Driving the electric revolution
After some false starts, the deployment of electric vehicles (EVs) is now seriously on the political agenda right around the world.
The fact that EV technology presents a ready, viable and clear way to reduce our emissions is providing even greater incentive to speed up their roll-out.
Even in Australia, interest is hotting up. This week, the Climate Group is hosting a series of business and government roundtables in Brisbane, Sydney and Adelaide on electric vehicles.
The interest here is, in part, recognition of the pace of change and the significance of policies and legislation being adopted around the world to accelerate the scale-up and deployment of EVs.
New legislation is being introduced across the globe to scale up the use of EVs. Major economies such as the US, EU and China are introducing policies, strategies and incentives to accelerate EV deployment.
The US House and Senate introduced bi-partisan legislation at the end of May this year which, if adopted, would electrify half of US cars and trucks by 2030. A combination of grants, rebates and other incentives would be provided for the widespread adoption of EVs in selected pilot areas, with the initial goal of deploying 700,000 vehicles over the next six years.
The House Bill (Electric Drive Vehicle Deployment Act of 2010) calls for the US Department of Energy to award $US250 million in grants for the pilot communities. Residents could qualify for rebates up to $US10,000 on a plug-in vehicle. On a national scale, the existing $US7,500 tax credit for EVs would be expanded to include larger vehicles such as commercial trucks.
The Senate Bill (the Electric Vehicle Deployment Act of 2010) also includes $US1.5 million for research to develop a battery that, on a single charge, would last up to 500 miles. Both versions of the bill also increase incentives for EV manufacturers and supporting infrastructure.
On May 25, EU ministers called for a European standard for EVs, to accelerate their deployment. Support was also given for the European Commission’s strategy for clean and energy-efficient vehicles.
The strategy published in April outlines specific action in support of electric cars. The Commission plans to stimulate investment in charging infrastructure and EV services build-up and will issue guidelines on incentives for EV consumer purchase. At the Council meeting, France, Germany, Portugal and Spain presented a joint declaration on electric mobility, seeking to speed up the process to create a "fully interoperable pan-European charging system". This would see plug-in systems standardised to ensure that EVs can be charged anywhere within the EU.
There is also increasing support at the Member State level, with consumer purchase incentives of up to £5000 in UK, €5000 in France and €6000 in Spain being offered.
And it is not just the west that is moving on EVs. The Chinese government has recently unveiled a new subsidy program which aims to boost the adoption of EVs in the country. The pilot program will initially involve five cities: Shanghai, Changchun, Shenzhen, Hangzhou and Hefei. Consumers of fully electric vehicles will be eligible for subsidies of up to ¥60,000 ($10,000), and subsidies of up to ¥50,000 ($8,500) will be available for buyers of plug-in hybrids.
This is a fast moving area with policy from governments around the world now moving as swiftly as the technological developments. It is for this reason that governments and businesses in Australia are now better engaged in this area than ever before.
If successful, these policies will demonstrate large-scale EV use, which could lead to a shift in consumer attitudes towards EVs and the widespread deployment of EVs more quickly than some would have thought.
Rupert Posner is Director Australia, Director International Sales and Regions Program of The Climate Group
Comments on this article
In Australia? EVs makew no sense
Since when did any new development start with its ultimate performance? EVs will develop quickly to cope with most if not all local trips. However, when has there been any real questioning of the use of vehicles powered by 3-4 litre engines to transport, more often than not, one occupant at speeds averaging under 40 kph on most commutes?
Response to Tony Smith
Really Tony, on which forum have you ever communicated with me? Oh, that's right, I've never heard of you before. Never mind, I'm here now.
Could I indemnify anyone if I'm wrong, of course not but let's look at your flawed reasoning:
inflating the cost of energy is not zero sum so you will have more than an embarrassed look -- take just an environmental example, denying poor Indians, for example, cheap coal-fired electricity means they continue to strip forests for combustibles to cook and stay warm -- just a small example of downsides. No biggie, I guess.
Now, I don't see where I recommended Toorak Tractors or "a 200 series Landcruiser or many other fossil fuel powered behemoths", what I suggested was LPG-powered hybrids as a practical and doable step, primarily because Australia already has an established LPG distribution network and they don't have the environmental downsides of lithium or nickel foam. I still say EVs make no sense in Australia and you can achieve huge CO2 emission reductions with LPG hybrids (and you might even get consumer uptake of them).
What's your problem?
In Australia? EVs make no sense? Nonsense
Got to love the continued peddling of our climate denialist friend Mr. Hearn. I have challenged him in several forums with no acceptance on his part to indemnify the rest of us from all economic consequences of climate change if his views prove to be incorrect. Still looking forward to that one! If the IPCC is incorrect, we are left with an embarrassed look, clean air and a few ugly windmills. Move on.
An EV makes way more sense in Australian capital cities than (say) a 200 series Landcruiser or many other fossil fuel powered behemoths. Why? Because the vast percentage of daily trips are well within their daily range capability, they have enormous "cloud storage" capability to dampen peak demand in the grid and with initiatives like Better Place, have similar amenity to their petrol driven counterparts.
Re the "but their powered by coal and therefore just as bad as anything else" argument - this is peddled by people who have no comprehension of year 11 thermodynamics and/or physics. Why? Because of a little thing called conversion efficiency. Getting boringly technical, normal unleaded petrol contains 34.8 MJ/litre of which less than 17.6 MJ/litre ends up being converted to mechanical work by even the most efficient engines. Run that through a gearbox and it reduces below the maximum theoretical 50% above. An electric motor is considerably more efficient at converting stored energy ito mechanical work; 90% in fact is converted. Bottom line, a kilometre in an EV produces way less CO2 even from coal than the equivalent petrol car. And Better Place and it's kin buy their power from renewables.
Still looking forward to being indemnified......
In Australia? EVs make no sense.
Green waffle is right. Powering EVs with coal fired electricity is nonsense even if the EVs were economical and practical which they aren't at present.
A century ago EVs and IC cars were competitors. IC cars of the day were terrible, unreliable contraptions which were noisy, smelly and oily and yet they prevailed. There has to be a reason for this. Modern IC vehicles are reliable, quiet and economical. EVs have a long way to go and large barriers to overcome. The sad truth is that a battery will never have the energy density of a tank of hydrocarbon (petrol or diesel) fuel. While we're at it forget hydrogen. The way to burn that is to attach some hydrogen atoms to a few carbon atoms. It is called petrol or diesel.
In Australia? EVs make no sense.
EVs don't appear to make sense in Australia where electricity is basically coal-fired and there is an existing LPG distribution system. The Koreans already mass produce LPG-powered hybrids for which there is little need for major infrastructure investment in Australia and which overcome Australia's tyranny of distance. If there is a consumer market for reduced emission vehicles why not something potentially useful and more to the point, marketable in Australia, like LPG hybrids?
How about Climate Spectator tries a little harder to get serious about business practicality? So far its pitch has been very disappointing green waffle. A bit more business sense in a Business Spectator publication would go a long way.