Along with Israel, Denmark is one of the first countries to sign on to Project Better Place’s attempt to establish a viable electric car infrastructure. And as with all early adopters, Denmark is paying a pretty price for the experiment. The country is spending $100m on infrastructure, including charging points and battery-swap stations. Moreover, Better Place’s partner, public utility Dong Energy, is trying to run the new EV infrastructure entirely on wind power, which is already the source of 20 percent of Denmark’s energy. “We’re the perfect match for a windmill-based utility,” Better Place founder and CEO Shai Agassi tells the NY Times. “If you have a bunch of batteries waiting to be charged, it’s like having a lot of buckets waiting for rain.” Despite the close government involvement in the project, Danes are still wary of making a wholesale switch to EVs, prompting the government to offer $40,000 in consumer incentives for electric vehicles, as well as free parking in downtown Copenhagen. Though there’s plenty of skepticism in Denmark about the plan, that incentive is expected to make a huge difference.
Tag: Government
As I noted yesterday, the intersection of automobiles and politics is a difficult area of analysis. In the United States, where motorists don’t face the daily challenges they do in Russia, discussions of politics in an automotive forum too often gets overwhelmed by larger political battles. Before you know it, a conversation about the future of electric cars can turn into a debate on military and foreign policy, and an auto-industry bailout can be justified by virtue of its small size relative to the bank bailout. In short, everything happens within a context, and politics is all about context. TTAC has always waded into political issues based on their relevance to cars, motorists, consumers and the industry, and we’ve held some fascinating explorations of political topics ranging from red-light and speed cameras and foreign oil dependence to anthropogenic climate change, bailouts and pay-per-mile tax schemes. In the interest of providing the right balance of big-picture and street-level issues in our coverage, we’re curious: what car-related political issues fascinate, concern or perplex you most?
No, General Motors is not paying back the taxpayers, nor will it ever fully… it’s more like a partial refund. That’s not exactly fresh news around here, but the Grey Lady called wanting the breakdown. So here it is. Just don’t ask how they misspelled the byline.
Dutch motorists can prepare themselves for spending up to four years in the slammer and to pay fines of more than $100,000 if they intend to tamper with the automotive equivalent of an electronic ankle bracelet which their government will put in their cars.
(Read More…)
According to GM’s 3rd Quarter financial results announcement:
GM plans to repay the United States, Canadian and Ontario government loans in quarterly installments from escrowed funds, beginning next month with an initial $1.2 billion payment to be made in December ($1.0 billion to the UST and $192 million to the EDC), followed by quarterly payments. Any escrowed funds available as of June 30, 2010 would be used to repay the UST and EDC loans unless the escrowed funds were extended one year by the UST. Any balance of funds would be released to GM after the repayment of the UST and EDC loans.
Though this sounds like positive news, don’t let it fool you. GM’s financials only acknowledge $6.7b in government debt, a sum that barely scratches the surface of the taxpayer “investment” in The General (let’s use $52b as a baseline). The escrow fund in question contains $13.6b of the final $30b GM was given as it exited bankruptcy. Having burned through nearly half of that princely sum, GM now plans on using at least part of the rest to pay off the “outstanding $6.7b.” The escrow account expires in June 2010, at which point whatever is left unpaid of the $6.7b will be returned to the government, and GM will keep the rest. GM will then declare victory and pretend like it has squared up with the tax paying public, when in fact the public will have merely paid itself back a paltry fraction of what GM actually owes. This “repayment” will then be dutifully reported without question by the mainstream media, and the stain of bailout will be symbolically lifted. Except, of course, it won’t. GM and the government are playing a classic shell game, taking advantage of the public’s inability to keep the billions straight. Shameful.
