I don't believe regular-hybrids like e.g. the non-plug-in Prius were ever eligible. Vehicles like the Prius Prime and Volt which are plug-in hybrids are eligible if they were purchased prior to Dec 31, 2018.
The program has changed as of the first of the year such that rebates on vehicles purchased after Jan 1 are only for BEV and fuel cell vehicles with a purchase price of under $50k, here's a current list of eligible cars:
They should've had a 50k limit from the start IMO all those Tesla numbers from 2014, 2015, etc. were handouts to Model S and X buyers paying at least 70k, nobody pay 70k for a car who wants to _save_ money. I got the former max rebate of $2500 for my Volt, they got the max for a Model S too, but now you only get $1500 for a car and $450 for a motorcycle.
Making plug-in hybrids ineligible is a bit unfair though. The Prius Prime is a good car at a good price. The BMW i3 is a meh car for the price they sell it for, the markup on that car is huge.
The Prius and Volt are/were simply better cars for the money than most of the cars on that list, even though they're not strict BEVs (and the i3 with range extender engine isn't either but it gets a pass apparently)
I'm pleasantly surprised that there are that many companies producing electric cars. Haven't followed close enough to know that. Do you have any country wide stats? Mikek
Probably have to check out the Wikipedias of the various models to get exact figures for some of them, and some of the small-time players in the game may not release regular stats. Nationwide Tesla sales should be easy to come by,
Nationwide Chevy Volt sales will probably top out just under 300k prior to the model being discontinued in 2019, I've owned two and they're quite common here in the Boston area, sometimes I can't get a spot at a four-bay public charger at the train station on weekdays there are already four other Volts plugged in by 10 AM.
Nissan Leaf about 100k nationwide, Prius Prime plug-in about 70k. The two (discontinued?) Ford plug-in hybrids about 50k. BMW i3 about 30k.
There's a plug-in hybrid Chrysler Pacifica minivan I'd never even heard of it until I saw one a couple months ago. it's $40,000 but gets very good reviews. They probably haven't sold much more than 10k of them nationwide I expect.
Other than the Teslas that (unfairly in my estimation) scooped up many $2500 checks from the state as a reward for buying a $70,000 car the majority of rebates did not go to de-luxe car marques and jet-set buyers it went to Chevrolet, Ford, Toyota and Nissan-buyers, not exactly luxury marques.
Charger congestion could become a limiting turn-off for electric car owners. Gas fillups are faster than recharges, but gas stations are already crowded in many places; the real estate is more valuable as apartment buildings.
It will be interesting to see if electric car sales grow over time, or peak and dwindle off, the PT Cruiser curve.
People love to get stuff for free, and might over-spend on a car in exchange for a smallish government kickback.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
lunatic fringe electronics
But everybody has electricity in their homes, and their garages. The averag e car spends 95% of its time parked, and it makes sense to charge it where it's parked, rather than having to make trip to a charging station.
Electricity is cheaper than gasoline, and hybrid cars make more efficient u se of gasoline than pure gas-guzzlers. The economics do favour electric car s.
A $2,500 kickback isn't a big deal in the price of a car. At the moment buy ing a electric car is investing more capital now to get lower spending on g etting around later. The kickback lowers the pay-off period, but not a lot.
age car spends 95% of its time parked, and it makes sense to charge it wher e it's parked, rather than having to make trip to a charging station.
That's a great idea, often expressed as ABC, "Always Be Charging" and can w ork all the time except when it doesn't. Your support of it is based on a single data point and as we've discussed before this is not enough informat ion to adequately characterize the situation.
There are two big issues, the first of which is travel. Tesla built a Supe rcharger network to support travel. With an EPA range of 300 miles there n eeds to be chargers along the highways enough that the range can be properl y utilized. There is a location in Quartzsite, AZ with only 8 chargers for many miles. It has become a recurring congestion point. I'm sure Tesla w ill resolve the issue sometime soon, but with the increased sales from the model 3 this will happen in other locations as well.
The other issue is that many locations simply don't have facilities and the re is no money to add them. L2 chargers are all that is needed for long te rm parking (home and work are the most useful). But many home locations si mply don't have facilities to support this and it can be very expensive to add them. Even though they are just 240 volt circuits someone has to pay f or the electricity so they need to be connected to the appropriate meter an d then run to an appropriate parking space.
For the vast majority of people charging at home will deal with 90% of thei r needs. This is the charging method that is getting little attention, esp ecially from people like Larkin.
use of gasoline than pure gas-guzzlers. The economics do favour electric c ars.
At the moment. It won't take a huge adoption of EVs for the price of gas t o plummet with the lowered demand. Likewise with the increase in demand fo r electricity there will be a need for intelligent control of charging to p roperly utilize the existing electrical infrastructure rather than building a lot of generation and transmission that aren't required.
d
rs
ry
uying a electric car is investing more capital now to get lower spending on getting around later. The kickback lowers the pay-off period, but not a lo t.
You couldn't be more wrong about that. The idea of getting something for n othing can be a huge incentive. We will be able to see some live data on t his now that Tesla's tax credit has been cut in half.
Rick C.
- Get 6 months of free supercharging - Tesla referral code -
On Sunday, January 6, 2019 at 4:11:02 PM UTC+11, snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wr ote:
:
ts
producing
et
n
d be
ior
t a
erage car spends 95% of its time parked, and it makes sense to charge it wh ere it's parked, rather than having to make trip to a charging station.
work all the time except when it doesn't. Your support of it is based on a single data point and as we've discussed before this is not enough inform ation to adequately characterize the situation.
Which "single data point" would that be?
You don't like the whole idea, but that makes you a single data point.
percharger network to support travel. With an EPA range of 300 miles there needs to be chargers along the highways enough that the range can be prope rly utilized. There is a location in Quartzsite, AZ with only 8 chargers f or many miles. It has become a recurring congestion point. I'm sure Tesla will resolve the issue sometime soon, but with the increased sales from th e model 3 this will happen in other locations as well.
here is no money to add them. L2 chargers are all that is needed for long term parking (home and work are the most useful). But many home locations simply don't have facilities to support this and it can be very expensive t o add them.
For some undefined value of "very expensive". It's just another power point .
lectricity so they need to be connected to the appropriate meter and then r un to an appropriate parking space.
The current drawn has to be metered - which isn't a big deal - and even par king meters can now recognise regular cash cards.
eir needs. This is the charging method that is getting little attention, e specially from people like Larkin.
John Larkin gets his thinking from denialist web sites, which are set up by people who want to keeping making money out of selling gasoline.
r
nt use of gasoline than pure gas-guzzlers. The economics do favour electric cars.
to plummet with the lowered demand.
This does assume that oil is only used fuel cars in first world countries.
Whenever the price of oil declines, the oil-producing countries negotiate r educed production to get it back up again.
d for intelligent control of charging to properly utilize the existing elec trical infrastructure rather than building a lot of generation and transmis sion that aren't required.
100% electric cars in the US would require a 30% increase in the total powe r generated to keep them charged.
If the cars mostly got charged overnight, when the existing transmission ne twork is lightly loaded, this shouldn't require any extra transmission capa city (not that the people who build it and charge for it are likely to admi t this).
e
.
ard
y
ny
yers
xury
buying a electric car is investing more capital now to get lower spending on getting around later. The kickback lowers the pay-off period, but not a lot.
And your evidence fro this claim is?
Right up to the point where it is realised that you have to spend twenty ti mes more than the kickback to get it "for nothing".
has been cut in half.
So evidence is going to exist, but nothing you can find at the moment.
average car spends 95% of its time parked, and it makes sense to charge it where it's parked, rather than having to make trip to a charging station.
an work all the time except when it doesn't. Your support of it is based o n a single data point and as we've discussed before this is not enough info rmation to adequately characterize the situation.
You know exactly what I am talking about, but you like to turn to personal attacks when you don't have a valid argument. Your 95% number seems to be the be-all factoid that justifies so much of your thinking regarding EVs. Unfortunately there is a *lot* of information that single datum hides.
Supercharger network to support travel. With an EPA range of 300 miles the re needs to be chargers along the highways enough that the range can be pro perly utilized. There is a location in Quartzsite, AZ with only 8 chargers for many miles. It has become a recurring congestion point. I'm sure Tes la will resolve the issue sometime soon, but with the increased sales from the model 3 this will happen in other locations as well.
there is no money to add them. L2 chargers are all that is needed for lon g term parking (home and work are the most useful). But many home location s simply don't have facilities to support this and it can be very expensive to add them.
nt.
One example I know of a person was quoted $8,000 to install a 240 volt outl et by her parking space in the garage of the apartment building in CA. CA has a law that says the apartment owners have to accommodate her needs, but at her expense. They seem to be cooperating with her, but the work involv ed is not like adding a 20 foot wire and outlet in your garage.
There are other issues involved in such situations. One that would concern me is vandalism. Because they are new I would expect some percentage of t hem to be damaged or the cables stolen for the copper inside. But then I'm not an apartment type of person.
$8,000 on top of a $35,000 car is a bit rich for a lot of people. So charg ing at fast chargers is a better option for them just like they don't have their own wells or grow their own food.
electricity so they need to be connected to the appropriate meter and then run to an appropriate parking space.
arking meters can now recognise regular cash cards.
Yep, some day they will happen. I recall paying $2 an hour to park in Beth esda, MD (a restaurant Mecca). It would be nice to get something for that money. But those meters don't have power. Someone would need to pay for i nstalling chargers at each meter. That's a *lot* of money to cough up even if it makes money in the end. It won't happen overnight and in the mean t ime there aren't good places to charge in general, other than at the fast c hargers or at home if possible.
their needs. This is the charging method that is getting little attention, especially from people like Larkin.
by people who want to keeping making money out of selling gasoline.
I know. He seems to have a particular bug up his ass about EVs. Even if t here were no environmental advantage to them at all (which some people will claim) they are pretty awesome vehicles in their own right. One of their greatest advantages is the acceleration. Merging into traffic is a breeze. While on the entrance ramp at 30 I can literally punch the accelerator as a car is going by and my speed is matched in two seconds as I merge in beh ind. In fact, I have to be very careful to not overdo it and end up beside the other car. lol
The quiet is amazing too. No roar of the engine. I can actually listen to music and enjoy it almost like being in my living room! Better actually a s my stereo is rather old and not as good as the sound system in the car.
or
ient use of gasoline than pure gas-guzzlers. The economics do favour electr ic cars.
as to plummet with the lowered demand.
.
Not sure what this is saying. The grammar seems to have been mucked by a t ypo.
reduced production to get it back up again.
Doesn't matter. The reduction will be an ongoing thing and while negotiati ng as prices are rising is easy, negotiating as prices are falling is not s o easy. Mostly this will be driven by pain of lower net profits and hard t o make up. Essentially it will keep the oil producing nations in a constan t pain for some time.
eed for intelligent control of charging to properly utilize the existing el ectrical infrastructure rather than building a lot of generation and transm ission that aren't required.
wer generated to keep them charged.
In isolation not a terribly relevant fact.
network is lightly loaded, this shouldn't require any extra transmission ca pacity (not that the people who build it and charge for it are likely to ad mit this).
Yeah, there will be the FUD of the power companies negotiating for higher r ates, but the bottom line for generation and transmission is that they are now competitive and this may finally pay off for the consumer. We don't pa y anyone to build generation or transmission infrastructure... or do we? T here is presently a bit of a scandal in South Carolina where the power comp any and several other outfits botched the construction of a nuke plant. Th e consumers have been paying higher rates for some time to pay for the cons truction and it has now failed and will produce no power ever. Dominion (a VA based utility) is buying the SC utility if I am reading the articles co rrectly and seem to want to push all new costs of this failed plant to the consumers as well. It's something over $1,000 per household. I don't foll ow why the local power companies get to push any costs to the consumers whe n generation and transmission are supposed to be separate now.
The
0k.
heard
ery
m
many
he
buyers
luxury
nt buying a electric car is investing more capital now to get lower spendin g on getting around later. The kickback lowers the pay-off period, but not a lot.
How about the fact that Tesla has lowered the price of their cars by $2,000 to help offset the $3,500 loss in EV tax credits? Obviously Tesla thinks it is a big deal. The stock analysts also seem to think it is a big deal a s well.
What is your evidence to support your claim? I don't know anyone who had d one a "pay-off period" analysis on the lower fuel costs. I think we are st ill in the era of buying EVs because they are "good for the environment" fo r the most part, or just because they are cool or because they are very nic e cars with powerful engines. I haven't met any owners who even care about the running costs except for the one guy who only charges his Bolt at free chargers. He actually cares about saving the $6 a day.
times more than the kickback to get it "for nothing".
Huh? People buy cars all the time. They are essential for most. Just yes terday I was talking to a lady who hates her new car because the seats are not comfortable. She paid in the mid $30s for it. If Tesla had their $35,
000 car she could have bought that. I think she wouldn't mind paying $40,0
00, but the husband was against it. Another two or three thousand rebate m ight have changed his mind.
it has been cut in half.
Yes, we will find evidence to prove or disprove your theory.
Rick C.
Get 6 months of free supercharging + Tesla referral code -
need for intelligent control of charging to properly utilize the existing e lectrical infrastructure rather than building a lot of generation and trans mission that aren't required.
ower generated to keep them charged.
network is lightly loaded, this shouldn't require any extra transmission c apacity (not that the people who build it and charge for it are likely to a dmit this).
What are you saying? Do you really think that excess power during the day would not be used? Do you not understand the meaning of the word "mostly"?
The point is car charging is not a power use that has a fixed time of day l ike most uses. Mostly it can be scheduled to optimize the best use of the power grid. But to do this will require the utilities to get on the stick and figure out ways to make this happen effectively. I don't know if they can react in time to keep up with the transition to EVs. It may happen mor e quickly than any of us realize.
In five years virtually ever car maker will have their own EV models on the road and there will be a network of charging installed to support them. T his will not be a significant drain on the grid, but by this time the utili ties will be working hard to capitalize on the situation. I can't say what this will entail, but I'd be willing to bet it results in additional costs being passed onto the consumer. So consumers need to get in touch with th eir governments to get ahead of this and require the utilities to find ways to mitigate the problems of charging EVs while there is time to implement them and avoid giving the utilities an opportunity to gouge consumers.
Rick C.
-- Get 6 months of free supercharging -- Tesla referral code -
need for intelligent control of charging to properly utilize the existing e lectrical infrastructure rather than building a lot of generation and trans mission that aren't required.
ower generated to keep them charged.
network is lightly loaded, this shouldn't require any extra transmission c apacity (not that the people who build it and charge for it are likely to a dmit this).
Depends where you put the energy storage. Thermal solar stores the energy a s heat (as in hot molten salt) and you can turn that into electricity overn ight.
The proposition was that if cars got charged overnight, then the existing t ransmission system wouldn't get overloaded. If your generating system was h eavily reliant on solar cells, you might have to build extra transmission l ines to cope with the extra load, but since large scale solar farms tend to be well away from the places where people have built generating plants, th e grid operators are already claiming this an excuse to build even more pol es and wires without bothering to throw in electric vehicles as an extra ju stification.
a need for intelligent control of charging to properly utilize the existing electrical infrastructure rather than building a lot of generation and tra nsmission that aren't required.
power generated to keep them charged.
on network is lightly loaded, this shouldn't require any extra transmission capacity (not that the people who build it and charge for it are likely to admit this).
as heat (as in hot molten salt) and you can turn that into electricity ove rnight.
transmission system wouldn't get overloaded. If your generating system was heavily reliant on solar cells, you might have to build extra transmission lines to cope with the extra load, but since large scale solar farms tend to be well away from the places where people have built generating plants, the grid operators are already claiming this an excuse to build even more p oles and wires without bothering to throw in electric vehicles as an extra justification.
Both of you seem to be ignoring the fact that the grid is sized to carry th e full generating capacity. As long as EVs are charged without adding to t he generating capacity, i.e. charged at other than peak times, no addition to generation or transmission capacity is needed. Much of the 5% of the ti me when cars are not available for charging is during the peak power consum ption times when there is no available power to charge them with. Doesn't that work out well?
Rick C.
-+ Get 6 months of free supercharging -+ Tesla referral code -
e average car spends 95% of its time parked, and it makes sense to charge i t where it's parked, rather than having to make trip to a charging station.
can work all the time except when it doesn't. Your support of it is based on a single data point and as we've discussed before this is not enough in formation to adequately characterize the situation.
You may like to think so, but it's revealing that you didn't identify the " single data point" that you are claiming that you have identified.
ment.
There's nothing particularly personal in asking you to identify the "single data point".
your thinking regarding EVs. Unfortunately there is a *lot* of information that single datum hides.
An average is single data point.
The UK average is 96.5%
The Australian figure seems to be 96% - 80% of the time parked at home, 16% of the time parked away from home.
We did discuss how the proportion of cars parked changes during the day, an d I dug up a link that showed that proportion didn't drop much below 88% at any time - it may look as if every car in the area is on the road at peak commuting times, but the figures don't seem to support that point of view.
formatting link
-the-US
a Supercharger network to support travel.
But few people spend much of their driving time "travelling". You seem to b e unusual in this respect.
highways enough that the range can be properly utilized. There is a locati on in Quartzsite, AZ with only 8 chargers for many miles. It has become a recurring congestion point. I'm sure Tesla will resolve the issue sometime soon, but with the increased sales from the model 3 this will happen in ot her locations as well.
nd there is no money to add them. L2 chargers are all that is needed for l ong term parking (home and work are the most useful). But many home locati ons simply don't have facilities to support this and it can be very expensi ve to add them.
oint.
tlet by her parking space in the garage of the apartment building in CA. C A has a law that says the apartment owners have to accommodate her needs, b ut at her expense. They seem to be cooperating with her, but the work invo lved is not like adding a 20 foot wire and outlet in your garage.
That's exactly the physical work involved. It's easy enough to find ways to charge more on top of this - mechanically robust protection for what other wise would be an accessible power lead, and an insurance inspection to prov e that putting in the wiring is not going to set up any kid of potentially hazardous situation. Lazy apartment owners know how to get out of inconven ient requests.
rn me is vandalism. Because they are new I would expect some percentage of them to be damaged or the cables stolen for the copper inside. But then I 'm not an apartment type of person.
The parking area in our garage is not accessible to the public. There are k ey-operated gates on every entry point. The cars stored there are a lot mor e valuable than a length of copper cable.
It isn't going to be the price an average car owner would have to pay.
on't have their own wells or grow their own food.
Scarcely parallel examples. The average garage has a light circuit. Most ha ve power points adequate for regular power tools. Plugging a car charger in to such a power point isn't comparable with digging a well.
he electricity so they need to be connected to the appropriate meter and th en run to an appropriate parking space.
parking meters can now recognise regular cash cards.
thesda, MD (a restaurant Mecca). It would be nice to get something for tha t money. But those meters don't have power.
The local parking meters have enough power to run a cash-card reader. In Ca nada a parking meter has a low-powered power socket for your car's radiator warmer - and your parking charge pays for that current.
a *lot* of money to cough up even if it makes money in the end. It won't happen overnight and in the mean time there aren't good places to charge in general, other than at the fast chargers or at home if possible.
Parking meters already cost $500-$600 each. Smart meters already need a mai ns electricity supply and the information link to report and verify credit card transactions, and beefing that up to support domestic charging current s isn't going to make much difference to the price - which is mostly diggin g the holes and filling them in afterwards.
formatting link
PDF
f their needs. This is the charging method that is getting little attentio n, especially from people like Larkin.
p by people who want to keeping making money out of selling gasoline.
there were no environmental advantage to them at all (which some people wi ll claim) they are pretty awesome vehicles in their own right. One of thei r greatest advantages is the acceleration. Merging into traffic is a breez e. While on the entrance ramp at 30 I can literally punch the accelerator as a car is going by and my speed is matched in two seconds as I merge in b ehind. In fact, I have to be very careful to not overdo it and end up besi de the other car. lol
to music and enjoy it almost like being in my living room! Better actually as my stereo is rather old and not as good as the sound system in the car.
e, or
icient use of gasoline than pure gas-guzzlers. The economics do favour elec tric cars.
gas to plummet with the lowered demand.
tries.
typo.
te reduced production to get it back up again.
ting as prices are rising is easy, negotiating as prices are falling is not so easy. Mostly this will be driven by pain of lower net profits and hard to make up. Essentially it will keep the oil producing nations in a const ant pain for some time.
Oil is a diminishing asset. Oil field run dry. Oil producing nations are "i n constant pain" about this - with the possible exception of Norway which dumps the royalties into its sovereign wealth fund.
formatting link
need for intelligent control of charging to properly utilize the existing electrical infrastructure rather than building a lot of generation and tran smission that aren't required.
power generated to keep them charged.
It's a well known fact - and there was a slightly alarmist article in the P roceedings of the IEEE on the subject a couple of decades ago, which I can still remember reading, but can't be bothered to try and dig out.
n network is lightly loaded, this shouldn't require any extra transmission capacity (not that the people who build it and charge for it are likely to admit this).
rates, but the bottom line for generation and transmission is that they ar e now competitive and this may finally pay off for the consumer. We don't pay anyone to build generation or transmission infrastructure... or do we? There is presently a bit of a scandal in South Carolina where the power co mpany and several other outfits botched the construction of a nuke plant. The consumers have been paying higher rates for some time to pay for the co nstruction and it has now failed and will produce no power ever. Dominion (a VA based utility) is buying the SC utility if I am reading the articles correctly and seem to want to push all new costs of this failed plant to th e consumers as well. It's something over $1,000 per household. I don't fo llow why the local power companies get to push any costs to the consumers w hen generation and transmission are supposed to be separate now.
Think ENRON. Legislators get bribed to do thinks that make money for influe ntial businessmen, who can pay the bribes, and also the lawyers to makes su re that the bribes stay hidden. Trump clearly didn't pay his lawyer enough.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.