Who adopts new technologies, and who doesn't, and why?

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.
GRA said:
WetEV said:
GRA said:
Which is why I have no problem subsidizing manufacturers and infrastructure providers early on. NOT consumers.

Every subsidy of a new product is equivalent to a subsidy for consumers.


Of course, but it doesn't go directly into their pockets so it's not obvious, and will have little or no influence on their decision making about that product.

Amusing. The economists are wrong. A price reduction has no influence on decision making!?! Really?!?


GRA said:
WetEV said:
I pay $225 per year higher taxes for an EV, and have no mandates or perks.

Other than the perk of the e-tron is awesome to drive, of course.


What you mean is that

is that I pay higher taxes because I own an EV.
 
SageBrush said:
WetEV said:
SageBrush said:
What subsidy ?

Norway EV drivers don't need to pay CO2 excise tax.

And for good reason. But that is not a subsidy, which is the point I was making to GRA

The Norwegian EV incentives:

No purchase/import taxes (1990-)
Exemption from 25% VAT on purchase (2001-)

No annual road tax (1996-2021). Reduced tax from 2021. Full tax from 2022..
No charges on toll roads or ferries (1997- 2017).
Maximum 50% of the total amount on ferry fares for electric vehicles (201:cool:
Maximum 50% of the total amount on toll roads (2019)
Free municipal parking (1999- 2017)
Parking fee for EVs was introduced locally with an upper limit of a maximum 50% of the full price (201:cool:
Access to bus lanes (2005-). New rules allow local authorities to limit the access to only include EVs that carry one or more passengers (2016)
50 % reduced company car tax (2000-2018). Company car tax reduction reduced to 40% (201:cool: and 20 percent from 2022.
Exemption from 25% VAT on leasing (2015)
Fiscal compensation for the scrapping of fossil vans when converting to a zero-emission van (2018)

https://elbil.no/english/norwegian-ev-policy/


I'd say those are still some pretty hefty subsidies, plus the perks.
 
WetEV said:
GRA said:
WetEV said:
Every subsidy of a new product is equivalent to a subsidy for consumers.


Of course, but it doesn't go directly into their pockets so it's not obvious, and will have little or no influence on their decision making about that product.

Amusing. The economists are wrong. A price reduction has no influence on decision making!?! Really?!?


Of course it does, but the price reduction applies to everyone, as opposed to being a direct payment to an individual. It's the same reason why


GRA said:
WetEV said:
I pay $225 per year higher taxes for an EV, and have no mandates or perks.

Other than the perk of the e-tron is awesome to drive, of course.


What you mean is that

is that I pay higher taxes because I own an EV.[/quote]


It wasn't for lack of trying:
Gov. Inslee’s $7,500 electric car rebate remains uncertain in WA Legislature

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattl...idents who buy a,$1,000 for an electric bike.


The fate of a $100 million proposal by Gov. Jay Inslee to dramatically expand incentives for Washington residents to purchase electric vehicles remains uncertain as legislators scrutinize it.

House and Senate legislators are deciding if, and in what form, to include the measure in their operating budgets for the fiscal year that begins July 1.

The state payments up to $7,500 would be coupled with federal tax credits in place of up to $7,500 for some vehicles. And they come amid debate in Washington state and elsewhere about how to structure such incentives to best maximize the amount of carbon emission reductions they achieve.

“If we’re going to invest that kind of money in electric vehicle rebates, we want to make sure that is helping people who would not otherwise want, or be able, to do this,” said Rep. Joe Fitzgibbon, D-West Seattle, who chairs the House Environment & Energy Committee.

The proposal Inslee released in December would offer one year of rebates to motorists who go electric, and could set a template for future rebates. The intent is to drastically speed up the transition to electric vehicles as the state tries to meet ambitious goals of slashing carbon emissions emitted by fossil fuels to net zero by 2040, and to include more low-income people in the transition.

Washington residents who buy a new electric or fuel cell vehicle could get a $7,500 check from the state government. They could receive a $5,000 check to purchase a used electric vehicles and $1,000 for an electric bike.



So what happened?

Washington State Legislature Fails to Pass $7,500 EV Rebates

Gov. Jay Inslee proposed spending $100 million to subsidize the purchase of electric vehicles, but only $25 million was earmarked for EV incentives in the budget that was passed on Thursday.

(TNS) — An ambitious scheme to nearly double government subsidies for electric vehicles — along with a slew of climate policies — saw mixed results in Washington state's supplemental budget approved this week by legislators.

To nudge drivers away from fossil fuels, Gov. Jay Inslee proposed in December spending $100 million to subsidize the purchase of electric vehicles. However, in the supplemental budget announced Wednesday, only $25 million was earmarked for the incentives and with no clear structure yet indicating who would be eligible, when or for how much. The Legislature passed the budget late Thursday.

With public demand for green cars comparatively low in Washington state and the infrastructure for electrified transportation still in its infancy, the proposal might have been premature.

"We've decided to focus primarily on public infrastructure and charging availability," said Senate Environment, Energy and Technology Committee Chair Reuven Carlyle, D- Seattle, on Thursday.

The legislature appropriated $207 million for charging infrastructure and $120 million for electric-vehicle incentives through the end of the next biennium, in June 2025. Included in the latter is $95 million reserved for the next legislative session, while $25 million will become available in June.

Rebates on electric vehicles and charging infrastructure could be part of that program but are not explicitly required, according to the governor's office. . . .

Included in the supplemental operating budget is $69 million for grants to create EV charging infrastructure in rural areas, office buildings, housing and other state and local government offices; $25 million for EV incentives; and $8.5 million to create a map of charging locations — all of which will be hashed out in the coming months, and years, by the state's Department of Commerce. . . .

While the proposal for EV rebates saw mixed results this session, lawmakers allocated millions in spending to, among other things, install an additional 150 electric-vehicle charging stations around the state and $2 million to provide charging stations for cruise ships idling while docked at the Port of Seattle's downtown terminal.

"We really need to go big on these clean transportation investments and continue to do so session after session," Missik said.

The supplemental budget also allocated funds to improve air quality monitoring and access to solar energy in overburdened or low-income communities, advance the production of hydrogen fuel and reduce methane emissions from landfills. . . .

https://www.governing.com/next/washington-state-legislature-fails-to-pass-7-500-ev-rebates


Good for them, they opted to spend the money where it was most important, charging infrastructure.
 
GRA said:
Of course it does, but the price reduction applies to everyone, as opposed to being a direct payment to an individual. It's the same reason why

Did that make sense to anyone else?


GRA said:
WetEV said:
GRA said:
What you mean is that

is that I pay higher taxes because I own an EV.


It wasn't for lack of trying...

If wishes were fishes we would all cast nets.

I pay higher taxes because I own an EV.

GRA said:
$2 million to provide charging stations for cruise ships idling while docked at the Port of Seattle's downtown terminal.

Somehow that will not help my car much. Probably keeps Seattle's air cleaner... but that's miles away from me, and often downwind of me.

While state government funded charging stations are sometimes helpful, this isn't a long term solution. Getting enough EVs on the road so private charging networks are profitable is a long term solution.
 
WetEV said:
GRA said:
Of course it does, but the price reduction applies to everyone, as opposed to being a direct payment to an individual. It's the same reason why

Did that make sense to anyone else?


It's simple enough. It's the same reason stores have sales, because they know it provides strong psychological motivation to individuals. 30-40% off! BOGO! Now how much would you expect to pay?!


WetEV said:
GRA said:
WetEV said:
is that I pay higher taxes because I own an EV.


It wasn't for lack of trying...

If wishes were fishes we would all cast nets.

I pay higher taxes because I own an EV.


Bummer for you. I expect the $7,500 tax credit you got for your e-Tron should more than cover it.


WetEV said:
GRA said:
$2 million to provide charging stations for cruise ships idling while docked at the Port of Seattle's downtown terminal.

Somehow that will not help my car much. Probably keeps Seattle's air cleaner... but that's miles away from me, and often downwind of me.

While state government funded charging stations are sometimes helpful, this isn't a long term solution. Getting enough EVs on the road so private charging networks are profitable is a long term solution.

Of course it's not the long-term solution, but as we both apparently agree, PEVs and their infrastructure are a chicken and the egg problem. Outside of a company (Tesla) that's dependent on BEVs and the fast charging infrastructure that makes them useful for something other than local use, there simply hasn't been enough demand from PEVs to make charging infrastructure, especially DCFCs, profitable. So government stepped in, and IMO that, along with supporting RD&D and manufacturing, is exactly where government money should be spent, not used to bribe people to buy PEVs. Those need to be able to stand on their own , i.e. they need to have customer appeal that makes them viable. Infrastructure, OTOH, isn't sexy, just essential.
 
GRA said:
WetEV said:
GRA said:
Of course it does, but the price reduction applies to everyone, as opposed to being a direct payment to an individual. It's the same reason why

Did that make sense to anyone else?


It's simple enough. It's the same reason stores have sales, because they know it provides strong psychological motivation to individuals. 30-40% off! BOGO! Now how much would you expect to pay?!

Too bad auto manufacturers never figured that out.... Wait...


GRA said:
WetEV said:
GRA said:
It wasn't for lack of trying...

If wishes were fishes we would all cast nets.

I pay higher taxes because I own an EV.


Bummer for you. I expect the $7,500 tax credit you got for your e-Tron should more than cover it.

That credit is to cover for the loss of free tailpipe dumping. No tailpipe. I pay higher taxes because I own an EV.

Most EV owners do not get a $7500 credit any more. Most WA EV owners just pay higher taxes..

WetEV said:
GRA said:
$2 million to provide charging stations for cruise ships idling while docked at the Port of Seattle's downtown terminal.

Somehow that will not help my car much. Probably keeps Seattle's air cleaner... but that's miles away from me, and often downwind of me.

While state government funded charging stations are sometimes helpful, this isn't a long term solution. Getting enough EVs on the road so private charging networks are profitable is a long term solution.

GRA said:
Of course it's not the long-term solution, but as we both apparently agree, PEVs and their infrastructure are a chicken and the egg problem. So government stepped in, and IMO that, along with supporting RD&D and manufacturing, is exactly where government money should be spent, not used to bribe people to buy PEVs. Those need to be able to stand on their own , i.e. they need to have customer appeal that makes them viable. Infrastructure, OTOH, isn't sexy, just essential.

Government funded charging stations are often in less than ideal locations. One the other hand,
Electrify America sees huge charging session increase in 2021. Electrify America shared its 2021 charging statistics in a press release today, reporting 1.45 million sessions compared to 268,000 in 2020. That's over 5x more in a year's span.

So maybe more PEVs might keep that growing.
 
Back
Top