Guest post by Bjørn Lomborg
I’ve said electric cars get subsidized too much. Turns out I was wrong.
In California, they are subsidized ridiculously too much.
Tesla gets $45,000 for each car it sells in state and federal subsidies. The Tesla S starts at $69,000, so about 40% of its total cost is subsidies (Tesla isn’t making any big profits).
This is because the California Air Resources Board has mandated that zero emission vehicles should comprise 15% of new-car sales by 2025 — up from less than 1% now. This forces other car companies that can’t comply to pay for credits from Tesla.
“At the end of the day, other carmakers are subsidizing Tesla,” says one analyst.
Remember, the Tesla avoids perhaps 10 tons of CO2 (more likely, with its large battery pack it avoids nothing or even *increases* total CO2 emissions). That means Americans pay at least $5,000 per ton of CO2 avoided – about a thousand times more than the price in the European Trading System.
It also avoids local air pollution (which is presumably the Air Resources Board’s objective), but over the entire lifetime of the car, this is worth around $500.
Source:
Air pollution costs:
For Europe:http://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/sustainable/doc/2008_costs_handbook.pdf, p57, air pollution for new gasoline cars is about €0.001/km or $150 for 150,000 km;
For France:http://www.internationaltransportforum.org/jtrc/DiscussionPapers/DP201203.pdffor France, p26, shows €634
Danish numbers: DKK 1500 (or about $300) for 150,000km, p147http://www.dors.dk/graphics/Synkron-Library/Publikationer/Rapporter/Miljo_2013/Trykt/M13.pdf
We subsidize electric cars too much:http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324128504578346913994914472.html
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/may/05/business/la-fi-electric-cars-20130506
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I drove alongside a Tesla S the other day on the freeway. Pretty car. Noisiest thing was the tires.
Thought about which part of the car I bought for the person enjoying ownership….
They didn’t thank me for any of it though.
Interesting to see what the second hand value of these things will be after two or three years… and remember the range on a charge with heater, headlights, wipers and heated rear window on in the winter isn’t going to be very far. I wonder what the breakdown insurance will be.
The only useful electric vehicle I’ve seen is the one that used to deliver our milk.
Just like practically everything else in California, it’s all an illusion. There is no such thing as zero emission electricity in California, nor zero emission cars – even their solar farms produce tons of carbon and other emissions when the solar panels and other required paraphernalia are built, not to mention all the carbon to back it up or that emitted when they constructed their pumped storage facilities. California is the stupidest (and most bankrupt) state in our union.
“The story of Fisker is a story of the ingenuity of an American Company, the commitment to innovation by the U S government and the preservation of the American automobile industry” ~ VP Joe Biden
This week Fisker declared bankruptcy, defaulting on $200 million in loans, ending 2000 jobs after creating only 2000 GREEN autos. Fair to say, the taxpayers got Fiskered on this one.
DJ says:
May 12, 2013 at 11:40 am
Thought about which part of the car I bought for the person enjoying ownership….
They didn’t thank me for any of it though.
No problem – you just tell them “you’re welcome” in as sincere a voice as you can muster.
Bloke down the pub
The only useful electric vehicle I’ve seen is the one that used to deliver our milk.
Before then, I remember ours being delivered on horse and cart.
That’s probably where we’ll end up if the greenies get their way.
“…the California Air Resources Board has mandated that zero emission vehicles should comprise 15% of new-car sales by 2025 — up from less than 1% now…”
ZERO EMISSIONS? HA HA HA …
Lets take a look:
**21% of California’s electricity comes from the South Western U.S.
http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/overview/energy_sources.html
**”The Four Corners Generating Station is a coal-fired power plant located near Fruitland, New Mexico, United States, on property located within the Navajo Indian Reservation that is leased from the Navajo Nation. The Four Corners Generating Station consists of five units with a total rated generating capacity of about 2,040 megawatts. Units 1, 2, and 3 have a combined generating capacity of 560 megawatts while units 4 and 5 each have a generating capacity of 770 MW.
The Arizona Public Service Company (APS) owns 100% of Units 1, 2, and 3, while Units 4 and 5 are operated by APS but owned by six companies, with APS owning 15%, Southern California Edison (SCE) 48%, Public Service Company of New Mexico 13%, Salt River Project 10%, Tucson Electric Power 7%, and El Paso Electric 7%.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Corners_Generating_Station
Southern Cal Edison owns 48% of two coal fired units located out of state. This is a shell game of EXPORTING emissions from the L.A. air basin to another state. We export our emissions to China and import the manufactured goods (read: windmills/solar panels, batteries, aka: green energy). Let us at least be honest with ourselves about this. What a con game. It has nothing to do with conservation of resources. It is about environmental cost shifting.
Electric cars belong on golf courses and in retirement communities. And yes, Californians are the dumbest people int he U.S.
To name the car the Tesla is an insult to the great Nikola Tesla who no doubt would turn three phases in grave at such nonsense. These people are frigging idiots.
Zero emission? That car has to be built somewhere, those raw materials need to be shipped in, and that goes on train and truck. And trucks don’t run on electricity.
Green power does make weird economic sense if some government is idiotic enough to guarantee you an inflation adjusted, tax free price of 4-5 times what you have to pay for electricity from the grid for 30 years. That’s why I put solar panels up in the UK – the annual rate of return is around 15%.
One of the reasons for this insanely huge subsidy was to supposedly guarantee the local manufacture of solar cells – yeah right! Another reason was to help the UK meet EU green energy targets – as if my annual 3,250kW generation of solar electricity would make any difference. However, the most important reason was the gullibility/stupidity of politicians, which has resulted in us all having to pay hugely for their insatiable need to feel smug and superior in matters of green energy.
Their utterly ludicrous policies of “Greener Than Thou” have put a millstone around the neck of western economies.
The Tesla is another classic example of “Greener Than Thou” policies which are doomed to fail on the alter of economic reality..
Cost of Tesla electric vehicle – $114k.
Cost to consumer after rebate – $69k.
Cost to others including consumers and taxpayers – $45k.
Value to environment – negligible.
Value of helping rich people buy cool stuff, and feel smug about it – priceless.
Some day they’ll retrofit these Teslas (and other autos) with LENR powerplants–THEN you’ll have a truly “green” car. And until that happens, the taxpayer will continue to get fleeced by charlatan politicians.
These are not zero emission vehicles they are remote emission vehicles.
It’s a straightforward principle.
The Market provides the most cost-effective method of providing goods and services. Any fiddling with the market produces a distortion, which by definition will lower the cost-effectiveness, since it is already at the optimum position.
If the fiddling is done in pursuit of a political or activist goal, the fiddlers are not going to be interested in the level of distortion at all. Resulting in the kind of extremes we see here.
And it can get much worse…
“To name the car the Tesla is an insult to the great Nikola Tesla who no doubt would turn three phases in grave at such nonsense.”
Three phase, variable frequency drive. Peak battery output 220 Kv, 53 Kwh storage. I think Tesla would be smiling.
Tesla just announced their first profitable quarter this past week. Without the big subsidies it would have had another big loser. Doesn’t matter, however, stock went up > 25%. Just like everything else these days, smoke and mirrors wins out over reality even though everyone knows that it’s smoke and mirrors (see wind and solar energy).
My ’03 Ford Econoline chateau with a 5.4L V8 is a MZEV (mostly zero emissions vehicle) as I rarely drive it.
Electric cars are zero emission if the electric power that is used to power the electric car is zero emission which is not the case.
Lithium-ion batteries lose roughly 10% of their power to internal currents when new. Depending on ambient temperature (maximum 40C. Internal losses increase to 40% if the ambient temperature reaches 40C.) that increases to around 30% when the batteries are 5 years old.
If the generation losses, transmission losses, and battery losses are included and the generation source is hydrocarbon, the electric car gets equivalently 38 miles/gallon.
Curiously if the objective has to reduce carbon dioxide emissions it would be better (1/3 the cost, if people car about costs) to purchase a small diesel powered car which can get 45 miles per gallon and not have the battery problems.
Roughly 60% of European cars are diesel.
It don’t make sense that common sense don’t make sense no more.
How far can this car travel with a family of 5 on one charge?
If Tesla car owners bought a diesel generator to charge their car at home, and the fuel consumption of the generator is 2 liters an hour and lets say for talk sake (cough) the claims made about the Tesla are true, that it takes 3.5 hours with 70 amp to charge, and the cost of diesel is $1.88 which add up to $13.16 per charge.
Is this more efficient than buying a much cheaper, longer lasting and reliable diesel car?
Maybe I have lost the plot about what efficiency means, but, these battery cars do not make economic or even environmental sense to me.
“This is because the California Air Resources Board has mandated that zero emission vehicles should comprise 15% of new-car sales by 2025 — up from less than 1% now. This forces other car companies that can’t comply to pay for credits from Tesla.”
It is incomprehensible to me that the folks on the CARB in California are so stupid as to believe that electric cars make any sense at all let alone require 15% of new car sales. One of my fears is that we also have leaders in the NJ legislature that appear to be equally stupid and obsessed with similar fantasies.
OOPS we have leaders in Washington who share such stupid notions!!
We should not spend one penny on an electric car until we have a viable battery.
The car is technically feasible, a viable battery remains to elusive after years and years of research and may never be realized.
One secret to successful research is to determine the weak link in any concept and focus basic research and efforts on solving those problems. Don’t attempt commercialization until all the knotty problems have been solved at the bench scale, repeat solved.
south park
smug alert
fitting
http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s10e02-smug-alert
“Just like everything else these days, smoke and mirrors wins out over reality even though everyone knows that it’s smoke and mirrors (see wind and solar energy).”
—————————————
It’s not smoke and mirrors when a bank robber spends the money they stole. Doesn’t make it anything approaching right or ethical though.
It must be understood that every car manufacturer is subsidised by their governments – General Motors who manufacture Holdens and Cruze in Australia has received huge payouts from the Australian Government – the latest being $200 million. (The Holden V8 appears in the US as a Chevy SS)
Tesla are leading the research in electric car technology, battery technology etc and should be encouraged IMO.
I would love an electric car, not for environmental reasons but because I’d love to drive a car with the torque available with electric motor drive. It also requires less maintenance than a petrol motor etc.