I'm not going to break down every point, but these few....
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Era
You mean like the $35K Tesla, or the $35K Chevy, or the $30K Nissan, or the number of low cost Chinese cars waiting to get permission to be imported into the North American market. And that doesn't take into consideration the number of models the Europeans are developing and bringing to market.
|
There is no 35k Tesla yet, The Bolt loses money on every sale,
Quote:
|
An unnamed source cited by Bloomberg News estimates that General Motors is expected to take a loss of between US$8,000 and US$9,000 per Bolt sold. A GM spokesman first declined to comment on the expected profitability.[20] Opel refuted that in December 2016 and states that GM has battery cell costs of $130/kWh, and industry is not yet optimized for mass production.[21] A UBS teardown in 2017 suggested slightly smaller losses per vehicle, of $7418 on a base spec, or $5520 on a higher spec vehicle.[22] They estimate that by 2025 the Bolt will make a profit of about $6000 per vehicle.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Bolt
and the Leaf starts at $30,000, which could be compared with the comparable Versa Note is $16 000. The Bolt is a similar class car. So they are almost twice the cost. I'm not even going to get into the Chinese examples. The European ones are going to have similar price discrepancies to the Leaf and Bolt. I'm not trying to push an agenda here, I'm just stating facts. BEV's are much more expensive, and it isn't changing any time soon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Era
Yeah, even if it is contributing to the demise of the planet as we know it. What are you going to do when these vehicles do become more affordable? What would happen if these subsidies you were crying about were finally held back from the car manufacturers and the fossil fuel industries? What happens when you have to pay for a gallon of gas what it actually costs to process it? What will happen then? Will those IC engines still be affordable? Christ, I'm hearing people piss and moan about cost with gas at $3.20 a gallon. Double that when the subsidies end and then talk about affordability.
|
When these vehicles become more affordable I'll probably buy one. I wired my new garage with 2 50A circuits for just that possibility. You are painting an image of me that you have made up in your head. I'm being realistic. My original point was wondering if subsidizing EV"s made sense for CO2 reduction. I then did some research and found that no, they do not. You haven't actually refuted that. Because we have limited funding, I'd rather the subsidy go to other areas where it is more effective at reducing CO2. That's all. But you have imagined that I'm some gas guzzling dinosaur. It's not the case, I'm just looknig at these things form realistic angles and trying to understand the most effective way forward. From my view that isn't subsidizing consumer BEV's.
As snootchiebootchies pointed out, urban pollution is a big issue, but lets start with the worst of the polluters. I think replacing diesel buses with natural gas makes a lot of sense. Maybe battery powered buses as well, though costs are a bit of an uncertainty given the need for pack replacements. I'd actually like to see diesel banned or greatly reduced in cities given the particulate pollution it produces. I've seen lots of natural gas delivery vehicles in Calgary and they could probably replace many diesels. Semi trucks are a big issue as well, but that's a tough one. Given the short lifespan of these types of vehicles I think it makes sense to move to natural gas now, and maybe when batteries or hydrogen or something starts to make sense they will be EOL anyway. But lets get started on these things now, so I'd rather see subsidies help municipalities make these changes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Era
Well, that's a credible source.  |
Well that's nice. Who cares what the source is, go find me one that proves otherwise. I've seen similar numbers elsewhere. The point still stands.