NZ Government Incentives Coming Soon For Buyers of Electric Vehicles!

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › NZ Government Incentives Coming Soon For Buyers of Electric Vehicles!

1 | ... | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | ... | 60

5118 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2274592 11-Jul-2019 12:45

Technofreak:

I find it incredible that EV evangelists that think just because an EV suits their needs, an EV will suit the needs of everyone, therefore it's OK for the government to penalise those naughty people with an ICE for not buying an EV.

It's not about penalising anyone, let alone labeling anyone as naughty. It's about people paying the true cost of what they do. If you really need an ICEV, then you pay more, which is a reflection of the damage that ICEV do to the environment, and the costs that this imposes on the Govt (i.e. the rest of us).

Sharesies

Affiliate link

Affiliate link: Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies.

ockel

1782 posts

Uber Geek

#2274595 11-Jul-2019 12:55

frankv:

Technofreak:

I find it incredible that EV evangelists that think just because an EV suits their needs, an EV will suit the needs of everyone, therefore it's OK for the government to penalise those naughty people with an ICE for not buying an EV.

It's not about penalising anyone, let alone labeling anyone as naughty. It's about people paying the true cost of what they do. If you really need an ICEV, then you pay more, which is a reflection of the damage that ICEV do to the environment, and the costs that this imposes on the Govt (i.e. the rest of us).

Except that its a token payment. If it were a true polluter-pays structure then it should be levied on km travelled (like diesel RUC) using each vehicles emissions level and the current cost of carbon credits.

Anything else is just waffle.

tdgeek

26525 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2274600 11-Jul-2019 13:07

Obraik:

I haven't looked it up but I'm doubtful there's a location in NZ where the cost of power per KM is more expensive than fuel per KM.

I checked this, here are a few places. Auckland. ChCh. Arthurs Pass, [insertanyNZplacehere]

How do I know this? I buy an $80,000 Kona, that's $40,000 more than the ICE. I'm now using cheaper power to fuel my EV but it costs me $40,000 to do that. What's my investment interest on $40,000? But I still have to pay $1 per litre RUC and electricity, so my fuel bill will slightly more than halve, and the cost to do this is $40,000 plus depreciation, so I will lose most of that over just a few short years

zyo

510 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2274602 11-Jul-2019 13:19

Obraik:
Technofreak:

The irony of this daft scheme is it relies for it's funding on people buying ICE vehicles. Then to add insult to injury, I'd say nearly 100% of those people buying an ICE vehicle would happily buy an EV if there was one available that either they could afford or fitted their needs. This scheme is an unfair tax on those that cannot afford an EV or have needs that cannot be met by an EV. This scheme isn't going to reduce EV prices to a level those that cannot afford them now will be able to afford them once the daft scheme is introduced.

So far as vehicle pricing goes that will take care of itself. As EV's become mainstream they will become cheaper and ICE will become relatively dearer. The ICE will become dearer for two reasons, ever increasing emission standards will increase development costs and as production numbers reduce the normal production costs will amortised over fewer vehicles. There is no need for the government to interfere when natural progression will achieve the same result.

I find it incredible that EV evangelists that think just because an EV suits their needs, an EV will suit the needs of everyone, therefore it's OK for the government to penalise those naughty people with an ICE for not buying an EV.

Personally I think the RUC free ride EV owners are getting is more than enough recompense.

It's not free to halt climate change, someone has to pay for it. Don't you think it's fairer that those actively choosing to contribute to climate change by buying cars that excessively pollute should be paying rather than all tax payers?

The whole idea of the scheme is that more people start buying EVs over ICE vehicles and the scheme acknowledges that as more people start buying EVs over ICE vehicles that there will be less funding for EVs - which is why the subsidies reduce each year.

RUC hasn't been working to get people to buy an EV over an ICE vehicle. We're less than two years out from the previous governments goal of having 2% of the fleet being EVs and we're not even at 1% yet. Other hand, other countries around the world have successfully combated a stagnant uptake with the introduction of similar incentives to what is now being proposed here.

