Among people aged 25+, as a percentage relative to the US rates at large, Oklahoma has 29% less Doctorate attainment (e.g., 0.95% OK vs 1.34% US), 32.4% less Professional degree attainment, 28.5% less Master's degree attainment, 13.2% less Bachelor's degree attainment, and 9.3% less Associate's degree attainment.
We do have 13.3% more "Some College" educational attainment, 14.9% more High School Attainment and 13.5% more "Some High School”

Oklahoma has a very good network of trade schools, especially in NE OK with Tulsa Tech, TWS and Spartan Aeronautics. There is a skilled manufacturing workforce for companies to tap into and these workers don’t necessarily have bachelors degrees (or need them for that matter).

Oklahoma has a very good network of trade schools, especially in NE OK with Tulsa Tech, TWS and Spartan Aeronautics. There is a skilled manufacturing workforce for companies to tap into and these workers don’t necessarily have bachelors degrees (or need them for that matter).

This. Community colleges and trade schools in OKC work with Tinker directly to make sure our workforce here is up to snuff. And a lot of those blue-collar jobs at Tinker will pay more than a lot of people with PhD's will ever make.

Please, please stop. No one likes this hyperbole. It is unnecessary and doesn't help anyone, except you trying to make yourself seem edgy or cool on a message board.

Sir,
My opinion is just that an opinion. whether or not you "like" my statements is not important. As an aside my comment IS meant to be taken literally.

Sir,
My opinion is just that an opinion. whether or not you "like" my statements is not important. As an aside my comment IS meant to be taken literally.

If you have ZERO positive to say, at all, you don't have an opinion. You are a troll, who gets off on being negative and bashing the state you supposedly live in (or care too much about if you don't).

But I will take my Bachelors and CPA license-having self out of this conversation, since I don't have a Masters or PhD, and am not smart enough to dialogue with you.

Can you back that up? I don't believe you're correct in your assertion of support businesses and incentives.

The Panasonic Battery plant IS the example. We made a pitch to Tesla but they chose Texas. So here comes Panasonic wanting to make batteries for Tesla and we have to give them incentives also. You think if Tesla had chosen Oklahoma that Panasonic would have not asked for $700 million?

Just chirping out raw statistics gives a false view of reality.

The problem with that thought is that if I were to give an opinion, I would be bashed for it not being "negative", "bashing the State", or some such nonsense. And if I am to give facts it is "a false view of reality".



the kind of work done in OK doesn't necessarily require large numbers of PHDs and MBAs ... People who wish to live in a particular area have to aim their education toward what work is available in that area.

What is wrong with trying to bring those engineering / design / technology jobs here, though? You have kinda posed a chicken-and-egg scenario. Do jobs follow the workforce, or does the workforce follow jobs, or both? You seem to be of the position that the workforce follows jobs. While manufacturing jobs are great for the economy, and I am glad we got this EV battery manufacturing plant, it is small potatoes (taxes wise, e.g., impact on the budget to, for example, pay higher teacher salaries) compared to having a corporate headquarters move to the State. And I don't think anyone here is under the illusion that we would be a competitive location for a corporate headquarters of a STEM-based business when considering educational attainment (i.e., there is no incentive for jobs to follow the workforce in such a scenario as there is no adequate workforce).

And when you bring in STEM-based businesses, the workforce size having advanced degrees becomes important. For example, where I work, we are almost constantly open to bringing on some interns - which will almost certainly convert to full employment upon graduation. However, the primary group of eligible persons, in the State, is maybe 3-5 graduates per year. At my school (nearly a decade ago now) there were only three people among all graduating classes that were even eligible.

The problem with that thought is that if I were to give an opinion, I would be bashed for it not being "negative", "bashing the State", or some such nonsense. And if I am to give facts it is "a false view of reality".




