Value Collector
Have courage, and be kind.
- Joined
- 13 January 2014
- Posts
- 12,424
- Reactions
- 8,770
Its like these mechanics on TikTok, trying to scare people off EV’s, obviously the are just scared of EV’s and repeating tired old nonsense.
You can definitely charge along the most common road trip routes, the remote areas again are extreme examples that most people aren’t doing, but yeah if you plan to do that get a petrol car for now.True, but a daily routine does not take into account road trip holidays in remote areas or towing for which an EV is not suitable.
So that involves either having more than one vehicle, not having the holidays you want, or hiring a vehicle which is expensive.
Its like these mechanics on TikTok, trying to scare people off EV’s, obviously the are just scared of EV’s and repeating tired old nonsense.
Yeah, I agree with that one a little bit, But there are so many new chargers popping up everywhere including street charging .if he is fueling up once at petrol stations anyway, he could easily plug in for 30 mins a week some where while he does his grocery shop.The point about having to park in the street is a good one. (To hard to charge).
it's a big deal in the older parts of Melbourne.
I want to get an electric car in two years time but am hesitating as the solid state batteries look like the future. But unfortunately are at least 4 years away.Yeah, I agree with that one a little bit, But there are so many new chargers popping up everywhere including street charging .if he is fueling up once at petrol stations anyway, he could easily plug in for 30 mins a week some where while he does his grocery shop.
But yeah the gold standard is home charging,
If you live in a city and don't do a lot of heavy hauling, I would recommend a full EV over a hybrid, the extra servicing and complexity made me opt for a full EV.I want to get an electric car in two years time but am hesitating as the solid state batteries look like the future. But unfortunately are at least 4 years away.
I think plug in hybrids generally appear a bit stupid. worst of both worlds, but maybe I am being harsh.
The good standard hybrids like Subaru/Toyota appear pretty good if I can't wait.
ah, there will be better tech in the future, but the way I see it is that the current tech is good enough, so there isn’t really a down side to getting the current version and just getting the upgraded tech on the next car after that.I want to get an electric car in two years time but am hesitating as the solid state batteries look like the future. But unfortunately are at least 4 years away.
I think plug in hybrids generally appear a bit stupid. worst of both worlds, but maybe I am being harsh.
The good standard hybrids like Subaru/Toyota appear pretty good if I can't wait.
I am not sure what more you want them to do, the adoption seems pretty quick to me.No doubt that in 20 years I'd say 80% of the cars on the road will be EV's, and that will be a good thing.
I'd just like to see a bit more effort on the behalf of governments to advance their adoption instead of just expecting it to happen.
I think the best part about plug in hybrids, is it’s a stepping stone for the people that are scared. Once they realise that they love that first 70kms of battery driving, and hate buying fuel, I think they will upgrade to a full EV.If you live in a city and don't do a lot of heavy hauling, I would recommend a full EV over a hybrid, the extra servicing and complexity made me opt for a full EV.
Getting a usable charging network installed would be helpful.I am not sure what more you want them to do, the adoption seems pretty quick to me.
Stop the free ride: all motorists should pay their way, whatever vehicle they drive
A new road charge is looming for electric vehicle drivers, amid reports Treasurer Jim Chalmers is accelerating the policy as part of a broader tax-reform push.
At a forum in Sydney this week, state and federal Treasury officials are reportedly meeting with industry figures and others to progress design of the policy, ahead of next week’s economic reform summit.
Much discussion in favour of the charge assumes drivers of electric and hybrid vehicles don’t “pay their way”, because they are not subject to the fuel excise tax.
This view is based on an economic misconception: that fuel taxes are justified by the need to pay for the construction and maintenance of roads.
This is incorrect. In a properly functioning economic system, fuel taxes should be considered a charge on motorists for the harmful pollution their vehicles generate.
That leaves the problem of paying for roads. To that end, a road-user charge should be applied to all motorists – regardless of the vehicle they drive – so no-one gets a free ride.
A road-user charge should be applied to all motorists. NSW government
What is the fuel excise?
The fuel excise in Australia is currently about 51 cents a litre and is rolled into the cost of fuel at the bowser.
Some, such as the Australian Automobile Association claim revenue from the excise pays for roads. But it actually goes into the federal government’s general revenue.
The primary economic function of the fuel tax is that of a charge on motorists for the harmful pollution their vehicles generate.
Fuel excise is rolled into the cost of fuel at the bowser. FLAVIO BRANCALEONE/AAP
Paying the cost of pollution
Vehicles with internal combustion engines – that is, those that run on petrol or diesel – create several types of pollution.
The first is carbon dioxide emissions, which contribute to human-caused climate change. Others include local air pollution from particulates and exhaust pollution as well as noise pollution.
