Posted by: KenN
Posted by: tashi
Our people are poorer than those in Norway too. Makes it harder to buy our way to sustainability.
But implementing an incentive program that truly makes a new EV more affordable than an equivalent ICE will still work - ie., anyone buying a new car already (presumably) can afford a new car and thus will have their choices influenced by the incentives.
BC's incentive of $3000 is piss in a bucket. Even the US, which will soon be offering up to $12k in incentives is way better. Norway has a VAT that is added to all new car sales, but for the last 6 years (at least) the VAT was waived for zero emission vehicles.
No matter what the incentive amount is, it’s only going to people who can afford new cars. Since most people can’t afford new cars, it’s essentially a wealth transfer to the wealthy. Like most targeted subsidies. And like most targeted subsidies, it’s enacted because it’s politically beneficial because it’s “free money” and looks like the politicians are doing something.
Anecdote time: Victoria used to provide free charging in its parkades. My father, who has an extensive commute was able to fuel his commute at no charge. I have a short commute, make decent money, but don’t have the resources to buy an electric car. By paying for my fathers fuel through my taxes I was just getting further from being able to switch, while paying for the unnecessarily long commute of someone who can pay cash for a 6-figure luxury car. Does this make any sense? Wouldn’t taxing the shit out of the externalities make more sense?
Has anyone done an accounting of say carbon emissions (or any other major pollutant) comparing running a vehicle 5 years longer vs buying a new electric? Making new shit generally costs the planet far more than keeping shit going, even if the old thing is a little dirtier.
