UK Ends Subsidies for Electric Cars(gov.uk)
gov.uk
UK Ends Subsidies for Electric Cars
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/plug-in-grant-for-cars-to-end-as-focus-moves-to-improving-electric-vehicle-charging
71 comments
> it currently costs about 1/10th the price to fuel up an electric car vs. a petrol car
Can you provide some data for that claim. Are we talking cost per mile travelled eg like for like?
Can you provide some data for that claim. Are we talking cost per mile travelled eg like for like?
Looking at this, which has petrol costs from a month ago, it seems possible, although ⅛th is more realistic.
With today's price it would be 16p/mi for petrol. Their optimal May electricity price gives 1.88p/mi.
https://www.whichev.net/2022/05/13/is-it-cheaper-to-drive-an...
With today's price it would be 16p/mi for petrol. Their optimal May electricity price gives 1.88p/mi.
https://www.whichev.net/2022/05/13/is-it-cheaper-to-drive-an...
Cost per mile driven. 1/10th cost is on the more favorable end of the spectrum, but it's achievable if you can charge at home using an off-peak tariff. The ratio depends very much on what petrol MPG you compare it to.
I think it's closer than that?
Very roughly, UK prices are ~£0.2/kwh electrity and ~£2/litre of petrol. Per mile I make that £0.2 for petrol vs £0.045 for electric. Although you could probably get to the 1/10th figure if you always charged on the super-off-peak EV tarrifs.
Very roughly, UK prices are ~£0.2/kwh electrity and ~£2/litre of petrol. Per mile I make that £0.2 for petrol vs £0.045 for electric. Although you could probably get to the 1/10th figure if you always charged on the super-off-peak EV tarrifs.
Where are these places that give you massively discounted electricity at night?! Done away with around here many years ago… I wouldn’t rely on them always being there - obviously especially if everyone starts charging cars at night as it will cease being off peak and the reason for the lower price will be eroded.
There are multiple electricity providers in the UK currently that have "EV tariffs" where they give you substantially discounted overnight/off-peak rates in exchange for a slightly higher daytime rate in order to encourage overnight charging. Often up to a maximum specified number of KWh per cycle.
In previous times they used to offer a tariff called economy 7 which worked in conjunction with so-called storage heaters. They would charge during off-peak times and provide heat during more active hours. (disclaimer, I've never lived in a property on such a scheme but definitely saw a few in my student days)
In previous times they used to offer a tariff called economy 7 which worked in conjunction with so-called storage heaters. They would charge during off-peak times and provide heat during more active hours. (disclaimer, I've never lived in a property on such a scheme but definitely saw a few in my student days)
Octopus (https://octopus.energy/) do 7.5p/kwh 00:30-04:30. I haven't used it, though, no idea if there are catches.
They are becoming more common here in the US. Although the one that I see most is more like a 3-4 hour peak period with very high rates and lower rates the rest of the day.
It's common in france due to the amount of nuclear
Assuming 7 pounds / gallon and 30mpg, a gas car would cost 23p per mile. Assuming 28.2p/kwh and 300wh/mi that comes out to about 8.5p/mi (figures pulled from Google for London, no idea if they're accurate, I'm in the US). In my experience that 300wh/mi is generous (my 2022 model y is usually closer to 350wh/mi in the summer driving downhill with the wind at my back and up to 450wh/mi in the winter). In any case, it doesn't seem to be anywhere near 1:10.
Do you drive like a maniac? Even here in Texas where you need to run the a/c full bore most tesla drivers see 250-300wh/mi.
No, and I'm actually worried that I got a shit battery. It also charges at max 60kw. I just drove from Illinois to Denver and we got an average of ~350wh/mi (we had the A/C on but we tried to moderate it to save battery).
There are charging losses to take into account as well. I think my gross is closer to 300 wh/mi lifetime than the 260 or so that the car reports.
My figures were not gross, sadly. :(
Energy pricing doesn't have to be constant - there's tariffs available which have cheap overnight electricity (eg Octopus Energy) - if you sign up now it's something like 7.5p/kWh, but some older contracts have it at 5p/kWh. You pay more during the day, but if you're charging a car a lot then it works out cheaper overall.
