LG Chem & Samsung SDI Hit By Chinese Sanctions, Now Exports Cells From China

4 weeks ago by Mark Kane 93

Samsung SDI Battery Plant In China

LG Chem and Samsung SDI lithium-ion battery manufacturers have become victims of the Chinese government’s retaliation of the new THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense) missile defence system, installed in South Korea.

Volkswagen

LG Chem lithium-ion battery cell

Both companies are unable to sell its products to customers in China, despite establishing brand new factories in recent years.

The only rescue is now the production and export of the batteries outside of China – which is possible, but at the same time hurts profitability, as facilities the weren’t designed for export, but rather the Chinese market.

Samsung SDI will send its batteries to BMW for use inside the i3, while LG Chem has more than enough demand coming from Hyundai with (massively under-built) IONIQ Electric, and the new Hyundai Kona/Kia Niro.

“LG Chemicals and Samsung SDI’s batter plants in China that stopped operating due to retaliation from Chinese Government regarding THAAD will be converted into center for foreign supplies.”

““We did not expect that Chinese Government’s new regulations that cut off Samsung SDI and LG Chemicals from Chinese suppliers at the end of last year will be prolonged like this.” said a high-ranking official for a battery manufacturer. “However they are able to recover their normal operation rates as amount of supplies of batteries for electric vehicles has risen for automotive manufacturers.””

Also, a third South Korean battery manufacturer, SK Innovation fell out of love with region, and is leaving the Chinese JV.

“On the other hand, SK Innovation is currently leaving its joint corporation, which was co-established with Beijing Motors Group (60% of shares) that is the number four automotive manufacturer in China, alone for many months as it is the group‘s exclusive battery pack plant and is difficult to supply products to other companies. Beijing Motors recently switched its supplier of batteries from SK Innovation to China’s CATL.”

source: The Electronic Times

Tags: , ,

93 responses to "LG Chem & Samsung SDI Hit By Chinese Sanctions, Now Exports Cells From China"

  1. Mark.ca says:

    There’s is a saying: “if you sleep with the pigs, you get f***ed by the Chinese”
    These are the risks of doing business in a communist country.

    1. Michael Will says:

      Expect the same crap from Trump though, solar panels import tax to support his fossil fuel friends

      1. Rob Stark says:

        The opposite crap.

        Trump administration may impose sanctions on Chinese made solar panels and cells to protect Chinese owned solar panel manufactures inside the US.

        The Trump administration will not prohibit Chinese owned solar panel/cell manufactures from selling their American made products inside the US.

    2. SJC says:

      The Communist Chinese government can change their mind anytime they want. Not a stable business environment.

      1. Ocean Railroader says:

        The first rule about China that we in the US don’t understand is that China makes it’s own rules whenever it wants.

    3. Tuning In says:

      There’s a saying, but only a saying that only Mark.ca says …..

    4. SparkEV says:

      It’s not about communist country. If China put missile defense system in Mexico that could thwart US military, US won’t sit by and not take action against Mexico. Indeed, the last time something like that happened (in Cuba), US was ready to destroy the world with thermonuclear war. What China is doing is not good, but it’s by no means terrible.

      But China is like a puppy eating out of North Korean hands. Despite their crazy leadership, NK knows how to wag the dog.

      1. Steve says:

        @SparkEV

        North Korea ISO country code is KP not NK. NK is what CNN likes to use.

        1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          I don’t know what an “ISO code” is, nor do I particularly care. If I write “NK” in the context of a comment about N. Korea, I expect readers to understand. If I wrote “KP”, I would expect most people would think of the army designation for “KP duty”.

          Language has use only so far as we all understand what words and terms mean, and agree on them.

          1. Martin Winlow says:

            It was pretty obvious to me…

      2. Rob Stark says:

        Laughable nonsense.

        Defensive missile systems are not the same as offensive nuclear weapons.

        The Chinese can cover all of Mexico with defensive anti- missile systems and the US would not do a thing.

        One Chinese Nuclear missile installed in Mexico would be a cause for war.

        1. ModernMarvelFan says:

          In the balance of war, defensive weapons are just as important as offensive weapons. Effective Defensive weapons means others can’t strike you but you can strike at them anytime you want. That is tipping in balance which is perceived as threatening.

          The entire global nuclear balance is hinged on “mutual destruction”. Defensive weapons, especially effective ones will tip that balance.

          To make those so called “defensive weapons” effective, the closer you put near their “door step”, the more effective it will likely to be.

          1. Rob Stark says:

            Basic load of crap.

            Since South Korea does not have offensive nuclear weapons.

            China has enough nuclear weapons to overwhelm any defense from South Korea.

            This only protects South Korea from North Korea.

            In any event, China does not have the right to obliterate South Korea at any time.

            South Korea has zero ability to harm China.

            Whereas nuclear weapons under joint Soviet-Cuban control in Cuba would threaten the US.

            1. ModernMarvelFan says:

              So, instead of arguing it reasonably. you like to call other’s opinion who disagree with you a load of crap. Obviously your load of crap are big pile here for sure. But I will play along since it isn’t the first time that you spew crap here. So, let us stink it up. Like I said before, you throw a rock, I will pile a mountain back on.

              “Since South Korea does not have offensive nuclear weapons.”

