bust Archives - HopeGirl Blog

EVs in the USA head for bust while sales globally are artificially propped up

Hope — Thu, 20 Aug 2026 17:00:00 +0000

In an article last month, The New York Times documented the US electric vehicle bust. But then it goes onto spin a false narrative about global sales of electric vehicles booming.

In the following, Robert Bradley Jr. comments on excerpts from the article.

The Weak EV Narrative (fix is in with NYT essay)

By Robert Bradley Jr., as published by Master Resource on 13 August 2026

Table of Contents

Introduction

Matthew Shaer’s 5,500-word New York Times essay, ‘The American E.V. Has Been Crushed. Will It Take the US Auto Industry with It?’ (15 July 2026), documents the US electric vehicle (“EV”) bust. Very useful. But then he spins a false narrative. And for credibility, the article comes with a statement: “Matthew Shaer spoke with dozens of autoindustry analysts and academics for this article” … but not anyone who challenges the EV narrative in light of the failed domestic policy.

Shaer’s essay is a Malthusian masterpiece: doom-and-gloom with a prediction waiting to be refuted. Its subtitle: “The largest US automakers have backed away from electric vehicles, even as global sales are booming. The decision may make them obsolete.”

The first sentence is factual and correct. The second sentence is wrong – and missing the other side of the story. Overall, Matthew Shaer refuses to consider:

The consumer imperative (and “social justice”) of affordability.
Automaker decision-making in a subsidy-neutral market.
The improvements in ICE (internal-combustion engine) technology, including emission reductions.
China’s EV buildup as a money-losing, central-planning blunder.

Quotations follow below with my comments and added subtitles.

EV Losses, EV Crash: Correct

Doug Field, the head of Ford’s EV unit … had good reason to be optimistic. Buoyed by billions of dollars in federal investment in charging infrastructure and a generous $7,500 consumer tax credit, the electric vehicle market in the United States had recently hit historic highs, climbing from annual sales of roughly 490,000 in 2021 to more than 800,000 in 2022 – an increase of approximately 60 per cent.

Yes, it was government-enabled and woke-driven. A false boom – and a colossal economic mistake in retrospect.

[Ford’s early EV model] seems to have been cursed from the outset. Unlike many of the earlier Ford EVs, the “bullet train” was not merely a retrofitted version of an existing vehicle with an internal combustion engine … It was an entirely new car, requiring a large and complicated battery to match the vehicle’s projected heft.

The early reaction to Ford’s ambition (wokeness) was green-is-great and the auto-transition-is-on. But reality set in.

In April 2024, Ford pushed back the sale of the “bullet train” by two years, to “enable Ford to take advantage of emerging battery technology”; that August, it confirmed it was killing it entirely. “These vehicles need to be profitable,” Ford’s chief financial officer, John Lawler, explained in a conference call with reporters. “If they’re not profitable, based on where the customer is and the market is, we will pivot and adjust and make those tough decisions.”

No kidding! And the verdict of losses was industry-wide.

At the time, his comments went relatively unnoticed. But it soon became clear that Ford – which went on to retire the Lightning, an electric variant of its best-selling F-150 pickup – was not the only manufacturer to have suddenly developed a case of cold feet. In July 2024, General Motors said it was delaying the introduction of a Buick EV SUV, and the following September, Volvo dialled back plans for an all-electric lineup of vehicles that would have debuted in the United States. In 2025, Dodge followed suit, axing a battery-powered Charger and its long-anticipated EV Ram pickup truck. Two plug-in hybrid Jeeps were sent to the scrap heap in the sky, as were several e-sedans that Honda and Nissan had designed for the US market. Acura pulled the plug on an electric SUV built at a GM plant in Tennessee.

A total fail ….

The cancellations accumulated at such a rapid clip that the industry press often struggled to keep up: Late last year, for example, MotorTrend published an effusive review of the BrightDrop, a cutting-edge electric van from Chevrolet. The cargo hold of the vehicle was “cavernous,” the magazine’s writers noted approvingly, and the pedal feel supple. As for visibility, it was akin to “looking out of a giant terrarium.” The only problem was that the BrightDrop was no longer available, having been discontinued by Chevy two weeks after its press team dropped the thing off at MotorTrend headquarters. (“Well, this is awkward,” the article begins.)

