So first the government announces cuts...
… and next, they're helping people buy their cars?
Buy an e-car next year and the government will pay a quarter of the asking price - up to a maximum of £5000. You'll have to buy one of nine named electric vehicles, and your choice will be limited further by the fact that only three of them will actually be available to buy. The e-cars subsidised by the £43m scheme include the …
… and next, they're helping people buy their cars?
... kick-starting a shift in the market. The money's the same as the annual budget for ten average-sized high schools, which doesn't seem massive to shift an industry the size of the UK car market.
So, who exactly will benefit? Most people spending £20-25k on a car would be expecting a lot more vehicle for their cash, so it's likely to be either highly-principled (which is fine in this case) or highly-paid who will benefit. Supporting a shift to greener transport needs to be done without bunging cash at those who already have it.
No politician ever got sacked for giving money to middle class people
for that? what?!
why is something that is 'better' always pricier?
If I use my definition of better, which is largely based on practicality (especially practicality of journeys larger than, say, 200 miles) then my shitty M plate Astra still wins.
Numerous studies have shown that a 10+ year old car, kept in decent nick will produce less pollution than ANY of these fucking dodgem cars....
I'll stick with my petrol turbo thank you very much.
The studies about being less polluting that a 10+ year old car are not comparing like for like as they include the pollution from the powerstations for the car but don't include the carbon footprint of getting the diesel to the garage. It takes 7.5Kw/hours refine one US gallon of petrol for example.
Because the makers know that half the price of these cars are being paid for by grants / tax-breaks / etc and so double the sticker price - and then double it again for the UK
Remember when the government bought BBC micros for every school ? Remember how they cost twice as much as every other home computer ?
We see the same thing here with water tanks. Some states give grants to people who put in watertanks. Funnily enough the tanks in these states are much more expensive than those in states that don't offer grants.
The only ones who apparently don't understand how these things work are the dipshits running our various governments.
Those idiots should be "first against the wall when the revolution comes" I say.
For the person who can work out who in the Government or Civil Service is getting a bung for this one.
Good to see this lot are as corrupt as the last lot.
I have an average daily usage of about 15 miles, I have a 3 phase supply at home and was in the market for a new motor. My missus has a nice company diesel for proper journeys and they're building charge points around the corner from my office. Target audience you'd think.
I would get emails building up to the release from Nissan, until the one that announced the price of £19,000 after the government contribution. £19,000!!!!
So I'm an ideal commuter type who'd genuinely use the electric car in the manner it's intended for, completely priced out of the market. I couldn't spend £20k on a car anyway, certainly not a small city run-around that won't get me safely out of town and back again. So those with the dough to make a statement will score, and the intended market haven't got a hope in hell.
(But not when on the bike)
You can get electric mopeds for around £1,500. The top-speed isn't great at around 40mph, but if you're not going onto a dual-carriageway then it's fine. Likewise, the range is limited at about 40 miles.
Or, if you want something more like a motorbike, rather than a moped, then for £3,500 you can get one with 65 mpg, 55 miles (but probably not at the same time).
helps finance the electricity generation / supply upgrades needed to power all these ponsy dodgem cars.
Ooooh silly me, it's the taxpayer not the government that is subsidising these motorists. Glad to see somene being generous with our money.
Like a farmer friend in North Yorkshire once said of the metric system; "it'll never catch on round here..."
The amount of power these puppies dan draw is noticble load on the substations. Indeed dont take many at the wrong time say when eastenders is on to be charging to realy start to see some nice localised powercuts and need for extra substations to handle the extra load. How green is that. Sadly cost of electricity generated in the uk compared to petrol and you get more CO2 into our lovely atmosphere with a petrol car than ANY electric car the goverment is subsidising.
How green is that?
Well maybe it's all the case of being seen to be doing something rather than actualy planning beyond a 5 year plan. Maybe this was some EU directed induced initiative, smells akin to it. Either way its not even a placebo.
Now subsirdising train fares - and maybe introducing standby tickets were if the train is half full your allowed on it for some realy cheap price. Ie defining offpeak to the real offpeak times were they need to move the trains ready for the peak times needs/be seen to run a regular service. That would be green and actualy save money as the trains already run and would make more use of the underused times.
Heck - giving cheap effecient tires would reduce the CO2 levels in one day more than this idea would and be cheaper.
Who will get one of these, well those who can afford to be in such trends and that would be middle/upper class so as such its a green perceieved incentive for those who can afford to do better.
Now I could be wrong but I'm not feeling it; But can we honestly say that this will act as an incentive enough to get a electric car over a petrol one -- those living near london excluded as we all know its worth it just on saving the congestion charge ;).
Basicly - how many people who work at banks will buy one of these compared to average joe public who probably already uses public transport, or least shoudl I say gets used by public transport.
Now as for who is getting a bung over this `initiative` I'd say the one who has got a electric car for there partner on loan from the company in the capacity of road trials/market research that avoids having to be declared as a perk. But hey thats just a wild guess.
PARIS as we dont have a Mr Bean political Icon :(
If they gave me £5k I might take one away for them. Or if something along the lines of the QED Mini could be made at a reasonable price I might be interested, or even more the super little NICE car designed by Cranfield a coupe or three years ago. I don't need a big fat blob full of batteries that will need to be replaced sooner or later.
Like a Polo Bluemotion at 80Mpg combined at around £15k. Looks like a normal car as well.
A quick look shows the Imiev figures as:
Purchase price: £25k
12,000 miles of leccy = £270
range = 80 miles with a recharge time of 6 hours, or 80% charge in 30 mins with quick charger.
0-60 - 13.5s
compared to the Polo Bluemotion:
12,000 miles of fuel = £850
range = practically unlimited with a refuel time of a couple of minutes.
0-60 - 13.9s
so, on fuel you save about £600 per year, and assuming servicing is cheaper on the leccy (fewer moving parts) about £200 there.
Assume a widening of the gap between leccy prices and diesel then it seems reasonable, and easy for the maths, to estimate the leccy car as costing £1000 per year less than the Polo to run.
So,10K more to buy, 1k less per year gives you a ten year ROI, assuming that all other costs are equal, but given the very expensive battery will die before then it is optimistic at the least.
However, assuming you are a London commuter then you could estimate the congestion charge at something like £2000 per year and possible parking saves which would bring ROI down to 2-3 years (or about 3 weeks if Ken Livingstone becomes Mayor).
You are asking a lot for non-London commuters to swallow just to save a small part of the planet, and even taking all the London anti-normal-car cost savings into consideration it is a big ask to justify a leccy car against the public transport system or a pushbike.
That's weird because the Smart website says full electric production won't happen until 2012 :(
How long does one of these things (electric cars) hold its charge for? I use my car occasionally. If I fill up with fuel, drive it, leave it and then come back later (maybe a week) I can pretty much expect that all the fuel I didn't use to still be there. If I were to charge my electric car and do the same, how much would have leaked away? Maybe not much when new, but after four or maybe five years? I can see a point where I'd be having to charge every night, just to keep it topped up ready for use. In the short term how is that better for the environment, considering the source of all the electricity is fossil fuel?In the long run, how is that better for me when green electricity becomes more abundanyt, as current projections have it pegged as significantly more expensive.
If you keep a car at the moment for 5 years chances are you'll be able to flog it reasonably easy. But whose going to want to buy an electric car with a knackered battery? Whose going to want to shell out for a new battery on a car they're going to sell?
What chance does the education system have when we get:
"The Ampera and the Volt are essentially one and the same too"
I suppose the marketing deartments turned down the Watt car as a name?