What type of propulsion will power our cars in twenty years time?

dr.fuzzenstein

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

The government is dependent on billions in tax on fossil fuel, imagine if we all bought electric cars? Either the state would face into an unprecedented crisis, or they would load the cars and electricity with taxes.

They do depend on billions of tax, but they also spend billions on importing foreign energy in the first place, so using electrics will greatly reduce the need to import fuel due to electrics being a lot more efficient, saving billions.

There is huge night time capacity for charging electrics and this greatly improves efficiency using the energy generated in keeping boilers producing steam to be ready to meet demand.

Wind energy that otherwise has to be turned off at night can be used to charge electric car batteries. When wind turbines are turned off the investors still get paid by our tax money because they're guaranteed a certain amount of income, ridiculous situation but true !

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Early adaptors might seem to be getting a better deal, but will have to deal with poor supply, an unreliable product and a very high purchase price.

Electric cars have proven hugely reliable, the Leaf, plug in prius, Opel Ampera, are all very reliable cars.

There is enough supply to meet demand and as demand grows so will the supply, the ESB have clearly stated this. They have also said that the busiest charging stations will get 2 or more fast chargers on site also to keep queues to a minimum.

The Leaf is not more expensive than a diesel.

Batteries in the current gen will wear out over time and this depends on usage and fast charging habits, the 2nd gen batteries will be a huge improvement.

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

So in the end the consumer will have to get screwed for about the same amount in order for the states tax income to stay the same.

Not really, as I pointed out above the savings from importing billions of Euro's worth of fossil fuels will most likely balance out the books. This is not including the fines from failing to meet emissions regulations and targets.

dr.fuzzenstein

Deleted User wrote: »

They do depend on billions of tax, but they also spend billions on importing foreign energy in the first place, so using electrics will greatly reduce the need to import fuel due to electrics being a lot more efficient, saving billions.

There is huge night time capacity for charging electrics and this greatly improves efficiency using the energy generated in keeping boilers producing steam to be ready to meet demand.

Wind energy that otherwise has to be turned off at night can be used to charge electric car batteries. When wind turbines are turned off the investors still get paid by our tax money because they're guaranteed a certain amount of income, ridiculous situation but true !



Electric cars have proven hugely reliable, the Leaf, plug in prius, Opel Ampera, are all very reliable cars.

There is enough supply to meet demand and as demand grows so will the supply, the ESB have clearly stated this. They have also said that the busiest charging stations will get 2 or more fast chargers on site also to keep queues to a minimum.

The Leaf is not more expensive than a diesel.

Batteries in the current gen will wear out over time and this depends on usage and fast charging habits, the 2nd gen batteries will be a huge improvement.



Not really, as I pointed out above the savings from importing billions of Euro's worth of fossil fuels will most likely balance out the books. This is not including the fines from failing to meet emissions regulations and targets.

OK, fair enough, but what I fail to see is how the state imports fossil fuel.
Energy providers import fossil fuel, which they then sell on or turn into electricity and sell on, notwithstanding the fact that they may be semi-state bodies.
The state does buy some of that petrol and electricity, but since they surely are exempt from paying tax, or in any case pay the tax to themselves, energy costs must be vastly lower in that case.
What the state does massively depend on is the aforementioned billions that people pay on their energy bills.
If we all went electric, the tax burden on an electric car would be the same as on a fossil fuel one, the only difference would be that electricity would go through the fcuking roof, since the state is now missing billions of taxes from fuel.
Side effects would be that your household bill would explode, as well as the cost for industry would go up.
Bottom line, where are the billions going to come form?
Those German bankers want to be paid, after all.

dr.fuzzenstein

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

You're correct, the energy companies import the energy.

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

What the state does massively depend on is the aforementioned billions that people pay on their energy bills.
If we all went electric, the tax burden on an electric car would be the same as on a fossil fuel one, the only difference would be that electricity would go through the fcuking roof, since the state is now missing billions of taxes from fuel.

Well first, this isn't going to happen over night, it will be a gradual process for the next 20 years and beyond, unless people have a change of attitudes towards electrics in the meantime.

People who are not into technology and cars don't care what powers the car, they only care about having something to get from A to B

Currently the people who can afford new cars don't need to worry about paying up to 60-70 Euro's a week extra to fuel their car. The people who do care are the less well off where 60-70 a week makes a huge difference who can't buy new cars anyway.

