Team-BHP > Electric Cars


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 8th September 2019, 19:09   #1
BHPian
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: N Delhi
Posts: 407
Thanked: 200 Times
Default Electric Cars: Progressivism & Fiscal profligacy to subsidise the elite

https://www.rt.com/news/468342-norwa...ars-hypocrisy/
.

I will just let this sit here.

Caveat: Yes, I am a fan of electric vehicles, when they are a proven better option not needing state fiat or exchequer provided legs/wheels.

[ Mods please place as appropriate as this deals with the intersection of automotive tech and politics ]
RS_DEL is offline   (7) Thanks
Old 8th September 2019, 19:39   #2
BHPian
 
nakul0888's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: kochi
Posts: 482
Thanked: 1,503 Times
Default re: Electric Cars: Progressivism & Fiscal profligacy to subsidise the elite

Of course the Norway model of anything is unsustainable and out of reach for other normal countries. We are talking about a country with 5 million people and trillions of dollars of fossil fuel reserves. It’s basically Qatar for Caucasians. Also it’s ironic isn’t it? The whole green new deal thing in Norway is actually funded by the dirty dino juice.
nakul0888 is offline   (13) Thanks
Old 8th September 2019, 20:40   #3
BHPian
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: N Delhi
Posts: 407
Thanked: 200 Times
Default re: Electric Cars: Progressivism & Fiscal profligacy to subsidise the elite

It is not just about Norway even though the OP is based on a news report about Norway. The point simply is - what is not being accounted for is the full costs of EVs.

Full costs commencing from degradation due to extraction of Lithium-Cobalt-Rare Earth minerals to the source of electricity to the costs of scrapping/recycling the spent batteries, the solar PV farms, the wind mills.

These costs are being transferred to the commons via the exchequer of course.

The conventional ICE option does not involve such costs. So why are the politicians bent on mandating this option - as they hope to eventually?

Last edited by suhaas307 : 9th September 2019 at 15:02. Reason: Spacing
RS_DEL is offline   (5) Thanks
Old 8th September 2019, 22:44   #4
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Bangalore,Coorg
Posts: 1,073
Thanked: 716 Times
Default re: Electric Cars: Progressivism & Fiscal profligacy to subsidise the elite

Quote:
Originally Posted by RS_DEL View Post
So why are the politicians bent on mandating this option - as they hope to eventually?
Three reasons. 1) Petrol is a finite resource. It has to run out at some point. On the other hand, if you go to renewable energy sources (solar, wind, water etc) it never runs out. More importantly, prices are a lot more stable, unlike oil, which has ranged from 40 to 140 dollars a barrel over the last couple of years.

2) In the long run, electric vehicles are less polluting than ICE, especially when using renewable energy.

3) Even if electricity is generated from fossil fuels, the pollution will tend to be away from densely populated areas, making acid rain and respiratory problems (among other issues) a far smaller issue than it is at present.
pganapathy is offline   (2) Thanks
Old 8th September 2019, 23:22   #5
Distinguished - BHPian
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Delhi
Posts: 6,467
Thanked: 29,815 Times
Default re: Electric Cars: Progressivism & Fiscal profligacy to subsidise the elite

This is just a very poorly written article. Appears to be sensational, uncovering etc. etc. in fact it is so poorly written and researched it really makes you wonder. It offers no perspective or any insightfulness. It is utter, utter garbage.

Just about any western European country has a green agenda. And it all includes promoting electrical cars. Only so many instruments governments have at their disposal. But taxes and subsidies are always used to promote such things.

An example: in the early 60s the largest gas field in the world ever was discovered in the Netherlands. Within 20 years every single house hold, every building in the Netherlands was converted to gas heating. All promoted and done via tax advantages, subsidies etc.

I installed solar panels on my roof last year. Nowadays, The Dutch government is pursuing an aggressive green agenda. So I get the VAT (21%!!) reimbursed! That is a big incentive to get yourself some solarpanels. You need to get people moving into a new direction. Already new houses, can not have a gas connection, so enter more subsidies for heat pumps, insulation, more solar panels etc. in less than 10-12 years I will be without a gas connection. So my house heating and cooking needs to convert to something different. I expect the Dutch governement to come up with some financial initiatives to help me out!

Exactly the same is happening with electric cars. Lots of tax and or subsidies are on offer. Just over hundred years ago, ICE type of cars became available. Do you think it was the poor who bought them first? Do you think people did away with their horse and cart overnight when they bought a car? Of course not. These are massive transitions in society and it takes time.

What a load of rubbish about Norwegian owning two cars, one an ICE, one electrical. 10 years from now that will be two electrical cars. It aint happening overnight, but it sure is moving in a very different direction. It still means even today 50% of the cars are electrical.

If you offer a standard tax rebate on a electrical car, obviously in absolute money you are going to get a lot more money back on a Tesla than say a Fiat 500. And what the article fails to mention is that across Europe, including Norway new legislation is already being introduced to shift the financial advantages to the middle segment of the electrical car segment. But hey, that segment did not exist until recently.

Yes, so initially rich folks were buying Tesla’s and getting a lot of financial advantages. But that is changing now.

Looking at this in a complete isolated d fashion, without looking at the Norwegian overall Green agenda and how they are going to get there, this is just bitching and moaning of those who prefer to be ill informed, rather than think for themselves and do a bit of proper reading up on these matter.

Whether electricity and electrical cars are the right way to go, is a very different question all together, of course. I wish, as much effort, budget, subsidies, tax advantages were given to hydrogen initiatives.

Jeroen
Jeroen is offline   (28) Thanks
Old 8th September 2019, 23:45   #6
KMT
BHPian
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Coorg
Posts: 455
Thanked: 856 Times
Default re: Electric Cars: Progressivism & Fiscal profligacy to subsidise the elite

Wow, it looks like the writers main intent is to share all the big impressive english words he has learnt.

The likes of him would have written similar articles a 100 years ago when cars began to replace horse drawn carriages.

Perhaps, if he had his way, we should all stick to fossil fuel.
KMT is offline   (1) Thanks
Old 9th September 2019, 00:55   #7
BHPian
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: N Delhi
Posts: 407
Thanked: 200 Times
Default re: Electric Cars: Progressivism & Fiscal profligacy to subsidise the elite

Quote:
Originally Posted by pganapathy View Post
Three reasons. 1) Petrol is a finite resource. It has to run out at some point. On the other hand, if you go to renewable energy sources (solar, wind, water etc) it never runs out. More importantly, prices are a lot more stable, unlike oil, which has ranged from 40 to 140 dollars a barrel over the last couple of years.
With fracking and even otherwise there is no dearth of hydrocarbon sources to provide fuel for automotive use for a very long time.

Capital efficiency of alleged green sources of generating electricity is a big question mark as is operational reliability.

You would do well to see the transition from "Green" back to thermal energy in Germany the paragon of green energy. Even Japan is reverting thermal power with new tech.

Your lament about energy price variations - hopefully energy producers are sensitive to your concerns and forego the rules of economics for pricing their products.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeroen View Post
This is just a very poorly written article. Appears to be sensational, uncovering etc. etc. in fact it is so poorly written and researched it really makes you wonder. It offers no perspective or any insightfulness. It is utter, utter garbage.

Just about any western European country has a green agenda. And it all includes promoting electrical cars. Only so many instruments governments have at their disposal. But taxes and subsidies are always used to promote such things.

I expect the Dutch government to come up with some financial initiatives to help me out!

Jeroen
Within the EU, the paragon of green energy i.e Germany is switching to thermal after a very expensive and failed experiment called Energiewende.

I could post multiple reports but anyone who wishes to deal with facts will do their own research.

