So final tax for EV cars in 2023

[davymead]

Sales of new ICE ends in 2030. That isn't asking consumers to change, it's compelling them.

Precisely, and apart from all of the other arguments ongoing, compelling is where a whole lot of folks I come into contact with have a big problem. Particularly when said legislation is drafted by egoistical dopes with a track record of not being able to run a bath, let alone a country.

 

[markjay]

Here's what I would do:

- Where possible, pedestrianise main streets in city centres, with car access only for traders at certain hours of the day (or night).

- Ban all non-zero-exhaust emissions vehicles from entering all main cities, with some exemption given to trade vehicles and LGV/HGV as needed.

- Bring back trams for all those cities who not currently have them.

- Let anyone who wants to drive an ICE car, do so. In practical terms, only people living outside main cities will still own them.

Would you vote for me....?

 

[SW18]

... compelling is where a whole lot of folks I come into contact with have a big problem.

I don't really get that point. We're all compelled to do (or not do) many things in life. It's a normal part of society.

 

[davymead]

Here's what I would do:

- Where possible, pedestrianise main streets in city centres, with car access only for traders at certain hours of the day (or night).

- Ban all non-zero-exhaust emissions vehicles from entering all main cities, with some exemption given to trade vehicles and LGV/HGV as needed.

- Bring back trams for all those cities who not currently have them.

- Let anyone who wants to drive an ICE car, do so. In practical terms, only people living outside main cities will still own them.

Would you vote for me....?

Possibly not Mark, as we seem to be living on different planets at this moment in time.

 

[ALFAitalia]

.....and because petrol stations will have disappeared by then.

Why?........there are lots more vehicles than cars out there.....like several million motorcycles......all of which will need fuel....and then there are HGVs and bigger vans (no dates for EV on those yet) etc etc. Sure we wont need as many of them and many will be changed to EV charging stations (not sure how but they will) but I don't see petrol stations becoming extinct anytime soon.

 

[ALFAitalia]

Here's what I would do:

- Where possible, pedestrianise main streets in city centres, with car access only for traders at certain hours of the day (or night).

- Ban all non-zero-exhaust emissions vehicles from entering all main cities, with some exemption given to trade vehicles and LGV/HGV as needed.

- Bring back trams for all those cities who not currently have them.

- Let anyone who wants to drive an ICE car, do so. In practical terms, only people living outside main cities will still own them.

Would you vote for me....?

No....!
And by the way....despite what makers claim there is no such thing as Zero Emissions vehicle.....the emissions (although they are less) are just moved. Apart from tyre particulates which are worse with an EV due to their higher weights.

 

[Bellow]

It will compele people to choose (in 2030) between a new or second-hand EVs, and a second-hand ICE car.

Those who prefer new will doubtless go new EV - unless financially outwith their reach (possible).

About 10-15 years later (2040-2045) people will no longer be practically able to choose an ICE car of any description, both because those available will be too old for them, and because petrol stations will have disappeared by then.

Unless they become ethanol/methanol/etc stations. Oh, I know - that won't happen!

But in reality, the legislation itself will have little effect on the changes in the car market, because things are likely to move much faster than that.

It would be a brave or stupid car manufacturer who continued to produce ICE when countries have banned their sale. The legislation is of importance here. Ditto EURO 7 regs which (although I haven't seen the detail) very likely overstep what is actually required of a motor car and its operating environment.

The financial incentives for EVs and the punitive measures for fossil fuel cars will achieve this much sooner.

In fact, the government's legislation it totally pointless because it can easily achieve this via financial measures, and indeed it appears to be doing just that. I would hazard a guess that the announcement was simply an attempt at political point scoring while in fact the government's goal would be largely achieved anyway using financial leveraging.

I don't doubt that and there's always turning off the tap of essential maintenance/replacement parts to hasten the transition.
This is unsettling though. Huge swathes of people depend on the car for their own essential personal mobility are looking up the road aware that the government will price them out of what they have yet the only alternative is so far financially out of reach (to what extent can PCP deals be massaged to be affordable?)

It seems to me that most people do want to do what's right for the environment but when it comes to cars are being priced out - excluded. Excluded when the problems we face require that everyone is engaged. The car (EV) has become the focus of 'greenness' and the centre of a debate that excludes all the other changes we can make at the personal level. Changes that if enacted have the potential to reduce CO2 emissions to a larger extent than replacing an ICE with an EV. EV is becoming an exercise in box ticking where it is the only visible box to tick.

The legislation does, however, eliminate the 'pay to pollute' situation where a handful of super wealthy people might have continued to buy new V8s and other exotic cars.

In actual numbers, too few to worry about. The misers too miserable to properly maintain their diesels did much more damage. Now, EVs - which I don't dispute improve inner-city air quality - are being thrust upon all of irrespective of where they will be used, and their ability to actually reduce CO2 emissions is not fully realised until their manufacture and recharging is from renewable sources. And, sadly, hoodwinking some into believing they've 'done their bit' by buying one. I guess we could test their green commitment by banning EVs from airport car parks. Like the Glaswegian woman distressed at being delayed by the Just Stop Oil protesters on the M25. She claimed to 'totally understand their point' - while heading to the airport for a short haul flight to Glasgow.... You don't have to be 'super wealthy' to get it wrong - but you can buy yourself a nice EV.

 

[Gollom]

Here's what I would do:

- Where possible, pedestrianise main streets in city centres, with car access only for traders at certain hours of the day (or night).

- Ban all non-zero-exhaust emissions vehicles from entering all main cities, with some exemption given to trade vehicles and LGV/HGV as needed.

- Bring back trams for all those cities who not currently have them.

- Let anyone who wants to drive an ICE car, do so. In practical terms, only people living outside main cities will still own them.

Would you vote for me....?

I don't disagree in principle - but the city centre traders will certainly not be your friend!

 

[markjay]

No....!
And by the way....despite what makers claim there is no such thing as Zero Emissions vehicle.....the emissions (although they are less) are just moved. Apart from tyre particulates which are worse with an EV due to their higher weights.

I did say "zero exhaust emissions".

As for tyres, true, but then EVs do not produce brake particles. However, in any event, having more pedestrianised zone will kill these two birds with one stone.

 

[markjay]

I don't disagree in principle - but the city centre traders will certainly not be your friend!

True. As they say: turkeys don't vote for Christmas.

 

[markjay]

I don't really get that point. We're all compelled to do (or not do) many things in life. It's a normal part of society.

The way I see it... when the government legislates in order to shape the public's behaviour, some people will say they are compelling us. When the government does not legislate but imposes taxes instead, some people will say that they are giving exemptions to the rich. I guess that very few government policies can please everyone.

 

[markjay]

....It would be a brave or stupid car manufacturer who continued to produce ICE when countries have banned their sale. The legislation is of importance here. Ditto EURO 7 regs which (although I haven't seen the detail) very likely overstep what is actually required of a motor car and its operating environment.....

Firstly, there are large markets outside of the Western world were new ICE cars will continue to be sold for the foreseeable future, so I don't really see auto makers stopping production of ICE cars any time soon. Though, they will likely invest much less on ICE R&D and on developing new car models etc.

Them, given that almost every major car manufacturer attempted to cheat in one way or another in order to meet the stringent Euro 6 Diesel emissions restrictions (while still keeping their cars competitive in terms on economy and performance), the subsequent huge fines and criminal convictions, and the ensuing civil class-act law suites, I think that Euro 7 Diesel is pretty much dead in the water - no Western government will accept it as a viable option, not with the history track of the failed implementation of Euro 6 Diesel. In short, Diesel car manufacturers had their chance to demonstrate that they can be trusted to make Diesel engines that won't harm our health - and they blew it.

 

[Bellow]

Firstly, there are large markets outside of the Western world were new ICE cars will continue to be sold for the foreseeable future, so I don't really see auto makers stopping production of ICE cars any time soon. Though, they will likely invest much less on ICE R&D and on developing new car models etc.

What do you envisage there? High end expensive for the oil rich Arab states? The impoverished developing world?

