johnlocke
Posts: 668
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2016 3:47 pm
Delivery Date: 14 Dec 2015
Leaf Number: 300582

Re: ABG:EV charging is not cost competitive at retail stations, says Phillips 66

Fri Apr 09, 2021 9:19 pm

WetEV wrote:
Fri Apr 09, 2021 6:08 am
johnlocke wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 9:52 pm
The gas tax has always been syphoned off by the state legislature for other projects rather than being used for road repair as originally intended. if you really wanted to be fair, raise the tax on diesel fuel by $2/Gal to pay for repairs. Weight/mileage based taxes don't work unless weight is valued differently for different classes.
General funds are used for road repair, as not enough is collected in gas taxes. Maybe it was different 50 years ago, when gas taxes collected enough to pay for road repair. But the gas tax hasn't changed, and costs of road repairs have increased. Things change.
Problem with taxes in general is that after you collect them, they're just laying round begging to be spent. Then someone with "good intentions" proposes taking "a little" to pay for their pet project rather than saving it or the intended use when needed. Gas taxes have never kept up with the actual costs of maintaining our highways. When the taxes are increased, they then get funneled into Public Transit projects or highway beatification. Anything but actual repair of roadways.

Proposing Taxes on EV's is just picking on an unrepresented segment who can't squeal loud enough to make it difficult to do.
2016 SV, New battery at 45K mi.
Jamul, CA
San Diego East County

WetEV
Posts: 4376
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: ABG:EV charging is not cost competitive at retail stations, says Phillips 66

Sat Apr 10, 2021 8:33 am

johnlocke wrote:
Fri Apr 09, 2021 9:19 pm
WetEV wrote:
Fri Apr 09, 2021 6:08 am
General funds are used for road repair, as not enough is collected in gas taxes. Maybe it was different 50 years ago, when gas taxes collected enough to pay for road repair. But the gas tax hasn't changed, and costs of road repairs have increased. Things change.
Problem with taxes in general is that after you collect them, they're just laying round begging to be spent.
The problem with no taxes is that roads and bridges are needed by everyone.
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red
2019 eTron Blue

GRA
Posts: 12881
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: ABG:EV charging is not cost competitive at retail stations, says Phillips 66

Sat Apr 10, 2021 4:57 pm

I tried copying the post I'm replying to here over to the "Mink hole. . ." topic, but having to add all the missing quotes and keep the attributions straight while doing this on my phone and gradually losing feeling in my fingers (it was cool and windy last night) was just too much. A mod should feel free to move this and the next two replies to that topic, if they wish.
WetEV wrote:
Thu Apr 01, 2021 8:43 pm
GRA wrote:
Wed Mar 31, 2021 7:02 pm
WetEV wrote:
Tue Mar 23, 2021 9:30 am

As I said, amusing. PHEVs with a subsidy are not selling very well. The "mass market" doesn't agree with your opinion.
As I've pointed out, they're outselling BEVs now in many European countries, for a variety of reasons, much higher fuel prices being one.
For 2020 in Europe, 740,805 BEVs in 2020, and 573,526 PHEVs.

https://carsalesbase.com/european-sales-2020-ev-phev/

Did I miss the week that PHEVs outsold BEVs?
You apparently missed the last couple of months, where PHEVs did, which was the opposite of what had been happening before. Too early to say if it's a long term trend or just a blip. But looking at 2020, what happened in Europe then? Let's see, IIRR the Model 3 (and Y?) arrived, priced for early adopters. Then the pandemic hit, and sales % presumably shifted to the higher end as here, as early adopters had the disposable income to buy cars, and those lower down had either lost their jobs or were worried about doing so.

WetEV wrote:
Thu Apr 01, 2021 8:43 pm
GRA wrote:
Wed Mar 31, 2021 7:02 pm
WetEV wrote:
Tue Mar 23, 2021 8:52 am
Does a computer care how often it needs to stop for a recharge?
Who cares what the computer thinks? The user sure as hell cares.
Ah yes, if the truck is automated, the user isn't there. So who cares how often the truck stops to recharge: the total trip time is what matters. For most commodities, how much does trip time matter? Is 22 hours always worth less than 18 hours?
For AV 'user' read 'owner', and yes, they do care. Judging by the amount of money and effort now going into long-haul FCEV trucks and fueling infrastructure, with little to none into BEVs for the same, the future 'owners' definitely do think 22 hours is better than 18, as is not paying a several thousand lb. weight penalty per load. Why do you think Anheuser-Busch decided to go with FCEVs instead of BEVs for distribution (not even long-haul)? I imagine the fact that they're liquid loads played a large part in their financial calcs.

WetEV wrote:
Thu Apr 01, 2021 8:43 pm
GRA wrote:
Wed Mar 31, 2021 7:02 pm
WetEV wrote:
Tue Mar 23, 2021 8:52 am
Perhaps the solution is smaller battery packs and more frequent charge stops, especially for dense loads.
In which case you pay even more of a time penalty. Some long-haul sleeper tractors can go 1,300 miles or more.
Without two drivers, need a sleep stop. That's 21 hours of just driving, no pee breaks, no dinner, not sleep, nothing. Or a whole lot of whites.

See above.
Last edited by GRA on Sat Apr 10, 2021 5:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

GRA
Posts: 12881
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: ABG:EV charging is not cost competitive at retail stations, says Phillips 66

Sat Apr 10, 2021 4:59 pm

WetEV wrote:
Thu Apr 01, 2021 10:55 am
GRA wrote:
Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:03 pm
Uh huh, except that PHEVs can offer significant GHG reductions with much smaller packs, e g. Niro/Kona/Prius Prime. FTM, plenty of people could have significantly reduced their GHGs from the PiP's 11 mile AER, if it was easier to keep the ICE from kicking in; my 1-way commute is 4.2 miles, so if I were to drive it like most people instead of riding my bike, the PiP's AER would be alI I'd need.
Only problem is that in reality, most people with PHEVs drive them like they were HEVs. Almost never plugged in. So far less real GHG reduction.
Can you provide a cite that 'most' PHEVs are never plugged in? I've seen studies that indicates that's often the case for company cars owing to the lack of incentives for driving EV, plus I've seen a fair amount of anecdotal remarks that some PiPs were bought by people in California solely for the HOV stickers, but I've seen nothing to indicate that 'most' PHEVs with greater and more robust AERs are so used. As one piece of anecdotal evidence, A friend has had two Fusion Energis, and he told me he can and does do all his routine driving on the battery. California has now raised the minimum range so his car would no longer qualify for a state subsidy/HOV sticker.

WetEV wrote:
Thu Apr 01, 2021 10:55 am
Don't get me wrong, a HEV is generally less polluting than an ICE. And yes, some are actually driven as PHEVs. But with battery prices below $100/kWh, a PHEV is a more expensive solution than a BEV. As is an ICE, unless gasoline prices are really low, or the driving/charging pattern isn't reasonable.

Maybe a different tax or subsidy scheme might change this, but such behavior seems fairly consistent even with high gasoline prices in Europe. I'd guess, and GRA is going to ignore this point, the underwhelming driving experience of most PHEVs on pure EV might be a large part of the issue.
Again, depends where you're driving it,
relative prices of fossil fuel and electricity, andd what your incentives are to drive it electrically. And while some PHEVs have had anemic pure EV performance, many don't - it's not inherent to the tech. The PiP was underwhelming, the Volt wasn't, etc.

WetEV wrote:
Thu Apr 01, 2021 10:55 am
GRA wrote:
Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:03 pm
Meanwhile, BEVs need much larger packs to be considered useful by customers, which raises their price to where people with incomes able to claim the full tax exemption are, i.e. above mass-market prices.

If we're going to have subsidies here, I'm glad that we cap the fed. subsidy at 18kWh although it would be far better to end it altogether, or at least change it to range-based as California has done with ours. But without a price cap as well, it doesn't send the right signal to customers or companies, instead subsidizing those who need it least, and causing companies to emphasize developing more rather than less expensive options (see Mach-E vs. Escape below).
The point to subsidies, mandates and/or pollution taxes is to drive adoption of the new and clean technology, and to match the cost of the dirty technology that isn't accounted for directly. Not social justice. Not optimal economic efficiency today. Long term economic efficiency.
Any such subsidies, mandates etc. should be designed to achieve the desired end as quickly, efficiently and at the lowest cost both financially and environmentally as possible. The current ones here fail to do that.

WetEV wrote:
Thu Apr 01, 2021 10:55 am
GRA wrote:
Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:03 pm
WetEV wrote:
Tue Mar 23, 2021 7:49 am
I just recall for how long you insisted that EVs were less than 1% of sales after the time EVs were more than 1% of sales. Doesn't fit your schema, eh?
Provide a cite showing I "insisted" any such thing, as I was monitoring and quoting the IEVS monthly sales totals until they stopped doing that.
OK, you repeated the statement multiple times after correction. Wrong word, "insist".
Again, since you say I did so multiple times, you should have no trouble provide a cite showing that I incorrectly stated the % of PEVs and BEVs sold here, any correction of same followed by my repeating the same mis-statement. I am unaware of any such interchange between us, but will happily concede I'm wrong given evidence. I expect you to concede the same should you be unable to do so. I have repeatedly cited the most current data I could find, from IEVS and other sources.