If you struggle to pay fuel then you shouldn't buy a new car. So the need, imo for electrics just isn't there, people have to want them and they don't because the ice still does what they need. I can't see fuel getting more expensive, as we've seen in the last 2 budgets, the government have not increased taxes on cars or fuel because the need isn't there now with water charges and property tax, they'll actually gain a lot more revenue from this than more tax on cars.

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Side effects would be that your household bill would explode, as well as the cost for industry would go up.
Bottom line, where are the billions going to come form?
Those German bankers want to be paid, after all.

The German investors (along with many others) have long been paid. What would we have done if Germany did not allow us borrow ? Whatever people think about Germany most Germans know and highly believe our Government should not have agreed to pay the bond holders, they do not like the situation where German money goes into paying huge bad debt. And they absolutely don't like the Idea of the Irish tax payer having to pay it off, believe me I know enough Germans. And it often comes up for debate, especially when I'm over there.

I don't know if they could increase the cost of electricity so much because the price of electricity is regulated unlike petrol and diesel at the pumps. They can up the levies though and motor tax most likely will go up.

However, I would rather see us invest more in our own energy, and especially research into safer Nuclear energy such as Thorium and L.F.T.R which is a debate for another thread but I believe Nuclear will be greatly needed as more transport is put on the Grid the energy requirements will be much more than will be possible to generate via wind/solar especially when you include HGV's on the grid, the energy requirements will be mind boggling !!!

I don't believe the Government are doing nearly enough to secure our energy future or even think about it, this lack of foresight will bite us hard in the decades to come as energy prices soar we will need to move from oil. Ireland's answer always has been , let someone else do it.

dr.fuzzenstein

German investors have been paid? That is obfuscating the point, to say the least.
Ireland got permission to pay them off early, but not because we have the money, but because we are able to borrow somewhere else cheaper.
We have exited the bailout and re-organised the debt, but we still owe the money and it has to be paid off. And that costs billions every year. How that fact can escape anyone is simply astounding.
You mention something about what type of person may or may not buy and electric car, maybe, but my example is based on a sudden, massive shift, that is indeed theory only and not likely to happen, but even if it happens over a much longer time, the Irish state needs X billions to run the show and that will not change.
So, X is required to run the state. Maybe in the future there will be Y savings due to "green" tech, but that figure is not known or at best speculative.
One thing I can guarantee with 100% certainty:
If anyone thinks that the people will get those savings of Y back in their pockets, is dreaming, the government will swipe that and burn it.
No matter who we vote in.

September1

Let's calculate it and for easiness let's assume comparing diesel car at 6l/100km vs electric at 20kwH/100km. Cost of fuel per km is 8.4c for diesel and 2c for electric. Diesel has 51% of tax (source http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/government-taxes-on-fuel-add-to-austerity-burden-for-motorists-244664.html) so every km brings 4.3c while every electric km brings only VAT at 0.2c per km but 6.4c is left in economy. Now it all depends on fiscal multiplier, but let's assume it is 2 thus we get 12.8c extra in GNP and with typical Irish taxation of 25% of GNP it would mean extra 3.2c meaning that extra 0.9c needs to taxed elsewhere, if applied to electricity it would mean 45% increase in night time rate.

I think though that state would get more, as most people would use fuel savings to spend on items highly taxed like entertainment, goods and services - so maybe they would not have to search for that missing 0.9c in taxation of electricity.

Joe 90

Why do you think governments keep looking at road pricing? If you are charged by the mile you pay whether you use petrol, diesel, leccy or fairy dust. It's nothing to do with controlling congestion and all to do with protecting revenues.

dr.fuzzenstein

September1 wrote: »

Let's calculate it and for easiness let's assume comparing diesel car at 6l/100km vs electric at 20kwH/100km. Cost of fuel per km is 8.4c for diesel and 2c for electric. Diesel has 51% of tax (source http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/government-taxes-on-fuel-add-to-austerity-burden-for-motorists-244664.html) so every km brings 4.3c while every electric km brings only VAT at 0.2c per km but 6.4c is left in economy. Now it all depends on fiscal multiplier, but let's assume it is 2 thus we get 12.8c extra in GNP and with typical Irish taxation of 25% of GNP it would mean extra 3.2c meaning that extra 0.9c needs to taxed elsewhere, if applied to electricity it would mean 45% increase in night time rate.

