Ontario EV incentives upped to $14K... and decreased to $3k for Tesla

[Ktowntslafan]

High-ranking provincial politicians toured the Canadian International Auto Show in Toronto pointing out all the ONTARIO-MADE vehicles that qualify for their "improved" EV incentive program. I'm not aware that they even saw the Tesla display. Although the government is interested in reduced pollution, it's probably more interested in cars made in Ontario.

Brutal-thanks

 

[Breezy]

I tend to look at hybrids as just 'light cigarettes' as opposed to regulars (standard ICE). It's still smoking and still unsafe for health. Polluting is polluting no matter the amount!

We we have a hybrid Highlander and I used to feel good about polluting less (6.7/7.3l/100) for a 7 passenger hauler...and then realized it's laughable at patting myself on the back for smoking 'light' rather than quitting!

I also realize that there is an environmental cost to producing LIon batteries as well damage upon disposal so EV tech is not all that perfect yet either but another step in the evolution of greener sustainable energy!

I'm just responding to the suggestion that the Volt "heavily pollutes" in cold weather. Focusing on worst-case conditions is misleading in any case. The Volt drives 70% of the time as an EV as a fleet average, 71% in my case, and the 2016 Volt is better.

I think "light cigarettes" are a terrible analogy. That's a marketing gimmick and they're just as harmful. A plug-in hybrid is much less harmful than an ICEV or conventional hybrid.

 

[Jaff]

So basically what you are saying is this ...you want the rebates to entice as many folks as possible to buy an EV, and you don't think that the reduction in the amount for EVs will cost Tesla even one sale.

Needles to say, I couldn't disagree with you more.

I think it is naive to think that the loss of the larger incentive will force someone into a lesser range EV...the lesser range EV will not fit the prospects needs, so they will just buy another ICE, and wait...this does not fit my definition of helping get as many EVs on the road asap!

By the way, just because another jurisdiction has adopted this corrupted, illogical stance, does not make it correct!

The changes were influenced by lobbying, no doubt. Most things are. But this looks like a government initiative driven by a desire to take action on climate.

The most important thing is that more electric vehicles (that includes plug-in hybrids) are put on the roads as soon as possible. I think this program will help achieve that. Ultimately the Model 3 may be the largest beneficiary, but that depends on how quickly Tesla gets them into production.

They are still providing an incentive on vehicles up to $150,000. Typically, where this sort of cap has been set in other jurisdictions, it has been set at a much lower prices than $75k or $150k.

- - - Updated - - -

Your perspective is again different than mine...if you are burning gas, I would argue that you are polluting, and that in itself is too much!

I drove around town yesterday in -13C weather and used 6.29 L/100km. I would argue that doesn't qualify as polluting heavily.

- - - Updated - - -

If they took the time to visit the Tesla booth, they might have been late for the apres-show coctail party sponsored by...... :wink:

High-ranking provincial politicians toured the Canadian International Auto Show in Toronto pointing out all the ONTARIO-MADE vehicles that qualify for their "improved" EV incentive program. I'm not aware that they even saw the Tesla display. Although the government is interested in reduced pollution, it's probably more interested in cars made in Ontario.

 

[Destiny1701]

Exactly! 'Less harmful'...but still harmful. That was my point sorry I felt the light cigarette analogy is perfect actually in terms of damage to health, environment.

Example my 'hybrid' Suv still pollutes more than an ice small car. The Volt probably equivalent or just slightly better to a Diesel engine in mileage and pollution. (Except vw lol). Better than ice

I'm just responding to the suggestion that the Volt "heavily pollutes" in cold weather. Focusing on worst-case conditions is misleading in any case. The Volt drives 70% of the time as an EV as a fleet average, 71% in my case, and the 2016 Volt is better.

I think "light cigarettes" are a terrible analogy. That's a marketing gimmick and they're just as harmful. A plug-in hybrid is much less harmful than an ICEV or conventional hybrid.

