From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
By Paul Homewood
If you wondered why EV fleet sales have been doing so well, look no further than the government approved Electric Car Scheme:
In short, employees can lease an EV via the scheme, paying for it via salary sacrifice. This means that the employee saves the Income Tax and NI he would otherwise have paid:
Salary sacrifices are perfectly legitimate, and commonplace – for interest employees might opt for higher pension contributions from his employer. However what makes the EV option attractive is the very low rate of Benefit in Kind taxation.
To be able to save 30% on the cost of lease payments is naturally hugely attractive to potential buyers, and is a subsidy paid by government.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Of course, the subsidy is not paid by government. The subsidy is paid by taxpayers.
Technically a lack of tax revenue is not a subsidy paid by the government since nothing is paid. Still a subsidy. Most of the Inflation Reduction Act subsidies are tax credits so also not paid but still a very real.cost.
It is called pump-priming, deficit spending, to prop up a near-zero, real-growth economy, with decreasing real, spendable incomes, increasing trade deficits, and increasing deficit spending, and increasing interest on the growing national debt, to….. save the world, from what?, while floating in a wicker basket down the Mississippi
The US people are so screwed by Biden’s follies, including open borders.
My pint is a lot of these subsidies do not involve spending. Also Congress passed the IRA not Biden.
The Congress passed a $390 billion IRA, but Goldman Sachs estimates the cost at $1.3 TRILLION, because IRA provisions are not capped, and loosely written, on purpose.
The U.S. people are again so screwed.
Both numbers are just guesses as to how many tax credits will be claimed over the next ten years. Those depending on profit may never happen.
The out of control spending, CBO “certified”, has come about, exactly because of Congressional low-ball guesses of their fantasy misdeeds.
That is the reason, we are having uncontrollable deficits for decades; a credit card without limit, until all of a sudden the market says, enough of this BS.
No one dares propose increasing taxes
This “argument” annoys the hell out of me. It’s money the government gets from Joe to fill the hole created by Alice not paying. Quibbling about it not being revenue is the too cute by half nonsense beloved of lawyers.
The tax credits are to get investors to invest in high-cost wind/solar/battery systems that NO ONE would invest in without about 50% subsidies
That level of subsidies, on a national basis, has been proven to be totally untenable in a sane world.
The ITC subsidies are paid up front when the owner makes an “investment” in wind, solar, batteries, etc.
If the investment goes sour, as some do, those tax credits are lost, unrecoverable.
Not sure why you think it isn’t a subsidy, DW. Subsidy is any market intervention, usually in the forms of cash, grants, or tax breaks, to stimulate demand or supply in such a way the quantity sold increases.
This appropriately named ‘scheme’ seeks to artificially increase demand. The great thing, indeed maybe whole point, will be that if this subsidy measurably increases demand, then we’ll see sale prices rise. Win win, except that shlubs in the shrinking middle class will be compelled to pay more and more into an ever shrinking fiscus.
Of course, as with any other monstrous OPM (other people’s money) scheme, there is precious little way to measure effectiveness — that is, bang for the buck. But, I can’t see this making any financial sense to the average shlub, unless he was already committed to buying such a vehicle. In other words, the net effect of this is to partially socialize the cost of a new car, and privatize the benefits to EV manufacturers.
According to all Liberals, failure to tax IS a subsidy if anything fossil fuel related is involved. Get it straight.
The U.S. government is racking up about $1 trillion in debt every few months now on behalf of its citizens. At the border, “immigrants” are handed a $5000 debit card, which usually more than covers what they own to the cartels.
If it seems like it’s out of control, it is.
Migrants?
On its way, is another 15000 more.
A large glob of unvetted, unskilled, uneducated, not English-speaking/writing/reading people, with no work ethic, culturally different, from impoverished, crime-ridden neighborhoods, in Third World countries, is being rounded up by billionaire-financed, Globalist NGOs, with help of local governments, that aim to get rid of these people, and with help of an infrastructure of bleeding-heart US NGOs to “settle” them, and try to get them on voter registration lists asap.
All are just marching through Biden’s welded-OPEN BORDER, causing major social unrest, and damage to US traditional culture, and costing the US people hundreds of $BILLIONS PER YEAR, in addition to the $100+ BILLION Ukraine folly.
Vote the Biden posse out, asap, to save the US.
“Migrants?
On its way, is another 15000 more.
A large glob of unvetted, unskilled, uneducated, not English-speaking/writing/reading people, with no work ethic, culturally different, from impoverished, crime-ridden neighborhoods,
Sounds like a lot of the the immigrants that populated the USA & Australia 250 yrs ago, displacing the indigenous people.
The “immigrants” to Australia post-1788 were British convicts exiled to remote new colonial outposts as extra punishment for their “crimes” (mostly minor theft).
Still, these exiles were sent to far better conditions than the overflowing barques and coal barges anchored in the Thames they were imprisoned on back in Blighty.
If you are making a comparison, you need to be correct.
These millions of walk-ins from anywhere are displacing Americans who live in an advanced industrial society
Your prior walk-ins were displacing hunter, fishing, gathering, foraging folks.
China, Russia India, etc., are laughing at us, as we destroy ourselves from within. They have to do nothing, but wait.
Wake up, you brainwashed fools.
“Migrants” are the new “illegal aliens.”
I find it strange that the Bidens are allowing thousands of Chinese males of PLA age each month. Trojan horse?
if you think the Joe Bribe’em is bad, just as BAD ARE REPUBLICANS WHO HAVE NOT EVEN THOUGHT OF IMPEACHING HIM IN 2021, 2022 OR 2023 FOR COMPLETELY IGNORING IMMIGRATION LAWS.
The Republicans did not control the House until 2023.
Please explain how they could impeach him in 2021 or 2022.
And the House passed a resolution to authorize a formal impeachment investigation less than a month ago, all Rs voted in favor.
And if they are smart about it, a big if, they won’t vote to impeach until after Brandon becomes the Democrat nominee.
Then the dog and pony show every day of another of the Brandon administration’s anti-democracy, pro corruption and treasonous actions.
Have the vote in the Senate the week before early voting starts so that John Tester, Kyrsten Sinema, Angus King, Jacky Rosen, Sherrod Brown, Bob Casey, Tim Kaine, and Tammy Baldwin, who are all democrats in Republican of swing states and are up for election this year, will vote to Impeach or not. That vote could swing the election for the Senators, and or Brandon. Forcing the vote will make it more difficult for those senators to high there true liberal voting record. Joe Manchin already has walked away from his Senate seat.
Being from Nevada, Jacky Rosen has been in the papers lately (Israel, etc.) supporting conservative or middle of the road issues to try to get re-elected. Trying to fool NV voters. She has voted far left liberal every time in the US Senate.
Good idea, they may indeed have this scenario mapped out.
Impeachments start in the House, per US Constitution
Pelosi was in charge, and she was NOT going to impeach Biden, but did impeach Trump TWICE, for next to nothing, compared to the serial grifting/grafting/influence-peddling crimes of the Biden family, while the 10% BIG Guy was VP
Richard, I agree … ” …. REPUBLICANS WHO HAVE NOT EVEN THOUGHT OF IMPEACHING … ” . “Not even thought … “! Although they did not have the numbers at the time, you are perfectly correct as there were more than just a handful who indicated that they would not vote to impeach anyway.
Yes: When government decides who gets a tax break, it give them power. They choose winners and losers and that sucks.
Conservatives generally want an even playing field, low taxes and limited spending. So this SCHEME makes a clever and evil argument for choosing winners and losers while they continue unabated spending.
There is a lot to unpack here!
> the subsidy is not paid by government. The subsidy is paid by taxpayers.
Plus the massive government overhead costs of administrating the schemes.
Notice also that the scheme is disproportionately beneficial to the higher tax brackets.
Paul/Anthony, “paid by the government” sorry paid by the taxpayer. Government’s do not have any money.
Do we really have people commenting here who don’t know how to use apostrophes? You’re not seriously one of those people who puts an apostrophe on every plural word, are you?
And as for the article – LOL at the “Each person wants to make choices to achieve a net zero future.” Sure – we all want the price of food to rise inexorably, and to freeze to death in the Winter. The arrogance and stupidity of EVERYONE who believes in ‘climate change’ is beyond belief.
Maybe not native English speaking ?
From time to time I too have some problems and have to look up in dicts. and grammar explanations.
but.. but.. they can print it! /sarc
“Each person wants to make choices to achieve a net zero future”. That is quite an assumption and demonstrates the mentality of the fantasy world that climate alarmists inhabit.
Net Zero is probably the MOST DESTRUCTIVE economic policy any country can attempt to implement.
Why would anyone want to destroy their own country. ???
Politicians need to be asking themselves that question, in front of the mirror, every morning.
I really, really wish I understood Net Zero in the same manner as our illustrious MPs who spent a mere 88 minutes of parliamentary time discussing it without a single vote eventually committing us to purgatory!
We are going to invest (spend) £Trillions to achieve cheap, reliable energy so that, in turn, will help save the World from Climate Disaster. (I believe that is the sum of it).
For my very few brain cells remaining I think that this (investment) will help reduce the Satan’s molecule (CO2) – but, of course, only the anthropogenically produced carbon dioxide. Again, correct me if I am wrong, the anthropogenically produced CO2 amounts to around 3% of the total. Surely we can never in a Month of Sunday’s, reduce this three percent to Zero – ever(?)
So, in a good year, we (the World) may come together and reduce the 3% anthropogenic emissions to possibly 2.9% (that is) if we ALL stay at home, don’t travel or switch on any electrical devices for one year (no heating or aircon) and don’t produce anything (including EVs, Wind Turbines or Solar panels. We then hope that there are no huge natural volcanic eruptions similar to the Tonga eruption which sent c. 146 teragrams of water vapour into the stratosphere – around 10% of the water already in the atmospheric layer to which will disrupt the stats.
Am I getting anywhere close to the thought processes of MPs? (Santa didn’t bring me anymore brain cells this year, again!)
“Again, correct me if I am wrong, the anthropogenically produced CO2 amounts to around 3% of the total”
You are VERY wrong, and stupid if you continue to repeat the 3% hoax
‘
This 3% hoax has to end
It is making conservatives look like fools
About +250 manmade CO2 emissions since 1850
About +140 ppm atmospheric CmO2 icrease
since 1850
The entire +50% increase of CO2 since 1850 from 290ppm to 420ppm (+140ppm) was manmade
+140ppm / 420ppm now = 33%, not 3%
I’ve been trying to refute CAGW scaremongering since 1997 and the 3% manmade CO2 cult of idiots is standing in the way, just like some RINO Republicans are standing in the way of impeaching Jumpin’ Joe Bribe’em
The Tonga volcano had no measured effect on the global average temperature.
The stratosphere contains perhaps 1% of all atmospheric water vapor so a 10% increase is tiny.
You need another hobby
Nut Zero is a strategy to increase government power over the private sector devised by evil leftists whose ultimate goal is fascism, which they see as Rule by Leftist Experts.
And after all your aggressive “debunking” of the man-made CO2 estimates, you insert a reference to that nonsensical “average global temperature” construct?
Greene is not an honest person.
You seem to have bypassed and ignored the warming oceans release of CO2 as to henry’s law. 420 ppm is still at trace gas level and a 33% increase in almost nothing is still almost nothing. The plants are still starving but it is an improvement.
Salute!
Well put, Matthew.
Perhaps use that observation to get a grant for further research.
Maybe the warming water releasing the evil gas is why we see the gas increasing AFTER the temperature goes up! This is definitely worth submitting a grant request.
Gums sends…
NASA satellites have shown that the planet has increased biomass by more than our “emissions” can account for.
NOBODY knows how many of these there are:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRYgeOMBlmQ
140ppm is 14 thousandths of 1% of the total atmosphere, and over 170 years that’s less than 1 thousandth of 1% per decade. That cannot be outside of a reasonable margin of error. Do you really believe they can make comparisons to that accuracy from ice cores?
“Although our output of 29 gigatons of CO2 is tiny compared to the 750 gigatons moving through the carbon cycle each year,…”
This is about 3.8%.
He did say total.
As I understand it, ad hominem attacks are normally the domain of Communists, Marxists and the Left Wing of politics. Scientists normally discuss and debate!
This is poorly constructed sarcasm right? Please tell me there are not people who have imbibed this much Kool-Aid.
Don’t believe anything he posts.
Mr. Monte: IMO that’s too harsh. He opposes AGW cult, and fights the same battle we fight. He has an annoying (kind word) habit of picking fights here, this is a great example. Went out of his way to attack the idea (co2 source from warming oceans) and says we are hurting the cause. On a point (CO2 source?) that can’t be resolved in a few posts, and his certitude, particularly where he admits the uncertainty in the field, is maddening. “Don’t believe anything he posts” goes too far.
He claims to oppose it, but AFAICT he only wants to stir people up.
So I don’t believe anything he posts.
Mr Greene:
My understanding is that as the earth warms up, the oceans, also warming, release CO2. So, it would follow that the warming since 1850, although miniscule, must account for most of the 140 ppm of CO2, not vice-versa, since the ocean has not only released it, but is ‘unwilling’ to absorb it anymore. I had thought that there were a number of research papers that observed a temp-CO2 lag, although that might be some other mechanism.
Folks this whole thing is not about science; it is grift, by government, media, corporations, big tech, you name it. Accompanied with power or control. Okay I’ll name it: the ruling class. Look at who you are not allowed to challenge or criticize.
The government is killing all of us. How? They continually take more and more of the money we earn from us ‘to save the planet’. We then have less and less money for good healthy food, good living conditions, and adequate medical care. So, when you die 3 years early, it was like the government pulled the trigger today and the bullet hits you in the future. But it hits you. And your spouse, and your kids and on and on.
They do not care about the lies. Follow the money. Notice.
If you want to change minds, tell folks things that ought to make them angry.
It is part of the worldwide communist plan to equalize all counties – since they can’t improve 3rd world countries they must tear down advanced economies –
The millionaires and billionaires plan on making trillions from the $US200 trillion in spending Bloomberg’s green energy research team estimates it will cost to meet the 2050 deadline. They own the media and control the politicians with their campaign contributions.
Not much point in talking to themselves. Politicians don’t own their own minds. They don’t know what a free conscience is let alone the value of it. Same goes for most voters. Unfortunately.
” ….. then you can enjoy your nightmare electric car …. ”
There, fixed the second sentence in the explanation of what the salary sacrifice scheme means.
Oldseadog, you’re absolutely correct, however your nightmare is my dream: to cheat the system and get a 60% subsidy on an electric golf cart. Since my accountant does not have ME paying any taxes, somebody else will pay. Merry Christmas!
This must be a parody website. According to the website “The Tax Advisor”, the company owned vehicle is a taxable benefit when used for personal use, including commuting.
“Employees generally must include in income the fair market value (FMV) of their personal use (including commuting) of an employer-provided auto (Regs. Sec. 1.61-21(a)(1)).”
https://www.thetaxadviser.com/issues/2022/nov/employer-provided-company-owned-vehicles.html
democrites are exempted
Does that include the Big Man?
He gets an extra 10% 🙃
The FAQ under the Employee tab indicates lessees have to pay the “benefit in kind” tax, which presumably in the UK is at a lesser tax rate than the sacrificed income, thereby providing additional offset. Weird scheme none the less.
I think the tax treatment with this EV arrangement is that it is not treated as an “employer- provided” vehicle.
Wow, it does not get much better than this.
The Washington, DC, perpetrators of these follies want to be re-elected to have power over you, to use more of your money, the do more of the same follies!!
Electric Buses: Electric buses have been failures in Oslo, Minnesota, etc., but nations, states and municipalities, wanting to polish their green credentials, keep on doing the impossible with other people’s money, despite abundant contrary evidence.
Minnesota Cities Used $Millions in Federal Grants to Buy Electric Buses For Public Transit, But the Buses Failed During Cold Weather, Had Charging Issues
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/minnesota-cities-used-millions-in-federal-grants-to-buy-electric
Oslo’s E-Bus Fleet Could Use Some Warming…City Paralyzed As Buses “Break Down” Due To Cold
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/oslo-s-e-bus-fleet-could-use-some-warming-city-paralyzed-as-buses
.
Currently, the vast majority of charging infrastructure is concentrated in more densely populated coastal areas, as opposed to more rural areas of the country, according to the Department of Energy (DOE).
Almost all people in rural areas, often with dirt roads, and snow and ice and cold, and longer distances, are definitely not buying EVs.
Insurance Costs Very High: EV insurance rates are about 3 times the rate of gasoline vehicles, completely wiping out any energy savings.
Monthly Payments Very High: Because EVs are more expensive and interest rates are high, monthly payments are much higher than for gasoline cars, completely wiping out any benefits of subsidies.
Useful Service Life Very Short: EV useful service lives are very short, usually at most 8 years.
No one in his/her right mind, would spend at least $15,000 to $20,000 to replace a battery in an 8-y-old EV, which by then. would have lost almost all of its value, unlike a gasoline vehicle.