I think though that state would get more, as most people would use fuel savings to spend on items highly taxed like entertainment, goods and services - so maybe they would not have to search for that missing 0.9c in taxation of electricity.

I'm afraid the government doesn't think like that. The government runs a budget and it says income from revenue is X. if X is down, increase taxes until X is where it was.
I have never in 40 years across several countries seen otherwise.
Because:

Joe 90 wrote: »

Why do you think governments keep looking at road pricing? If you are charged by the mile you pay whether you use petrol, diesel, leccy or fairy dust. It's nothing to do with controlling congestion and all to do with protecting revenues.

Thank you Joe, nail on the head, so now we know where we are going to get screwed.
I bet my house on that. GPS tracking device in your car, you get charged for ever meter you drive.
I am not anti technology, I work in IT, without me many a website would be down.
BUT:
Whenever a government says "We are going to pass the savings on to you", punch the bastard, because he is a lying cnut.
Governments pass on token tax cuts to win elections, but there is no way a government will EVER tolerate a drop in revenue income greater than a few %.

the_syco

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

The problem is not the motors or the cost of electricity , it's the cost/weight of the batteries.

Meh. I did note in the first line of what you quoted about better batteries :P And I've no doubt such batteries do exist, but until recently, companies such as GM would usually buy a controlling share of the company and then shut it down, as it did with Ovonics in 1994.

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

OK, fair enough, but what I fail to see is how the state imports fossil fuel.

Since always? http://www.seai.ie/News_Events/Press_Releases/2007/Ireland_90_Dependent_on_Imported_Fuels_in_2006.html

dr.fuzzenstein

the_syco wrote: »

Meh. I did note in the first line of what you quoted about better batteries :P And I've no doubt such batteries do exist, but until recently, companies such as GM would usually buy a controlling share of the company and then shut it down, as it did with Ovonics in 1994.


Since always? http://www.seai.ie/News_Events/Press_Releases/2007/Ireland_90_Dependent_on_Imported_Fuels_in_2006.html

I was referring to the government.
Ireland as a country imports fossil fuel, but the government doesn't really give a damn about that.
They will tax this energy up to any percentage they see fit to make X income and they don't care how we manage as long as we cough up the dough.
And:
Where is this pricesaving coming from? How do we benefit? I don't see it.
If any new or established energy companies now found a way to produce electricity or fuel ten times cheaper, you think we would see that saving?
It goes straight into massively increased profit margins and nice, fat, juicy dividends for shareholders. It's called maximising profits, it translates into screw the bastard.

dr.fuzzenstein

OK, put it another way:
Once runners and electronic goods where manufactured in whatever country they where made and sold to the public at very expensive prices.
A lot of well-know companies then found out they can make their stuff in China and India and pay workers 10 cent an hour, instead of paying a proper wage back home.
I remember being told at that time "the savings will be passed on to the consumer".
They weren't, the companies merely decided to bolster their profit margin.
So brand X sneakers that where incredibly expensive when made back home are still incredibly expensive, despite being made by children in a sweatshop for a pittance.
Does an iPhone, a Blu-ray a game or a piece of software really have to cost that much?
Hell no! This is just to increase the billions of profit that company makes that it doesn't really need and that does no one any good, except the very few who become immeasurably rich.
If the amount of money that goes into Apple was used for something productive and useful, there would be no one starving on this planet.
New technology will arrive and replace the old technology, but people are deluded if they think the government will allow people to get away with paying anything less.
If the state took nothing from petrol, electricity, booze, fags, VAT, income tax would be 90% and if people all stopped working, a tax on breathing would be introduced.
It's simple economics, the state needs X and it will get X and every bit besides they can.
It used to be that the state was just an institution to make sure everything ran smoothly, but has become a self-sustaining entity whose goal it is to suck up revenue and invest in itself.
The goal is to take as much money from the taxpayer as humanly possible and the 10% who can't make it, well, it's just too bad for them.

Joe 90

Joe 90 wrote: »

Why do you think governments keep looking at road pricing? If you are charged by the mile you pay whether you use petrol, diesel, leccy or fairy dust. It's nothing to do with controlling congestion and all to do with protecting revenues.

If you charge per mile then it could make driving to work unaffordable for the longer distance driver, and probably much cheaper for the low mileage driver.

Wrong balance, but in a sense the lower mileage driver pays less anyway because they don;t need as much fuel.