 

[Breezy]

So basically what you are saying is this ...you want the rebates to entice as many folks as possible to buy an EV, and you don't think that the reduction in the amount for EVs will cost Tesla even one sale.

That's not basically what I'm saying at all. I think it will cost some Model S and X sales (and Volvo XC90, BMW X5, ELR, etc.), but it will enhance Model 3 sales, as well as sales of other plug-ins, and that will more than make up the difference in total electric miles driven.

Your perspective is again different than mine...if you are burning gas, I would argue that you are polluting, and that in itself is too much!

I don't think our perspectives are different. I am polluting, but I'm not "polluting heavily" as was suggested above.

 

[SluyterCapital]

I think this is justified from a political point of view. Look at the twitter comments. Everybody complaining that a $14K incentive doesn't benefit anybody but the rich. This clause allows them to say the increase will go to the middle class, not the rich.

Having more EV's on the road benefits everybody. What I find offensive is knowledge that my tax dollars were used to bail out car companies that should be bankrupt today. This move is more proof that we live in a Crony Capitalistic Province and Country.

 

[Ktowntslafan]

Having more EV's on the road benefits everybody. What I find offensive is knowledge that my tax dollars were used to bail out car companies that should be bankrupt today.

Yes-that bailout money could have bought Canadian taxpayers one of these:

Instead, we propped up the tobacco industry and associated jobs-so we can all continue smoking.

In all honesty, our tax $$ are now fighting against Tesla...crazy!

 

[Jaff]

No, you are still not understanding my point...why sacrifice any EV sales at all...it is highly likely that there will not be any Model 3s in Canada until late 2018, or early 2019...why would you want to sacrifice any Tesla EV sales between now and the delivery of the first Model 3? It makes zero sense
to sacrifice these sales...it is an illogical move by a government which wants as many EVs on the roads asap.

You also miss my point about polluting...my perspective is that any polluting is too much.

That's not basically what I'm saying at all. I think it will cost some Model S and X sales (and Volvo XC90, BMW X5, ELR, etc.), but it will enhance Model 3 sales, as well as sales of other plug-ins, and that will more than make up the difference in total electric miles driven.



I don't think our perspectives are different. I am polluting, but I'm not "polluting heavily" as was suggested above.

 

[Ktowntslafan]

No, you are still not understanding my point...why sacrifice any EV sales at all...it is highly likely that there will not be any Model 3s in Canada until late 2018, or early 2019...why would you want to sacrifice any Tesla EV sales between now and the delivery of the first Model 3? It makes zero sense
to sacrifice these sales...it is an illogical move by a government which wants as many EVs on the roads asap.

You also miss my point about polluting...my perspective is that any polluting is too much.

+100

 

[RiverBrick]

Ontario is investing 20 million in public charging and I commend them for it. They should be promoting vehicles that can take full advantage of the coming network, but there are several vehicles getting the full $13,000 that cannot.

In lieu of or in addition to the bonus for 5 seats (or 4.5 seats in the case of the 2016-Volt) there should be a bonus for a quick charge port. The stated rational for the 5-seat bonus is that it makes cars more practical--which is exactly what quick charge does for EVs.

There should be a $1,000 penalty for plug-ins that don't have a level II on board charger of at least 6 kW. Then if an upgrade from 3.3 kW were a $1,000 option, everyone would order it. If a PHEV has a Winter AER of less than 50 km, one hour L2 charging at 6 kW while out and about might often make the difference between burning gas or not. However, 3 kW usually means too slow to make a difference or a vehicle clogging up a station for twice as long. On top of that, if the station charges a flat or hourly fee some PHEV drivers will rather pollute than charge, because at < 4 kW they feel electricity costs more than gas.

The budget for this program is obviously not infinite, so to allow as many citizens as possible to benefit, I would cap the rebate at $10,000. PHEVs not having a battery of at least 10 kWh should be limited to $4,000. The increased rebates would not be retroactive. There is no way you can create more November 2015 sales, so can anyone explain why people who purchased then will be getting checks for up to $4,500 additional? In order to qualify for the full rebate on leases, the minimum term dropped from four years to three? Why?

