Ross Clark: The electric vehicles farce has reached a shambolic new low
By Paul Homewood
If the industry wants to survive, it should stop making bad cars nobody wants to drive. It appears to want subsidies instead
When the electric vans startup Arrival announced that it was seeking to focus its business on the US market, it seemed like a good move. Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act was offering massive subsidies for the green industries of tomorrow; the market would surely surge, and Arrival’s fortunes with it.
They did not. The “British Tesla” as it was once known, which was valued at over £10 billion on the Nasdaq at one point, has seen its UK arm enter administration. It follows that other darling of green industrial policy, Britishvolt, which collapsed last year (it was later bought by Recharge Industries).
It has been clear for a long time now that electric vehicles have run up against one of those concrete blocks the automotive industry uses in crash tests. In spite of huge subsidies over the years, and a tax regime which continues massively to favour owners of electric cars over petrol and diesel ones, the motor industry still struggles to shift its wares.
Last year, for the first time, the market share for pure battery-powered cars fell back for the first time, from 16.6 per cent in 2022 to 16.5 per cent in 2023. Private buyers lost interest a while ago, and now fleet buyers are losing faith too: the US arm of car rental firm Hertz recently announced it was planning to sell off a third of its electric vehicle fleet and reinvest in petrol.
In a sane world, this would be a signal for manufacturers to cut back production. Unfortunately, the Government thinks otherwise, and since 1 January manufacturers have been under a mandate to make sure that at least 22 percent of the vehicles they sell are zero emission, a proportion that is due to rise to 80 percent by 2030. Fail, and they face stiff fines.
Given that people don’t want to buy these cars, it’s causing a considerable headache. The preferred solution of the car industry, of course, is simple: ask the Government for more taxpayer-funded handouts.
Industry figures are already complaining that grants for plug-in cars, which at their height offered bungs of up to £4,000 per vehicle, were phased out in 2022. They should consider, however, that electric cars continue to enjoy substantial fiscal incentives. Buy a litre of petrol and around half of what you pay is tax; charge your EV at home and all you pay is 5 percent VAT. Electric cars won’t even be liable for road tax until next year – after years of using the roads for free.
If your industry has this many state-mandated advantages over its competitors and still can’t persuade people to buy, the answer isn’t to double down on your lousy product, and beg the Government to save you. It’s to stop making bad cars nobody wants to drive.
As for the state, it’s time for it to step back and stop throttling the sector with ridiculous rules. How many times will we have to learn the lesson that governments waving massive subsidy cheques make for awful investors? Throwing yet more money at the electric vehicle industry won’t make the vehicles better. They’ll keep being expensive, slow to charge, excessively heavy, and lacking in range compared to their far superior petrol peers. The Government should end this farce.
https://netzerowatch.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=c920274f2a364603849bbb505&id=5eae70f4c0&e=4961da7cb1
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Another government initiated fiasco, how come the motor industry went along with it? Surely market research would have shown that the BEV was so inferior to ICE vehicles that the general public would hesitate to purchase one.
So they request more subsidies to get them out of the mess, serve them right!
‘after years of using the roads for free.’
And their very heavy batteries and propensity to damage road surfaces for the rest of us before spontaneously combusting!
Heavy taxes on electricity are bound to follow if the planned transition to EVs goes ahead. How can taxes on domestic charging be separated from public charging? Domestic electricity bill payers will be penalised even if they don’t drive an EV. Then there’s the spectre of road pricing, with vehicles tracked 24/7. I wouldn’t rule that out .
It’s why the Government is mandating EVs are charged on a circuit with a separate smart meter. They’ll have a different rate to the rest of the domestic electricity. If people want to charge on a 13amp circuit, they’ll just have to expect to charge their cars for half a day.
It’s not just road surfaces. It’s also road side infrastructure like barriers.
See MGUY TV on his ‘EVs TOO HEAVY for roadside crash barriers’
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kD47ZDYArAw
The devotion to Net Zero is fanatical. That’s the root cause that needs addressing.
Electric cars are not ‘zero emission’, says advertising watchdogCarmakers ordered to take account of CO2 used in manufacturing and charging
Electric cars cannot be advertised as completely “zero emission” because of the carbon dioxide that is generated when they are made and charged, the advertising watchdog has declared.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/02/07/electric-cars-are-not-zero-emission-advertising-watchdog/
Paywalled unfortunately
Chariots of fire
Electric cars are not ‘zero emission’, particularly when they explode !!!!
.
Here is the text from the Telegraph …
.
Electric cars are not ‘zero emission’, says advertising watchdogCarmakers ordered to take account of CO2 used in manufacturing and charging
Matt Oliver, Industry Editor 7 February 2024 • 12:55pm
Related Topics
584
Electric cars cannot be advertised as completely “zero emission” because of the carbon dioxide that is generated when they are made and charged, the advertising watchdog has declared.
In a ruling that will change how electric vehicles (EVs) are promoted, the Advertising Standards Authority has banned carmakers from referring to them as zero emission unless they make clear this is only while driving.