WetEV wrote:
Thu Apr 01, 2021 10:55 am
GRA wrote:
Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:03 pm
WetEV wrote:
Tue Mar 23, 2021 7:49 am
Yes, the last two years are below the exponential trend. The last two years have been interesting, to say the least. China cut subsidies for EVs in 2019 and the pandemic in 2020.
IIRR, China's subsidy 'reduction' involved raising the minimum AER for a vehicle to qualify for it.
So? A reduction of subsidy should cause a temporary reduction, especially as the reduction might also be temporary. Might even change the exponent of the exponential trend. Rather than about 2.5 years, might be 3 years. But doesn't change the exponential nature of adoption, which is common with new technologies.

It will cause a reduction if there isn't strong incentive to change. China's mandates for NEVs and their restricting licenses for ICEs, plus the fact that their economy was growing rather than shrinking all played their parts. I note you edited out those factors, which I cited, in your reply. Care to address them, and what effect YOU think they would have on sales?
As I noted above, California has now raised the minimum AER just as China did, eliminating some entirely practical and relatively affordable PHEVs from qualifying for incentives, while continuing to provide incentives for more expensive cars. Which is exactly what I said was happening, but you questioned.

WetEV wrote:
Thu Apr 01, 2021 10:55 am
GRA wrote:
Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:03 pm
WetEV wrote:
Tue Mar 23, 2021 7:49 am

Do note that subsidies and mandates for non-ICE cars reduce air pollution. To counter the subsidy that an ICE gets for dumping toxic chemicals into people's lungs, EVs should be subsidized.
As others have noted, higher fuel/carbon taxes can do the same job as subsidies, directly penalizing the vehicles doing the most damage. That's one of the main reasons (along with generally higher subsidies, stronger mandates, and/or shorter driving distances) that PEVs have higher take rates in Europe.
PHEVs?

Subsidies are far more efficient when the clean technology is a small fraction of the market. Revisit this in a decade or less, after EVs are close to a majority of the market.
We're already a decade in to mass-produced PEVs, and most of our subsidies have been going to people who need them the least or not at all. California still has a $60k price cap on our state rebate, and an even more idiotically high income cap - why? I forget if the feds finally imposed either. Washington state, at least, got that right years back, when they put IIRR a $35k price cap on their rebate.

Nobody felt that subsidizing the wealthy to buy personal computers, cell phones, HDTVs or similar high tech in their expensive early days made sense, so why should EVs be different? By all means subsidize R&D, Dem/Val and maybe even some factory tooling, but not consumer deployment.

WetEV wrote:
Thu Apr 01, 2021 10:55 am
GRA wrote:
Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:03 pm
WetEV wrote:
Fri Mar 19, 2021 7:45 am
The subsidies and mandates almost
surely started the EV explosion faster, and do move the sales around, but the explosion was likely to happen in any case.

An EV as a daily driver is just better.

Did you catch that Worldwide EV sales have been growing exponentially?
See above, which merely confirms my claim that PEV and esp. BEV sales remain dependent on subsidies and mandates rather than natural demand. Remove the subsidies and add taxes, and people will buy the HEV/PHEV/BEV that best matches their requirements.
Again, taxes are less efficient than subsidies, and BEV sales are not dependent on subsidies and mandates OR taxes at the high end.
At the high end they aren't necessary, so why are any of them used? We agree there's neither a need or justification for them AT THE HiGH END.

WetEV wrote:
Thu Apr 01, 2021 10:55 am
Technology adaptions are often exponential for a list of reasons. Notice that worldwide EV sales have been growing exponentially.

Exponential growth often is not understood. EV adoption is so slow, GRA can't wait. Doubling every ~2.5 years will look slow, until it looks explosive.
Oh please, I don't need you to tell me how exponential growth proceeds. I was involved in PV/battery systems 30 years ago, and I'm well aware of what that adoption curve looked like. The difference is that I consider the need for a more rapid early change to be far more critical in this case.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

GRA
Posts: 12881
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: ABG:EV charging is not cost competitive at retail stations, says Phillips 66

Sat Apr 10, 2021 5:02 pm

WetEV wrote:
Thu Apr 01, 2021 7:51 pm
GRA wrote:
Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:26 pm
WetEV wrote:
Tue Mar 23, 2021 8:52 am
PHEVs are percentage wise more subsidized than EVs.