What is wrong with trying to bring those engineering / design / technology jobs here, though? You have kinda posed a chicken-and-egg scenario. Do jobs follow the workforce, or does the workforce follow jobs, or both? You seem to be of the position that the workforce follows jobs. While manufacturing jobs are great for the economy, and I am glad we got this EV battery manufacturing plant, it is small potatoes (taxes wise, e.g., impact on the budget to, for example, pay higher teacher salaries) compared to having a corporate headquarters move to the State. And I don't think anyone here is under the illusion that we would be a competitive location for a corporate headquarters of a STEM-based business when considering educational attainment (i.e., there is no incentive for jobs to follow the workforce in such a scenario as there is no adequate workforce).

And when you bring in STEM-based businesses, the workforce size having advanced degrees becomes important. For example, where I work, we are almost constantly open to bringing on some interns - which will almost certainly convert to full employment upon graduation. However, the primary group of eligible persons, in the State, is maybe 3-5 graduates per year. At my school (nearly a decade ago now) there were only three people among all graduating classes that were even eligible.

Oklahoma has a ton of engineering job, that are not O&G related. There are tons aviation and aerospace engineering jobs in OKC. Heck, Boeing does no manufacturing or building here. They have 4000 or so engineers in OKC. Same with L3 and Pratt Whitney (granted, I believe they also have manufacturing jobs). But, those manufacturing jobs pay in excess of $35 an hour, and are always hiring because they are always growing.

Again, I wish people would quit making Texas out to be this liberal, highly educated utopia. They have fairly similar metrics, just 10 times the population. I would venture to guess that a decent % of their advanced degrees are due to people relocating there (can'tprove it, but it seems to be common sense, given how many people have moved their for work, after incentives were given), when their companies got masilaive, massive incentives to relocate there.

Not saying they don't have advantages or that OK can't keep improving. But saying that Texas is just some uber-educated, highly competent populace is a fallacy.

Yes, Oklahoma needs to better fund education. I am not taking that away from the equation. But Texas is proof that you can throw a lot of money, and it fixes a lot of problems. Money Oklahoma will never have, no matter what taxes they raise.

The talent "issue" is definitely real. I work for one of the fortune 500 companies in the NE part of the state. There's always a struggle to fill tech positions that require higher levels of education or experience. I can't imagine trying to move a HQ here and hoping to find 500-600 tech/engineer employees.

So ONEOK or Williams. 😀

The talent "issue" is definitely real. I work for one of the fortune 500 companies in the NE part of the state. There's always a struggle to fill tech positions that require higher levels of education or experience. I can't imagine trying to move a HQ here and hoping to find 500-600 tech/engineer employees.

It's also why we have such a dearth of start-ups.

Most of the job growth in this country is from small- and medium-sized businesses and those are usually home-grown, not bribed to relocate from elsewhere.

And start-ups come from great universities, of which Oklahoma has exactly zero. Show me a city with a lot of start-ups and well-paying jobs and I'll show you top-notch universities nearby.

Give OU $1 billion instead of Panasonic -- far better long-term investment.

It's also why we have such a dearth of start-ups.

Most of the job growth in this country is from small- and medium-sized businesses and those are usually home-grown, not bribed to relocate from elsewhere.

And start-ups come from great universities, of which Oklahoma has exactly zero. Show me a city with a lot of start-ups and well-paying jobs and I'll show you top-notch universities nearby.

Give OU $1 billion instead of Panasonic -- far better long-term investment.

Unfortunately, that isn't something you can really improve, anymore. Colleges don't just jump in credibility anymore. The upper echelon have been for 50 years.

Not an excuse, but it is a legit problem.

I'll be bashed for it, but it is my opinion. Show me a new to the scene elite college. For better or worse, there are none. UT has always had money and had a great MBA program. Duke, UNC, Michigan, Vanderbilt, Stanford, Ivy league schools. But no new, up and coming educational powerhouses. This is an indictment on the American education system.

