A friend on FB has been posting sarcastic negative EV memes of late and I finally said that in the big picture oil is a finite resource, especially at the rate we're consuming it (climate considerations aside). So isn't it a good thing that we have all these beta testers on the road these days working the bugs out ahead of time for a oil-less future? It seems to me it's like the beginning of the last century where there were many new car companies or the late 90s with all the dotcoms vying for leadership with new technologies. Lots of ups and downs in these early tech periods.
Negative sentiment usually means "its over" or its a contrarian signal. EVs are definetly not over. This is a good point and I would also expect plenty of ups and downs to come.
It's fine to say that market forces are a central consideration for choosing EV or ICE, but only if real costs are considered. The IMF quantifies direct and indirect fossil fuel annual subsidies at ~$1.7 trillion, of which ~$600-700 billion are by U.S.
EVs look a heck of a lot better when subsidies are taken away and the real price for gasoline is $12/gal. The real cost of fossil fuels--including pollution and greenhouse gases--should be considered in any cost assessment of EVs. As it stands now, fossil fuel subsidies are a regressive tax hiding behind suppressed fuel prices, while real and enormous costs get ignored.
I'm all for ending fossil fuel subsidies (but all others with it).
First, if you're right and the market price for gasoline is $12/gal, crude oil would be well north of $200/barrel. With crude oil that high and being the most key input to all manufacturing and industry, what would that do to the cost of EVs as a consequence?
Second, you can find estimates for EV subsidies from various sources which are in roughly in the hundreds of billions for 2023. The government is paying for the construction and wages for several battery factories. The federal deficit is blowing out in peactime/non-recession with IRA spending just begining to pay out. We should get rid of all subsidies including these too, but I assume you support EV subsidies, just not fossil fuels.
Third, it is not morally justifiable in my opinion to tax carbon emissions (or otherwise quantify the "real" environmental cost) as a strategy to reduce fossil fuel use. Id prefer to let the market innovate better, more efficient, and less polluting products which it has and would do better if the government stayed out of the way. That is a path to authoritarianism that I don't approve.
A friend on FB has been posting sarcastic negative EV memes of late and I finally said that in the big picture oil is a finite resource, especially at the rate we're consuming it (climate considerations aside). So isn't it a good thing that we have all these beta testers on the road these days working the bugs out ahead of time for a oil-less future? It seems to me it's like the beginning of the last century where there were many new car companies or the late 90s with all the dotcoms vying for leadership with new technologies. Lots of ups and downs in these early tech periods.
Negative sentiment usually means "its over" or its a contrarian signal. EVs are definetly not over. This is a good point and I would also expect plenty of ups and downs to come.
It's fine to say that market forces are a central consideration for choosing EV or ICE, but only if real costs are considered. The IMF quantifies direct and indirect fossil fuel annual subsidies at ~$1.7 trillion, of which ~$600-700 billion are by U.S.
EVs look a heck of a lot better when subsidies are taken away and the real price for gasoline is $12/gal. The real cost of fossil fuels--including pollution and greenhouse gases--should be considered in any cost assessment of EVs. As it stands now, fossil fuel subsidies are a regressive tax hiding behind suppressed fuel prices, while real and enormous costs get ignored.
I'm all for ending fossil fuel subsidies (but all others with it).
First, if you're right and the market price for gasoline is $12/gal, crude oil would be well north of $200/barrel. With crude oil that high and being the most key input to all manufacturing and industry, what would that do to the cost of EVs as a consequence?
Second, you can find estimates for EV subsidies from various sources which are in roughly in the hundreds of billions for 2023. The government is paying for the construction and wages for several battery factories. The federal deficit is blowing out in peactime/non-recession with IRA spending just begining to pay out. We should get rid of all subsidies including these too, but I assume you support EV subsidies, just not fossil fuels.
See https://www.thegrayareasubstack.com/p/go-fund-me
Third, it is not morally justifiable in my opinion to tax carbon emissions (or otherwise quantify the "real" environmental cost) as a strategy to reduce fossil fuel use. Id prefer to let the market innovate better, more efficient, and less polluting products which it has and would do better if the government stayed out of the way. That is a path to authoritarianism that I don't approve.
I appreciate your thoughts and comments.