Carrots not enough? Is the stick era coming?
Discussion
Whilst the ZEV mandate is working well to increase the number of new Zero Emissions cars entering the car pool, couple of articles recently reporting the increasing age of the UK car fleet. This suggests that things are quite a way off where the UK has committed to be in terms of emissions reduction.
I wonder if we’re about to see sticks coming in to clear out some of the older car fleet to bring the average age back down? Going to be another awkward dilemma to add to the list for government economic consideration… None of the obvious options such as increasing fossil fuel tax, introducing scrappage schemes for cars over 10 years old, retrospective VED increases for older cars feel like they’d go down well. Any other ideas what approach might be taken? Or will the cheaper option just to admit defeat with our commitments and face the financial consequences, whatever they are?
https://www.racfoundation.org/data/green-fleet-ind...
I wonder if we’re about to see sticks coming in to clear out some of the older car fleet to bring the average age back down? Going to be another awkward dilemma to add to the list for government economic consideration… None of the obvious options such as increasing fossil fuel tax, introducing scrappage schemes for cars over 10 years old, retrospective VED increases for older cars feel like they’d go down well. Any other ideas what approach might be taken? Or will the cheaper option just to admit defeat with our commitments and face the financial consequences, whatever they are?
https://www.racfoundation.org/data/green-fleet-ind...
My wild assed guess: carrots will grow, sticks unlikely to fly.
Whatever your take on climate is, electrifying everything you can will be necessary, unless you want to be at disadvantage when selling products and services through European public procurement. Ignoring this niche will make it harder to reach economies of scale (similar dynamics as the California emission regulations had on the whole US).
The switch to electric power in industrial processes requires massive increases in cheap, low-carbon energy production (everywhere, not just in the UK). If your public charging is priced like in Finland, the short-term economies work for people who routinely drive long distances, too. During the last visit: ~0.22£/kWh for AC, IONITY Passport Power 0.21£, other DC providers a bit over 0.3£ per kWh. Might be enough of a carrot to get to the steep part of the "adoption S-curve".
In terms of overall emission targets, cheap electricity should make heat pumps more attractive for households. Heating homes seems to be almost at the same ballpark as an emission source as transport (I assume the "transport" number includes both private vehicles and trucks/ferries/rail/...). This should give headroom for a Norway-style approach (keep fuel prices low, use taxes to make EVs cheaper to buy than corresponding ICEs).
If you take a longer-term view, a lot of the above would pay for itself directly or indirectly (lower healthcare costs, more healthy life years, more resilient electric grid infrastructure,...). But the political process (and psychological resistance to any change) doesn't care much about the long term.
Whatever your take on climate is, electrifying everything you can will be necessary, unless you want to be at disadvantage when selling products and services through European public procurement. Ignoring this niche will make it harder to reach economies of scale (similar dynamics as the California emission regulations had on the whole US).
The switch to electric power in industrial processes requires massive increases in cheap, low-carbon energy production (everywhere, not just in the UK). If your public charging is priced like in Finland, the short-term economies work for people who routinely drive long distances, too. During the last visit: ~0.22£/kWh for AC, IONITY Passport Power 0.21£, other DC providers a bit over 0.3£ per kWh. Might be enough of a carrot to get to the steep part of the "adoption S-curve".
In terms of overall emission targets, cheap electricity should make heat pumps more attractive for households. Heating homes seems to be almost at the same ballpark as an emission source as transport (I assume the "transport" number includes both private vehicles and trucks/ferries/rail/...). This should give headroom for a Norway-style approach (keep fuel prices low, use taxes to make EVs cheaper to buy than corresponding ICEs).
If you take a longer-term view, a lot of the above would pay for itself directly or indirectly (lower healthcare costs, more healthy life years, more resilient electric grid infrastructure,...). But the political process (and psychological resistance to any change) doesn't care much about the long term.
plfrench said:
Whilst the ZEV mandate is working well to increase the number of new Zero Emissions cars entering the car pool, couple of articles recently reporting the increasing age of the UK car fleet. This suggests that things are quite a way off where the UK has committed to be in terms of emissions reduction.
