Going back to the horse and buggy analogy. When fossil fuel powered motor vehicles started replacing horses as a form of transportation and work, the cars offered almost everything better than what they were replacing. No, it didn't happen overnight, but over time, they (motor vehicles) were more convenient, easier to use, go farther, go faster, haul more, etc. than the horse. The same thing when steam replaced wind in ships, those were true revolutions. Shifting to EV is not a revolution, its an evolution, we are chaining the propulsion system and nothing more - EVs (despite what the fanboys believe) offer nothing new or nothing better, they are literally a one to one replacement and the only reason why they will be successful is because of Government mandates forcing the change. If there were no mandates, the shift would take decades.

I don't disagree that we need to change the way we power our vehicles, and we would have to eventually, but to worship EVs like the Second Coming of Christ is just fanatical and I just don't get the fanboyism behind it and that's when you start to see such resistance towards EVs. Its not the cars or the technology that people dislike, its the smugness behind it all - its no different than a vegan telling you about their plant based diet or a religious person witnesses to you about your salvation, it simply turns people against you.

And the whole "People who don't like Tesla's or EVs have never driven one" etc, argument is so cliche. I'm a car guy, I've driven various EVs including Teslas. Yeah, they're cars, nothing more and nothing less. What does a Tesla 3 do better than a Civic, Corolla or Golf that's worth twice the price? Nothing - not one thing.

ACDC8 wrote:

I don't disagree that we need to change the way we power our vehicles, and we would have to eventually, but to worship EVs like the Second Coming of Christ is just fanatical and I just don't get the fanboyism behind it and that's when you start to see such resistance towards EVs. Its not the cars or the technology that people dislike, its the smugness behind it all - its no different than a vegan telling you about their plant based diet or a religious person witnesses to you about your salvation, it simply turns people against you.

.

I «hate» vegans for all the wrong reasons as much as anyone. While progressive, I realize a certain percentage of the population will always resist seeing too much change in their life time, especially the second half. They just can’t keep up and default to becoming reactionary to keep their sense of security. My mother, herself a progressive, retired from her high up education management job less than 10 years ago, and her language is already out of touch, and she probably be fired for being offensive today. Thats too fast! In reality she was and is the definition of non-offensive, and that sort of change in «sensibillities» should probably take a generation or so.
You could say society has a buildt in speed limit towards change, and that is something one needs to take into account when strategizing politically. Changing social structures and dealing with discrimination for instance, takes centuries. We are barely half way even in the most progressive countries.

And then there’s climate change. It doesn’t follow those rules. Change must happen faster. Even if it carries a cost in the social fabric of society and creates inbalance in the popular opinion. EVs are one of those things that needs to be pushed along a lot faster than it organically would, even of you then (naturally) see more resistance.

Horse and bugggies which had been around for hundreds of years were eliminated in the us and Western Europe in a matter of 20 years.

Ice cars will be dead in China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Europe and the USA in the same time frame.

Planeflyer wrote:

Horse and bugggies which had been around for hundreds of years were eliminated in the us and Western Europe in a matter of 20 years.

Ice cars will be dead in China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Europe and the USA in the same time frame.

50 years, not 20 years:

https://thetyee.ca/News/2013/03/06/Hors ... Big-Shift/

I read the article and could not find the 50 year transition time you cited. But there is plenty on data if you carry out a google search. On the wikpepdia page under a search for transition time from horses to autos it was stated that in 1900 there were a few hundred cars in the US and by 1920, 5000,000.

At Tesla’s investor day they described the single largest advancement in automotive mfg since Ford introduced the moving assembly line.

I’ll stand by my predictions.

Let's hope we see more bans on future gasoline stations like we are starting to see. We need to ban any new development of fossil fuel cars and gas stations. We should transition to EVs quickly and then also promote limited ownership of EVs and instead fund green public transportation. We can limit ownership to one car to family unit. These policies will help mitigate human caused climate change.

Hopefully this town will require existing fossil fuel stations to convert to electric vehicle stations soon on top of banning any future gas stations.

https://www.euronews.com/green/2023/03/ ... is-us-city

I don't think it will require laws to complete the transition to EVs. Good guesses have 10% of car sales is typically the tipping point. We are close. Tesla is still the only mass producer, my guess is 2025 and ICEs will plummet.

frmrCapCadet wrote:

I don't think it will require laws to complete the transition to EVs. Good guesses have 10% of car sales is typically the tipping point. We are close. Tesla is still the only mass producer, my guess is 2025 and ICEs will plummet.

The global 10% has been reached thanks to a massive subsidy/tax scheme.