Driving in Ireland is priced so high that many people are forced to pay 3 grand or more per year just to drive to work, that's before maintenance and car payments. Paying per mile could force many people into poverty.

There is also levies on insurance.

What would be better is the "option" of pay per mile which would suit those driving small distances.

dr.fuzzenstein

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

I was referring to the government.
Ireland as a country imports fossil fuel, but the government doesn't really give a damn about that.
They will tax this energy up to any percentage they see fit to make X income and they don't care how we manage as long as we cough up the dough.
And:
Where is this pricesaving coming from? How do we benefit? I don't see it.
If any new or established energy companies now found a way to produce electricity or fuel ten times cheaper, you think we would see that saving?
It goes straight into massively increased profit margins and nice, fat, juicy dividends for shareholders. It's called maximising profits, it translates into screw the bastard.

The Government can't raise the tax on electricity to the point it's equivalent to petrol and diesel. It would ruin many businesses and many families wouldn't be able to pay.

At that point it would be cheaper to install a wind turbine and solar panels.

The pay back for ev and solar isn't that long to be honest today with the feed-in-tariff. Problem in Ireland is the ESB only allow you send 5kw total to the grid.

There are water charges and property tax now that will generate a hell of a lot of money, the need to continue to screw the motorist isn't there as it was in the past and one reason in another thread here I knew they would not increase taxes on motoring in this budget. It's unfair to screw the motorist continuously at every budget. There are a lot of people that do not own cars, that own houses, apartments etc and consume water.

This certainly won't happen over night and there is plenty of night time capacity to charge thousands of electrics, if everyone switched and HGV's then we wouldn't have capacity to generate, we would absolutely need nuclear at this stage because putting transport on the grid would consume an astronomical amount of electricity, that will boggle the mind. I can;t see even a fraction of this being generated by renewable.

The Government think about our current electricity demands but electrifying transportation is a whole new ball game that will cause serious issues if we don't think about this now.

How much coal, gas and oil can we continue to use ? Nuclear isn't the whole solution but it can be a major part to energy independence and Irish people need to wake up to this fact also and not rely on buying energy from the U.K who at this point will also struggle.

dr.fuzzenstein

Deleted User wrote: »

The Government can't raise the tax on electricity to the point it's equivalent to petrol and diesel. It would ruin many businesses and many families wouldn't be able to pay.

At that point it would be cheaper to install a wind turbine and solar panels.

The pay back for ev and solar isn't that long to be honest today with the feed-in-tariff. Problem in Ireland is the ESB only allow you send 5kw total to the grid.

There are water charges and property tax now that will generate a hell of a lot of money, the need to continue to screw the motorist isn't there as it was in the past and one reason in another thread here I knew they would not increase taxes on motoring in this budget. It's unfair to screw the motorist continuously at every budget. There are a lot of people that do not own cars, that own houses, apartments etc and consume water.

This certainly won't happen over night and there is plenty of night time capacity to charge thousands of electrics, if everyone switched and HGV's then we wouldn't have capacity to generate, we would absolutely need nuclear at this stage because putting transport on the grid would consume an astronomical amount of electricity, that will boggle the mind. I can;t see even a fraction of this being generated by renewable.

The Government think about our current electricity demands but electrifying transportation is a whole new ball game that will cause serious issues if we don't think about this now.

How much coal, gas and oil can we continue to use ? Nuclear isn't the whole solution but it can be a major part to energy independence and Irish people need to wake up to this fact also and not rely on buying energy from the U.K who at this point will also struggle.

The government would't hesitate to slap similar taxes to petrol and diesel on electricity and they have shown that they don't care who they ruin, as long as it's within acceptable parameters.
During the bust 20% of businesses closed down and the government did absolutely nothing whatsoever. So we can say that 20% or more is a acceptable rate of businesses going bust. As long as the multinationals don't mind (Who will get a sweetheart deal anyway), they don't give a flying fcuk if a third of Irish businesses go bust.
As for

the need to continue to screw the motorist isn't there

sorry, we're still running a deficit and borrowing billions a year, the need to screw the Irish people is still very much there. You're quoting household charges and water rates as an indication that the government won't screw us, I quote it as an indication that they absolutely will and that it won't end anytime soon. Irish debt is € 1.6 TRILLION and that has to be paid back. Not a lot of people are aware of that.
There is no need to screw a good lot of people, it's what governments do, they hoover up as much money from the people as is humanly possible to sustain themselves. Fuel, electricity, alcohol, tobacco, savings, pensions, property are all fair game but there is no need to screw the blind, the elderly and the disabled, but it is being done anyway. Why? because they don't have a voice and cannot fight back. Sure, a few lives will be ruined, a handful of protesters will stand outside the Dail, but the majority of people in Ireland don't care as long as they get a fiver back in their wages.
The motorist is getting a break now, but wait a few years, the government will tighten the screws again.
Taxes in other countries are used as tools to govern behaviour, in Ireland they're just money-grabbing tools with no regard of who gets ploughed under. One gets the feeling that whoever in government plans these things doesn't have the faintest idea.

