Does Trump's Election Spell the End for Federal EV Subsidies?

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
baustin said:
What makes you think it is anywhere near the top of the list of things they want to change right away? There is a Supreme Court Justice to nominate, and Obamacare to repeal and replace. That should keep them busy for quite a while.

oh like an army of advisers cant do two things at once. the mantra is "stop the bleeding first" which means that subsidy is definitely on the first page!
 
LTLFTcomposite said:
Everyone forgets it was a Republican that got the ball rolling on the EV tax credit. And the clean air act, and civil rights, and ending slavery.

Perception and reality are two disjoint worlds when I think of the word "progressive".
LOL!! and they nailed it!!!.... with you.

me however? ... well first off, there were near ZERO dollars doled out when bush was in office and the fact he signed the bill one month and one day before the election? gee, can't imagine what his motivations were...
 
Don't any of you remember the "great Recession"? Brought to you courtesy of the Republicans and their "who needs regulations" attitude. If the Republicans dismantle the regulatory structure in favor of big oil and Wall Street nuclear war may be the least of our problems. Bush nearly brought the world economy to a crashing halt last time with his banking reforms alone. Trump's stated trade policies are likely to do it again. What happens If China just calls his bluff? The US is China's largest trade partner but we make up only a fraction of their trade. Do you think that Europe, South America, or the Russians are likely to side with us in a trade war? Think that the Japanese will join either? Those $40/hr factory jobs went away for a reason and aren't coming back. If we build new factories in America, they're going to be automated and require only 10% of the people who used to work those jobs. Those jobs will be highly technical and skilled, not the guy who used to spin the bolts on the tires on the assembly line.

What if China simply ignores our trade policy and starts dumping goods. If Trump applies punishing tariffs do you think that will help the economy? If Trump pulls troops out of NATO and South Korea, do you think the military gets bigger or smaller? If we don't honor our treaties, does America gain or lose World Stature and the ability to make world policy?
 
johnlocke said:
Don't any of you remember the "great Recession"? Brought to you courtesy of the Republicans and their "who needs regulations" attitude.
Actually it was brought about by liberal policies that required "fay-er" lending to people regardless of their ability to repay. Then it was prolonged by liberal policies that slowed foreclosure processes, so rather than lenders being forced to take a haircut and get those properties back into the market, they were mired in the courts and neighborhoods became blighted.
 
One of Reagan's first acts was to have Carter's solar panels removed from the White House.

Just yesterday, Trump named a climate denier in chief.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/11/09/trump_s_pick_to_lead_epa_transition_team_is_a_proud_climate_skeptic.html

It's a good bet that EV's wont receive much positive attention for the foreseeable future.
 
LTLFTcomposite said:
johnlocke said:
Don't any of you remember the "great Recession"? Brought to you courtesy of the Republicans and their "who needs regulations" attitude.
Actually it was brought about by liberal policies that required "fay-er" lending to people regardless of their ability to repay. Then it was prolonged by liberal policies that slowed foreclosure processes, so rather than lenders being forced to take a haircut and get those properties back into the market, they were mired in the courts and neighborhoods became blighted.

Shall we try again? Try predatory lending practices and securitization of mortgages by bundling them and reselling them on the commercial market. That's what led to the crash. After the investment banks crashed and had to be bailed out by the government, no bank was willing to lend on housing unless you had nearly perfect credit. After a while inventory started to build and housing prices crashed then no one who could buy would because they were waiting for the market to bottom out. Housing prices dropped so much many people's home equity evaporated. A lot of people just walked away from their homes and mailed the keys to the bank. For the banks, there was no market to put those homes on. Most banks didn't even have the staff to manage foreclosures and couldn't even respond to offers on foreclosed properties. I know this because I was trying to buy properties at the time.
 
johnlocke said:
securitization of mortgages by bundling them and reselling them on the commercial market.
I mostly agree with your post, just one comment on the above. I haven't studied the issue closely, so it may well be that the securitization itself contributed to the crisis by enlarging the unregulated shadow banking system. However, my understanding is that the biggest issue with the securitization is that the rating agencies mistakenly rated them as AAA. They misapplied a statistical model in which the underlying mortgages were presumed to be fairly independent in their default risks, while as we saw their default risks were in fact highly correlated.

Cheers, Wayne
 
The planet is entering a period where all nations have to do the best we can to preserve the climate for future generations.