If EVs were not better to drive, then the high end of the market wouldn't be where EVs sold. Subsidies for EVs reduce the distortion of the market caused by free ICE dumping of toxic gases into your lungs.
See fuel/carbon taxes.
Subsidies are more efficient when alternatives are a tiny fraction of the market. This will change.
High fuel taxes seem to be working quite well in Europe, an area where the take rate is higher than the U.S. Are you suggesting that European countries should eliminate them, and only rely on subsidies?

WetEV wrote:
Thu Apr 01, 2021 7:51 pm
GRA wrote:
Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:26 pm
WetEV wrote:
Tue Mar 23, 2021 8:52 am

Which doesn't change the fact that PHEVs, as EV only, are not very good to drive, at least in my experience. Small battery means small electric output, which means under powered under electric only. I don't see how you fix that.
PHEV batteries tend to be more on the power than energy side if the spectrum. I've previously mentioned the RAV4's 5.9 sec. 0-60. The i8 was 3.6 sec. And I have no doubt you could design a PHEV with whatever ridiculous Accel capability your wealthiest customers were willing to pay for, but what does that have to do with providing mass market transportation?
Not just 0-60 times, BEVs are smoother and more responsive. Real PHEVs, unlike those "you could design" tend to have small electric motors as well as small batteries. The exceptions are the Volt and the I3 with REx. GM killed the Volt, and BMW has said REx has no future.
I don't recall people complaining that the Volt, a semi "mass-market" PHEV, was sluggish when in hold mode.
Maximum electric thrust is still 149 horsepower and a rollicking 294 pound-feet of torque, and Chevy's claimed 0-60 mph acceleration time remains pegged at 8.4 seconds. Our 2016 Chevy Volt long-termer beat that mark with a 7.5-second performance at our test track, and this 2019 example feels like it will do the same.
https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/first- ... drive.html

For comparison, my Forester does 0-60 in 9.6 seconds, which is entirely adequate - faster is fun, but hardly necessary. Many of the current 200+ mile BEVs have around 200 HP motors, but then so do some comparable PHEVs which can drive them solely off the battery. Again, you can design a PHEV for whatever power split you choose. My personal desire is for an ICE to maintain freeway cruising speed, with the battery and motor providing adequate accel (ca. 8-10 sec. 0-60) alone or boost to the ICE for passing. Others have different priorities.

WetEV wrote:
Thu Apr 01, 2021 7:51 pm
The focus on "mass market". The real market is a distribution, not just a "mass market".

New technologies rarely start at the center of the market. Instead, they start at an edge. Then grow.

Why do you keep insisting that EVs start with "the mass market"?
Please point to anywhere I've "insisted" (there's you using that word again) that EVs "start" with the mass market. What I have said is that we're a decade into mass production of PEVs and we shouldn't be helping the wealthy buy expensive toys, but should instead concentrate on getting as much of a transportation GHG reduction we can as soon as we can, which requires a much larger % of PEVs being sold. That can only be accomplished by reducing their prices and reducing or eliminating as many practical roadblocks as possible. Batteries and charging infrastructure aren't there yet, so that leaves HEVs and PHEVs as the lowest common denominator. I don't believe we can afford to wait to 2030 to do so. You apparently do.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

GRA
Posts: 12881
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: ABG:EV charging is not cost competitive at retail stations, says Phillips 66

Sat Apr 10, 2021 5:16 pm

WetEV wrote:
Fri Apr 09, 2021 6:04 am
GRA wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 6:01 pm
One area where incentives are on- topic is that seriously raising fuel or carbon taxes so that fossil fuels are more expensive than charging anywhere in the country would transform charging infrastructure, especially DC QCing, to a profitable business model. That would provide the incentive for companies to build and operate them without being dependent on government subsidies, or for car manufacturers to build them as a marketing expense, massively increasing the rate at which the infrastructure expands.

As any such major increase would be massively unpopular here and politically impossible for years if not decades, we should at least try to gradually increase the fed. fuel tax to catch up to inflation and then index it to that. It apparently needs to be raised about 15¢/gal. to make up for 28 years of inflation since it was last raised in 1993, so doing it over a 3 (5¢/year) or 5 year (3¢/year) period should be a priority. AFAICT there's no mention of that in the current infrastructure plan, but drivers should be bearing the cost of the wear and year they themselves cause directly. On a related note, my corner gas station just hit $4.00/gal. for the first time in two or three years, presumably still fallout from Texas.
Electric cars are not exactly the same as gas cars.

Public charging is not exactly the same thing as gasoline retailing.

Forcing square pegs into round holes isn't often useful.

GRA is focused on trying to recreate the gasoline economy with electric (or hydrogen) cars. The hole is round. The peg is square.

Electric cars with distributed fueling are just nicer. Of course, that only works for 98% (or something like that) of driving. With the exception of the few times when you want to make a long trip, then some sort of centralized fueling is needed. The total package needs to be cost competitive, not the exception. Twice or even four times the price for 2% of the time and half the price for 98% of the time is a good deal. Focusing on the exception is ignoring most of the issue. I pay about $1 per gallon equivalent. What is your corner gas station?

Electric cars make the most sense when they can be L1/L2 charged at home or work. They don't fit nicely into centralized fueling. Round hole. Square peg.
In 50 to 100 years, when everyone has the ability to charge at home or work, then the need for central charging will be limited. Which doesn't help us for the next 20-30 years, when the need to reduce GHGs is most critical. Of course, maybe we'll see a large scale shift to subscription transportation with or without AVs, or urban redesign, or a large increase in mass transit use, to reduce the number of privately owned cars and the need to provide convenient charging for all of them. Failing that, we're going to need QCs and fast L2s away from home/work just for routine charging.

WetEV wrote:
Fri Apr 09, 2021 6:04 am
Gasoline taxes to pay for roads and bridges wouldn't pass in much of the country. Washington State has passed such taxes, but we are mostly all wet up here, so don't expect that to work everywhere.
My They passed here too, but hey, if people are willing to put up with crappy transportation infrastructure and the economic losses that entails, that&s their call.

WetEV wrote:
Fri Apr 09, 2021 6:04 am
GRA wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 6:01 pm
Additionally, as fossil fuel taxes will inevitably decline as the transition to AFVs continues, it will be necessary to start now to implement alternative taxes for AFVs if not all vehicles, preferably (axle) weight-based mileage fees that don't raise privacy issues. As AFVs are heavier than comparable ICEs they'll pay a bit more in that area, but as they'll be paying less or nothing in fossil-fuel taxes that will incentivize buyers to switch without any need for government subsidies.
Gas cars and diesel trucks don't pay their way in road taxes. Why should EVs?

Because drivers should have a direct, personal stake in the cost of maintaining infrastructure, be incentivized to drive less, and to do so as efficiently as possible. As long as someone else is paying for it, why would they care how they use it? One of the reasons I switched to Pay Per Mile is that I can more easily calculate the cost of driving a mile versus other modes of transport. Most people aren't as anal as I am, but paying directly for something does make most people consider their options.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

johnlocke
Posts: 668
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2016 3:47 pm
Delivery Date: 14 Dec 2015
Leaf Number: 300582

Re: ABG:EV charging is not cost competitive at retail stations, says Phillips 66

Sun Apr 11, 2021 9:15 pm

WetEV wrote:
Sat Apr 10, 2021 8:33 am
johnlocke wrote:
Fri Apr 09, 2021 9:19 pm
WetEV wrote:
Fri Apr 09, 2021 6:08 am
General funds are used for road repair, as not enough is collected in gas taxes. Maybe it was different 50 years ago, when gas taxes collected enough to pay for road repair. But the gas tax hasn't changed, and costs of road repairs have increased. Things change.
Problem with taxes in general is that after you collect them, they're just laying round begging to be spent.
The problem with no taxes is that roads and bridges are needed by everyone.
I'm not advocating "no taxes", just pointing out that any tax is subject to the lawmaker's whims and that money in a "trust" or exclusive use fund is subject to being raided. If you want to claim that roads and bridges are used by everyone, I'm all for that. List it as a service like fire and police and pay for it accordingly. Just as a pet peeve of mine, Why does Congress expect the post office to pay for itself but not the Armed Forces? Use taxes are always easier to pass than general tax increases. That's why they exist in the first place.
2016 SV, New battery at 45K mi.
Jamul, CA
San Diego East County

johnlocke
Posts: 668
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2016 3:47 pm
Delivery Date: 14 Dec 2015
Leaf Number: 300582

Re: ABG:EV charging is not cost competitive at retail stations, says Phillips 66

Sun Apr 11, 2021 9:50 pm

GRA wrote:
Sat Apr 10, 2021 5:16 pm


In 50 to 100 years, when everyone has the ability to charge at home or work, then the need for central charging will be limited. Which doesn't help us for the next 20-30 years, when the need to reduce GHGs is most critical. Of course, maybe we'll see a large scale shift to subscription transportation with or without AVs, or urban redesign, or a large increase in mass transit use, to reduce the number of privately owned cars and the need to provide convenient charging for all of them. Failing that, we're going to need QCs and fast L2s away from home/work just for routine charging.

WetEV wrote:
Fri Apr 09, 2021 6:04 am
Gasoline taxes to pay for roads and bridges wouldn't pass in much of the country. Washington State has passed such taxes, but we are mostly all wet up here, so don't expect that to work everywhere.
My They passed here too, but hey, if people are willing to put up with crappy transportation infrastructure and the economic losses that entails, that&s their call.

WetEV wrote:
Fri Apr 09, 2021 6:04 am
GRA wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 6:01 pm
Additionally, as fossil fuel taxes will inevitably decline as the transition to AFVs continues, it will be necessary to start now to implement alternative taxes for AFVs if not all vehicles, preferably (axle) weight-based mileage fees that don't raise privacy issues. As AFVs are heavier than comparable ICEs they'll pay a bit more in that area, but as they'll be paying less or nothing in fossil-fuel taxes that will incentivize buyers to switch without any need for government subsidies.
Gas cars and diesel trucks don't pay their way in road taxes. Why should EVs?

Because drivers should have a direct, personal stake in the cost of maintaining infrastructure, be incentivized to drive less, and to do so as efficiently as possible. As long as someone else is paying for it, why would they care how they use it? One of the reasons I switched to Pay Per Mile is that I can more easily calculate the cost of driving a mile versus other modes of transport. Most people aren't as anal as I am, but paying directly for something does make most people consider their options.
In 50-100 years everyone will have fusion powered cars ( see "Back to the Future"). Also explain how you plan to charge commercial users in such a way they don't pass the costs on to consumers. Raising taxes on gas in Europe has done little to reduce driving. Civic planning and lack of urban sprawl has done much better. Won't happen in the US. Same for mass transit . We've tried for 70 years to implement mass transit but most American cities aren't designed with mass transit in mind. We are in love with the automobile and the freedom to go anywhere we choose. Smaller more efficient cars have ben built and sold but we love SUV's and trucks too much. We will eventually switch to EV's and they will still be big. Use taxes are regressive and hit those who can least afford it the hardest. Rebuilding infrastructure and replacing worn out roads and bridges should be part of the general tax burden. Taxing commercial users for the actual damage they cause sounds wonderful until you realize that they will pass those costs on to their customers who will pass them on to the consumer.

As an additional note Solar PV is getting to be so cheap that eclectic power may one day be unmetered just like long distance phone service is now. That will be the real incentive to go EV. I have solar PV installed now and my cost of operation is around $.04/KWH after incentives. Utility sized systems being bid now are in the range oF $.01-.02/kwh wholesale rates.
2016 SV, New battery at 45K mi.
Jamul, CA
San Diego East County

WetEV
Posts: 4376
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: ABG:EV charging is not cost competitive at retail stations, says Phillips 66

Mon Apr 12, 2021 6:44 am

johnlocke wrote:
Sun Apr 11, 2021 9:15 pm
Use taxes are always easier to pass than general tax increases. That's why they exist in the first place.
Then why is a gas tax so hard to pass? General taxes are partly paying for roads and bridges now, the gas tax due to increasing fuel economy and inflation no longer covers the cost of repairs.
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red
2019 eTron Blue

alozzy
Posts: 1930
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2017 4:25 pm
Delivery Date: 18 Jan 2017
Location: Vancouver, BC
Contact: Website

Re: ABG:EV charging is not cost competitive at retail stations, says Phillips 66

Mon Apr 12, 2021 2:08 pm

The topic of this thread is "ABG: EV charging is not cost competitive at retail stations, says Phillips 66" - it seems to have wondered off topic...
Vancouver, CA owner of a 2013 Ocean Blue SV + QC, purchased 01/2017 in WA
Zencar 12/20/24/30A L1/L2 portable EVSE
1-1/4" Curt #11396 hitch
After market, DIY LED DRLs
LeafSpy Pro + Konnwei KW902 ELM327 BT OBDII dongle
Loving my first BEV :D

Return to “Batteries & Charging”