The decision emerged as the regulator criticised BMW for describing its range of EVs as “zero emission cars” in Google searches.
In the ruling, the ASA said: “We understood that when electric vehicles were driven no emissions were produced, unlike a car with a petrol or diesel engine where emissions came from the tailpipe.
“However, in other circumstances, such as the manufacture or charging of an electric vehicle using electricity from the national grid, emissions were generated.
“For that reason an ad that featured a “zero emissions” claim, that did not make explicitly clear that it was related to the reaction of the vehicle while it was being driven was likely to mislead.”
It is understood to be the first time the ASA has issued such a ruling on cars and comes amid a crackdown by the regulator on so-called greenwashing, where companies over-promote their eco credentials.
However, the ASA’s stance appears at odds with that of the Government, which is calling battery-powered EVs “zero emission vehicles” for the purposes of the newly introduced ZEV mandate.
The mandate requires carmakers to make EVs an ever-bigger proportion of their sales, rising steadily from 22pc this year to 80pc by 2030.
With manufacturers under pressure to sell ever-high numbers of EVs, the ASA’s ruling will be a fresh headache.
While a typical battery EV creates no emissions at the tailpipe while driving, carbon dioxide (CO2) is generated if they are charged from Britain’s power grid because of its heavy reliance on gas.
Meanwhile around eight tonnes of CO2 equivalent is generated when an EV is manufactured, according to the International Energy Agency.
That includes 1.4 tonnes related to the battery’s critical minerals, 1.2 tonnes during the battery’s assembly and then another 5.4 tonnes when the full vehicle is manufactured.
By comparison, making a typical internal combustion engine (ICE) car creates about six tonnes of CO2 equivalent.
However, the lifetime emissions of an EV are generally far less, at around 11.7 tonnes of CO2 for charging compared to 35.9 tonnes of CO2 created by the fuel for ICE cars.
My VW Passat is zero emissions when it’s parked which, is most of the time,can I have a subsidy please?
“Paywalled unfortunately”
Disable Javascript in your browser to view the whole story.
I have a browser set up specifically for that purpose.
In the past I have had the paywall pointed out to me so now I put the warning in for those more honest than myself
this reminds me of Ronald Reagan hen he said the words nobody wants to hear. I’m from the government and I’m here to help
Governments are incapable of making the decisions necessary to run projects like this. They are run by Oxford PPE arts grads who cannot understand and so cannot judge good advice from bad.
Adam Smith said the only thing a government could run was the Royal Mail because it is simple, and repeats daily. Look at the mess they have even managed to get that into!
What chance cars? None. Only the market can be allowed to make those decisions.
Its a government scam, EVs was a one-liner in the 2019 manifesto (the election was all about brexit) therefore no mandate from the people
Any chance of Parminter and ZapLap actually informing themselves on this one ? The longer this folly persists the greater these intransigents’ stupidity.
The erudition of Chariots of Fire ( see above) is wasted on Net Zero and EV zeolots . None so stupid as will not listen. The Labour party are considering a ‘root and branch’ review of the H. of Lords. They could do worse than make competence a condition of membership. Too many have been ‘kicked up stairs’.
I suggest that the reign of the amateurs in both Houses since about 1990 is the main cause of such much ill understood or properly thought out legislation – and our increasing disrespect for the part they play in working life.
The problem is the power they have given themselves.
Had they limited power, no one would care what they did.
Unfortunately the Labour Party seem to make incompetence a condition of membership, and certainly of standing for office.
Those in charge of Net Zero have no intention of ending this farce because the reasons for the forced transition to bevs is firstly to destroy the UK motor manufacturing business and secondly to make private transport too expensive for the hoi polloi. Both are intended to reduce CO2 emissions. The Net Zero Strategy will be claimed to be of enormous benefit to the health of the nation as people are forced into “active travel” whilst leaving the roads free for those who are really entitled to use them. What’s not to like?
There was no intention to leave the ERM either.
But markets have an amazing ability to eventually price stupidity (even government stupidity accompanied by very deep pockets) into oblivion.
See Black Wednesday 16 September 1992. Hailed asa disaster by Labour, but all I remember is that after that my mortgage interest rate fell back to normality over the next 5 years from a peak of 16.9%.
White Wednesday was the start of a long period of growth for the UK economy once free of being tied to the German economy.
98% of battery cars on UK roads are company cars driven by BIK dodgers – once the tax perks end and they will, they’ll be dropped like hot coals
I read the term “Subsidy Harvesting” somewhere on this site. That simple two word phrase sums up the entirety of EVs, windmills and solar cells. While it seemed like a good idea to subsidize these innovative energy sources and uses thirty+ years ago, that initial boost has become the sole reason for existence of this industry.
A very good article about ridiculous and useless EVs, save for one point:
Road tax was abolished in the 1930s and no longer exists in the UK. Road maintenance is paid for out of general taxation. Pretty much all taxpayers pay for the upkeep of our roads, whether they drive a vehicle or not.
They are probably mistakenly referring to Vehicle Excise Duty as a road tax.