Finally, any restrictions on rebates for supposedly rich drivers would be based on income and not on MSRP. It's crazy that a family that has two 50k EVs, trades them in every three years and vacations every year in the Caribbean might get $52,000 off over the next 3-4 years, but a family that goes with a single Tesla and prefers tent-camping vacations only gets $3,000.

 

[Breezy]

No, you are still not understanding my point...why sacrifice any EV sales at all...it is highly likely that there will not be any Model 3s in Canada until late 2018, or early 2019...why would you want to sacrifice any Tesla EV sales between now and the delivery of the first Model 3? It makes zero sense
to sacrifice these sales...it is an illogical move by a government which wants as many EVs on the roads asap.

You also miss my point about polluting...my perspective is that any polluting is too much.

The funds aren't unlimited so it makes sense to spend them where they will have the greatest effect, which in my opinion is on vehicles that are affordable to mass market customers.

If Tesla doesn't deliver the Model 3 until 2019, then it probably won't benefit much, I agree, so the solution is for Tesla to deliver them more quickly. Otherwise the benefits will go to other vehicles that are available.

As for any polluting being too much, that's a nice idea. Unfortunately it's not possible for any of us to achieve at this point.

 

[S'toon]

Well, if you look at it a certain way, $3000 is still more than what people in most provinces get.

 

[Doug_G]

In my experience, governments persistently bungle EV policy because none of the people making the policies drive EVs. People are not very good at imagining what it must be like to drive one. They learn by doing. And they're not learning.

The way they are assessing these incentives are bizarre in the extreme. There doesn't seem to be any evidence-based reasoning going on here. Or even logical-based reasoning. Since when did the number of seats become a big deal? Maybe only 2 seats might be a problem, but most people don't need 5+ seats in their cars. Those that do buy bigger cars. I don't see how incentives will change that.

I'm hopeful that the new charging station initiative might actually do some good. Probably the stations will be far from optimally located, but if enough of them are deployed it could be useful.

 

[S'toon]

In my experience, governments persistently bungle EV policy because none of the people making the policies drive EVs. People are not very good at imagining what it must be like to drive one. They learn by doing. And they're not learning.

The way they are assessing these incentives are bizarre in the extreme. There doesn't seem to be any evidence-based reasoning going on here. Or even logical-based reasoning. Since when did the number of seats become a big deal? Maybe only 2 seats might be a problem, but most people don't need 5+ seats in their cars. Those that do buy bigger cars. I don't see how incentives will change that.

I'm hopeful that the new charging station initiative might actually do some good. Probably the stations will be far from optimally located, but if enough of them are deployed it could be useful.

This is true. This is why legislation like this EV incentive smacks of lobbyist fingerprints all over it.

 

[Ktowntslafan]

This is true. This is why legislation like this EV incentive smacks of lobbyist fingerprints all over it.

+100

Please, let's stop trying to make sense of it in any other context. We all know what's going on, no?

 

[SluyterCapital]

I am sure if Tesla would open up a manufacturing facility in Ontario they would have been at the table with GM and Ford twisting the Governments rubber arm. Telsas' interests would have been reflected in the incentives. What if Tesla would sell the car for exactly the threshold amount to obtain the full rebate and sell us the non-optional floor mats for $75,000.00. Would this work?

 

[Jaff]

Agree totally Doug.

This is bungled policy, because imo, the resultant policy has been rendered impure by both lobbyists, and by the continuing economic attacks on all fronts by the socialist Liberal government.

The EV rebate program should not have been tainted by these factors...I find it appalling and disgusting that they have allowed this to happen...it is now a divisive policy within the EV movement.

In my experience, governments persistently bungle EV policy because none of the people making the policies drive EVs. People are not very good at imagining what it must be like to drive one. They learn by doing. And they're not learning.

