Yearly Archives: 2021

News: The Station: Bird’s improving scooter-nomics, breaking down Tesla AI day and the Nuro EC-1

The Station is a weekly newsletter dedicated to all things transportation. Sign up here — just click The Station — to receive it every weekend in your inbox. Hello readers: Welcome to The Station, your central hub for all past, present and future means of moving people and packages from Point A to Point B. I’m

The Station is a weekly newsletter dedicated to all things transportation. Sign up here — just click The Station — to receive it every weekend in your inbox.

Hello readers: Welcome to The Station, your central hub for all past, present and future means of moving people and packages from Point A to Point B. I’m handing the wheel over to reporters Aria Alamalhodaei and Rebecca Bellan.

Before I completely leave though, I have to share, the Nuro EC-1, a series of articles on the autonomous vehicle technology startup reported by investigative science and tech reporter Mark Harris with assistance from myself and our copy editorial team. This deep dive into Nuro is part of Extra Crunch’s flagship editorial offerings.

As always, you can email me at kirsten.korosec@techcrunch.com to share thoughts, criticisms, opinions or tips. You also can send a direct message to me at Twitter — @kirstenkorosec.

Micromobbin’

New York City finally launched its long-awaited scooter pilot in the Bronx this past week. Over 90 parking corrals specifically for e-scooters have been installed across the borough, but residents can also park in unobstructive locations on the sidewalk. Bird, Lime and Veo were the operators chosen for the pilot, each bringing their own sets of strengths. 

Bird says it intends to focus on the mobility gap in the Bronx and will use its AI drop engine to ensure equitable deployment across all neighborhoods in the pilot zone. Veo is focused on safety and accessibility, bringing its Astro VS4, the first e-scooter with turn signals, to the mix, as well as its Cosmo, a seated e-scooter. Lime is also focusing on accessibility, with its Lime Able program, which offers an on-demand suite of adaptive vehicles. Lime also highlighted a safety quiz it will require new riders to take before hopping on a vehicle. 

All three companies have promised to partner with community organizations to hire locally as well as to offer discounted pricing for vulnerable groups.

Big week for Bird

Not only has Bird officially launched in NYC, but it was also awarded a 12-month permit to operate 1,500 scooters in San Francisco. Well, technically it’s Scoot that got the permit, but Scoot is owned by Bird, and was kind of Bird’s backdoor way into the city. Last month, the SFMTA asked Scoot to halt its operations just as the fresh round of scooter permits were kicking off because the company was implementing its fleet manager program with unauthorized subcontractors. 

On Friday, after careful evaluation of Scoot’s application, SFMTA determined Scoot has qualified for a permit to operate. Scoot intends to have its vehicles back on the roads in the coming weeks. 

Bird also officially launched its consumer e-bike, dubbed the Bird Bike (which I think is also the name of their shared e-bike). Bird hasn’t had the easiest time with profitability, and really, not many scooter companies have, so this is a chance for Bird to diversify, get a piece of the $68 billion e-bike sales pie and create more brand awareness across marketplaces. The bike costs $2,229 and consumer sales will likely make up about 10% of Bird’s revenue going forward, per the company’s S-4 filing.

Bird (and Scoot) are now integrated with Google Maps. So is Spin, as of this week. More integrations like these, as we saw a couple weeks ago with Lime joining Moovit, demonstrate how shared micromobility is becoming more integrated with the way we think about moving around cities and planning our journeys. I heartily welcome such integrations. 

Finally, Alex Wilhelm dug into new financial data released by Bird. The tl;dr: the quarterly data shows an improving economic model and a multiyear path to profitability. However, that path is fraught unless a number of scenarios all work out in concert and without a glitch, Wilhelm reports.

— Rebecca Bellan

Deal of the week

money the station

Imagine a future in which drivers don’t charge their electric vehicles but instead swap out the batteries at small, roadside pods. That’s the future Ample is imagining, and this week it announced a fresh $160 million funding round to scale its operations.

The internationally funded Series C was led by Moore Strategic Ventures with participation from PTT, a Thai state-owned oil and gas company, and Disruptive Innovation Fund. Existing investors Eneos, a Japanese petroleum and energy company, and Singapore’s public transit operator SMRT also participated. Ample’s total funding is now $230 million.

It’s an interesting idea but one that will require considerable buy-in from automakers to make it a reality — for example, by selling vehicles with either a standard battery or Ample’s battery system pre-built in. But according to Ample co-founders John de Souza and Khaled Hassounah, it wouldn’t be all that complicated for OEMs to separate the battery from the car.

“The marketing departments at the OEMs want to tell you that … ‘This is a super-duper battery that is very well integrated with the car; there’s no way you can separate it,’ ” Hassounah said. “The truth of the matter is they’re built completely separately and so true for almost — not almost, for every battery in the car, including a Tesla.

“Since we’ve built our system to be easy to interface with different vehicles, we’ve abstracted the battery component … from the vehicle,” he added.

Other deals that got our attention this week …

AEye, the lidar startup, completed its reverse merger with special purpose acquisition company CF Finance Acquisition Corp. III. AEye is now a publicly traded company that trades on the Nasdaq exchange.

Canada Drives, an online car shopping and delivery platform, announced $79.4 million ($100 million CAD) in Series B funding that it will use to expand its service across Canada. The company is going to use its recent funding to keep enhancing the product, grow its inventory in existing and new markets and hire around 200 people over the next year, particularly in product development.

DigiSure, a digital insurance company that caters to modern mobility form factors like peer-to-peer marketplaces, is officially coming out of stealth to announce a $13.1 million pre-Series A funding round. The startup will use the funds to hire more than 50 engineers, data scientists, business development, insurance and compliance specialists, as well as scale into new industry verticals and across into Europe.

High Definition Vehicle Insurance Group, a commercial auto insurance company that is initially focused on trucking, raised $32.5 million in Series B funding round led by Weatherford Capital, with new investors Daimler Trucks North America and McVestCo, and continued participation from Munich Re Ventures, 8VC, Autotech Ventures and Qualcomm Ventures LLC.

RepairSmith, a mobile auto repair service that sends a mechanic right to the driver’s home, raised $42 million in fresh funding with the aim of expanding to all major metros by the end of 2022. The company is looking to disrupt auto servicing and repair, a massive industry that hasn’t seen much change in the past 40 years.

REE Automotive was awarded $17 million from the UK government as part of a $57 million investment, coordinated through the Advanced Propulsion Centre. The investment, the company said, is in line with the UK government’s ambition to accelerate the shift to zero-emission vehicles.

Swvl, a Dubai-based transit and mobility company, will be expanding into Europe and Latin America after it acquired a controlling interest in Shotl. Shotl, which is in 22 cities across 10 countries, matches passengers with shuttles and vans heading in that same direction. The company partners with governments and municipalities to provide mobility solutions for populations that are underserved by traditional mass transit options. While Swvl declined to share the financials of the transaction, a spokesperson told TechCrunch that the company’s “footprint is being doubled by this acquisition.”

Xos Inc., a manufacturer of electric Class 5 to Class 8 commercial vehicles completed its business combination with NextGen Acquisition Corporation. As a reuslt, Xos made its public debut on the Nasdaq exchange.

Notable reads and other tidbits

Advanced Driver Assistance Systems

Regarding Tesla investigations, when it rains it pours. First, the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration opened a preliminary investigation into Tesla’s Autopilot advanced driver assistance system, citing 11 incidents in which vehicles crashed into parked first responder vehicles while the system was engaged.

The Tesla vehicles involved in the collisions were confirmed to have either have had engaged Autopilot or a feature called Traffic Aware Cruise Control, according to investigation documents posted on the agency’s website. Most of the incidents took place after dark and occurred despite “scene control measures,” such as emergency vehicle lights, road cones and an illuminated arrow board signaling drivers to change lanes.

A few days later, Senators Edward Markey (D-Mass.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) asked the new chair of the Federal Trade Commission to investigate Tesla’s statements about the autonomous capabilities of its Autopilot and Full Self-Driving systems. The senators expressed particular concern over Tesla misleading customers into thinking their vehicles are capable of fully autonomous driving.

“Tesla’s marketing has repeatedly overstated the capabilities of its vehicles, and these statements increasingly pose a threat to motorists and other users of the road,” they said. “Accordingly, we urge you to open an investigation into potentially deceptive and unfair practices in Tesla’s advertising and marketing of its driving automation systems and take appropriate enforcement action to ensure the safety of all drivers on the road.”

Autonomous Vehicles

Waymo, Alphabet’s self-driving arm, is seriously scaling up its autonomous trucking operations across Texas, Arizona and California. The company said it was building a dedicated trucking hub in Dallas and partnering with Ryder for fleet management services.

The Dallas hub will be a central launch point for testing not only the Waymo Driver, but also its transfer hub model, which is a mix of automated and manual trucking that optimizes transfer hubs near highways to ensure the Waymo Driver is sticking to main thoroughfares and human drivers are handling first and last mile deliveries.

Electric vehicles

Canoo is expecting 25,000 units out of its manufacturing partner VDL Nedcar’s facility by 2023, CEO Tony Aquila said during the company’s quarterly earnings call.

Year over year, Canoo upped its workforce from 230 to 656 total employees, 70% of which are hardware and software engineers. The startup’s operating expenses have increased from $19.8 million to $104.3 million YOY, with the majority of that increase coming from R&D.

Ford, Stellantis, Toyota and Volkswagen are among the carmakers this week that have announced production cuts in response to the ongoing global shortage of semiconductors. It’s been a grim week.

A brief run-down: Toyota said it anticipated a production drop of anywhere from 60,000-90,000 vehicles across North America in August. Then Ford joined the chorus, saying it would temporarily close its F-150 factory in Kansas City. Volkswagen told Reuters it couldn’t “rule out further changes to production” in light of the chip shortage. And finally, Stellantis is halting production at one of its factories in France.

Tesla unveiled what it’s calling the “D1” computer chip to power its advanced AI training supercomputer, Dojo, at its AI Day on Thursday. According to Tesla director Ganesh Venkataramanan, the D1 has GPU-level compute with CPU connectivity and twice the I/O bandwidth of “the state of the art networking switch chips that are out there today and are supposed to be the gold standards.”

Venkataramanan also revealed a “training tile” that integrates multiple chips to get higher bandwidth and an incredible computing power of 9 petaflops per tile and 36 terabytes per second of bandwidth. Together, the training tiles compose the Dojo supercomputer.

But there was more, of course. CEO Elon Musk also unveiled that the company is developing a humanoid robot, with a prototype expected in 2022. The bot is being proposed as a non-automotive robotic use case for the company’s work on neural networks and its Dojo advanced supercomputer.

Reality check: Tesla is not the first automaker, or company, to dip its toe into humanoid robot development.  Honda’s Asimo robot has been around for decades, Toyota and GM have their own robots and Hyundai recently acquired robotics company Boston Dynamic.

The full rundown of Tesla’s AI Day can be found here.

In-car tech

General Motors and AT&T will be rolling out 5G connectivity in select Chevy, Cadillac and GMC vehicles from model year 2024, in a boost that the two companies say will bring more reliable software updates, faster navigation and downloads and better coverage on roadways.

5G technology has generated a lot of hype for its promises to boost speed and reduce latency across a range of industries, a next-gen tech that everyone thought would change the world far sooner than now. That hasn’t happened (yet), in part because network rollout was much slower than people anticipated. So this announcement can be taken as a clear signal that, at the very least, AT&T thinks its 5G network will be mature enough to handle “millions” of connected vehicles by 2024.

Ride-hailing

RubiRides, a new ride-hailing company focuses on transporting kids, launched in the Washington D.C. metro area. The ride-hailing service is designed for children ages 7 and older. But the service also offers ride services for seniors and people with special needs. The company was founded by Noreen Butler, who was inspired to start the company after searching for transportation to support the busy schedules of her children.

News: India’s Zetwerk valued at $1.33 billion in new funding

An Indian startup that operates a business-to-business marketplace for manufacturing items is the latest to attain the coveted unicorn status in the South Asian market. Bangalore-based Zetwerk said on Monday it has raised $150 million in a Series E financing round led by New York based D1 Capital Partners. New investors Avenir and IIFL also

An Indian startup that operates a business-to-business marketplace for manufacturing items is the latest to attain the coveted unicorn status in the South Asian market.

Bangalore-based Zetwerk said on Monday it has raised $150 million in a Series E financing round led by New York based D1 Capital Partners. New investors Avenir and IIFL also participated in the round, along with existing investors Greenoaks Capital, Lightspeed Venture Partners, Sequoia Capital and Accel Partners.

The new investment values Zetwerk at $1.33 billion, twice of $600 million-$700 million it was valued at in its Series D round in February this year. The round also included several high-profile angel investors including Kunal Shah of CRED and Ritesh Aggarwal of OYO.

The four-year-old startup runs a business-to-business marketplace for manufacturing items that connects OEMs (original equipment manufacturers) and EPC (engineering procurement construction) customers with manufacturing small-businesses and enterprises.

All the products it sells today are custom-made. “Nobody has a stock of such inventories. You get the order, you find manufacturers and workshops that make them,” explained Amrit Acharya, co-founder and chief executive of Zetwerk, in an interview with TechCrunch earlier this year.
The startup said its revenue grew approximately three times in 2020-21, but didn’t disclose figures.

“In a short period of time, we believe Zetwerk has become a leader in delivering fast and cost-effective manufacturing solutions to companies globally and accelerating the pace of digital transformation of a very traditional industry,” said Jeremy Goldstein of D1 Capital Partners.

The startup plans to deploy the fresh capital to broaden its technology stack and expand to more international markets.

“Zetwerk is helping enterprises navigate the shift to digital manufacturing amidst rapidly changing global supply chains,” said Acharya. “Over the last year, more than 100 western companies have moved their supply chains to India via Zetwerk, across industrial and consumer products.”

Zetwerk is the 25th Indian startup to become a unicorn this year, up from 11 last year, as high-profile global investors double down on their bets in India.

More to follow…

News: Tencent in talks to lead funding in India’s Pocket FM

Tencent is in advanced stages of talks to lead an investment round in Gurgaon-headquartered Pocket FM, the latest in the Chinese giant’s push to broaden its consumer internet portfolio in the Indian market. The Chinese firm, which is already an investor in Pocket FM, is in talks to lead a ~20-25 million round in Pocket

Tencent is in advanced stages of talks to lead an investment round in Gurgaon-headquartered Pocket FM, the latest in the Chinese giant’s push to broaden its consumer internet portfolio in the Indian market.

The Chinese firm, which is already an investor in Pocket FM, is in talks to lead a ~20-25 million round in Pocket FM, according to three people with knowledge of the matter. The proposed term values the three-year-old startup between $75 million to $100 million, two people said. Existing investors Times Internet’s Brand Capital and Lightspeed are also participating in the round.

The round hasn’t closed, so the terms may change. Tencent and Pocket FM declined to comment.

Pocket FM operates an eponymous app that offers users podcasts and audiobooks in English and several Indian languages. On its website, the service says its catalog is over 10,000 hours. The startup works with several creators to produce audiobooks.

The app is available in a freemium model. It has a paid subscription as well as an ad-supported free version.

The investment talks come at a time when a range of Indian startups are beginning to launch in — or expand to — audio category. Indian social network ShareChat, for instance, launched a Clubhouse-like feature earlier this year.

Pocket FM will be Tencent’s latest bet in India’s consumer internet space. The Chinese giant is also a major investor in music streaming service Gaana and on-demand video streaming player MX Player.

Tencent slowed its the pace of investments in India last year after New Delhi amended a rule to require Chinese companies to take its approval before backing Indian firms. It has become more active in recent quarters, investing through debt instead of equity with a convertible note.

News: Mobility startup Plentywaka picks up $1.5M seed, acquires Ghana’s Stabus

Lagos and Toronto-based mobility startup Plentywaka has raised a $1.2 million seed round to scale its operations on the back of leaving the Techstars Toronto accelerator program last month.  Canadian-based VC firm The Xchange led the round, SOSV and Shock Ventures participated, while Techstars Toronto made a follow-on investment. Nigerian firms Argentil Capital Partners and

Lagos and Toronto-based mobility startup Plentywaka has raised a $1.2 million seed round to scale its operations on the back of leaving the Techstars Toronto accelerator program last month. 

Canadian-based VC firm The Xchange led the round, SOSV and Shock Ventures participated, while Techstars Toronto made a follow-on investment. Nigerian firms Argentil Capital Partners and ODBA & Co Ventures took part in the seed round, alongside some angel investors from Canada, other parts of Africa, and the U.S.

In March, when TechCrunch covered Plentywaka, CEO Onyeka Akumah said the two-year-old company eyed both regional and global expansion. There hasn’t been much development on the latter except that the company set up its headquarters in Canada. However, for the former, it’s in the form of an acquisition. The company says it has fully acquired Ghanaian mobility startup Stabus but declined to comment on the acquisition price.

Plentywaka is primarily a bus-booking platform but, per its website, has over 900 vehicles ranging from cars to vans to buses. The company provides intrastate travel (via its Dailywaka offering) and interstate travel (via its Travelwaka offering) for its users via a mobile application. Since going live in September 2019,  Plentywaka says it has acquired over 80,000 users while completing up to half a million rides.

Stabus, on the other hand, commenced operations in Ghana a month after Plentywaka’s launch. Its co-founder and CEO, Isidore Kpotufe, shared that the startup has since moved over 100,000 people within the country’s capital city Accra using different vehicles.

Plentywaka

The Plentywaka and Stabus executives

Akumah tells TechCrunch that before talks on an acquisition started, he and Kpotufe kept in touch frequently on a personal and business level since they launched their respective companies two years ago.

Then in April this year, Isidore, intrigued by the pace at which Plentywaka was scaling, asked Akumah if his company had plans to scale to Ghana. The Plentywaka CEO answered in the affirmative, revealing a timeline edging towards the end of the year. That meant competition, but the duo thought the better outcome for both companies was to merge.

“Isidore is someone I’ve known for going to two years now. And I’ve seen what he has done with Stabus and I understand exactly how they operate. So it was an easy yes for us to do this,” Akumah said to TechCrunch.

The complexities of what structure to use came up; run with the Stabus brand or change it. Eventually, they settled for the latter, renaming the acquired 12,000-user strong business to Plentywaka Ghana. Some of Stabus’ (now Plentywaka Ghana) customers include multinationals like MTN and GB Foods. Meanwhile, Kpotufe becomes Country Manager of the new business.

“Plentywaka’s acquisition of Stabus is a firm statement about our commitment to grow and build the largest shared mobility startup in Africa, one country at a time. Isidore is a brilliant entrepreneur and we are excited about having him and his team execute our plans for the Ghanaian market,” Akumah said in a statement.

In Nigeria, the company caters to travelers across 21 cities. Travelers in Accra will begin to use the service when Plentywaka Ghana goes live on September 16. And the next plan after Accra is to replicate the expansion in six other African countries within 24 months. Akumah also mentioned that Plentywaka is raising its Series A to ramp up these expansion efforts.

“We are incredibly excited by our investment in Plentywaka. Techstars is a huge believer in the future of Africa and a proud supporter of African entrepreneurs. Onyeka is a two-time Techstars founder which deepens this relationship further,” managing director of Techstars Sunil Sharma said in a statement.

Speaking on the seed round, managing partner at lead investor The Xchange, Todd Finch said, “The Xchange is on a mission to fuel purpose-driven founders with the capital and resources they need to realize the world-changing potential of their ideas. Given Onyeka’s proven track record, his team’s undeniable thirst for making an impact, and Plentywaka’s impressive growth, we knew this was an opportunity we wanted to invest in.” 

News: Blockchain startup XREX gets $17M to make cross-border trade faster

A substantial portion of the world’s trade is done in United States dollars, creating problems for businesses in countries with a dollar shortage. Blockchain startup XREX was launched to help cross-border businesses in emerging markets perform faster transactions with products like a payment escrow service and crypto-fiat exchange platform. The Taipei-headquartered company announced today it has

Blockchain startup co-founders Winston Hsiao and Wayne Huang in front of the company's logo

XREX co-founders Winston Hsiao and Wayne Huang

A substantial portion of the world’s trade is done in United States dollars, creating problems for businesses in countries with a dollar shortage. Blockchain startup XREX was launched to help cross-border businesses in emerging markets perform faster transactions with products like a payment escrow service and crypto-fiat exchange platform.

The Taipei-headquartered company announced today it has raised $17 million in pre-Series A funding led by CDIB Capital Group. The oversubscribed round also included participation from SBI Investment (a subsidiary of SBI Holdings), Global Founders Capital, ThreeD Capital, E.Sun Venture Capital, Systex Corporation, MetaPlanet Holdings, AppWorks, BlackMarble, New Economy Ventures and Seraph Group. XREX’s last funding was a $7 million seed round in 2019.

Part of the new round will be use to apply for financial licenses in Singapore, Hong Kong and South Africa, and partner with banks and financial institutions, like payment gateways.

“We specifically wanted to build a regulatory-friendly cap table,” XREX co-founder and chief executive officer Wayne Huang told TechCrunch. “It’s really hard for a startup like us to raise from banks and public companies, but as you can see, this round we deliberately to do that and we were successful.”

Huang sold his previous startup, anti-malware SaaS developer Armorize Technologies, to Proofpoint in 2013. Armorize analyzed source code to find vulnerabilities, and many of its clients were developers in Bangalore and Chennai, so Huang spent a lot of time traveling there.

“We ran into all sorts of cross-border money transfer issues. It seemed almost unstoppable,” Huang said. “Growing up in the U.S. and then in Taiwan, we were not exposed to those issues. So that planted a seed, and then when Satoshi [Nakamoto] published the bitcoin white paper, of course that was a big thing for all cybersecurity experts.”

He began thinking of how blockchain can support financial inclusion in emerging markets like India. The idea came to fruition Huang teamed up with XREX co-founder Winston Hsiao, the founder of BTCEx-TW, one of Taiwan’s first bitcoin exchanges. Hsiao grew up in India and founded Verico International, exporting Taiwan-manufactured semiconductors and electronics to other countries, so he was also familiar with cross-border trade issues.

XREX Crypto Services give merchants, especially those in countries with low U.S. dollar liquidity, tools to conduct trade in digital fiat currencies. “They have to get quick access to the U.S. dollar and be able to pay it out quick enough for them to secure important commodities that they want to import, and that’s the problem we want to solve,” said Huang.

To use the platform, merchants and their customers sign up for XREX’s wallet, which includes a commercial escrow service called Bitcheck. Huang said it is similar to having a standby letter of credit from a commercial bank, because buyers can use it to guarantee they will be able to make payments. Bitcheck uses digital currencies like USDT and USDC, stablecoins that are pegged to the U.S. dollar.

Merchants pay stablecoin to suppliers and XREX escrows the funds until the supplier provides proof of shipment, at which point it moves the payment to them. XREX’s crypto-fiat exchange allows users to convert USDT and USDC to U.S. dollars, which they can also withdraw and deposit through the platform.

Part of XREX’s funding will be used to expand its fiat currency platform, though Huang said it doesn’t plan to add too many cryptocurrencies “because we’re not built for crypto traders, we’re built for businesses and brand really matters to them. Brand and compliance, so whatever the U.S. Comptroller of the Currency says is a good stablecoin is what they’re going to use.”

Some of XREX’s partners include compliance and anti-money laundering providers like CipherTrace, Sum&Substance and TRISA. Part of XREX’s funding will be used to expand its security and compliance features, including Public Profiles, which are mandatory for customers, and user Reputation Index to increase transparency.

In a statement about the funding, CDIB Capital Innovation Fund head Ryan Kuo said, “CDIB was an early investor in XREX. After witnessing the company’s fast revenue growth and their commitment to compliance, we were determined to double our investment and lead this strategic round.”

News: Gillmor Gang: Cryptonomics

Twitter seems on an aggressive path to putting pedal to the metal. From its earliest days as a failwhale generator and a ransacker of third party successes, the company under Jack Dorsey’s stewardship has become an acquirer of tools to support the creators it hosts. Twitter Spaces, its Clubhouse clone, has steadily improved its UI

Twitter seems on an aggressive path to putting pedal to the metal. From its earliest days as a failwhale generator and a ransacker of third party successes, the company under Jack Dorsey’s stewardship has become an acquirer of tools to support the creators it hosts. Twitter Spaces, its Clubhouse clone, has steadily improved its UI with integration of relevant tweets at the top of a space and Twitter graph awareness of listeners. When I most recently joined a Kara Swisher spacecast, my icon appeared at the top of the window right after the host and invited speakers. But next to me on the listener list was Dan Farber, my Salesforce colleague and frequent Gillmor Gang member over the years.

What I think is going on is a personalization based on my Twitter social graph. A subtle touch, but much more interesting to me than some sort of global Twitter ranking that factors in celebrities and other signals not as relevant as what the feature reflects, an algorithm of, to borrow a phrase, influencer rank. Not influence at a social level, but guided by my own internal algorithm, that if I was looking for friends in a space of over a thousand people, Dan is now a simple direct message away when I click on his icon.

There are other tweaks in Spaces, but the most important one may turn out to be integration of Spaces metadata in the new Twitter API v2. In effect, this capability could be harnessed by third party developers to create their own algorithms around Space dynamics and listener uptake by host, speakers, topics, and scheduled events. Other contiguous projects include a pilot to wire up your Twitter profile to your Revue newsletter. Clicking on the link takes you to a page detailing recent newsletters and links to joining as a subscriber. Twitter, which bought Revue to compete with Substack, is extending clever integration points like Revue’s RSS-enabled drag and drop support for feeds you can mine for citations as you build your newsletter.

A few weeks or months ago, I wouldn’t have paid much attention to the growing conversation around crypto. That would include Jack Dorsey’s moves in his companies Square and Twitter to promote the possibilities of the blockchain and growing attention from Congress and regulatory agencies. Eye opening was the impact on the bipartisan Infrastructure bill, where an anti-crypto tax-related amendment threatened to slow down Senate adoption before failing. But Twitter’s success at consolidating various assets around the growth of the subscription and social audio sectors makes me think at least twice about other things being connected. On this Gillmor Gang episode, Keith Teare and the Gang rehash the same ground about the viability of crypto. But it’s hard to argue that, whether or not anyone can answer the question of what problem crypto solves, it may factor into a surprising variety of solutions.

the latest Gillmor Gang Newsletter

__________________

The Gillmor Gang — Frank Radice, Michael Markman, Keith Teare, Denis Pombriant, Brent Leary and Steve Gillmor. Recorded live Friday, July 23, 2021.

Produced and directed by Tina Chase Gillmor @tinagillmor

@fradice, @mickeleh, @denispombriant, @kteare, @brentleary, @stevegillmor, @gillmorgang

Subscribe to the new Gillmor Gang Newsletter and join the backchannel here on Telegram.

The Gillmor Gang on Facebook … and here’s our sister show G3 on Facebook.

News: Suing your way to the stars

Hello friends, and welcome back to Week in Review! I’m back from a very fun and rehabilitative couple weeks away from my phone, my Twitter account and the news cycle. That said, I actually really missed writing this newsletter, and while Greg did a fantastic job while I was out, I won’t be handing over

Hello friends, and welcome back to Week in Review!

I’m back from a very fun and rehabilitative couple weeks away from my phone, my Twitter account and the news cycle. That said, I actually really missed writing this newsletter, and while Greg did a fantastic job while I was out, I won’t be handing over the reins again anytime soon. Plenty happened this week and I struggled to zero in on a single topic to address, but I finally chose to focus on Bezos’s Blue Origin suing NASA.

If you’re reading this on the TechCrunch site, you can get this in your inbox from the newsletter page, and follow my tweets @lucasmtny.


The big thing

I was going to write about OnlyFans for the newsletter this week and their fairly shocking move to ban sexually explicit content from their site in a bid to stay friendly with payment processors, but alas I couldn’t help myself and wrote an article for ole TechCrunch dot com instead. Here’s a link if you’re curious.

Now, I should also note that while I was on vacation I missed all of the conversation surrounding Apple’s incredibly controversial child sexual abuse material detection software that really seems to compromise the perceived integrity of personal devices. I’m not alone in finding this to be a pretty worrisome development despite Apple’s intention of staving off a worse alternative. Hopefully, one of these weeks I’ll have the time to talk with some of the folks in the decentralized computing space about how our monolithic reliance on a couple tech companies operating with precious little consumer input is very bad. In the meantime, I will point you to some reporting from TechCrunch’s own Zack Whittaker on the topic which you should peruse because I’m sure it will be a topic I revisit here in the future.

Now then! Onto the topic at hand.

Federal government agencies don’t generally inspire much adoration. While great things have been accomplished at the behest of ample federal funding and the tireless work of civil servants, most agencies are treated as bureaucratic bloat and aren’t generally seen as anything worth passionately defending. Among the public and technologists in particular, NASA occupies a bit more of a sacred space. The American space agency has generally been a source of bipartisan enthusiasm, as has its goal to return astronauts to the lunar surface by 2024.

Which brings us to some news this week. While so much digital ink was spilled on Jeff Bezos’s little jaunt to the edge of space, cowboy hat, champagne and all, there’s been less fanfare around his space startup’s lawsuit against NASA, which we’ve now learned will delay the development of a new lunar lander by months, potentially throwing NASA’s goal to return astronauts to the moon’s surface on schedule into doubt.

Bezos’s upstart Blue Origin is protesting the fact that they were not awarded a government contract while Elon Musk’s SpaceX earned a $2.89 billion contract to build a lunar lander. This contract wasn’t just recently awarded either, SpaceX won it back in April and Blue Origin had already filed a complaint with the Government Accountability Office. This happened before Bezos penned an open letter promising a $2 billion discount for NASA which had seen budget cuts at the hands of Congress dash its hoped to award multiple contracts. None of these maneuverings proved convincing enough for the folks at NASA, pushing Bezos’s space startup to sue the agency.

This little feud has caused long-minded Twitter users to dig up this little gem from a Bezos 2019 speech — as transcribed by Gizmodo — highlighting Bezos’s own distaste for how bureaucracy and greed have hampered NASA’s ability to reach for the stars:

“To the degree that big NASA programs become seen as jobs programs and that they have to be distributed to the right states where the right Senators live, and so on. That is going to change the objective. Now your objective is not to, you know, whatever it is, to get a man to the moon or a woman to the moon, but instead to get a woman to the moon while preserving X number of jobs in my district. That is a complexifier, and not a healthy one…[…]

Today, there would be, you know, three protests, and the losers would sue the federal government because they didn’t win. It’s interesting, but the thing that slows things down is procurement. It’s become the bigger bottleneck than the technology, which I know for a fact for all the well meaning people at NASA is frustrating.

A Blue Origin spokesperson called the suit, an “attempt to remedy the flaws in the acquisition process found in NASA’s Human Landing System.” But the lawsuit really seems to highlight how dire this deal is to the ability of Blue Origin to lock down top talent. Whether the startup can handle the reputational risk of suing NASA and delaying America’s return to the moon seems to be a question very much worth asking.


Elon Musk, co-founder and chief executive officer of Tesla Inc., speaks during an unveiling event for the Boring Company Hawthorne test tunnel in Hawthorne, south of Los Angeles, California on December 18, 2018.

Photo: ROBYN BECK/AFP via Getty Images

Other things

Here are the TechCrunch news stories that especially caught my eye this week:

OnlyFans bans “sexually explicit content”
A lot of people had pretty visceral reactions to OnlyFans killing off what seems to be a pretty big chunk of its business, outlawing “sexually explicit content” on the platform. It seems the decision was reached as a result of banking and payment partners leaning on the company.

Musk “unveils” the “Tesla Bot”
I truly struggle to even call this news, but I’d be remiss not to highlight how Elon Musk had a guy dress up in a spandex outfit and walk around doing the robot and spawned hundreds of news stories about his new “Tesla Bot.” While there certainly could be a product opportunity here for Tesla at some point, I would bet all of the dogecoin in the world that his prototype “coming next year” either never arrives or falls hilariously short of expectations.

Facebook drops a VR meeting simulator
This week, Facebook released one of its better virtual reality apps, a workplace app designed to help people host meetings inside virtual reality. To be clear, no one really asked for this, but the company made a full court PR press for the app which will help headset owners simulate the pristine experience of sitting in a conference room.

Yes, this looks dumb. But avatar-based work apps are coming for your Zooms, and Facebook made a pretty convincing one here. https://t.co/aGvOW6zm8U

— Lucas Matney (@lucasmtny) August 19, 2021

Social platforms wrestle with Taliban presence on platforms
Following the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan, social media platforms are being pushed to clarify their policies around accounts operated by identified Taliban members. It’s put some of the platforms in a hairy situation.

Facebook releases content transparency report
This week, Facebook released its first ever content transparency report, highlighting what data on the site had the most reach over a given time period, in this case a three-month period. Compared to lists highlighting which posts get the most engagement on the platform, lists generally populated mostly by right wing influencers and news sources, the list of posts with the most reach seems to be pretty benign.

Safety regulators open inquiry into Tesla Autopilot
While Musk talks about building a branded humanoid robot, U.S. safety regulators are concerned with why Tesla vehicles on Autopilot are crashing into so many parked emergency response vehicles.


 

Image Credits: Nigel Sussman

Extra things

Some of my favorite reads from our Extra Crunch subscription service this week:

The Nuro EC-1
“..Dave Ferguson and Jiajun Zhu aren’t the only Google self-driving project employees to launch an AV startup, but they might be the most underrated. Their company, Nuro, is valued at $5 billion and has high-profile partnerships with leaders in retail, logistics and food including FedEx, Domino’s and Walmart. And, they seem to have navigated the regulatory obstacle course with success — at least so far…”

A VC shares 5 keys to pitching VCs
“The success of a fundraising process is entirely dependent on how well an entrepreneur can manage it. At this stage, it is important for founders to be honest, straightforward and recognize the value meetings with venture capitalists and investors can bring beyond just the monetary aspect..

A crash course on corporate development
“…If you’re going to get acquired, chances are you’re going to spend a lot of time with corporate development teams. With a hot stock market, mountains of cash and cheap debt floating around, the environment for acquisitions is extremely rich.”


Thanks for reading! Until next week…

Lucas M.

News: The tough calculus of emissions and the future of EVs

Mark Mills Contributor Share on Twitter Mark Mills is the author of the forthcoming book, “The Cloud Revolution: How the Convergence of New Technologies Will Unleash the Next Economic Boom and a Roaring 2020s.” He is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a Faculty Fellow at Northwestern University’s McCormick School of Engineering. Investors and

Mark Mills
Contributor

Mark Mills is the author of the forthcoming book, “The Cloud Revolution: How the Convergence of New Technologies Will Unleash the Next Economic Boom and a Roaring 2020s.” He is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a Faculty Fellow at Northwestern University’s McCormick School of Engineering.

Investors and politicians embracing a vision of an all-electric car future believe that path will significantly reduce global carbon dioxide emissions. That’s far from clear.

A growing body of research points to the likelihood that widespread replacement of conventional cars with EVs would likely have a relatively small impact on global emissions. And it’s even possible that the outcome would increase emissions.

The issue is not primarily about the emissions resulting from producing electricity. Instead, it’s what we know and don’t know about what happens before an EV is delivered to a customer, namely, the “embodied” emissions arising from the labyrinthine supply chains to obtain and process all the materials needed to fabricate batteries.

All products entail embodied emissions that are ‘hidden’ upstream in production processes, whether it’s a hamburger, a house, a smartphone, or a battery. To see the implications at the macro level, credit France’s High Climate Council for a study issued last year. The analysis found that France’s claim of achieving a national decline in carbon dioxide emissions was illusory. Emissions had in fact increased and were some 70% higher than reported once the embodied emissions inherent in the country’s imports were counted.

Embodied emissions can be devilishly difficult to accurately quantify, and nowhere are there more complexities and uncertainties than with EVs. While an EV self-evidently emits nothing while driving, about 80% of its total lifetime emissions arise from the combination of the embodied energy in fabricating the battery and then in ‘fabricating’ electricity to power the vehicle. The remaining comes from manufacturing the non-fuel parts of the car. That ratio is inverted for a conventional car where about 80% of lifecycle emissions come directly from fuel burned while driving, and the rest comes from the embodied energy to make the car and fabricate gasoline.

Virtually every feature of the fuel-cycle for conventional cars is well-understood and narrowly bounded, significantly monitored if not tightly regulated, and largely assumption-free. That’s not the case for EVs.

For example, one review of fifty academic studies found estimates for embodied emissions to fabricate a single EV battery ranged from a low of about eight tons to as high as 20 tons of CO2. Another recent technical analysis put the range at about four to 14 tons. The high end of those ranges is nearly as much CO2 as is produced by the lifetime of fuel burned by an efficient conventional car. Again, that’s before the EV is delivered to a customer and driven its first mile.

The uncertainties come from inherent—and likely unresolvable—variabilities in both the quantity and type of energy used in the battery fuel cycle with factors that depend on geography and process choices, many often proprietary. Analyses of the embodied energy show a range from two to six barrels of oil (in energy-equivalent terms) is used to fabricate a battery that can store the energy-equivalent of one gallon of gasoline. Thus, any calculation of embodied emissions for an EV battery is an estimate based on myriad assumptions. The fact is, no one can measure today’s or predict tomorrow’s EV carbon dioxide ‘mileage.’

As more dollars flood into government programs and climate-tech funds — 2021 is on track to blow past record 2020 climate-tech investments, with three firms alone, BlackRock, General Atlantic and TPG, each announcing new $4 to $5 billion cleantech funds — we’re overdue for paying serious attention to embodied emissions of EVs and other presumed technological panaceas for reducing carbon dioxide emissions. As we will see shortly, the attention may not reveal the expected outcomes.

Data (on) mining

The goal for any vehicle is to have the fuel system take as small a share of total weight as possible, leaving room for passengers or cargo. Lithium batteries, as revolutionary and Nobel-prize worthy as they are, still constitute a distant second place in the metric of merit for powering untethered machines: energy density.

The inherent energy density of lithium-class chemicals (i.e., not a battery cell, but the raw chemical) can be theoretically as high as about 700 watt-hours per kilogram (Wh/kg). While that’s roughly five-fold greater than the energetics of lead-acid battery chemistry, it’s still a small fraction of the 12,000 Wh/kg available in petroleum.

To achieve the same driving range as 60 pounds of gasoline, an EV battery weighs about 1,000 pounds. Not much of that gap is closed by the lower weight of an electric versus gasoline motor because the former is typically only about 200 pounds lighter than the latter.

Manufacturers offset some of a battery’s weight penalty by lightening the rest of the EV using more aluminum or carbon-fiber instead of steel. Unfortunately, those materials are respectively 300% and 600% more energy intensive per pound to produce than steel. Using a half ton of aluminum, common in many EVs, adds six tons of CO2 to the non-battery embodied emissions (a factor most analyses ignore.) But it’s with all the other elements, the ones needed to fabricate the battery itself, where the emissions accounting gets messy.

There are many combinations of elements possible for lithium battery chemistries. Choices are dictated by compromises to meet a battery’s mix of performance metrics: safety, density, charge rate, lifespan, etc. Depending on the specific formulation chosen, the embodied energy associated with the key battery chemicals themselves can vary by as much as 600%.

Consider the key elements in the widely used nickel-cobalt formulation. A typical 1,000-pound EV battery contains about 30 pounds of lithium, 60 pounds of cobalt, 130 pounds of nickel, 190 pounds of graphite, and 90 pounds of copper. (The balance of the weight is with steel, aluminum, and plastic.)

Uncertainties in the embodied energy begin with the ore grade, or share of rock that contains each target mineral. Ore grades can range from a few percent to as little as 0.1 percent depending on the mineral, the mine, and over time. Using today’s averages, the quantity of ore mined—necessarily using energy-intensive heavy equipment—for one single EV battery is about: 10 tons of lithium brines to get to the 30 pounds of lithium; 30 tons of ore to get 60 pounds of cobalt; 5 tons for the 130 pounds of nickel; 6 tons for the 90 pounds of copper; and about one ton of ore for the 190 pounds of graphite.

Aerial view of trucks loading brine from the evaporation pools of the new state-owned lithium extraction complex, in the southern zone of the Uyuni Salt Flat, Bolivia, on July 10, 2019. Image Credits: PABLO COZZAGLIO/AFP via Getty Images

Then, one must add to that tonnage the “over-burden,” the amount of earth that’s first removed in order to access the mineral-bearing ore. That quantity also varies widely, depending on ore type and geology, typically from about three to seven tons excavated to access one ton of ore. Putting all the factors together, fabricating a single half-ton EV battery can entail digging up and moving a total of about 250 tons of earth. After that, an aggregate total of roughly 50 tons of ore are transported and processed to separate out the targeted minerals.

Embodied energy is also impacted by a mine’s location, something that is in theory knowable today but is a guessing-game regarding the future. Remote mining sites typically involve more trucking and depend on more off-grid electricity, the latter commonly supplied by diesel generators. As it stands today, the mineral sector alone accounts for nearly 40% of global industrial energy use. And over one-half of the world’s batteries or the key battery chemicals are produced in Asia with its coal-dominated electric grids. Despite hopes for more factories in Europe and North America, every forecast sees Asia utterly dominating that supply chain for a long time.

The wide variability of power grids and batteries

Most analyses of EV emissions don’t ignore the embodied carbon debt in batteries. But that factor is typically, and simplistically, assigned a single value in order to calculate the variabilities arising from using EVs on different electric grids.

A recent analysis from the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT) is usefully illustrative. The ICCT, using a fixed carbon debt for a battery, focused on how the EV carbon footprint varies depending on where it’s driven in Europe. The calculations showed that, compared to a fuel-efficient conventional car, an EV’s lifecycle emissions can range from as much as 60% lower when driven in Norway or France, to about 25% lower when driven in the U.K., to tiny emissions reduction if driven in Germany. (Germany’s grid has roughly the same average carbon emissions per kilowatt-hour as does America’s.)