Arguably motorists are paying more than enough to negate their share of climate changing emissions had their tax intake been solely used for carbon captures etc rather than subsidising public transports, new railroads etc.

Obraik

1617 posts

Uber Geek

#2274609 11-Jul-2019 13:42

tdgeek:

Obraik:

I haven't looked it up but I'm doubtful there's a location in NZ where the cost of power per KM is more expensive than fuel per KM.

I checked this, here are a few places. Auckland. ChCh. Arthurs Pass, [insertanyNZplacehere]

How do I know this? I buy an $80,000 Kona, that's $40,000 more than the ICE. I'm now using cheaper power to fuel my EV but it costs me $40,000 to do that. What's my investment interest on $40,000? But I still have to pay $1 per litre RUC and electricity, so my fuel bill will slightly more than halve, and the cost to do this is $40,000 plus depreciation, so I will lose most of that over just a few short years

The average Auckland power rate is 20.88c. The Kona EV has a kWh/100km rating of 14.3, with a RUC of $7.20 per 100km, so a cost of $10.19 per 100km. The Kona Elite AWD has a L/100km rating of 6.7 and the current 91 fuel cost in Auckland at the moment is $2.17, so $14.54 per 100km. So no, power per km in Auckland is not higher than fuel per km.

tdgeek

26525 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2274699 11-Jul-2019 15:30

Obraik:

tdgeek:

Obraik:

I haven't looked it up but I'm doubtful there's a location in NZ where the cost of power per KM is more expensive than fuel per KM.

I checked this, here are a few places. Auckland. ChCh. Arthurs Pass, [insertanyNZplacehere]

How do I know this? I buy an $80,000 Kona, that's $40,000 more than the ICE. I'm now using cheaper power to fuel my EV but it costs me $40,000 to do that. What's my investment interest on $40,000? But I still have to pay $1 per litre RUC and electricity, so my fuel bill will slightly more than halve, and the cost to do this is $40,000 plus depreciation, so I will lose most of that over just a few short years

The average Auckland power rate is 20.88c. The Kona EV has a kWh/100km rating of 14.3, with a RUC of $7.20 per 100km, so a cost of $10.19 per 100km. The Kona Elite AWD has a L/100km rating of 6.7 and the current 91 fuel cost in Auckland at the moment is $2.17, so $14.54 per 100km. So no, power per km in Auckland is not higher than fuel per km.

I did mention that to obtain the fuel cost saving you need to spend $40,000, which has an annual finance cost

wsnz

630 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2274715 11-Jul-2019 16:10

tdgeek:

I checked this, here are a few places. Auckland. ChCh. Arthurs Pass, [insertanyNZplacehere]

How do I know this? I buy an $80,000 Kona, that's $40,000 more than the ICE. I'm now using cheaper power to fuel my EV but it costs me $40,000 to do that. What's my investment interest on $40,000? But I still have to pay $1 per litre RUC and electricity, so my fuel bill will slightly more than halve, and the cost to do this is $40,000 plus depreciation, so I will lose most of that over just a few short years

Yes, depreciation can be a killer. On a new vehicle, depreciation is usually 20-30% in the first year, with 15% PA subsequent to that. This makes it difficult to recover the cost saved in fuel on even a relatively cheap vehicle, hybrids included.

Dingbatt

5873 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2274730 11-Jul-2019 16:49

Obraik:

The average Auckland power rate is 20.88c. The Kona EV has a kWh/100km rating of 14.3, with a RUC of $7.20 per 100km, so a cost of $10.19 per 100km. The Kona Elite AWD has a L/100km rating of 6.7 and the current 91 fuel cost in Auckland at the moment is $2.17, so $14.54 per 100km. So no, power per km in Auckland is not higher than fuel per km.

Oh dear! By your calculations my Camry Hybrid costs $11.28 per 100km so now there is less reason to go fully electric.

I still maintain the way you ‘punish’ the ‘polluters’ is with the price of fuel. You use more, you pay more. Thereby encouraging people to move to more efficient vehicles, without trying to mandate what size shower head to use.