              THAAD isn’t going to stop nukes from N.Korea. They could have launched it from artillery. And launching Nukes into S.Korea certainly doesn’t help “united Korea under North control”…

              “China has enough nuclear weapons to overwhelm any defense from South Korea.”

              Dumb ass. It is US THAAD system that can limit Chinese Nukes against Japan or US. Ever thought of the bigger picture in your small head sometimes?

              “This only protects South Korea from North Korea.”

              Obviously only idiots see that shallow. Maybe you should apply for a job at the State Dept now. It fits with the current administration of hiring idiots.

              “In any event, China does not have the right to obliterate South Korea at any time.”

              But S. Korea HOSTING A US controlled THAAD is certainly perceived as a threat to contain China by US interest.

              1. floydboy says:

                What State Department? The recipient of Russia’s highest civilian honor, Rex Tillerson, cleaned that place out and pretty much shut it down. Only thing left to do for Mr Putin now, is to get the oil sanctions lifted, so he can get his big oil deal with Exxon.

              2. Windbourne says:

                Perhaps u spend too much time in your comic books.
                U are too bright or knowledgeable about real military.
                We do have a small thaad system in KR. Supposedly it can take out missiles from KP that are launched south-southeast. It CAN not take out missiles that are launched north-northeast.
                CN missiles designed to hit US will go over the northern great circle since it is a shorter route.

                CN is not threatened in ANY fashion unless they intend to launch at JP or KR.

                So, China’s blusster is just that;blusster.

            2. SparkEV says:

              “nuclear weapons under joint Soviet-Cuban control in Cuba would threaten the US.”

              And nuclear missiles in Turkey would threaten USSR, which is why they tried to put missiles in Cuba. Read history, because you are talking like a moron who don’t know anything before 1993 when Mosaic was deployed.

              1. Windbourne says:

                Yes, because 2000+ km is as close as 120 km. And Jupiter could not reach Moscow .

                More importantly, Jupiter was developed for the army and was a battlefield system( though, I would think a 1 Mt bomb was way too much for battle ).

                USSR just wanted to not appear like they were losing everything, so taking out a minor system that was battlefield oriented was not a big deal.

        2. SparkEV says:

          “The Chinese can cover all of Mexico with defensive anti- missile systems and the US would not do a thing.”

          Apparently, you’re too young to remember ABM treaties. Those who don’t know history are morons who repeat them, kind of like the insane doing the same thing over and over when the end result is the same.

          1. Windbourne says:

            Hey sparky, I lived through the Cuban missile crisis and worked for DARPA developing defense ( and it turned offense ) systems. I’m well aquanted with ABM treat that was between us/Russia and America, and was thrown away by W.

            Apparently, u are not very well educated.

      3. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        SparkEV said:

        “It’s not about communist country.”

        No, it’s about a powerful country ruled by a ruthless and thoroughly corrupt oligarchy; a country which is a rapidly growing military power which likes to use its might to bully other countries. China uses its economic power to bully its trade “partners”… or rather, victims; and now it’s using its growing military power to bully its regional neighbors in a more direct way.

        “If China put missile defense system in Mexico that could thwart US military, US won’t sit by and not take action against Mexico. Indeed, the last time something like that happened (in Cuba), US was ready to destroy the world with thermonuclear war. What China is doing is not good, but it’s by no means terrible.”

        WOW! That is so wrong it’s breathtaking!

        The Soviet missiles in Cuba were not merely a “defense system”; they included nuclear missiles aimed at the USA. The Soviet Union was using Cuba as a proxy to threaten the USA. (And in fact, if I recall correctly, the Soviets hadn’t told Castro they were putting in an offensive nuclear missile system until it was a fait accompli.)

        The missile defense system that the USA has recently deployed in N. Korea isn’t a nuclear attack system; the purpose and strategic use of that is about as far away from an attack system as it’s possible to get.

        “But China is like a puppy eating out of North Korean hands. Despite their crazy leadership, NK knows how to wag the dog.”

        Nope, you’ve got the tail wagging the dog. China is deliberately using N. Korea as an attack dog, and China is holding the leash. China could rein in N. Korea any time it wanted to. Very clearly China doesn’t want to, because the threat from N. Korea prevents the U.S. from labeling China a currency manipulator or otherwise taking steps to address China’s grossly unfair international business practices.

        1. ModernMarvelFan says:

          “The missile defense system that the USA has recently deployed in N. Korea isn’t a nuclear attack system; the purpose and strategic use of that is about as far away from an attack system as it’s possible to get.”

          Defense system against an offense system is tilting the balance of “mutual destruction” scheme of balance.

          The entire point of mutual destruction is to ensure neither side is stupid enough to use it. But if one side has somewhat effective shield and it could “encourage” the side to tip that balance by using their offensive weapons.

          As far as China/N.Korea wagging goes. Well, that is a pretty rabid dog that China is dealing with which may or may not bite its own hand. I don’t think China likes a nuke nation on its border either. But it also doesn’t want that nation to collapse so millions of refugee would create problem in its NE region. It certainly doesn’t want an united Korea on its border with US military base right on the Chinese border. That is understandably self interest at play there.

        2. Moché says:

          “No, it’s about a powerful country ruled by a ruthless and thoroughly corrupt oligarchy; a country which is a rapidly growing military power which likes to use its might to bully other countries. USA uses its economic power to bully its trade “partners”… or rather, victims; and now it’s using its growing military power to bully its regional neighbors in a more direct way.”

          Really should make Unitedstatians and their “Canadian” lapdogs think.

        3. SparkEV says:

          “The Soviet missiles in Cuba were not merely a “defense system””

          PuPu, go look up ABM treaty. If “defense system” was so benign, there wouldn’t be such treaties. Even the primitive anti-missiles of 1960’s were enough to scare the superpowers into action, and having far more capable system that actually work half the time like THAAD in Mexico (or Cuba) would elicit very strong response from US, like threatening nuclear war.

          Also, Soviets only put the missiles in Cuba after US put the nukes in Turkey, just across Black sea. As far as they’re concerned, they were executing game theory 101 in doing exactly what US was doing.

      4. Windbourne says:

        First off, both Russia and China are using Venezuela as FOB for their naval ships. No actions by America.
        Secondly, we have a SMALL MDS, which can take out 10-20 missiles at relatively close range. China acknowledges 750 nukes, but are thought to have closer to 2000, based on plutonium generated and missing. They would overwhelm what little bit we have.
        Third, America was not going to destroy the workd; ussr was. They parked a bunch of nukes 90 miles off our shores and then tried to deny it, followed by threats against America, including that they would launch.
        And it is ussr/Russia that built and CURRENTLY maintains a doom day system in which if military Kremlin was cut off from communications with system, they would launch ALL 3000+ missiles at the WEST, giving us nuclear winter.

    5. georgeS says:

      @Mark.ca

      Unfortunately the big three are all sleeping with the pigs and Tesla WANTS to sleep with the pigs.

      This is just the tip of the iceberg. If we get into a bigger dispute with China they can just do the same thing with GM as they just did with LG and Samsung. GM makes a big chunk of its profit by selling in China.

      …but of course we have some leverage. We can just slap import duties of just flat out ban Chinese products in the US.

      It’s a bit OT. But I was watching the history of the Vietnam War on TV. We are so outnumbered there it’s a no win situation. You would think the US would learn after the Korean War and the Vietnam War but it doesn’t look like it.

      Hopefully our version of “the crazy fat kid” (Donny) doesn’t get us into a war over there.

      1. Mark.ca says:

        The “defense” got the biggest budget increase this year so it’s not logical to have go to waste, you have to use the money somehow, it’s the rule. War is next on the menu.

        1. SparkEV says:

          Right. And that’s what I fear, too: US soldiers dying in some stupid foreign war. All the tax increases Dumbocrats passed in the past will come in very handy for Prez Dump to ship off our boys and girls to die.

          Best way to fight North Korea is to drop bunch of DVD and USB sticks with K-pop, K-dramas, hollywood movies (like Titanic), and satellite Internet capable laptops all over NKorea instead of bombs.

          https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/26/north-korea-defector-titanic

          1. Mark.ca says:

            I like the dvd idea! Similar stuff was tried in E Europe some decades ago through OTA tv stations.

          2. mx says:

            LOL. Trump tax cuts to the rich are going to Blow Up the Deficit Again, like Repubs always do. Yet, it’s the liberals fault.

            Repubs, Never Take Responsibility.

            1. Mark.ca says:

              The deficit was not repayable anyway so no harm done. I did the math and my taxes will be increasing a bit so i guess i’m not rich enough.

            2. SparkEV says:

              Dump cutting taxes means there would be even less money to start a foreign war. Dumbocrats are the morons who can’t see beyond 4 years. Fact is, US gov’t is swimming in money, and all that extra dough is just itching to be spent in killing people.

              Yes, it is entirely the Dumbocrats’ fault. Without money, we wouldn’t be spending more on “defense” than next 8 countries combined.

              1. Mark.ca says:

                Don’t be naive and open your eyes. There is no parties, no dems or reps. No matter what party takes over one thing happens and that is the big corporations get their breaks and whatever they want. The rest of the issues are just distractions that’s why nothing seems to be done to help people. We are not paying enough.

      2. Windbourne says:

        Actually, if Tesla/musk really wanted a plant in CAN, it would already be there.
        CN gov has offered to fund it, passed new laws designed to get Tesla in there, and it STILL is not happening.

        Otoh, the big 3 paying to build there with OUR bailout money, giving up their IP, and exporting to America. Even European and JN car makers are going there.

        Tesla is now the MOST American car makers going.

    6. mx says:

      Game Theory 101.
      Match the Sanctions, exactly and immediately.

      1. SparkEV says:

        Last time Soviets tried game theory, US threatened them with nuclear war.

        In case you’re not aware, US put nuclear missiles in Turkey just across Black Sea from USSR. To counter, USSR tried to put missiles in Cuba which is when the US tried to start a thermonuclear war.

        In the end, US agreed to remove the missiles from Turkey, and Soviets agreed to remove them from Cuba.

        But of course, the left wing US media brainwashing only talks about how great Kennedy was in standing up to the Soviets instead of how much of a mad man he was in almost starting the thermonuclear war.

        Another fun fact: Kennedy cut top marginal taxes from 91% to 65%. Kennedy was very much like the war mongering, tax cutting neo-cons of past decade.

  2. DJ says:

    Hey this is good news for us right 😀

    More and cheaper EVs for everyone outside of China.