Look at the US, a laggard when it comes to subsidies so ended 2022 with just 5,6%, up to 7% in Feb thanks to, you guessed it, a new subsidy scheme.

https://insideevs.com/news/653395/evs-m ... -by-tesla/

Cost parity just isn't there, even in times of very high gas prices. Then there's the convenience factor which is hard to put in numbers.

Developing countries, with few subsidies and poor infrastructure have basically zero EV market share.

Interesting article today - half of EV owners in British Columbia are concerned about public charging access combined with one third of EV owners still have range anxiety and still own an ICE vehicle.

https://www.castanet.net/news/BC/417485 ... ing-access

Planeflyer wrote:

I read the article and could not find the 50 year transition time you cited.

Fifth paragraph in. If you want more details, its in the book the article is based on.

Pi7472000 wrote:

Let's hope we see more bans on future gasoline stations like we are starting to see. We need to ban any new development of fossil fuel cars and gas stations. We should transition to EVs quickly and then also promote limited ownership of EVs and instead fund green public transportation. We can limit ownership to one car to family unit. These policies will help mitigate human caused climate change.

Hopefully this town will require existing fossil fuel stations to convert to electric vehicle stations soon on top of banning any future gas stations.

https://www.euronews.com/green/2023/03/ ... is-us-city

That's a cap, not a ban.

JJJ wrote:

The global 10% has been reached thanks to a massive subsidy/tax scheme.

Look at the US, a laggard when it comes to subsidies so ended 2022 with just 5,6%, up to 7% in Feb thanks to, you guessed it, a new subsidy scheme.

https://insideevs.com/news/653395/evs-m ... -by-tesla/

Cost parity just isn't there, even in times of very high gas prices. Then there's the convenience factor which is hard to put in numbers.

Developing countries, with few subsidies and poor infrastructure have basically zero EV market share.

We saw that happen here in Canada, both the Federal and some Provincial Governments gave big rebates to new EV purchases, once those rebates were exhausted, EV sales dropped to the point that the Government had to re-instate them.

On a related note, there was another article today about a local EV owner who's strata denied him installing a charger on the property which more and more strata's are doing the same , most strata bylaws here require a 75% vote in favour which many EV owners are not getting. So, unless the Provincial Government steps in and overrides strata bylaws (which means more mandates), at home charging for many will not be possible and push people back into ICE vehicles. So again, without laws and mandates, fewer sales.

frmrCapCadet wrote:

Tesla is still the only mass producer, my guess is 2025 and ICEs will plummet.

2025 sounds about right. Tesla might be the only mass producer in that particular street in California. But they are really, really really not the only mass producer of EVs.

M564038 wrote:

frmrCapCadet wrote:

Tesla is still the only mass producer, my guess is 2025 and ICEs will plummet.

2025 sounds about right. Tesla might be the only mass producer in that particular street in California. But they are really, really really not the only mass producer of EVs.

American members only see Teslas in the street because they have 60+% market share.

Other manufacturers still haven't been going all in because the incentives just aren't there yet. This is changing with the new 2023 law.

Define "plummet".

M564038 wrote:

frmrCapCadet wrote:

Tesla is still the only mass producer, my guess is 2025 and ICEs will plummet.

2025 sounds about right.

Sorry, but 2025 is less than two years away. Maybe it’ll happen in a few isolated communities or use-cases but there are simply too many obstacles to overcome for it to happen that quickly on a widespread basis.

Local content requirements to qualify for subsidies alone will delay it more than two years.

Even if sufficient interested buyers existed the multiple months waiting periods at car dealerships (i.e., supply chain issues) would prevent a substantial increase in EV market share over that period of time.

Not to be a party-pooper but practical realities are what they are.

We are beyond the «isolated communities and use-cases» already with several countries having passed 50%. Norway still in the lead with around 80-90%.

QF7 wrote:

M564038 wrote:

frmrCapCadet wrote:

Tesla is still the only mass producer, my guess is 2025 and ICEs will plummet.

2025 sounds about right.

Sorry, but 2025 is less than two years away. Maybe it’ll happen in a few isolated communities or use-cases but there are simply too many obstacles to overcome for it to happen that quickly on a widespread basis.

Local content requirements to qualify for subsidies alone will delay it more than two years.

Even if sufficient interested buyers existed the multiple months waiting periods at car dealerships (i.e., supply chain issues) would prevent a substantial increase in EV market share over that period of time.

Not to be a party-pooper but practical realities are what they are.

QF7 wrote:

M564038 wrote:

frmrCapCadet wrote:

Tesla is still the only mass producer, my guess is 2025 and ICEs will plummet.

2025 sounds about right.

Sorry, but 2025 is less than two years away. Maybe it’ll happen in a few isolated communities or use-cases but there are simply too many obstacles to overcome for it to happen that quickly on a widespread basis.

Local content requirements to qualify for subsidies alone will delay it more than two years.

Even if sufficient interested buyers existed the multiple months waiting periods at car dealerships (i.e., supply chain issues) would prevent a substantial increase in EV market share over that period of time.

Not to be a party-pooper but practical realities are what they are.

Agreed, but 20-25% should be reachable...

I meant to say that Tesla was the only mass producer in the US of EVs. Even for them the limitation is mostly battery supply chain. By the time the 2026s models come out in late 2025 there will be a lot more options, supply will be meeting demand. Ford's Lightning and Mustang will be available at list price. GM will bring up the rear. Most of the EU car makers will have EV production going on in North America. Companies that do not have a good foot in the EV market in 2926 will be facing disaster.

frmrCapCadet wrote:

I meant to say that Tesla was the only mass producer in the US of EVs. Even for them the limitation is mostly battery supply chain. By the time the 2026s models come out in late 2025 there will be a lot more options, supply will be meeting demand. Ford's Lightning and Mustang will be available at list price. GM will bring up the rear. Most of the EU car makers will have EV production going on in North America. Companies that do not have a good foot in the EV market in 2926 will be facing disaster.

foot in the market 2029 (not 900 years later. grrrrrr)

Yes, be careful with ignoring the world outside the US when it comes to EVs;-) or everything else.

As I see it there are very roughly 3 categories when it comes to the manufacturers. You have the all-ins, the more-than-you-thinks, and the lost cases.
The interesting thing is there aren’t a lot in the third category. Toyota, Mazda, Subaru and a few more?
The all ins are Tesla, Bud, a few other large chinese players(Polestar included).

The second category, VW, BMW, Mercedes, Stellantis, GM, Nissan, Hyundai/Kia etc. all dipped their feet in the water 10 years ago or more already.
It doesn’t come from nothing. The Ford Focus electric, The e-golf, that weird little BMW, Mercedes electric B, Peugeot partner electric, The Hyundai Ioniq/KIA soul, the Opel Ampera/Chevy Bolt etc. from 10 years ago.


Several of them have more or less full 2nd gen. EV lineups by now:




They might not be that well known in all markets, but every gangster drive EQSs or a Mustang around here now, their younger brothers got the old Tesla S, every plumber or electrician got a VW Buzz at work and a Tesla Y or Citroen electric at home over the last few months. The anti-Elon academics drive a Ioniq 5 or a KIA 6. And some conservatives, late bloomera so to speak, cling to paying double for a Porsche instead of a Tesla with the same specs.

Ok I re read the article and see it says it took 50 years for ice to replace the horse on farms, public transport and commercial delivery however there are no citations.

In any case the entire conversation has focused on autos and ice autos replaced horses in in 20 years. Moreover the transition curves between Bev replacing ice and ice replacements ng autos is very similar.

I am looking at this from an investor perspective and good investors like athletes see where the ball is going not where it is.

I’d recommend putting some of your investment funds into Tesla. The risks are much lower than any other automaker and the rewards much higher.

Why?

Tesla is making money on BEV where most others are not. Just today the Chinese begged for government intervention to regulate prices in light of Tesla’s cuts.

Tesla with their casting technology ( which all other makers downplayed…… until recently)described how they would further reduce caped and cycle time. An advance not seen since 1913 when Ford introduced tge moving assembly line.

It is worth noting that Austin is already achieving 42 second cycle time whereas the best anyone else can do is 60 seconds.

Imagine the cash flow and market share implications when Tesla moves to 20 second cycles.

At the current share price fsd, energy and robotics are all free of charge

M564038 wrote:

We are beyond the «isolated communities and use-cases» already with several countries having passed 50%. Norway still in the lead with around 80-90%.

Norway is a wonderful country and I have liked the Norwegians I have known.

But Norway is less than 3.3% the size of the United States and roughly 300 million fewer people live there (and presumably there are roughly a similarly fewer number of vehicles).

So while congratulations are in order for Norway the market share for the world as a whole is far behind and still will be in two years.

(Just to be clear, I am not anti-EV. I’m just trying to be realistic about expectations.)