Bad went to worse with the pullback of subsidies, moving towards a government-neutral policy.

Under the second Trump administration, the EV tax credit was eliminated and tailpipe-emission standards were gutted, which more or less instantly drove down sales of new battery-powered vehicles and encouraged the so-called Big Three – Ford, GM and Stellantis North America, the maker of the Dodge, Chrysler, Ram and Jeep brands – to refocus their considerable resources on trucks and plus-size SUVs. Assembly lines at EV plants went dormant, and the battery plants that had sprung up around the country in the Biden years were unceremoniously closed or repurposed for other tasks, like the manufacture of industrial battery storage units. Thousands of workers lost their jobs. One of them was Doug Field, the brain behind Ford’s three-row “bullet train,” who departed the company this spring as part of an internal restructuring.

The overall malinvestment was huge, one of the greatest in US history.

In purely financial terms, the combined cost of this industry about-face remains nothing short of staggering: This year, Stellantis alone was forced to write down $26 billion in EV – related losses. (Ford reported a slightly less ghastly $19 billion loss.) But somehow, it’s the long-term repercussions that look worse. “The way I’d put it,” the auto journalist Martin Padgett told me recently, “is that we pulled a U-turn while the rest of the world was pushing forward.”

Global Growth, Loss Economics

Matthew Shaer then spins a narrative based on high global sales. But this “boom” is artificial, the result of government direction and special favour. Consumer affordability and taxpayer dollars get no mention in the article.

According to the International Energy Agency, a Paris-based policy group, one of every four vehicles sold globally in 2025 was battery-powered. Analysts with Bloomberg have predicted that in the next decade, that number will more than double, putting gas-powered cars – for the first time ever – in the minority of overall new vehicle sales. Overseas, Asian and European manufacturers have spent years preparing for this eventuality, dumping billions into the development of battery technology. With predictable results: China now makes 75 per cent of all EVs sold anywhere on earth. (The United States makes around 5 per cent.) Many of those vehicles are produced by BYD, a Chinese company that recently became the largest manufacturer of battery-powered cars in the world.

Help us, author. How is BYD doing? Is it losing money? AI answered:

No, BYD is not losing money on its overall EV sales in China, but its profit margins have shrunk significantly. A fierce domestic price war, cooling local demand and reduced government subsidies have heavily squeezed profits – causing sharp net profit declines – yet the company remains profitable overall, leaning heavily on its massive scale and growing international exports to offset domestic margin pressures.

Is China losing money with its solar buildout? Again, AI overview:

Yes, China’s solar manufacturing industry is losing substantial money on its solar sales. Severe overcapacity – with factories capable of producing double the total global demand – has triggered a punishing price war, causing leading manufacturers like LONGi, Jinko Solar, Trina Solar and Tongwei to post billions of dollars in losses.

This appears to substantiate the benefits of domestic free market policy versus foreign government intervention. But no, the narrative goes to a “technological gap” between the US and foreign nations.

“Already, the technological gap is getting dangerously wide,” says Stephen Ezell, a senior economist with the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, or ITIF, a Washington-based non-profit. “Today, China can get a new EV from blueprint to launch about 33 per cent faster than a US company, give or take. But that will accelerate, right? The speed of innovation, the speed of the production cycles at these foreign companies, is just going to get faster and faster. And at some point, the gap will get pretty close to fully impossible for American automakers to close.”

Shaer then spins that EVs were/are the way forward to re-establish “the US auto industry’s once-dominant stake in the domestic car business.” “The timing could not be worse” for domestic automakers to have given up on EVs.

Since the 1960s, the US auto industry’s once-dominant stake in the domestic car business has been slowly chewed up by foreign manufacturers, sinking from a near monopoly of 92 per cent in 1965 to 46 per cent in 2015. As of 2024, Ezell estimates, only a third of new cars purchased in the United States were built by the Big Three. The EV revolution was seen by its proponents as a way to reverse that trend. It was an opportunity for Detroit to rediscover its capacity for ingenuity and to re-establish credibility in an industry it helped to create.

The narrative is fanciful. Shaer claims that a profitable, robust EV market exists in the United States!

Instead, whipsawed back and forth by shifting political headwinds and afflicted by all manner of self-enforced error, it appears to be in the process of sealing its own doom – at the precise moment interest in EVs is surging in the United States. In April, the analytics firm JD Power conducted a survey showing that 26 per cent of prospective buyers in the United States were “very likely” to consider an EV for their next car. And that was before the chaos in the Strait of Hormuz helped push the price of unleaded gasoline to a four-year high.

So, automakers do not know their market? Did the poll account for the up-front price premium for EVs over ICE and other issues?

“We’ve reached a genuinely existential moment,” Ezell told me. In a best-case scenario, Detroit manages to meet it by crafting a viable, long-term EV strategy while also servicing the still dependably lucrative existing market for ICE trucks. In the worst, it retreats onto what the economist Susan Helper calls a “shrinking island of ICE,” churning out outlandishly large trucks and not much else. At which point, the obsolescence of the mighty US automobile industry – a sector once inextricably associated with American know-how and economic might – would be all but guaranteed. As Ford’s chief executive, Jim Farley, recently acknowledged in a statement that could apply to any member of the Big Three, “If we don’t put our chips on the right number and the right colour, Ford could maybe not exist.”

What a poor, speculative conclusion. The problem with the domestic EV market is not so much the bust but government subsidies and bullying that created a false industry and resulting bust. And for the international EV market, characterised by anti-energy policies and loss economics: “Greater speed to the wrong destination is not a virtue.”

The rest of Shear’s article can be read HERE.

Source: https://theexposenews.com/2026/08/14/evs-in-the-usa-head-for-bust/

Fight the Censorship Join the Hopegirl Mailing List and get my free AudioBook: The QEG Chronicles Free Energy Full Disclosure: https://bit.ly/HGQEGBook

HopeGirl Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@hopegirlblog
HopeGirl Telegram Channel Chat and Groups: https://t.me/Hopegirl587
Get Our Free EMF Survival Guide : https://bit.ly/FTWEMF
10 Percent Off our EMF Protection Products with this Link: https://www.ftwproject.com/ref/tenoff

The post EVs in the USA head for bust while sales globally are artificially propped up appeared first on HopeGirl Blog.

EU’s flagship industrial-scale insect farming operation goes bust

Hope — Mon, 12 Jan 2026 21:00:59 +0000

Last month, French insect farming startup Ÿnsect entered judicial liquidation, marking the end of a company that raised over $600 million despite its ambitions to build insect-based protein at an industrial scale.

The collapse follows years of financial struggles, including an inability to secure sufficient funding, persistent revenue shortfalls and high capital costs associated with its large-scale production facility, YnFarm.

The company, once highlighted by actor Robert Downey Jr. during the 2021 Super Bowl, failed to establish a viable economic model across its target markets of animal feed and pet food.

The trend towards insect-based foods is linked to the UN’s Agenda 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (“SDGs”), promoting sustainability and forced behavioural modifications. They claim the aim is to provide alternative sources of protein to humans and animals’ natural foods, such as beef.

However, as Dr. Meryl Nass pointed out some time ago, “Just because it is protein doesn’t mean it’s good for us.” And we would add, it’s not good for our pets and farm animals either.

Nass cited parasites that could be spread by insects, difficulties in digesting insects, and common allergies to chitin, commonly found on the exoskeleton of insects.

She suggested that one reason behind the shift to insects as food is “to cause emotional harm: to degrade, debase, downgrade human beings” and that beef is “being demonised,” potentially to “weaken the species.”

So it’s good news for humanity and our animals that Ÿnsect, a French insect farming pioneer that was at one time a flagship for Europe’s climate tech ambitions, has gone bust.

