# White House Proposal Would Provide Instant $7500 Rebate on Electric Vehicles



## EVDL Archive (Jul 26, 2007)

Plan would also include $200 million grant program for electric car charging infrastructure.

More...


----------



## ElectriCar (Jun 15, 2008)

Well you better be ringing up your republican congressmen and voice your support. Look, they've been forcasting $4 gas this spring already. Last time it hit that price the economy tanked, June 08. I am a contractor and when that happened companies backed out of their projects. Our business dropped by 30% the following year. The likelyhood of Obama getting elected I'm sure had something to do with that too. The government needs to do this to advance technology I think and bring prices down. My wife drives a Civic @ 32mpg. It's costing her 5 times what it costs me to drive my S10. That's BS!


----------



## Ziggythewiz (May 16, 2010)

Yes, because cash for clunkers was such a great investment. For what we handed GM&Co we could have converted most of those to electric instead of crushing em.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

Here's a better idea for the White House:

Stop spending money they don't have, and encourage Americans to come up with revolutionary innovations to help get us out of the mess our government has created.


----------



## ElectriCar (Jun 15, 2008)

If we don't get off oil fast we're not going to have an economy. Seriously, this could get nasty really quick. When gas hits about $4.50 or so it's going to get rough.


----------



## JRoque (Mar 9, 2010)

Hi. Let's hope this thread doesn't go downhill too quickly. Personally, I don't see why the Gov should finance car company's ventures. Any other company that wants to introduce a new product either eats the upfront cost in hopes they'll sell lots or passes it to the buyer right away. 

If I, as a consumer with no significant buying power, can buy a new 2011 car and convert it to electric for <$40K, why can't car companies do that for much less? They're jacking up the price knowing the Gov will cough up the difference in the name of "innovation". If the Gov wants to help, they should put every scientific facility we already own and pay for to work on new cells and then pass that on to US companies to produce.

JR


----------



## ElectriCar (Jun 15, 2008)

It's not about car companies, it's about how you and I get to work. It's about how your company vehicles go and the price of fuel for them. It's about UPS and Fedex and semi trucks that haul all the stuff in your office, shop, home etc. EVERYTHING is going to go up in price when fuel goes up including food. It's about national security. 

We must have oil now to do anything, to manufacture anything. We're sending billions overseas to purchase oil. It's an investment in the US economy, in your personal finances, your company finances and the finances of everyone you purchase anything from.

It's not like the money is out the window with no return. It costs 5X to operate a civic that gets 32mpg in fuel costs alone compared to what my S10 costs to drive. I think its' a no brainer. 

Have you heard that for the last few years the world is using more oil than it's finding every year? Look it up. Peak oil.


----------



## Ziggythewiz (May 16, 2010)

It doesn't matter that we're using more than we're finding. We're not using more than we're pumping. The only reason gas spiked was because [email protected] got greedy.

For years it went up in the summer, then down in the winter, because "the summer formulation costs more". Then one year it went up even more in the winter, because "the winter formulation costs more".

The next year it broke $4 and everything collapsed. They won't do that again any time soon because they know it almost destroyed everything. They'll creep it up as much as they can, but they're very sensitive to lower it when they feel the resistance. I don't see it hitting 4 again until you go a month without someone mentioning the economy or unemployment rate.


----------



## JRoque (Mar 9, 2010)

Hi. You couldn't be more right about what you describe. It is very much a National concern. I just think they're attacking the wrong end of the issue. Perhaps that's because they're too late to the party - they should have been working on new battery technologies long ago. 

If they truly understood the severity of the problem, you and I would be getting equal or more of a hand out for - not crushing a piece of valuable capital equipment like they did with cash-for-clunkers but - converting an existing oil car to electric. With a conversion, we take one car out of the oil cycle, make it purely electric and have nothing to show for but a miserly tax break that's pathetic frankly. GM on the other hand adds a new car to the road, leaves the old car that's being replace in the oil cycle, and gives us a car that still needs oil. Oh and gets $7500 of your battery development money to boot.

I'm not outright advocating for conversions to get a Gov handout. But if they just want to get us all out of the oil consumption business, they couldn't do any better than aiding conversion costs. Think of how much quicker your project would go, and how many more people would jump into it, if you got $7500 to make your conversion. You wouldn't have to compromise and buy a car with no visual appeal. You get to keep the car you already own and love but get a new Lithium pack courtesy of the Gov. And where's the incentive for Evnetics, HPEV and others? Shouldn't they be getting a break too? After all, when you buy a Soliton 1, you're drawing a direct line between your investment dollars and the fact that one less car will depend on oil. 

JR


----------



## ElectriCar (Jun 15, 2008)

Ziggythewiz said:


> It doesn't matter that we're using more than we're finding. We're not using more than we're pumping. The only reason gas spiked was because [email protected] got greedy.