With respect to your use of adjectives to describe those who decry fiscal profligacy I am not really surprised, given that you Europeans have been going Leftwards for ages and are now on the verge of giving third world countries a run for their money in the dystopian sweepstakes.

So with such a world view it is perfectly normal to find people demanding state munificence to finance their consumption and finding it ethical/without any moral hazard, which you have done with utmost confidence.
RS_DEL is offline   (2) Thanks
Old 9th September 2019, 04:41   #8
Distinguished - BHPian
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Delhi
Posts: 6,467
Thanked: 29,815 Times
Default re: Electric Cars: Progressivism & Fiscal profligacy to subsidise the elite

Quote:
Originally Posted by RS_DEL View Post
Within the EU, the paragon of green energy i.e Germany is switching to thermal after a very expensive and failed experiment called Energiewende.
Being Dutch, which means neighbors of Germany and having lived and worked in Germany for some time, I am quite familiar with Energiewende.

Energiewende is not failed, it is very much alive and it is delivering by and large on its promises. It is above and beyond the average EU plans. It was/is a very ambitious multi-decade program that envisages the German energy transition. As with all such programs not everything goes to plan. And adjustments are made along the way.

Wikipedia does a decent write up, including the criticism:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energiewende_in_Germany


Quote:
Originally Posted by RS_DEL View Post
So with such a world view it is perfectly normal to find people demanding state munificence to finance their consumption and finding it ethical/without any moral hazard, which you have done with utmost confidence.
For me a fiscal regime is a reflection on what a nation believes its society should look like. What are its values, its ambitions. How do you ensure everybody gets his/her fair share. The fiscal regime is just an instrument to achieve all of this.

To illustrate, I am just going to oversimplify, but hopefully give some context and insights on how fiscal systems can work. But no matter what, you can never spend more than your income. That goes for governments as well.

I take the Netherlands as an example. It is very similar to other Northern European and some western European countries in its outlook on society and how it uses its fiscal system to maintain and enhance society.

So some key aspect to how we like our society to be

1 Good Schooling available to all, with low (financial) barriers
2 Good Health care available to all, with low (financial) barriers
3 Equality for all
4 Good infrastructure, well maintained and kept up to date. So roads, rivers, trains, airports etc.
In the Netherlands, given 3/4 of the country is below sea level we need to invest a huge amount of money in all sorts of dikes, water management, flood barriers etc. to protect everybody
5 Safe place to be, good police force, efficient fair court systems. Good efficient civil servants organisation
6 Everybody is entitled to decent living accommodations
7 Public TV, Radio and sufficient attention to art and music.
8 Preserve historical significant sites / attention to heritage
9 Green, healthy environment

The list is much longer. But of course all of the above needs a lot of money. And a very substantial part of that money is raised though taxation. But that very fiscal system also incorporates various instruments that enable and or facilitate all of the above.

The above is expensive, so income tax is heavy. Also, the consensus is, that those who earn more should pay more. So we have progressive income tax. Depending on your income you will pay, give or take, between 30 - 60% income tax. And everybody with a job does pay income tax. There is no cheating, the system is pretty well foolproof. On top of that almost everything you buy has 21% VAT included.

So everybody is entitled to decent living accommodation. Owning your own house is important. So everybody can deduct their mortage interest from their income tax. If you can not afford your own home, if you are renting, depending on your income and rent, you might receive a rent subsidy.

Public radio, TV, museums, the arts and music are considered an important part of society, so they are funded through taxes. All subsidized.

Children, new borns, are important for any nation/society. So everybody is entitled to child support, which comes in the shape of a discount on your income tax. (for every child you get an incremental discount)

Primary and secondary education comes at very minimal cost. Anybody that can not afford that minimal cost, based on income, will get a subsidy to ensure his/her child can attend. We do have some College and University fees, but in order to ensure everybody can participate all students can get an interest free loan. If you pass your finals and find a job and start earning, you might or might not have to pay it back, depending on income. So all of this is funded through taxes.

A healthy lifestyle is encouraged. So if you commute to work on your bicycle you can deduct the cost of your bicycle from your income tax.

To promote the transition to a more green and sustainable energy landscape various subsidies are available. Usually these subsidies tend to come down over time. They are often used as stimulants to get the first 10-20% of the population to adopt these new approach to heating or generating electricity. (e.g. the VAT rebate I enjoyed on my solar panels is stopped in 2021.)

The Dutch government has spend huge sums of money over the last 10-15 years getting wind energy started. All sorts of fiscal subsidies and discounts were available for whoever wanted to invest in a wind mill. Be it commercially or just on your roof top. Just about all these initial fiscal measures have been halted. A whole new industry has come about, cost prices have come down, many players, new suppliers have emerged, healthy competition. So now it is just business as usual, no subsidies required going forward, But without the subsidies it would have taken much, much longer to get started, if it had happened at all.

So there is a vast range of fiscal stimulus available in these societies. Because it is an important part of what these societies are about, and where they want to go to.

But it still needs to balanced. So all these countries tend to have relative high income tax and other taxes. But in addition a range of fiscal arrangements to ensure everybody gets its fair share of what the society is supposed to stand for and where it is heading to. (ambition, vision).

For companies it is actually very similar. There are all sort of taxes on companies, big and small. But there are also all sorts of stimulus packages available. So we have various fiscal rules for start up companies, specially for small start ups. The government has special fiscal rules for certain industries, because they like to attract certain businesses.

For instance, farming is still a huge industry in the Netherlands. And all sorts of new (environmental) legislation puts a real financial strain on a lot of these businesses. But as a society we believe the environmental measures are important, so they will be enforced, but there are subsidies available to farmers. They still needs to invest substantial amounts of money. (just like me. I paid Euro 7000 for my solar panels and got a rebate of 21%, or put differently I still ended up paying 79% of Euro 7000)

So a fiscal regime needs to be seen in it's entirety. Fiscal instruments are part of shaping a society. Show me a fiscal regime and I can tell you what it's society looks like!

Citizens pay (everybody pays and pays quite a lot) income and other taxes. Those aspects of society that are considered really important are either funded for all or promoted, supported through fiscal instrument for those who need it, can not afford it otherwise, or are willing to invest themselves too. (e.g. renewable/sustainable energy).

So I would say a pretty well balanced system overall. At least in its intent and mostly in its execution as well. I like the fact that a government puts its vision on society into very concrete (fiscal) measures. Collect tax from all, collect more from those than can afford, spend and re-distribute to what society believes is important / relevant. Support those who need it and support those who are willing (and capable) of investing in the future. As long as all the plusses and minuses do not leave a deficit you are good to go!

It is not a perfect system, nor are these societies perfect. But, interestingly, these countries (Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, Finland and a few other Western European countries) have been doing extremely well for more than 7 decades. That is, if you believe in a society that tries to treat everybody equal, provides and caters for everybody equally, takes care of those that can not afford. And importantly has long term ambition/vision when it comes to topics such as sustainable energy and how to fund and promote it.

Jeroen

Last edited by Jeroen : 9th September 2019 at 05:11.
Jeroen is offline   (15) Thanks
Old 9th September 2019, 07:45   #9
BHPian
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: N Delhi
Posts: 407
Thanked: 200 Times
Default re: Electric Cars: Progressivism & Fiscal profligacy to subsidise the elite

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeroen View Post
Being Dutch, which means neighbors of Germany and having lived and worked in Germany for some time, I am quite familiar with Energiewende.

Energiewende is not failed, it is very much alive and it is delivering by and large on its promises. It is above and beyond the average EU plans. It was/is a very ambitious multi-decade program that envisages the German energy transition. As with all such programs not everything goes to plan. And adjustments are made along the way.