I wonder if we’re about to see sticks coming in to clear out some of the older car fleet to bring the average age back down? Going to be another awkward dilemma to add to the list for government economic consideration… None of the obvious options such as increasing fossil fuel tax, introducing scrappage schemes for cars over 10 years old, retrospective VED increases for older cars feel like they’d go down well. Any other ideas what approach might be taken? Or will the cheaper option just to admit defeat with our commitments and face the financial consequences, whatever they are?
https://www.racfoundation.org/data/green-fleet-ind...
Admit defeat. There's little will from the general population to voluntarily go EV. The government are already up shtcreek, enforcing this kind of stuff will ensure defeat at the next election.I wonder if we’re about to see sticks coming in to clear out some of the older car fleet to bring the average age back down? Going to be another awkward dilemma to add to the list for government economic consideration… None of the obvious options such as increasing fossil fuel tax, introducing scrappage schemes for cars over 10 years old, retrospective VED increases for older cars feel like they’d go down well. Any other ideas what approach might be taken? Or will the cheaper option just to admit defeat with our commitments and face the financial consequences, whatever they are?
https://www.racfoundation.org/data/green-fleet-ind...
A few subtle VED increases for the older more polluting cars will just push people into less polluting cheaper ICE rather than older EVs .
First, there's no rush. The goal is net zero by 2050, the current rules say the last combustion engined car is sold in 2034. The number of miles driven by 15+ year old cars isn't significant, so we have another two elections before the actual crunch point.
The ZEV mandate is politically clever as it makes selling EVs the carmakers' problem, thus dodging any unpopularity for the government - unlike say ULEZ.
So for the current parliament there is no incentive for the government to do anything other than stand by the current rules. The idea of doing something really unpopular now, in order to mitigate a problem at the end of the next parliament which might not even be a problem then, doesn't make any political sense.
In the meantime the government absolutely is working to install more clean power generation as stated, with the aim of mostly decoupling the electricity price from the gas price.
The 2029 election may, depending on voters' priorities, become a turning point at which 'sticks' might potentially come out to curtail ICE car sales and/or usage. More likely by that time the way forward will be clearer and it'll be a non-issue.
The ZEV mandate is politically clever as it makes selling EVs the carmakers' problem, thus dodging any unpopularity for the government - unlike say ULEZ.
So for the current parliament there is no incentive for the government to do anything other than stand by the current rules. The idea of doing something really unpopular now, in order to mitigate a problem at the end of the next parliament which might not even be a problem then, doesn't make any political sense.
In the meantime the government absolutely is working to install more clean power generation as stated, with the aim of mostly decoupling the electricity price from the gas price.
The 2029 election may, depending on voters' priorities, become a turning point at which 'sticks' might potentially come out to curtail ICE car sales and/or usage. More likely by that time the way forward will be clearer and it'll be a non-issue.
TheRainMaker said:
I think someone might have dropped the ball with this one. Even if all ZEV targets are hit, it still only works out at 18% of cars on the UK roads being BEVS.
My math could be wrong though
Yes I think they must have been counting on a larger total volume of new car sales and a larger number of older cars being scrapped over the last few years… seems quite a long way off as things are now!My math could be wrong though
A base diesel golf is £30k. No wonder people are hanging on to their cars.
Also, the average age can have different factors other than people hanging on to old cars. Since corona, electrification and price increases, most companies I work with have upped their lease terms from 4 years to 5 or even 6 years.
I know very few companies that still hold to a 4 year lease. Another part of it of course is aging BEVs. In a lot of ways they are defined, BEV is the end goal. There really is no incentive to get a new BEV once you have one, whereas this was definitely the case with ICE in the past couple of decades, your 4 year old ICE was punished by emission laws, as a company you really had to love paying taxes to keep your vehicles.
