German Government Expands Subsidies For Electric Cars (dw.com) 86
The German government and car industry have agreed to increase joint subsidies for the purchase of electric cars on the same day automobile giant Volkswagen began production of a new all-electric vehicle. From a report: The agreement between the government and the automobile industry was reached following a Monday evening "car summit" aimed at fostering the mass production of cleaner transportation. Under the agreement, consumer subsidies for electric cars costing less than $44,500 will increase to about $6,700 from from $4,400. Purchasers of plug-in hybrids in this price range would be given a subsidy of $5,000, up from $3,320. For electric cars over $44,500, there will be an increase in the subsidy by 25%. Industry and government will evenly split the cost of the subsidies. The subsidies will also be extended from the end of 2020 to the end of 2025. In addition to the subsidy issue, the two sides discussed ways to expand infrastructure for electric cars.
Can someone from Germany explain (Score:3)
How does splitting the subsidy work? I guess there must be some benefit to the manufacturer doing it this way rather than just dropping the list price by a few thousand Euro.
Re: (Score:2)
But then what would he have to complain about?
Just kidding. I'm sure he could still find an innumerable number of things to complain about.
Tax the people, to subsidize the rich's sports car (Score:1)
So let me get this straight... We're going to tax all the working class people who can barely afford a brand new car, let alone an expensive electric car, so that we can pay subsidies to rich people buying expensive electric cars.
And then we wonder why so many people harbor ill-feelings towards people driving around those subsidized electric cars [electrek.co].
Seems legit. Save the planet!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So let me get this straight... We're going to tax all the working class people who can barely afford a brand new car, let alone an expensive electric car, so that we can pay subsidies to rich people buying expensive electric cars.
Yep. Also, tax the people that didnt go to college to subsidize those that did, tax those that saved for their retirement to subsidize those that didn't, tax those that live in sustainable rural environments to subsidize those that don't, and so on.
The theme is: Tax the responsible to pay for the irresponsible.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Or put another way, tax the fortunate people who could afford to go to college so that unfortunate others might go, tax those who were fortunate enough to have money to save for retirement for those that were too unfortunate to afford saving for retirement, tax those that live in sustainable rural environments to subsidize those that cannot pick up and move to a sustainable rural environment, and tax all of us so that we don't make the world too hot for those who cannot afford cool air.
Taxing the fortunate
Re: (Score:2)
You are not reading his comments correctly. "tax the people that didnt go to college to subsidize those that did,"
This is criticizing things like Stafford Loans and proposals like loan forgiveness which benefit the 25% of Americans who actually get a bachelor's degree. The taxes are drawn from the fortunate, but also from the less fortunate. On balance these kinds of programs subsidize the most affluent Americans. See also the mortgage deduction and even "Medicare for all" proposals - poor and old people al
Re: (Score:2)
Existing Medicare subsidizes the affluent because they live longer.
Existing Medicare hurts the poor because it is funded with a regressive payroll tax.
Social Security also disproportionately benefits the affluent. Not only because they live longer, but also because they make wiser choices about when to start drawing benefits. It is generally wiser to wait, but the poor can't afford to do that.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Rural environments are not sustainable. Living in a rural area is pretty much a guarantee that you use more resources, create more waste, and emit more CO2 than if you lived in a city.
Re: Tax the people, to subsidize the rich's sports (Score:1)
This is so wrong it makes my head hurt.
Re: (Score:1)
Here, maybe this [archive.org] will make your head hurt even more!
Re: Tax the people, to subsidize the rich's sport (Score:1)
An article by a biased guy full of anecdotal points and references that can at best be described as controversial, from 15 years ago?
Yes, yes that did make my head hurt more.
Re: (Score:3)
This is so wrong it makes my head hurt.
No, it is not wrong. Rural people have bigger cars, drive them more, live in bigger houses, which require more heat per sqft than apartments. They have bigger lawns, which require more water and more chemicals.
In many countries, rural people heat and cook with firewood or charcoal, which is a leading cause of deforestation, especially in Africa.
Rural families also have more children. In poor countries, they often have even more kids than they want due to a lack of access to contraception and low literacy
Re: (Score:2)
I dunno hoss, i'm on several acres of forest land. How much carbon do you think each acre of that offsets?
I'd argue that living in an overgrown ant farm is damaging to the psyche and is not sustainable either.