And, only half of the USA voted for their new president when clearly the choices were between a known and stable person and a total wacko who might do anything and is definitely not able to show any care for our environment.

EV Subsidies will be the least of our worries now...
 
Beleaf said:
The planet is entering a period where all nations have to do the best we can to preserve the climate for future generations.

And, only half of the USA voted for their new president...
Actually less than a fifth of the total American population voted for trump, and once more of the votes are counted, he will probably have received close to a million votes less than Clinton.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/2016-election-results/us-presidential-race/

="Beleaf"EV

..Subsidies will be the least of our worries now..
Yes, but that is the subject of this thread.

Since trump has displayed a complete lack of any principles, it impossible to say whether the subsidy will be extended, allowed to expire, or be cancelled prematurely by legislation.

But the $7,500 tax credit is and will continue to be completely ineffective as a means of "preserve (ing) the climate for future generations" anyway.

I would say the chances of any effective response to significantly slowing carbon pollution and global heating from vehicle use, such as a carbon pollution tax, can be completely ruled out during trump's reign.
 
edatoakrun said:
Beleaf said:
The planet is entering a period where all nations have to do the best we can to preserve the climate for future generations.

And, only half of the USA voted for their new president...
Actually less than a fifth of the total American population voted for trump, and once more of the votes are counted, he will probably have received close to a million votes less than Clinton.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/2016-election-results/us-presidential-race/

That was my point. Too many people in the US don't vote. only ~120 million voted! The number of people of voting age is ~250 million. So about half of the total voted (clearly, only one of the presidential candidates won!) Not all of the population are eligible to vote, so it's not appropriate to include the ineligible in the maths.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_the_United_States_presidential_elections
 
Pansy gen y and millennial get their feelings hurt and won't vote.

The cause of the Great Recession was the same as the Great Depression,
Lindsey graham and mckaine overturned glass stegal .

The previous Clinton spoke against it but caved to bipartisan pressure late in his presidency.

Reinstate glass segal which worked for over 60 years and the conflicts of interest that cause bank failure will go away overnight.
 
Funny I consider myself conservative or right leaning, but I'm concerned if not passionate about CO2 emissions, renewable energy, transportation electrification and environmental concerns. If I'm not driving a car with a plug you can be damn sure it won't have more than four cylinders.
The guy in the cube next to me is a liberal Democrat, freaking out over the outcome of this election. But he thinks climate change is bullshit and drives a huge V8 pickup truck with no apparent functional need. I've talked to him about the rationale and science behind climate change and environmental risks of tar sands pipelines but he thinks I'm full of it.
Go figure.
What's interesting though is he does think Teslas are cool, and said he'd like to have one some day.
 
EV subsidies from the federal government (quite obviously) will likely be eliminated probably one of the first 100 days:

Auto manufacturer's Oct 19, 2012 request to EPA for waiver from CARB:

http://www.globalautomakers.org/sites/default/files/document/attachments/JointCommentsCAWaiverRequest10-19-12.pdf

"It is highly unlikely that the required infrastructure and the level of consumer demand for ZEVs will be sufficient by MY2018 in either California or in the individual Section 177 States to support the ZEV sales requirements mandated by CARB. EPA should therefore deny, at the present time, California’s waiver request for the ZEV program for these model years. During the interim, Global Automakers and the Alliance believe that California and EPA, with full auto industry participation, should implement a review for the ZEV program similar to the mid-term review process adopted under the federal GHG and CAFE regulations for MYs2017 through 2025."

That's a whole lot of gobbledy goop to say, "keep the traveling provision so we can only sell cars in California at the minimum number, and not sell any in the other CARB states."

The auto manufacturers lost.

******

November 10, 2016, two days after the election of Trump, "Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers" request relief from California Air Resources Board (CARB) Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) mandates, U.S. government Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requirements for Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE), plus weakening of autonomous car rules.

How do you think a Trump administration will handle this?


http://www.reuters.com/article/us-autos-regulations-trump-exclusive-idUSKBN1352EI

**********

CARB states - Arizona, California, Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, District of Columbia.

