CVRP changes coming Dec 3, 2019

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

cwerdna

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,674
Location
SF Bay Area, CA
TIL thanks to TMC, I learned about changes coming up on Dec 3: https://cleanvehiclerebate.org/eng/faqs/what-should-i-know-about-december-3rd-program-changes.

Sorry... wasn't sure which of the many CVRP threads to put it in.
 
cwerdna said:
TIL thanks to TMC, I learned about changes coming up on Dec 3: https://cleanvehiclerebate.org/eng/faqs/what-should-i-know-about-december-3rd-program-changes.

Sorry... wasn't sure which of the many CVRP threads to put it in.

Yep, bad news. CARB's headed in the wrong direction. Not the way to get to their target. In light of what I learned this week about CARBs work on EVs it fits.

Only one rebate per family, rather than two.
Only $2,000 rebate down from $2,500.

The excuse is their running out of money. If that's the case, the answer is increase the money. Duh!

Paul
 
paulgipe said:
The excuse is their running out of money. If that's the case, the answer is increase the money. Duh!
I personally believe the only way to reduce carbon is to incentivize it's elimination; e.g., to tax it. We need less rebates on EVs and increased "exhaust taxes" on ICEVs.
 
jlv said:
paulgipe said:
The excuse is their running out of money. If that's the case, the answer is increase the money. Duh!
I personally believe the only way to reduce carbon is to incentivize it's elimination; e.g., to tax it. We need less rebates on EVs and increased "exhaust taxes" on ICEVs.
With near 50% EVs or more, a carbon fuels tax or "exhaust taxes" exhaust would make more sense.

With 2% EVs, a subsidy is more effective for less government, as many have noted. It is a 50 times smaller program than taxes.

Time for carbon taxes isn't quite here. It is coming, so hold that thought.
 
When they say single entity do they mean household or person in the house? In other words is your spouse counted separately?

Sounds like I can personally use it once more.

Is that a lifetime limit?
 
jlv said:
I personally believe the only way to reduce carbon is to incentivize it's elimination; e.g., to tax it. We need less rebates on EVs and increased "exhaust taxes" on ICEVs.
Agreed.

Too bad they do exactly the opposite
 
I'd started a topic with a link to this article on GCC a week or so ago, but a moderator deleted it and a bunch of others on the grounds that such news stories were creating "clutter" on the forum:
CARB approves $533M funding plan for clean transportation investments
https://www.greencarcongress.com/2019/10/20191025-arb.html


Now that someone else has started on topic on the exact same story, presumably I can repost that link.

I am glad to see that they finally capped the MSRP, albeit at $60k (presumably to cover higher end Model 3s) rather than at say $40k, which is much closer to a mass market price, and they left the price of FCEVs uncapped as well. Anyone who can even consider paying $60k+ for a car has no business using OPM to buy it. And the income limits remain unchanged and are far too high, at $150/$204/$300k for single/H-o-H/married filing status.

They also changed the eligibility requirements for PHEVs, which now have to achieve a minimum 35 mile AER*, which I think eliminates all of them except the Clarity and i3REx, and seems dumb. I could see a 20 or 25 mile AER minimum, but requiring 35 miles now probably boosts PHEV prices well above the mass market in addition to eliminating almost all the choices.



*"As determined by CARB", so maybe there's some difference between that and EPA AER.
 
rmay635703 said:
jlv said:
I personally believe the only way to reduce carbon is to incentivize it's elimination; e.g., to tax it. We need less rebates on EVs and increased "exhaust taxes" on ICEVs.
Agreed.

Too bad they do exactly the opposite


The governor agrees with you, but has accepted cap-and-trade instead. From a year ago:
A year after California extended cap-and-trade, Newsom still prefers carbon tax
https://www.politico.com/states/cal...-trade-newsom-still-prefers-carbon-tax-740266
 
GRA said:
I'd started a topic with a link to this article on GCC a week or so ago, but a moderator deleted it and a bunch of others on the grounds that such news stories were creating "clutter" on the forum
Just to be clear:
The particular complaint was creating a new thread with nothing more than a single link to an off-site article (no other text was included).
I checked the moderation logs: exactly one (1) thread was deleted, and it happened on Oct 31. The moderator who took this action sent you this message:
Please stop starting threads just to link to other stories. This is becoming spam as discussed before and other users are complaining
 
Rebate limits are reducing from 2 rebates to 1 rebate per any single entity for individual and business applicants.

So what does "entity" mean in the wording?

Does that mean household? Or would it be the specific buyer, that is, I can use it once then my wife once.
 
jlv said:
GRA said:
I'd started a topic with a link to this article on GCC a week or so ago, but a moderator deleted it and a bunch of others on the grounds that such news stories were creating "clutter" on the forum
Just to be clear:
The particular complaint was creating a new thread with nothing more than a single link to an off-site article (no other text was included).
I checked the moderation logs: exactly one (1) thread was deleted, and it happened on Oct 31. The moderator who took this action sent you this message:
Please stop starting threads just to link to other stories. This is becoming spam as discussed before and other users are complaining


Several topics I started on that same day disappeared. If there's a requirement for someone to post some comments of their own in order to post a link to a news topic that may be of interest to others, what is the minimum length for such a comment, as there doesn't seem to be any standard.

As to other users complaining, if they find the articles of no interest, why read them? Is it all that hard to just skip them, as I do with the topics I have no interest in?

Alternatively, as I've pointed out before, if they find anyone's posts to be of no value, then all they have to do to avoid seeing them is "ignore" them, as I know some posters have done with me. So, Let's have some standard as to the definition of "clutter", rather than some arbitrary one that varies from moderator to moderator.
 
IEVS has a Tom Moloughney article on this, and in it he clarifies that the 35 mile AER is on the UDDS rather than the full 5-cycle test that EPA uses to rate PEVs:
California Reshapes EV Rebate Program; Excludes EVs Over $60,000
https://insideevs.com/news/382176/california-amends-cvrp-rebate-program/


He suggests that 35 miles on the UDDS may equate to perhaps 25 miles on the full EPA test cycle, which is a lot more reasonable, and means that the Prime et al would qualify. We'll have to see how this shakes out once they list those cars that do qualify under the new standard.
 
Found this list of vehicles which will no longer meet the 35 mile AER and/or $60k price on the CVRP website:

Beginning December 3, 2019, vehicles that no longer meet eligibility requirements as defined here will be removed from the eligible vehicle list.

Below is the list of vehicles that will no longer be eligible for the CVRP rebate beginning with any applications submitted on or after December 3, 2019:

Does not meet minimum 35 mile electric range requirement:

Audi A3 e-tron
BMW 530e iPerformance
BMW 530e xDrive iPerformance
Ford C-MAX Energi
Mistubishi Outlander PHEV
Subaru Crosstrek Hybrid PHEV
Volvo S60 T8
Volvo XC60 T8

Does not have a base Manufacturer Suggested Retail Price (MSRP) of $60,000 or less:

Audi e-tron
Jaguar I-PACE
Karma Revero GT
Tesla Model S
Tesla Model X

Does not meet minimum 35 mile electric range requirement and Does not have a base Manufacturer Suggested Retail Price (MSRP) of $60,000 or less:

Volvo S90 T8
Volvo V60 T8
Volvo XC90 T8

Last eligible model year more than two years old; may still be eligible:

BLUECAR Bluecar
BYD e6
Ford Focus Electric
Hyundai Tuscon Fuel Cell
Mercedes Benz B250e
Mistubishi i-MiEV


I'd guess that most PHEVs with an EPA AER of 25 miles or higher, e.g. the Niro, Kona and Prime, will meet the 35 mile UDDS standard going forward.
 
https://cleanvehiclerebate.org/eng/faqs/how-often-do-cvrp-program-requirements-change-0 says
Vehicle Eligibility

Effective April 6, 2021, the AER requirement for eligible Light-Duty Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs) will be increased to 30 miles EPA (45 miles UDDS). All applications received on or after April 6, 2021 will only be eligible for a rebate if the vehicle is on the updated eligible vehicle list at the time of application. The following vehicles are NO LONGER ELIGIBLE beginning April 6, 2021:

• Ford Fusion Energi
• Hyundai Sonata Plug-in Hybrid
• Hyundai Ioniq PHEV
• Kia Niro Plug-in Hybrid
• Kia Optima Plug-in Hybrid
• Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV
• Toyota Prius Prime
I'm guessing that CA sales of the above will plummet.
 
Back
Top