Jeroen
Since the focus of the OP was a very limited point i.e. fiscal support to an idea that should stand the test of the market, I will restrict my response to that only.

*****

Germany's Federal Court of Auditors is even more forthright about the failures. The shift to renewables, the federal auditors say, has cost at least 160 billion euros in the last five years. Meanwhile, the expenditures "are in extreme disproportion to the results," Federal Court of Auditors President Kay Scheller said last fall, although his assessment went largely unheard in the political arena. Scheller is even concerned that voters could soon lose all faith in the government because of this massive failure.



https://www.spiegel.de/international...a-1266586.html

*****

The above observation is that of a statutory authority based on hard facts, not the politically coloured opinion of a reactionary Conservative like me.

This clearly makes the point that all energy options have to stand on merit and not be subsidised/fiscally incentivised because of considerations of what is clean and what is not. This principle has to be applicable to automotive technologies too.

WRT the state mandating, if memory serves me right, Diesel was declared a more environmentally benign fuel option and fiscally incentivised. Remember how that worked out?


Thank you for extolling the virtues of Leftism . I have no desire to argue on political philosophies and create unnecessary thread sprawl. All the best to you on your slippery slope to third world scale dystopia.
RS_DEL is offline   (2) Thanks
Old 9th September 2019, 10:53   #10
BHPian
 
JayKis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Pune
Posts: 256
Thanked: 573 Times
Default Re: Electric Cars: Progressivism & Fiscal profligacy to subsidise the elite

The article is pure non-sense. All the governments use tax credits to make the people move in certain direction. If that direction is right or wrong can be debated. But if the numbers are looked at, it might not be worthy of a debate per se.


Quote:
Originally Posted by RS_DEL View Post
Full costs commencing from degradation due to extraction of Lithium-Cobalt-Rare Earth minerals to the source of electricity to the costs of scrapping/recycling the spent batteries, the solar PV farms, the wind mills.

These costs are being transferred to the commons via the exchequer of course.

The conventional ICE option does not involve such costs. So why are the politicians bent on mandating this option - as they hope to eventually?
If you are quoting the full costs, then it should include the entire gamut of energy required for operations for the current car industry as well. Kindly feel free to add if anything has been missed.
  1. The amount of energy required to manufacture a complete car - Assuming the drive train to be the major difference in the components between the ICE and the EV, the ICE would have 2000+ parts whereas the EV would have 20+.
  2. The efficiency of the car - ICE efficiency is like 15-20% at the max (fuel to the wheels) whereas most of the EVs its 65-70% (grid to the wheels).
  3. Efficiency depending up on the type of power used. (Efficiency of Power Plant * Efficiency of EV)
    • Steam power plant would be (30% * 65% = 20%) which is on par with the ICE.
    • Diesel Power plant (35% * 65% = 25%)
    • Nuclear Power Plant (55%* 65% = 35%)
    • Hydro Electric (85% * 65% = 55%)
  4. Distribution losses – The energy required for the transportation costs of electricity is nothing compared to the energy costs for transporting oil to petrol bunks. Also the losses (like 5%) during distribution are much lesser.
  5. Extraction energy costs – Energy used for Extracting crude oil and refining to produce vs Energy used for extracting Lithium and carbon
  6. Servicing energy costs over the life time of a car – EVs require very little servicing though how much is a question mark.

So the EV has a worst case efficiency which matches the best efficiency of ICE with lower distribution and servicing energy costs and offers recyclability. Extraction energy costs can be debatable till hard numbers come by.

Last edited by JayKis : 9th September 2019 at 11:00.
JayKis is offline   (3) Thanks
Old 9th September 2019, 11:09   #11
Team-BHP Support
 
Samurai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bangalore/Udupi
Posts: 24,639
Thanked: 28,201 Times
Default Re: Electric Cars: Progressivism & Fiscal profligacy to subsidise the elite

Quote:
Originally Posted by RS_DEL View Post
Thank you for extolling the virtues of Leftism . I have no desire to argue on political philosophies and create unnecessary thread sprawl. All the best to you on your slippery slope to third world scale dystopia.
Jeroen merely described the economic system of his country, using facts. He didn't talk about politics, so please don't turn it into politics by labeling it as leftism. Those labels don't mean much anymore, and they just confuse everyone.

