Further to this post,
Electric Fairyland, Part 2: Too much green (at least in US) to drive green
from an Op-Ed piece in the Washington Post:
…
Maybe it was karma, but the Volt’s launch coincided with publication of a 72-page report by J.D. Power and Associates that confirmed, in devastating detail, what many other experts have found: Electric cars still cost too much, even with substantial federal subsidies for both manufacturers and consumers, to attract more than a handful of wealthy buyers – and this will be true for at least another decade.What little gasoline savings the vehicles achieve could be had through cheaper alternative means. And electrics don’t reliably reduce greenhouse gas emissions, since, as often as not, the electricity to charge their batteries will come from coal-fired plants.
The Obama Energy Department has suggested that, with the help of federal money, manufacturers can ramp up mass production and bring the price of electric-car battery packs down 70 percent by 2014 – thus rendering the cars more affordable.
But J.D. Power is skeptical. “Declines of any real significance are not anticipated during the next 5 years,” the report notes, adding that “the disposal of depleted battery packs presents yet another environmental challenge.”
Nor are industry and government close to resolving the lack of a nationwide recharging infrastructure – or the vehicles’ poor performance in cold weather or on hilly terrain.
Fine print on the Volt ad promises just “25-50 miles of electric driving in moderate conditions.” Translation: Much of the time the car will be running on gas, just like ones that cost far, far less than the four-seat Volt’s price of $33,500 (after a $7,500 federal tax credit).
In short, the Obama administration’s commitment of $5 billion in loans and grants for electric cars is the biggest taxpayer rip-off since corn-based ethanol. It benefits no one but a few well-to-do car buyers and politically connected companies. Any “green” jobs these rent-seeking firms create will vanish when consumers reject their products and/or the subsidies cease…
The J.D. Power study is hardly an outlier. It jibes with similar work by Deloitte Touche, Boston Consulting Group, Roland Berger Strategy Consultants, professor Henry Lee of Harvard’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Energy Initiative.
Last year the National Academy of Sciences’ National Research Council concluded: “Subsidies in the tens to hundreds of billions of dollars. . .will be needed if plug-ins are to achieve rapid penetration of the U.S. automotive market. Even with these efforts, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles are not expected to significantly impact oil consumption or carbon emissions before 2030.”..
Another nail in Dauntless Dalton’s coffin?
McGuinty promises to boost plug-in car
The Ontario government is giving a jolt to the Chevy Volt.
While the experimental electric car that General Motors hopes will turn around its fortunes doesn’t hit the market till late next year, the province, which owns 3.8 per cent of GM after a multi-level government bailout of the automaker, is planning hefty cash incentives for would-be Volt buyers.
Premier Dalton McGuinty and Transportation Minister Jim Bradley will be at Courtesy Chevrolet on The Queensway this morning to announce “support for Ontarians buying electric vehicles.”
In the U.S., the Volt, a plug-in electric hybrid that is more advanced than traditional hybrids such as the Toyota Prius because it is propelled solely by its electric motor, will cost about $40,000 and there are to be government rebates worth $7,500.
Sources say McGuinty, a vocal booster of the Volt since it was first unveiled as a concept car in 2007, plans cash incentives in Ontario of up to $10,000…
My tax dollars at work to help “…a few well-to-do car buyers and politically connected companies.” Fie.
Update: Version of the post is in the National Post’s “Full Comment”:
Mark
Ottawa
Instead of trying to flog the environmentally correct electric vehicles, the government,and the taxpayer would be better off if we got rid of the huge V-8 gas guzzler option,and went to diesels for all vehicles requiring power,like my company truck.
A viable electric vehicle may be decades away,so let the auto companies pay for their own research,and market one that actually works, instead of providing us with expensive “experimentals” that we’ll buy at our financial peril.
A vehicle with a 25- 50 mile range is useless in Canada,and what effect does -25 have on the batteries? No thanks,I’ll keep the gas powered vehicle and make it to work every morning.
The only real way I can see the Electric cars getting started is to build the car as a Modular unit where the Corporation owns the Battery pack to write-off on a tapered wasting asset, the car owner leases the completed remains and can ugrade the battery cell or have the dealer dispose of the hybrid cell and then resell or scrap the car.
The delivery of gasoline and its perfected refining is too cheap to abandone, so either work on flex-fuels and bio-fuels for current 4 stroke engines and then shift gasoline to more Gas-Turbine Locomotives and high mileage Transport trucks to keep the demand high for older cars being retired.
To lease a Hybrid worth well over $30’000.00 makes no sense when a 4 cyl import is 66% of the price and will never cost $10’000 extra in gas to negate the benefits.
I do not understand why we in North America cannot get small diesel engined vehicles like you can get in every other country in the world. Most vehicles in Europe have small, clean burning diesel engines that are far more efficient than gas at a fraction of the price of hybrids.
Very good question. Diesels are around 50% of sales in Europe–see the chart here:
http://blog.polk.com/blog/guest-blogs/0/0/scrappage-incentives-hurt-diesel-car-sales
Mark
Ottawa
Splendor:
Various reasons including:
“Note that in many countries of Europe, Diesel fuel has less of a price premium to U.S. diesel. Some countries subsidize diesel through lower taxes. As a result, there are many more diesel vehicles in Europe compared to the US, and diesel fuel is more readily available.”
http://goeurope.about.com/od/transportation/a/gas_prices.htm
A linked graph shows average diesel prices in Europe are roughly $1 per gallon (U.S.) gallon less than gasoline prices.
Fuel is inexpensive in the U.S. hence there is less incentive to go diesel to save money.
I’m not certain on this, but emissions standards for NOx and particulates may be higher in the U.S. (and especially California) than Europe. That is why both VW and Mercedes stopped importing diesels for a while until they developed the technology to meet the new standards.
A few years ago, Jeep produced a diesel powered Liberty. After two years of production, it was canned because of “new emissions regulations”. Hmmm…
Any other country in the world, you can buy Toyota Hiluxes (pre 2004 Tacoma), Land Cruisers, and other passenger cars, light pick-ups and SUV’s with fuel efficient small diesels.
Apparently, Jeep and Ford will be producing Wranglers and Rangers respectively with diesels, but they will only be available outside of North America.
Hybrids, on the other hand, are very impractical for the added cost outside of congested urban areas because the electric motor kicks in only when you’re crawling in traffic at less than 30 km/h.
Sorry for the rant. The lack of small diesel engined cars in our marketplace (available to the rest of the world) is a pet peeve of mine.
One I share, larger diesels too:
http://carscoop.blogspot.com/2009/06/2010-bmw-7-series-new-306hp-diesel-for.html
“…For the 7-Series, the new model year brings a new straight-six diesel engine with 306 horsepower on the 740d…”
Mark
Ottawa