Company car sales are a significant part of the market, if even half of them decide to up the lease term by 25% or even 50%, it'll have a massive impact on new car sales.
Tbh, I think that's mostly what happened.
Also, the average age can have different factors other than people hanging on to old cars. Since corona, electrification and price increases, most companies I work with have upped their lease terms from 4 years to 5 or even 6 years.
I know very few companies that still hold to a 4 year lease. Another part of it of course is aging BEVs. In a lot of ways they are defined, BEV is the end goal. There really is no incentive to get a new BEV once you have one, whereas this was definitely the case with ICE in the past couple of decades, your 4 year old ICE was punished by emission laws, as a company you really had to love paying taxes to keep your vehicles.
Company car sales are a significant part of the market, if even half of them decide to up the lease term by 25% or even 50%, it'll have a massive impact on new car sales.
Tbh, I think that's mostly what happened.
P675 said:
Imagine being European and driving your EV over here, to find 0.85p chargers. Why are we mugged off on absolutely everything.
I've seen similar rates all over Europe, it's a bit of a minefield. They really need to get the public charger situation sorted for people without off street parking. I'm an EV convert and I believe EVs can work as they are now for almost everyone, but I advise against getting one if you don't have a regular place to charge at a rate that's acceptable, which seems to be the case pretty often.For example in Belgium, to keep up with EU demands for public chargers, they put up grants for anyone who installs a charger and makes it publicly available. However, it seems that there are little to no checks on that, so many of them are behind gates that close at night, or just have an insane hourly and kwh rate on there (again, no regulations for it) so that they can take the grant but no one charges on their driveway. Meanwhile the city can claim they added hundreds of new charging points that year.
With the tariffs that the US and the EU have put on Chinese EV's this year I wouldn't be surprised if we get flooded with them which may make them a more attractive bet though people maybe weary of brands they haven't seen before.
There's no way that more stick will work for motorists, people already have to pay over £700 per year road tax on older cars and look at the backlash to ULEZ.
The sheen has also worn off EV's, before Tesla was voted the most desirable car brand even above the German luxury brands whereas it's now tumbled down the list.
Anecdotally the people I know with EV's are now going to hybrid for their next car, colleague at work bought a brand new Mercedes EQA back in 21' and paid £50k for it, the trade in value now is likely around £12-15k!
A close friend had the Model 3 but now has a Toyota RAV 4 plug in hybrid as electric didn't work for him even with the supercharging stations dotted about.
There's no way that more stick will work for motorists, people already have to pay over £700 per year road tax on older cars and look at the backlash to ULEZ.
The sheen has also worn off EV's, before Tesla was voted the most desirable car brand even above the German luxury brands whereas it's now tumbled down the list.
Anecdotally the people I know with EV's are now going to hybrid for their next car, colleague at work bought a brand new Mercedes EQA back in 21' and paid £50k for it, the trade in value now is likely around £12-15k!
A close friend had the Model 3 but now has a Toyota RAV 4 plug in hybrid as electric didn't work for him even with the supercharging stations dotted about.
P675 said:
PetrolHeadInRecovery said:
During the last visit: ~0.22£/kWh for AC, IONITY Passport Power 0.21£, other DC providers a bit over 0.3£ per kWh.
Imagine being European and driving your EV over here, to find 0.85p chargers. Why are we mugged off on absolutely everything.Still, I'm cautiously optimistic about initiatives such as https://sparkalliance.com/ and eventual addition of the "non-contract/ad hoc" electricity prices to the motorway fuel price displays.
In the end, an occasional charge at ~1€/kWh is more of an emotional than a financial hardship. Obviously different if you need to do it several times per week.
Wouldn't a fairly easy "stick" to implement be tightening up on emission tests for MOTs?
