EV Sales Boom As Ethiopia Bans Fossil-Fuel Car Imports (financialpost.com)
- Reference: 0180825118
- News link: https://tech.slashdot.org/story/26/02/19/0117253/ev-sales-boom-as-ethiopia-bans-fossil-fuel-car-imports
- Source link: https://financialpost.com/pmn/business-pmn/electric-vehicle-sales-boom-as-ethiopia-bans-fossil-fuel-car-imports
> In 2024, the Ethiopian government banned the import of fossil fuel-powered vehicles and slashed tariffs on their electric equivalents. It was a policy driven less by the country's climate ambitions and more by fiscal pressures. For years, subsidizing gasoline for consumers has been a major drag on Ethiopia's budget, costing the state billions of dollars over the past decade. The country defaulted on its sovereign bonds in 2023 after rising interest rates drove up the costs of servicing its debts, and it received a $3.4 billion bailout from the International Monetary Fund the following year.
>
> In the two years since the ban on internal combustion engine vehicles, EV adoption has grown from less than 1% to [1]nearly 6% of all of the vehicles on the road in the country -- according to the government's own figures -- some way above the global average of 4%. "The Ethiopia story is fascinating," said Colin McKerracher, head of clean transport at BloombergNEF. "What you're seeing in places that don't make a lot of vehicles of any type, they're saying: 'Well, look, if I'm going to import the cars anyway, then I'd rather import less oil. We may as well import the one that cleans up local air quality and is cheaper to buy.'"
>
> For decades, Ethiopia's high import tariffs on vehicles put new car ownership out of the reach of most of the country's population. Per capita gross domestic product is only about $1,000, and even by the standards of low-income countries, it has among the lowest car ownership rates. At 13 vehicles per 1,000 people, it's a fraction of the African average of 73. With few cars manufactured in the country, the vast majority are imported, and most are bought used. The government's import policy has upended the market. In parallel, tariffs for EVs were dropped to 15% for completed cars, 5% for parts and semi-assembled vehicles, and zero for "fully knocked down" -- vehicles shipped in parts and assembled locally. That has made new EVs cost-competitive with old gasoline cars.
[1] https://financialpost.com/pmn/business-pmn/electric-vehicle-sales-boom-as-ethiopia-bans-fossil-fuel-car-imports
Red Barchetta (Score:2, Insightful)
"When gas-fueled cars are outlawed, only outlaws will have gas-powered cars."
Canadian band Rish warned us about this. So did Australian actor Mel Gibson.
Re: (Score:2)
What do you mean by "overheated our planet"? Are you saying that Earth climate is too warm right now? This is simply not true by any historical measure. Are you saying that Earth climate going to become too warm if certain things happen? If so, when and what must happen for this forecast to become true?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, and the only historical measure where it isn't is if you go way way before humans were kicking about. By any *human* history it's already too warm, and exacerbating our path toward an unfamiliar climate is not a huge comfort just because prehistoric fauna could cope on some scale, nothing to know that human civilization at our current scale can be sustained under such conditions.
Re: (Score:1)
You are correct by pointing that during brief period (by geological standards) human civilization existed climate warming up is unprecedented. However, human civilization started approximately 12,000 years which coincides with the end of ice age. That is, our civilization was enabled by Earth warming up. Personally, I see no doubts that civilization can be sustained, given that other, much bigger risks, such a nuclear war, are mitigated.
Re: (Score:2)
Correlation is not causation. Tech is the big factor for our current rise to dominance over nature, rather than any warming climate.
Big negative changes for populations, like loss of food security, is exactly what causes wars to break out. Widespread floods and droughts are still something we can't deal with technologically.
Re: (Score:2)
> Correlation is not causation.
We have enough data to safely assume causation. Civilizations that adapted to extreme cold, such as Inuit, are universally non-technological. That is, farming, which requires temperate climate, is a clear prerequisite for technological civilization to exist. I stand by my earlier assertion.
Re: (Score:2)
LOL. And all that happened *during* the last ice age. You could just as easily say it was the ice-age that gave us the tech.
Re: (Score:2)
What's more, human activities have been so large we've flipped the direction of climate trajectory. The natural cycle had been heading back towards an ice-age.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you think not heading towards ice-age is a bad thing? Would you rather lose some shorelines to raising water or have mile-deep ice sheet all the way to Texas?
Re: (Score:2)
Talk about missing the point! We've got the collective strength to flip the climate of the whole planet!
Re: (Score:2)
> Do you think not heading towards ice-age is a bad thing? Would you rather lose some shorelines to raising water or have mile-deep ice sheet all the way to Texas?
Clearly a new glaciation would not be a good thing. Last I heard the glacial cycle timing discussed, though, the end of the interglacial wasn't expected for another 10,000 years.
Keep in mind it is possible that both too cold and too warm are undesirable.
Overheating? [Re:Red Barchetta] (Score:2)
> What do you mean by "overheated our planet"? Are you saying that Earth climate is too warm right now? This is simply not true by any historical measure.
I think I may side with your kvetching here. We have seen pretty conclusive evidence of global warming, but the amount of warming so far doesn't seem to be "overheating" as of 2026.
> Are you saying that Earth climate going to become too warm if certain things happen?
Right, you nailed it. If we keep burning fossil-fuels and adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, the warming due to the greenhouse effect will continue to rise. Eventually this will have bad effects.
> If so, when and what must happen for this forecast to become true?
I will direct you to the various IPCC reports. Try the synthesis report first: [1]https://www.ipcc.ch/synthesis-... [www.ipcc.ch] , but for details
[1] https://www.ipcc.ch/synthesis-report/
Re: (Score:1)
> Canadian band Rish warned us about this.
Larry Niven, is that you?
Rent-Free... again (Score:2)
Oh look I'm important again, my troll is back to ride my dick. They modded this and the next two posts down because they didn't understand what I wrote, as usual.
Re: (Score:2)
Right now I’d make it:
“When gas-fueled cars are outlawed, only non-legacy American car manufacturers will sell abroad”.
Given the state of auto manufacturers and US oil business, with their focus on lobbying to weaken EPA environmental regulations, they will have to play catch-up. Certainly EVs certainly have always to go in terms of battery technologies and reducing costs, but they are improving given the increased investments. The problem for the US is that it keeps on giving up its techn
Chinese Belt and Road Initiative (Score:1, Interesting)
The geopolitical story with Ethiopia is the root cause of EV mandates. Ethiopia signed up with Chinese Belt and Road Initiative but unsurprisingly cannot afford payments on Chinese-built infrastructure. As such, becoming a dumping ground for oversupply of Chinese EVs is one of the concessions they had to make. Best of luck to Ethiopia, but they are now fully a Chinese client state.
Re: (Score:3)
They also don't, nationally, produce enough energy. Enen with that energy deficit, they were still exporting electricity to Djibouti, Sudan, and Kenya as of 2024. I'm sure this will be viewed as a wonderful decision when viewed from 2030.
Re:Chinese Belt and Road Initiative (Score:4, Insightful)
Probably yes, because at the same time, Solar is booming in Ethiopia, because you can set up a local grid completely independent from any nation wide power grid. And you can charge an EV locally, while Ethiopia can't produce any gasoline locally without importing oil. Solar panel are a one-time investment, which will last for decades. Oil is a recurring cost, and you have to have a network of roads and trucks to get it anywhere - all a non-issue with Solar.
Re: (Score:3)
Failing to see the downside here.
Once solar panels are installed, and they ain't expensive, the electricity is free. And Ethiopia is equatorial, so it gets fantastic insolation. Why keep paying over again for oil when you can pay for solar panels once?
Best of luck to Ethiopia, but they are now fully a Chinese client state.
If you're not a major power, or part of a bloc, you need to pick your poison. If you think this kind of thing is bad, then vote for whoever supports international development. Countries ar
Re: (Score:1)
I don't think EVs powered by solar panels are a bad idea for Ethiopia. I think Chinese EVs driven on Chinese-built roads powered by Chinese solar panels is a bad idea for Ethiopia.
Re: (Score:2)
Not wrong, but no one else seems up to being hegemon at the moment so may as well get some cheap cars out of it
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, but it's not like Ethiopia has the manufacturing base to make cars or solar panels. They're going to be relying on foreign cars and foreign solar panels either way.
Gasoline Subsidies (Score:2)
It looks like they are getting rid of subsidies on gasoline as well, which will also make electric vehicles more attractive.
[1]Ethiopiaâ(TM)s Government Officially Ends Fuel Subsidy: Prices to Follow Global Market Rates [addisinsight.net]
[1] https://addisinsight.net/2025/06/21/ethiopias-government-officially-ends-fuel-subsidy-prices-to-follow-global-market-rates/
Re: (Score:2)
Here's the thing. Oil is concentrated in a few countries, and if you do not have oil resources, you have to pay other countries for it.
Electricity, though, is everywhere. You can get it in various forms, and while you may have to buy solar panels, once you put them up, they power EVs for a really long time.
So you could import a gallon of oil and once you use that gallon up, import another gallon of oil, Lather, rinse, repeat.
Or you could import a solar panel, and now have basically a limitless supply of ele
Well, what a (pleasant?) surprise. (Score:3)
I certainly did _not_ have Ethiopia in my top list of progressive environmentally aware ueber-hipster compliant countries but you never know.
Two thinks do make sense though:
1.) It's totally logical for Afrika to skip any outdated ICE tech and infrastructure and go strait to the good new stuff.
2.) Quite a few parts of Afrika have been gaining traction and gotten on top of things. Ruanda has a rise in womans rights and participation due to the exorbitant male death toll from that civil war / epically uncivil slaughtering a few decades back. Botswana is a doorstep country closing in on a bona-fide first-world situation fast. IIRC there are quite a few other countries on a similar trajectory.
I hope for Afrika and the world that this encouraging trend continues.
Cheap Hydro Power (Score:2)
Ethiopia just built a huge dam on the Blue Nile. Electricity is now far cheaper than importing fuel.
How can you call it boom? (Score:1, Insightful)
Boom implies that people choosing EVs, which is clearly not the case here if it is mandated.
Re:How can you call it boom? (Score:5, Insightful)
Boom simply means that a product/category is seeing more popularity, no matter the reason.
The number of EVs went up by over five-fold, that is a boom. You may not *like* why it happened, but it happened.
Further given the context, I don't think it's like the people are going to call 'bullshit' or anything, the entire nation has fewer cars than you'll find in medium sized US cities. Looks like you might be over a hundred miles from the nearest gas station for most of the country. Looks like there's no such thing as convenient long-haul refueling for gas either.
Re: (Score:2)
> Boom simply means that a product/category is seeing more popularity, no matter the reason.
I see. So you think it would be accurate to say Forced Labor Camps Boom in North Korea?
Re: (Score:3)
It would be correct to say so, if you can prove that they have multipled in the last years.
Re: (Score:2)
No one forced EVs. It's just that the alternative, mainly clunkers from the scrapyards of Europe, are now banned. You are still able to manufacture your own internal combustion engine cars in Ethiopia.
Re: (Score:2)
> No one forced EVs
According to TFA: " the Ethiopian government banned the import of fossil fuel-powered vehicles". What is your understanding of "banned the import"?
> You are still able to manufacture your own internal combustion engine cars in Ethiopia.
Is that "if you don't like censorship, build your own Internet" kind of logic?
Re: (Score:2)
>> Boom simply means that a product/category is seeing more popularity, no matter the reason.
> Really? No matter the reason? How about you look up the actual definition of that before you spout the marketing bullshit few believe anymore. "generally driven by high consumer confidence", doesn't exactly define a forced mandate.
First, "generally" does not mean "always", so your definition is not in conflict with the statement "Boom simply means that a product/category is seeing more popularity, no matter the reason."
Second, you didn't give a source for your definition, Here's online Merriam Webster [1]definition 2b [merriam-webster.com]:
: to experience a sudden rapid growth and expansion usually with an increase in prices
[1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/boom
Re: (Score:2)
> Boom simply means that a product/category is seeing more popularity, no matter the reason.
Only being able to buy EVs these past couple years kinda had an outsized influence on the market.