New tech is a good thing, because, unlike the greens, I care about if something is really good for the planet, not what can bring in more money and force the green agenda down people's throats. I ultimately don't care if my car is petrol, diesel, electrical, hybrid, solar, gas, wind or compressed air, whatever, I'll take it.
But to make the argument that car ownership and commuting will be so much better, brighter, easier and cheaper in the future is simply deluded. Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining!:P

It is a good idea to electrify transport, we must be the only country in Europe that relies of diesel rail transport, simply ridiculous. But you also make the point that this needs to be planned and implemented, well, the Irish government hasn't go a glowing track record in that regard. We mostly ignore something until it's a catastrophe and then introduce panic measures. This will be no different.

The Irish government is just about capable to hang on by it's fingertips when things run smoothly, but introduce any change and it's headless chicken panic, this is due to the fact that no forward planning takes place and no government department is talking to another one. Leap card, e-voting, pulse, encrypted garda radios anyone?
Sorry, zero faith. All run by people who have never left Ireland, never even left their county until they went to Leinster house.

No the government will not raise taxes on electricity to the equivalent of petrol and diesel in 20 years or so. This would never happen. Believe it or not.this would mean at that point people would not have electricity in their homes what so ever.

Many countries are in debt, the U.k, France, Germany and the U.s have far greater debt than Ireland .

We'll pay it off over 50 odd years no big deal really, it isn't all doom and gloom as mat coopers radio show make it out to be. And people whining at joe Duffy.

Water charges and property tax will give significant income to the government, especially if house prices go up so too will the property tax.

We could be in a much better financial position in 20 years anyway.

Forget any typos , I'm typing on the iPad, I wish they had a swipe keyboard.

dr.fuzzenstein

Here's hoping. And I hope you're right.

September1

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

I'm afraid the government doesn't think like that. The government runs a budget and it says income from revenue is X. if X is down, increase taxes until X is where it was.
I have never in 40 years across several countries seen otherwise.

Actually this year Irish government had collected more in taxes than planned and has a bit lowered some taxes. They like to buy our votes so I think that if exchequer revenue increases, they will not have strong pressure on increasing electricity taxes. So I'm not sure where you get that it never happened, as I'm sure that was not first time that country that gets more revenue decides to lower taxes.

There is also some possibility that EVs would cut prices of electricity and thus create ability to raise taxes without raising prices.

I think that should EVs become a successful experiment there would be some increase in road tolls, very moderate increase in electricity taxes and significant raise in motor tax.

dr.fuzzenstein

September1 wrote: »

Actually this year Irish government had collected more in taxes than planned and has a bit lowered some taxes. They like to buy our votes so I think that if exchequer revenue increases, they will not have strong pressure on increasing electricity taxes. So I'm not sure where you get that it never happened, as I'm sure that was not first time that country that gets more revenue decides to lower taxes.

There is also some possibility that EVs would cut prices of electricity and thus create ability to raise taxes without raising prices.

I think that should EVs become a successful experiment there would be some increase in road tolls, very moderate increase in electricity taxes and significant raise in motor tax.

Let's just say average consumption is 50 liters a week and 87 cent a liter on petrol and 74 cent for petrol, annual tax take for the Irish state on fuel per motorist is 2262 for petrol and 1924 on diesel. (Very rough figures, of course)
So yes, I would expect an increase in motor tax of somewhere in the region of €2000 a year to make up for the shortfall.
OK, that may be a bit drastic, if anyone could calculate the tax taken in for electricity used to charge EV's, we'd have the real figure. But the government doesn't calculate tax take by saying "Tax from A is down, but tax from B is up, so it's grand". It's "Tax from A is up, raise taxes", I'm afraid no more thought goes into that.
Yes, pressure from the electorate does play a role, but the government mostly just engages in token politics, no real saving will ever be passed on. What happened in this budget is a classic example. Remembers, still running a deficit. If anyone thinks that the taxpayer will see any real benefits from the state is deluded. They're just throwing a few fish-heads our way, hoping we'll slap our fins together and vote them back in.
The government doesn't care one jot about the people, they only care about themselves.
But i am willing to wager my house and left testicle it would have to be, best case scenario, €2500 annual motor tax at the very least if everyone drove an EV.