Of course it took 50 years for the ICEs to replace the horse, and it will take as long for the EV to replace the ICE, especially in the USA. In general the infrastructure in the USA does not deserve the have the word "structure" in it. It is deteriorating horribly and nowhere near a level you expect from a western country. From an electric grid that looks like the 50s because there is no money to put proper underground networks into place, a train network that is so bad, Stephenson might have to raise from his grave, to a road infrastructure where you have to fear for your live every time you drive over or under an overpass, how in the name of the good lord will there be a somewhat functioning charging infrastructure in a reasonable matter of time?

But as long as individual ownership is more valued than communal one, so as long as the mindset is Me Me Me in the USA, it will be hard to create communal service. Imagine the outrage if a group of people (citizens) have to fund something together that is for the good of everyone (like roads, rails, powergrids, etc.).

In other parts of the world though, the transition will be faster as there is a bit more a We mentality instead of a Me.

QF7 wrote:

M564038 wrote:

We are beyond the «isolated communities and use-cases» already with several countries having passed 50%. Norway still in the lead with around 80-90%.

Norway is a wonderful country and I have liked the Norwegians I have known.

But Norway is less than 3.3% the size of the United States and roughly 300 million fewer people live there (and presumably there are roughly a similarly fewer number of vehicles).

That's the wrong angle.

Norway is a sparsely populated country (half the population density of the US) with very complicated geography that makes it very expensive to bring infrastructure.

What they have, though, is very high Government revenue driven by: #1 Oil & gas and #2 Very high personal taxes.

Back in the day when the Model S was released and Norway decided it was time to go all in on EVs the cost of a Model S was on a par with a VW Passat because it was exempt from most of the taxes that weighed on personal cars.

Look at this piece from 2015

https://www.teslarati.com/norway-loves-tesla-model-s/

So the answer to why EV adoption is so high in Norway is simple: it hits people right in the pocket.

Planeflyer wrote:

Ok I re read the article and see it says it took 50 years for ice to replace the horse on farms, public transport and commercial delivery however there are no citations.

In any case the entire conversation has focused on autos and ice autos replaced horses in in 20 years. Moreover the transition curves between Bev replacing ice and ice replacements ng autos is very similar.

I am looking at this from an investor perspective and good investors like athletes see where the ball is going not where it is.

I’d recommend putting some of your investment funds into Tesla. The risks are much lower than any other automaker and the rewards much higher.

Why?

Tesla is making money on BEV where most others are not. Just today the Chinese begged for government intervention to regulate prices in light of Tesla’s cuts.

Tesla with their casting technology ( which all other makers downplayed…… until recently)described how they would further reduce caped and cycle time. An advance not seen since 1913 when Ford introduced tge moving assembly line.

It is worth noting that Austin is already achieving 42 second cycle time whereas the best anyone else can do is 60 seconds.

Imagine the cash flow and market share implications when Tesla moves to 20 second cycles.

At the current share price fsd, energy and robotics are all free of charge

Yes, lets all step on the TSLA hype train, with unpresedented PE values.

Tesla has to keep discounting there cars to keep sales on par with production. In EU they are giving about ~30% discount compared to last year. That has to tell you something about the demand situation...

JJJ wrote:

QF7 wrote:

M564038 wrote:

We are beyond the «isolated communities and use-cases» already with several countries having passed 50%. Norway still in the lead with around 80-90%.

Norway is a wonderful country and I have liked the Norwegians I have known.

But Norway is less than 3.3% the size of the United States and roughly 300 million fewer people live there (and presumably there are roughly a similarly fewer number of vehicles).

That's the wrong angle.

Norway is a sparsely populated country (half the population density of the US) with very complicated geography that makes it very expensive to bring infrastructure.

What they have, though, is very high Government revenue driven by: #1 Oil & gas and #2 Very high personal taxes.

Back in the day when the Model S was released and Norway decided it was time to go all in on EVs the cost of a Model S was on a par with a VW Passat because it was exempt from most of the taxes that weighed on personal cars.

Look at this piece from 2015

https://www.teslarati.com/norway-loves-tesla-model-s/

So the answer to why EV adoption is so high in Norway is simple: it hits people right in the pocket.

That angle was inacurate in 2015, and it is even more inacurate now.

M564038 wrote:

JJJ wrote:

QF7 wrote:

Norway is a wonderful country and I have liked the Norwegians I have known.

But Norway is less than 3.3% the size of the United States and roughly 300 million fewer people live there (and presumably there are roughly a similarly fewer number of vehicles).

That's the wrong angle.

Norway is a sparsely populated country (half the population density of the US) with very complicated geography that makes it very expensive to bring infrastructure.

What they have, though, is very high Government revenue driven by: #1 Oil & gas and #2 Very high personal taxes.

Back in the day when the Model S was released and Norway decided it was time to go all in on EVs the cost of a Model S was on a par with a VW Passat because it was exempt from most of the taxes that weighed on personal cars.

Look at this piece from 2015

https://www.teslarati.com/norway-loves-tesla-model-s/

So the answer to why EV adoption is so high in Norway is simple: it hits people right in the pocket.

That angle was inacurate in 2015, and it is even more inacurate now.

You might want to tell the World Economic Forum.

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2023/01/ ... ly%20clean.

Or, well, your own Government.

https://www.regjeringen.no/en/topics/tr ... id2677481/

A combination of taxation rules and incentives are the main reasons for the high penetration of electric vehicles in Norway. Exemption of purchase tax and VAT provide large financial incentives for potential buyers of electric cars, and as a result, a new Tesla has a price tag about the same as a new Audi or Mercedes. Other benefits include free parking on some public parking spaces, no road toll, free access to ferries connecting national roads and the use of bus lanes.

JJJ wrote:

So the answer to why EV adoption is so high in Norway is simple: it hits people right in the pocket.

Agreed. Using tax policy to give people pocketbook reasons to buy EVs will unsurprisingly motivate a lot of people to do so.

Here in the U.S. local content and “made in America” and arbitrary price point requirements have made it more difficult to qualify for incentives than to actually receive them (I may be exaggerating slightly). Hopefully the Administration is on the cusp of rolling out a more straight-forward approach that is less tangled up in agenda politics. If you want people to buy EVs give them a simple reason to do so, and don’t disqualify so many makes and models.

Planeflyer wrote:

Ok I re read the article and see it says it took 50 years for ice to replace the horse on farms, public transport and commercial delivery however there are no citations.

Again, if you want more details, read the book as I have.

Planeflyer wrote:

In any case the entire conversation has focused on autos and ice autos replaced horses in in 20 years. Moreover the transition curves between Bev replacing ice and ice replacements ng autos is very similar.

The original discussion was actually about horses in the workplace and ICE vehicles in general - energy transition is more than must selecting one or two specific parts.

Planeflyer wrote:

I am looking at this from an investor perspective

Oh, you don't need to tell me that, I clued into that from the get go.

Planeflyer wrote:

I’d recommend putting some of your investment funds into Tesla.

No thanks.

Planeflyer wrote:

Why?

Not interested.

M564038 wrote:

I «hate» vegans for all the wrong reasons as much as anyone. While progressive, I realize a certain percentage of the population will always resist seeing too much change in their life time, especially the second half. They just can’t keep up and default to becoming reactionary to keep their sense of security. My mother, herself a progressive, retired from her high up education management job less than 10 years ago, and her language is already out of touch, and she probably be fired for being offensive today. Thats too fast! In reality she was and is the definition of non-offensive, and that sort of change in «sensibillities» should probably take a generation or so.
You could say society has a buildt in speed limit towards change, and that is something one needs to take into account when strategizing politically. Changing social structures and dealing with discrimination for instance, takes centuries. We are barely half way even in the most progressive countries.

And then there’s climate change. It doesn’t follow those rules. Change must happen faster. Even if it carries a cost in the social fabric of society and creates inbalance in the popular opinion. EVs are one of those things that needs to be pushed along a lot faster than it organically would, even of you then (naturally) see more resistance.

Funny how you argue about "resistance" but any other technology geared towards reducing greenhouse gases is taboo for you - its your way or no way.

Germany reduces subsidies for new BEVs - BEV sales plummet by almost 83%:

https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/e- ... 88b4c27cd8

ACDC8 wrote:

Germany reduces subsidies for new BEVs - BEV sales plummet by almost 83%:

https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/e- ... 88b4c27cd8

Can’t be too surprised by that. The subsidy is enough of an enticement that if you’re on the fence, it could sway you. But without it…No go.

Alternate headline could be “sales of previously discounted item decrease after price is raised”

ACDC8 since you seem to relish sarcasm you might want to revisit the the title of the thread.

And not even ice powered commercial vehicles have 50 years. Daimler, who I think we can all agree understands ICE trucks said that if Tesla’s semi could achieve 500 they have missed something and would buy a few to understand what they don’t know.

A perfect example of why legacy producers rarely survive the disruption that’s occurring.

Planeflyer wrote:

ACDC8 since you seem to relish sarcasm you might want to revisit the the title of the thread.

What about it?

Planeflyer wrote:

And not even ice powered commercial vehicles have 50 years.

Hmmm, wonder if mandates are an important factor in that equation? Something the ICE never had to rely on when it took over as the propulsion system of choice.

