EV (electric vehicle) News & Discussion

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › EV (electric vehicle) News & Discussion

1 | ... | 586 | 587 | 588 | 589 | 590 | 591 | 592 | 593 | 594 | 595 | 596 | ... | 725

1063 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#3082964 31-May-2023 19:06

I reckon RUCs should be applied to all road-going vehicles no matter the fuel or propulsion type, and they should be based on the vehicle GVM (Gross Vehicle Mass).

This is the fairest way to apply charges, as the heavier vehicles cause more wear on the roads, and therefore they should be charged more for this upkeep based on the distance travelled. It shouldn't be based on how much fuel you use.

Fuel taxes applied to petrol don't make any sense, as there are a lot of non-road based applications where the fuel is being used (lawn mowers, recreational boats, dirtbikes, generators etc.

jarledb

Webhead
3253 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3082967 31-May-2023 19:14

jonathan18:

I was interested to find out where the Paraparaumu charger was, given that's the one I'm most likely to use

That seems like a strange place to put them. Someone said construction has started. Have you seen anything happening around there @michaelmurphy ?

Jarle Dahl Bergersen | Referral Links: Want $50 off when you join Octopus Energy? Use this referral code
Are you happy with what you get from Geekzone? Please consider supporting us by making a donation or subscribing.

jarledb

Webhead
3253 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3082972 31-May-2023 19:26

Mehrts:

I reckon RUCs should be applied to all road-going vehicles no matter the fuel or propulsion type, and they should be based on the vehicle GVM (Gross Vehicle Mass).

This is the fairest way to apply charges, as the heavier vehicles cause more wear on the roads, and therefore they should be charged more for this upkeep based on the distance travelled. It shouldn't be based on how much fuel you use.

Fuel taxes applied to petrol don't make any sense, as there are a lot of non-road based applications where the fuel is being used (lawn mowers, recreational boats, dirtbikes, generators etc.

I disagree. I think RUC should be based on emissions. We need to get the vehicle fleet in NZ turned towards less pollution.

Your idea about vehicle weight, if it is going to be fair - would mean they would have to charge huge amount on trucks etc.

I think we are going to see RUC being applied to all types of vehicles when they change it, but have a feeling it might not happen for a while yet. They will have to find a way to effectively manage RUC payments and how far the vehicles have been driven.

HarmLessSolutions

969 posts

Ultimate Geek

Subscriber

#3082973 31-May-2023 19:32

Dingbatt:

Technofreak:

Sorry, GST and RUC are two very different things.

No need to be sorry. I know the taxes are different. There’s fuel excise on petrol as well. And general taxes (or more accurately, tax backed borrowing) are being used to ‘offset’ the excise reduction at the moment.

I believe in pure “user pays” for all vehicles. A fee per km for each vehicle class, like diesel vehicles currently have, including petrol vehicles. Fairer for everyone, but unlikely to be instituted because the fuel excise is too easy for the government to collect as it can’t be avoided.

A distance based RUC system is pretty much the only way that they can be levied on EVs so that's pretty much a given but how the distance is recorded is the big question. A GPS based monitoring system such as that used by E road for fleet vehicles would make for a simple way to automate the collection of these charges on a regular basis which avoids manual payment by owners and eliminates the fraud present in the current self reporting of the diesel vehicle charge. Jusy graduate the per km rate to incentivise/penalise different fuel types and vehicle weights.

The next question is where do hybrids and PHEVs fit into this system so that are fairly charged, and not charged doubly by way of distance and fuel. Extend the distance based system to all road vehicles is an obvious solution. When EVs' are drawn into the RUC net next year we will find out what conclusions have been made from the current RUC discussions underway.

https://www.harmlesssolutions.co.nz/

richms

28168 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3083019 31-May-2023 20:00

jarledb:

I disagree. I think RUC should be based on emissions. We need to get the vehicle fleet in NZ turned towards less pollution.

Your idea about vehicle weight, if it is going to be fair - would mean they would have to charge huge amount on trucks etc.

I think we are going to see RUC being applied to all types of vehicles when they change it, but have a feeling it might not happen for a while yet. They will have to find a way to effectively manage RUC payments and how far the vehicles have been driven.

Trucks already do pay a huge amount, Wear goes up as an exponent of weight per wheel so that only makes sense to do that.

Emissions should be on the fuel per gram of CO2 released when used. Its easy enough to do on the sale of it since there isn't really anything to do other than burn it in an engine.

Damage to the road should be on distance x weight ^ n where n is something the smartypants work out.

For cars with connectivity the logical thing is to pass it onto the car maker like trucks do with eroad to charge it. For dumb cars pay it up ahead and you get checked at WOF time and if its behind, no car for you till caught up. It is not far off working for all the diesel SUVs and utes that are under 3500kg that have to pay it, just a silly thing to have to get a little paper thing to show when anyone checking it would have a device that can get the info as part of all the rest of the vehicle query they do.

Richard rich.ms

Obraik

2123 posts

Uber Geek

#3083026 31-May-2023 20:24

jarledb:

jonathan18:

I was interested to find out where the Paraparaumu charger was, given that's the one I'm most likely to use

That seems like a strange place to put them. Someone said construction has started. Have you seen anything happening around there @michaelmurphy ?

That was me 😊 This pic was posted on the FB group last week:

Looking to buy a Tesla? Use my referral link and we both get credits

Mehrts

1063 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#3083033 31-May-2023 21:11

jarledb:

I disagree. I think RUC should be based on emissions. We need to get the vehicle fleet in NZ turned towards less pollution.

Vehicle licencing (rego) can be based on vehicle emissions as an option. Just as it's based on safety standards currently.

The lower the emissions, the lower the rego cost per year.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

DS248

1691 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#3083046 31-May-2023 22:30

Mehrts:

jarledb:

I disagree. I think RUC should be based on emissions. We need to get the vehicle fleet in NZ turned towards less pollution.

Vehicle licencing (rego) can be based on vehicle emissions as an option. Just as it's based on safety standards currently.

The lower the emissions, the lower the rego cost per year.

Except distance is equally if not more important. Car I drive has done ~10,000 km in the last 5 years. Cars doing 50,000+ km per year should pay a lot more.

Scott3

3963 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#3083059 31-May-2023 23:31

Mehrts:

I reckon RUCs should be applied to all road-going vehicles no matter the fuel or propulsion type, and they should be based on the vehicle GVM (Gross Vehicle Mass).

This is the fairest way to apply charges, as the heavier vehicles cause more wear on the roads, and therefore they should be charged more for this upkeep based on the distance travelled. It shouldn't be based on how much fuel you use.

Fuel taxes applied to petrol don't make any sense, as there are a lot of non-road based applications where the fuel is being used (lawn mowers, recreational boats, dirtbikes, generators etc.

That's how current RUC's work, take a look at the rates table.

https://www.nzta.govt.nz/vehicles/road-user-charges/ruc-rates-and-transaction-fees#RUC-rates-for-distance-licences-powered

Note that the rates for 2 axle light powered vehicles (7.6c/km un-discounted) are very close to the rates for 2 axle vehicles up to 6000kg (8.0 or 8.2c/km depending on the rear tire configuration).

This is because light vehicles do negligible road damage compared to larger heavy vehicles, which are charged at much higher rates, for example class 666 (a 18,000 - 20,000kg 2 axle crane) pays $1.087/km. Light vehicles are largely just paying for space on the roads and chipping in for general upkeep, such as repairing storm damage, rather than paying for the damage they cause.

The RUC system strongly encourages large tucks to have lots of axles, as the same load spread over more axles is less damaging to the road.

I understand that road damage goes up by the 4th power or axle load, so there is an argument that even with their expensive RUC's, that the heavy transport industry is getting off cheap.

jarledb:

I disagree. I think RUC should be based on emissions. We need to get the vehicle fleet in NZ turned towards less pollution.

Your idea about vehicle weight, if it is going to be fair - would mean they would have to charge huge amount on trucks etc.

I think we are going to see RUC being applied to all types of vehicles when they change it, but have a feeling it might not happen for a while yet. They will have to find a way to effectively manage RUC payments and how far the vehicles have been driven.

We already have what is essentially a carbon charge included in Petrol & Diesel via the ETS. Personally not the biggest fan of the ETS, as I feel that the massive carbon farming it encourages isn't a great outcome and would rather see a carbon tax instead (from which the money would go to general taxation. But this is the system we have... And given we have this system it is not really to crank up carbon charge component of petrol / diesel more to raise tax to run the roading system. Firstly it is pretty unfair that the carbon charge to make 1kg of CO2 is way more than it would be to make it with a decorative gas flair... Secondly, as we move to a greater electrified share of road transport, at some point the charge on emitting vehicles is going to be unworkable high, so all the EV's can use the roads for free, and the whole funding system won't function anymore... And thirdly, hammers those in poverty... That family of 8 who can only afford a 2004 previa 2.4L that burns 11.7L/100km as their only car (and can't afford to live somewhere not car dependent) is now lumped with paying for the bulk of the roading network, that EV owners use for free...

Basing a per km charge on the rated emissions of the vehicle would be: - Fairly complex to administer, - fall into the same fairness traps as the above, - like the clean car schemes, suffer from that rated emissions often don't reflect real emissions (so many cars doing Auckland commutes with roof tents on them...)

Some of the problems we have with moving to RUC's on all vehicles is that the current system with a road use component adding a lot to the price of petrol does already function as a strong incentive for efficient (petrol cars). Swap this out with a per KM RUC charge, and V8 owners will rejoice, while efficient hybrid car owners (especially the taxi industry) get really upset that their running costs have shot up, despite them doing the right thing and buying efficient cars...

An unintended effect of the per liter diesel road tax is that it makes small efficient diesel cars nonviable, and pushes most large, inefficient vehicles (utes, Larger off road style 4x4, Large van's) to diesel fuel.

All up I thing the most likely outcome is that the government of the time will just kick the can down the road a few more years when it comes to getting rid of the light EV RUC exemption.

Next most likely outcome I see is just picking an arbitrary lower value for EV RUC's. Perhaps 1/2 the normal rate for Pure EV's, and 1/3rd the rate of PHEV's, but change the rules so that PHEV's cannot claim back petrol tax like other RUC-paying petrol vehicles.

I feel this last option would be poor outcome, the owners of diesel, Hydrogen, and other alternate fuel vehicles (waste veggie oil etc.), would rightly still ask why EV's get to use the roads at half price. And the EV's not paying their fair way argument would still stick around...

I really do think that RUC's on all vehicles is the fairest option (ideally a GPS based system that incorporates congestion charges), but I think it will be many years before a government has the guts to make that change.

empacher48

368 posts

Ultimate Geek

#3083074 1-Jun-2023 07:08

HarmLessSolutions:
The next question is where do hybrids and PHEVs fit into this system so that are fairly charged, and not charged doubly by way of distance and fuel. Extend the distance based system to all road vehicles is an obvious solution. When EVs' are drawn into the RUC net next year we will find out what conclusions have been made from the current RUC discussions underway.

The ability to charge a petrol vehicle RUC and then claim back the petrol tax so you’re not charged twice is already there.

My father has a large American SUV, LHD converted and runs on petrol. He has to pay RUC due to its weight. (About the best vehicle for towing a 5th wheeler).

He buys RUC just like a diesel vehicle, but every quarter you send copies of your fuel receipts back to the NZTA who pay back the levy on the fuel you bought.

wellygary

8312 posts

Uber Geek

#3083145 1-Jun-2023 08:58

Scott3:

An unintended effect of the per liter diesel road tax is that it makes small efficient diesel cars nonviable, and pushes most large, inefficient vehicles (utes, Larger off road style 4x4, Large van's) to diesel fuel.

Although given what we have subsequently learnt about the inability of small diesel cars to meet basic emissions standards, this consequence was probably a positive for NZ at the time...

Dingbatt

6754 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#3083147 1-Jun-2023 09:10

Just watched Richard Edwards’ (EVs&Beyond) first drive YouTube video of the BYD Dolphin. Essentially the NZ vehicles $50K (45kWh) and $56K (60kWh), so perhaps a little more expensive than some might have hoped.

edit: Oh, and they’ve launched their vehicle via YouTube but it’s not on their website. So the spec sheet shown in the video isn’t accessible.

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

HarmLessSolutions

969 posts

Ultimate Geek

Subscriber

#3083154 1-Jun-2023 09:32

empacher48:
HarmLessSolutions:

The next question is where do hybrids and PHEVs fit into this system so that are fairly charged, and not charged doubly by way of distance and fuel. Extend the distance based system to all road vehicles is an obvious solution. When EVs' are drawn into the RUC net next year we will find out what conclusions have been made from the current RUC discussions underway.

The ability to charge a petrol vehicle RUC and then claim back the petrol tax so you’re not charged twice is already there.

My father has a large American SUV, LHD converted and runs on petrol. He has to pay RUC due to its weight. (About the best vehicle for towing a 5th wheeler).

He buys RUC just like a diesel vehicle, but every quarter you send copies of your fuel receipts back to the NZTA who pay back the levy on the fuel you bought.

Claiming back the RUC component of petrol may be a solution for the small number of oversized and totally offroad vehicles currently but I don't see this as a practical approach when you consider the massive numbers of hybrids in NZ.

Owners are going to be resistant to having to both record their distance travelled (if it remains a non-automated input) plus then submitting the paperwork involved in claiming the RUCs back, then of course the processing required by NZTA. How many NZers presently claim the RUCs back for their boat, lawnmower, chainsaw, dirt bike, etc. fuel?

https://www.harmlesssolutions.co.nz/

Scott3

3963 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#3083163 1-Jun-2023 09:53

Dingbatt:

Just watched Richard Edwards’ (EVs&Beyond) first drive YouTube video of the BYD Dolphin. Essentially the NZ vehicles $50K (45kWh) and $56K (60kWh), so perhaps a little more expensive than some might have hoped.

edit: Oh, and they’ve launched their vehicle via YouTube but it’s not on their website. So the spec sheet shown in the video isn’t accessible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgS_Qapcz_k

It's a respectable offering, but it has come in a lot more expensive than people have been speculating. Entry pricing for the BYD Dolphin is exactly the same (+ORC on both) as that of the MG ZS EV & Ora Goodcat entry trim. Rated range is about the same (340km WLTP on the Dolphin standard range, 320km for the MG ZS EV standard range, 310km of the Ora good cat standard).

Not the prices to change color at the bottom left of the spec sheet.

Standard range Dolphin is unusually low powered for the segment at 70kW (12.3s 0-100 time). This is less power than the 80kW in the old shape leaf, and a lot less than the 130kW MG ZS EV & the 126kW of the Ora good cat.

The extended range is quite powerful for the segment at 150kW & 7s 0-100. For the private buyer the $6000 jump the extend range version looks like a good value:

More than double the power 0-100 time drop from 12.3s to 7s
More range (320km vs 427km WLTP estimate)
Faster DC charging (60kW vs 80kW)
Different (better?) interior and exterior colors available
Bigger wheels & fatter tires
No payload hit (410kg on both versions)
Only a very minor efficiency hit (15.9 vs 15.2 kWh/100km)

I'm guessing that the standard range will largely be sold to fleets, who want to avoid the image of having a fleet full of SUV's.

Scott3

3963 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#3083170 1-Jun-2023 10:08

wellygary:

Scott3:

An unintended effect of the per liter diesel road tax is that it makes small efficient diesel cars nonviable, and pushes most large, inefficient vehicles (utes, Larger off road style 4x4, Large van's) to diesel fuel.

Although given what we have subsequently learnt about the inability of small diesel cars to meet basic emissions standards, this consequence was probably a positive for NZ at the time...

Yes absolutely. We absolutely and accidentally dodged the bullet that hit Europe with regard to urban air quality, by essentially pricing small / economical diesel cars off the road.

For those who are unaware, some years back, Europe put in place strong incentives to by lower-emitting vehicles (in CO2 terms). This drove a lot of people to pick more economical diesel models over petrol models (Hybrid tech wasn't as widespread as it is today and this is before EV's became a viable option for many). Despite improving diesel emissions regulations, air quality in Europe big cities became the worst it has been in modern history.

In short, diesel cars are better than petrol for CO2 emissions but worse for local air quality. Fleet mix moving to diesel in the real world resulted in much worse air quality despite the tighting emissions regulations. A big factor in this is that diesel cars did worse in the real world than on test:

Some brands outright cheated on the test, and when the car detected it was being tested ran a low emissions tune, but otherwise ran a tune with a high emissions profile (allowing more power, less fuel usage etc.)
In the real world some people driver in ways not covered by the emissions test (rapid changes in power etc).
Over time emissions profiles of cars can worsen as a result of wear or damage
Modern diesel emissions reduction tech is a pain to live with & maintain, Modifying diesel cars to get rid of some of it was not unusual (and isn't in NZ either). i.e. engine chip, DPF delete, EGR blanking plate, Adblue defeat device).

Should note that all the same stuff applies to large diesel cars & trucks too, but these make up a smaller percentage of the fleet.

If RUC's was rolled out to EV's (but petrol cars still pay by petrol tax), we would see smaller EV's be priced off the road overnight as is the case with small diesels historically (with a Toyota aqua etc. becoming much cheaper to run). Hence the need for some other solution before RUC's go back on EV's.

1 | ... | 586 | 587 | 588 | 589 | 590 | 591 | 592 | 593 | 594 | 595 | 596 | ... | 725