CARB-Zero Emission Vehicle states - California’s ZEV program has now been adopted by the states of Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island and Vermont. These states, known as the “Section 177 states,” have chosen to adopt California's air quality standards in lieu of federal requirements as authorized under Section 177 of the federal Clean Air Act. Additionally, California’s GHG standards are now spelled out federal law. Maine, Washington DC and New Jersey are participating with ZEV initiatives, but are not signatory CARB-ZEV states.

http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2014/zev2014/zev14isor.pdf
 
TonyWilliams said:
<snip>
November 10, 2016, two days after the election of Trump, "Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers" request relief from California Air Resources Board (CARB) Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) mandates, U.S. government Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requirements for Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE), plus weakening of autonomous car rules.

How do you think a Trump administration will handle this?
Wow, weakening of autonomous car rules too... Ok.. Not sure what that means, but this will be "interesting". Given the Myron Ebell is Trump's lead on this, and he want to disband the EPA (dating from Nixon), I'd guess your inclinations are correct.
 
LTLFTcomposite said:
California is still free to do what they want,no ? CARB mandates unaffected?

No guarantees. Under Bush II, the federal EPA sued California over their right to independently regulate CO2. California prevailed in the Supreme Court.
 
johnlocke said:
Don't any of you remember the "great Recession"? Brought to you courtesy of the Republicans and their "who needs regulations" attitude. ...

Not so clear-cut. A major factor was the dismantling of the Glass-Steagal Act, which happened during the Clinton administration. I remember it well. I was working for a bank at the time and when I read it in the paper (remember those) I thought "they must be out of their minds". Neither party is blameless.
 
LTLFTcomposite said:
Funny I consider myself conservative or right leaning, but I'm concerned if not passionate about CO2 emissions, renewable energy, transportation electrification and environmental concerns. If I'm not driving a car with a plug you can be damn sure it won't have more than four cylinders.
The guy in the cube next to me is a liberal Democrat, freaking out over the outcome of this election. But he thinks climate change is bullshit and drives a huge V8 pickup truck with no apparent functional need. I've talked to him about the rationale and science behind climate change and environmental risks of tar sands pipelines but he thinks I'm full of it.
Go figure.
What's interesting though is he does think Teslas are cool, and said he'd like to have one some day.

change their 0-60 time to 7 seconds and I guarantee his interest will fade faster than a Greenland Ice cap
 
Personally don't believe EV subsidies will continue much longer without an extremely strong economic argument. In reality, it's the same middle-America voters that put Trump over the top who are basically subsidizing EV use, which is mostly concentrated in the CARB states. That won't pass the smell test much longer with this government balance. As another member suggested, maybe have a US-built requirement. Maybe it's a domestic energy argument. Last time I checked my local power utility, my LEAF is @ 65% coal powered, which I'm certain will cause outrage with ecologists. However, It is energy that is not coming from a hostile foreign source. I do know that without subsidizing the extremely excessive depreciation loss, this product dies an economic death very quickly in a $2/gal gasoline market.
 
LTLFTcomposite said:
Funny I consider myself conservative or right leaning, but I'm concerned if not passionate about CO2 emissions, renewable energy, transportation electrification and environmental concerns.

What's interesting though is he does think Teslas are cool, and said he'd like to have one some day.

I guess you are a unicorn.

There are only 3 out hundreds where I work that view Evs positively, 1 out of 10 is a democrat.

That said my own very liberal aunt and uncle were leaning into me telling me my ev was too expensive to operate, even after I told them $17,500 out the door brand new and free electric.

Most Americans are more concerned with image than actual utility, cost or environmental issues.

I think most are trying to live in a fantasy world.

They don't want to be bothered to think.
 
Even "coal-powered" EVs are much better than ICE cars because of the centralized power source and much greater overall efficiency. I think it's a mistake to expect something like the subsidy continuing for US-Made or US-assembled EVs, because ending the subsidy isn't about rational economics - it's about making a political statement to the US Right, and punishing the "Left" such as it is here. That subsidy will be going completely away ASAP - probably before Spring. With Nissan dropping the ball on competing with the Bolt our choices are going to be an over-priced GM EV with lots of power and range but unknown build quality, or a barely-warmed-over Leaf That will be affordable (until the subsidy is gone) but outdated.

It's quite true that this subsidy is almost literally the least of our worries, but for those like me who can only afford a new EV if it's leased and the subsidy is applied to the lease, it's pretty important on the personal scale. On the larger environmental scale, I think it's been clear for some time now that the US isn't going to change course enough to halt or even slow climate change, but it still hurts to see that inertia set in stone, as long-term policy.
 
Back
Top