 In summer of 08 you may recell president Bush calling on the Saudis to pump more oil. They didn't say anything publically which was odd to me. There's been speculation that they were already pumping at capacity. Sure some parts of the world may could have pumped more but many nations including the US are pumping less and using more. Mexico is close to being at that point is they're not already. Some countries have recognized that countries wells are drying up and have stopped exporting to save it for themselves. I saw on TV a couple of weeks ago that $4 gas was expected again this spring. Yes you're right producers don't want to see high prices like that but it may be they can't stop it. Could it be? They know alternatives will be sought out with high prices but I honestly don't think they're able to produce enough to meet demand now. While the US has reduced our consumption of oil yearly for the last few years, India and China have increased consumption and are expected to continue the trend. Governments worldwide are advocating acceleration of electric vehicle sales & technology, Germany and China are two I've read about. They know we need to move quickly and I think the US knows too thus the funds being dumped world wide for battery development. BTW, I've read that most who study this subject were in agreement a couple of years ago that 2010 would be the year that demand would outstrip supply. A large yet smaller group thought 2012 would be the year with the smallest group think 2013 or beyond. I've read also that a 5% supply will double the price of oil and that will sink economies world wide. I'm not a doom and gloomer but I've read a lot about this subject. Who knows what will happen but the world pretty much agrees we need to step it up. I think it's prudent to prepare for it and this rebate is a quick way to accelerate the switch. And I'm a very conservative when it comes to how the government spends money. I think they need to abolish many government agencies but this I think we have no choice about.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

Ziggythewiz said:


> It doesn't matter that we're using more than we're finding. We're not using more than we're pumping. The only reason gas spiked was because [email protected] got greedy.
> 
> For years it went up in the summer, then down in the winter, because "the summer formulation costs more". Then one year it went up even more in the winter, because "the winter formulation costs more".
> 
> The next year it broke $4 and everything collapsed. *They won't do that again any time soon because they know it almost destroyed everything. They'll creep it up as much as they can, but they're very sensitive to lower it when they feel the resistance.* I don't see it hitting 4 again until you go a month without someone mentioning the economy or unemployment rate.


It fascinates me that people choose to describe an equivalent two-sided equation as somehow being one-sided. What you have described here is nothing other than the law of Supply and Demand; characterizing the businesses as "greedy" (no doubt meaning "evil," despite the fact that big oil is one of the least profitable industries per dollar of capitalization) and somehow the consumers are "good."

It's utter rubbish, of course. As consumers we benefit from the product. Government takes a bigger piece than any of the producers or refiners. And, if anyone is to "blame" for high prices it is the consumers for demanding so much of the silly stuff.


----------



## jeremyjs (Sep 22, 2010)

PhantomPholly said:


> It fascinates me that people choose to describe an equivalent two-sided equation as somehow being one-sided. What you have described here is nothing other than the law of Supply and Demand; characterizing the businesses as "greedy" (no doubt meaning "evil," despite the fact that big oil is one of the least profitable industries per dollar of capitalization) and somehow the consumers are "good."
> 
> It's utter rubbish, of course. As consumers we benefit from the product. Government takes a bigger piece than any of the producers or refiners. And, if anyone is to "blame" for high prices it is the consumers for demanding so much of the silly stuff.



Yep. Even if the oil were an infinite resource ( I'm not saying it is, just if it were) you can only pump it out of the ground so fast. Once consumption exceeds that rate the price goes up until the supply/demand ratio reaches a near equal state. The inverse is also true. When the economy tanked and demand fell and the price dropped like a rock.

Personally I'm concerned whether or not we can have a true recovery until we switch to alternative fuel for transportation. Since transportation accounts for 70% of the oil consumption and accounts for hundreds of billions of dollars sent over seas every year. We need that oil for other things. Plastics, lubricants, fertalizer, etc.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

jeremyjs said:


> Yep. Even if the oil were an infinite resource ( I'm not saying it is, just if it were) you can only pump it out of the ground so fast. Once consumption exceeds that rate the price goes up until the supply/demand ratio reaches a near equal state. The inverse is also true. When the economy tanked and demand fell and the price dropped like a rock.
> 
> Personally I'm concerned whether or not we can have a true recovery until we switch to alternative fuel for transportation. Since transportation accounts for 70% of the oil consumption and accounts for hundreds of billions of dollars sent over seas every year. We need that oil for other things. Plastics, lubricants, fertalizer, etc.


Agreed - and therein lies the rub. There simply isn't another alternative available yet that is as versatile for the same, or even nearly the same, price. The closest thing is Propane, and that only works if you live in a metro near a filling station. Even then most of those folks really need dual-fuel systems to allow cross-country trips.

It's coming, though. One way or another - once the genie gets out of the bottle, there's no putting it back.


----------