Say for diesels, remove the "before 1 July 2008 maximum level of 2.5m-1 for at non-turbocharged engine or 3.0m-1 for a turbocharged engine"
instead have the current 1 July 2008 and 31 December 2013 maximum level at 1.5m-1 apply to anything before 31/12/2013.
Cheap for the Government to bring in, anyone with a 17 year old diesel could spaff thousands to try to bring it up to spec but more likely scrap it.
Easy sell for the gov to the majority of motorist - "we're removing the most polluting, people and planet killing vehicles..."
Once they've got the small % of low hanging fruit dealt with, keep reducing the limit until it aligns with the post 2013 0.7m-1.
Say for diesels, remove the "before 1 July 2008 maximum level of 2.5m-1 for at non-turbocharged engine or 3.0m-1 for a turbocharged engine"
instead have the current 1 July 2008 and 31 December 2013 maximum level at 1.5m-1 apply to anything before 31/12/2013.
Cheap for the Government to bring in, anyone with a 17 year old diesel could spaff thousands to try to bring it up to spec but more likely scrap it.
Easy sell for the gov to the majority of motorist - "we're removing the most polluting, people and planet killing vehicles..."
Once they've got the small % of low hanging fruit dealt with, keep reducing the limit until it aligns with the post 2013 0.7m-1.
J__Wood said:
Wouldn't a fairly easy "stick" to implement be tightening up on emission tests for MOTs?
Say for diesels, remove the "before 1 July 2008 maximum level of 2.5m-1 for at non-turbocharged engine or 3.0m-1 for a turbocharged engine"
instead have the current 1 July 2008 and 31 December 2013 maximum level at 1.5m-1 apply to anything before 31/12/2013.
Cheap for the Government to bring in, anyone with a 17 year old diesel could spaff thousands to try to bring it up to spec but more likely scrap it.
Easy sell for the gov to the majority of motorist - "we're removing the most polluting, people and planet killing vehicles..."
Once they've got the small % of low hanging fruit dealt with, keep reducing the limit until it aligns with the post 2013 0.7m-1.
Sounds great.Say for diesels, remove the "before 1 July 2008 maximum level of 2.5m-1 for at non-turbocharged engine or 3.0m-1 for a turbocharged engine"
instead have the current 1 July 2008 and 31 December 2013 maximum level at 1.5m-1 apply to anything before 31/12/2013.
Cheap for the Government to bring in, anyone with a 17 year old diesel could spaff thousands to try to bring it up to spec but more likely scrap it.
Easy sell for the gov to the majority of motorist - "we're removing the most polluting, people and planet killing vehicles..."
Once they've got the small % of low hanging fruit dealt with, keep reducing the limit until it aligns with the post 2013 0.7m-1.
Unfortunately its rather costly in that older cars especially in higher tax bands pay lots to the govt tax black hole both in ved and fuel duty with no tax bungs at all unlike the vast majority of battery car drivers who not only get BIK but pay no fuel duty, older cars also tend to be owned by people who go out and do real work for a living rather than push pens, who, in my own case being just one example, can bring forward full retirement, claim my pensions and do without a vehicle of any sort, i haven't worked out how much i pay in income and other taxes but it will be a considerable sum as it is for most others who are PAYE and running normal vehicles.
Yes they can get all the old cars of the road if they wish, the uniparty state has proven over the last 30 years it can do pretty well what it wants whilst ignoring the wishes of the country, but at what cost, the place is effectively bankrupt, there comes a point when its no longer worth going to work and millions of net contributors are already dangerously close to that point.
Straws and camels backs.
J__Wood said:
Wouldn't a fairly easy "stick" to implement be tightening up on emission tests for MOTs?
Say for diesels, remove the "before 1 July 2008 maximum level of 2.5m-1 for at non-turbocharged engine or 3.0m-1 for a turbocharged engine"
instead have the current 1 July 2008 and 31 December 2013 maximum level at 1.5m-1 apply to anything before 31/12/2013.