Though New York’s new “Empire Gold” license plates aren’t opening the same constitutional can of worms as South Carolina’s recently-rejected “I Believe” plates, they’re still generating some feisty political opposition. By next April, every licensed vehicle in the state will have to switch to the new plates, at $25 a pop. That’s ten bucks more per plate than the previous models, and keeping your previous number or vanity plate will cost an additional $20. The switch is estimated to raise $129m for the state, which is currently facing a $5b budget shortfall. But according to Newsday, some 57,000 New Yorkers have signed a petition at nonewplates.com, expressing their displeasure with the new plates and their fees. Best of all, the new plates will mean new jobs for 120 inmates in New York’s penal system. The inmates will be paid 42 cents per hour to produce the plates.
The Chinese government had announced earlier this year that it wants to “encourage” its more than 100 automakers (nobody is quite sure how many there really are) to consolidate. The goal: Make China’s industry more competitive with foreign rivals. Beijing wants to see four big ones and four smaller ones. Unsaid: the remaining 90-odd carmakers should look for other employment.
To lead by example, the Chinese government just initiated one of the largest merger deals in the Chinese auto industry. Easy for them to do: The government owns both companies.
(Read More…)
The recent revelation that congresspeople have been successful in coercing GM to rescind dealer closures in their districts, has the rest of our elected representatives (not to mention GM itself) sitting up and taking notice. In a conference call with Michigan’s congressional delegation, Fritz Henderson said GM was close to a deal which would restore a number of “mistakenly” closed dealerships. But GM hasn’t met with rejected dealers in weeks, and the Committee To Restore Dealer Rights is unaware of any such agreement. “[Henderson] was very vague, and the plan sounded inadequate to me,” Michigan Republican Hoekstra tells Automotive News [sub]. “He explained, for instance, that they might reopen some franchises if they found errors, but he didn’t say what those errors might be.” Henderson also rejected the dealer demand for compensation of $3,000 per vehicle sold in 2006, 2007 and 2008, further supporting suspicions that GM doesn’t have a deal at all. So what is happening?
(Read More…)
The WSJ reports that EV manufacturer Aptera is asking the government for $75M from its energy-efficient retooling funds. Unfortunately for the makers of the Jetsons-inspired 2e, there’s some debate about whether its three-wheel design makes it a car or a motorcycle. Which means the gravy train could be delayed at the station. The Department of Energy has already rejected Aptera’s request for this reason, but Congress is wading into the issue at the EV maker’s request.
The Detroit Free Press reports that Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) has added some car dealer-friendly provisions to the proposed $43g (gazillion) economic stimulus package.
Mikulski’s proposal would grant a tax credit for vehicles bought between Nov. 12 of last year and Dec. 31 of this year. The tax break would only go to families making less than $250,000 a year, and would only apply to interest on loans up to $49,500.
“Everyone wants to save auto manufacturers, but no matter how much government aid we give to the Big Three auto makers, they can’t survive if consumers don’t start buying cars,” Mikulski said.
True dat. HOWEVER, this is like putting a band aid on an arterial wound. Until the U.S. housing market recovers, car sales will not come back. And maybe not even then, for a while anyway. How Congress/the feds do that remains to be seen. Later.
Three-hundred dollars Canadian is not a lot of money for a car that functions. But it buys you—well, the Canadian government—a lot of greenwashing. OK, some. “Retire Your Ride” pays the three bills for any currently registered Canadian car produced before 1996, “the year the government introduced more stringent emissions standards.” Canadian Driver dutifully reports, “These pre-1996 models produce about 19 times more air pollutants than newer cars and trucks.” Wow! Nineteen times! The Clean Air Foundation is in charge of sending any one of five million-ish eligible cars to the crusher, in exchange for CA$300 or discounts on public transit passes, bicycles or memberships in car sharing companies. As my father said to me on many memorable (if imminently lamentable) occasions, “How much is this boondoggle going to cost me?” This one, me, nothing. Canadian taxpayers, CA$92m. Canadian Driver saves the withering analysis for the end of their article, but it’s worth the wait…
Recent Comments