September1

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Let's just say average consumption is 50 liters a week and 87 cent a liter on petrol and 74 cent for petrol, annual tax take for the Irish state on fuel per motorist is 2262 for petrol and 1924 on diesel. (Very rough figures, of course)

Let's calculate it for diesel driver as I have numbers in previous calculation, where we know that taxes are 51% hence typical annual spend it 3772 Eur vs perhaps 600Euro spend on electricity - that means economy gets 3172 Eur per annum extra which should bring 1586 Euro of taxes to excheques as per previous calculations fiscal multiplier and typical GDP/tax ratio. Clearly road tax has increase by 338 Euro.

You concerns are very valid, although not for reasons you specify. Just think about thought experiment, if tomorrow everyone in Ireland has received unlimited supply of free petrol - would it increase tax take or decrease it? Would country be richer or poorer?

dr.fuzzenstein

September1 wrote: »

Let's calculate it for diesel driver as I have numbers in previous calculation, where we know that taxes are 51% hence typical annual spend it 3772 Eur vs perhaps 600Euro spend on electricity - that means economy gets 3172 Eur per annum extra which should bring 1586 Euro of taxes to excheques as per previous calculations fiscal multiplier and typical GDP/tax ratio. Clearly road tax has increase by 338 Euro.

You concerns are very valid, although not for reasons you specify. Just think about thought experiment, if tomorrow everyone in Ireland has received unlimited supply of free petrol - would it increase tax take or decrease it? Would country be richer or poorer?

I'd say that depends on whether someone paid for that petrol!
If everyone just got a year's worth of petrol from the oil fairy, the state would effectively be broke and finances would collapse in a matter of weeks.
If everyone just got a weekly allowance, paid for by an eccentric benefactor, all would be well.
If everyone where to receive a huge tanker full of petrol (by the same eccentric billionaire) on the 1st of January to cover the year, reports would celebrate the unexpected windfall in Q1, but Q2,3,4 would have catastrophic reports on a massive collapse in tax take and panic in government on how to deal with it, probably followed by emergency budgets and some emergency taxes hastily cobbled together to make up for the shortfall.

Clearly road tax has increase by 338 Euro.

Sorry, I don't quite follow where that figure comes from. You mean that is the increase for everyone if we all bought EV's overnight? If so, I think it may be optimistic. Just asking, happy to be put right.

September1

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

I'd say that depends on whether someone paid for that petrol!
If everyone just got a year's worth of petrol from the oil fairy, the state would effectively be broke and finances would collapse in a matter of weeks.

I'm thinking about oil fairy scenario, our tanks become magical and cannot be emptied any more. Why would we go broke? Irish trucks could service all EU freight as they would be always cheaper than competition, causing drivers to build massive mansions which would bring plenty of taxes for government. Internet shopping would boom, as free fuel would cut shipping costs. Tourists would have more money to spend, assuming they use rental cars.

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Sorry, I don't quite follow where that figure comes from. You mean that is the increase for everyone if we all bought EV's overnight? If so, I think it may be optimistic. Just asking, happy to be put right.

Have you read my previous mail? Basically amount of money you do not spend in petrol you do spend somewhere else. Perhaps you go and get a home extension. This means builders in given year earn more, so they can go to hairdressers more often which means hairdressers can spend more. Unfortunately this effect is not infinite and for that reason 'fiscal multiplier' was invented. It was observed that putting X money to economy can mean that GDP goes up by X times this fiscal multiplier. Anyway if we are in situation where everyone spends less money on fuel, it means economy is growing faster than anticipated and state gets more money from taxes - nice from government perspective thing about it is that is natural phenomena, no need to do emergency budgets or so on.