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

tdgeek

26525 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2274750 11-Jul-2019 18:14

wsnz:

tdgeek:

I checked this, here are a few places. Auckland. ChCh. Arthurs Pass, [insertanyNZplacehere]

How do I know this? I buy an $80,000 Kona, that's $40,000 more than the ICE. I'm now using cheaper power to fuel my EV but it costs me $40,000 to do that. What's my investment interest on $40,000? But I still have to pay $1 per litre RUC and electricity, so my fuel bill will slightly more than halve, and the cost to do this is $40,000 plus depreciation, so I will lose most of that over just a few short years

Yes, depreciation can be a killer. On a new vehicle, depreciation is usually 20-30% in the first year, with 15% PA subsequent to that. This makes it difficult to recover the cost saved in fuel on even a relatively cheap vehicle, hybrids included.

You are right. I am a big fan of EV and solar PV. But for many, the savings you can achieve are dwarfed by the cost of buying them. Both of these have scenarios where you can manage them to maximise benefit. But solar PV need to be cheaper and EV needs to be similar to ICE cost. Both don't meet that

tdgeek

26525 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2274751 11-Jul-2019 18:17

Dingbatt:
Obraik:

The average Auckland power rate is 20.88c. The Kona EV has a kWh/100km rating of 14.3, with a RUC of $7.20 per 100km, so a cost of $10.19 per 100km. The Kona Elite AWD has a L/100km rating of 6.7 and the current 91 fuel cost in Auckland at the moment is $2.17, so $14.54 per 100km. So no, power per km in Auckland is not higher than fuel per km.

Oh dear! By your calculations my Camry Hybrid costs $11.28 per 100km so now there is less reason to go fully electric.

I still maintain the way you ‘punish’ the ‘polluters’ is with the price of fuel. You use more, you pay more. Thereby encouraging people to move to more efficient vehicles, without trying to mandate what size shower head to use.

Agree. If it cost me $x per km for an ICE and less for an EV and price are sort of similar, I will justify that. But I can't. My example is a Kona. 40k for an ICE 80 for the EV. 40k is a LOT of petrol

frednz

1431 posts

Uber Geek

#2274791 11-Jul-2019 19:40

https://www.driven.co.nz/news/lifestyle/judith-collins-solves-entire-ev-debate-by-suggesting-they-sell-them-cheaper/

From the above:

"Rather than taxing Kiwis who can’t afford EVs," she wrote, "why don’t the manufacturers bring down the prices? After all, there’s precious little to them.. apart from batteries and a wee electric motor."

To help Judith to understand why the prices of NZ-new EVs are so high, "driven.co.nz" published the above article!

frednz

1431 posts

Uber Geek

#2274796 11-Jul-2019 19:56

Technofreak:

The irony of this daft scheme is it relies for it's funding on people buying ICE vehicles. Then to add insult to injury, I'd say nearly 100% of those people buying an ICE vehicle would happily buy an EV if there was one available that either they could afford or fitted their needs. This scheme is an unfair tax on those that cannot afford an EV or have needs that cannot be met by an EV. This scheme isn't going to reduce EV prices to a level those that cannot afford them now will be able toh afford them once the daft scheme is introduced.

Although it's true that the scheme relies partly for its funding on people buying heavily polluting ICE vehicles, the real irony of "this daft scheme", is that some of what is raised from this source goes back into help people buying, well, would you believe it, more fuel efficient ICE vehicles, such as the Suzuki Swift etc.

This must make people who want to buy a new ICE vehicle feel a whole lot better, because after reading several of the "EV Evangelist" posts, you are made to feel that, if you buy a new ICE vehicle, you are badly letting the side down and that this will cause even more polar bears and seaside places to get into trouble (which is probably true).

