Discussion:
The democrat 1%, New state rules cap income levels for low-emission vehicle rebates
(too old to reply)
$15 An Hour! Snicker...
2016-04-20 02:12:59 UTC
Permalink
After handing out close to $300 million in rebates for
purchasers of low- and zero-emission vehicles, state regulators
spotted a nettlesome trend -- much of the money ended up in the
pockets of upper middle class and wealthy homeowners.

Did the state really need to subsidize owners of gleaming new
Volts and Teslas and BMW i3s?

"If somebody is going to buy a top-line Tesla," said Dave
Clegern, spokesman for the California Air Resources Board, "they
may not need the help."

Late last month, new rules capped income levels for the Clean
Vehicle Rebate Project, or CVRP. The program offers a range of
rebates, including $1,500 for hybrid vehicles, $2,500 for
electric cars and $5,000 for hydrogen cars. The program also
took steps to encourage more low and moderate income families to
join the clean vehicle fleet.

The rules took effect March 29 and eliminate rebates for
consumers with annual incomes above $250,000 for single
taxpayers and $500,000 for joint filing families. Low- and
moderate-income buyers, defined as making less than three times
the federal poverty level or $72,900 for a family of four, are
eligible for an additional $1,500 rebate toward the purchase of
a new low or zero emission vehicle.

Clean vehicle purchasers are also eligible for federal tax
credits, which can lower the cost of a new vehicle by as much as
$7,500.

The state established the rebate project in 2010 to encourage
clean vehicle ownership, with a goal of having 1.5 million zero-
emission vehicles on California roads by 2025. The program is
funded by bonds and proceeds from the cap-and-trade program,
Clegern said.

Last year, a study commissioned by the Air Resources Board found
that the typical rebate went to a college-educated, white male
who owned a home and had an annual income of between $50,000 and
$200,000.

Just 6 percent of the rebate dollars went to residents in poor
communities, according to the report. The state failed to reach
its modest, 10 percent goal to reach neighborhoods defined as
disadvantaged communities.

Clegern said the changes were designed to better distribute the
rebate money. "It's still reasonably generous," he said. "Our
goal is still to get these vehicles on the road."

The debate continues among clean vehicle advocates on how to
encourage growth in the industry.

Eileen Tutt, executive director of the California Electric
Transportation Coalition, said the rebate program has been
"incredibly effective." The nonprofit encourages growing the
fleet of electric vehicles.

The organization opposed the caps, believing it could discourage
prospective buyers who did not want to share personal income
information with the state, Tutt said. CalETC felt it was too
early for restrictions that made it harder to qualify for the
rebates, she said. But she hopes the additional rebate for lower-
income families will expand the market.

Tutt said two pilot programs -- in San Joaquin Valley and
Southern California -- encourage clean transportation by
allowing moderate-income residents to combine rebates to put
toward the purchase of a used, low-emission vehicle. "It's
important to try it," she said.

The fast-growing clean transportation sector, which includes
hybrid, electric and natural gas vehicles, added 7,000 new jobs
in California last year, a 65 percent increase over the previous
year, according to a study by industry group Advanced Energy
Economy.

More than half of the people employed in the sector work on
electric and hybrid vehicles. The industry got another boost
this month from Palo Alto-based Tesla Motors, which booked more
than 300,000 reservations for its lower-priced sedan in a week.

Steve Chadima, senior vice president for external affairs at
Advanced Energy Economy, said the rebate program has encouraged
clean vehicle purchases, much like the subsidies that helped
build the market for solar panels a decade ago.

The price of electric vehicles will decline as more are
produced, he said. "Is the program working?" Chadima asked. "The
answer is mostly, 'yes.' "

Contact Louis Hansen 408-920-5043. Follow him at
Twitter.com/HansenLouis.

CALIFORNIA CLEAN VEHICLE REBATE PROJECT

The top five brands and the percentage of rebates from 2010 -
2015:
Chevrolet: 21 percent
Nissan: 20 percent
Tesla: 15 percent
Toyota: 14 percent
Ford: 12 percent

Source: Center for Sustainable Energy

http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_29773932/new-state-rules-
low-emission-vehicle-rebates?source=most_viewed
Wayne
2016-04-20 02:39:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by $15 An Hour! Snicker...
After handing out close to $300 million in rebates for
purchasers of low- and zero-emission vehicles, state regulators
spotted a nettlesome trend -- much of the money ended up in the
pockets of upper middle class and wealthy homeowners.
Did the state really need to subsidize owners of gleaming new
Volts and Teslas and BMW i3s?
"If somebody is going to buy a top-line Tesla," said Dave
Clegern, spokesman for the California Air Resources Board, "they
may not need the help."
LOL. And sooner or probably later these regulator monkeys are going to
realize that there is a bigger carbon footprint for electric vehicles
(sometimes known as "coal powered" vehicles.
Governor Swill
2016-04-28 22:57:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wayne
Post by $15 An Hour! Snicker...
After handing out close to $300 million in rebates for
purchasers of low- and zero-emission vehicles, state regulators
spotted a nettlesome trend -- much of the money ended up in the
pockets of upper middle class and wealthy homeowners.
Did the state really need to subsidize owners of gleaming new
Volts and Teslas and BMW i3s?
"If somebody is going to buy a top-line Tesla," said Dave
Clegern, spokesman for the California Air Resources Board, "they
may not need the help."
LOL. And sooner or probably later these regulator monkeys are going to
realize that there is a bigger carbon footprint for electric vehicles
(sometimes known as "coal powered" vehicles.
Reducing coal use is a global trend. The Chinese have cut their coal
consumption by 30% over the past decade. No mean feat when you factor
in growth. In the US, there simply is not the demand there was and
now Peabody has gone belly up.

Swill
--
The biggest data leak in history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panama_Papers
https://panamapapers.icij.org/
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-panama-tax-idUSKCN0X10C2
http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/03/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-panama-papers
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-35918844
Wayne
2016-04-29 02:07:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wayne
Post by $15 An Hour! Snicker...
After handing out close to $300 million in rebates for
purchasers of low- and zero-emission vehicles, state regulators
spotted a nettlesome trend -- much of the money ended up in the
pockets of upper middle class and wealthy homeowners.
Did the state really need to subsidize owners of gleaming new
Volts and Teslas and BMW i3s?
"If somebody is going to buy a top-line Tesla," said Dave
Clegern, spokesman for the California Air Resources Board, "they
may not need the help."
LOL. And sooner or probably later these regulator monkeys are going to
realize that there is a bigger carbon footprint for electric vehicles
(sometimes known as "coal powered" vehicles.
# Reducing coal use is a global trend. The Chinese have cut their coal
# consumption by 30% over the past decade. No mean feat when you factor
# in growth. In the US, there simply is not the demand there was and
# now Peabody has gone belly up.

Even if coal isn't involved, the electricity has to be generated somewhere
and transported by wires to the end user.
Factoring all in manufacturing costs including battery construction and
disposal, conventional cars are still just a bit cleaner.

An exception to this might be Norway where hydro electricity abounds.
Governor Swill
2016-04-29 04:38:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wayne
# Reducing coal use is a global trend. The Chinese have cut their coal
# consumption by 30% over the past decade. No mean feat when you factor
# in growth. In the US, there simply is not the demand there was and
# now Peabody has gone belly up.
Even if coal isn't involved, the electricity has to be generated somewhere
and transported by wires to the end user.
Factoring all in manufacturing costs including battery construction and
disposal, conventional cars are still just a bit cleaner.
More disconcerting are the highly toxic waste by products of rare
earths, lithium and other minerals to refine into products. The
creation of a battery electric generates significantly more toxic
waste byproducts than an standard IC engine vehicle.
Post by Wayne
An exception to this might be Norway where hydro electricity abounds.
Lots of geothermal in Iceland