The way they are assessing these incentives are bizarre in the extreme. There doesn't seem to be any evidence-based reasoning going on here. Or even logical-based reasoning. Since when did the number of seats become a big deal? Maybe only 2 seats might be a problem, but most people don't need 5+ seats in their cars. Those that do buy bigger cars. I don't see how incentives will change that.

I'm hopeful that the new charging station initiative might actually do some good. Probably the stations will be far from optimally located, but if enough of them are deployed it could be useful.

- - - Updated - - -

Again, with only the Bolt being an true addition to the EV world in Canada, you saying that the government must spend their rebate funds where they would have the greatest effect is laughable imo. You probably also belive that Volt style hybrids should get the same "weight" of rebate as a true BEV...again, I do not agree with you.

The funds may be limited, but that does not mean this fund may not be replenished in the future...that is pure speculation on your part.

As there is probably no way there will be a critical mass of EVs on the road by 2019 (even considering Bolt sales), I believe there will still be a Guv of Ontario rebate program in effect, albeit a tainted one.

The funds aren't unlimited so it makes sense to spend them where they will have the greatest effect, which in my opinion is on vehicles that are affordable to mass market customers.

If Tesla doesn't deliver the Model 3 until 2019, then it probably won't benefit much, I agree, so the solution is for Tesla to deliver them more quickly. Otherwise the benefits will go to other vehicles that are available.

As for any polluting being too much, that's a nice idea. Unfortunately it's not possible for any of us to achieve at this point.

 

[Ktowntslafan]

This is true. This is why legislation like this EV incentive smacks of lobbyist fingerprints all over it.

The real issue is that we are backing the wrong horse. This is very short sighted and will result in a slow painful degradation of Ontario's air quality and auto sector. Can't say it enough-Big Auto does not want to electrify!

Please read article below with new EVIP plan in mind:


Most of the current major car companies will fail because they can’t adapt to the disruption that electrification is bringing to their industry. They will refuse to cannibalize their other products. They will refuse to shift power and money to the electric divisions. They will refuse to engineer true electric cars because the economics don’t make sense until they don’t have any money to do it, anyway.

This pattern has played out innumerable times over the past 100 years. Remember RCA? Philips? Control Data? Burroughs? Kodak?


Have Tesla and Apple disrupted the auto industry past the point of no return? - Quartz

 

[RiverBrick]

I'm hopeful that the new charging station initiative might actually do some good. Probably the stations will be far from optimally located, but if enough of them are deployed it could be useful.

In the application for funding, conditions are spelled out for preferred placements that seem very good. I think they got expert consulting. There's no Ontario manufacturer of charging stations afaik, so no rules favoring one approach over another. One peculiar clause though was requiring proposals for L3 funding be for units taking 480 volt input. Maybe they don't know that most utilities in Ontario are going to provide 600V or 208V and DCQC stations are available that are 600V or 208V compatible and save hosts from having to install extra transformers.

 

[Ktowntslafan]

I'm hopeful that the new charging station initiative might actually do some good. Probably the stations will be far from optimally located, but if enough of them are deployed it could be useful.

This says it all IMO. I'm actually quite incensed that Ontario taxpayers are funding charging infrastructure. Tesla, a much smaller company, took care of this critical piece on their own. If GM was serious, they could do the same-or take Elon up on his offer to partner:

Several GM executives agreed, no support by GM to improve fast charging infrastructure. This issue is one of the yardsticks we should use to measure an automaker’s seriosity to embracing electric cars. No matter how wonderful the Bolt appears to be, by this measure GM is failing to demonstrate serious intent.

GM wont help build the fast charging infrastructure that would jumpstart Bolt sales | The Long Tail Pipe

This is just another smokescreen excuse pumped out by the big boys so they can keep polluting and making stacks of cash. What will help is a carbon tax-let's hope the Feds follow through on that...because: