Skip to comments.Electric Cars: The Environmentally Friendly Way of Losing Money Since 2009
Posted on 12/07/2012 7:36:51 AM PST by Kaslin
A Congressional Budget Office report released in the fall tells Obama what the rest of us have known for some time: Your bet on electric cars wasnt an investment, but a gamble; a dumb gamble.
And now youve just come up snake eyes.
Despite the federal government pumping $7.5 billion into the electric vehicle industry in the United States through 2019, writes the CSMonitor.com, overall national gasoline consumption is unlikely to be significantly affected, according to a report released by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).
The CBO says that even if Obama increased the amount of the subsidy, it would make little difference to the gasoline usage or emissions output because automakers would still be required to hit fuel efficiency targets. Instead, the CBO says that either a tax on gasoline or carbon is the only way to increase the attractiveness of electric cars to consumers.
Thats because electric cars dont save gas, they dont save money and they dont save the planet.
They are only a vanity-plumping, amenity purchase for the metro-testicled.
Assuming that everything else is equal says the CBO, the larger an electric vehicles battery capacity, the greater its cost disadvantage relative to conventional vehiclesand thus the larger the tax credit needed to make it cost-competitive.
Its not like none of us pointed this out at the time Obama unveiled his plan to put a million electric vehicles on the road before he destabilized the Middle East.
Ok, so he didnt tell us that last part.
Dr. Strange-Chu told us about that one.
Somehow, Strange-Chu said, we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.
Hey? How about a regional civil war? We could lob a few missiles at Libya?
But even with Middle East and North African disorders keeping oil prices high, electric vehicles are still not cost competitive- nor does the consumer seem to want them at any cost.
General Motors essentially confirmed Obamas bad bet when they admitted that the recent rash of viral Chevy Volt sales have been stoked by discounts of as much as $10,000 off the MSRP of $40,000.
Three months ago industry insiders revealed that General Motors was taking a loss of around $50,000 per Chevy Volt sold. That was assuming a sales price without the new and improved $10k discount. If you add in the $7,500 government subsidy, the Volts cost to the consumer is around $22,500.
Cost to the taxpayers is much, much higher.
Before the discount, the Volt cost General Motors- a joint venture between Obama, Inc., and the United Auto Workers that was subsidized by your tax dollars- around $650 million just this year according to estimates by industry insiders. In August alone the discount bumped up the price to GM by another $28 million.
So far this year the company has sold around 13,000 Volts, compared to the 60,000 unit goal that they set at the beginning of the year.
"Let's face it, over $40,000 is asking a lot for a compact car," says Bob Lutz, who helped develop the Volt- and was present when GM was hurling toward bankruptcy.
"Its prime purpose was to introduce a new generation of technology," says the now-retired Lutz, according to CBSNews. "And at the same time ... demonstrate to the world that GM is way more technologically capable than the people give it credit for."
I never knew technology was capable of losing this much money so quickly.
Im impressed. And now so is the Congressional Budget Office.
when you factor the batteries into the equatuion, electric cars and hybrids are NOT environmentall friendly. wish we would put that factiod out there more often...
Been watching tv adverts. I’ve checked various cities looking for electric car plug-in’s like on the streets. Can’t find any. Ford has an advert on their new electric. Says it gets 100mpgE which I take it gets 100 miles per gallon. This is false since they’re adding in the electric range too. In Seattle I remember seeing a pic. of a plug-in. It was vandalized. So basically these cars are running on gas 90% of the time with an avg. of maybe 30mpg(?). I’ve read where it’s less than that.
Obviously the goal is not the reduction of carbon fuels, but the reduction of money.
Someone wants a New World Order, and is willing to destroy the worlds economy to get it.
” Ive checked various cities looking for electric car plug-ins like on the streets. Cant find any.”
You didn’t look in the right places. Check your local gubamint screwls, or go to your local hospital like I did. Now in addition to making the patients use the top four floors of their new parking garage (the bottom four are for the doctors and the candy stripers who are much more important than the patients), they now have a half a dozen charging stations which sit unused. And the hospital? John Muir Memorial in Walnut Creek, CA, where a 24 hour stay costs $40k. (that is if you don’t have anything done)
So somebody with an electric car has to find a local screwl or hospital to charge the car - free??
“!!!40K!!! for just an overnight stay??
So somebody with an electric car has to find a local screwl or hospital to charge the car - free??”
Would you like to see the bill?
And I guess that’s the most galling thing about EV’s that the owners get to charge them at the taxpayers expense, and here in California they are EXMPT from the Carpool Lane Restrictions. Also, just think, they also are not paying any of the motor fuel taxes that are used to maintain our highways. EV owners are part of the 47% who are the “takers.”
I thought that CA enacted a surcharge or something for people who used EV’s because they weren’t collecting enough gas tax from them.
“I thought that CA enacted a surcharge or something for people who used EVs because they werent collecting enough gas tax from them.”
You gotta be kidding! California has been giving $5000. a tax credit for buying an electric or Hybrid vehicle!