I pay $0.07 per kwh in Portland, OR. My Tesla Y gets roughly 3 miles per kwh. So 30 miles for $0.70.
At $5/gal and 20mpg, you'll pay $7.50 for 30 miles.
At $5/gal and 20mpg, you'll pay $7.50 for 30 miles.
It would be better spent on e-bike subsidies. They are a far more sustainable electric vehicle and have the added benefit of killing traffic.
That's a very London-centric view. An e-bike wouldn't be particularly useful in Devon.
It certainly would. One can get a lot further and move more things on an ebike compared to on a bicycle.
Not to forget the advantages of ten times less road maintenance, ten times more throughput, ten times less parking requirements, more social contact, ten times less energy consumption than an electric car, and on and on.
The main thing I've noticed here in slightly hilly Leuven, Belgium, is that so many more people I would never have seen on a human powered bike will actually use ebikes.
If you're a believer in government steering citizens to make the right decision, stimulating ebike use certainly makes sense. If in doubt, you might want to think about the war going on with one of our main energy suppliers.
Not to forget the advantages of ten times less road maintenance, ten times more throughput, ten times less parking requirements, more social contact, ten times less energy consumption than an electric car, and on and on.
The main thing I've noticed here in slightly hilly Leuven, Belgium, is that so many more people I would never have seen on a human powered bike will actually use ebikes.
If you're a believer in government steering citizens to make the right decision, stimulating ebike use certainly makes sense. If in doubt, you might want to think about the war going on with one of our main energy suppliers.
More than 25% of the UK population lives in the five largest metropolitan areas, with the London urban zone being almost 15% of the UK population. Subsidising e-bikes and electrified public transit for those areas would be the most efficient and highest impact use of those funds for climate change mitigation.
Out of interest, how so? E-bikes are very popular in the Swiss countryside.
I would have thought an e-bike would actually have more use in Devon, than in a relatively flat city like London.
I would have thought an e-bike would actually have more use in Devon, than in a relatively flat city like London.
True, but don't more people live in London than in Devon?
I imagine a government would want to prioritize the highest impact action.
I imagine a government would want to prioritize the highest impact action.
London already has excellent public transport. Devon has a bus on Tuesdays and they can't afford to put diesel in it.
Why would electric bikes be bad in Devon, though? Geography?
Practicality. They'd be fine for leisure, but not for travel to work if you live outside of Exeter and maybe some other big cities. The population is much more spread out than in larger urban areas. Most people live in smallish towns and villages and commute to work in urban centers (public transport is not good). Either that or they're agricultural workers who need cargo capacity and for whom ebikes would be useless. Also useless for famliles with children who go to school in another town or village. Plus, totally useless in the winter—the winter roads around here and Cornwall are bad enough when you have an SUV.
The cost you quoted can’t be right. I would like to see a quote for that. More importantly electric cars still cost a lot more to acquire and the vast majority of sales are ICE cars.
Ending subsidies seems counterproductive.
Ending subsidies seems counterproductive.
I suspect the issue is more that car companies can't make enough EVs for demand. I recently had a similar problem and ended up with an ICE car to avoid year+ wait times
[deleted]
He's right but it's only in optimal condition where you can get cheap rate electricity. Driving in London is very efficient for EVs, you can hit 5mpkWh with ease since traffic is so bad. To cover 100 miles you only need 20kWh, at 5p/kWh off peak charging it's £1/100 miles. Equivalent petrol/diesel at £1.9/l and 55mpg is about £15/100 miles.
For public charging the rate is several times more than 5p/kWh, equalising the numbers somewhat.
For public charging the rate is several times more than 5p/kWh, equalising the numbers somewhat.