Them, given that almost every major car manufacturer attempted to cheat in one way or another in order to meet the stringent Euro 6 Diesel emissions restrictions (while still keeping their cars competitive in terms on economy and performance), the subsequent huge fines and criminal convictions, and the ensuing civil class-act law suites, I think that Euro 7 Diesel is pretty much dead in the water - no Western government will accept it as a viable option, not with the history track of the failed implementation of Euro 6 Diesel. In short, Diesel car manufacturers had their chance to demonstrate that they can be trusted to make Diesel engines that won't harm our health - and they blew it.

Hmmm. Is VW's claim for recycling batteries believable then?
In truth, it's not so much that manufacturers aren't trusted with EURO 7 regs as they have no desire to even attempt to meet them knowing how much cost it adds to the vehicle. Certainly not viable below a threshold price point - a further erosion of the cheap and cheerful small(er) car.

 

[Bellow]

In other news.... Just read on an American forum that fast food outlets (yes, McDonalds) are springing up around newly built recharging stations for EVs. Raze hundreds more acres of rain forest to graze cattle for the burgers while the eco-friendly EV is getting its feed of electrons.

 

[markjay]

In other news.... Just read on an American forum that fast food outlets (yes, McDonalds) are springing up around newly built recharging stations for EVs. Raze hundreds more acres of rain forest to graze cattle for the burgers while the eco-friendly EV is getting its feed of electrons.

I am a vegetarian...............

 

[markjay]

....Hmmm. Is VW's claim for recycling batteries believable then?...

Actually, in this case VW's claims are 100% believable, because if you read it carefully you'll see they did not actually commit to anything beyond the current figure of 53% (and which is verifiable by other sources). The 76% figure is currently only a pilot, and the 97% figure is a long-term goal. I only quoted it to demonstrate that referring to the the issue of battery recycling as a decisively 'unsolvable problem', was inaccurate.

 

[Bellow]

Actually, in this case VW's claims are 100% believable, because if you read it carefully you'll see they did not actually commit to anything beyond the current figure of 53% (and which is verifiable by other sources). The 76% figure is currently only a pilot, and the 97% figure is a long-term goal. I only quoted it to demonstrate that referring to the the issue of battery recycling as a decisively 'unsolvable problem', was inaccurate.

I have more trust in the claim than distrust also. I don't dispute recycling batteries is solvable but it is a massive undertaking to commit to and when all the other difficulties associated with producing EVs (I'll overlook that there is still no safe method of disposal of nuclear waste - only storage - more of which will be a fact as electrification of everything proceeds) are factored in I still cannot understand why bio-fuels are not being pursued (and may have to be merely to dispose of rotting vegetation which emits CO2 if left). I can only assume it is due to the land being prioritised for meat production and that there must be some pretty heavy hitters in the meat market for it be this way.

 

[markjay]

I have more trust in the claim than distrust also. I don't dispute recycling batteries is solvable but it is a massive undertaking to commit to and when all the other difficulties associated with producing EVs (I'll overlook that there is still no safe method of disposal of nuclear waste - only storage - more of which will be a fact as electrification of everything proceeds) are factored in I still cannot understand why bio-fuels are not being pursued (and may have to be merely to dispose of rotting vegetation which emits CO2 if left). I can only assume it is due to the land being prioritised for meat production and that there must be some pretty heavy hitters in the meat market for it be this way.

There are two levels to this issue.

Burning fossil fuels is seen as the big issue, not only because of the harmful emissions but also because of how oil sourced and produced, and the politics around coal mining.

Then, burning any form of Carbon-based fuel - from whatever source - is also seen as an issue albeit a lesser one.

CO2 emissions are only part of the problem, the other part is that it is very difficult to burn Carbon products without causing some level of harmful air pollution. See for example the recent ban of the sale of certain types of open fire woodburners and the new restrictions regarding the type of solid fuel that can be used in existing fireplaces - a major cause of Asthma, apparently.

 

[markjay]

He raises some interesting points

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[ALFAitalia]

I like him.....his views pretty much mirror mine!!