The following is an article published by Press Kit at the end of last month describing the demise of the EU’s flagship insect farming operation. It seems Ÿnsect was a non-starter rather than a start-up. Although it hasn’t dissuaded smaller insect farmers from forging ahead. Proponents of insect farming in the UK are viewing it as a problem with large-scale operations before the “technology” is ready and are sure that their “measured, evidence-led” approach will succeed where Ÿnsect has failed.

Read more: Ÿnsect’s collapse raises big questions: Is feed and fertiliser the future of insect farming? AgTech Navigator, 8 December 2025

French Court Declares Europe’s Largest Insect Farming Company Bankrupt

By Press Kit, 30 December 2025

Ÿnsect, Europe’s largest insect production company, was unable to secure the financing it needed to continue operating, despite massive past funding, and was liquidated, declared bankrupt, placed into judicial liquidation – essentially bankruptcy – due to insolvency, and closed down by the court in Évry, 35 km south of Paris.

And revenue was the problem. According to publicly available data, Ÿnsect’s revenue from its parent company peaked at €17,8 million in 2021 (about $21 million), a figure apparently inflated by internal transfers between subsidiaries. By 2023, the company had accumulated a net loss of €79,7 million ($94 million), Tech Crunch reports.

Now, following the court’s decision, the Poulainville factory farm will close permanently.

“The company now has solid technologies and an operating model, although the necessary financing was not secured in time,” says Emmanuel Pinto, President of Ÿnsect, despite the multimillion-dollar project receiving massive EU funding.

It had raised over $600 million, including funds from Downey Jr.’s FootPrint Coalition, taxpayers, and many others. The company also secured a €160 million ($175,5 million) Series D financing round in 2023 with the aim of developing its portfolio and accelerating marketing authorisations for its ingredients in several markets, Global Pet Industry reports.

Additionally, the company has received approximately €170 million in convertible bonds, €150 million in bank debt, and approximately €20 million in public subsidies, including €15 million from the European Union. In the same year, the French company also initiated a rebranding and transferred its ingredient-based product portfolio under the Sprÿng brand.

In 2020, the company announced a further capital increase of €315 million, primarily intended to finance the construction of a factory in Poulainville (Somme department). This facility is designed to become the largest vertical farm in the world.

Another capital increase of €160 million followed in April 2023. Local authorities and policymakers saw the project as a contribution to industrial development and ecological transformation.

The project has received further support from local authorities and policymakers.

It was launched and presented as a start-up symbolising the industrial boom in the insect industry, but within a few months, it turned into one of the most expensive industrial flops of the decade. “Iron Man” star Robert Downey Jr. extolled its merits on the “Late Show” during the 2021 Super Bowl weekend, The Epoch Times reports.

Ÿnsect had been struggling for months. The company’s vertical mealworm farm in Dole (55 km from Dijon), which produced 200.000 tons of insect-based ingredients annually, was sold in June, Global Pet Industry reports.

Ÿnsect instead focused on producing insect proteins for animal feed and pet food. In 2021, it expanded its operations and acquired Protifarm, a Dutch company that breeds mealworms for human consumption, adding a third market to the mix. Even when the company announced the deal, then-CEO Antoine Hubert admitted that it would take a couple of years before human food would only account for 10-15% of Ÿnsect’s revenue.

“His proposition was simple: offer an alternative to resource-intensive proteins like fishmeal and soy. This same thesis also attracted significant capital to competitors like Better Origin and Innovafeed, and it looked promising,” Tech Crunch continues.

But the vision collided with market reality. Animal feed is a commodity market driven by price, not sustainability premiums. In a perfect world, insect protein would be completely circular, with insects fed food waste that would otherwise end up in a landfill. But in practice, industrial-scale insect production typically ends up relying on grain byproducts already usable as feed, meaning insect protein simply adds a costly additional step. For animal feed, the calculations simply didn’t add up.

Ÿnsect eventually realised this. Pet food proved to be a different equation: it’s less price-sensitive than animal feed and represents a far better market for insect protein, despite competition from other protein alternatives like lab-grown meat. By 2023, the company had refocused its strategy on pet food and other higher-margin segments, with Hubert citing broader economic pressures.

Sources: