Workflow
超400亿电池投资或撤离,美国电池业遭“特朗普寒流”
Sou Hu Cai Jing·2025-06-20 09:24

Core Viewpoint - International companies are collectively adjusting their electric vehicle and battery investment projects in the U.S. due to increasing policy uncertainty and a slowdown in the electric vehicle market growth [1][5][9] Group 1: Company Adjustments - Faraday Future has postponed its battery factory project in South Carolina until U.S. policies become clearer, citing "policy uncertainty" and "cost sensitivity" as reasons for this decision [1][4] - CATL and Ford's battery project in Michigan is also at risk of being shelved due to similar uncertainties [1][4] - Faraday Future's Tennessee factory has begun production of energy storage cells, marking it as the first energy storage cell factory in North America [1][3] Group 2: Market Dynamics - The U.S. battery manufacturing landscape is facing challenges due to the Trump administration's complex trade policies and the halt of green transition initiatives, which have overshadowed the rapid growth seen under the Biden administration [5][7] - Over $6 billion in battery factory investments have been canceled or postponed in the first quarter of 2025 due to increased costs and policy risks [7][9] Group 3: Global Strategy - Chinese battery companies are optimizing their global capacity structure, shifting focus to more stable markets in Europe and Asia amid uncertainties in North America [9][10] - Faraday Future has expanded its production capabilities in Europe, with significant investments in factories across France, Germany, and Hungary, reflecting a strategic pivot towards the European market [10][12] Group 4: Future Outlook - The European market is experiencing a significant shift towards electrification, with BEV market share rising to 15.3% in early 2025, indicating a growing opportunity for Chinese battery manufacturers [10][12] - Faraday Future emphasizes the importance of a "global manufacturing + local delivery" capacity coordination system to enhance supply chain resilience and response efficiency [13]