Clearly oil fairy would be better than electric cars, but economic and physical reality is as it is so that is why I made this calculation. It is based on assumptions but they are not outlandish.

dr.fuzzenstein

September1 wrote: »

I'm thinking about oil fairy scenario, our tanks become magical and cannot be emptied any more. Why would we go broke? Irish trucks could service all EU freight as they would be always cheaper than competition, causing drivers to build massive mansions which would bring plenty of taxes for government. Internet shopping would boom, as free fuel would cut shipping costs. Tourists would have more money to spend, assuming they use rental cars.

Maybe, but the state doesn't' think like that.

Have you read my previous mail? Basically amount of money you do not spend in petrol you do spend somewhere else. Perhaps you go and get a home extension. This means builders in given year earn more, so they can go to hairdressers more often which means hairdressers can spend more. Unfortunately this effect is not infinite and for that reason 'fiscal multiplier' was invented. It was observed that putting X money to economy can mean that GDP goes up by X times this fiscal multiplier. Anyway if we are in situation where everyone spends less money on fuel, it means economy is growing faster than anticipated and state gets more money from taxes - nice from government perspective thing about it is that is natural phenomena, no need to do emergency budgets or so on.

Clearly oil fairy would be better than electric cars, but economic and physical reality is as it is so that is why I made this calculation. It is based on assumptions but they are not outlandish.

I get you, but it always comes down to the same thing:
The government would only see a massive hole in tax take. Since any benefit from that would not filter down immediately, there would only be a giant hole in the budget, to be filled with draconian emergency taxes, you name it, it would go up. I have been here since 1993 and one thing I have never seen is any evidence of the government thinking as you described, it just not how that works. There is a budget and there are targets. Every department has to be on target. If one department is off by a huge amount, it doesn't matter what happens elsewhere, that department will have to pull it's socks up and deliver.
In any case, we're both only speculating what will happen in a theoretical scenario, we could both be way off, so we won't know until it actually happens. I'm just coming at it from a slightly more pessimistic viewpoint that the state doesn't care if B is up 20%, it will only care that A is down by 20% and they'll want that money come Hell or high water.
I'm not saying I'm right and that is what will happen, but that's what I think is likely to happen.
No big saving anywhere has ever lead to the taxpayer being let off the hook to a significant amount, other than a few measly token % to buy the next election.

I think people should stop listening to Joe Duffy and Matt Cooper, all doom and gloom.

As I said, there are countries with far greater debt than Ireland and they don't rip people off in tax revenue.

Ireland's answer of cuts and tax increases is not the answer if money is spent productively and not wasted.

Our public transportation system is a disaster there needs to be a major investment, the grid lock on our roads is a disgrace. And there is no rail link from the airport.

You'll get a lot of money back from a proper good transport network.

dr.fuzzenstein

Deleted User wrote: »

I think people should stop listening to Joe Duffy and Matt Cooper, all doom and gloom.

As I said, there are countries with far greater debt than Ireland and they don't rip people off in tax revenue.

Ireland's answer of cuts and tax increases is not the answer if money is spent productively and not wasted.

Our public transportation system is a disaster there needs to be a major investment, the grid lock on our roads is a disgrace. And there is no rail link from the airport.

You'll get a lot of money back from a proper good transport network.

Agreed on JD and MC, you wouldn't want to have a rope handy when listening to them...
I'm afraid the rip-off culture is so ingrained in Ireland, I don't see it change any time soon. The Irish state doesn't do encouragement, initiatives and handing out money, there's just tax hammer and ban hammer. I think it can be said the Irish succeed despite the best efforts of the government.
As per the rail link to the airport, I heard the discussions on that and I simply cannot believe the amount of hostility towards it, any investment in infrastructure that takes traffic away from roads is a good thing.
Again, the thinking here is only "how much will it cost and how much will it make", nobody takes impact on other areas into account.
One FF transport minister wanted to literally close down goods transport by rail "because it's not making money". When you hear statements of obvious and rampant stupidity on a daily basis emanating from the government, one cannot hope for an improvement in the near future.

I am a huge fan of new technology, just think of the prospect of splitting enough water into hydrogen and oxygen by renewable means (water, wind and solar power as well as algae) to power fuel cells all over the country to run everything on, and the waste product in the end? Water. Which gets split and the cycle starts again.
What a great concept and what an infinitely renewable resource (unless you live in the middle of a desert:pac:).
The problem? We humans will only do something if it is immediately viable and profitable, we want instant results and we don't care how something might benefit the planet over maybe a century, if it means that profits are down by 2% and so the money needed to develop this technology gets pissed away on the new iPhone, which is now half an inch bigger and has a new chat app or whatever. What does the government do? Increase taxes. Yeah! The earth is saved! :rolleyes:

September1

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Maybe, but the state doesn't' think like that.