You started this thread using a hatchet piece from RT (formerly Russia Today), a media company fully funded by Russian government. Russia is considered a big threat by Norway. The credibility of the article you linked is very questionable, and most likely created because political reason. Let's not get sucked into it.

Please stick to economic discussions and don't veer into politics, which will violate the forum rules. - Support Team

Last edited by Samurai : 9th September 2019 at 11:11.
Samurai is offline   (9) Thanks
Old 9th September 2019, 11:44   #12
BHPian
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: bang
Posts: 665
Thanked: 1,876 Times
Default Re: Electric Cars: Progressivism & Fiscal profligacy to subsidise the elite

Quote:
Originally Posted by KMT View Post
Wow, it looks like the writers main intent is to share all the big impressive english words he has learnt.
I was also " Flummoxed" by the article until i realized that its written and published by RT. As @samurai had already pointed out, RT is a proxy for the Russian Govt ( read old soviet , KGB etc etc ) and generally uses it to belittle either US or its allies like Norway which are in NATO. Not wrong, i suppose by today's media standards in which almost any one can have a channel for broadcasting their views (thanks to youtube). With the proper channel selection and search words in google, you can also get many more such reports.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RS_DEL View Post
With fracking and even otherwise there is no dearth of hydrocarbon sources to provide fuel for automotive use for a very long time.
How long is "very long"?. The dino juices may be there for many years but then its a question of why use it?.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RS_DEL View Post
Thank you for extolling the virtues of Leftism . I have no desire to argue on political philosophies and create unnecessary thread sprawl. All the best to you on your slippery slope to third world scale dystopia.
Leftism?. No words my friend.

I leave you with this poem from Ezra Pound.

“When I carefully consider the curious habits of dogs
I am compelled to conclude
That man is the superior animal.

When I consider the curious habits of man
I confess, my friend, I am puzzled”
srini1785 is online now  
Old 9th September 2019, 12:14   #13
BHPian
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: N Delhi
Posts: 407
Thanked: 200 Times
Default Re: Electric Cars: Progressivism & Fiscal profligacy to subsidise the elite

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samurai View Post
Jeroen merely described the economic system of his country, using facts. He didn't talk about politics, so please don't turn it into politics by labeling it as leftism. Those labels don't mean much anymore, and they just confuse everyone.


Please stick to economic discussions and don't veer into politics, which will violate the forum rules. - Support Team
Perception of what RT is or is not, is not germane to the issue. That is your perception. I may or may not agree with you.

Fact is that the subsidies are a reality and are market distorting, subsidising consumers who are affluent. This is happening because of the tendencies of the state to weigh in on choices which are considered
appropriate for the greater good. That is the entire point. The member you refer to decided to give me a discourse which was political. I had merely pointed out the reality that Europe is inclined towards a certain political world view which promotes market distorting practices. I have refrained from engaging with a political response.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JayKis View Post
The article is pure non-sense. All the governments use tax credits to make the people move in certain direction. If that direction is right or wrong can be debated. But if the numbers are looked at, it might not be worthy of a debate per se.




If you are quoting the full costs,
So the EV has a worst case efficiency which matches the best efficiency of ICE with lower distribution and servicing energy costs and offers recyclability. Extraction energy costs can be debatable till hard numbers come by.
Governments distorting markets via fiscal interventions is a reality and does not in any way make that acceptable because it is done widely.

It is the reason sub par technologies are able to get a life line solely due to extraneous considerations. If EVs are a viable option then they would not be requiring crutches from the exchequer.

EV sales graphs viewed against a backdrop of subsidies establish the reality of how the consumers see them. If all your calculations are indeed correct then EVs' would not be needing support. They would be beating ICE options in the market place. Are they doing so? That will settle the issue.
RS_DEL is offline   (1) Thanks
Old 9th September 2019, 12:20   #14
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 1,225
Thanked: 3,965 Times
Default Re: Electric Cars: Progressivism & Fiscal profligacy to subsidise the elite

ICEs were sustaining for a very long time in countries like India because of subsidies on diesel and petrol. Without the subsidies, the market volume would have been much smaller as people would have been persuaded to avoid a purchase.
2000rpm is offline   (1) Thanks
Old 9th September 2019, 14:10   #15
Distinguished - BHPian
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Delhi
Posts: 6,467
Thanked: 29,815 Times
Default Re: Electric Cars: Progressivism & Fiscal profligacy to subsidise the elite

Quote:
Originally Posted by RS_DEL View Post
The above observation is that of a statutory authority based on hard facts, not the politically coloured opinion of a reactionary Conservative like me.
It is an interesting article, although I read it differently from you. Germany was probably one of the first, if not the first, to launch such a massive transformation program. The Netherlands, although we have had several initiatives, has only come up with an integral approach to sustainable energy last year.

So the Germans learned a lot and that always comes at a price. They have also made a lot of progress, gained a lot of traction. For several reasons parts of the program is loosing momentum. Which means the program, or at least parts of the program are being overhauled. I would not expect anything else on such monumental programs that run over several decades.

What is interesting are some of the observations in the last paragraphs

Quote:
The result has been that Berlin policymakers are currently leaning toward a model like the one used in Switzerland, in which a large portion of the CO2 tax revenues is sent back to citizens as compensation for the fact that climate-neutral behavior can be expensive and requires sacrifice. That's the core lesson of more than two decades of the Energiewende: Policymakers must ensure that people are on board. Voters must begin to understand what the transformation means for them and that it is vital that they change their behavior. Without sacrifice, it won't work. The second, more difficult, part of the Energiewende -- the intelligent interlinking of different sectors -- is bringing the Energiewende closer to ordinary people. It is influencing how and where people live, how they travel
This massive transformation comes at a price to all. And it is going to be more than an inconvenience. By now, that is a on a political level clearly understood around the world (well, at least most of Europe).

To give you an example: The Dutch program of doing away with gas connections to private home is going to cost the average Dutch family home owners an investment of some Euro 20-30.000. To put that in context, Euro 20.000 buys you a nicely specced Ford Fiesta. Euro 30.000 gets you a very nice Ford Focus indeed.

There is likely to be some form of fiscal help, but irrespective Dutch citizens are expected to cough up a very substantial sum of money over the next ten years. But by and large, the Dutch Green Program, introduced last year is appreciated by most of the Dutch population. And well understood that it will be more than just an inconvenience. The way we live our lives, and what it cost to life our lives is changing considerable. As always, those who can easily afford it are likely to have fewer fiscal advantages than those who earn less. Referring to my earlier post, where fiscal measures are used to promote new ideas, but also to ensure everybody gets their fair share and makes a fair contribution, based on your income.

And the Germans are going the same way. Get better understanding of what it really means on an individual level, what individual (financial and other) sacrifices are required and how the government could help to some extent.

Quote:
Jeroen merely described the economic system of his country, using facts. He didn't talk about politics, so please don't turn it into politics by labeling it as leftism. Those labels don't mean much anymore, and they just confuse everyone
Thanks, not to add to the confusion, but for those who like those classic left/right terms. Since 2003, so for the last 16 years, the Dutch government has been a right center coalition.

Jeroen

Last edited by Jeroen : 9th September 2019 at 14:23.
Jeroen is offline   (7) Thanks
Reply

Most Viewed
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Team-BHP.com
Proudly powered by E2E Networks