That is Oklahoma. Aspire low, stick with the status quo, we don’t want no stinking PHDs prolly too liberal. No sir we stick with our dirty O and G. Just give us manual labor, no real thinkin required. Sad

What a useless comment. If Oklahoma is sticking with oil and gas, then the governor wouldn't be successfully soliciting for battery making plants for electric cars and electric car makers. We're lucky state energy companies don't appear to be trying to put a stop to it.

^

I went to one: Pepperdine. They went from nowhere to the #55 ranked university in the nation, comparable to Texas. It can be done but it takes money, commitment and time.

We are not talking about Ivy League; we are talking about building a university and entrepreneurial programs that are well up in the Top 100.

Almost every state has at least one (and usually several) that are superior to OU by a significant margin. And most of them are public.

You *have* to attract bright minds who will then meet and interact with other bright minds who are then guided by top-notch professors which then results in scores of new companies nearby.

Unless you've lived, worked and gone to school in this environment you literally have no idea how it feeds upon itself and drives everything upward.


And who are we attracting with these incentives anyway? Call centers, distribution warehouses, and assembly plants. Not headquarters, not tech companies...The huge majority of those jobs we are paying for are not well paid. We need to have an environment where companies are grown, not one of buying the lowest-paid back-office functions of exisiting businesses.

The problem with that thought is that if I were to give an opinion, I would be bashed for it not being "negative", "bashing the State", or some such nonsense. And if I am to give facts it is "a false view of reality".




What is wrong with trying to bring those engineering / design / technology jobs here, though? You have kinda posed a chicken-and-egg scenario. Do jobs follow the workforce, or does the workforce follow jobs, or both? You seem to be of the position that the workforce follows jobs. While manufacturing jobs are great for the economy, and I am glad we got this EV battery manufacturing plant, it is small potatoes (taxes wise, e.g., impact on the budget to, for example, pay higher teacher salaries) compared to having a corporate headquarters move to the State. And I don't think anyone here is under the illusion that we would be a competitive location for a corporate headquarters of a STEM-based business when considering educational attainment (i.e., there is no incentive for jobs to follow the workforce in such a scenario as there is no adequate workforce).

And when you bring in STEM-based businesses, the workforce size having advanced degrees becomes important. For example, where I work, we are almost constantly open to bringing on some interns - which will almost certainly convert to full employment upon graduation. However, the primary group of eligible persons, in the State, is maybe 3-5 graduates per year. At my school (nearly a decade ago now) there were only three people among all graduating classes that were even eligible.

Or you can get your MBA or PHD and work at Red Prime or Starbucks. We have large numbers coming out of college with engineering degrees that are suitable for O&G, and aerospace because thats where the jobs are. OK certainly could invest vast amounts in technology and computer engineering but they will leave the state to go where the suitable work is - at least for a while.

It's also why we have such a dearth of start-ups.

Most of the job growth in this country is from small- and medium-sized businesses and those are usually home-grown, not bribed to relocate from elsewhere.

And start-ups come from great universities, of which Oklahoma has exactly zero. Show me a city with a lot of start-ups and well-paying jobs and I'll show you top-notch universities nearby.

Give OU $1 billion instead of Panasonic -- far better long-term investment.

Surely, wealthy alumni have given both OU and OSU over $1billion for the past decade. All that money does some kind of good for higher education, I'm sure, but competition for new industry from other states is often too tough.

Surely, wealthy alumni have given both OU and OSU over $1billion for the past decade. I'm not sure more and more money directed there does much good for Oklahoma. Competition for new industry from other states is often too tough.

We're talking about creating an environment of home-grown businesses, not paying huge multi-national corporations to get their lowest-level jobs.

We're talking about creating an environment of home-grown businesses, not paying huge multi-national corporations to get their lowest-level jobs.

I agree, but as you know that requires better support for education as modern society continues to advance. Probably not enough dollars for it are coming from wealthy alumni. The state won't do much to pull up the slack. Neither will the people, like when voters turned down a question that would raise state sales tax by one penny to improve support for education. Education in the state is left to try to work with what it does have, while hopefully not being left behind in a cloud of dust from more advanced states.

Right, but as you know that requires better support for education as modern society continues to advance. Probably not enough dollars for it are coming from wealthy alumni. The state won't do much to pull up the slack. Neither will the people, like when voters turned down a question that would raise state sales tax by one penny to improve support for education. Education in the state is left to try to work with what it does have, while hopefully not being left behind in a cloud of dust from more advanced states.

What I'm saying is that if the state has a $1 billion to give away, it would be better spent in aid of improving our universities instead of writing a check to a massive company that is going to use us as nothing more than an assembly plant.

What I'm saying is that if the state has a $1 billion to give away, it would be better spent in aid of improving our universities instead of writing a check to a massive company that is going to use us as nothing more than an assembly plant.

exactly this. and not given to the universities for athletics, but for actual improvements to the curriculum and to develop new strategies to try and get those types of students who want to be start up creators here and then see a reason to stay here.

What a useless comment. If Oklahoma is sticking with oil and gas, then the governor wouldn't be successfully soliciting for battery making plants for electric cars and electric car makers. We're lucky state energy companies don't appear to be trying to put a stop to it.

This is very well said. He’s an objectively terrible poster and should be consistently called to account for it.

I don't mind dialogue about this. The pot shots some have had don't help anyone. Oklahoma will never improve if all you do is bash others for their views. See Michael Scott in the Office - they will just believe how they do harder.

That has been my main issue with these massive tax breaks to corporations to get these projects. If the state has 1 billion to "invest" in the state, why not just invest it directly back into the state? A billion dollars in QOL/education/infrastructure investment would be a guaranteed billion dollars of improvements for the taxpayer. Instead we divert it through a private company and (after the company takes its cut of the profits) have to keep our fingers crossed that at some point in the future an unknown portion of that money will end up improving something. its an incredibly inefficient way to use taxpayer money to attempt to improve the outlook of the state.

I don't specifically blame Oklahoma for this particular deal. Unfortunately this is the game all states are playing and Oklahoma is trying to keep up. It is something that needs to be addressed with an agreement between multiple states to stop these massive giveaways. States are competing in a race to the bottom.

And what's particularly absurd is our unemployment rate is already very low at 3%; it's not possible to go much lower.

What we need is more high-paying jobs, not more distribution warehouses, call centers, and assembly plants.

It's also why we have such a dearth of start-ups.

Most of the job growth in this country is from small- and medium-sized businesses and those are usually home-grown, not bribed to relocate from elsewhere.

And start-ups come from great universities, of which Oklahoma has exactly zero. Show me a city with a lot of start-ups and well-paying jobs and I'll show you top-notch universities nearby.

Give OU $1 billion instead of Panasonic -- far better long-term investment.

Could not agree more. OU ranked 127th is disappointing. Not even top 100

^

I went to one: Pepperdine. They went from nowhere to the #55 ranked university in the nation, comparable to Texas. It can be done but it takes money, commitment and time.

We are not talking about Ivy League; we are talking about building a university and entrepreneurial programs that are well up in the Top 100.

Almost every state has at least one (and usually several) that are superior to OU by a significant margin. And most of them are public.

You *have* to attract bright minds who will then meet and interact with other bright minds who are then guided by top-notch professors which then results in scores of new companies nearby.

Unless you've lived, worked and gone to school in this environment you literally have no idea how it feeds upon itself and drives everything upward.


And who are we attracting with these incentives anyway? Call centers, distribution warehouses, and assembly plants. Not headquarters, not tech companies...The huge majority of those jobs we are paying for are not well paid. We need to have an environment where companies are grown, not one of buying the lowest-paid back-office functions of exisiting businesses.

Wow Pete, I find myself in Total alignment with these comments

I also want to point out that a Panasonic manufacturing plant is in no way an offset to what may happen to our oil & gas industry.

With O&G, those companies are headquartered here and generally owned by Oklahomans. There is a tremendous amount of wealth generated and that all stays in the state. Lots of people on this site work in those businesses and are paid very well. Yes, there are oilfield jobs and related manufacturing but that's hardly an area where the state is lacking for similarly-paid jobs.

A battery plant isn't much different that an Amazon warehouse: generally unskilled labor not requiring any real education and employees are paid accordingly.

Even with Canoo, it will just be assembly in an old road equipment manufacturing building. It's not like either one of these companies is ever going to be headquartered here or that any of their profits will stay in Oklahoma.


For any real counter-balance to what may be a fading O&G industry (and isn't that a big part of the argument for the $1 billion in incentives?), we need to replace those legacy energy companies with alternative energy and EV businesses that actually originate here and stay and grow here. I don't see a single shred of evidence that that is happening and adding a battery factory in Pryor is basically earning some political brownie points and not at all setting the state up for future success.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojz6xkqyPFo

For any real counter-balance to what may be a fading O&G industry (and isn't that a big part of the argument for the $1 billion in incentives?), we need to replace those legacy energy companies with alternative energy and EV businesses that actually originate here and stay and grow here. I don't see a single shred of evidence that that is happening and adding a battery factory in Pryor is basically earning some political brownie points and not at all setting the state up for future success.

You would think, given that Oklahoma has put all of its chips in the "energy" sector, and the weather here, that OKC should be widely known as a hub in the wind energy industry. That we are not makes me feel like we're squandering an opportunity somewhere along the line.

You would think, given that Oklahoma has put all of its chips in the "energy" sector, and the weather here, that OKC should be widely known as a hub in the wind energy industry. That we are not makes me feel like we're squandering an opportunity somewhere along the line.

We barely even have solar energy. You see much more of it on rooftops (commercial and residential) in states with comparable levels of sunshine.

I believe very strongly that this battery plant deal is just a distraction to make it appear that we are somehow diversifying instead of concentrating on the real growth opportunities which involve more than writing a billion-dollar check.

Is our plan to replace an industry that built beautiful skyscrapers and campuses and filled them with tens of thousands of highly-paid workers with battery factories in Pryor?

Almost every local accumulation of wealth in this state has some tie to oil & gas exploration. You can't replace that with factories owned by out-of-state conglomerates.

I also want to point out that a Panasonic manufacturing plant is in no way an offset to what may happen to our oil & gas industry.

With O&G, those companies are headquartered here and generally owned by Oklahomans. There is a tremendous amount of wealth generated and that all stays in the state. Lots of people on this site work in those businesses and are paid very well. Yes, there are oilfield jobs and related manufacturing but that's hardly an area where the state is lacking for similarly-paid jobs.

A battery plant isn't much different that an Amazon warehouse: generally unskilled labor not requiring any real education and employees are paid accordingly.

Even with Canoo, it will just be assembly in an old road equipment manufacturing building. It's not like either one of these companies is ever going to be headquartered here or that any of their profits will stay in Oklahoma.


For any real counter-balance to what may be a fading O&G industry (and isn't that a big part of the argument for the $1 billion in incentives?), we need to replace those legacy energy companies with alternative energy and EV businesses that actually originate here and stay and grow here. I don't see a single shred of evidence that that is happening and adding a battery factory in Pryor is basically earning some political brownie points and not at all setting the state up for future success.

https://www.glassdoor.com/Salary/Panasonic-Sparks-Salaries-EI_IE4279.0,9_IL.10,16_IC1149628.htm

^

You can make the same money working at Amazon and they provide benefits from day one.

^

You can make the same money working at Amazon and they provide benefits from day one.

For the low end jobs certainly, but Amazon will not have any of the high end technical jobs. Panasonic is not a warehouse.

The only thing that really gets accomplished with something like a battery plant is currency flow. Money would flow into Oklahoma from all corners of the US, cycle through the local economy, before being redistributed to all corners of the US. Now, is that worth exporting $700 million? I don't think so.

I don't specifically blame Oklahoma for this particular deal. Unfortunately this is the game all states are playing and Oklahoma is trying to keep up. It is something that needs to be addressed with an agreement between multiple states to stop these massive giveaways. States are competing in a race to the bottom.

There should be more support for Interstate Compacts to do away with this "game".

Phase Out Corporate Giveaways Interstate Compact - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase_Out_Corporate_Giveaways_Interstate_Compact)

Yeah, but the loopholes will be plentiful, and every state will offer them as soon as the ROI is there.

There should be more support for Interstate Compacts to do away with this "game".

Phase Out Corporate Giveaways Interstate Compact - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase_Out_Corporate_Giveaways_Interstate_Compact)

This 100%!!! Companies should base their decisions on what is best for their businesses and leave the taxpayers out of it. If Oklahoma finds they can't attract business then change the tax and regulatory framework for everyone, not just a select few.

If tax increments financing, favorable tax status, and property tax abatement are good for some, then it should be good for all.

It's also why we have such a dearth of start-ups.

Most of the job growth in this country is from small- and medium-sized businesses and those are usually home-grown, not bribed to relocate from elsewhere.

And start-ups come from great universities, of which Oklahoma has exactly zero. Show me a city with a lot of start-ups and well-paying jobs and I'll show you top-notch universities nearby.

Give OU $1 billion instead of Panasonic -- far better long-term investment.

In the absolute worst case scenario is this investment would not spur much new business/industry and the state would only be left with a higher quality, more competitive university that all people of the state could benefit from.

Worst case scenario with these corporate giveaways would be the private company building a plant that brings in mostly low quality jobs, doesn't spur much new business/industry, and the state would be out a billion dollars with almost no benefit to the public.

This 100%!!! Companies should base their decisions on what is best for their businesses and leave the taxpayers out of it. If Oklahoma finds they can't attract business then change the tax and regulatory framework for everyone, not just a select few.

If tax increments financing, favorable tax status, and property tax abatement are good for some, then it should be good for all.


Did we.......did we just agree?
:Smiley051

At this point is the issue still come down to the infrastructure improvements Panasonic wants in addition to the financial incentive? I know the TIF that Mayes County voted down would’ve funded many of those improvements. Anyone know where the deal currently stands?

At this point is the issue still come down to the infrastructure improvements Panasonic wants in addition to the financial incentive? I know the TIF that Mayes County voted down would’ve funded many of those improvements. Anyone know where the deal currently stands?

It's supposed to be addressed in special session. Of course they can't get their act together as usual. McCall wants income tax cuts in order to approve the additional money which is ridiculous but he is using it as leverage for a political win for himself. I've heard he's thinking about running for Governor so it's all for posturing.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.teslarati.com/tesla-supplier-panasonic-domestic-ev-battery-production/amp/

Panasonic reduced earnings and cutting EV battery production

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.teslarati.com/tesla-supplier-panasonic-domestic-ev-battery-production/amp/

Panasonic reduced earnings and cutting EV battery production

sounds like they are only cutting battery production in japan. as it states earlier that it wouldn't increase production at US factories, but said nothing about cutting US factory production.

sounds like they are only cutting battery production in japan. as it states earlier that it wouldn't increase production at US factories, but said nothing about cutting US factory production.

Not increasing US production also means no need for an Oklahoma facility. I guess

EV overall facing some pretty big headwinds, especially in a high interest rate environment. Don’t know how it plays out in the 2030s but from now till 2030 no way they hit targets.

Ford will postpone about $12 billion in EV investment as buyers become more cautious:

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/10/26/ford-will-postpone-about-12-billion-in-ev-investment.html

EV overall facing some pretty big headwinds, especially in a high interest rate environment. Don’t know how it plays out in the 2030s but from now till 2030 no way they hit targets.

I'm not sure what they were thinking would happen when Ford and other major manufacturers basically doubled the cost of new vehicles. The basic Lightning was supposed to have an MSRP of $35K and now is $59K.

I'm not sure what they were thinking would happen when Ford and other major manufacturers basically doubled the cost of new vehicles. The basic Lightning was supposed to have an MSRP of $35K and now is $59K.

and even if the full EV market is dying off... i still have a feeling that Toyota was smart in their continued leverage of new and more advanced hybrid vehicles. battery usage is still going to be going up globally, just maybe not as fast as those who felt EV's were going to take over by 2030, thought.

and even if the full EV market is dying off... i still have a feeling that Toyota was smart in their continued leverage of new and more advanced hybrid vehicles. battery usage is still going to be going up globally, just maybe not as fast as those who felt EV's were going to take over by 2030, thought.

Mentioning Toyota and the fact that they are developing solid state batteries with a 900 mile range. The lithium batteries could go the route of beta video players or Google glasses.

Mentioning Toyota and the fact that they are developing solid state batteries with a 900 mile range. The lithium batteries could go the route of beta video players or Google glasses.

They could be close, they could also continue on the perpetual cycle of being 5 years away like they have been

They could be close, they could also continue on the perpetual cycle of being 5 years away like they have been

Eh they have a good thing going with their PHEVs. The Rav4 Prime is backlogged with orders for years. They know their market pretty well.

Eh they have a good thing going with their PHEVs. The Rav4 Prime is backlogged with orders for years. They know their market pretty well.

I was talking about solid state batteries

Solid state batteries will revolutionize the EV industry if all goes well with their final developments.

Toyota's 745-Mile Solid-State Battery Breakthrough, Explained.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/news/toyotas-745-mile-solid-state-battery-breakthrough-explained/ar-AA1kznxE

^

Thanks for sharing that.

I have no doubt batteries will soon get much better simply because they will represent perhaps the biggest market in the world.

History has shown that when you get a lot of companies all over the globe throwing huge resources at something with potentially huge revenues, significant innovation always follows.

EV's are still in their infancy; I bet in 5 years we'll see some pretty dramatic improvements in range.

Toyota is looking to get out in front with EV's, fuel cells, and PHEV.
Toyota is looking to have their solid state batteries in use prior to 2030.
They also plan to manufacture these batteries in house in N.C.
Toyota has been very smart in how they have approached new technology. They realize consumers by and large are being cautious with EV's and the range anxiety that goes with them. They put out a quality product and Tesla with the baggage their owner carries should take note.
This article was published 2 days ago.
https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a45942785/toyota-future-ev-battery-plans/

Electric cars seem to be before their time:

[deleted: crazy conspiracy site ~ Pete]

Is Oklahoma Still getting one or did Kansas Snatch it up?

Is Oklahoma Still getting one or did Kansas Snatch it up?

Still the plan but no timeline for construction to begin

It sounded to me like it is in an indefinite hold due to the slump in EV demand. Will probably pick back up eventually, but who knows if they'll still need the second facility.

It sounded to me like it is in an indefinite hold due to the slump in EV demand. Will probably pick back up eventually, but who knows if they'll still need the second facility.

i mean i think we all assumed it would happen after the De Soto plant was finished. and it is currently being constructed with still a target opening of 2025. so at this point, i see no reason to believe that anything is on an indefinite hold until the end of 2025 and no ground work has been started.

in fact, just back in july, Panasonic told Reuters in an interview that it needed to boost it's battery production by about 4 times it's capacity of the de soto facility, and do so by 2031. and they apparently have still been looking at a March 2024 announcement of their third North American battery production site.

so i guess that really will be the first sign of if things have slowed down, is if a third site isn't announced in March or April 2024. and then the bidding for a potential 4th never starts.

Panasonic rebuffs Oklahoma again, won't build EV battery plant in Pryor.

sounds definitive…

https://www.kosu.org/local-news/2023-12-19/panasonic-rebuffs-oklahoma-again-company-wont-build-ev-battery-plant-in-pryor