Their analysis used average grid emissions data that don’t necessarily represent emissions that occur when plugged in. But the specific time, not the average, determines the actual source of electricity used for ‘fueling.’ No such ambiguities attend to the location and time of gasoline use; it’s always the same anytime and anywhere on the planet. While the EV time factor has minimal variability in Norway and France where most electricity comes around the clock from hydro and nuclear respectively, it can vary wildly elsewhere from, say, 100% solar to 100% coal depending on the time of day, month and location.

The lignite-fired power station of Boxberg in Germany. The region of Lusatia in the east of Germany and its economic infrastructure is heavily dependent on the coal-fired power plants in Jaenschwalde, Schwarze Pumpe and Boxberg. Image Credits: Florian Gaertner/Photothek via Getty Images

Another recent ICCT analysis also used annualized grid averages and calculated that, compared to an average car, lifecycle emissions reductions range from about 25% for EVs in India to 70% in Europe. But, as with the similar exercise for intra-European comparisons, a single, fixed carbon debt for battery fabrication was assumed, and a low value at that.

There is good reason to consider the implications of the range of embodied battery emissions, rather than a single, low average value, because the IEA (amongst others) reports that most mineral production today entails processes at the higher end of emissions “intensity.” Adjusting the ICCT outcomes for that reality lowers the calculated lifecycle EV emissions savings to about 40% (instead of 60%) driving in Norway, to little or no reduction in the U.K. or the Netherlands, and about a 20% increase for EVs driven in Germany.

That’s not the end of the real-world uncertainties. The ICCT, again typical of many similar analyses, made calculations based on batteries 30% to 60% smaller than the size required to replicate the 300-mile range needed for widespread replacement of conventional cars. The larger batteries are common on high-end EVs today. Doubling the size of the battery leads to a straightforward doubling of its carbon debt which, in turn, dramatically erodes or eliminates lifecycle emissions savings in many, maybe most places.

Similarly problematic, one finds forecasts of future emissions savings often explicitly assume that the future battery supply chain will be located in the country where the EVs operate. One widely cited analysis assumed aluminum demand for U.S. EVs would be met by domestic smelters and powered mainly from hydro dams. While that may be theoretically possible, it doesn’t reflect reality. The United States, for example, produces just 6% of global aluminum. If one assumes instead the industrial processes are located in Asia, the calculated lifecycle emissions are 150% higher.

For EV carbon accounting, the problem is that there are no reporting mechanisms or standards even remotely equivalent to the transparency with which petroleum is obtained, refined, and consumed. The challenges in having accurate data are not lost on the researchers, even if those concerns don’t percolate up into executive summaries and media claims. In the technical literature one often finds cautionary statements such as a “greater understanding of the energy required to manufacture Li-ion battery cells is crucial for properly assessing the environmental implications of a rapidly increasing use of Li-ion batteries.” Or in another recent research paper: “Unfortunately, industry data for the rest of the battery materials remain meager to nonexistent, forcing LCA [lifecycle analysis] researchers to resort to engineering calculations or approximations to fill the data gaps.”

Those “data gaps” become chasms when it comes to expanding the world’s mineral supply chain to support the production of tens of millions of more EVs.

Turning up the volume

Perhaps the most important wildcard is the expected rise in energy costs associated with obtaining the necessary quantities of “energy transition minerals,” (ETMs) as the International Energy Agency (IEA) terms them.

Earlier this year, the agency issued a major report on the challenges of supplying ETMs to build batteries as well as solar and wind machines. The report reinforces what others have earlier pointed out. Compared to conventional cars, EVs require using, overall, about 500% more critical minerals per vehicle. Thus, the IEA concludes that current plans for EVs, along with plans for wind and solar, will require a 300% to 4,000% increase in global mine output for the necessary suite of key minerals.

The fact that an EV uses, for example, about 300 to 400% more copper than a conventional car has yet to impact global supply chain because EVs still account for less than 1% of the total global auto fleet. Producing EVs at scale, along with plans for grid batteries as well as for wind and solar machines, will push the “clean energy” sector up to consuming over half of all global copper (from today’s 20% level). For nickel and cobalt, to note two other relevant minerals, “transition” aspirations will push clean energy use of those two metals to 60% and 70%, respectively of global demand, up from a negligible share today.

Tesla Inc. vehicles in a parking lot after arriving at a port in Yokohama, Japan, on Monday, May 10, 2021. Image Credits: Toru Hanai/Bloomberg via Getty Images

To illustrate the ultimate scale of demand that EV mandates alone will place on mining, consider that a world with 500 million electric cars—which would still constitute under half of all vehicles—would require mining a quantity of energy minerals sufficient to build batteries for about 3 trillion smartphones. That’s equal to over 2,000 years of mining and production for the latter. For the record, that many EVs would eliminate only about 15% of world oil use.

Set aside the environmental, economic, and geopolitical implications of such a staggering expansion of global mining. The World Bank cautions about “a new suite of challenges for the sustainable development of minerals and resources.” Such an increase in mining has direct relevance for predictions about the future carbon intensity for minerals because acquiring raw materials already accounts for nearly one half of the life-cycle carbon dioxide emissions for EVs.

As the IEA report also observes, ETMs not only have a “high emissions intensity,” but trends show that the energy-use-per-pound mined has been rising because of long-standing declines in ore grades. If mineral demands accelerate, miners will necessarily chase ever lower grade ores, and increasingly in more remote locations. The IEA sees, for example, a 300% to 600% increase in emissions to produce each pound of lithium and nickel respectively.

Nickel mine, Thio, New Caledonia, French Overseas Collectivity, France. Image Credits: DeAgostini/Getty Images

Trends with copper are illustrative of the challenge. From 1930 to 1970, advances in the post-mining chemical processes led to a 30% drop in energy use to produce a ton of copper even though ore grades slowly declined. But those were one-time gains as optimized processes approached physics limits. Thus, during the four decades after 1970, as ore grade continued to decline, energy use per ton of copper increased, and returned to the same level as in 1930. That will be the pattern for the near future as ore grades continue to decline for other minerals.

Nonetheless, the IEA, like others, uses today’s putative average supply-chain emissions intensity to assert that EVs in the future will reduce emissions. But the data in the IEA’s own report point to rising embodied emissions for ETMs. Add to this the implications of far more solar and wind construction, which the IEA notes require 500% to 700% more minerals compared to building a natural gas power plant, and we’ll see even more pressure on the mining supply chain — which, in the commodity world, points to a dramatic rise in prices.

If the EV share of vehicles rises from today’s less than 1% and begins to approach a 10% share, the resource experts at Wood Mackenzie see untenable material demands: “Unless battery technology can be developed, tested, commercialised, manufactured and integrated into EVs and their supply chains faster than ever before, it will be impossible for many EV targets and ICE (internal combustion engine) bans to be achieved – posing issues for current EV adoption rate projections.”

There’s no evidence of capabilities to accelerate industry-class chemical development and manufacturing, or mining, in the short time-periods common in policy aspirations. Nearly three decades passed after the discovery of lithium battery chemistry before the first Tesla sedan.

Chasing carbon efficiencies in the battery supply chains

There are, of course, ways to ameliorate some of the factors that are dragging the world toward a future with increasing EV supply-chain emissions: better battery chemistry (reducing materials needed per kilowatt-hour of stored energy), more efficient chemical processes, electrifying mining equipment, and recycling. All of these are often offered as “inevitable” or “necessary” solutions. But none can have a significant impact in the time frames contemplated for rapid EV expansion.

Even though popular news stories frequently claim some “breakthrough,” there are no commercially viable alternative battery chemistries that significantly change the order-of-magnitude of the physical materials needed per electric-vehicle-mile. In most cases, changing chemistry formulations merely shifts burdens.

For example, reducing the use of cobalt is generally achieved by increasing nickel content. As for chemistries that eliminate the use of energetic atoms of, say, carbon or nickel, using instead, for example, more prosaic and low-energy-intensity elements like iron (e.g., the lithium-iron-phosphate battery), such formulations have lower energy density. The latter means a bigger, heavier battery is needed to maintain vehicle range. Still, it is reasonable to imagine the eventual discovery of a foundationally superior classes of battery chemistries. But once validated, it then takes many years to safely scale-up industrial chemical systems. Batteries put into cars today, and for the near future, will necessarily use technologies available now and not theoretically available someday.

Then there’s the prospect for improving the efficiency of the various chemical processes used in the mineral refining and conversion processes. Improvements there are inevitable, in no small part because that’s what engineers always do, and in the digital era they will more often find success. But there are no known “step function” changes on the horizon in the well-trod field of physical chemistry where processes already operate near physics limits. Put differently, lithium batteries are now well past the early stages where one sees rapid improvements in process (and cost) efficiencies and have entered the stage of incremental gains.

