Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | ... | 19


956 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 173


  Reply # 2096240 25-Sep-2018 16:37
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

tdgeek:

 

frednz:

 

With regard to the Nissan Leaf, owners of second-hand imported Leafs have faced many issues that wouldn't have been present if they had been able to buy NZ-New Leafs. For example, the navigation system may not have NZ maps and may be written in Japanese. The stereo systems etc may have to be adapted to NZ conditions.

 

And worst of all, it took Nissan NZ a long time to come to the party with updated firmware for 30 kWh Leafs to "solve" the fast battery degradation problem! In the meantime, some 30 kWh owners paid $250 to get their Leafs updated by third party software that still hasn't been approved by Nissan! So these owners are now faced with paying an official Nissan dealer to overwrite the third party firmware with Nissan approved firmware. None of this would have happened if Nissan NZ had marketed the 30 kWh Leaf as new in NZ, but they didn't do this.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't feel that is relevant, could happen to an ICE car, washing machine, things happen.

 

 

I think it's relevant because, with a NZ-New vehicle, the manufacturer's warranty gives the owner peace of mind in that things that go wrong will be put right. But, with imported second-hand cars, the dealers who sold the cars have not been obligated to provide, for example, NZ maps written in English or stereos that work properly in NZ. So, some Leaf owners have had to pay third parties to do this work for them.

 

 




956 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 173


  Reply # 2096244 25-Sep-2018 16:47
Send private message quote this post

ockel:

 

If the Govt was serious about leadership on this issue then it would direct all Govt departments to fleet buy only EV's (not a proportion like 30% but a full 100%).  Thats crown limo's through to Govt departments.  The cost is carried in the Budget and results in actively sending the signal to the wider community, deepening the 2nd hand EV market as fleet renewals start to occur in 3 years, and doesnt artificially skew demand.  Its a genuine tool to fast track tyres onto roads and still achieves the desired outcome and has properly functioning market forces.

 

 

I agree this would be a step in the right direction but it would be expensive when you consider that new EVs cost considerably more than equivalent new petrol vehicles. Because NZ is a small country with limited funds, I think there would be a considerable amount of public criticism if the cost of new EVs for Govt departments meant that expenditure on essential items had to be curtailed to some extent.

 

Also, the limited driving range of EVs and the scarcity of charging stations in some areas of the country, make it a bit impractical for all Government vehicles to be EVs. I'm not sure the Prime Minister would appreciate waiting for an hour at a charging station while her vehicle was charged up!


1396 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 201


  Reply # 2096248 25-Sep-2018 17:01
Send private message quote this post

frednz:

 

ockel:

 

If the Govt was serious about leadership on this issue then it would direct all Govt departments to fleet buy only EV's (not a proportion like 30% but a full 100%).  Thats crown limo's through to Govt departments.  The cost is carried in the Budget and results in actively sending the signal to the wider community, deepening the 2nd hand EV market as fleet renewals start to occur in 3 years, and doesnt artificially skew demand.  Its a genuine tool to fast track tyres onto roads and still achieves the desired outcome and has properly functioning market forces.

 

 

I agree this would be a step in the right direction but it would be expensive when you consider that new EVs cost considerably more than equivalent new petrol vehicles. Because NZ is a small country with limited funds, I think there would be a considerable amount of public criticism if the cost of new EVs for Govt departments meant that expenditure on essential items had to be curtailed to some extent.

 

Also, the limited driving range of EVs and the scarcity of charging stations in some areas of the country, make it a bit impractical for all Government vehicles to be EVs. I'm not sure the Prime Minister would appreciate waiting for an hour at a charging station while her vehicle was charged up!

 

 

Crown limos - BMW 7 series have a price tag in excess of $200k.  It does not seem to limit the ability to acquire.  Either you believe the TCO argument of EV's or you dont.  You cant be in support of EV's and then say that they're too expensive.  Climate change is an ideological argument supported by this Government.  If one cant justify it for public servants then its hard to encourage the general public to get on board.

 

And now we're back into range anxiety.  The claim has been made that the developments of EV vehicles means that range anxiety is fast becoming obsolete.  But now it isnt?  I'm confused.  Are these vehicles fit for purpose?  Doesnt the Government own a transmission company - and have the ability to build/own/operate charging stations (even with a view to privatising in the future - shock horror).  

 

You've just pointed out that EV's are too expensive, dont have the range required and have insufficient charging networks.  Sounds like any incentive for the public isnt going to overcome these major issues - and a Government with sufficient balance sheet to afford to invest in the next generations future just shouldnt be spending on climate change?  Is that where you stand?  I'm really confused.




956 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 173


  Reply # 2096251 25-Sep-2018 17:12
Send private message quote this post

ockel:

 

frednz:

 

ockel:

 

If the Govt was serious about leadership on this issue then it would direct all Govt departments to fleet buy only EV's (not a proportion like 30% but a full 100%).  Thats crown limo's through to Govt departments.  The cost is carried in the Budget and results in actively sending the signal to the wider community, deepening the 2nd hand EV market as fleet renewals start to occur in 3 years, and doesnt artificially skew demand.  Its a genuine tool to fast track tyres onto roads and still achieves the desired outcome and has properly functioning market forces.

 

 

I agree this would be a step in the right direction but it would be expensive when you consider that new EVs cost considerably more than equivalent new petrol vehicles. Because NZ is a small country with limited funds, I think there would be a considerable amount of public criticism if the cost of new EVs for Govt departments meant that expenditure on essential items had to be curtailed to some extent.

 

Also, the limited driving range of EVs and the scarcity of charging stations in some areas of the country, make it a bit impractical for all Government vehicles to be EVs. I'm not sure the Prime Minister would appreciate waiting for an hour at a charging station while her vehicle was charged up!

 

 

Crown limos - BMW 7 series have a price tag in excess of $200k.  It does not seem to limit the ability to acquire.  Either you believe the TCO argument of EV's or you dont.  You cant be in support of EV's and then say that they're too expensive.  Climate change is an ideological argument supported by this Government.  If one cant justify it for public servants then its hard to encourage the general public to get on board.

 

And now we're back into range anxiety.  The claim has been made that the developments of EV vehicles means that range anxiety is fast becoming obsolete.  But now it isnt?  I'm confused.  Are these vehicles fit for purpose?  Doesnt the Government own a transmission company - and have the ability to build/own/operate charging stations (even with a view to privatising in the future - shock horror).  

 

You've just pointed out that EV's are too expensive, dont have the range required and have insufficient charging networks.  Sounds like any incentive for the public isnt going to overcome these major issues - and a Government with sufficient balance sheet to afford to invest in the next generations future just shouldnt be spending on climate change?  Is that where you stand?  I'm really confused.

 

 

I'm not sure the situation is quite as "black and white" as your post seems to suggest. Electric vehicles are in their infancy and will take a few years before they take over from petrol vehicles. It's great for the Government to move gradually towards buying EVs, and for running around town they would be perfect. But, for 100% use by Government, be patient and give it some time. This same attitude is needed by "Greenies", it will simply take a long time before NZ has the infrastructure to support the 100% use of EVs.


165 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 32

Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 2096288 25-Sep-2018 17:29
3 people support this post
Send private message quote this post

It won't happen overnight but it will happen.

 

 

 

In the meantime there are 10,000 owners enjoying the benefits of driving cars that don't add to the problems that are being created by ICE cars with their exhaust emissions.

 

 

 

 


3710 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2250

Trusted
Spark NZ

  Reply # 2096319 25-Sep-2018 17:40
3 people support this post
Send private message quote this post

frednz:

 

Also, the limited driving range of EVs and the scarcity of charging stations in some areas of the country, make it a bit impractical for all Government vehicles to be EVs. I'm not sure the Prime Minister would appreciate waiting for an hour at a charging station while her vehicle was charged up!

 

 

All I'm hearing from you there is a lack of imagination... Just have this follow important politicians around....

 

 

Cheers - N

 

 


3710 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2250

Trusted
Spark NZ

  Reply # 2096322 25-Sep-2018 17:43
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

morrisk:

 

It won't happen overnight but it will happen.

 

In the meantime there are 10,000 owners enjoying the benefits of driving cars that don't add to the problems that are being created by ICE cars with their exhaust emissions.

 

 

If you're going to use throwaway lines like that is if they are the whole story, then you really have to expect reasoned counterpoint...

 

For example... IN the meantime, I'm happy to let 10,000 early adopters spend way above the odds for a cool but limited car and cause enough problems for everyone that the issues stopping mass adoption are addressed by the time I get one.

 

Cheers - N

 

 


1396 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 201


  Reply # 2096366 25-Sep-2018 18:57
Send private message quote this post

frednz:

 

 

 

I'm not sure the situation is quite as "black and white" as your post seems to suggest. Electric vehicles are in their infancy and will take a few years before they take over from petrol vehicles. It's great for the Government to move gradually towards buying EVs, and for running around town they would be perfect. But, for 100% use by Government, be patient and give it some time. This same attitude is needed by "Greenies", it will simply take a long time before NZ has the infrastructure to support the 100% use of EVs.

 

 

And that is exactly why a subsidy is the wrong thing to introduce.  The Govt and the public need to move gradually toward buying EV's - when it makes economic sense to do so, when the infrastructure is in place and when the product is fit for purpose.

 

Introducing subsidies in NZ wont speed up R&D, it wont improve the supply side dynamics of the market.  It might hasten the development of infrastructure but if thats the intention then a subsidy for EV's is the wrong tool to use to achieve that.

 

As you say, be patient, give it time.  Let the market develop normally without distorting it for no good reason.  If the Govt is ideologically predisposed to EV's then develop policy that reflects leadership in that space.  A subsidy is not the right policy tool. 


13429 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2428

Trusted

  Reply # 2096380 25-Sep-2018 19:25
Send private message quote this post

frednz:

 

tdgeek:

 

frednz:

 

With regard to the Nissan Leaf, owners of second-hand imported Leafs have faced many issues that wouldn't have been present if they had been able to buy NZ-New Leafs. For example, the navigation system may not have NZ maps and may be written in Japanese. The stereo systems etc may have to be adapted to NZ conditions.

 

And worst of all, it took Nissan NZ a long time to come to the party with updated firmware for 30 kWh Leafs to "solve" the fast battery degradation problem! In the meantime, some 30 kWh owners paid $250 to get their Leafs updated by third party software that still hasn't been approved by Nissan! So these owners are now faced with paying an official Nissan dealer to overwrite the third party firmware with Nissan approved firmware. None of this would have happened if Nissan NZ had marketed the 30 kWh Leaf as new in NZ, but they didn't do this.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't feel that is relevant, could happen to an ICE car, washing machine, things happen.

 

 

I think it's relevant because, with a NZ-New vehicle, the manufacturer's warranty gives the owner peace of mind in that things that go wrong will be put right. But, with imported second-hand cars, the dealers who sold the cars have not been obligated to provide, for example, NZ maps written in English or stereos that work properly in NZ. So, some Leaf owners have had to pay third parties to do this work for them.

 

 

 

 

I dont disagree, but what are the numbers that can buy a new car and that can buy a pre owned car? If you focus on new buyers you are excluding the masses, and thereby reducing take-up. Plus there will be the " You gave subsidies that only benefit well off people"


13429 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2428

Trusted

  Reply # 2096381 25-Sep-2018 19:28
Send private message quote this post

frednz:

 

I think there would be a considerable amount of public criticism if the cost of new EVs for Govt departments meant that expenditure on essential items had to be curtailed to some extent.

 

 

 

 

Wrong. Govt or a business are better placed to buy a new EV. They do that for one reason. Saving. So when a Govt or business outfits itself with EV its a saving not an extra cost.


13429 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2428

Trusted

  Reply # 2096382 25-Sep-2018 19:32
Send private message quote this post

ockel:

 

frednz:

 

 

 

I'm not sure the situation is quite as "black and white" as your post seems to suggest. Electric vehicles are in their infancy and will take a few years before they take over from petrol vehicles. It's great for the Government to move gradually towards buying EVs, and for running around town they would be perfect. But, for 100% use by Government, be patient and give it some time. This same attitude is needed by "Greenies", it will simply take a long time before NZ has the infrastructure to support the 100% use of EVs.

 

 

And that is exactly why a subsidy is the wrong thing to introduce.  The Govt and the public need to move gradually toward buying EV's - when it makes economic sense to do so, when the infrastructure is in place and when the product is fit for purpose.

 

Introducing subsidies in NZ wont speed up R&D, it wont improve the supply side dynamics of the market.  It might hasten the development of infrastructure but if thats the intention then a subsidy for EV's is the wrong tool to use to achieve that.

 

As you say, be patient, give it time.  Let the market develop normally without distorting it for no good reason.  If the Govt is ideologically predisposed to EV's then develop policy that reflects leadership in that space.  A subsidy is not the right policy tool. 

 

 

Other countries disagree, they offer subsidies. Our infrastructure here seems pretty good going by other EV threads here. Its not for everyone. If we avoid subsidies it will be a LOOOOOOONG time before nature makes it ok. Subsidies etc help keep it from being niche. If we ignore a helping hand it will be like Linux. Cool, a niche, and a very low turnout. 




956 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 173


  Reply # 2096393 25-Sep-2018 20:04
Send private message quote this post

tdgeek:

 

frednz:

 

I think there would be a considerable amount of public criticism if the cost of new EVs for Govt departments meant that expenditure on essential items had to be curtailed to some extent.

 

 

 

 

Wrong. Govt or a business are better placed to buy a new EV. They do that for one reason. Saving. So when a Govt or business outfits itself with EV its a saving not an extra cost.

 

 

I don't think it's as black and white as that! I think there's a fair bit of pressure on Govt Departments and politicians to buy EVs to show they're supporting the Government's climate change objectives. Cost accountants within the Government might be hard pressed to prove that buying new EVs at high prices produces cost savings to taxpayers! 


1396 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 201


  Reply # 2096394 25-Sep-2018 20:07
Send private message quote this post

tdgeek:

 

Other countries disagree, they offer subsidies. Our infrastructure here seems pretty good going by other EV threads here. Its not for everyone. If we avoid subsidies it will be a LOOOOOOONG time before nature makes it ok. Subsidies etc help keep it from being niche. If we ignore a helping hand it will be like Linux. Cool, a niche, and a very low turnout. 

 

 

Which is why changing the Govt fleet to EV keeps it from being niche and SHARES the burden across ALL taxpayers.  A subsidy has tax payers assisting those that can afford (or near afford) an EV.  It benefits a few at the expense of those that cant afford it.

 

Did other countries employ a Govt-based shared cost model like Crown Fibre to drive fibre uptake?   If a centre-right Govt can implement a left-leaning policy to promote fibre (to better education and business - and give you superfast email and video (cough, cough)) why cant a left Govt use Crown Fibre (or Crown Infrastructure) to facilitate a fast rollout of infrastructure?  Did the Govt give subsidies to drive fibre uptake?  Nope.  Market took it from niche to fast-follower through policy setting and competition.  Why do cars have to be different?


1396 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 201


  Reply # 2096396 25-Sep-2018 20:10
Send private message quote this post

frednz:

 

tdgeek:

 

frednz:

 

I think there would be a considerable amount of public criticism if the cost of new EVs for Govt departments meant that expenditure on essential items had to be curtailed to some extent.

 

 

 

 

Wrong. Govt or a business are better placed to buy a new EV. They do that for one reason. Saving. So when a Govt or business outfits itself with EV its a saving not an extra cost.

 

 

I don't think it's as black and white as that! I think there's a fair bit of pressure on Govt Departments and politicians to buy EVs to show they're supporting the Government's climate change objectives. Cost accountants within the Government might be hard pressed to prove that buying new EVs at high prices produces cost savings to taxpayers! 

 

 

And yet in the stroke of an announcement the Govt can reduce its future earnings by $8-9bn and axe jobs to show it supports climate change objectives.  The cost accountants didnt even get to do their analysis.  MBIE and Treasury are now counting the cost of the policy on oil & gas - and the Minister is still choosing to ignore it on the basis of political ideology!  Surely EV's benefits are more quantifiable.


13429 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2428

Trusted

  Reply # 2096402 25-Sep-2018 20:29
Send private message quote this post

frednz:

 

tdgeek:

 

frednz:

 

I think there would be a considerable amount of public criticism if the cost of new EVs for Govt departments meant that expenditure on essential items had to be curtailed to some extent.

 

 

 

 

Wrong. Govt or a business are better placed to buy a new EV. They do that for one reason. Saving. So when a Govt or business outfits itself with EV its a saving not an extra cost.

 

 

I don't think it's as black and white as that! I think there's a fair bit of pressure on Govt Departments and politicians to buy EVs to show they're supporting the Government's climate change objectives. Cost accountants within the Government might be hard pressed to prove that buying new EVs at high prices produces cost savings to taxpayers! 

 

 

The Govt using EV isnt going to enlighten the masses


1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | ... | 19
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.