I get you, but it always comes down to the same thing:
The government would only see a massive hole in tax take. Since any benefit from that would not filter down immediately, there would only be a giant hole in the budget, to be filled with draconian emergency taxes, you name it, it would go up. I have been here since 1993 and one thing I have never seen is any evidence of the government thinking as you described, it just not how that works. There is a budget and there are targets. Every department has to be on target. If one department is off by a huge amount, it doesn't matter what happens elsewhere, that department will have to pull it's socks up and deliver.
In any case, we're both only speculating what will happen in a theoretical scenario, we could both be way off, so we won't know until it actually happens. I'm just coming at it from a slightly more pessimistic viewpoint that the state doesn't care if B is up 20%, it will only care that A is down by 20% and they'll want that money come Hell or high water.
I'm not saying I'm right and that is what will happen, but that's what I think is likely to happen.
No big saving anywhere has ever lead to the taxpayer being let off the hook to a significant amount, other than a few measly token % to buy the next election.

I gave you concrete example of Irish government acting in a way I described. Remember that with shift to EVs government would get increased VAT/Income tax immediately and change is already happening with more and more EVs on Irish roads. If they looked so carefully at fuel taxes, they would have to already raise them to combat fact that Ireland uses less petrol and diesel - what happened this October? They kept petrol/diesel unchanged and decreased some other taxes - because they collected more than planned.

They indeed are not banning ICE right now, maybe for reasons you mention. But assuming smooth transition that is already happening and possibility that EVs might deliver - they should not notice much drop in income from fuel taxes, as it will be hidden in growth in other taxes. However as you seem to be certain that one day they completly ban ICE vehicles there is an example from 2010 Budget where they made a cut in stamp duty which caused a drop in revenue - if you look at budget documents, it was actually planned. So clearly they can cut taxes in anticipation of future benefits.

dr.fuzzenstein

I never once even hinted at the possibility of ICEs being banned, I was referring to the greater population deciding that EVs are a neat idea and everyone would switch en masse. Purely hypothetical.
I still completely fail to understand how this would not have a fiscal impact, but green policies are usually worked out along the principle of Step one, collect underpants, step two ?, step 3, Profit!
I find the idea that the collapse in tax take on stamp duty was carefully planned for and well handled. Where? I'd like to live there, cause that's not what happened here.

September1

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

I never once even hinted at the possibility of ICEs being banned, I was referring to the greater population deciding that EVs are a neat idea and everyone would switch en masse. Purely hypothetical.
I still completely fail to understand how this would not have a fiscal impact, but green policies are usually worked out along the principle of Step one, collect underpants, step two ?, step 3, Profit!

That is not likely, as people need to dump ICE at reasonable prices first. Once ICE is nearly free there is little reason to go for EV. I did not say it would have no fiscal impact, it certainly will but IF electric cars are good tech then this impact would much lower. Raising road tax by 338 or taxes on electricity by 44% seems to cover it. Maybe mix or both or some completely new form of taxation.

I find the idea that the collapse in tax take on stamp duty was carefully planned for and well handled. Where? I'd like to live there, cause that's not what happened here.

In late 2010 they announce in:
http://www.budget.gov.ie/Budgets/2011/Documents/Summary%20of%20Measures%20Combined.pdf
that reduction will cause budget to get 36m less, actual reduction happens to be 57m

http://economic-incentives.blogspot.ie/2012/11/stamp-duty-versus-mortgage-interest.html

No stamp duty increases happened so far.

reboot

Big push by Hyundai on Hydrogen vehicles,(BBC R 4)?

Can't see it, we have an electric infrastructure, we don't have a hydrogen infrastructure.

Hydrogen production is very inefficient and energy intensive.

We'll have ev's with ranges of 200 miles a lot sooner than hydrogen cars so there won't really be the need for hydrogen.

dr.fuzzenstein

Getting a feeling of deja vu on this thread, I think were going round in circles.

Capt'n Midnight

Deleted User wrote: »

We'll have ev's with ranges of 200 miles a lot sooner than hydrogen cars so there won't really be the need for hydrogen.

Google that Israeli Aluminium Air battery IIRC it'll do 200 miles.

Places like Iceland could export electricity as Aluminium