Charging Cost Very High: EV charging cost is very high, usually at least 30 c/kWh.
The annual fuel cost savings are minimal, because EVs are driven fewer miles per year than gasoline cars, and the price of gasoline is about $3.20/gallon
Minimal CO2 Reduction: EVs, driven about 72,000 miles for 8 years, do not reduce CO2 emissions compared to efficient gasoline vehicles, if CO2 evaluations are made on a mine-to-landfill basis.
“Useful Service Life Very Short: EV useful service lives are very short, usually at most 8 years.”
Total BS
EV batteries will last the life of the vehicle unless damaged in an accident.
At 200,000 miles their range could be down 10% to 20% but that is not a big deal that makes the EV worthless
The 8,000 mile battery hoax is data free conservative claptrap.
The charging costs at home are lower than gasoline costs.
EVs have a huge number of disadvantages.
There is no need to lie if we want to criticize them. The truth is bad enough.
“The charging costs at home are lower than gasoline costs. This is only due to the government artificially inflating the gas prices.
“The ratings are based on EPA’s formula, in which 33.7 kilowatt hours of electricity is equivalent to one gallon of gasoline.”
The average residential electricity rate in Michigan is 19 cents per kWh.
I don’t think charging cost is lower than gasoline.
Mr Kelly. You are right I just calculated and my cost for gas is about $5.49 per gallon and the electrical equivalent where I live is is $5.94. So I’m saving roughly $0.45 per gallon in my $2500 truck. Boy I’m glad I didn’t buy an EV.😉😎
Teslas, driven 75,000 to 80,000 miles, will have lost about 15 to 20% of battery capacity at end of year 8.
So if going with more than one passenger, with some luggage, was a challenge on a longer trip, and on a cold/snowy day even more of a challenge, then an older EV has all that and more., which is reason enough not to buy one.
Used EVs lose 50% of their high original value at end of year 3.
Well-stated.
This is a UK program(me), not a US plan.
It will not work like is shown in the US.
The clue, NI payments, not FICA.
Ah, the new company car.
And the best Christmas cracker joke so far?
“”Making the switch to electric vehicles: ‘The biggest shock was the huge savings’””
https://amp.theguardian.com/business/2023/dec/23/making-the-switch-to-electric-vehicles-the-biggest-shock-was-the-huge-savings
Here’s a question I don’t yet understand- do EVs work in very cold weather? What is the temperature range an EV owner needs to worry about this?
Read my above comment
Battery University recommends not charging an EV, if its battery temp is 32 F or less.
This “news” has been known at least 10 years, but is carefully suppressed by manufacturers and the lapdog media owned by billionaire Globalists
In Vermont, we have -25 F or less
Yikes
Get a bike with a dynamo….
Of course, the wealthy have nice heated garages, their own charging units, can easily afford whatever the electric bill is, and have servants to worry about it.
Like our RINO Governor in Vermont, and his chauffeur-driven, always-washed, always-shiny, SUV EV going for shorter trips here and there, showing off being WOKE, extolling EVs for you and I, as a good thing.
The Democrats have veto-proof majorities in Vermont, the most socialist/communist state in the U.S., by far,
Theylike to have him around, because he does not “interfere” with their shenanigans.
If he did, they would get rid of him in a heart beat.
Battery cars are nothing except demonstrations of virtue signaling.
Total BS
You are a great source
of EV disinformation
EVs are safe to charge in all weather conditions.
In very cold weather battery power must be used to keep the battery case warm so charging will take longer. In cold weather EVs will lose range if they are not plugged in ad not moving (parked) because the battery thermal management system is keeping the batteries warm.
A Battery Thermal Management System, or BTMS, helps to maintain a battery pack at its optimal temperature range of 20o to 45oC regardless of ambient temperature.
When temperatures are too low, it slows the chemical reactions and reduces the amount of charge a battery holds. In both scenarios, the car’s software will also slow down its charging speed to avoid stressing the battery.
Clown Greene is back and spewing…
With ZERO evidence to back his loudmouth claims.
As per usual.
Funny you say this crap but in the real world it is not true. The busses don’t work when it gets cold and they don’t work much better even when they are warm. Batteries are the issue and always will be as the laws of physics are not going to change.
Salute!
Lemme see if I unnerstan this:
The EV battery or maybe an external add-on battery or a plug-in doofer (like we use to use to keep the evil ICE warm enough to start) burns a charge to heat the big, mamoo EV main battery to keep it above 20 deg C. WOW! So my island retreat in the Keys is a great place for a new EV….BUT, but..I just got transferred back to Winnepeg Canada and it routinely gets way below zero on both C and F thermometers. In fact, we even used to use a light bulb ( not LED or fluro thing) to keep the battery warm, or bring it inside at night.
So If I got the math correct, we use a battery to power the vehicle and all accessories, then we use it to keep itself warm between charging? This sounds like a pyramid investment scam. Besides, my apartment cannot charge my new EV, nor the other 40 residential apartments due to small wires and limited parking in the main garage. But we’ll save Earth and our own money!!! Somehow this sounds fishy.
Gums sends…
Until it gets wet in the next rainfall event, at which time an emergency push off the causeway into the ocean may become necessary.
Charging Batteries at Less than 32 F: If an EV owner parks at an airport, goes away for a few days or a week, upon return he/she may find the EV with an empty battery, if during that week the weather were below freezing, because the battery thermal management system, BTMS, will maintain battery temperature, until the battery is empty, then the battery freezes to below 32F, or less. Charging would not be allowed, until the battery is warmed up in a garage.
Mr. Greene: Several comments here state “EVs this” or “EV batteries that” as if they are all the same. But they’re not, are they? Tesla fanboys will tell us the battery is better than others, they do talk. Let’s not bother with them, just tell me if the numbers your Ford engineer gave you apply to Chevy Volt?
You are well aware that differences across makes/models/batteries exist, why do you ppost as if there is only one EV battery? And we’re hurting the cause??!!
0 degrees F.
40% to 60% loss of range
Sitting outside at 0 degrees F, unplugged
2% to 4% loss of range per day
95 degrees F.
15% to 20% loss of range
Data from Ford electrical engineer about one year ago
Batteries must be heated or cooled,
which wastes energy.
well, as I’ve said before- if my woke governor wants to give me one so I can help save the planet, I’ll take it!
Governors give nothing for free. You pay for it all. They buy the peoples votes with the peoples own money. They are pissing themselves laughing.
You will regret it!
Joseph, when posing questions like this, you need to add “asking for a friend”.
😊
Call Fact Checkers…many facts need checking.,..including does CO2 really cause climate warming? Does an EV have to be driven 80000 miles before it can be said to begin to “save” the creation of net CO2? Do EVs cost an average of 25% more than ICE vehicles?….but the EVs depreciate faster? Why does gubment subsidize EVs? Over 1/2 the population including China and India will determine the future atmospheric CO2?
Fact checkers ?? Really ??
I never read of one having checked facts.
Sarc?? 😀
Opinion Spouters?
Narrative compliance checkers
does CO2 really cause climate warming?
Yes, but a small amount and harmless
Does an EV have to be driven 80000 miles before it can be said to begin to “save” the creation of net CO2?
Depends on fuels used to generate electricity
The Volvo study found that, in a scenario in which its power source is the current global energy mix, the C40 Recharge EV would need to cover 68,300 miles to break even with its gas-power equivalent — or almost six years, based on U.S. average miles traveled a year, roughly half its lifetime.
Do EVs cost an average of 25% more than ICE vehicles?….but the EVs depreciate faster?
Tesla Model 3 $39,000 – $7500 – $31,500
Toyota Corolla $22,000
Cost difference Tesa is 43% more WITH tax credit
2021 Tesla 3 depreciation 1/3 by December 2023
2021 Toyota Corolla depreciation less than 10%
Approximate 2023 prices in Detroit area
Why does gubment subsidize EVs?
Because EV are too expensive and have many disadvantages — only rich leftist virtue signalers would buy them without tax credits
Over 1/2 the population including China and India will determine the future atmospheric CO2?
Over 7/8th of the world population could not care less about CO2, so Nut Zero will never stop the rise of atmospheric CO2 … which is great news for plants and the people and animals who eat them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car_longevity
A quick search. If you read it, remember it is written by a leftist so it quotes “futurists” who use numbers for life of an ICE vehicle LESS then earlier in the article of 200K MILES for the AVERAGE 2012 ICE car.
I love the last little bit where they mention a Tesla going a million miles, but with the replacement of 8 motors and at least one new battery. Funny how they don’t know how many battery replacements.
My 2002 Chevy Silverado, now owned by our son, is over 250K miles with only a transmission replacement. That year transmission was known for problems, but still lasted 160K miles. GM fixed the issue, according to a repair garage owner I spoke with, and later model years are lasting much longer. The transmission was replaced by a new crate gm transmission for under $3k. My son has begun to replace bushings, after 24 years, you know, rubber parts, even though the truck still ran straight and true. He is a truck driver and has the shop area and tools to do the job.
As to your point #2, 68,300 miles being 1/2 the life of the electric, compared to 200K for an AVERAGE 2012 model year ICE. Not very good for the EV I would say.
Just so you know, I buy new and keep for a LONG time. I know I could save by buying used but I love the new car smell, and due to the way I care for my cars, I usually have the smell for over 5 years from the date of purchase. My wife’s RAV 4 is at 12 years old and only 120K miles since we are retired. The only work, replace one wheel bearing, shame on Toyota for that.
Oh, don’t forget the ICE advantage of my diesel truck traveling over 500 MILES on a fill up, and to refuel is 5 to 10 minutes. The RAV 4, 250 miles plus and 5 minutes to refill. And yes, we do regularly travel over 200 miles from point to point in either vehicle depending on our needs. Home to cabin, 210 miles, with one stop to top off the RAV 4, travel time under 3 hours 15 minutes. The diesel will fuel on the way due to lower diesel costs in Utah, but the same travel time and I can then drive all the way home and back to Utah (if I don’t do a lot of local driving in Vegas) on the tank with NO range anxiety lol.
BTW: Are there 2 different Richard Greene posters. If not, you must have at least 2 personalities.
“Scheme” That is all ev crap is, a scheme to steal, all the while producing massive amounts of toxic waste. And lets us not forget the child labor and slavery required for ev “production”. Yea, a scheme and nothing else.
Madness and idiocy. Rather, eliminate personal income tax altogether and let the Guardian readers buy their golf carts while the rest of us buy what’s practical.
Well, they got the “scheme” part right. The real “sacrifice” is made by poor people through inflation brought on by deficit spending.
Anytime you see the canned phrase “meet 1.5C temperature rise goal”, or derivatives thereof, remind yourself that you are looking at extrapolations from linear regression of bogus air temperature anomaly “data”.
Any undergraduate who has passed an introductory statistics course can tell you that extrapolation of linear regression outside of the range of x data is invalid.
Feeling violated yet? I suspect only well paid employees could give up much of their pay check. So this is a scam to store worthless EVs in a rich persons garage rather than have them waste away on the car lot. Out of sight out of mind. These people are pitiful.
Each person wants to make choices to achieve a net zero future.
oh drat, maybe I won’t be able to attain my net zero goal??? How will I live with myself? Oh wait, I don’t give a rats ass about their stupid policy and what idiocy they set up thinking that I should adhere to.
This blew my mind. 90% of the 2022 model-year gasoline and diesel cars and trucks have lower PM emissions than EVs. EVs are mandated or governmentally “justified” based on their particulate matter (PM), NOx and GHG reductions being greater than gasoline or diesel vehicles or internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs).
I was surprised to find that 90% of the 2022 model-year ICEVs have lower PM emissions than EVs charged by California power plants. Using the EPA Certified Emission Values for 2022 model-year gasoline and diesel cars and trucks https://www.epa.gov/compliance-and-fuel-economy-data/annual-certification-data-vehicles-engines-and-equipment and EPA Fuel Economy Guide Energy Use for 2022 model-year EVs.
A fact that WE all need to be lobbying EPA and CARB is to recognize is that all ICEVs consume air and thus air pollution. [The current policy assumes that all vehicles are operated in laboratory pristine clean environments.] Examining Low (110 ug/m3) and Mid (225 ug/m3) PM conditions shows that 90% of the 2022 model-year ICEVs have PM levels below zero. For NOx, 60% of the 2022 Model Year ICEs are lower than EVs. This is HUGE.
But, what car dealership is willing to take that cost hit? Is the government giving them the money? Most manufacturers have a profit margin of 4%-7% on vehicles. Further, this whole scheme seems to violate state and federal laws on leasing, with the residuals being fixed by the manufacturer. What will the money factor be? Why wouldn’t the manufacturer jack it up? This scheme will also destroy the used market for the vehicles.