As for electrifying mining trucks and equipment, Caterpillar, Deere and Case (and others) all have such projects, and even a few production machines for sale. Promising designs are on the horizon for a few specific applications, but batteries are not up to the 24×7 performance demands to power heavy equipment in most uses. Moreover, the turnover rate in mining and industrial equipment is measured in decades. Mines will use a lot of oil-fired equipment for a very long time.

Finally, there’s recycling, commonly proposed to mitigate new demands. Even if all batteries were entirely recycled, it couldn’t come close to meeting the enormous increase in demand that will arise from the proposed (or mandated) growth path for EVs. In any case, there are unresolved technical challenges regarding the efficacy and economics of recycling critical minerals from complex machines, especially batteries. While one might imagine someday having automated recycling capabilities, nothing like that exists now. And given the variety of present and future battery designs, there’s no clear path to such capabilities in the timeframes policymakers and EV proponents have in mind.

Legal chaos and EV emissions credits

The unavoidable fact is that there are so many assumptions, guesses, and ambiguities that any claims of EV emissions reductions will be subject to manipulation if not fraud. Much of the necessary data may never be collectable in any normal regulatory fashion given the technical uncertainties, the variety and opacity of geographic factors, as well as the proprietary nature of many of the processes. Even so, the Securities and Exchange Commission is apparently considering such disclosure requirements. The uncertainties in the EV ecosystem could lead to legal havoc if European and U.S. regulators enshrine “green disclosures” in legally binding ways, or enforce “responsible” ESG metrics regarding carbon dioxide emissions.

For policymakers eager to reduce automotive oil use, engineers have already invented an easier and more certain way to achieve that goal while awaiting revolutions in battery chemistry and mining. Commercially viable combustion engines already exist that can cut fuel use by as much as 50%. Capturing just half that potential by providing incentives for consumers to purchase more efficient engines would be cheaper, faster—and transparently verifiable—than adding 300 million EVs to the world’s roads.

News: Y Combinator, 500 Startups, Plug and Play invest in Odiggo’s $2.2M seed round

Servicing one’s car personally is a time-consuming, expensive and painstaking process. It’s a cycle that can lead to more expensive repairs and safety issues down the line, and no car owner likes that. Egypt and Dubai-based auto tech startup Odiggo is a platform addressing this problem. It allows car owners to get the help they

Servicing one’s car personally is a time-consuming, expensive and painstaking process. It’s a cycle that can lead to more expensive repairs and safety issues down the line, and no car owner likes that.

Egypt and Dubai-based auto tech startup Odiggo is a platform addressing this problem. It allows car owners to get the help they need by finding car services and parts suppliers from providers around them. Then for the suppliers, it increases their sales and reaches more customers without necessarily spending on marketing.

Odiggo is part of the current YC Summer batch and has secured a $2.2 million seed round before Demo Day. The rosters of existing investors participating in the round are Y Combinator, 500 Startups, and Plug and Play Ventures. Regional VCs like Seedra Ventures, LoftyInc Capital, and Essa Al-Saleh (CEO of Volta-Tucks) also took part.

Ahmed Omar and Ahmed Nasser launched Odiggo in December 2019. The company operates a marketplace that connects car owners with service providers who can solve their problems, from servicing and repair to washing and maintenance. A commission-based model is used and Odiggo charges the car suppliers 20% commission on every transaction.

Over 50,000 car owners across three markets — Egypt, the UAE and Saudi Arabia — use Odiggo. The company also works directly with over 300 merchants. It claims merchant numbers have grown 40% month-on-month while its user base has increased 200% since the start of the pandemic.

We believe we are at a watershed moment. It is incredible that since COVID hit, Odiggo has experienced over 10 times growth in the last year,” said co-founder Omar. 

CEO Omar said with this new round, Odiggo’s priority will be to attain consistent growth while expanding its team across the UEA, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

Odiggo

L-R: Ahmed Nassir (co-founder) & Ahmed Omar (co-founder and CEO)

He adds that since Odiggo taps into a mix of data sources — including car metrics and internal software, it will use that same information to provide more product offerings.

Odiggo will use part of the funding to continue developing its tech and dashboard software, he said.

“For example, the platform would be hooked up to the car owner’s vehicle and link the vehicle to the marketplace and provide frequent updates of your vehicle condition so you’ll be informed if the tires are low, the oil needs changing, or if a service is required.”

The pandemic has upended the mobility and logistics sectors, especially in MENA, making players like Odiggo gain much visibility from investors. In an industry today worth over $61 billion in the Middle East and Africa alone, Odiggo is looking to become a market leader. It has even more lofty plans to go public in the next three years.

“We are also aiming to be fully focused on spending more on our product and technology, as building an ecosystem to monetize requires more capital. Our target is to go for IPO by 2024 and achieve one billion services booked, and this requires a lot of network effects, infrastructure and technology,” the CEO said.

“We aim to be the first $100 billion company coming out of the region,” added Nasser.

Some of its investors, Idris Ayodeji Bello, managing partner at LoftyInc, and Essa Al-Saleh, are onboard with the startup’s plan despite early days.

“We are excited to back Odiggo through our Afropreneurs Funds in its quest to transform the automotive parts market and provide superior service to clients, starting from MENA. The leadership team of Omar and Nasser, supported by the rest of the employees, have been a joy to work with and we are on a countdown to the IPO,” said Bello in a statement

News: Samsung’s refined Galaxy Fold

Samsung wasn’t quite ready to declare the Galaxy Note dead. Not just yet. When we put the question to the company again after this month’s Unpacked event, a rep told us: Samsung is constantly evaluating its product lineup to ensure we meet the needs of consumers, while introducing technology that enhances users’ mobile experiences. We

Samsung wasn’t quite ready to declare the Galaxy Note dead. Not just yet. When we put the question to the company again after this month’s Unpacked event, a rep told us:

Samsung is constantly evaluating its product lineup to ensure we meet the needs of consumers, while introducing technology that enhances users’ mobile experiences. We will not be launching new Galaxy Note devices in 2021. Instead, Samsung plans to continue to expand the Note experience and bring many of its popular productivity and creativity features, including the S Pen, across our Galaxy ecosystem with products like the Galaxy S21 Ultra and including to other categories like tablets and laptops. We will share more details on our future portfolio once we’re ready to announce.

It’s not an answer, exactly, so much as a reiteration of its earlier announcement that there will be no new Note for 2021. Asked whether it was simply a matter of chip shortages, Samsung sent us a similarly non-committal response:

The current volatility of the semiconductor market is being felt across the entire technology industry and beyond. At Samsung, we are making our best efforts to mitigate the impact, and will continue to work diligently with our partners to overcome supply challenges.

Image Credits: Brian Heater

It’s too early to declare the Galaxy Fold 3 the heir to the Note’s decade-long phablet throne. What is for certain, however, is that new features introduced for the Galaxy S line and the company’s high-end foldable have rendered the device fairly redundant. What seems most likely, meanwhile, is Samsung’s wait and see approach. A good selling Fold 3 is as compelling an argument for the Note’s redundancy as any. But that continues to be a big “if.”

Samsung was smart to position early Folds as exciting experiments. It’s never easy to be among the first to market with a new technology, especially with the sorts of scales Samsung tends to trade in. The original Fold brought with it some major questions, both in terms of reliability and adoption. Without retreading the former too much here (we’ve written plenty about it), let’s just say the company went back to the drawing board a couple of times with that first round.

As for the latter, the company revealed back in 2019 that it sold one million units that first year. It was a surprising — and impressive — figure. Obviously it can’t hold a candle to the sorts of numbers the company puts up with the S and Note Series, but for an unproven $2,000 device a few months after launch, it was certainly a positive sign that — at the very least — early adopters were along for the ride.

Image Credits: Brian Heater

The Fold 2 found the company more directly addressing some of the biggest issues that arrived with its predecessor, making for a more robust and well-rounded device. The Fold 3 isn’t a radical departure by any stretch, but there are some key updates and refinements on board here. Top-level, here’s what’s new:

  • S-Pen support
  • IPX8 water resistance
  • Slightly larger external display
  • Under-display camera
  • Strengthened interior screen protector, frame and front glass

So what, precisely, does all of that add up to? For Samsung, the answer is simple: a new flagship. It’s one of those words in the mobile world with a bit of a floating definition. Samsung, after all, previously had two flagships, in the form of the S and Note series. Whether this a tech passing moment for the Note or a declaration of a third flagship for the Galaxy line is dependent on the words written above. What it does signal, however, is Samsung’s stated confidence that this is the moment its high-end foldable goes mainstream.