> p>The number of EVs went up by over five-fold, that is a boom. You may not *like* why it happened, but it happened.
This quote stands out to me:
> The Ethiopia story is fascinating," said Colin McKerracher, head of clean transport at BloombergNEF. "What you're seeing in places that don't make a lot of vehicles of any type, they're saying: 'Well, look, if I'm going to import the cars anyway, then I'd rather import less oil. We may as well import the one that cleans up local air quality and is cheaper to buy.'"
Saying "We may as well import the (cars) that cleans up local air..." ignores the fact that it is illegal to import non-EVs, there's no choice.
The actual increase in EV cars on the road is easily attributable to consumers simply replacing older cars as they wear out EV market share went up 5% over two years, that's 2.5% a year - if a car lasts 40 years, you'd expect to turn over about
Re: How can you call it boom? (Score:2)
People embraced EVs. Just as long as by people, you mean not your average Ethiopian, but the ones making decisions in Ethiopia.
And so? That's how it works with most things everywhere. If you're bothered by how the decisions by people with money and power influence regular people's decisions, I suggest you have bigger fish to fry than EVs in Ethiopia.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, fretting about cars in ethiopia, based on the stated adoption rate, would be like people getting up in arms over particulars of yacht ownership in the USA.
Re: (Score:2)
> Only being able to buy EVs these past couple years kinda had an outsized influence on the market.
Yes, and that would be a plausible reason for a 'Boom', government mandates can cause these things regardless of consumer sentiment. A boom just means an expanded economic result, it does not speak to the motivation or virtue of the expansion, just that it is.
> Saying "We may as well import the (cars) that cleans up local air..." ignores the fact that it is illegal to import non-EVs, there's no choice.
It's not ignoring it, the 'We' in that statement are the people making the policy decision. This isn't saying that consumers are deciding what to import, it's a statement of the reasoning the government expresses as they made this change.
> The actual increase in EV cars on the road is easily attributable to consumers simply replacing older cars as they wear out
I don't know
Re:How can you call it boom? (Score:4, Insightful)
If you actually read the article instead of just pontificating from a position of ignorance, you’ll find a perfectly straightforward explanation of the policy shift. In the olden days, the only choice for a car was for it to be an ICE car. But that cost the government a lot of money, because Ethiopia had to import the fuel. But it’s not the olden days any more. Ethiopia has a big shiny dam and a surplus of electricity, and EVs are relatively cheaper, so it improves the country’s finances considerably to prefer the drivetrain that uses the cheap homegrown elecricity instead of the expensive imported fuel.
Re: (Score:2)
Also this is pretty rational government behavior. You've got a country that produces copious green energy (and has the potential for much more) and where oil is expensive. It's exactly the right thing to do.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, there's a lot of people projecting from areas with ubiquitous cars and robust fossil fuel infrastructure and can't imagine a context where combustion engines aren't as amazingly convenient. Getting upset on behalf of a population that probably mostly does not care.
Re: (Score:2)
I will wager that Ethiopians travel in vehicles quite a lot, largely shared minibuses, and ICE minibuses are prone to breaking down in a way that EV minibuses won’t, so Ethiopians will find the greater reliability an important benefit of this transition. The article describes the expansion of EV minibuses as an assembly activity in the country
Re: (Score:2)
> Boom implies that people choosing EVs, which is clearly not the case here if it is mandated.
Fuck you and your outdated definition of "boom". The new definition is here to stay.
(Just in case you were wondering how we got here. It was because the masses chose to not bitch-slap the living shit out of stupidity and incompetence when it started speaking in public.)
Re: (Score:3)
The last line of the summary is the interesting bit: "That has made new EVs cost-competitive with old gasoline cars."
They reached price parity, so people do have a choice. They can buy a fossil car still, albeit a used one. I'm not saying it's a completely equal, free choice, but it's also not fully compelled either.
Re: (Score:2)
The government squeezes the car market so tightly that there is almost no activity, and when they loosen their grip it's like they've made some great achievement. No, they've been screwing up their economy for a long time and accidentally took a half-step in the right direction.
This all feels like a variation on the broken window fallacy.