Re: (Score:3)
I dunno hoss, i'm on several acres of forest land. How much carbon do you think each acre of that offsets?
Unless you planted the forest, it doesn't benefit from you living there.
I'd argue that living in an overgrown ant farm is damaging to the psyche and is not sustainable either.
Rural isolation may be worse: Americans in rural areas more likely to die by suicide [cdc.gov].
Re: (Score:2)
those that live in sustainable rural environments
*Laughs in Central Europe*
Re: (Score:2)
Europe has plenty of rural areas.
Especial countries with warmer climate, the question is how rural you want to go.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Sustainable" makes in that context no real sense.
Re: (Score:1)
More like, tax those who inherited their wealth to subsidize those who have to work for it!
That couldn't afford to save for their retirement because their money was taken from them to subsidize the wealthy [strongtowns.org]! So I think returning their money during their retirement years is completely appropriate, don't you?
Re: (Score:1)
Seems legit. Save the planet!
You mean "Save the planet...for me!"
Re: (Score:2)
The other thing that your argument forgets is that these subsidies also bring down the costs of used EVs. How? Take me for example. I bought a used
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Can someone from Germany explain (Score:5, Insightful)
Fossil cars aren't economically viable, they have to be heavily subsidised by other people. It's just much harder to measure the value of the subsidy because it's distributed. Healthcare, cleaning, climate change mitigation, pollution etc.
Re: (Score:2)
I can buy a used car for cheap. A very good one for less than four thousand dollars.
What is the used EV market like? Can I buy a used EV for less than four thousand dollars and expect to put 150k miles on it?
Note, there is no subsidy in that purchase. I do not get a tax credit. I do not get anything except exchanging money for keys.
Re: Can someone from Germany explain (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Not paying an ill defined tax != subsidy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What carbon emissions does a car, by itself, contribute that an EV doesn't? The fuel is what causes the emissions but taxing that isn't enough.
But Ok. So we redefine subsidy to fit your definition so you feel comfortable conflating a grant as not taxing a car to assume a car is not economically viable compared to an EV.
Does that mean I get lower tax on the gas that has been raised because of carbon emissions? How is a car not economically viable when I have to pay a tax on the car and a tax on the gas and i
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's also heavily taxed. So is my fossil car subsidized or not?
Lol, just to recap so far. EV have a direct subsidy from the government to reduce cost of EV because "Fossil cars are not economical". Fossil cars are cheaper by simply having a used market but they are subsidized for not having a direct tax on the car itself yet having the fuel taxed for carbon emissions and infrastructure. That is not enough because they would still be cheaper than EV with the subsidy therefore my fossil car is subsidized ( as
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> barely pays for the roads
Depends on the State. Some yes others no.
> It doesn't do anything to offset the CO2.
States have levied taxes on gas for carbon emissions.
> civilised countries
Don't care.
Re: (Score:2)
If you had to pay a full impact carbon tax then your cheap ICE vehicle would suddenly be very, very expensive (~$10/gallon gestimate), that aside the 5 year ownership cost of a Tesla Model 3 SR+ is already equivalent to a Toyota Camry without a carbon tax and with only the $1,750 federal incentive for the model 3.
Re: (Score:2)
How did you come to $10/gallon? What will that do to the price of your EV? Are you assuming that more than doubling gas prices won't have an impact on other products?
> e the 5 year ownership cost of a Tesla Model 3 SR+ is already equivalent to a Toyota Camry without a carbon tax
Are you talking brand new Camry? My price limit is $4000 Because I can find a car for that cheap and it will last 150k miles.
> only the $1,750
I can buy a descent car at that price and with a little work and depending on how wel
Re: (Score:2)
Not paying an ill defined tax != subsidy.
Actually specifically not being taxed is precisely how subsidies work.
Re: (Score:3)
You can rest assured that the subsidy is affecting taxes, essentially meaning that the government will foot the whole bill. It's not like Merkel ever did anything to hurt the sacred German industry.
Re:Can someone from Germany explain (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
But thanks to the subsidy, you also get to count it against tax payments, so that means you only pay $88,000 in taxes.
That does not make any sense at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And why would that be the case?
The article says, the cost is split, why would the company get two tax credits?
It does not nake any sense, sorry, And your math made no sense either, why would anyone get a tax reduction two times for the same thing?
Re: (Score:2)
Its a green Germany idea.. "sense" left that side of politics back in the 1980's...
The government lets people buying electric transport feel better by giving more gov money away...
Re:Can someone from Germany explain (Score:5, Insightful)
How does splitting the subsidy work? I guess there must be some benefit to the manufacturer doing it this way rather than just dropping the list price by a few thousand Euro.
The VW diesel scandal was something of a wake up call to the German government. They finally realized that 'green diesel' was a steaming pile of bullshit and that the German car giants who are already playing a game of catch-up with Tesla would be playing catch-up with the entire industry if nothing was done. So, now the the German car giants are being dragged, kicking and screaming in protest, into the EV market at least a bit ahead of the S-curve before the traditional combustion engine goes the way of the dinosaurs. How are they benefiting from this? For one thing German car companies are getting the transition to electric vehicles and the re-tooling of their factories subsidized by the taxpayer while more libertarian countries are still waiting for market forces to kick their manufacturers in the ass and the faction of the US ruling class that is currently in charge is busy trying to put as many rocks and lions in Tesla's way as possible because: 'the future is coal and gasoline, not hippie tree-hugger libtard electric cars'. Another indirect benefit to the German car industry is that a bunch of dusty old conservative 'gas-n-diesel' CEOs and chief engineers have been golden parachuted into retirement thanks to the diesel emissions scandal and replaced by people with new ideas.
Re: (Score:3)
The VW diesel scandal was something of a wake up call to the German government. They finally realized that 'green diesel' was a steaming pile of bullshit
"Green Diesel", the popular name for diesel made by refining oil [wikipedia.org] (whether animal or vegetable) is a 1:1 replacement for diesel fuel, unlike biodiesel. Maybe you meant "Clean Diesel"?
But even clean[er] diesels aren't a scam, only the ones made in Germany by a combination of corrupt automakers, and a corrupt supplier (Bosch). Mazda has a nice one. They held off building one until they could do it right, unlike the Germans.
Re: (Score:2)
The VW diesel scandal was something of a wake up call to the German government. They finally realized that 'green diesel' was a steaming pile of bullshit
"Green Diesel", the popular name for diesel made by refining oil [wikipedia.org] (whether animal or vegetable) is a 1:1 replacement for diesel fuel, unlike biodiesel. Maybe you meant "Clean Diesel"?
But even clean[er] diesels aren't a scam, only the ones made in Germany by a combination of corrupt automakers, and a corrupt supplier (Bosch). Mazda has a nice one. They held off building one until they could do it right, unlike the Germans.
Yeah, I meant clean diesel. That having been said green (as in bio) diesel is also a dead end once you do the math on the amount of land you'd have to dedicate to growing crops to make green bio-diesel out of to power even a part of the current diesel fleet, never mind converting the entire transport and personal car fleets to the stuff. There is no getting around the fact that EVs are the future, even if the 2nd coming of god in all of his orange glory would like to take us back to coal fired steam engines
Re: (Score:2)
There is no getting around the fact that EVs are the future
Whatever. You keep telling yourself that while EV sales take a dive and governments keep handing out subsidies to drive sales.
Re: (Score:2)
There is no getting around the fact that EVs are the future
Whatever. You keep telling yourself that while EV sales take a dive and governments keep handing out subsidies to drive sales.
[citation needed]
... it should be easy to find if EV sales are experiencing a permanent and catastrophic global collapse.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I meant clean diesel. That having been said green (as in bio) diesel
Green diesel is refined lipids. Biodiesel is transesterified lipids. Stop conflating the two, it's confusing. Petrochemicals come from biological sources too, if you go back far enough, should we call all diesel biodiesel?
is also a dead end once you do the math on the amount of land you'd have to dedicate to growing crops
Nope. You can pump seawater into the desert near a salt flat, grow algae in it, use the lipids to make green diesel (or biodiesel, or some combination thereof) and use the rest to make butanol. Then you dump the salty wastewater into the salt flat. There's no need to grow crops on topsoil.
Re: (Score:2)
There is no getting around the fact that EVs are the future
That's correct, but we literally cannot build batteries fast enough to put everyone in an EV any time soon, so liquid fuels will be with us for quite some time.
I see that as a solvable problem.
Re: (Score:2)
I see that as a solvable problem.
Technically? Sure. Realistically? I don't think so.
Sure, it will be "solved" ... but slowly.
(Barring some technological development which makes it much cheaper.)
Re: (Score:2)
I see that as a solvable problem.
Technically? Sure. Realistically? I don't think so.
Sure, it will be "solved" ... but slowly.
(Barring some technological development which makes it much cheaper.)
And converting every fossil fuel powered piece of equipment on earth to bio diesel is realistic?
Re: (Score:2)
And converting every fossil fuel powered piece of equipment on earth to bio diesel is realistic?
No, it's simply unnecessary. Read up on green diesel [wikipedia.org]. Biodiesel presents special challenges, but green diesel doesn't. It's mature technology, and the fuel is a 1:1 replacement for petrodiesel in exactly the way that biodiesel isn't.
Re: (Score:2)
It is easy to make a clean diesel.
Add about 30% water to it and an additive.
Technology is well known since 30 years, but except for a few experimental ships, no one is using it.
Re: (Score:2)
It causes lubricity problems if you mix it with the fuel, and it doesn't mix well so that causes problems too. However, plenty of people are using water+methanol injection in their diesels. Water injection kits are not exactly hard to come by. You can get an EGT (set point controller) for about fifty bucks from Auber with an internal relay to trigger the spray kit's higher-power relay, which runs the pump. They might include it on stock vehicles if methanol were more available. It only helps when under loa
Re: (Score:2)
the benefit is that the car is still cheaper then you could manage as a company.
say you could drop the price €1.000, the goverment subsidy will lower the price further without requiring you to take a loss.
And they still don't know ... (Score:2, Insightful)
nuke is coming back big time... (Score:1)
... and if the US stalls on it... other countries, like India, are going to own the industry. But it'll come.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:And they still don't know ... (Score:4, Informative)
Not even 1% of the places where we could build a wind mill has one. Offshore is basically completely unused at the moment.
You also forget that we often have a huge overproduction, EVs on smart meters would be pretty cool.
Re: (Score:1)
Why not tax ICEs? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
They already do. Thats what the taxes on the gas you purchase is.
Re: (Score:2)
Because you would need an EU wide tax for that. Or I could buy my ICE car just in France or Netherlands and drive home with it.
Re: (Score:2)
That didn't go very well in France for example.
Also what you might not know is that there have been bans for diesel cars (depending on emissions) in various large German cities. People don't like it and now and then demonstrate against the bans.
So like the others already said, people prefer to have subsidies funded by the taxes they pay, where the fl
Re: (Score:2)
Different countries tried that in various ways. For example by taxing fossil fuels, which is inadvertently passed down to the consumer by increased prices. That didn't go very well in France for example.
Yeah, but it went over very, very well in California. So well, in fact, that voters refused to repeal a 20 cent/gallon tax increase when they had the chance. And a year later, the governor is calling for an investigation into high gasoline prices.
Re: (Score:2)
Instead of subsidizing car owners, why not tax internal combustion engine car purchases?
Because that would place the cost of such vehicles out of the reach of the people at the bottom of the economic ladder, and harm their economy. This handout to one of their largest employers (VAG) will promote it instead.
Re: (Score:2)
To make buying an EV seem like its "free market" freedom more reductions in price get offered by the gov.
EV good, IC bad... so poor working people in the EU have to support EV by seeing their tax payments support the sale of an EV.
A tax on the IC transport they have. A tax to make the buying of EV feel good.. while still using an IC...
So buying a new EV looks and feels good. Just don't ask about who is paying for the gov offe
DIesel (Score:2)
Re: DIesel (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
i don't know about the US, but in EU agriculture diesels run on 'special' diesel.
it works just fine for your car as well, but they do random checks to see if you're not using the agriculture diesel for your car.
and if you are, the fines are massive.
Carbon intensive (Score:1)
Germany's electricity grid is very carbon intensive so using electric cars there instead of modern internal combustion engine does not help much. In fact, i wonder if they do not have a negative environmental impact because the construction of the electric cars (not their operation) is more energy intensive than the ICE ones.
In a country like France or Norway that would make more sense.
But i guess the goal is just to subsidize the car industry so whatever.
Re:Carbon intensive (Score:4, Informative)
Germany's electricity grid is very carbon intensive
No it is not. ~47% comes frome renewables ~10% from nukes.
Re: (Score:2)
And even if it were true (which it isn't) EVs produce less CO2 than ICEs even when charged from coal plants.
How much does Tesla M3 cost in Germany? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla knows how to play that game, though.
Just look at the special Canadian edition that came about after they set a subsidy just under the M3 price.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/b... [google.com]