The first step toward mainstreaming the product is a no brainer. Price. The Fold 3 is still not, by any stretch of the imagination, an affordable device. At $1,800, it’s fittingly still the price of two flagship phones put together. But a $200 drop from its predecessor marks a considerable step in the right direction. One imagines/hopes things will continue to go down as Samsung is able to scale the tech further. Those seeking an “affordable” foldable should be taking a closer look at the new Flip, which actually ducks below the $1,000 price point. More on that in a later review.

There are bound to be issues with any new form factor — even one from a company with Samsung’s know how. I have this visceral memory of walking around gingerly with the original Fold for fear of breaking the thing. There’s a certain expectation of usage during the review process — that you’ll effectively treat the device as you would your own, but the earliest Fold didn’t afford that opportunity, leaving me a bit tense throughout that I might inadvertently damage the $2,000 phone.

And, well, I did. And I certainly wasn’t the first. There were enough issues to warrant reinforcing the device before sending it out into the broader world. It was the right move, to be sure. I don’t think anyone was expecting the Fold would be indestructible, but, again, there’s that expectation of standard usage that the earliest unit didn’t live up to.

The primary fix was two-fold: extending the protective film to the edges after the first looked far too similar to the removable screen protectors Samsung (and other) phones ship with, and second, the company added a brush mechanism to the interior of the hinge mechanism that would still allow some debris in, but would sweep it away through the process of opening the product. That would remove it before it had an opportunity to damage the screen.

The second generation upgraded to a more durable foldable glass. The new version extends those protections further. It is, notably, the first version of the Fold that doesn’t greet you with a laundry list of restrictions the moment you open the box. That’s a good sign. As a rule, I’d say users should probably adhere to a similar “normal usage.” And probably invest in one of those cases. It’s an $1,800 phone, after all.

Image Credits: Brian Heater

The most notable addition on the durability front is the IPX8 rating. That’s water resistance for up to 1.5 meters for as long as 30 minutes. The company’s foldables line was a little slow on the uptake in terms of the sort of waterproofing/water resistance that has become nearly standard for premium phones — and understandably so, given the complex mechanisms required. The “X” in the rating, however, indicates that there’s no dustproofing here, for the simple reason that the hinge is actually designed to let particles in (as noted above).

The front and back of the device are now covered with Gorilla Glass Victus — Corning’s latest. Per Corning, “In our lab tests, Gorilla Glass Victus survived drops onto hard, rough surfaces from up to 2 meters. Competitive aluminosilicate glasses, from other manufacturers, typically fail when dropped from 0.8 meters. Additionally, the scratch resistance of Gorilla Glass Victus is up to 4x better than competitive aluminosilicate.” The phone’s body and hinge, meanwhile, are built out of alloy Samsung calls “Armor aluminum, which it claims is “the strongest aluminum used in modern smartphones.”

Perhaps most important of all is the inclusion of a stronger reinforced screen protector that extends further to the sides, making it a lot more difficult and less tempting to try to peel it off. The added protection is necessary both for standard usage (you really don’t want a phone that’s going to get damaged from too much tapping) and opens it up for S Pen functionality. The company now has three lines that utilize its stylus and all of the productivity features contained therein.

Image Credits: Brian Heater

In addition to the S Pen Pro, the company introduced a Fold-specific model. The $50 stylus is smaller and features a retractable tip, specifically designed to lessen the pressure on the screen. I played around with both styli and didn’t notice a dramatic difference between the two, and while Samsung doesn’t explicitly warn against using the Pro, I’d go for the Fold Edition out of an abundance of caution. (The system also issues a warning if you attempt to use an older version of the S-Pen.)

The company offered TechCrunch the following statement on stylus compatibility:

Only the latest S Pen Fold Edition and S Pen Pro are compatible as they are set to a different frequency than standard S Pens. However, S Pen Pro is compatible with other S Pen-enabled devices—such as Samsung Galaxy tablets, Chromebooks, and smartphones. Users can switch the frequency of the S Pen Pro using the switch at the top.

The 7.6-inch canvas lends itself well to S-Pen functionality. Of course, the Fold — like other foldables — still has a visible crease in the center. That takes some getting used to, compared to the Note. But if you’re a stylus devotee, the functionality fits in well with a growing suite of productivity tools like multiple active windows and app split view. Samsung has compiled quite a productivity workhouse here.

Of course, unlike the Note (and like the S line), the Fold doesn’t feature a built-in slot for the S Pen. It seems likely there may have been some structural integrity issues barring its inclusion — or, at the very least, it probably would have added even more thickness to what is already a fairly thin device when folded up. Samsung does offer up an S Pen case for those serious about taking their stylus with them — and are otherwise worried about losing it.

The primary display hasn’t changed much since last year. It’s still 7.6 inches with a 120Hz refresh rate and a 2208 x 1768 resolution, with support for HDR10+. The 6.2-inch front screen doesn’t have the high dynamic range format, though it has been bumped up to 120Hz from 60Hz. The Fold 2 upgraded the exterior screen size last year, and it makes a big difference. There are plenty of times you just don’t want to deal with unfolding the thing. The aspect ratio is still much to skinny to rely on it most of the time, but App Continuity is a nice feature that lets you seamlessly jump between screens on enabled apps.

Image Credits: Brian Heater

The biggest addition on the screen front is more of a subtraction, really. The pinhole camera is gone from the main screen. In its place is an under-display camera — the first on a Samsung device. The technology has been a longstanding holy grail for companies. Samsung’s not the first to offer the feature — companies like Oppo and ZTE have sported the feature for a little while now. The Fold uses similar technology, applying a thin layer of pixels above the hole punch. The spot is still visible, particularly when there’s a white image on the screen, but at first blush, it does offer something more contiguous.

Image Credits: Brian Heater

If you follow the space at all, you know that the image performance of these cameras have been less than ideal thus far. And Samsung suffers the same fate. The above shots were taken on the front 10-megapixel and under-display four-megapixels cameras respectively. There’s a haze or blur on the under-screen camera — really not up to the standards we expect from a premium smartphone in 2021.

In an earlier conversation with Samsung, the company was pretty candid about this — and the reason the Fold is the first of its phones to sport the tech. It’s here because you’ve got the additional option of the front-facing camera for selfies, so you’re not reliant on a, frankly, subpar camera. Certainly I wouldn’t rely on it for shooting photos — which is already admittedly awkward with the large form factor. I suppose it can work for teleconferencing in a pinch, but even then, you’re probably better off with the front one. File it as something Samsung can improve on in future updates, as the underlying tech improves.

Image Credits: Brian Heater

The main camera system, meanwhile, is largely unchanged since the last version at:

  • 12MP Ultra Wide. F2.2, Pixel size: 1.12μm, FOV: 123-degree
  • 12MP Wide-angle. Dual Pixel AF, OIS, F1.8, Pixel size: 1.8μm, FOV: 83-degree
  • 12MP Telephoto. PDAF, F2.4, OIS, Pixel size: 1.0μm, FOV: 45-degree

It’s a great camera setup that shoots excellent photos, with the added bonus of being able to switch between a 7.6 and 6.2 inch viewfinder (honestly, again, the full screen is kind of awkward for shooting in most scenarios, so I largely stuck with the smaller one).

The battery meanwhile, takes a small hit, down from 4,500mAh to 4,400mAh, split between two modules behind the display halves. It’s a step in the wrong direction, if only a small one. A big device like this tends to be power hungry. Depending on your usage, you should be able to get through a day. That’s not going to be huge problem so long as many of us are still largely stuck at home, but probably not something you’re going to sit around and binge videos on all day without plugging it in.

Naturally, the Fold sports the latest Snapdragon — the 888. That’s coupled with 12GB of RAM and 256GB of storage on the model Samsung sent us. Doubling the storage will bring the price tag up to $1,900.

Image Credits: Brian Heater

It’s been impressive to watch Samsung take the Fold from troubled early adopter tech to something far more stable in the course of two generations. But while the company is ready to toss around words like mainstream in the context of its foldables, it’s hard to shake the feeling that such goals are still a long ways away.

The price is heading in the right direction, but the product is still prohibitively expensive for most. I certainly can’t answer the question of why you need such a product, though the advantages of a larger screen make themselves known pretty quickly. In many instances, the form factor is still a bit cumbersome.

If the Galaxy Note is suddenly redundant, the fault lays more with the Galaxy S series than the Fold. And if Samsung is looking for a truly mainstream foldable experience, it may want to take a longer look at the Galaxy Z Flip. In terms of size, price, flexibility and good looks, that’s looking like the one to beat. Review coming soon.

WordPress Image Lightbox Plugin