After a day, 56 percent of the subsidy for new electric cars remains – IT Pro – News

If the subsidy continues, this means (structurally) more demand for (B) EVs, which will drive up sales prices. The subsidy will then effectively partly come to the buyer and seller.

The entire government policy on cars and environmental impact is very interesting: About 5-10 years ago compact diesel cars were financially stimulated by the government. After a few years, the benefits were reversed and then there was the situation that all these newly purchased cars were no longer of interest to the current owners and were sold en masse. The result: a lot of supply, little demand, so those financial benefits are lost in the extra high depreciation.

Not much later, something similar happened to hybrid SUVs: the Mitsubishi PHEV was in demand, due to space and financial benefits. Later it was decided that these were not so economical (which was already known in practice, but they did well on paper, which was also known to be incorrect).
So there too the financial benefits in depreciation disappeared.

Now that I look at electric models, I fear the same will happen. Financial benefits are slowly being reversed and an older Model S (one of the few cars that has been on the market for a longer time with a reasonable range) has depreciated an average of € 10,000 per year (you can drive a neat car used for that, all in). Now we see a run on sale for the second-hand models, which may be offered again in a few years, because the MRB is increased or the costs for loading?

I therefore see no financial benefit in the medium to long term for us as a citizen, due to government policy. But that does not matter either: the masses do not see this phenomenon and buy what the government thinks is most interesting from an environmental point of view. So: mission accomplished.

I wonder what you think of this. But: something else. If you look at the full climate impact of manufacturing and using a car, the (B) EV will “win” after I believe 70,000km. So it is better for the environment. Or should it be said: less bad? Because when is it enough? Since we don’t know that, I think we (now) want to go for 0% impact for transport. And that is not possible with (B) EV at the moment. However, if (compensation) measures are also taken. I don’t know if that is possible, but I just call it easy: planting trees. Could we then go to 0% impact? Or a step further: what if we plant more trees, can we make driving an ICE (combustion engine) car climate neutral? And what would the difference in costs be?
Where I want to go: suppose we plant an ICE with trees just as climate (un) friendly as an (B) EV and isn’t that cheaper in the end? That may be cheaper than the (perhaps) expensive subsidy now. And apparently there are already sounds that the financial policy regarding EVs is not favorable for CO2 emissions.

–