In economic terms, these effects are known as “negative externalities”. They arise when one party makes another party worse off, but doesn’t pay the costs of doing so.
How big are the costs to society imposed by polluting vehicles? Estimates vary widely. But they are almost certainly as large as, or larger than, the revenue generated from fuel excise.
Let’s tease that out.
A litre of petrol weighs about 0.74 kg. But when burned, it generates 2.3 kg of CO₂. That’s because when the fuel is combusted, the carbon combines with heavier oxygen atoms.
Before the re-election of United States President Donald Trump, the nation’s Environmental Protection Agency estimated the social cost of carbon dioxide emissions at about US$190 (A$292) per metric tonne.
So in Australian terms, that means CO₂ emissions from burning petrol costs about 67 cents a litre, more than the current excise of 51 cents per litre.
Even using a more conservative estimate of US$80 a metric tonne, CO₂ emissions generate costs of around 28 cents a litre, more than half the fuel excise.
A spotlight on health impacts
Motor vehicles are a major cause of air pollution. Air pollution is causally linked to six diseases:
Estimates of the deaths associated with air pollution in Australia range from 3,200 to more than 4,200 a year.
- coronary heart disease
- chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)
- stroke
- type 2 diabetes
- lung cancer
- lower respiratory infections.
Even the lower end of that range is far more than the roughly 1,200 lives lost in car crashes annually.
University of Melbourne analysis in 2023 landed at an even higher figure. It suggested vehicle emissions alone may be responsible for more than 11,000 premature deaths in adults in Australia a year.
Putting a dollar value on life and health is difficult – but necessary for good policy making.
The usual approach is to examine the “statistical” reduction in deaths for a given policy measure. For example, a policy measure that eliminates a hazard faced by 1,000 people, reducing death risk by 1 percentage point, would save ten statistical lives.
The Australian government ascribes a value of $5.7 million per (statistical) life lost or saved. So, hypothetically, a saving of 2,000 lives a year would yield a benefit of more than $10 billion.
This is more than half the revenue collected in fuel excise each year.
Putting a dollar value on life and health is difficult – but necessary for good policy making. DIEGO FEDELE/AAP
The best road forward
Given the harms caused by traditional vehicles, society should welcome the decline in fuel excise revenue caused by the transition to EVs – in the same way we should welcome declining revenue from cigarette taxes.
If we assume fuel excise pays for pollution costs, then who is paying for roads?
The cost of roads goes far beyond construction and maintenance. The capital and land allocated to roads represents a huge investment, on which the public, as a whole, receives zero return.
Vehicle registration fees make only a modest contribution to road costs. That’s why all motorists should pay a road-user charge.
The payment should be based on a combination of vehicle mass and distance travelled. That’s because damage to roads is overwhelmingly caused by heavy vehicles.
Then comes the question of Australia’s emissions reduction. The switch to electric vehicles in Australia is going much too slowly. A road user charge targeting only electric and hybrid vehicles would be a grave mistake, slowing the uptake further.
There is chargers every where I look these days, you might not notice them but the are popping up everywhere. There are 5 fast chargers just in my local area, and all over the rest of the city they are every where too. I used to have to make sure I wouldn't miss one on the Sydney - Brisbane drive, now I drive past dozens along the way for every one that I actually end up stopping at.Getting a usable charging network installed would be helpful.
that one is premium:I'm all for a road user tax. Anyone that uses the roads, including recipients of delivered goods, should in some form contribute to the building and repair of roads.
However, I also believe that government should stop putting the collected tax from fuel excise into general revenue and instead use all of it for its required purpose - road maintenance and pollution mitigation.
The fuel excise in Australia is currently about 51 cents a litre and is rolled into the cost of fuel at the bowser.Some, such as the Australian Automobile Association claim revenue from the excise pays for roads. But it actually goes into the federal government’s general revenue.The primary economic function of the fuel tax is that of a charge on motorists for the harmful pollution their vehicles generate.
5?There is chargers every where I look these days, you might not notice them but the are popping up everywhere. There are 5 fast chargers just in my local area, and all over the rest of the city they are every where too. I used to have to make sure I wouldn't miss one on the Sydney - Brisbane drive, now I drive past dozens along the way for every one that I actually end up stopping at.
Really... how many do you think you need in your suburb? in 6 years I have only used them twice. Remember the vast majority of people are charging at home.5?
That doesn't fill me with much confidence. How pop dense is your area?
Thats because EVs are a tiny % right now.Really... how many do you think you need in your suburb? in 6 years I have only used them twice. Remember the vast majority of people are charging at home.
We don't have a lot of apartments, mainly houses and townhouses, there is a few apartments around, but not many.Thats because EVs are a tiny % right now.
Unit blocks that are older and density housing is where 5 is a joke. Thats why i asked about population density in that area
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?