Planeflyer wrote:

Daimler, who I think we can all agree understands ICE trucks said that if Tesla’s semi could achieve 500 they have missed something and would buy a few to understand what they don’t know.

What, you think a car manufacturer buying examples of a competitors models and breaking them down is something new?

Planeflyer wrote:

A perfect example of why legacy producers rarely survive the disruption that’s occurring.

Which legacy producers haven't survived an energy transition?

FGITD wrote:

Can’t be too surprised by that. The subsidy is enough of an enticement that if you’re on the fence, it could sway you. But without it…No go.

Alternate headline could be “sales of previously discounted item decrease after price is raised”

Yup, saw the same thing here in Canada. Subsidies were eliminated, BEV sales tanked. Brought subsidies back, BEV sales picked up again. Tesla is a good example of this with the Model 3, our EV subsidy cap is a vehicle MSRP of $55000 so Tesla had to bring down the price under that to attract new customers and the Model 3 is now exactly within $10 of that cap.

The Provincial rebate is also income based, so people who make $100,001 or more a year don't get a rebate with only those who make $80,000 or less a year get the full $4000.

JJJ wrote:

M564038 wrote:

JJJ wrote:

That's the wrong angle.

Norway is a sparsely populated country (half the population density of the US) with very complicated geography that makes it very expensive to bring infrastructure.

What they have, though, is very high Government revenue driven by: #1 Oil & gas and #2 Very high personal taxes.

Back in the day when the Model S was released and Norway decided it was time to go all in on EVs the cost of a Model S was on a par with a VW Passat because it was exempt from most of the taxes that weighed on personal cars.

Look at this piece from 2015

https://www.teslarati.com/norway-loves-tesla-model-s/

So the answer to why EV adoption is so high in Norway is simple: it hits people right in the pocket.

That angle was inacurate in 2015, and it is even more inacurate now.

You might want to tell the World Economic Forum.

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2023/01/ ... ly%20clean.

Or, well, your own Government.

https://www.regjeringen.no/en/topics/tr ... id2677481/

A combination of taxation rules and incentives are the main reasons for the high penetration of electric vehicles in Norway. Exemption of purchase tax and VAT provide large financial incentives for potential buyers of electric cars, and as a result, a new Tesla has a price tag about the same as a new Audi or Mercedes. Other benefits include free parking on some public parking spaces, no road toll, free access to ferries connecting national roads and the use of bus lanes.

Yes. EVs was totally exempt from most taxation back when they were called Mitsubishi i-miev, e-golf, leaf etc.
That was a genious strategy to let EVs gain foothold.
Most of the waived taxes was was applied for pollution in the first, so thus it was waived for zero-tailpipe vehicles. Duh..

These days I pay 100% road tax, I pay more for parking, toll roads etc. than the normal rate was back when fossils was defined as normal. I can not freely use bus lanes. VAT is applied to EVs above $55,000.

The incentives is gone but proliferation is still there.

It was a good strategy to get going, but is not the main cause of people preferring EVs as of 2023.
EVs are still cheaper to own and maintain, though, but that’s just the nature of the beast.

M564038 wrote:

EVs are still cheaper to own

That's literally the point that was trying to be made - tax a non-EV to the point that an EV is the cheaper option.

https://thenorwayguide.com/tax-and-fees ... -vehicles/

Mandates, rebates, taxation - it doesn't matter, its all the same tactic and its the reason why many people are jumping into EVs, Norwegians included.

M564038 wrote:

JJJ wrote:

M564038 wrote:

That angle was inacurate in 2015, and it is even more inacurate now.

You might want to tell the World Economic Forum.

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2023/01/ ... ly%20clean.

Or, well, your own Government.

https://www.regjeringen.no/en/topics/tr ... id2677481/

A combination of taxation rules and incentives are the main reasons for the high penetration of electric vehicles in Norway. Exemption of purchase tax and VAT provide large financial incentives for potential buyers of electric cars, and as a result, a new Tesla has a price tag about the same as a new Audi or Mercedes. Other benefits include free parking on some public parking spaces, no road toll, free access to ferries connecting national roads and the use of bus lanes.

Yes. EVs was totally exempt from most taxation back when they were called Mitsubishi i-miev, e-golf, leaf etc.
That was a genious strategy to let EVs gain foothold.
Most of the waived taxes was was applied for pollution in the first, so thus it was waived for zero-tailpipe vehicles. Duh..

These days I pay 100% road tax, I pay more for parking, toll roads etc. than the normal rate was back when fossils was defined as normal. I can not freely use bus lanes. VAT is applied to EVs above $55,000.

The incentives is gone but proliferation is still there.

It was a good strategy to get going, but is not the main cause of people preferring EVs as of 2023.
EVs are still cheaper to own and maintain, though, but that’s just the nature of the beast.

Some incentives are gone, the big one which is taxing ICE disproportionately is still there.

And the even bigger one: outright banning ICE cars is just around the corner. You can paint it any colour you want, but without massive government intervention EVs would still be at single digit % adoption.

JJJ wrote:

You can paint it any colour you want, but without massive government intervention EVs would still be at single digit % adoption.

Yup

JJJ wrote:

Some incentives are gone, the big one which is taxing ICE disproportionately is still there.

$20K US more for a $70K US ICE versus a $70K US EV. That's a big difference.

JJJ wrote:

M564038 wrote:

JJJ wrote:

You might want to tell the World Economic Forum.

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2023/01/ ... ly%20clean.

Or, well, your own Government.

https://www.regjeringen.no/en/topics/tr ... id2677481/

Yes. EVs was totally exempt from most taxation back when they were called Mitsubishi i-miev, e-golf, leaf etc.
That was a genious strategy to let EVs gain foothold.
Most of the waived taxes was was applied for pollution in the first, so thus it was waived for zero-tailpipe vehicles. Duh..

These days I pay 100% road tax, I pay more for parking, toll roads etc. than the normal rate was back when fossils was defined as normal. I can not freely use bus lanes. VAT is applied to EVs above $55,000.

The incentives is gone but proliferation is still there.

It was a good strategy to get going, but is not the main cause of people preferring EVs as of 2023.
EVs are still cheaper to own and maintain, though, but that’s just the nature of the beast.

Some incentives are gone, the big one which is taxing ICE disproportionately is still there.

And the even bigger one: outright banning ICE cars is just around the corner. You can paint it any colour you want, but without massive government intervention EVs would still be at single digit % adoption.

If ICE cars were taxed to the extent reasonable for the damage they make, EVs would have taken over 70 years ago.

M564038 wrote:

JJJ wrote:

M564038 wrote:

Yes. EVs was totally exempt from most taxation back when they were called Mitsubishi i-miev, e-golf, leaf etc.
That was a genious strategy to let EVs gain foothold.
Most of the waived taxes was was applied for pollution in the first, so thus it was waived for zero-tailpipe vehicles. Duh..

These days I pay 100% road tax, I pay more for parking, toll roads etc. than the normal rate was back when fossils was defined as normal. I can not freely use bus lanes. VAT is applied to EVs above $55,000.

The incentives is gone but proliferation is still there.

It was a good strategy to get going, but is not the main cause of people preferring EVs as of 2023.
EVs are still cheaper to own and maintain, though, but that’s just the nature of the beast.

Some incentives are gone, the big one which is taxing ICE disproportionately is still there.

And the even bigger one: outright banning ICE cars is just around the corner. You can paint it any colour you want, but without massive government intervention EVs would still be at single digit % adoption.

If ICE cars were taxed to the extent reasonable for the damage they make, EVs would have taken over 70 years ago.

An interesting point of view but not what we were discussing about.

ACDC8 wrote:

JJJ wrote:

You can paint it any colour you want, but without massive government intervention EVs would still be at single digit % adoption.

Yup

Governments around the world, including China, have decided that incentives of Ev’s are the way the go. Do you believe those incentives will disappear until the market has completely shifted?

One of the first lessons you learn in business is that governments are your biggest business partner. And that the sentiment of governments move slowly but definitely…

Fossil fuel is still receiving lucrative subsidies.

frmrCapCadet wrote:

Fossil fuel is still receiving lucrative subsidies.

Pricing externalities is an extremely complex exercise, especially when your whole economy runs on the stuff.

Agree and the subsidies for evs are corrosive but I suppose unavoidable because otherwise Tesla and the Chinese would own the entire automotive market in 5-10 years time.

Planeflyer wrote:

Agree and the subsidies for evs are corrosive but I suppose unavoidable because otherwise Tesla and the Chinese would own the entire automotive market in 5-10 years time.

Both creatures born out of subsidies themselves and now facing overcapacity (which is spilling to other markets).

Tesla, more than any other company is harmed by subsidies. I agree that subsidies are amplifying growth in EV’s but it is also certain that w/o subsidies Tesla would still grow and have a much larger market share.

W or w/o subsidies EV’s will take over based on the 4-5x efficiency of electric motors. Yes, I know batteries, for the time being make them more expensive to buy but they are less expensive to own and are at the steep part of tge learning curve. Ice can only improve a small% each year so in 5-10 years time will be much more expensive to buy and own.

In semis because cost of ownership is the more important metric, EV’s ( read Tesla) will take over much quicker.

Planeflyer wrote:

Tesla, more than any other company is harmed by subsidies. I agree that subsidies are amplifying growth in EV’s but it is also certain that w/o subsidies Tesla would still grow and have a much larger market share.

Tesla would not have made it past the startup stage without subsidies, both direct and indirect.

Without the different emission schemes and carbon credits they would have died before even releasing the model 3.

Nonsense! The people who bought Tesla’s up through 2017 had the motivation and income to buy wo subsidies.

ACDC8 wrote:

Germany reduces subsidies for new BEVs - BEV sales plummet by almost 83%:

https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/e- ... 88b4c27cd8

Many of those German govt subsidized BEV's never really made it to the German roads.

Last year Germans would get an up to €6,000 subsidize on each BEV he bought. But only when he kept that car for at least six months.

After six months he could sell the car and still get the full subsidize. So thousands were - after being kept in a barn for six months - sold to neighboring countries which did not have such subsidizes. He could then share the "rebate" with the end user.

Here in Denmark 90% of all Tesla's sold last year were imported "used" cars from Germany, typically six months and one day old, and with zero miles on the clock.

It is rumored that some of those "used" cars were not even six months old, but rather only few days old. How come? The German (strawman?) bought his BEV('es) for delivery in six months time, but with immediate delivery of chassis identification number. He could then have the car registered six months before it was produced, while keeping the license plates in his office drawer. And then, six months later, return the unused German license plates, and sell the brand new car to Denmark, and cash in the German govt subsidize.

Planeflyer wrote:

Nonsense! The people who bought Tesla’s up through 2017 had the motivation and income to buy wo subsidies.

That's an extremely selective view of things. Read a few posts back on the history of EVs in Norway. At several points Norway sales were over 10% of total Tesla sales. Without those incentives sales would have been a fraction.

China has always been a major market for Tesla and what has driven EV sales in China? Major cities puttiong a parallel wait line for EVs to skip the years-long wait list for a ICE vehicle plate.

How much has Tesla made in CARB credits, emission credits in Europe? Even gaming the subsidies with the whole battery swap swindle.

https://dailykanban.com/2015/06/23/tesl ... o-nowhere/

Just because you don't see it on the sticker price it doesn't mean there are no subsidies.

JJJ wrote:

Planeflyer wrote:

Nonsense! The people who bought Tesla’s up through 2017 had the motivation and income to buy wo subsidies.

That's an extremely selective view of things. Read a few posts back on the history of EVs in Norway. At several points Norway sales were over 10% of total Tesla sales. Without those incentives sales would have been a fraction.

China has always been a major market for Tesla and what has driven EV sales in China? Major cities puttiong a parallel wait line for EVs to skip the years-long wait list for a ICE vehicle plate.

How much has Tesla made in CARB credits, emission credits in Europe? Even gaming the subsidies with the whole battery swap swindle.

https://dailykanban.com/2015/06/23/tesl ... o-nowhere/

Just because you don't see it on the sticker price it doesn't mean there are no subsidies.

Indeed, Tesla would be much smaller without al those subsidies. Even now with massive subsidies everywhere they have demand problems...

JonesNL wrote:

JJJ wrote:

Planeflyer wrote:

Nonsense! The people who bought Tesla’s up through 2017 had the motivation and income to buy wo subsidies.

That's an extremely selective view of things. Read a few posts back on the history of EVs in Norway. At several points Norway sales were over 10% of total Tesla sales. Without those incentives sales would have been a fraction.

China has always been a major market for Tesla and what has driven EV sales in China? Major cities puttiong a parallel wait line for EVs to skip the years-long wait list for a ICE vehicle plate.

How much has Tesla made in CARB credits, emission credits in Europe? Even gaming the subsidies with the whole battery swap swindle.

https://dailykanban.com/2015/06/23/tesl ... o-nowhere/

Just because you don't see it on the sticker price it doesn't mean there are no subsidies.

Indeed, Tesla would be much smaller without al those subsidies. Even now with massive subsidies everywhere they have demand problems...

Correct. A few posts back planeflyer argued he was watching Tesla mostly from the investing side.

He seems to forget that Tesla's very raison d'être was to get ahead of the curve of the Government-forced EV adoption that's happening. Without that massive government intervention, Tesla wouldn't have attracted the kind of investor money they pulled in.

I'm sure someone bought the BS about robotaxis, solar and whatnot but the smart money was banking on that Government teat holding the whole thing together until it gained critical mass.