Polestar CEO says ‘pump anxiety’ is driving EV demand as fuel prices surge from Iran war



TL;DR

Polestar CEO Michael Lohscheller told CNBC that “pump anxiety” has replaced range anxiety as the dominant consumer concern, with rising fuel prices from the Iran war and Strait of Hormuz closure driving a measurable shift toward EV demand. EU EV registrations jumped 51% in March. Polestar reported a widening Q1 net loss of $383 million on flat revenue of $633 million despite record deliveries of 13,126 vehicles, with gross margins swinging negative due to pricing pressure, tariffs, and currency effects.

 

For years, the electric vehicle industry’s biggest problem had a name: range anxiety. Now, according to the chief executive of Polestar, the anxiety has moved to the other side of the forecourt. “People are concerned, ‘how much do I pay at the gas station?’” Michael Lohscheller told CNBC’s Squawk Box Europe on Wednesday, coining a phrase “pump anxiety” that captures a shift the entire automotive industry is struggling to absorb.

The context is not subtle. Since the United States and Israel launched strikes against Iran on 28 February, the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow waterway that carries roughly a fifth of the world’s oil supply, has been effectively closed to commercial shipping. Brent crude has surged past $100 a barrel. In the United Kingdom, average petrol prices have risen by more than 25 pence per litre since early March, with diesel tracking nearly 45 pence higher, according to RAC Fuel Watch. Across the European Union, petrol has breached €2 per litre in several markets. The result is a measurable, continent-wide recalculation of what it costs to drive.

The economics have flipped

Lohscheller’s argument is that the cost equation has inverted. “In the past, people considered EVs for idealistic reasons, and now the decision is all about money,” he said. The claim is supported by the numbers. EU electric vehicle registrations jumped 51% in March compared with the same month a year earlier, with Italy recording a 65.7% increase in battery-electric registrations in the first quarter, France following at 50.4%, and Germany at 41.3%, according to industry data compiled by the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association. In the United Kingdom, Polestar’s home market in operational terms, Chinese EV manufacturers and European incumbents alike are reporting surges in online inquiries and test-drive bookings.

The shift is not uniform. In the United States, where petrol prices have topped $4 per gallon for the first time in four years, the effect has been more muted. Used EV sales rose 12% year on year in the first quarter, and 17% over the previous quarter, but new EV sales have not yet shown the same spike. Lohscheller cited disappearing federal tax incentives and broader consumer uncertainty as factors dampening American demand.

A company under pressure

The pump-anxiety thesis arrives at a moment when Polestar could use some good news. The Geely-controlled, Sweden-headquartered company reported a widening net loss of $383 million in the first quarter, more than double the $166 million loss in the same period last year. Revenue was flat at $633 million despite a 7% increase in deliveries to a record 13,126 vehicles. Gross margins swung to negative 3.2%, down from positive 10.3% a year earlier, a deterioration the company attributed to pricing pressure, EU and US tariffs, lower carbon-credit sales, and unfavourable foreign-exchange movements driven by the weakening Chinese yuan.

The financial picture reveals the paradox at the heart of the EV industry in 2026. Demand is rising, but so is the cost of competing. Polestar manufactures primarily in China, which makes its vehicles subject to both American and European tariff regimes designed to counter the competitive advantage of Chinese production. The company described China’s domestic market as “hyper competitive” and suggested Europe needed to “speed up” its own response.

Range anxiety is over. What comes next is harder.

Lohscheller, who previously ran Opel and Vauxhall, was blunt about the range question. “Range anxiety, I think this has gone,” he said at the Financial Times Future of the Car conference, also held on Wednesday. The cheapest Polestar 2 now offers 344 miles of official range on the WLTP test cycle. The dual-motor Polestar 3 SUV manages 402 miles. An 82-kilowatt-hour Polestar 2 can be fully charged overnight on a domestic EV tariff in the UK for roughly £15, a fraction of what a comparable petrol car costs to refuel at current prices.

But lower running costs have not yet translated into lower purchase anxiety. Lohscheller acknowledged that EV residual values remain a pain point, lagging behind equivalent combustion cars. New-car pricing pressure, driven by manufacturers scrambling to meet the UK’s zero-emission vehicle mandate quotas or face fines, has led to aggressive discounting that erodes used-EV values further. “I’m asking for stability,” he said of the regulatory environment. “Every three months to have a new debate about these rules changing is not helping anybody.

The bigger picture

The fuel-price shock is reshaping automotive markets well beyond Polestar’s niche. BYD exported more than 120,000 electric and hybrid vehicles in March alone, a 65% increase year on year. Renault has described the Middle East conflict as having triggered a “seismic shift” in EV adoption. The International Energy Agency’s chief, Fatih Birol, has said countries are likely to pivot to renewables as a way to mitigate geopolitical risk, calling the Hormuz disruption the largest supply disruption in the history of the global oil market.

The irony is that the crisis most likely to accelerate the transition to electric vehicles is also the crisis most likely to punish the companies trying to lead it. Higher energy costs raise manufacturing expenses. Tariff walls make cross-border competition more expensive. Currency volatility erodes margins on vehicles built in one country and sold in another. Polestar’s first-quarter results are a case study in all three dynamics operating simultaneously.

Lohscheller’s framing, that the conversation has moved from range to price, from ideology to arithmetic, is probably correct. The question is whether Polestar, a company losing money on every percentage point of margin while navigating tariffs, competition, and a war-driven energy shock, is positioned to benefit from the shift it is describing. Pump anxiety may be good for EVs in the aggregate. Whether it is good for Polestar depends on whether the company can turn rising demand into something its balance sheet has not yet demonstrated: a sustainable business.



Source link

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get our latest articles delivered straight to your inbox. No spam, we promise.

Recent Reviews


Modern displays are amazing when it comes to detail, brightness, color, and all the ingredients that make for an impressive picture—except motion clarity.

CRT screens are still the king of motion clarity, but plasma flat-panel screens hold a respectable second place, and in many ways I still miss my old 720p 51-inch plasma TV and the crisp motion I gave up by switching to a 4K LCD.

Plasma solved motion the “right” way

Plasma displays didn’t just show an image—they flashed it.

While they operate on different principles, CRTs and plasma TVs have a few things in common. First, the phosphors used by CRTs and plasma displays are the same. Second, because these phosphors fade quickly, they need to be continuously refreshed.

In a CRT, the electron beam scanning from the top to the bottom of the screen achieves this, and in a plasma, a high-speed electric pulse does the same. Because of this rapid pulse-and-fade, these screen technologies have crisp perceptual motion, since our brains tend to interpret moving images that don’t pulse as “smearing” across our retinas.

The pulsing nature of plasma technology isn’t the only reason for its better motion reproduction. These screens also have very low latency and very fast pixel response times. Combined, it’s not quite as good as CRT motion handling, but it’s significantly better than LCD and OLED technology, even today.

Modern TVs rely on sample-and-hold—and that’s the problem

Stand and deliver blurry images

Blur Busters UFO Test

Modern LCD and OLED televisions are “sample and hold” technologies. They can hold each frame of video perfectly for the entire duration of that frame without deviating in brightness and then instantly snap to the next frame without any dipping to black in-between.

On paper, this sounds like a good thing, but your eyes don’t stay still when tracking motion. As they follow a moving object, the image being held on screen effectively drags across your retina, creating the perception of blur. Even if the panel itself is perfectly sharp.

You might not even realize how blurry motion is on modern displays if all you’ve ever seen with the naked eye is an LCD or plasma. However, if you see a CRT or plasma in person, the difference is quite striking.

The sample and hold issue means that no matter how much you increase the refresh rate, that type of blur persists. It’s why my 85Hz CRT monitor is clearly less blurry in motion than my 240Hz LCD monitor. It’s especially apparent when you’re playing 2D games that scroll the entire screen, with LCDs or OLEDs smearing the image in a way that gives me a bit of a headache if I’m being honest.

Playing Diablo 2 on a CRT. Credit: Sydney Louw Butler/Shutterstock.com

It creates this weird situation where a modern TV can be incredibly sharp in a freeze frame but somehow look softer than a lower-resolution display that isn’t sample and hold as soon as you press play.

Motion interpolation is a workaround, not a solution

It’s an abomination, that’s what it is

One of the “fixes” that TV makers came up with to reduce unwanted motion blur is a technology known as frame interpolation, or more commonly “motion smoothing.” Here an algorithm creates fake frames that guess at what the middle step of motion would look like if it were captured. This creates a high frame-rate video output, which we see as smoother and more crisp.

While this doesn’t take away sample-and-hold blur, it does improve motion clarity. Unfortunately, it also destroys the intended frame rate that shows and movies were meant to be seen at. It’s also useless for video games, because it introduces an enormous amount of input lag. NVIDIA’s DLSS technology is also frame interpolation, but it works for games because of several mitigations NVIDIA put into the technology. These measures don’t exist on TVs.

While some people think motion smoothing isn’t all bad, TV makers are no longer activating it by default as much anymore, and my advice is to always turn it off because the trade-offs are just not worth it.

Screenshot 2025-07-01 at 9.21.03 AM

7/10

Brand

TCL

Display Size

85-inches

The 2025 model TCL QM6K Google TV delivers a stunningly clear and bright picture with a new Mini-LED panel, improved local dimming zones, Dolby Vision IQ, and a neat new Halo Control system for improved visuals. Get this TV and elevate your living room. 


Black frame insertion tries to recreate plasma—but comes with trade-offs

Who turned out the lights?

The other trick sample-and-hold screens have to mimic what CRTs and plasma TVs do naturally is called BFI, or Black Frame Insertion. As the name suggests, the display inserts a full black frame between every original frame. This provides an instant and dramatic increase in motion clarity. However, it also has a big impact on brightness. As much as half of the light is now gone, so the image is much dimmer. Pushing overall brightness to compensate makes things hotter and more energy-hungry.

Some BFI implementations cause visible flicker, for which I personally have no tolerance at all, but the biggest problem here is that BFI doesn’t have the smooth pulsing roll off of the phosphors used in CRTs and plasma.


The future might circle back—but we’re not there yet

That might be changing, however, because a new generation of LCDs can leverage the power of multi-zone backlight technology to strobe the backlight across the screen in a way that mimics a CRT scanline.

NVIDIA’s G-SYNC Pulsar has received rave reviews from the biggest motion blur haters, and I sincerely hope that a similar technology becomes standard in TVs going ahead, so we can go back to enjoying the crisp motion we used to have without all the compromises.



Source link