Swill
--
The biggest data leak in history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panama_Papers
https://panamapapers.icij.org/
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-panama-tax-idUSKCN0X10C2
http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/03/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-panama-papers
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-35918844
Siri Cruise
2016-04-29 02:28:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wayne
Post by $15 An Hour! Snicker...
After handing out close to $300 million in rebates for
purchasers of low- and zero-emission vehicles, state regulators
spotted a nettlesome trend -- much of the money ended up in the
pockets of upper middle class and wealthy homeowners.
Did the state really need to subsidize owners of gleaming new
Volts and Teslas and BMW i3s?
"If somebody is going to buy a top-line Tesla," said Dave
Clegern, spokesman for the California Air Resources Board, "they
may not need the help."
LOL. And sooner or probably later these regulator monkeys are going to
realize that there is a bigger carbon footprint for electric vehicles
(sometimes known as "coal powered" vehicles.
How many coal burning generators are there in California?
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'
If you assume the final scene is a dying delusion as Tom Cruise drowns below
the Louvre, then Edge of Tomorrow has a happy ending. Kill Tom repeat..
John David Galt
2016-04-29 03:56:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Wayne
LOL. And sooner or probably later these regulator monkeys are going to
realize that there is a bigger carbon footprint for electric vehicles
(sometimes known as "coal powered" vehicles.
How many coal burning generators are there in California?
The question you should have asked is "How many coal burning generators
are going to be providing the power for California's electric vehicles?"

Electricity is not perfectly clean power. It is just a way to move the
pollution to the generating location. So now, Los Angeles gets to ship
some of the smog from their cars to other Western states. Isn't that
nice of them? Doesn't that truly deserve a federal subsidy? ..NOT!!
Siri Cruise
2016-04-29 06:57:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by John David Galt
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Wayne
LOL. And sooner or probably later these regulator monkeys are going to
realize that there is a bigger carbon footprint for electric vehicles
(sometimes known as "coal powered" vehicles.
How many coal burning generators are there in California?
The question you should have asked is "How many coal burning generators
are going to be providing the power for California's electric vehicles?"
So....how many?

Generators are single point sources. Any amelioration at the generator
immediately applies to all the customers; research is under way to capture
carbon dioxide at generators, condense it to liquid, and sequester underground
or at the bottom of the ocean. Then again the hydroelectric, geothermal, solar,
wind, and nuclear generation doesn't produce any carbon dioxide to capture.
Post by John David Galt
Electricity is not perfectly clean power. It is just a way to move the
pollution to the generating location. So now, Los Angeles gets to ship
some of the smog from their cars to other Western states. Isn't that
nice of them? Doesn't that truly deserve a federal subsidy? ..NOT!!
Why should I be motivated to defend Los Angeles?
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'
If you assume the final scene is a dying delusion as Tom Cruise drowns below
the Louvre, then Edge of Tomorrow has a happy ending. Kill Tom repeat..
Dänk 42Ø
2016-04-20 04:46:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by $15 An Hour! Snicker...
After handing out close to $300 million in rebates for
purchasers of low- and zero-emission vehicles, state regulators
spotted a nettlesome trend -- much of the money ended up in the
pockets of upper middle class and wealthy homeowners.
Did the state really need to subsidize owners of gleaming new
Volts and Teslas and BMW i3s?
"If somebody is going to buy a top-line Tesla," said Dave
Clegern, spokesman for the California Air Resources Board, "they
may not need the help."
Late last month, new rules capped income levels for the Clean
Vehicle Rebate Project, or CVRP. The program offers a range of
rebates, including $1,500 for hybrid vehicles, $2,500 for
electric cars and $5,000 for hydrogen cars. The program also
took steps to encourage more low and moderate income families to
join the clean vehicle fleet.
Regardless of income, the rebate for hybrids should be much higher
than for electric. Hybrids recover energy normally lost as heat
by braking friction, whereas electric vehicles rely on electricity
that is likely generated by fossil fuels. "Zero" emissions at
the tailpipe, lots of smog and CO2 produced elsewhere.

Hydrogen is still too experimental to qualify for a subsidy. And
it also requires electricity to either split water, or other type
of energy to reform methane or other hydrocarbons into hydrogen,
with CO2 being the waste product. It may produce less CO2 per unit
of energy than fossil fuels, but it is not as clean as proponents
suggest.

There also is no hydrogen infrastructure, and probably won't be
because the element is so volatile. Commercial automobiles would
probably fill up with petrol or methane, strip the hydrogen and
run it through fuel cells, then belch CO2 as exhaust. It might
be possible to sequester the CO2, but all these expensive
components would add so much weight as to make it hardly any
more efficient than petrol.
Loading...