Anyway, what happens if the money raised from those ICE vehicles that DO attract a fee, is insufficient to meet the amount of the discounts given to all those low-emitting vehicles? No doubt the Government's budgeting process will include an amount for any shortfall?

frednz

1431 posts

Uber Geek

#2274815 11-Jul-2019 20:17

tdgeek:

Agree. If it cost me $x per km for an ICE and less for an EV and price are sort of similar, I will justify that. But I can't. My example is a Kona. 40k for an ICE 80 for the EV. 40k is a LOT of petrol

https://www.stuff.co.nz/motoring/114135887/lets-not-be-fundamentalist-about-feebates-and-ev-ownership

The above article compares the discounted cost of a NZ-new 40kWh Leaf ($51,990) with the Corolla ZR ($36,690), giving a premium to pay for an EV of about $15,000. This example shows the way we are going and is perhaps better than saying the gap is $40,000, which doesn't allow for the $8,000 discount and is for a 64kWh vehicle that is in a different class to the Leaf. The non-Elite Kona costs $78,000 and will qualify for the $8,000 discount.

So, it's obvious that the Leaf is going to be more popular with budget conscious EV buyers than the more expensive and longer range new EVs, and is getting closer to the price of an "equivalent" petrol vehicle.

happyfunball

285 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2274844 11-Jul-2019 20:34

The Jacinda government is subsiding large Utes and this plan doesn’t change that much. It doesn’t seem like they are serious about climate change. From RNZ: “Right now the government is actually subsidising people to buy the very utes that could stop us meeting our climate change commitments, because when you buy a ute you don’t have to pay fringe benefits tax. Utes are categorised as a commercial vehicle exempt from FBT, unlike a passenger car.

And if you buy the ute as a business, even if you don’t need to cart around tools or livestock, you can also reclaim the GST.“

frednz

1431 posts

Uber Geek

#2274846 11-Jul-2019 20:40

tdgeek:

frednz:

tdgeek:

frednz:

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/394036/national-critical-of-government-s-clean-vehicle-incentive-plan

Short extract:

Ms Bennett said National was not against incentives for electric vehicles.

"We see the benefits in cleaner emissions from vehicles.

"Electric vehicles and other vehicles with low emissions are a great thing.

"It's the penalising of those who don't have alternatives that I think is really unfair.

"Its another tax, another cost on those small businesses, the tradies the farmers, those that are doing the hard grind out there."

It's worth reading the full article, which also mentions that:

Imported Motor Vehicle Industry Association chief executive David Vinsen yesterday

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/393967/clean-car-discount-supply-standard-ignores-consultations-imported-motor-vehicle-association

said the minister's proposal was a "draconian" way of reducing emissions] A simple pricing signal to the buying public would be most effective, he said.

Why is this move draconian? Have I missed something?

https://www.rnz.co.nz/audio/player?audio_id=2018703276

This question was also asked in the above interview and David Vinsen explained in some detail why he used the word "draconian".

Thanks Fred.

So, the feebate scheme is fine as that influences what we want to buy. But its "draconian"to ask importers to bring in cars that are low emissions. He used a lot of words to complain, but the issue is apparently the need to have an average emission level that his cars have? What I note is lots of adjectives and no detail on his problem. Feebate means you and I will buy EV's, hybrids, Swifts. This importer has a problem that he needs to manage the average emissions of these 100 EV's, Hybrids, Swifts that he imports?

If you read Part 2A of the discussion paper, it includes strong words, such as "require" and "must meet". Imagine the amount of paper work and effort needed to comply with the clean car standard proposals. I can see why some importers wouldn't be happy being told by Government how they to have to manage, by law, their vehicle imports! For example:

The proposed Clean Car Standard would require vehicle suppliers to lower the average CO2 emissions of the vehicles they are bringing into New Zealand. It would apply to all new and used light vehicles entering the New Zealand fleet, including all cars, SUVs, vans, utes, and light trucks of 3.5 tonnes gross vehicle mass or less.

The proposed Clean Car Standard would have an emissions target that vehicle suppliers must meet, on average, across their vehicle fleets. An average fleet target means that vehicle suppliers can import vehicles with emissions over the target, so long as this is balanced by sufficient imports of vehicles that are under the target. This allows vehicle suppliers to decide how they will improve their fleets to meet the target.

1 | ... | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | ... | 60