Rohimah Moly, two of Newsom’s top staff members, to the upscale Prelude Kitchen & Bar, which is a short walk from the state Capitol.

Willie Rudman, a spokesman for the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development, said the wildfire fund wasn’t discussed at the meal. Instead it “was a general meet and greet,” Rudman said, where the governor’s staff and PG&E executives “discussed opportunities for future collaboration.”

PG&E declined to answer questions. Lynsey Paulo, a PG&E spokesperson, said in a statement that the utility’s lobbying expenses were paid with shareholder funds and not money from customers.

“Like many individuals and businesses, PG&E participates in the political process on behalf of our customers and company,” Paulo said.

MAZDA is pulling the plug on its first and only electric car, criticised during its four-year run for its limited range and cramped cabin.

The MX-30, which made its world debut at the 2019 Tokyo Motor Show, is a subcompact crossover SUV that offered EV, plug-in hybrid, and mild hybrid variants.

4

4

4

4

But now, it’s quietly reached the end of its production lifespan.

Launched in the UK in 2021, the MX-30 was positioned against competitors such as the Kia Soul EV and Peugeot e-2008.

However, it struggled to gain traction, primarily due to its short range and limited practicality.

One of the most significant criticisms of the MX-30 – aside from its bizarre, coach-style doors – was its modest range of just 124 miles, thanks to its 35.5kWh battery.

The smaller battery size, chosen to reduce the car’s weight, certainly improved handling and lowered its CO2 emissions during production.

However, it also resulted in persistent range anxiety among drivers.

Indeed, today, rivals like the Jeep Avenger, Renault 4, and MINI Aceman offer ranges of around 250 miles, highlighting the MX-30’s shortcomings.

WHAT’S NEXT?

While the fully electric MX-30 has been axed, the plug-in hybrid version remains on sale in the UK.

This variant, equipped with a fully charged battery and a full tank of petrol, can cover more than 400 miles, according to Mazda.

What’s more, the brand is set to give electric cars another stab next year with the 6e saloon, which is poised to be in the same segment as the top-selling Tesla Model 3.

A fully electric SUV is also in the pipeline, but the decision to temporarily pluck its only pure electric vehicle in its lineup is bold – particularly in light of the UK Government’s ZEV mandate.

Under the current mandate, at least 28% of manufacturers’ new car sales must be zero-emissions vehicles by 2025, prompting many brands to prioritise EV production.

As reported by Auto Express, a Mazda spokesperson said: “Mazda will meet the requirements of the ZEV/VETS legislation through the various flexibilities within the scheme and the introduction of further BEVs.”

This comes as Sun Motors supremo Rob Gill recently got to road-test the new Mazda 3, featuring a gutsy 2.5-litre naturally aspirated petrol engine.

A POPULAR Amazon gadget has been urgently recalled over fears it could give users a deadly electric shock.

A universal power supply, sold under the Wefomey brand, has been banned from entering the UK.

2

2

The dodgy device, model LGY-363000, was flagged by border officials and stopped from reaching British customers.

The plug-in gadget is advertised on Amazon as a “universal power adapter” that “fits almost all DC input sockets”.

The product is made in China and was being shipped to UK buyers.

However, it was found to be “inadequately earthed”, according to an advisory issued by the UK government.

The advisory reads: “The product presents a serious risk of electric shock due to a lack of protection from access to its live parts.”

It adds: “The insulation may break down during normal use, meaning the metal parts accessible to the consumer may be live.

“If a consumer were to touch the product during use, they may receive an electric shock.”

Officials confirmed that the product breaches the UK’s Electrical Equipment (Safety) Regulations 2016.

As a corrective measure, the import was rejected at the border to prevent it from entering the UK.

Owners have been urged to stop using the product immediately.

It comes as Amazon has issued an urgent product recall over fears an item of clothing could catch fire.

Customers have been urged to return the iHEAT Heated Jacket for Women.

According to an advisory issued by the UK government, the product presents a serious risk of fire as the lithium-ion battery pack is poorly constructed and does not provide sufficient protection to prevent thermal runaway.

The advisory reads: “Additionally, the power supply is fitted with a non-compliant plug, with the plug pins too close to the edge of the plug face, exposing the user to live parts.

“The product does not meet the requirements of the Electrical Equipment (Safety) Regulations 2016 or the Plugs & Sockets etc. (Safety) Regulations 1994.”

Owners have been urged to stop using the product immediately and contact the distributor you purchased from to request redress.

Meanwhile, a bedroom lamp sold on Amazon has been urgently recalled over fears it could spark a house fire.

The Murcher Bedside Table Lamp, sold under models WDF-YW-02 and WDF-FX01, poses a high fire risk due to a critical design fault, according to a new safety alert.

The issue lies in the lack of proper cord anchorage inside the lamp.

Over time, the power cord can shift and place dangerous strain on the lamp’s internal connections.

This can cause wires to detach, short-circuit and overheat – which could trigger a fire.