It's not, it's about half as I did this exact calculation a couple of days ago in a new car discussion with my partner (charging works out to ~£0.49 per 4 miles, we're currently ~£1.05 per 4 miles for a reasonable mpg car driven primarily urban crawl)
though note that thats retail charging, home charging is half that (about £0.25p per 4 miles)
though note that thats retail charging, home charging is half that (about £0.25p per 4 miles)
One subsidy, there are still big subsidies on leasing electric cars (no tax or employment tax has to be paid on this), as well as zero road tax, fuel tax and other incentives.
Electric cars are cheap enough now anyway that the subsidies don't really make sense, they've done their job establishing a market but keeping the subsidy in place now is just a distortion pushing nominal prices up.
Electric cars are cheap enough now anyway that the subsidies don't really make sense, they've done their job establishing a market but keeping the subsidy in place now is just a distortion pushing nominal prices up.
Sorry to be a little pedantic, but "road tax" was abolished in 1937 - https://ipayroadtax.com/
The current Vehicle Excise Duty is based on the amount of pollutants emitted by the vehicle - https://obr.uk/forecasts-in-depth/tax-by-tax-spend-by-spend/... - so electric vehicles still receive tax demands (albeit for zero).
Electricity to refuel cars is subject to VAT (at 5%).
The current Vehicle Excise Duty is based on the amount of pollutants emitted by the vehicle - https://obr.uk/forecasts-in-depth/tax-by-tax-spend-by-spend/... - so electric vehicles still receive tax demands (albeit for zero).
Electricity to refuel cars is subject to VAT (at 5%).
Just to add that if you keep and maintain a car long enough (Around 40 years), you never have to pay tax again regardless of how polluting it may be!
Buying an historical car is very cost effective - easy to fix yourself, no tax, etc
Buying an historical car is very cost effective - easy to fix yourself, no tax, etc
A 40 year old car is a deathtrap by modern standards, I guess that's ok if you live in a city or only travel short distances.
If ‘safety’ is your only criteria, then sure I guess. Personally it’s not too important to me - the chances of being in an RTA are negligible.
I’d hardly call cars from the 80s ‘deathtraps’ either.
I think we should get out of the habit of buying new stuff every few years. There’s something pretty amazing about driving a car that is decades old.
I think we should get out of the habit of buying new stuff every few years. There’s something pretty amazing about driving a car that is decades old.
Cars from the 80s barely have any airbags. Crumple zones are worse, etc. Anything before 2000 or even 2010 or so is bad, really bad. Except for luxury cars, which are generally ahead of the curve.
I just looked it up, and transport accidents are the 3rd most common cause of death for my age bracket in the UK, and the first I can do anything to prevent (behind suicide and accidental poisoning).
Once the risks of dementia get close, I'll join you in the world of thin A-pillars, but I wouldn't call that good general advice!
Once the risks of dementia get close, I'll join you in the world of thin A-pillars, but I wouldn't call that good general advice!
I am sorry but you are wrong about road tax - the name "road tax" never existed in the law, the tax that became VED was always legally called something else. Calling a fee required to drive your vehicle on the road a "road tax" is a perfectly legitimate use of the English language.
In all other regards you are correct though, there is VAT to be paid on electricity, and electric vehicles must be registered for tax even though they don't have to pay.
In all other regards you are correct though, there is VAT to be paid on electricity, and electric vehicles must be registered for tax even though they don't have to pay.
Plenty of vehicles can be driven on the road without paying road tax is the thing. So why would you call it road tax?
It's called road tax because you need to pay it before you can take your vehicle on the road. You can own a car and keep it in your garage and you don't have to pay any tax on it - it's not a car tax, it's a road tax.
It's an error to assume that people call taxes by what they pay for, the common name of a tax is what makes you liable for it. Income tax is paid when you earn income, insurance tax is paid when you take out an insurance policy, road tax is charged if you want to take your vehicle on the roads.
'plenty of vehicles' is also just bicycles and carts AFAIK, any other vehicle requires registration and tax (even if the rate is £0). In any case, it doesn't matter that not all road users pay road tax, we still call income tax as such even though not all earners pay it!
As an aside, I don't own a car and in fact prefer to cycle; I simply object to a factually incorrect and nonsensical prescriptivist campaign against how normal people speak.
It's an error to assume that people call taxes by what they pay for, the common name of a tax is what makes you liable for it. Income tax is paid when you earn income, insurance tax is paid when you take out an insurance policy, road tax is charged if you want to take your vehicle on the roads.
'plenty of vehicles' is also just bicycles and carts AFAIK, any other vehicle requires registration and tax (even if the rate is £0). In any case, it doesn't matter that not all road users pay road tax, we still call income tax as such even though not all earners pay it!
As an aside, I don't own a car and in fact prefer to cycle; I simply object to a factually incorrect and nonsensical prescriptivist campaign against how normal people speak.
No VED for horses, skateboards or scooters
Makes sense, most of my friends who are "almost buyers" of EVs i.e. they want to buy one but aren't sure whether this car or their next car will be their first EV are most concerned by charge point availability rather than anything else. The existing subsidy was only £1500 and only for cheaper EVs anyway so I doubt it was driving buying behaviour anymore.
Considering how many brits spend their life fighting for parking spaces, I can only imagine how much worse it'll be when you're fighting for the one space next to a charging point
There's an obvious market for charging facilities at parking spots so I imagine that'll become widespread at some point.
Here in London they integrate the charging in the street lights
The problem isn't inherently hard. A bunch of European cities is piloting charging via lamp posts. With enough demand, solutions will be found very quickly.
> are most concerned by charge point availability rather than anything else
This seems to be the biggest issue around EV's right now. Everyone has goals set for EV adoption but I think the Achilles heel of all of this will be charging infra.
This seems to be the biggest issue around EV's right now. Everyone has goals set for EV adoption but I think the Achilles heel of all of this will be charging infra.
Yes, agreed. I'd love to see government investment in charging points. Seems like the biggest limitation at the moment.
If I recall correctly (and I could be completely confused), the government initially funded gas station networks to support automobile markets. I'd love to see them build out subsidy to create a similar network for electric chargers.
As long as it doesn't take the form the broadband companies had.
As long as it doesn't take the form the broadband companies had.
If you read the article, the change in question is redirecting the subsidy away from EV purchase and towards expanding the charging network.
Cars, electric or otherwise, are not really the optimal answer to pollution or traffic in 2022. Car clubs, mass transit and e-bikes, could use a bit more love in the UK.
Whole reason they are doing this is because increased energy costs have driven demand for electric cars — which points to the real solution — phase out subsidies for petroleum based energy and systems, then increase taxes on them; UK has some of the largest subsidies for oil & gas in Europe.
An ex-colleague posted a Change.org petition asking the government to massively cut fuel duty (thus, subsidise those with ICE cars and indirectly the Oil Industry) as somehow a way to attack the cost of living problem.
Completely batshit. If the treasury wants to give poor people £5B it can just do that, but by instead reducing taxes on petrol (foregoing revenue of £5B) you're not giving that money to poor people but to whoever buys fuel and whoever they're buying it from. Sure enough of course said ex-colleague has a big inefficient car, and so this would suit them fine and they can pretend it's because they're concerned about "ordinary families".
Completely batshit. If the treasury wants to give poor people £5B it can just do that, but by instead reducing taxes on petrol (foregoing revenue of £5B) you're not giving that money to poor people but to whoever buys fuel and whoever they're buying it from. Sure enough of course said ex-colleague has a big inefficient car, and so this would suit them fine and they can pretend it's because they're concerned about "ordinary families".
> UK has some of the largest subsidies for oil & gas in Europe.
not really, it's actually quite in line with other European countries, both per capita, and as a % of GDP:
https://ourworldindata.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies
not really, it's actually quite in line with other European countries, both per capita, and as a % of GDP:
https://ourworldindata.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies
First, here’s my source for UK leading subsidies for oil & gas, see top of page 11:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=COM:...
Next, using analysis based on per capita, % of GDP, etc — hides the truth, UK’s subsidies by total amount spent are significant to the industry.
Next, using analysis based on per capita, % of GDP, etc — hides the truth, UK’s subsidies by total amount spent are significant to the industry.
> Next, using analysis based on per capita, % of GDP, etc — hides the truth, UK’s subsidies by total amount spent are significant to the industry.
actually it’s the opposite to “hiding the truth”.
my link shows UK’s subsidising oil and gas is actually quite in line with the rest of Europe.
total sums are quite irrelevant and they hide the truth. that is why all of these papers show gdp % and per capita, not total sums. i think the reason is quite obvious.
actually it’s the opposite to “hiding the truth”.
my link shows UK’s subsidising oil and gas is actually quite in line with the rest of Europe.
total sums are quite irrelevant and they hide the truth. that is why all of these papers show gdp % and per capita, not total sums. i think the reason is quite obvious.
From the industry’s perspective, they don’t care about per capita, they care about the total amount.
From the perspective of managing climate change, per capita analysis makes it easier to hide overall significance of the subsidies; aka 10k pop with 1k in subsidies on a per capita basis would be equivalent to 100k pop with 10k in subsidies; killing the 10k in subsidies of the 100k pop country would have 10x the impact on the industry.
This is not about being fair to countries, it’s about having as much impact as fast as possible.
From the perspective of managing climate change, per capita analysis makes it easier to hide overall significance of the subsidies; aka 10k pop with 1k in subsidies on a per capita basis would be equivalent to 100k pop with 10k in subsidies; killing the 10k in subsidies of the 100k pop country would have 10x the impact on the industry.
This is not about being fair to countries, it’s about having as much impact as fast as possible.
To be honest I don't think many people will care about this. I think as a whole the car market will struggle and stagnant for the next couple of years. We're stuck in this shift to electric while brands start to reduce ICE options.
I've got a car on PCP which is due to finish, I'll be taking out a loan to finance the rest of it, normally I would look at upgrading, but I love my diesel and they no longer offer the engine for my model. So going for an electric vehicle is too expensive for me, I've got a baby, moved house, last thing I want to be doing is spending more on a car. I'm sure they are are many people out there who feel the same, now is not the time to get a new car.
I'd love an electric car, but it's just out of reach and lower down my priorities
I've got a car on PCP which is due to finish, I'll be taking out a loan to finance the rest of it, normally I would look at upgrading, but I love my diesel and they no longer offer the engine for my model. So going for an electric vehicle is too expensive for me, I've got a baby, moved house, last thing I want to be doing is spending more on a car. I'm sure they are are many people out there who feel the same, now is not the time to get a new car.
I'd love an electric car, but it's just out of reach and lower down my priorities
My EU country is so backwards, it still doesn't have any EV incentives, while other countries are already getting rid of theirs :(
Well, being as you are in the EU, couldn't you go to one of the member states with good incentives like say Germany and save 4k from that, then drive you vechile to your own member state and avail of the single market.
Just a thought.
Just a thought.
Very likely those incentives are only for residents.
Not unless I go live there for a while.
Not possible unless you can prove German residency.
There are rules against car registration/importing to prevent this. Or else everyone in Western Europe would just buy and register their cars in Latvia/Romania etc.
You need to have a registered address or a friend in Germany in order to take advantage of the incentives. The car must be with German plates for the first year, which presents some other problems.
Some German auto dealers are skirting the law by buying EVs, getting the money from the two incentives while keeping the car sitting for some time, then selling it abroad for a bit less than it costs to buy it there.
Some German auto dealers are skirting the law by buying EVs, getting the money from the two incentives while keeping the car sitting for some time, then selling it abroad for a bit less than it costs to buy it there.
Ah yes, seems to be a thing - https://thedriven.io/2022/02/21/germany-to-tighten-ev-subsid...
maybe your country is not backwards, perhaps just ahead of the curve? :>)
The EV infrastructure in UK cities suck.
I can't see how the UK can have 30%+ EV cars by 2030 at the current rate of development.
I can't see how the UK can have 30%+ EV cars by 2030 at the current rate of development.
Of course some of that could be driven by the fact that it currently costs about 1/10th the price to fuel up an electric car vs. a petrol car (at least in London).