    1. Dav8or says:

      NO! It is not good news for us! Everyone seems to agree that being dependent on foreign oil is a bad thing, so why is being dependent on foreign manufacturing a good thing?? IT’S NOT!

      Please America, stop being selfish little consumers and consider the country as a whole and it’s future. We need to get off our addiction to cheap crap from China as much as we need to get off oil.

      1. DJ says:

        Wait, you’re condoning Americans for wanting to help with this issue that the Chinese caused?

        Ya, the better solution would be for them to just close up shop and not manufacture the batteries to put in EVs thus putting fewer EVs on the road which as a direct result would lead to more oil consumed.

        Sounds like the logical choice.

        1. Dav8or says:

          I hope you meant condemning… but it is a blog comment section, so anything is possible.

          It’s a simple idea. Americans can build their own batteries. See? Really simple. No need to be dependent on China, or Korea, or Japan, or even Germany. Tesla is starting and others need to follow.

          It is possible. Americans can be taught to build things. We used to make almost every single thing any American ever needed right here in America. Now we build a tiny fraction of what we consume.

          China makes the vast majority of what we consume including products for the US military. What do you suppose will happen when China’s home market becomes so strong that it can sustain itself without US sales? Soon they will not need us and we at present absolutely need them.

          We are dependent on them and they are currently dependent on us, so the trade imbalance works out, but they are working hard (with our help of course) to not be dependent on the US market. Where does that leave us? We need to start weening ourselves off their manufacturing NOW!

          1. Mark.ca says:

            “Americans can build their own batteries. See?”
            I see….do you?
            Americans are already building their own batteries! It’s that car maker that you constantly like to bash. This is your opportunity to say something good about Tesla…let’s see if you can.

            1. Dav8or says:

              Already did. Re-read my post above. I acknowledged that Tesla was already making batteries here and that I feel others should too.

              I don’t hate Tesla. They do many things well. I hope one day they will build a car I want to buy as I would like to support them. I would also like one of their solar tile roofs if they ever get the price down out of the stratosphere.

              What I “bash” is many of their ridiculous claims and PR events as well as their rabidly faithful fan club that blindly defends, or perpetuates the exaggerations and claims of Elon. It’s neat to have a favorite brand, but there is a point where one can go way overboard.

              1. Peter says:

                Some guys just Love to Hate.

                Good way to let steam out.

                ( instead of beating wife and kids )

                Blogs have a good purpose.

          2. DJ says:

            Ok yes, in general I think it would be good if we as American’s can make more of our own goods. Unfortunately there are a ton of hurdles to this. American’s like cheap stuff. You’re going to be hard pressed to get a struggling family on your side (of which I guess something like 50% of American families are) to spend more $ on something they could have gotten from China for less. The rest of the world also has a similar addiction, understandably, but American’s are definitely one of the worst when it comes to that.

            As automation becomes cheaper and cheaper I do think more and more manufacturing will come back to the US. It already has to some degree but at the same time that doesn’t mean manufacturing jobs will also rise at the same level.

            This is a specific case though where the option is either shutter the plant or make the batteries available to consumers outside of China. Personally I think making the batteries available outside of China is a good thing.

        2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          “Ya, the better solution would be for them to just close up shop and not manufacture the batteries to put in EVs thus putting fewer EVs on the road which as a direct result would lead to more oil consumed.”

          It certainly would be a better long-term solution if quite literally every single international company doing business in China would close up shop, move their business elsewhere, and end all business relations with China.

          Doing business with or in China is short-term thinking, and that will remain the case so long as China is using its central authority to create unfair business practices. It looks like China is currently moving to establish a near-monopoly on li-ion battery supply, just as it once established a near-monopoly on solar panels.

          Sadly, there’s no authority which can impose the same restrictions on China which the U.S. government once imposed on Standard Oil, when Standard pulled the same crap in the U.S. to establish a monopoly on gas stations.

          Thank goodness at least Tesla controls its own battery supply from a factory here in the USA. Since Tesla is largely consuming its own battery production, it is mostly immune from China’s attempt at an international monopoly.

          Too bad other U.S. auto makers are not moving to do the same thing; at least not yet. Hopefully that will change.

      2. Dan says:

        Average consumers don’t care. It’s the governmentas job to slap import tax to protect domestic industries. That is how the rest of the world works.

        1. Dav8or says:

          Sadly, you are correct. Most Americans don’t care. Particularly when they are faced with a purchase. As long as there is no such thing as a free market, I agree our government needs to do more to level the playing field where we can.

    2. ItsNotAboutTheMoney says:

      I don’t want a Chinese car, or a car with Chinese traction batteries or Chinese cells in that battery.

      China engages in rampant protectionism, and and protectionism is incompatible with export.

      I’d rather buy an ICEV than a PEV with a high proportion of Chinese-sourced content.

      1. SparkEV says:

        Good luck in trying to avoid Chinese product. Unless you’re a billionaire who can afford to make your own stuff at huge cost, you will be buying stuff made in China.

      2. DJ says:

        It’s actually kind of funny in certain parts of Asia how disliked Chinese products are.

        The parts can all come from there but if they’re assembled in say Japan they’re seen as high quality goods yet if the parts are assembled in China it’s seen as crap. That little “made in XXX” sticker definitely carries some weight in certain parts of the world.

        1. Dan says:

          Because that’s the fact!

        2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          “…if the parts are assembled in China it’s seen as crap.”

          With good reason. Counterfeiting of parts is rampant in China, especially electronic parts.

          It’s truly amazing to me that anyone would do business with any Chinese supplier. Generally speaking, spot-checking deliveries for quantity and quality is sufficient. But I’ve read horror stories of how shipments from China are likely to have at least part of the shipment be counterfeit goods, while other parts of the same shipment are the real thing.

          Apparently the attitude of “buyer beware” rules in China… on steroids!

          Apple must have pretty stringent quality control standards, to be able to get consistent quality out of consumer electronics assembled in China. I wonder how they accomplish that. Perhaps they ship the assembled units to another country, and then test each one individually before it’s sent on to the retailer?

      3. Lurfy says:

        Then rule out the BMW X3 BEV. Plan is to build it solely at China’s plant Dadong. The X3 PHEV (with 11.685 kWH) will be built at several plants including US plant Spartanburg.

    3. mx says:

      Owning the JOBS is better.

  3. Dav8or says:

    It’s funny the way the Chinese choose North Korea over commerce. I can not for the life of me see what great value China sees in the crap hole known as North Korea, but they do and so do the Russians.

    1. Mark C says:

      Probably for the entertainment value of the irratation that North Koreans missiles present to the Western world.

      That, and any excuse to get a free factory by running the owners out of town…..after they were able to get their manufacturing processes and their closely held intellectual property at no cost, too.

    2. Pinewold says:

      North Korea provides a buffer between capitalism and China’s sudo-capitalism/communism . If North and South were united, China would have more competition and might not fare as well in comparison (South Korea standard of living is better than China’s, North Korea is worse making China look good)

      1. ItsNotAboutTheMoney says:

        I’m sure they really don’t want a land border with a united Korea.

    3. ModernMarvelFan says:

      “I can not for the life of me see what great value China sees in the crap hole known as North Korea”

      It is true that commerce between China and S. Korea is far greater than China/N.Korea trades. But China needs to “prop” up the N. Korean government for 2 reasons.

      1. Buffer zone. It doesn’t want S.Korea or united Korea on its border where US military has its missiles right on its border and Beijing would be easily within strike distance of medium range missiles. That is like having a Russian military base just across the lake on the Canadian side by Buffalo, NY.

      2. Refugees. China doesn’t want to deal with millions of refugees once the N. Korean government collapse. It would create havoc on its borders. Despite the current tight border control by N. Korea, there are estimated up to 100,000 N. Korean secretly escaped to China and living there despite the government control. If the government of N. Korea collapse, there could be millions of them going across the border looking for jobs and food. The border between China/N. Korea is porous and hard to stop because people can just easily walk across during the winter when 2 rivers that separate the two countries freeze over.

      Both of those two reasons are China’s self serving interest. China is going to do what is good for China, no different than any other countries out there. Sure, the crazy nut in charge is annoying. Sure, the nukes on Chinese border and potential military race in NE Asia is bad, but the two other reasons are far more important to China.

  4. Jake Brake says:

    Its just a stalling tactic to allow chinas battery tech to catchup and force everyone to use chinese battery companies.

  5. William L. says:

    This ban has nothing to do with N. Korea people.

    It’s about S. Korea let US install THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense)

    1. SparkEV says:

      Why do you think S Korea let US install THAAD when they fully knew it would sour the relations with China? (hint: Murderous crazy regime to their north).

      1. ModernMarvelFan says:

        THAAD doesn’t do much to protect S. Korea when Seoul is already within the artillery shelling range of the N. Korea army.

        THAAD is “supposed” to protect US far east base as well as some part of Japan.

        Of course, it also potentially “hand cuffs” some of the Chinese missile capability because it is so close to China as well. That is why China is not happy about it. That is like putting a “Chinese version of the THAAD” system in Cuba, Mexico or Canada…

        1. Seoul says:

          “when Seoul is within the Artillery firing range of the N. Korea.” Actually that’s a bit of a myth NK has a small number of artillery that if placed on the border would be capable of reaching the very outskirts of Seoul. However currently the NK don’t have artillery at the closest point on the border to Seoul never mind their artillery with the longest range mainly because they would be very vulnerable. So artillery not a threat to the capital. However NK does have and is building up the number of ballistic missiles that it has that could strike Seoul… hence the requirement for THAAD.

          1. ModernMarvelFan says:

            Yes, I agree that “sea of fire” is kind of myth. But North Korea’s 152mm gun can reach the suburban area of the Seoul. But its rocket launchers can also reach Seoul as well if they are placed within 1km of the border.

            Yes, they wouldn’t be able to station troops without anyone noticing. But the threat is real that they can effectively reach a high population center within strike distance.

            THAAD won’t stop rocket launchers/MRL or howitzers that are just advanced past the borders. The point is that it will only take few hours for those advancement to make it well within the range of serious damages.

            One of my friend who used to station in the base in South Korea told me that the entire US military base is basically there to provide a “good speed bump” so that US would have the time to retaliate if North ever decides to act crazy again. Of course, the retaliation would be severe and fatal and swift. But the initial loss would be severe for both US base as well as Seoul. The eventual swift retaliation is what is keeping the peace all those decades.

  6. Ian says:

    Is this a sneaky way to dump Chinese made batteries into foreign markets…

  7. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

    Just one more reason not to do business in China.

    And it’s pretty hypocritical for China to be retaliating against defensive measures against N. Korea, since China is using N. Korea as an “attack dog” to keep the U.S. from imposing economic sanctions on China. As it is, China is the only country on the international stage to put real pressure on N. Korea, so the U.S. has to “play nice” with China in an effort to reign in N. Korea.

    For example, the current U.S. President (who shall remain nameless in this comment) promised to official label China a currency manipulator when he was campaigning, yet has changed policy on that once he realized his administration — just like several previous administrations — needs China to have any hope of reining in the loose cannon which is N. Korea.

    I hope this Gordian knot can be cut, but at least in the current situation, I don’t see any way to do it without the destruction of S. Korea’s capital of Seoul.

    If ever there was an international crisis that needs thinking outside the box for a solution, it’s this one.

    1. ModernMarvelFan says:

      Couple claims doesn’t make sense in my opinion.

      THAAD doesn’t do much to protect S. Korea when Seoul is within the Artillery firing range of the N. Korea.

      THAAD will protect Japan and certainly will have capability limiting Chinese missiles. That is why China isn’t happy about it. It is like Russian putting similar system in Cuba. Russia had same complains with US THAAD system in Czech, Turkey and Poland to “protect NATO against Iran”. It effectively threaten Russian missile capabilities as well.

      “promised to official label China a currency manipulator when he was campaigning, yet has changed policy on that once he realized his administration”

      No different than every other President before him. The so called devaluation has been blown out of proportion since Chinese currency has been on a steady rise ever since the economic crisis.

      Also, a country has two typical tools in controlling its currency. 1. Using interest rate as well as federal printing machine. 2. Adjusting exchange change by “locking” onto a foreign currency.

      China is doing the #2 as just about every major economy that “doesn’t have a hard currency”. Ever since the collapse of world economy in 2008, China has been slowly trying to build up its own currency as “hard currency”. Thus, there is even less argument against the so called “currency manipulation”.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        ModernMarvelFan said:

        “THAAD will protect Japan and certainly will have capability limiting Chinese missiles. That is why China isn’t happy about it.”

        Well, you’re likely right about that, altho I don’t have much sympathy for China’s displeasure over limiting its ability to threaten its neighbors. But you’re wrong to say:

        “THAAD doesn’t do much to protect S. Korea when Seoul is within the Artillery firing range of the N. Korea.”

        The purpose (or stated purpose, anyway) of THAAD is to intercept missiles — possibly nuclear-tipped missiles — and not to intercept artillery shells. Sure, THAAD won’t protect Seoul from the thousands of artillery pieces aimed at it from N. Korea. But that doesn’t mean it can’t provide some degree of protection from nuclear attack from that direction!

        “It is like Russian putting similar system in Cuba.”

        Yeah, but the Cuban missile crisis wasn’t caused by the Soviets installing a short-ranged missile defense system in Cuba. It was caused by the Soviets putting in medium-range nuclear missiles capable of hitting Washington, D.C.!

        “Russia had same complains with US THAAD system in Czech, Turkey and Poland to ‘protect NATO against Iran’. It effectively threaten Russian missile capabilities as well.”

        My heart bleeds for poor, poor Russia and any limitations to its ability to threaten its neighbors. (/snark) Especially after it started using its military for a naked power grab in Eastern Ukraine.

        “No different than every other President before him.”

        Gosh, maybe I should have said something like “just like several previous administrations”. Oh, wait… I said exactly that.

        “The so called devaluation has been blown out of proportion since Chinese currency has been on a steady rise ever since the economic crisis.”

        I don’t know the details since I’m not a “financial guy”. All I know is that the balance of trade is grossly in favor of the Chinese, and that they impose high tariffs and red-tape restrictions and delays on U.S. goods; tariffs and restrictions which are not balanced going the other direction. I’ve read that China has been granted special dispensation, by international trade treaties, for higher tariffs because they’re a “developing nation”, and obviously the U.S. isn’t. But it seems pretty clear China is abusing the privilege it’s been given, especially with the way it’s using wholesale government subsidies to artificially lower prices on certain goods, such as solar panels, and minerals such as rare earth elements, to allow China to corner the international market and create a monopoly or near-monopoly.

        I also question that China really deserves the label of a “developing nation”. It certainly has developed quite a bit, and arguably the handicapping in favor of China should be at least reduced, if not eliminated.

        Perhaps China isn’t really a “currency manipulator” to any large degree, MMF; but also perhaps labeling China a currency manipulator would be one of the few ways that the U.S. could fight back against China’s unfair trade practices while still remaining within the bounds of our trade treaty obligations.

        “China has been slowly trying to build up its own currency as ‘hard currency’.”

        It’s when you say things like that, MMF, that make me wonder if you have any idea what you’re talking about. No modern economy uses hard currency, and in fact no modern economy could possibly function if limited to a hard currency. Hard currency economies don’t allow for the easy credit which modern economies use to fund new and growing businesses.

        That assertion of yours is right “up there” with you claiming over and over that a standard ICEV automobile drivetrain is more complex than Voltec. It’s not merely that it’s wrong, MMF; it’s that it shows you have no idea what you’re talking about.

        Take some Dutch Uncle advice here, MMF, and stop trying to “correct” those who know more than you do about a subject.

        1. ModernMarvelFan says:

          “But that doesn’t mean it can’t provide some degree of protection from nuclear attack from that direction!”

          How is nuking S. Korea going to fulfill the dream of united Korea under North’s control? Maybe he is a nut job that would do such thing. But I doubt that is the true intent. But nuking Japan and US bases in the pacific is far more likely.

          “Yeah, but the Cuban missile crisis wasn’t caused by the Soviets installing a short-ranged missile defense system in Cuba. It was caused by the Soviets putting in medium-range nuclear missiles capable of hitting Washington, D.C.!”

          I never said it was the cause of Cuban Missile Crisis. I simply said we wouldn’t be okay with it if Russian installing a similar system in Cuba against our missile capability.

          “My heart bleeds for poor, poor Russia and any limitations to its ability to threaten its neighbors. (/snark) Especially after it started using its military for a naked power grab in Eastern Ukraine.”

          Not defending the Russian aggression. But that is the entire point that why Russian wouldn’t be okay with it as well due to threat on its offensive capability.

          “I don’t know the details since I’m not a “financial guy”. ”

          But yet, you are claiming that I shouldn’t refrain from talking while you are constantly spewing here on area that you have NO freaking clue in.. Geez, I see how that double standard works.

          Do we revisit the transmission lecture again?

          “All I know is that the balance of trade is grossly in favor of the Chinese, and that they impose high tariffs and red-tape restrictions and delays on U.S. goods; ”

          None of that is wrong and we should address them in terms of trade practices. But how is that justification for currency manipulation. In another word, how is high tariff (which is a violation) related to currency manipulation?

          Please take your own advice on not commenting on something you don’t know.

          “I also question that China really deserves the label of a “developing nation”. It certainly has developed quite a bit, and arguably the handicapping in favor of China should be at least reduced, if not eliminated.”

          That is certainly a valid point. China has been developing quickly and soon to become the #1 economy in the world. So, there is a good argument to make that it is no longer qualifying the criteria that other “developing nations” do. But of course, their argument is that on per capita basis, China is still well within the developing standard. Maybe there needs to be a separate standard due to China’s share market size. (eventually India, Brazil, Indonesia..etc can use the same category as well).

          “Perhaps China isn’t really a “currency manipulator” to any large degree, MMF; but also perhaps labeling China a currency manipulator would be one of the few ways that the U.S. could fight back against China’s unfair trade practices while still remaining within the bounds of our trade treaty obligations.”

          I agree that is true. But according to WTO rules, there are certain ways to fight back. Under Obama, we have brought far more complains to the WTO court than any previous administration and we have won far more as well. At the end of the day, since we are all in WTO, then we got to play the WTO rules. Labeling them currency manipulator without qualifying criteria will only cause retaliations that would be brought to WTO court and we would lose without justification. If WTO is the organization, then we should play to the WTO rules. Take China to the court! We need more good trade representative working for administration to make good cases.

          ““China has been slowly trying to build up its own currency as ‘hard currency’.”

          “It’s when you say things like that, MMF, that make me wonder if you have any idea what you’re talking about. “”

          Seriously, I guess you missed the clear ” ” that I used to describe the term hard currency. I mean seriously, are you freaking blind? That quote is used to indicate the term is somewhat questionable because the use of hard currency is to indicate the value of the currency in which 3rd world countries hold because it has trading value. Most trades are conducted in Dollar, Euro or Yen. Chinese Yuan isn’t part of it. But China is trying to make Yuan an international trading currency that other nations holds as reserves.

          “Hard currency” is purely used in the sense that is what other nations holds as reserve currency for trading.

          “That assertion of yours is right “up there” with you claiming over and over that a standard ICEV automobile drivetrain is more complex than Voltec. It’s not merely that it’s wrong, MMF; it’s that it shows you have no idea what you’re talking about.”

          So, you still failed to understand how modern ICE with 6 speed or more transmission works. Again, you insist your ignorance or lack of understanding of a complex topic (you said yourself that you are freaking moron who doesn’t understand the simple planetary gearset) is somehow superior to other’s understanding of a complex topic. Again, if you don’t even understand how a single planetary gearset works, then why would you be able to understand how 3 sets or more planetary works in a modern automatic transmission? Sounds like I am arguing about calculus with a parrot…

          “ake some Dutch Uncle advice here, MMF, and stop trying to “correct” those who know more than you do about a subject.”

          LOL. You are the moron who admits that you couldn’t understand how a SINGLE PLANETARY GEAR SET WORKS. But you insist on trying to say that a transmission with 3 or more planetary gearset is somehow simpler… Truly great display of ignorance at its best.

          1. Mark.ca says:

            Are you 2 trying to compete for the longest most boring post ever posted in IEVs?

          2. Ron says:

            I think the term you may have intended instead of “Hard” currency is “Reserve” currency. Previously countries kept gold as a reserve to use in international business dealings. Now that we use un-backed paper money (fiat currency) the treasuries keep reserves of money from other nations. The US dollar is widely accepted & relatively stable, so it is the main reserve currency.
            Having others use our currency is to our advantage – other companies trade their paper money (which we spend on real stuff) for our paper money (which sits in their vaults). We are fat & happy until something else comes along to be the reserve. It appeared the Euro might be a candidate, but its security is trashed. UK pound Sterling, & the Japanese Yen have been considered, and some have proposed the IMF establish an independent international currency: Special Drawing Rights. China and Russia have made suggestions, but the ruble & renmibi don’t have adequate wide acceptance.
            US using its status as the main reserve currency would wreak havoc with our economy. All the other treasuries selling our paper money would decrease its value – major league inflation would ensue.

  8. Benedictus says:

    So all the batteries from the full capacity of the factories are now going to Hyundai/Kia and BMW. That is great news for the European EV supply! I really hope this speeds up production of Ioniq Electric.

  9. Dan says:

    This is cause for WTO investigation! China has been sidestepping WTO rules for years!

    1. ModernMarvelFan says:

      Yes, South Korea needs to take China to the WTO court for this action!

  10. Benz says:

    Kim and Donald both look like cartoon figures.

    Just like Tom and Jerry.

    An idea for a new cartoon?

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Sure, lots of them. They are both such painfully easy targets for ridicule.

      And how embarrassing it is, as an American, to see the American president competing with that fat spoiled child to see who can appear the most angry, self-centered, and immature.

  11. Huhu says:

    So many cannot-be-further-from-the-truth comments here. Wondering why many companies love to source products from China? Because they (and numerous studies) found China produce highest quality stuff at the price specified by the requesting companies! And generally more reliable delivery too! Of course if the requester orders a product at a ridiculously low price, you will get what you paid for. China has widest span of higher to lower quality producers satisfying different tiers. On the higher end, just think iPhones, drones and many high end apparel / decorations…

    1. CCIE says:

      Wow, even reps of the Chinese government read InsideEVs and post propaganda! Nice!

      Most of us Americans are foolish enough to buy just based on price, which is often the Chinese product. But, not many of us think we’re buying a quality product. We know China makes crap, we’re just too cheap to pay for a good product…for now.

      1. Mark.ca says:

        “Wow, even reps of the Chinese government read InsideEVs and post propaganda! Nice!”
        lol…i was thinking the same thing. I made it a point some years ago to buy N American products as whenever possible. IMO the price difference doesn’t justify the quality sacrifice. In the long run you will pay more because you will have to buy the crap over and over if you go with the Chinese stuff.

        1. CCIE says:

          Yeah, I try to buy American, but it’s not easy. I do a fair amount of car work. Started buying quality tools at garage sales when Craftsman switched all production t China. Very disapointing.

          1. ModernMarvelFan says:

            “Started buying quality tools at garage sales when Craftsman switched all production t China”

            Hmm… Did they switch all the hand tools to China as well? I thought they started with the “green series” but kept the original Craftsman (blue and red colored as well as professional series) to the US.

            Luckily, I guess all my Craftsman hand tools are all Made in USA! And I won’t be selling them anytime. =)

            1. CCIE says:

              Yup, a few years ago even the hand tools went to China. You can tell she. You compare them to the USA ones that they’re not made as well.

      2. Moché says:

        Good fatty boy, keep shouting COMMUNISM!!! and blaming a foreign government… that does exactly what your own corrupt and inept government is doing (rofl). But hey, at least you’re slaving away for CAPITALISM and FREEDOM so you’re on the good side!

        What a proud citizen you must be. Munching on burgers, drinking coke and waving a flag 24/7 to support your economy and your “culture”, how beautiful! I’d love to see your fanciful bumper stickers!

        1. Mark.ca says:

          My bumper sticker say: “If you can read this, you are a dumb ass”.

          1. Moché says:

            That tells a lot about you. Thank you for the confirmation!

            1. Mark.ca says:

              I just wanted to see if you could read it. Stupid fish always bite!

        2. CCIE says:

          Umm, ok. I guess we have anti-capitalism trolls here now? Though China is really a capitalist/communist hybrid with an Oligarchy ruling it.

          Anyway, irrelevant of China’s government, the extreme corruption and other issues mean that their products are mostly low quality.

          I do enjoy freedom, and don’t really slave away for it. Let me know when your country trusts you enough to let you buy firearms. Mine still does.

          Also enjoy burgers and coke sometimes, though I’ve been on a Peruvian food kick lately.

          Flag only gets flown on July 4th, Memorial, and Veterans days. You’re right, I should fly it more.

          Those “091101 Terrorist Hunting Permit” bumper stickers were cute back in the day, but I’m just not a bumper sticker guy.

    2. Asak says:

      Yes, you’ll get the cheapest price due to no enforced environmental regulations. Hard to compete with companies who can just dump all the toxins into the local river, and spew out so much unfiltered pollution that many days you can’t see the sky.

      Unfortunately, in the long run I’m not sure the Chinese will find that Faustian bargain to have been worthwhile.

  12. Michael says:

    Couldn’t you just establish another company across Chinese borders and then sell right back to the Chinese market?

    1. Mark.ca says:

      No, because then you will have to pay the border tax which will probably take away all the profit.

  13. Windbourne says:

    This is exactly why companies that build anything more a small assembly plant in China, are idiots. 5 years ago, China used rare Earth against the west and yet, companies still do not learn. Hopefully, Tesla is smart enough and will not build more than what is in Europe right now.

Leave a Reply