End of EV Subsidies?

[NickW + 2,714]

Just now, jaycee said:

You are not getting the basic accountancy here. If there is a reduction in tax take for the government it has to be recouped in some other way. Reduce tax take on vehicles and you have to raise taxes elsewhere. I suggest EVs will have to take up the slack and therefore the cost saving will be minimal. Also where does the lost tax on NS oil get covered?
 

I will make it simple . I have said it already

CROSS SUBSIDY. Taxation on petrol and diesel cross subsidises EV's further incentivising the transition to EV's. 

A cross over point occurs when EV's reach a certain market penetration point where the government will then need to introduce a charge per mile. 

[DA? + 301]

1 hour ago, Auson said:

Yes Tom there is no such thing as a free lunch. 

So making electricity sending it down a line to store in an 800kg  battery so it can be transported around in a 2 ton high performance vehicle to transport one 75kg adult from place to place while virtue signalling to others in a $100k shiny new vehicle full of copper, cow hides and Lithium is not and never will be efficient use of the earths finite resources. 

I shall not repeat myself going on about how the Tesla model and now others are using the expensive EV's to get the ball running so better cheaper EV's can be built soon. Tesla does not use cow hides. Oceans of lithium, actually the oceans do have lithium in it a new operation in Portugal are going to extract it from sea water. Also Mr Carnot came up with the explanation why mixed with renewables EV's are more efficient than ICE.

[Auson + 123]

36 minutes ago, NickW said:

Sodium is a viable alternative and there is approx 12Kg in every m3 of seawater on the planet

A proportion of that copper wiring could be replaced by Aluminium (the most common metal on the planet) 

Furthermore you are not comparing like with like. Tesla is the EV equivalent of the upper end of the Merc / BMW range - it doesn't represent the typical car driven by joe public. A fairer comparison would be against vehicles such as the Bolt, Leaf etc which are less than half that price before government incentives. 

Nick W,

Yes I forgot sodium and aluminium are free. Copper is a much better conductor which is why its used for power transmission. 

[jaycee + 348]

3 minutes ago, DA? said:

I refer you to my previous answer, so some people don't get upset with me repeating myself.

5% tax on electricity is nowhere near the tax circa 50% tax on petrol. I did not reply to you last time as I was tired with your circular arguments, while we are at it thanks for agreeing that Germany since going Green has increased its dependance upon dirty coal instead of nukes, your reply tried to say well Spain hasn't but that is not really what we were discussing was it? When you are wrong admit it, it saves time.

[NickW + 2,714]

4 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

Are you serious about this?  They actually made people believe that diesel was cleaner?  Wow, I'm an engine guy and I just don't see how they sold this, unless there were incentives, which would mean people switched for financial and not environmental reasons.

A one eyed imbecile called Gordon Brown was behind this. 

At the same time my toxicology lecturer (2003) was telling me diesel would be the 'asbestos' of the 21st Century.due to the PM and NOX output. 

[jaycee + 348]

3 minutes ago, NickW said:

I will make it simple . I have said it already

CROSS SUBSIDY. Taxation on petrol and diesel cross subsidises EV's further incentivising the transition to EV's. 

A cross over point occurs when EV's reach a certain market penetration point where the government will then need to introduce a charge per mile. 

Nope not simple enough tell me how an all EV society pay less for thier cars, where does the lost tax on petrol and NS oil get made up?

[NickW + 2,714]

2 minutes ago, Auson said:

Nick W,

Yes I forgot sodium and aluminium are free. Copper is a much better conductor which is why its used for power transmission. 

Sounds strawmanish.

My comments about Sodium and Aluminium were in response to resource availability concerns. I made no such claim they were free or significantly lower in cost. 

I appreciate copper is better but Al is an adequate substitute which is why it is increasingly used as a cheaper replacement for CU in wiring systems. 

[jaycee + 348]

11 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

Are you serious about this?  They actually made people believe that diesel was cleaner?  Wow, I'm an engine guy and I just don't see how they sold this, unless there were incentives, which would mean people switched for financial and not environmental reasons.

Diesel was cheaper and you got more mpg. To be honest I believe the politicans actually believed the lies told by the motor comapnies and thought they would be going Green at the same time. However the point was they got people to change then jacked up the taxes just as they will do with EVs.

Edited December 6, 2018 by jaycee
typing and walking

[DA? + 301]

1 minute ago, jaycee said:

5% tax on electricity is nowhere near the tax circa 50% tax on petrol. I did not reply to you last time as I was tired with your circular arguments, while we are at it thanks for agreeing that Germany since going Green has increased its dependance upon dirty coal instead of nukes, your reply tried to say well Spain hasn't but that is not really what we were discussing was it? When you are wrong admit it, it saves time.

Am I going to have to repeat myself about the savings on health and accidents covering this loss? Germany is complicated, but yes I agree closing down the reactors was a mistake (as I have repeatedly said) but coal is on the way out they have to pour so much in to keep it a float and keep those unions happy. Luckily renewables are coming to the rescue. Not sure what you are saying I said about Spain, but they to are killing off coal and going for renewables as they are cheaper. I will admit I'm wrong, but you haven't shown that, try something new.

[DA? + 301]

2 minutes ago, jaycee said:

Diesel was cheaper and you got more mpg but that is what it takes. To be honest I believe the politicans actually believed the lies told by the motor comapnies and thought they would be going Green at the same time. However the point was they got people to change then jacked up the taxes just as they will do with EVs.

Nothing surer in life but death and taxes, but at least the countries can save money as they will have less expenses and maybe pay off some debt.

[NickW + 2,714]

2 minutes ago, jaycee said:

Nope not simple enough tell me how an all EV society pay less for thier cars, where does the lost tax on petrol and NS oil get made up?

They don't.  You have again misread or failed to understand what I have written which on the face of it appears quite simple. 

For the 3rd time.....

At this stage EV's only form a small part of the fleet - they are effectively cross subsidised by taxation on fuel or indeed any other form of tax as petrol duty is not specific to road maintenance etc. . Once EV market penetration achieves a certain level then the government will need to apply taxation rates - probably the best and fairest system is a per mile charge which is also related to vehicle weight. 

 

[DA? + 301]

7 minutes ago, jaycee said:

Nope not simple enough tell me how an all EV society pay less for thier cars, where does the lost tax on petrol and NS oil get made up?

Go do a bit of homework and look at the external costs of using ICE and dumb cars. That shows why the future of transportation will help save countries money.

[jaycee + 348]

 

7 minutes ago, NickW said:

At this stage EV's only form a small part of the fleet - they are effectively cross subsidised by taxation on fuel or indeed any other form of tax as petrol duty is not specific to road maintenance etc. . Once EV market penetration achieves a certain level then the government will need to apply taxation rates - probably the best and fairest system is a per mile charge which is also related to vehicle weight. 

You are agreeing with me, once the subsidies are gone there is no cost saving as taxation will have to be recovered from the motorist. The fact it's per mile is irrelevant to Joe Bloggs driving to work every day its still a cost, ICE or EV the cost will be the same near as dam it. Add in the costs for changing the Nation Grid now and I am not seeing the incentive short or long term. There is a cost to change and those profiting are those selling EVs and Green power.
The nice feeling of going Green does not seem to work I again refer you to France where the natives disagree with the Government wanting to add Green taxes to fuel. 

[Auson + 123]

13 minutes ago, DA? said:

Go do a bit of homework and look at the external costs of using ICE and dumb cars. That shows why the future of transportation will help save countries money.

DA,

Any views on aircraft ?

[NickW + 2,714]

9 minutes ago, jaycee said:

 

You are agreeing with me, once the subsidies are gone there is no cost saving as taxation will have to be recovered from the motorist. The fact it's per mile is irrelevant to Joe Bloggs driving to work every day its still a cost, ICE or EV the cost will be the same near as dam it. Add in the costs for changing the Nation Grid now and I am not seeing the incentive short or long term. There is a cost to change and those profiting are those selling EVs and Green power.
The nice feeling of going Green does not seem to work I again refer you to France where the natives disagree with the Government wanting to add Green taxes to fuel. 

Of course there are savings. 

Les investment needed on liquid fuel refining capacity.

Less expenditure on transporting liquid fuels - mostly by road

Less expenditure on people to drive liquid fuels around the country

Lower impacts on peoples health through reduced air pollution emissions (savings for the NHS and improved productivity) 

less noise (ok a non cost item but noise does impact on peoples health) 

Edited December 6, 2018 by NickW

[jaycee + 348]

24 minutes ago, DA? said:

Am I going to have to repeat myself about the savings on health and accidents covering this loss? Germany is complicated, but yes I agree closing down the reactors was a mistake (as I have repeatedly said) but coal is on the way out they have to pour so much in to keep it a float and keep those unions happy. Luckily renewables are coming to the rescue. Not sure what you are saying I said about Spain, but they to are killing off coal and going for renewables as they are cheaper. I will admit I'm wrong, but you haven't shown that, try something new.

Explain to me how EVs are safer than ICE cars, don't try the self driving crap as ICE cars can be self driving just like EVs.
Regards Germany I said they had increased coal power stations since going Green you said no, I proved you wrong with an article from a Green newspaper saying the opposite, the fact you choose not to admit it is the reason I find you tedious and a troll.

[SERWIN + 749]

On 12/4/2018 at 4:51 AM, DA? said:

It makes sense for me to buy a Tesla Model 3 when they become available (moving again). Just being the safest car's on the road makes Tesla a good buy, for my families safety I'd pay. Comfort, the local large supermarket is 3 hrs round drive away, make those hours feel less. 

 

Are you referring to a car that will drive itself into a stationary object without even slowing down? Eve a tractor trailer has a better safety system that will stop the truck if something is in the way. I wouldn't buy a Tesla for any amount of money. That is the single STUPIDEST mistake I can think of for a self driving vehicle.

[NickW + 2,714]

On 12/4/2018 at 8:15 PM, jaycee said:

Different people disagree with you yet you keep saying the same stuff, perhaps there is a clue there.

Different people keep stating the Moon is made of green cheese.

However the response is the same every time. 

[jaycee + 348]

16 minutes ago, NickW said:

Of course there are savings. 

Les investment needed on liquid fuel refining capacity.

Less expenditure on transporting liquid fuels - mostly by road

Less expenditure on people to drive liquid fuels around the country

Lower impacts on peoples health through reduced air pollution emissions (savings for the NHS and improved productivity) 

less noise (ok a non cost item but noise does impact on peoples health) 

Refineries are all going to the Middles East and closing down in the UK, have been for years pretty soon we will be down to 2 at most and those will be to support petrochem plants to make plastices to build EVs.
What about the transmission losses for electricity?
As above
Yup but that is not a massive cost saving and if you spend as much money as you want to spend on upgrading the National Grid on stopping smoking and the effects will be much more cost effective.
Straw grasping there. It will not eliminate noise either as you need EVs to make a noise otherwise people get knocked down.

[NickW + 2,714]

1 minute ago, jaycee said:

Refineries are all going to the Middles East and closing down in the UK, have been for years pretty soon we will be down to 2 at most and those will be to support petrochem plants to make plastices to build EVs.
What about the transmission losses for electricity?
As above
Yup but that is not a massive cost saving and if you spend as much money as you want to spend on upgrading the National Grid on stopping smoking and the effects will be much more cost effective.
Straw grasping there. It will not eliminate noise either as you need EVs to make a noise otherwise people get knocked down.

Well I have already outlined what is potentially needed to fill that capacity gap if we went 100% EV. . Some of that can be met by increased use of idle power plant overnight 

Please explain the specific need to upgrade the grid to accomodate EV's? at least 2/3rd of houses have driveways and its not that difficult to convert lamp posts into slow charges.  If most charging is undertaken overnight then we are simply using under capacity that is pretty much idle. 

My households overnight electricity use is less than 100 watts. I think on single phase I consume up to about 12-13KW. 

Tranmission lose rates are well known. 

[jaycee + 348]

11 minutes ago, NickW said:

Different people keep stating the Moon is made of green cheese.

However the response is the same every time. 

The moon is not made of green cheese is an arguement that can be proven big difference.

DA's reponses are based on wishes and miss out vital facts that people point out but are dismissed as not relevant just like my disussion with you on taxes. Suggesting the best case scenario with a large engineering project will happen every time is totally against all my experiences in my life as an engineer and many others here. You have to look for the unexpected and then assume there will be other unexpected consequences you will never think off and leave money to cover those. I am adding reality from experience and giving examples of such in the wider world not trying to say things are impossible.

[NickW + 2,714]

1 minute ago, jaycee said:

The moon is not made of green cheese is an arguement that can be proven big difference.

DA's reponses are based on wishes and miss out vital facts that people point out but are dismissed as not relevant just like my disussion with you on taxes. Suggesting the best case scenario with a large engineering project will happen every time is totally against all my experiences in my life as an engineer and many others here. You have to look for the unexpected and then assume there will be other unexpected consequences you will never think off and leave money to cover those. I am adding reality from experience and giving examples of such in the wider world not trying to say things are impossible.

I wouldn't disagree with that

Still if we didn't strive to change then we would still be travelling the country looking at the arsehole of horse. 

[DA? + 301]

36 minutes ago, Auson said:

DA,

Any views on aircraft ?

Short to medium haul are going to change, already have small battery planes for training pilots. As the battery tech improves so larger aircraft can go electric or hybrid. Fly in and out of airports all night as they are quite, fly lower saving energy and on short haul considerable amounts of time. Getting rid of the pilot helps they only think they know better than the autopilot and crash the things. Although EV's self driving will take some of the work over.

[DA? + 301]

58 minutes ago, jaycee said:

Explain to me how EVs are safer than ICE cars, don't try the self driving crap as ICE cars can be self driving just like EVs.
Regards Germany I said they had increased coal power stations since going Green you said no, I proved you wrong with an article from a Green newspaper saying the opposite, the fact you choose not to admit it is the reason I find you tedious and a troll.

Well have you seen the crash tests of the Model 3, safest car out there. But you can't separate EV and self driving as they will go together, treating anything like this in isolation is a fools game. No I said they cancelled planned builds, which they have. Please try to read what I say and not what you expect me to say, it's rather tedious.  

[DA? + 301]

58 minutes ago, SERWIN said:

Are you referring to a car that will drive itself into a stationary object without even slowing down? Eve a tractor trailer has a better safety system that will stop the truck if something is in the way. I wouldn't buy a Tesla for any amount of money. That is the single STUPIDEST mistake I can think of for a self driving vehicle.

Oh the cherry pickers are out in force. Yes it's a work in progress and progressing it is. The latest software update is great and getting better very fast. With a billion miles of data to use, so far. Give them a couple more years. Try better with your arguments because it shows you don't look for data just opinions.