Cheap for the Government to bring in, anyone with a 17 year old diesel could spaff thousands to try to bring it up to spec but more likely scrap it.
Easy sell for the gov to the majority of motorist - "we're removing the most polluting, people and planet killing vehicles..."
Once they've got the small % of low hanging fruit dealt with, keep reducing the limit until it aligns with the post 2013 0.7m-1.
17 year old cars don't emit that much pollution, because people don't drive huge annual mileages in them.Say for diesels, remove the "before 1 July 2008 maximum level of 2.5m-1 for at non-turbocharged engine or 3.0m-1 for a turbocharged engine"
instead have the current 1 July 2008 and 31 December 2013 maximum level at 1.5m-1 apply to anything before 31/12/2013.
Cheap for the Government to bring in, anyone with a 17 year old diesel could spaff thousands to try to bring it up to spec but more likely scrap it.
Easy sell for the gov to the majority of motorist - "we're removing the most polluting, people and planet killing vehicles..."
Once they've got the small % of low hanging fruit dealt with, keep reducing the limit until it aligns with the post 2013 0.7m-1.
Vans, taxis and rep-mobiles do a lot of miles.
Older, high emission vehicles are paying a lot of VED for the miles they do, and charged or excluded from LEZs.
People are already scrapping a lot of 17 year old diesels, particularly larger ones.
I would not be surprised to see more ULEZs and even ZEZs.
Or raising the ULEZ to euro 5 or 6 for petrol.
OutInTheShed said:
17 year old cars don't emit that much pollution, because people don't drive huge annual mileages in them.
Vans, taxis and rep-mobiles do a lot of miles.
This, the logical answer is fuel duty. But that's already over 50%.Vans, taxis and rep-mobiles do a lot of miles.
I'd say if this really is about air pollution and the like, lgvs should be next. But good electric vans are still rare.
ZesPak said:
This, the logical answer is fuel duty. But that's already over 50%.
I'd say if this really is about air pollution and the like, lgvs should be next. But good electric vans are still rare.
and bloody expensive! i'd love to change our 2015 vivaro for an electric van, but don't have the money to do so.I'd say if this really is about air pollution and the like, lgvs should be next. But good electric vans are still rare.
plfrench said:
Whilst the ZEV mandate is working well to increase the number of new Zero Emissions cars entering the car pool, couple of articles recently reporting the increasing age of the UK car fleet. This suggests that things are quite a way off where the UK has committed to be in terms of emissions reduction.
I wonder if we’re about to see sticks coming in to clear out some of the older car fleet to bring the average age back down? Going to be another awkward dilemma to add to the list for government economic consideration… None of the obvious options such as increasing fossil fuel tax, introducing scrappage schemes for cars over 10 years old, retrospective VED increases for older cars feel like they’d go down well. Any other ideas what approach might be taken? Or will the cheaper option just to admit defeat with our commitments and face the financial consequences, whatever they are?
https://www.racfoundation.org/data/green-fleet-ind...
That curve looks "interesting" I wonder if we’re about to see sticks coming in to clear out some of the older car fleet to bring the average age back down? Going to be another awkward dilemma to add to the list for government economic consideration… None of the obvious options such as increasing fossil fuel tax, introducing scrappage schemes for cars over 10 years old, retrospective VED increases for older cars feel like they’d go down well. Any other ideas what approach might be taken? Or will the cheaper option just to admit defeat with our commitments and face the financial consequences, whatever they are?
https://www.racfoundation.org/data/green-fleet-ind...
TX.
Why put loads effort into old car’s already ultimately they will fail the Mot in a few years and then you have a classic car back lash on your hands. Vans and lorries are the issue with no real progress being made. Van are available but sales seams flat. Lorries no noticeable progress what so ever. Bigger fish to fry I think.
Gassing Station | EV and Alternative Fuels | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff